The son of Ebed who came to Shechem along with his brothers to incite the citizens against Abimelek (Judg. 9:26–29). When the governor Zebul reported this rebellion to Abimelek, Abimelek attacked Shechem at dawn and drove Gaal and his brothers out of the city (9:30–41).

A mountain, not currently identified, in the hill country of Ephraim within the portion allotted to Joshua, where he was buried (Josh. 24:30; Judg. 2:9). Hiddai (called “Hurai” in 1 Chron. 11:32), one of David’s mighty men, also came from the region (2 Sam. 23:30).

Situated on the eastern edge of the central Benjamin Plateau, Geba (modern Jeba) and its sister city, Mikmash (Mukhmas), were about six miles north of Jerusalem on a significant route from the Jordan Valley up into the hill country. Although a branch of the Wadi Qilt separates the two towns, a “saddle” across that deep valley made travel easier between them. This geographical feature emerges in the description of the Assyrian advance toward Jerusalem (Isa. 10:28–29).

The name “Geba” comes from the Hebrew three-letter root meaning “hill” and is sufficiently similar to “Gibeah” that some have suggested that Geba, Geba of Benjamin (1 Sam. 13:16), Gibeah (Judg. 19–20), Gibeah of Benjamin (1 Sam. 13:2, 15; 14:16), and Gibeah of Saul (e.g., 1 Sam. 10:26; 11:4) are the same location. The best reading of the texts, however, indicates that Geba and Gibeah are at least two separate locations (1 Sam. 13:2–3; Isa. 10:29). Gibeah of Saul is Tell el-Ful, approximately two miles south of Jeba.

During the early years of Saul’s monarchy, the Philistines had an outpost at Geba, between the forces of Saul at Mikmash and those of Jonathan at Gibeah of Benjamin (1 Sam. 13:2–3). When they lost Geba to Jonathan, they regrouped at Mikmash, across the pass. Jonathan and his armor-bearer set out from Geba, descended into the wadi, climbed up the other side, and attacked and conquered the Philistine outpost (1 Sam. 14).

King Baasha of the north created a stranglehold on the southern kingdom by seizing Ramah, a critical crossroad point north of Jerusalem between Geba and Mizpah. Asa, king of the south, appealed to Ben-Hadad of Aram, who attacked the northern border of Baasha’s territory. Asa wrested control of Ramah back from Baasha and fortified both Geba to the east and Mizpah to the west, making certain to hold the access routes to the central Benjamin Plateau from both east and west (1 Kings 15:16–22).

A leader in the tribe of Benjamin who agreed to live in Jerusalem along with Sallai (cf. Neh. 12:20) after the return from exile (Neh. 11:8). The Hebrew text is problematic, and some prefer to translate it as “and his brothers [we’ekhayw] Gabbai, Sallai” (NRSV) instead of “and after him [we’akhrayw] Gabbai, Sallai” (MT; so also LXX; cf. NIV: “his followers, Gabbai and Sallai”).

An English rendering of the Greek transliteration of an Aramaic place name from the root gbb, probably meaning “high” or “elevated.” John gives this and the Greek name, Lithostrōton (“stone pavement”), together in describing Jesus’ trial before Pilate (John 19:13). Such a structure was commonly found in the marketplace of Roman cities. The exact location of the one in Jerusalem is unknown, but it is likely to have been on the east side of Herod’s palace. A previous suggested location, beneath the modern Sisters of Zion Convent, has been rejected because archaeologists have determined that the pavement there had not yet been laid at that time.

An angel who first appears in the book of Daniel (8:16; 9:21). His name means “strong man of God.” Gabriel functions as the spokesperson for God to the prophet, and in particular he explains the meaning of the visions that Daniel experienced. Although not mentioned by name in Dan. 10, he is likely the angel who comes to Daniel with the aid of Michael, another angel, to inform Daniel of the meaning of the vision recounted in Dan. 11. Gabriel is also sent to Zechariah and to Mary to inform them of the significance of the births of, respectively, John (the Baptist) and Jesus (Luke 1:19, 26).

(1) A son of Jacob, born to Zilpah, Leah’s maidservant. He was one of Jacob’s twelve sons, destined to become a tribe of Israel. His name can mean “luck,” and this is the etiology given in Gen. 30:11. (2) Another Gad, found in 2 Sam. 24, is called “David’s seer” (v. 11). He was the prophet who confronted David about the census he had taken and offered him three choices: famine, foes, or plague. Gad instructed him to buy Araunah’s threshing floor and build an altar there. When this was done and sacrifice made, the blight ended. Much earlier, he had advised David to return to the land of Judah during his tenure as persona non grata in Saul’s court (1 Sam. 22:5). (3) There is another Gad mentioned in Isa. 65:11, sometimes translated “Fortune,” as in the NRSV: “But you who forsake the Lord, who forget my holy mountain, who set a table for Fortune and fill cups of mixed wine for Destiny”—here perhaps the name of a god worshiped by some Israelites.

A Decapolis city six miles southeast of the Sea of Galilee (modern Umm Qeis), the namesake for the region of the Gadarenes (Matt. 8:28).

One of three principal variant names in all three Synoptic Gospels for the region where Jesus healed demoniacs after sailing with his disciples across the Sea of Galilee (Matt. 8:28–34; Mark 5:1–20; Luke 8:26–39). Most English translations select “Gadarenes” for Matthew and “Gerasenes” for Mark and Luke, leaving “Gergesenes” unselected. The exact location is disputed. Since all three Gospel accounts speak of “the region of” (Gk. chōra), which does not necessitate a discrete political territory, it is plausible for one location to be described with multiple names. A Decapolis city six miles southeast of the Sea of Galilee was called “Gadara,” making the southeastern shore of the lake a possible location for the region of the Gadarenes. Ancient coins with the name “Gadara” often bear the image of a ship. Another Decapolis city thirty-five miles southeast of the lake was Gerasa (modern Jerash), making the region name “of the Gerasenes” somewhat fitting as well. No place named “Gergesa” has been identified, but some traditions relate the region of the Gergesenes to the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee near modern Kursi. At the healing of the demoniacs, a herd of swine rushed over a cliff into the lake, and today Kursi is the most likely location on the eastern half of the Sea of Galilee, with clifflike structures near the water. Perhaps “the region of the Gadarenes/Gerasenes” extended along the southeastern and eastern shores of the Sea of Galilee.

A spy sent by Moses. He was the son of Susi of the tribe of Manasseh (Num. 13:11).

A spy sent by Moses. He was the son of Sodi of the tribe of Zebulun (Num. 13:10).

An irritating, biting insect used by Jeremiah as a metaphor for Babylon in his prophecy about its impending attack upon Egypt (Jer. 46:20).

Known only as the father of Menahem, who led a successful revolt and killed King Shallum of Israel in 752 BC. Menahem subsequently ruled the northern kingdom until 742 BC (2 Kings 15:14, 17).

One of the twelve tribes of Israel, descended from Gad, a son of Jacob born to Leah’s maidservant Zilpah. After the conquest of Canaan, the tribe of Gad (sometimes referred to as the “Gadites”) settled with the Transjordanian tribes, between Manasseh to the north and Reuben to the south, in a U shape that wraps around Bashan, the southern part of Manasseh. Sometimes the Bible equates the land with part of Gilead (Num. 32:25–26). One of its important cities was Ramoth Gilead (Josh. 21:38), where king Ahab was mortally wounded. Gad remained part of Israel until the kingdom came to an end, and its inhabitants eventually were taken into exile by the Assyrians.

A son of Nahor, Abraham’s brother, with his concubine Reumah (Gen. 22:24).

One of the ancestors of the temple servants (Nethinim) who returned to Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity under the leadership of Zerubbabel in 539 BC or soon after (Ezra 2:47; Neh. 7:49). The fact that many of the names in the list of ancestors are foreign has led to the belief that they were originally prisoners of war who were pressed into service to perform menial tasks as they assisted the Levites.

(1) Paul’s missionary companion (along with Aristarchus) who was apprehended by an angry Ephesian crowd until being released at the urging of the city clerk (Acts 19:29). This is likely the same Gaius who traveled with Paul into Macedonia (20:4). (2) A member of the church in Corinth who was baptized by Paul (1 Cor. 1:14) and who showed great hospitality to the entire Corinthian church during Paul’s time in that city (Rom. 16:23). (3) An elder in the church addressed by the author of 3 John who is praised for his faithfulness to the gospel (v. 1).

(1) A Levite, a descendant of Asaph, who returned to Jerusalem after the exile (1 Chron. 9:15). (2) A descendant of Jeduthun and ancestor of Obadiah (1 Chron. 9:16) and Abda (Neh. 11:17), two Levites who returned to Jerusalem after the exile.

An ethnic-geographic area in northern Asia Minor inhabited primarily by peoples of Gaulic and Celtic extraction since the mid-fourth century BC. In 25 BC the Romans conferred provincial status not only on the northern ethnic-geographic Galatian area, but also on parts of Pontus, Phrygia, Pisidia, and Lycaonia, farther to the south. Some of the towns that Paul visited on his first missionary journey (Acts 13–14) were in the southern part of this area: Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe. Very little evidence remains attesting to the presence of either Jews or Christians in the Roman provincial area of Galatia in the first or second century AD, beyond reference in the NT and Christian writings drawing from the NT.

The location of the Galatian churches to which Paul writes in his letter to the Galatians remains a thorny problem. On the one hand, the address (Gal. 1:2) naturally seems to indicate the ethnic-geographic area of the north. On the other hand, if one takes Acts seriously, Paul never traveled in that area and thus had no chance to proclaim the gospel to the ethnic Galatians. Even Acts 16:6 places Paul over 125 miles southwest of this area. Thus, some scholars adopt the South Galatian hypothesis: Paul addresses his letter to people living in the southern part of the Roman province of Galatia and its environs.

An inhabitant of central Asia Minor (modern Turkey). Paul visited the Galatians (Acts 18:23) and wrote to them (Gal. 1:2). The Galatians were among several groups addressed in 1 Pet. 1:1.

An English rendering of the Hebrew word gal’ed, meaning “witness pile” (Gen. 31:47–48). The patriarch Jacob chose “Galeed” as the name for the pile of stones that he and his clan erected as a memorial of the covenant between Jacob and his father-in-law, Laban. The pile also marked the boundary that neither was to cross in order to harm the other. The Aramaic-speaking Laban instead used the equivalent Aramaic term “Jegar Sahadutha.”

Someone who lives in or originates from Galilee. Jesus grew up in the extremely southern part of Galilee, at Nazareth, and his first followers were drawn from throughout the region. Galilee had a population of about three hundred thousand people in two hundred or more villages, as well as several large cities (Josephus, Life 235). Galileans shared a unique dialect (Matt. 26:73; cf. Acts 2:7). The region had a reputation for fomenting rebellion (Luke 13:1; 23:5–6). The Pharisee Gamaliel mentions Judas the Galilean (Acts 5:37), who sparked a revolt against the census under Quirinius around AD 6 (Josephus, J.W. 2.118, 433; Ant. 18.23). Galilee was also associated with non-Jews (Gentiles) primarily because of the Decapolis, a league of approximately ten cities (Matt. 4:12–17, citing Isa. 9:1–2; Mark 7:31). However, archaeological evidence and the NT suggest that Galilean Jews, many of whom colonized the area during the rule of the Maccabees, retained close cultural and religious ties with Judea and the temple (Luke 1:26–27; 2:1–7, 39–40; John 4:45).

The northern region of Israel. The name can mean “circle,” “region,” or “district.” Determining the region’s precise boundaries is difficult, but in Jesus’ time it appears to have encompassed an area of about forty-five miles north to south and twenty-five miles east to west, with the Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee forming the eastern border. Josephus divides the region into Upper and Lower Galilee. Upper Galilee contains elevations of up to about four thousand feet and is comprised mostly of rugged mountains, while Lower Galilee reaches a maximum height of about two thousand feet and is characterized by numerous fertile valleys. Lower Galilee was the site of most of Jesus’ ministry.

Galilee appears several times in the OT (e.g., Josh. 20:7; 1 Kings 9:11; 1 Chron. 6:76). It was part of the land given to the twelve tribes (Josh. 19). Since Galilee was distant from Jerusalem, which played the most prominent part in Jewish history, much of its history is not mentioned in the OT. Many of the references that do occur are military references, such as Joshua’s defeat of the kings at the waters of Merom (Josh. 11:1–9) and the Assyrian removal of the northern kingdom of Israel (Isa. 9:1). However, its great beauty, particularly of mountains such as Carmel, Hermon, and Lebanon, was the source of numerous images and metaphors in the poetic and prophetic literature (e.g., Ps. 133:3; Isa. 33:9; 35:2; Jer. 46:18).

Galilee figures more prominently in the NT. Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and conducted much of his early ministry there. Luke specifically identifies Galilee as the place where Jesus’ ministry began before spreading to Judea (Luke 23:5; Acts 10:37). Galilee is also portrayed as the place where Jesus will reunite with his disciples following the resurrection (Mark 16:7) and where he gives them the Great Commission (Matt. 28:16–20).

An ambiguous term referring to bitterness or something bitter. The NIV uses “gall” six times to translate three different Hebrew words and one Greek word, although other translations use various other words in these texts. The first of these is merorah, translated in Deut. 32:32 as “bitterness.” In the book of Job it is understood to mean “gall” (16:13 [here meaning “bile”]), “venom” (20:14), and the “liver” (20:25). The second word is ro’sh, which occurs about a dozen times and most often refers to poison or something poisonous (e.g., Ps. 69:21; Lam. 3:19). Some understand this word to refer to hemlock, while others believe it to be opium poppies or some other drug-yielding plant. Although identifications are numerous, perhaps it is best to understand ro’sh as an ambiguous term encompassing almost any drug, lethal or not. Another word sometimes translated as “gall” is la’anah, which frequently means “bitter” or “bitterness” (e.g., Prov. 5:4; Lam. 3:15). This word is also rendered as “wormwood” in some versions. The Greek word cholē functions as the catchall rendering for these Hebrew words. It occurs many times in ancient sources, though only twice in the NT, once as the gall mixed with wine offered to Jesus at his crucifixion (Matt. 27:34; cf. Ps. 69:21), and again as the metaphorical gall that symbolized the “bitterness” of Simon the Magician (Acts 8:23). It is likely that cholē is the word from which the English word “gall” is derived.

An architectural term (Heb. ’attiq) used in the description of Ezekiel’s vision of the temple complex (Ezek. 41:15–16; 42:3, 5). The precise nature of the spaces mentioned is uncertain. See also the “galleries” in Song 7:5 KJV (Heb. rahat [NIV, NRSV: “tresses”]).

A ship propelled by many oars. The term appears only in Isa. 33:21, where Isaiah prophesies that Jerusalem “will be like a place of broad rivers and streams” that no “galley with oars” or “mighty ship” will navigate.

A town mentioned in Isa. 10:30, which implies that it was located between Gibeah and Laishah, just north of Jerusalem. After his falling out with David, Saul gave his daughter Michal, formerly David’s wife, to Palti, an inhabitant of Gallim (1 Sam. 25:44). The obscurity of the term has led some to identify Gallim with similar-sounding locations, such as Gilgal (Josh. 15:7), Geliloth (Josh. 18:17), or Beth Gilgal (Neh. 12:29). The LXX mentions Gallim (Codex A; Codex B has Galem) in a text that is unparalleled in the Hebrew text, following Josh. 15:59.

The proconsul of Achaia in the years AD 51–52. He was the brother of the Stoic philosopher Seneca, with whom he shared a reputation for anti-Semitism. In Acts 18:12–17, the Jews of Corinth bring Paul before Gallio’s tribunal with the charge of persuading people to worship against the law. Since the charge is brought before the Roman proconsul, this probably refers to Roman law, not Jewish. Under Roman law, Judaism enjoyed the status of being a collegium licita (recognized religion), and so its members were exempt from the obligations of emperor worship. Christianity did not enjoy this status, and the Jewish prosecutors wanted Paul’s preaching be seen as part of a religio illicita (illegal religion).

Gallio did not allow Paul to speak, but he resolved that this was a dispute about words and the Jewish law; he refused to pass judgment. The Jews and Christians were left to settle the issue among themselves. Sosthenes, the ruler of the synagogue, was mistreated, and Gallio showed his total indifference by doing nothing. The fact that Gallio did not side with the Jews against the Christians may have given Christianity greater status in the Roman colony of Corinth. By including this account in Acts, Luke wishes to show that Christianity does not represent a threat to Rome.

The English word “gallon” is used in some Bible versions to render equivalent amounts for Hebrew or Greek measures. For example, the NIV translates the Greek for “one hundred batous” of olive oil (a batos was about eight or nine gallons) into its equivalent of “nine hundred gallons” (Luke 16:6). Similarly, the NIV translates the Greek for “two or three metrētas” (a metrētēs was about nine gallons) as “twenty to thirty gallons” (John 2:6).

(1) Gamaliel the son of Pedahzur is mentioned in Num. 1:10; 2:20; 7:54, 59; 10:23. He is described as the chief of the tribe of Manasseh (Num. 2:20), and he is chosen to help Moses take the census in the wilderness. (2) Gamaliel (also known as Gamaliel the Elder or Gamaliel I), who is mentioned in Acts 5:34; 22:3, was a member of the Sanhedrin, a Pharisee, and a teacher of the law. He is reputed to have been the grandson of the famous sage and scholar Hillel (according to later tradition). He was a member of the Hillel party of the Pharisees, who were renowned for their more liberal interpretation of Scripture when compared with the more conservative Shammai party. In Acts 5:34–40 Gamaliel intervenes at the trial of the apostles before the Sanhedrin with a reasoned speech. Paul acknowledges him as his teacher in Acts 22:3. He is also mentioned in the Mishnah, which says, “When Rabban Gamaliel the Elder died, the glory of the Law ceased and purity and abstinence died” (m. Sotah 9:15).

The Bible contains little information about nonathletic games, but archaeology has revealed numerous types of board games and children’s games in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Canaan. Although actual game pieces and dice have been found, information concerning the rules of the games is lacking. The Hebrew Bible does not describe anything like Greek or Roman games, but the NT makes numerous references to athletic competitions.

Greek games originated with funeral rites that commemorated heroes. The Iliad provides the earliest reference to Greek games as it describes games sponsored by Achilles in memory of Patroklos. The games became an integral part of Greek culture, honored the Greek gods, and were an essential element in a Greek education. Games were held at hundreds of local festivals across the Mediterranean, but the four Panhellenic games were the most prestigious. The games were accompanied by a sacred truce and held in sanctuaries. The Greeks trained and competed in the nude. Initially, running was the only competition, but by the second century AD Pausanius enumerated twenty-four contests, all of which were individual competitions. The specific contests varied from place to place, but the main events included running, chariot racing, long jumping, javelin throwing, discus throwing (2 Macc. 4:14), wrestling, boxing (1 Cor. 9:26), and the pankration, which was a form of all-out fighting. Some of the games included musical competitions. The prize, a wreath, was awarded only for first prize, and the winner of all four Panhellenic games was the periodonikēs. The victor returned home to a hero’s welcome, fame, and gifts. Some examples of cheating and bribery have survived, and those caught were fined.

The Olympic games, established in 776 BC, were the oldest and most prestigious of the Panhellenic games. They were held every four years in the sanctuary complex of Zeus in Olympia. The stadium was typically about 600 feet long, but Olympia’s was the longest, at about 630 feet, because of the tradition that Heracles had laid out the course. The remaining Panhellenic games were established about two hundred years later, in the sixth century BC. The Pythian games were held at the sanctuary of Apollo in Delphi. The Nemean games were held at the sanctuary of Zeus in Argos. The Isthmian games were administered by Corinth at the sanctuary of Poseidon.

The Romans preferred gladiatorial games and wild-game hunts over Greek games. Nevertheless, Romans were allowed to participate in the Panhellenic games. In fact, the emperors Tiberius and Nero participated. The Roman games were wildly popular with the people. By the second century AD, 135 days of games were held each year in Rome. The Circus Maximus was the largest venue, allowing up to two hundred thousand spectators to attend the chariot races. The Colosseum, the largest amphitheater in the Roman Empire, was built in AD 80, financed with spoils taken during the First Jewish Revolt. It held fifty thousand spectators for the gladiatorial games. Prisoners of war, slaves, and criminals condemned to die were forced to fight as gladiators and face wild beasts. Gladiatorial games were held throughout the empire. Herod the Great threw condemned criminals to wild animals in his amphitheater near Jerusalem in order to delight the spectators (Josephus, Ant. 15.273–75). Paul refers to fighting wild beasts in Ephesus (1 Cor. 15:32), though this is likely a metaphor for his spiritual opponents. Roman-style games honored Rome and became a symbol of loyalty to the Roman Empire.

Jewish views toward Greek and Roman games varied. Some Jews, especially those in the Diaspora, embraced the games as spectators and participants (2 Macc. 4:9–14). During the reign of Antiochus IV, some Jewish youth participated in the gymnasium in Jerusalem. They even underwent surgery to cover the signs of their circumcision (1 Macc. 1:12–15). Herod the Great built amphitheaters, stadiums, and hippodromes throughout his kingdom, and Philo of Alexandria frequented the games. However, the authors of 1–2 Maccabees criticize the priests for neglecting their duties by attending the games. Furthermore, the religious association of the games led many conservative Jews to oppose the games.

Because Paul and his audiences were familiar with Greek and Roman games, he drew upon them as analogies to the Christian life. During Paul’s eighteen-month ministry in Corinth, the nearby Isthmian games were played. Through references to training and competition, Paul demonstrates the need to be disciplined, focused, determined as an athlete (1 Cor. 9:24–27; 2 Tim. 4:7; cf. Heb. 12:1). In contrast to the wreath won by Greek athletes, Christians strive for an eternal prize and a crown of righteousness (1 Cor. 9:27; Phil. 3:14; 2 Tim. 4:7–8).

A place of uncertain location mentioned in Ezekiel’s lament concerning Tyre (Ezek. 27). The “men of Gammad” (KJV: “Gammadims”) are one of several groups of people named in connection with Tyre. The men of Gammad specifically were “in [Tyre’s] towers” (27:11), meaning that they defended the city. The Hebrew word (gammadim) may be a reference to a type of warrior (cf. ASV: “valorous men”) and not a proper noun, but most modern translators understand “Gammad” to be a place name.

A place of uncertain location mentioned in Ezekiel’s lament concerning Tyre (Ezek. 27). The “men of Gammad” (KJV: “Gammadims”) are one of several groups of people named in connection with Tyre. The men of Gammad specifically were “in [Tyre’s] towers” (27:11), meaning that they defended the city. The Hebrew word (gammadim) may be a reference to a type of warrior (cf. ASV: “valorous men”) and not a proper noun, but most modern translators understand “Gammad” to be a place name.

The head of a division of priests during the reign of David (1 Chron. 24:17).

The decay or death of body tissue after an injury due to loss of blood supply. In ancient times it also referred to a spreading ulcer or cancer. Paul compares the unchecked spread of the teaching of those who indulge in “godless chatter” to gangrene (2 Tim. 2:17).

The word “gang” appears only rarely in English translations of the Bible (e.g., Judg. 11:3 NIV; 1 Kings 11:24 NLT), but other terms with a similar meaning—a group of people gathered together under common allegiance to accomplish some purpose, often malicious—occur throughout Scripture. Most prominent are groups of raiders who rob (Hos. 7:1) and pillage (1 Sam. 30:15–16). Generally, these groups are from outside Israel (e.g., 2 Kings 13:20; 24:2), though David has his own “raiding bands” (1 Chron. 12:18), and Job accuses God of besieging him with his “troops” (Job 19:12), using the same Hebrew word (gedud). Job loses his property to two such raiding parties (Job 1:15, 17). Hosea compares the actions of priests to marauders in ambush (Hos. 6:9). The bands that surround and threaten the life of the psalmist (Pss. 22:16; 86:14) might also be considered gangs. The Hebrew word there (’edah) also describes the followers of Korah who opposed Moses (Num. 16:5). In Egypt the Israelites were forced into work gangs (Exod. 1:11), and later Solomon conscripted the foreigners in Israel into his own slave labor force (1 Kings 9:21). In the NT, large crowds often threaten Jesus (Luke 4:29–30) and his followers (Acts 14:19; 16:22; 21:27). But with the exception of those from the chief priests led by Judas (Matt. 26:47; Mark 14:43; Luke 22:47; John 18:3) and the gang of over forty Jewish men who bound themselves in an oath to murder the apostle Paul (Acts 23:12–13), these groups do not seem organized enough to qualify as gangs.

An enclosed farming area where vegetables and fruit trees are cultivated. Vineyards, orchards, and olive groves belong to a broader category of the garden. Gardens in biblical times generally were surrounded by a wall of mud-bricks or stones, along with a hedge of thorny bushes (Prov. 24:31; Song 4:12; Isa. 5:5). A booth or watchtower was set up to guard it from thieves and wild animals (Job 27:18; Isa. 1:8; 5:2). For irrigation, water was raised from wells or brought in through a canal system connected to rivers or springs.

Since most of the land of Canaan was a hilly and arid region, a well-watered garden was highly valued. Thus Balaam blesses the tents of the Israelites to be “like gardens beside a river” (Num. 24:6–7; cf. Ps. 1:3; Jer. 17:8). Notably, in Gen. 13:10 the Plain of Jordan, in its fertility from the ample water supply, is likened to two places: “the garden of the Lord” and “the land of Egypt.” The land of Egypt had developed vegetable gardens, with an irrigation system connected to the Nile (Deut. 11:10; cf. Num. 11:5). The garden of the Lord, or the garden of Eden, was also such a place of fruitfulness, with rivers and fruit trees, especially the tree of life (Gen. 2:9–10).

The garden of Eden also carries various connotations that are developed in the rest of the Bible. It is a place secluded from the world, where nakedness is not shameful (Gen. 2:25). Song of Songs describes the garden as a place of perfect love. It is also a meeting place between God and human beings (Gen. 2:16–17; 3:8–14; cf. idolatrous gardens in Isa. 1:29–31; 65:3; 66:17). More important, God is the gardener who planted it (Gen. 2:8).

The metaphorical identification of God as the gardener is frequently developed in the OT. In Deut. 11:10–12 the land of Canaan is described as a garden that God himself will take care of. Isaiah presents Zion as the vineyard that God planted and cultivated but decided to destroy due to its unfruitfulness (Isa. 5:1–7; cf. Jer. 12:10; Ezek. 19:10; Joel 2:3); after the time of its desolation, however, God also promises to restore and care for it (Isa. 27:2–6). Restored Zion is likened to a well-watered garden and even the garden of Eden (Isa. 51:3; 58:11; 61:11; cf. Jer. 31:12; Ezek. 36:34–35; 47:12).

Descriptions of God as the gardener perhaps convey the conception of kingship. Gardens belonged to socially prestigious people, especially royalty, as indicated by the references to the king’s garden at Jerusalem (2 Kings 25:4; Jer. 39:4; 52:7; Neh. 3:15) as well as the Persian palace garden (Esther 1:5; 7:7–8). But a royal garden was particularly regarded as the main achievement of a king (Eccles. 2:4–6; also note the story of Naboth’s vineyard in 1 Kings 21). The allusions to the garden of Eden in the taunt songs of the kings of Tyre, Assyria, and Pharaoh (Ezek. 28:13; 31:8–9, 16, 18) also support this relationship.

Metaphorical use of the garden continues in the NT. The people of God are described as the vegetation whose fruits reveal their identities (cf. Matt. 7:16–19). The need to bear fruit is particularly emphasized in the vineyard imagery of John 15, in which God is introduced as a farmer, Jesus as the vine, and believers as its branches. Paul mentions the bearing of fruit as the goal of Christian life (Rom. 7:4–5; Phil. 1:11; Col. 1:10), which is possible through the work of the Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:22–25). Revelation 21:1–22:5 describes the new Jerusalem as a restored garden of Eden, in the midst of which a river of life, issuing from beneath God’s throne, provides abundant water for the tree of life on both sides.

Also noteworthy is the reference in the Gospel of John to the two gardens: the garden of Jesus’ arrest (18:1–11) and the garden of Jesus’ burial (19:41). Considering their location in Jerusalem and the usage of royal gardens for burial (cf. 2 Kings 21:18), it seems that John mentions the gardens in order to underline Jesus’ kingship, which he particularly develops in John 18–19. Mary’s perception of the risen Christ as a gardener possibly supports this interpretation (John 20:15).

(1) One of David’s mighty men, called “the Ithrite” (2 Sam. 23:38; 1 Chron. 11:40). (2) A hill prophesied to be included in the new boundaries of Jerusalem (Jer. 31:38–40).

English versions use the word “garland” to translate several Hebrew and Greek words referring to floral wreaths worn on the head, usually to bestow honor as a celebratory adornment. In the book of Proverbs, a garland indicates the honor bestowed on those who are wise (1:9; 4:9). A bridegroom wore a garland, while his bride was adorned with jewels (Isa. 61:10 NRSV). Laurel wreaths or garlands were given to victorious athletes in the Greek games (1 Cor. 9:25 [NIV: “crown”]), and the priest of Zeus in Lystra brought garlands as gifts for Paul and Barnabas to honor them as gods (Acts 14:13 [NIV: “wreaths”]). In the great day of salvation, God will symbolically be “a garland of glory” for his people (Isa. 28:5 NRSV [NIV: “glorious crown”]).

Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.

In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).

Articles of Clothing

A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.

In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).

Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).

The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il  ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).

In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).

Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).

Special Functions of Clothing

According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).

Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).

Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).

Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.

Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).

Some English translations of Isa. 3:23 (RSV, NRSV) use the phrase “garments of gauze” to describe an adornment worn by the women of Jerusalem that God will snatch away from them when he judges Jerusalem. The meaning of the Hebrew term (gillayon) is uncertain, however, and probably refers to a garment or scarf of some kind (TEV: “revealing garments”; JPS: “lace gowns”; REB: “scarves of gauze”; NET, HCSB: “garments”) or to a mirror (NIV, ESV, NLT, JB, NAB). In Isa. 8:1 the same term is translated “scroll” or “tablet.”

A word used to describe Keilah, a descendant of Judah and Hodiah (1 Chron. 4:19). The meaning of “Garmite” is uncertain; it may denote Keilah’s ancestry or his hometown, or it may indicate something else about him.

The KJV rendering of the Hebrew words mazu (Ps. 144:13) and ’otsar (Joel 1:17) and the Greek word apothēkē (Matt. 3:12 // Luke 3:17), referring to barns or granaries.

A military outpost or the soldiers stationed at a post located on a frontier or at a distance from the central headquarters of an occupying military force. In the OT, there were Philistine outposts in Israel when Saul was king (1 Sam. 10:5), which both he and his son Jonathan attacked (1 Sam. 13:3–4; 14:1, 4, 6, 11, 12, 15). David encountered a Philistine garrison encamped in Bethlehem (2 Sam. 23:13; 1 Chron. 11:17) and established his own garrisons in Damascus and in Edom (2 Sam. 8:6, 14; 1 Chron. 18:6, 13). During the time of the divided kingdom, King Jehoshaphat stationed garrisons in the cities of Judah and Ephraim (2 Chron. 17:12). In the NT, Paul escapes from the garrison-guarded city of Damascus (2 Cor. 11:32–33).

The act of cutting the skin in a ritual of mourning (Jer. 41:5; 47:5) or as part of pagan religion (1 Kings 18:28). In the NIV, it is referred to as “cutting” or “slashing” oneself.

An Arab, king of Qedar, who resisted Nehemiah’s efforts to rebuild Jerusalem’s wall. He and his associates (Sanballat and Tobiah) appealed to the Persian king but ultimately were unsuccessful (Neh. 2:19; 6:1–2, 6). During the Persian period the Qedarites were located to the south of Palestine and in the Nile Delta region of Egypt. A reference to Geshem has been found on a silver container discovered at Tel el-Maskhuta in Egypt. “Gashmu” is an alternate spelling in Neh. 6:6 (see KJV).

An Arab, king of Qedar, who resisted Nehemiah’s efforts to rebuild Jerusalem’s wall. He and his associates (Sanballat and Tobiah) appealed to the Persian king but ultimately were unsuccessful (Neh. 2:19; 6:1–2, 6). During the Persian period the Qedarites were located to the south of Palestine and in the Nile Delta region of Egypt. A reference to Geshem has been found on a silver container discovered at Tel el-Maskhuta in Egypt. “Gashmu” is an alternate spelling in Neh. 6:6 (see KJV).

A descendant of Esau through his son Eliphaz (Gen. 36:11; 1 Chron. 1:36). One of the clans of the Edomites derives its name from Gatam (Gen. 36:16).

A controlled point of entry into an otherwise enclosed area such as a city (Gen. 34:24; Ps. 122:2; Acts 9:24), camp (Exod. 32:26–27), tabernacle court (Exod. 35:17), palace (2 Kings 11:19), temple area (Jer. 36:10; Ezek. 40), prison (Acts 12:10), or house (Acts 10:17).

In the OT, the city gate has a central role in that city’s military, economic, judicial, political, and religious aspects of life. A key component of the defense system of a city, the gate consists of doors fortified with bars (Judg. 16:3; Ps. 107:16; Nah. 3:13) and keeps invading armies out while also serving as the point of departure and return for the city’s army (2 Sam. 18:4; cf. God the warrior entering in Ps. 24:7–8). The gate also may serve as the location where news of the battle is delivered (1 Sam. 4:18; 2 Sam. 18:24). The destruction of the city gate usually means the destruction of the city (Isa. 24:12).

In the economic life of the city, the gate functions as a place of commerce (Gen. 23; 2 Kings 7:1) and music (Lam. 5:14). At the entrance to the city gate, the city elders assembled daily to hear cases and render judgment (Job 29:7; Prov. 24:7). Along with the elders, there might be additional witnesses (Ruth 4:1–11; Ps. 69:12). For criminal cases, the gate may also be the location where punishment is enacted (Deut. 17:5; 22:24). Thus, the gate is to be a place where all people can come to obtain justice (2 Sam. 15:2–4; Isa. 29:21; Amos 5:15). The gate may hold a seat reserved for the king (2 Sam. 19:8) as well as the king’s officials (Esther 2:19–21; 3:2–3). The city gate might also contain shrines to various gods (2 Kings 23:8; cf. Acts 14:13).

A city may have more than one gate (Jer. 17:19), each having a different name. For example, when Nehemiah sets out to rebuild the wall and gates of Jerusalem, there is mention of the Valley Gate, the Dung Gate, and the Fountain Gate (Neh. 2:11–17) as well as the Sheep Gate (3:1) and the Jeshanah Gate (3:6).

Some references to gates refer to those of the temple area (Ezek. 44; 46; Pss. 100:4; 118:19–20). In Ezek. 48 the temple area is to have twelve gates, each named after a tribe of Israel (Ezek. 48:30–35; cf. Rev. 21:12–25). The prophet Jeremiah proclaims the word of the Lord from both the city gate(s) (Jer. 17:19–27) and the temple gate(s) (7:1–4).

In the NT, Jesus raises the dead son of a widow at the town gate (Luke 7:11–17) and heals a lame man near the Sheep Gate (John 5:1–15). Peter heals a crippled man near the temple gate (Acts 3:1–10). Jesus mentions gates in his teaching, including a call to enter through the narrow gate of life (Matt. 7:13–14), and his parable of the sheep and the gate, in which Jesus refers to himself as the gate (John 10:1–18). See also City Gates.

A gate of Jerusalem located in the southeastern part of the city. It is through this gate that Zedekiah flees Nebuchadnezzar’s attack on Jerusalem (2 Kings 25:4; Jer. 39:4; 52:7). The gate is located near the king’s gardens and therefore would have overlooked the southern end of the Kidron Valley.

A gate of Jerusalem mentioned only in Neh. 12:39. It should be associated with the court of the guards (cf. Jer. 32:3; 33:1; 37:14–21; 38:6–28; 39:12–18). Based on the accounts of Jeremiah’s imprisonment and the procession of Nehemiah, this gate was between the royal palace precinct and the Temple Mount.

One who guards entrances into the city (at the gates), the palace, or the temple. Temple gatekeepers always were priests, who were charged to maintain the purity of the sacred area (1 Chron. 9:17–32; 2 Chron. 34:13; 35:15; Neh. 12:25). See also Doorkeeper.

The gates of Jerusalem and the temple have varied throughout history. Gates usually were given names that represented their function, activity, or the direction of travel. Most of what we know of gates during OT times is derived from Nehemiah’s inspection and description of the destroyed city.

Jerusalem contained several gates during the OT period. On the eastern wall was the Fountain Gate. Just south of this gate was the Potsherd Gate, later becoming the Dung Gate. On the southwest corner was the Valley Gate. On the northern wall were the Ephraim Gate (later called “Middle Gate”) and possibly the Fish Gate.

Gates that were either associated with or near the temple were the Muster Gate, Horse Gate, Gate of the Guard, and the Water Gate (possibly also called “East Gate”), the temple gate facing the north, New Gate, Horse Gate, and the upper Benjamin Gate (also Sheep Gate?).

Josephus recounts ten gates associated with the temple: four each on the north and south and two on the east. The gate that led to the court of the women may have been the Beautiful Gate (Acts 3:2), and the gate between the court of the women and the court of Israel probably was the Nicanor Gate. The Todi Gate was on the north; the Coponius Gate (Barclay’s Gate), Wilson’s Arch, and Warren’s Gate were on the west. The south side of the Temple Mount had two large gates: the Double Gate and the Triple Gate. Josephus mentions only two city gates: the Gate of the Essenes and the Gennath Gate.

The gates of Jerusalem and the temple have varied throughout history. Gates usually were given names that represented their function, activity, or the direction of travel. Most of what we know of gates during OT times is derived from Nehemiah’s inspection and description of the destroyed city.

Jerusalem contained several gates during the OT period. On the eastern wall was the Fountain Gate. Just south of this gate was the Potsherd Gate, later becoming the Dung Gate. On the southwest corner was the Valley Gate. On the northern wall were the Ephraim Gate (later called “Middle Gate”) and possibly the Fish Gate.

Gates that were either associated with or near the temple were the Muster Gate, Horse Gate, Gate of the Guard, and the Water Gate (possibly also called “East Gate”), the temple gate facing the north, New Gate, Horse Gate, and the upper Benjamin Gate (also Sheep Gate?).

Josephus recounts ten gates associated with the temple: four each on the north and south and two on the east. The gate that led to the court of the women may have been the Beautiful Gate (Acts 3:2), and the gate between the court of the women and the court of Israel probably was the Nicanor Gate. The Todi Gate was on the north; the Coponius Gate (Barclay’s Gate), Wilson’s Arch, and Warren’s Gate were on the west. The south side of the Temple Mount had two large gates: the Double Gate and the Triple Gate. Josephus mentions only two city gates: the Gate of the Essenes and the Gennath Gate.

One of the five major cities of the Philistines, each of which was ruled by its own lord (Josh. 13:3). Gath was situated close to the border of Judah. Since the Hebrew word gat means “winepress” and occurs in the names of several places (e.g., Gath Rimmon, Gath Hepher, Moresheth Gath), there may have been other towns of this name. Some of the biblical references (e.g., 1 Chron. 7:21; 8:13) may not be to Philistine Gath.

The most likely site of Philistine Gath is Tell es-Safi, overlooking the main north-south road through the Shephelah to the west of Jerusalem. Excavations here suggest that the site was inhabited in the pre-Israelite period and during the first millennium BC. Although the city was rebuilt in the Persian period after its destruction by the Babylonians, it seems to have been abandoned between the late first century BC and Crusader times.

At the time of the conquest, Gath (mentioned in the Amarna letters of the fourteenth century BC) was inhabited by the formidable Anakites, whom Joshua failed to dislodge (Josh. 11:21–22; see also Deut. 1:28; 9:2), and in David’s day it still boasted warriors of great height and strength (2 Sam. 21:19–22; 1 Chron. 20:5–8). However, it was also one of the cities that God afflicted with tumors when the captured ark of the covenant was stored there (1 Sam. 5:8–9; 6:17), and the mighty Goliath of Gath was no match for God’s anointed (1 Sam. 17:8–58).

On two occasions David fled from Saul to Achish, king of Gath. The first time, he was so scared of Achish that he feigned insanity and escaped as soon as he could (1 Sam. 21:10–22:1; cf. the superscription to Ps. 56). The second time, he settled down with six hundred men and their families to deceive Achish in a different way: he used Gath as a base to attack Israel’s other enemies (1 Sam. 27:1–30:31), all the while claiming that he was wreaking revenge on Saul. When Achish himself defeated Saul and Jonathan, David was horrified by the thought that the town of Gath would hear of their deaths and gloat (2 Sam. 1:20). His horror is poetically echoed in Micah’s eighth-century BC lament over a doomed Judah (Mic. 1:10).

David seems nevertheless to have made friends as well as enemies in Gath. Obed-Edom the Gittite was blessed rather than cursed when the ark was kept at his house before its final journey to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6:10–11; 1 Chron. 13:3). After David had conquered Gath (1 Chron. 18:1), the six hundred Gittite mercenaries in his army were among his most loyal followers (2 Sam. 15:18–22).

Gath seems to have changed hands fairly frequently thereafter. We know that Achish ruled it in Solomon’s day, when Shimei retrieved his runaway slaves from there (1 Kings 2:39–46), and that it was again in Philistine hands when Uzziah broke down its walls (2 Chron. 26:6). In between, however, we are told that Rehoboam of Judah fortified it (2 Chron. 11:8), and that in Joash’s reign Hazael of Aram conquered it (2 Kings 12:17). The fact that Amos mentions Gath as “in Philistia” (Amos 6:2) but does not group it with the other four cities of the Philistines (1:6–8) may mean that it was under Israelite control at the time. Assyrian records from the eighth century BC describe several campaigns against rebellious Philistine cities, including the city of Gath (Annals of Sargon II).

A town in Zebulun on the border with Naphtali (Josh. 19:13), the home of the prophet Jonah (2 Kings 14:25). It is identified with Khirbet ez-Zurra’, near the modern village of el-Meshhed, about three miles northeast of Nazareth (note connection of Jesus and Jonah in Matt. 12:39–41). An alternate spelling, “Gittah-Hepher,” reflecting an alternate Hebrew form, is found in some older translations of Josh. 19:13.

One of the cities allotted to the tribe of Dan (Josh. 19:45), later given to the Kohathite clans of the Levites (Josh. 21:24). The parallel in 1 Chron. 6:69 says that the city was given to the Kohathite clans from Ephraim (but see Josh. 21:23, missing from the 1 Chronicles account, which locates the city in Dan). In Josh. 21:25 Gath Rimmon is placed in the territory of the half-tribe of Manasseh, but in the parallel in 1 Chron. 6:70 the town is called “Bileam.” This confusion over Gath Rimmon is usually attributed to copyist error. Modern scholars identify Gath Rimmon with either Tell Jerisheh or Tell Abu Zeitun. The sites are near each other, and it cannot be determined with certainty which is the location of Gath Rimmon.

The biblical site of Gaza is located at Tell Harube/Tell ’Azza, which is beneath the modern Palestinian city of Gaza. It is strategically situated in southern Palestine near the Egyptian border and is approximately three miles from the Mediterranean Sea. Initial excavations were led by W. J. Phythian-Adams in 1922 under the auspices of the Palestine Exploration Fund. Additional excavations were directed by Asher Ovadiah in 1967 and 1976.

In the Late Bronze Age (1550–1200 BC), Gaza was under the control of Egypt. It is first mentioned in the annals of Thutmose III as the provincial capital of Canaan, and it functioned as an Egyptian administrative center in the Amarna and Taanach letters. At the beginning of the Iron Age (1200 BC), the Sea Peoples (especially the Philistines) took control of this coastal region. This scenario is reflected in Deut. 2:23, which states that the Caphtorites (i.e., the Philistines) displaced the Avvites. Joshua 11:22 also states that after the Israelite conquest, the giant Anakim only remained in Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod (they were most likely assimilated into Philistine culture, perhaps as mercenaries). These three cities, along with Ekron and Ashkelon, comprise the Philistine Pentapolis (Josh. 13:3; 1 Sam. 6:17–18). The Pentapolis remained unconquered at the end of Joshua’s life (Josh. 13:3), even though Ekron, Ashdod, and Gaza were included in Judah’s allotment (15:45–47). The Judahites took brief control of Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, which they were unable to maintain due to the Philistines’ employment of “iron chariots” on the plains (Judg. 1:18–19). During the period of the judges, Gaza is prominently featured in the exploits of Samson. The city is described as having a gate and a multistoried temple (Judg. 16:1–3, 26). After David’s conquests of the Philistines, King Solomon is said to have dominion over a vast region including Gaza (1 Kings 4:24). In the second half of the eighth century BC, Gaza became an Assyrian vassal (under Tiglath-pileser III). King Hezekiah also briefly subdued the region (2 Kings 18:8), but Gaza remained an Assyrian vassal until the end of the seventh century, when the city was briefly occupied by Pharaoh Necho II and then fell to Nebuchadnezzar (see Jer. 47:1–2, 5). Gaza is mentioned in a number of prophetic oracles against Philistia (Jer. 25:20; 47:1; Amos 1:6–7; Zeph. 2:4; Zech. 9:5). It appears only one time in the NT, when Philip is traveling toward Gaza and encounters the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:26).

The biblical site of Gaza is located at Tell Harube/Tell ’Azza, which is beneath the modern Palestinian city of Gaza. It is strategically situated in southern Palestine near the Egyptian border and is approximately three miles from the Mediterranean Sea. Initial excavations were led by W. J. Phythian-Adams in 1922 under the auspices of the Palestine Exploration Fund. Additional excavations were directed by Asher Ovadiah in 1967 and 1976.

In the Late Bronze Age (1550–1200 BC), Gaza was under the control of Egypt. It is first mentioned in the annals of Thutmose III as the provincial capital of Canaan, and it functioned as an Egyptian administrative center in the Amarna and Taanach letters. At the beginning of the Iron Age (1200 BC), the Sea Peoples (especially the Philistines) took control of this coastal region. This scenario is reflected in Deut. 2:23, which states that the Caphtorites (i.e., the Philistines) displaced the Avvites. Joshua 11:22 also states that after the Israelite conquest, the giant Anakim only remained in Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod (they were most likely assimilated into Philistine culture, perhaps as mercenaries). These three cities, along with Ekron and Ashkelon, comprise the Philistine Pentapolis (Josh. 13:3; 1 Sam. 6:17–18). The Pentapolis remained unconquered at the end of Joshua’s life (Josh. 13:3), even though Ekron, Ashdod, and Gaza were included in Judah’s allotment (15:45–47). The Judahites took brief control of Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, which they were unable to maintain due to the Philistines’ employment of “iron chariots” on the plains (Judg. 1:18–19). During the period of the judges, Gaza is prominently featured in the exploits of Samson. The city is described as having a gate and a multistoried temple (Judg. 16:1–3, 26). After David’s conquests of the Philistines, King Solomon is said to have dominion over a vast region including Gaza (1 Kings 4:24). In the second half of the eighth century BC, Gaza became an Assyrian vassal (under Tiglath-pileser III). King Hezekiah also briefly subdued the region (2 Kings 18:8), but Gaza remained an Assyrian vassal until the end of the seventh century, when the city was briefly occupied by Pharaoh Necho II and then fell to Nebuchadnezzar (see Jer. 47:1–2, 5). Gaza is mentioned in a number of prophetic oracles against Philistia (Jer. 25:20; 47:1; Amos 1:6–7; Zeph. 2:4; Zech. 9:5). It appears only one time in the NT, when Philip is traveling toward Gaza and encounters the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:26).

A small, fast antelope, the gazelle is mentioned over a dozen times in the OT. The animal was considered clean and permitted as food for the Israelites (Deut. 12:15, 22). It was a symbol of speed and agility (2 Sam. 2:18) as well as beauty and grace (Song 2:9).

Located in the Aijalon Valley, Gezer guarded the route from the seacoast up to Jerusalem. Gezer (Tell Jezer, Tell Jazari) is a mound, thirty-three acres in size, situated in the foothills of Judah. It is known from biblical, Egyptian, and Assyrian sources. Gezer was a major Canaanite city-state throughout the second millennium BC. The city was destroyed around 1500 BC and rebuilt during the Late Bronze Age, when it came under Egyptian hegemony. Joshua defeated the king of Gezer, who was part of a Canaanite coalition (Josh. 10:33). Gezer remained in Canaanite hands throughout the period of the judges (Josh. 16:10; Judg. 1:29), even though it formed the boundary for Ephraim’s tribal allotment (Josh. 16:3) and was assigned as a Levitical city (Josh. 21:21). David fought against the Philistines near Gezer (2 Sam. 5:25; 1 Chron. 20:4).

Gezer was conquered by Egypt and given as a dowry to Solomon. Solomon fortified Gezer along with Jerusalem, Hazor, and Megiddo (1 Kings 9:15–17). Gezer was destroyed by Shishak (c. 950–925 BC). It was rebuilt and destroyed by the Assyrians under Tiglath-pileser III (733 BC). Gezer became known as Gazara in the Hellenistic period and became an important city for the Hasmonean rulers.

(1) A son of Caleb by his concubine Ephah (1 Chron. 2:46a). (2) A grandson of Caleb, born to Haran, brother of the first Gazez (1 Chron. 2:46b), making the two Gazezes uncle and nephew.

The biblical site of Gaza is located at Tell Harube/Tell ’Azza, which is beneath the modern Palestinian city of Gaza. It is strategically situated in southern Palestine near the Egyptian border and is approximately three miles from the Mediterranean Sea. Initial excavations were led by W. J. Phythian-Adams in 1922 under the auspices of the Palestine Exploration Fund. Additional excavations were directed by Asher Ovadiah in 1967 and 1976.

In the Late Bronze Age (1550–1200 BC), Gaza was under the control of Egypt. It is first mentioned in the annals of Thutmose III as the provincial capital of Canaan, and it functioned as an Egyptian administrative center in the Amarna and Taanach letters. At the beginning of the Iron Age (1200 BC), the Sea Peoples (especially the Philistines) took control of this coastal region. This scenario is reflected in Deut. 2:23, which states that the Caphtorites (i.e., the Philistines) displaced the Avvites. Joshua 11:22 also states that after the Israelite conquest, the giant Anakim only remained in Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod (they were most likely assimilated into Philistine culture, perhaps as mercenaries). These three cities, along with Ekron and Ashkelon, comprise the Philistine Pentapolis (Josh. 13:3; 1 Sam. 6:17–18). The Pentapolis remained unconquered at the end of Joshua’s life (Josh. 13:3), even though Ekron, Ashdod, and Gaza were included in Judah’s allotment (15:45–47). The Judahites took brief control of Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, which they were unable to maintain due to the Philistines’ employment of “iron chariots” on the plains (Judg. 1:18–19). During the period of the judges, Gaza is prominently featured in the exploits of Samson. The city is described as having a gate and a multistoried temple (Judg. 16:1–3, 26). After David’s conquests of the Philistines, King Solomon is said to have dominion over a vast region including Gaza (1 Kings 4:24). In the second half of the eighth century BC, Gaza became an Assyrian vassal (under Tiglath-pileser III). King Hezekiah also briefly subdued the region (2 Kings 18:8), but Gaza remained an Assyrian vassal until the end of the seventh century, when the city was briefly occupied by Pharaoh Necho II and then fell to Nebuchadnezzar (see Jer. 47:1–2, 5). Gaza is mentioned in a number of prophetic oracles against Philistia (Jer. 25:20; 47:1; Amos 1:6–7; Zeph. 2:4; Zech. 9:5). It appears only one time in the NT, when Philip is traveling toward Gaza and encounters the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:26).

One of the ancestors of the temple servants (Nethinim) who returned to Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity under the leadership of Zerubbabel in 539 BC or soon after (Ezra 2:48; Neh. 7:51). The fact that many of the names in the list of ancestors are foreign has led to the belief that they were originally prisoners of war who were pressed into service to perform menial tasks as they assisted the Levites.

It is not entirely clear whether this is a person or a geographic location. The word occurs in a record of the clans of the tribe of Judah (1 Chron. 4:14). The NIV sees it as a place name, saying that Joab was “the father of Ge Harashim. It was called this because its people were skilled workers.” Thus, the NIV understands this word to be the place where this clan resided. The NASB, though in a footnote it recognizes the ambiguity, translates the word as a proper name: “Joab the father of Ge-harashim, for they were craftsmen.”

Situated on the eastern edge of the central Benjamin Plateau, Geba (modern Jeba) and its sister city, Mikmash (Mukhmas), were about six miles north of Jerusalem on a significant route from the Jordan Valley up into the hill country. Although a branch of the Wadi Qilt separates the two towns, a “saddle” across that deep valley made travel easier between them. This geographical feature emerges in the description of the Assyrian advance toward Jerusalem (Isa. 10:28–29).

The name “Geba” comes from the Hebrew three-letter root meaning “hill” and is sufficiently similar to “Gibeah” that some have suggested that Geba, Geba of Benjamin (1 Sam. 13:16), Gibeah (Judg. 19–20), Gibeah of Benjamin (1 Sam. 13:2, 15; 14:16), and Gibeah of Saul (e.g., 1 Sam. 10:26; 11:4) are the same location. The best reading of the texts, however, indicates that Geba and Gibeah are at least two separate locations (1 Sam. 13:2–3; Isa. 10:29). Gibeah of Saul is Tell el-Ful, approximately two miles south of Jeba.

During the early years of Saul’s monarchy, the Philistines had an outpost at Geba, between the forces of Saul at Mikmash and those of Jonathan at Gibeah of Benjamin (1 Sam. 13:2–3). When they lost Geba to Jonathan, they regrouped at Mikmash, across the pass. Jonathan and his armor-bearer set out from Geba, descended into the wadi, climbed up the other side, and attacked and conquered the Philistine outpost (1 Sam. 14).

King Baasha of the north created a stranglehold on the southern kingdom by seizing Ramah, a critical crossroad point north of Jerusalem between Geba and Mizpah. Asa, king of the south, appealed to Ben-Hadad of Aram, who attacked the northern border of Baasha’s territory. Asa wrested control of Ramah back from Baasha and fortified both Geba to the east and Mizpah to the west, making certain to hold the access routes to the central Benjamin Plateau from both east and west (1 Kings 15:16–22).

The son of Uri, he was a governor of Gilead during the reign of Solomon (1 Kings 4:19). Whether Ben-Geber (“son of Geber”), mentioned in 1 Kings 4:13, is his son or is Geber himself is a matter of some speculation.

A place mentioned only in Isa. 10:31, in a prophecy of the advance of the Assyrian army against Jerusalem. Its location is uncertain, but apparently it lay somewhere in the northern vicinity of Jerusalem, south of Anathoth.

(1) The son of Ahikam and grandson of Josiah’s scribe, Shaphan. After the exile of Zedekiah, he was appointed as governor over Judah by Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon in 587 BC (2 Kings 25:22–26; Jer. 39:14; 40:5–41:18). He not only protected the prophet Jeremiah but also gave the people similar advice, telling those who remained in Judah to serve the Babylonians. He ignored the warning of Johanan about an assassination plot and, after ruling for only two months, was killed by Ishmael, a representative of Baalis king of the Ammonites. A seal from Lachish appears to refer to him: “belonging to Gedaliah, who is over the house.” (2) A son of Jeduthun, and a temple musician appointed by David to prophesy with instruments (1 Chron. 25:3, 9). (3) A priestly descendant of Joshua who obeyed Ezra’s call to send away his foreign wife (Ezra 10:18). (4) The son of Pashhur, he was one of several officials of Jerusalem who convinced King Zedekiah to throw the prophet Jeremiah into a cistern because of his prediction of death and exile (Jer. 38:1–6). (5) The grandson of Hez-ekiah the king and grandfather of Zephaniah the prophet (Zeph. 1:1).

The fifth judge described in the book of Judges (6:1–8:35). After Deborah’s victory over the Canaanites, Israel again falls into sin, so God turns Israel over to a new oppressor, the Midianites and their allies.

In the past, when Israel has repented as they do in Judg. 6:7, God has immediately brought them a judge to rescue them. This time, however, God first sends a prophet, who berates them for their continual apostasy (6:8–10). Still, the narrative next focuses on Gideon, whom God commissions to rescue Israel from Midian (7:14). Like Barak before him (4:8), however, Gideon does not immediately agree, but rather sets conditions for his participation, asking for a sign. Even after receiving the sign, he first of all acts only locally, tearing down his father’s idolatrous shrine and building a proper altar to Yahweh (6:26–27). Although the people want to punish Gideon out of fear of the Midianites, his father defends him and renames his son “Jerub-Baal,” which means “Let Baal contend with him” (6:32).

At this point, the conflict grows more serious as the Midianites and their allies amass against Israel. Even after the Spirit of the Lord comes upon Gideon, he still sets conditions on God asking for yet another sign, this time putting a fleece in front of God and asking that it be wet while the ground is dry. Even though God meets this condition, Gideon demands a second trial, and only after that is successful does he proceed.

The successful battle against the Midianites is best known for the prebattle dismissal of many of the Israelite troops. Many respond to Gideon’s call to arms. As God demands, Gideon insists that fearful troops leave, but even after ten thousand men leave, twenty-two thousand remain. Ultimately, God instructs Gideon to have the troops drink from the waters of the Wadi Harod. The three hundred who drink water by lapping it with their hands to their mouths are chosen, and with these Gideon wins a great victory. There is nothing special about these three hundred troops. God knows that Gideon has a propensity to self-glorification (“by my hand” [Judg. 6:36]), and God wants to ensure that Israel will not boast in its own strength and will know that it is God who has brought deliverance.

Although Gideon is hesitant and apparently distrustful in answering God’s call, events during and after the battle show his true nature. His humility is in evidence (cf. Judg. 6:15) when he refuses the Israelites’ request to be their king (though later he names one of his sons “Abimelek,” meaning “My father is king”), insisting that God alone will rule them (8:22–23). However, a request of his own becomes an occasion for Israel to plunge back into idolatry when he fashions an ephod from plundered enemy gold, which the Israelites then worship (8:24–27). Even so, the book of Hebrews (11:32) considers him an example of faith.

One of thirty-one conquered cities listed in Josh. 12:9–24 (v. 13). The preceding and following cities suggest either the southern Judean foothills or the northern Negev. Other places, such as Beth-gader, Gederah, Gederoth, Gederothaim, and Gedor, have similar names. An original reading of “Gerar” is possible if a copyist error is considered. Geder may have been the home of Baal-Hanan, a Gederite who was an officer appointed by David to be “in charge of the olive and sycamore-fig trees in the western foothills” (1 Chron. 27:28). Khirbet Jedur has been suggested as a modern location.

(1) A town in the territorial allotment of Judah in the western foothills (Josh. 15:36). Here lived some of the descendants of Shelah son of Judah, noted for their production of pottery for the king (1 Chron. 4:23). Its location is debated. Tell Judeideh north of Beth-Gubrin, Khirbet Judraya in the Elah Valley, Khirbet Jedireh in the Aijalon Valey, Kedron (modern Qatra), and the vicinity of Latrun have been suggested. (2) The home of Jozabad, one of David’s ambidextrous warriors, who was called a “Gederathite” (1 Chron. 12:4). The town possibly was located at Jedireh near Gibeon.

(1) A town in the territorial allotment of Judah in the western foothills (Josh. 15:36). Here lived some of the descendants of Shelah son of Judah, noted for their production of pottery for the king (1 Chron. 4:23). Its location is debated. Tell Judeideh north of Beth-Gubrin, Khirbet Judraya in the Elah Valley, Khirbet Jedireh in the Aijalon Valey, Kedron (modern Qatra), and the vicinity of Latrun have been suggested. (2) The home of Jozabad, one of David’s ambidextrous warriors, who was called a “Gederathite” (1 Chron. 12:4). The town possibly was located at Jedireh near Gibeon.

One of thirty-one conquered cities listed in Josh. 12:9–24 (v. 13). The preceding and following cities suggest either the southern Judean foothills or the northern Negev. Other places, such as Beth-gader, Gederah, Gederoth, Gederothaim, and Gedor, have similar names. An original reading of “Gerar” is possible if a copyist error is considered. Geder may have been the home of Baal-Hanan, a Gederite who was an officer appointed by David to be “in charge of the olive and sycamore-fig trees in the western foothills” (1 Chron. 27:28). Khirbet Jedur has been suggested as a modern location.

A town in the territorial allotment of Judah (Josh. 15:41). This town was captured by the Philistines during the reign of Ahaz, who then requested help from the Assyrians to free the city (2 Chron. 28:16–21). The exact location of the town is unknown, but it likely was on the border between Israel and the Philistine cities in the foothills.

A town in the territorial allotment of Judah located in the western foothills of Judah (Josh. 15:36). There is some scholarly debate about whether this is the actual name of a town (separate from the previously mentioned town of Gederah in Josh. 15:36), a variant name of the town Gederah, or if “Gederothaim” should simply be translated literally (with “Gederah”) as “Gederah and her sheepfolds.”

(1) A Judahite, the son of Penuel, and a descendant of Hur (1 Chron. 4:4). (2) A Judahite, the son of Jered (1 Chron. 4:17–18). (3) A Benjamite who was a great-uncle of King Saul (1 Chron. 8:29–31; 9:35–37). (4) A town in the hill country that was part of Judah’s territorial allotment (Josh. 15:58). Joelah and Zebadiah, who defected from Saul to join David, were from Gedor (1 Chron. 12:7). (5) The Simeonites moved into the areas surrounding the town by this name (1 Chron. 4:39) when they needed room to expand because of the growth of their tribe. It is possible that this is the same town as in Josh. 15:58.

The servant of Elisha the prophet. Gehazi figures prominently in the stories of Naaman and the Shunammite woman. He was likely also the servant with Elisha whose eyes were opened to see the protecting heavenly horses and chariots of fire (2 Kings 6:17).

The Shunammite woman provided hospitality for Elisha, who sought to provide a favor in return. When Gehazi pointed out that she had no son, Elisha prophesied that she would have one the following year, which she did. Years later the boy died, and Gehazi took Elisha’s staff to place upon the boy until Elisha came and brought him back to life (2 Kings 4). After Naaman was healed of leprosy, Gehazi pursued Naaman with a contrived story designed to get clothing and silver from him. As punishment for his presumption, he became a leper (2 Kings 5:20–27).

This name is a Latin and Greek derivation of the Hebrew place name “Valley of Hinnom” (Neh. 11:30), the deep ravine on the southern end of the ancient city of Jerusalem. It was also called the “Valley of Ben Hinnom” (Jer. 19:2) and was the northern boundary of Judah from the time of the conquest (Josh. 15:8; 18:16). It marked the northern boundary of Judahite settlement in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah. This placed the city of Jerusalem just inside Benjamite territory. It became a name of infamy because pagan cultic places were located there during the time of the later monarchy (2 Kings 23:10; 2 Chron. 28:3; 33:6; Jer. 7:31; 32:35), cults that involved the sacrifice of children to Molek and Baal. Jeremiah renamed it the “Valley of Slaughter” (Jer. 7:32; 19:5–6).

It is easy to see, therefore, how in later Jewish writings Gehenna could become a metaphor for the fiery punishment that was the lot of the wicked on the day of judgment. This is reflected in NT usage. Jesus spoke about those who cursed others as being “in danger of the fire of Gehenna [NIV: ‘hell’]” (Matt. 5:22). He said that the fate of the wicked was to have their bodies “thrown into Gehenna [NIV: ‘hell’]” (5:29–30). It is a place of destruction (10:28), and fire is its tormenting and destructive element (18:9). Jesus described every hypocritical Pharisee as “a son of Gehenna [NIV: ‘hell’]” (23:15), for such hypocrisy would lead to their being sent there for punishment (23:33). The fact that this word is repeatedly found on the lips of Jesus (cf. Mark 9:43, 45, 47; Luke 12:5) means that this teaching cannot be dismissed as exaggeration or condemned as inconsistent with loving concern for the sinner facing punishment. Outside the Synoptic Gospels, “Gehenna” appears in the NT only in James 3:6 as part of his teaching on controlling the tongue. See also Hell; Hinnom, Valley of.

A town on the southern boundary of Benjamin’s tribal allotment and the northern boundary of Judah’s allotment (Josh. 18:17), near the Jordan River, where Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh built an “imposing altar” (Josh. 22:10–34).

Precious stones appear in visions and theophanies in the Bible. Examples include Ezek. 1:16; 10:1; Rev. 4:3. These precious stones, also used in jewelry, were well known to people in the ancient Near East and in the first-century Mediterranean basin.

Jewelry known in antiquity is broadly divided into two groups: everyday jewelry and fine jewelry. Everyday jewelry, found commonly among the people, was made of materials such as bronze, iron, and bone. Fine jewelry, on the other hand, consisted of objects crafted from gold or silver and included costly and precious stones. Jewelry was worn both by men and women as part of clothing. The ancients also conserved wealth with investments in jewels or used jewels as indicators of socioeconomic placing in society.

Most gold jewelry had sheet metal as its foundation. This sheet metal was shaped and/or decorated. One form of decoration, filigree, involved soldering wiring in a pattern on a background. A later form of decoration known as granulation used tiny grains of gold as a substitute for wires. An additional method of decorating jewelry was inlaying with colored stones, glass, or other precious items. Engraving was likewise used for decoration.

Jewelry in Antiquity

Jewelry has been discovered in Babylon dating back as far as 2700 BC. Examples of jewelry from this era were found in cemeteries in the city of Ur. Examples of ancient jewelry were likewise found in cemeteries on the island of Crete, dating back to 2400 BC. Other specimens of jewelry come from the Mycenaean world around 1100 BC. Jewelry dating after 800 BC was of high quality. During this period places such as Knossos on Crete and cities such as Corinth and Athens produced beautiful gold work.

By the seventh century BC, the finest jewelry was found on the Greek islands and in Asia Minor. Jewelry in Ephesus was offered to the goddess Diana, yet was also made for personal adornment. By 600 BC, jewelry became very scarce in Greece. This scarcity lasted for the next 150 years. Archaeologists postulate that supplies of gold were cut off by the Persians. After the Persians were defeated during the Classical period, some of the finest gold work was produced. Captured Persian treasures and exploitation of Macedonian mines made gold and precious stones and metals highly accessible to the Greeks. Consequently, jewelry was readily available during the Hellenistic period. The Greeks incorporated a variety of stones in their jewelry: carnelian, chalcedony, amethyst, and garnet, as well as small pearls. Materials and inspiration for the Greeks for certain types of jewelry came from newly conquered territories. In the early Roman Empire jewelry resembled that seen during the Hellenistic period. In general, during the Greek and the Roman periods, jewelry was gold-plated and decorated with costly stones.

Certain writers in antiquity documented well-known or costly jewelry and precious stones. One Roman historian described the value of pearls as the “topmost rank among all things of price.” Correspondingly, he wrote about two pearls owned by Cleopatra, queen of Egypt, known as the largest in history. The Egyptian Book of the Dead, dating to around 1500 BC, makes mention of amulets in the shape of hearts, considered jewelry by some experts. These amulets were made of carnelian, lapis lazuli, and green feldspar.

Jewelry in the biblical world was known by different terms. An ornamental circlet worn singly or as multiples on one’s arms or legs was known as a “bangle.” This term, however, does not occur in the Bible. The abundant presence of bangles as artifacts in archaeological digs is an indicator of their significance in everyday life in the biblical world. Bangles were stiff ornaments of relatively heavy weight. Materials varied: bronze, iron, silver, gold, and so forth. Bangles were of three types: bracelets, anklets, and armlets. They were either solid, complete circles or circlets with two distinct ends. These ends had specific designs, often artistically crafted in the shape of animal heads, such as those of serpents.

Rings likewise were prevalent in the biblical world. Rings were worn in the ears, nose, and around fingers and toes. Nose rings were popular during the Iron Age (1200–586 BC). In addition, rings were worn on neck cords. Rings not only were worn as articles of adornment but also were used as signets. Brooches or pins mostly were worn on clothing and were made of wood, bronze, iron, silver, or gold.

Amulets were common as religious jewelry. Worn as divine protection from harm, amulets varied from simple to ornate. Egyptian amulets often incorporated snake imagery or representations of Egyptian gods. Ancient Near Eastern amulets often were smaller than an inch wide. Greek amulets were colorful and crafted from stones. Christian amulets in the shape of the crucified Christ have also been found.

Although not often worn individually, beads were the most prevalent jewelry item in the ancient Near East. Beads were strung in bracelets, rings, circlets, and so forth.

Jewelry in the Bible

Many different items of jewelry are found in the Bible, including earrings (Gen. 35:4; Exod. 35:22; Judg. 8:24–26; Job 42:11), bracelets (Gen. 24:22, 30, 47; Num. 31:50), necklaces (Gen. 41:42; Ezek. 16:11; Dan. 5:29), nose rings (Gen. 24:22, 30, 47; Isa. 3:21; Ezek. 16:12), rings (Gen. 38:18, 25; 41:42; Exod. 28:11, 21, 36; 35:22; 39:14, 30; Num. 31:50; 1 Kings 21:8; Esther 3:10, 12; 8:2, 8, 10; Job 38:14; Isa. 3:21; Jer. 22:24; Hos. 2:13; Luke 15:22; James 2:2), headbands (Exod. 13:16; Deut. 6:8; 11:18), armlets (Num. 31:50; 2 Sam. 1:10; Isa. 3:20), pendants (Judg. 8:21, 26; Isa. 3:18), and anklets (Isa. 3:20).

Various articles of jewelry in the Bible carried significance beyond mere aesthetics. Early in Genesis, bracelets were used to signify the desire for covenantal marriage. When Abraham’s servant discovered Rebekah, a potential bride for Isaac, he gave her a nose ring and placed bracelets on her arms to signify that God had chosen her (Gen. 24:22, 47). The bracelets and nose ring weighed over ten shekels. By placing the jewelry on Rebekah’s arm, the servant indicated that a marriage contract was sought. The high value of the jewelry signifies the high bridal price paid for Rebekah.

Early in the OT, jewelry was used in temple worship. The law designated that the high priest’s breastpiece and ephod contain precious stones along with setting stones. The stones signified the majesty and holiness of God as his people worshiped in his holy temple (Exod. 25:7; 35:9).

Lovers flattered one another by comparing physical features to articles of fine jewelry (Song 5:14) and admiring their fine jewelry (4:9). God’s people appear as a jeweled necklace when God gathers them (Isa. 49:18) and are as highly esteemed as a bride adorned with jewels (61:10).

Biblical authors also challenged people’s desire for jewelry with admonitions to seek godly attributes and gifts of God above jewels and jewelry. Wisdom was to be desired above jewels (Prov. 3:15; 8:11), knowledgeable speech above gold and jewels (20:15), and a godly spouse far above jewels (31:10).

Similar to the habits of most ancient cultures, Israelite kings and other notable leaders wore jewelry of special significance. Like other kings of antiquity, Saul wore armlets and a crown (2 Sam. 1:10), which were intended to signify royalty and competence in military affairs. Such jewelry typically carried insignias that denoted features of national and royal identity. The victorious warrior in Rev. 19 wears many diadems (crowns) in order to signify his unmatched power (19:12). He has more than one crown, and even more than seven diadems, which is the number of diadems that the dragon has (12:3).

At times, jewelry carried negative connotations, especially when acquired within polytheistic trends of society or else designed as an object of worship. Even Jacob was found burying his jewelry that accompanied his foreign idols (Gen. 35:4). Such instances lend credence to theories that even early Hebrew faith wrangled with polytheism and was infused with its many golden artifacts. Gideon made an ephod from the sparkling plunder (rings and pendants) of the Midianites (Judg. 8:21). This ephod became an object of worship for the Israelites and greatly offended God.

Kings had signet rings that contained their own personalized engravings. The engravings were made by stonecutters who carefully worked the small semiprecious stones atop the rings. Throughout the OT, rings were used to make impressions on official documents (Exod. 28:11; 1 Kings 21:8; Esther 8:8). Prophets used signet rings to seal prophecies that were of grave importance for the nation (Isa. 8:16; Jer. 32:10). Unique rings were designed by notable families in order to signify the honor of the patriarch. Of special interest is the usage of the ring in Jesus’ parable of the prodigal son. The ring was placed on the returning son’s finger to show the radical grace of the father, who was willing to join his honor to his son’s shame (Luke 15:22) as the son was brought back into the household.

In certain NT writings, women are admonished not to adorn themselves with external jewelry (1 Tim. 2:9; 1 Pet. 3:3), as this was a sign of materialism and immodesty. In Rev. 21, jewels appear in John’s depiction of the new Jerusalem: it is a city of majestic beauty adorned with precious jewels, gates of pearls, and streets of gold (21:18–21).

The father of Ammiel of the tribe of Dan, one of Moses’ spies (Num. 13:12).

(1) The son of Hilkiah, he was one of two envoys to Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon and the Judean exiles there (Jer. 29:3). (2) The son of Shaphan, a high official, he had a chamber at the temple (Jer. 36:10–12). Gemariah allowed the scribe Baruch to read Jeremiah’s prophecies (36:10) and later tried to stop King Jehoiakim from burning Jeremiah’s scroll (36:25).

All numbers in the original languages of the Bible are written using words, not numerals. Neither the biblical Hebrew nor the Koine Greek writing system had distinct written numeral forms to represent numbers. Preexilic Hebrew inscriptions record numbers written either with words or in Egyptian hieratic number glyphs. During the exile, exposure to Aramaic resulted in the adoption of the Aramaic script to write Hebrew, but there are no clear indications that an Aramaic number system (as reflected in, e.g., the Elephantine inscriptions) was adopted. Hebrew later emulated Greek in assigning to the letters of the alphabet numerical values and so employing them to record numbers, although the practice of assigning numerical values to glyphs is also attested in pre-Hellenistic times. In Mesopotamia, for example, the practice of assigning numerical values to characters from their syllabic writing system seems to have existed at least as far back as the eighth century BC. The earliest evidence of this practice in Hebrew dates to no earlier than the middle of the second century BC, when it was used on Hasmonean coins.

The value and importance of numbers was widely recognized throughout the ancient world. Sophisticated mathematical texts are attested in both Mesopotamia and Egypt, although no such texts have been discovered originating in ancient Israel. The use of hieratic numbers in preexilic Israel suggests that mathematical knowledge may have been imported, particularly from Egypt. The Akkadian language adapted from Sumerian a hybrid sexagesimal number system, which used cuneiform symbols to represent numbers. Numbers were written in paired glyphs, one representing the values from 1 to 9, the second representing the multiples of 10 up to 50. For example, 59 was written by combining the glyph for 50 with that for 9. Larger numbers were then composed of sets of these paired glyphs. The impact of the sex-a-ges-i-mal system can still be seen in the division of hours and minutes into sixty parts. Most other Near Eastern cultures, including that of ancient Egypt and Israel, used a decimal system.

The decimal system was also used in the Greek-speaking world, and the Greek language, since before the NT era, had employed letters to represent numbers. The use of archaic letters that had otherwise disappeared from general usage by NT times gave the Greek alphabet twenty-seven letters, which provided the basis for representing ranges 1–9, 10–90, 100–900. Numbers were represented by adding letters together, so that the order of letters was unimportant.

When Hebrew started using letters to represent numbers, a similar scheme was adopted, although it necessarily stopped at 400 because the Hebrew alphabet has only twenty-two letters. For some, this suggests that Hebrew may have appropriated the system from Greek, but the same sequence of values in earlier counting indicates that the association of values 1–9, 10–90, 100–900 with the letters of the alphabet was itself not a Greek innovation.

Number Symbolism

Numbers often are used with symbolic significance in the Bible. Particularly prominent are the numbers 7 and 12, together with variations scaled by powers of 10. Other numbers occur frequently and also appear to have some symbolic significance, including 4, 40, and 1,000. A note of warning is pertinent, however, because there is a danger both of finding number symbolism where there is none and of overlooking the symbolic significance of numbers where it is appropriate.

Perhaps the most prominent symbolic association in the Bible occurs with the number seven. Broadly speaking, seven denotes completeness, perfection, or consummation. The number first appears in the creation account in association with the first Sabbath, in which it is tied to completion and rest. Linked to this are the working week, which concluded with a Sabbath, the sabbatical year for the land (Lev. 25:2–7), the duration of the major feasts over seven days (e.g., Passover [cf. Lev. 23:6, 34; Ezek. 45:21]), even the number of years Jacob worked for Leah and then Rachel (Gen. 29:15–30). God’s promise of comprehensive vengeance upon those who harm Cain is reflected in the use of seven (Gen. 4:15; cf. Pss. 12:6; 79:12; Prov. 6:31; Isa. 30:26). The idea that seven represents completeness can be seen in the seventy nations recorded in Gen. 10 and in the description of Yahweh as having seven eyes (Zech. 4:10). In the NT, the symbolic use of seven is expanded: it is used by Jesus in explaining unlimited forgiveness (Matt. 18:21–22) and most extensively by the author of Revelation, where reference is made to seven churches (1:4, 11, 20), spirits (1:4; 3:1; 5:6), golden lampstands (1:12; 2:1), stars (1:16; 2:1), seals (5:5; 6:1), eyes (5:6), angels (8:2, 6; 15:6, 7, 8; 16:1; 17:1; 21:9), trumpets (8:2, 6), thunderclaps (10:3, 4), crowns (12:3), heads (12:3; 13:1; 17:3, 7, 9), plagues (15:6, 8; 21:9), golden bowls (15:7; 16:1; 17:1), mountains (17:9), and kings (17:10).

Arising out of the observations relating to the symbolic use of the number seven are the manner in which its significance also applied to related numbers such as 7 × 7 = 49 (cf. Lev. 25:8–55) and 7 × 10 = 70 (cf. Exod. 24:1, 9; Jer. 25:12; 29:10; Dan. 9:2, 24; Luke 10:1–17).

The next most significant number with symbolic associations is twelve. In the OT, the primary association is with the tribes of Israel, and this association later develops to encompass God’s people in their entirety. It is likely that such an association is deliberately made in Jesus’ choice of twelve apostles.

The number ten is also associated with the practice of tithing, which was common throughout the ancient Near East. The number ten alone does not have a clear symbolic usage, although when a power of ten (e.g., 1,000 or 10,000) is used, these can represent any vast or unnumbered quantity (see “Large Numbers” below). Ten is also used in combination with other symbolic values to express the same symbolic notion emphatically; for example, 70 (7 × 10) or 77 (7 × 10 + 7) become emphatic affirmations of completeness, perfection, or consummation (e.g., Gen. 4:24; Matt. 18:22).

The number four appears to have some symbolic significance, perhaps due to the typical enumeration of the four cardinal directions, suggesting geographical or cosmological entirety (cf. Isa. 11:12; Jer. 49:36; Zech. 6:5). For example, four rivers leave Eden to water the entire land (Gen. 2:10–14).

The number forty appears frequently in association with long periods of endurance, such as Moses on the mountain (forty days [Exod. 24:18]), the time in the wilderness (forty years [Exod. 16:35]), Elijah’s journey to Horeb (forty days [1 Kings 19:8]), Jesus’ time in the wilderness (forty days/nights [Matt. 4:2; Mark 1:13; Luke 4:2]), and his time with his disciples following the resurrection (forty days [Acts 1:3]).

Large Numbers

Some scholars have argued that the large numbers in the OT present a particular problem in several places. Based on the figures in Num. 1, for example, there were 603,550 men of fighting age among those in the exodus, suggesting a total population of between one and three million (not counting livestock). Taken at face value, this number presents some difficulties: based on estimates of Egyptian population, it represents a very significant proportion of the entire population of that country; taken in conjunction with the number of firstborn recorded in Num. 3:43, it implies a very large average family size; it seems difficult to reconcile with the claim that the seven nations in the land of Canaan were greater than Israel (Deut. 4:38; 7:1; 9:1–2); and the logistics of moving that many people would pose significant problems.

However, if the observation made by Pharaoh in Exod. 1:9, that the Hebrews were more numerous than the Egyptians, was even approximately accurate, then a population of between one and two million would be appropriate. Nonetheless, various attempts have been made to mitigate the perceived difficulties by suggesting approaches that interpret the text in ways that result in significantly smaller population estimates for the Israelites.

The largest single-number word used in the OT is rebabah, which is used to represent large values greater than ten thousand but otherwise often lacks precision and is better understood to refer to a vast unnumbered multitude (e.g., Pss. 3:6; 91:7; Song 5:10). Similarly, the number one thousand can be used rhetorically without demanding mathematical precision (e.g., 2 Pet. 3:8, which should not be understood to provide a mathematical equation). It is this latter number that appears in the difficult passages in Numbers. The best solution to the problems lies in the meaning of the Hebrew term in question, ’elep (“thousand”). Several scholars have suggested that ’elep can also refer to a military unit or some other group (cf. Num. 1:16). Although the precise numbers in question are debated according to varying understandings of the sizes of the groups, the best solutions put the total number of Israelites in the exodus at around thirty thousand.

Gematria

Gematria is a system for calculating numerical values for words by assigning specific values to the letters of an alphabet. As noted above, the practice was used for legitimate numerical notation in Greek and, in some periods, in Hebrew. Letters were assigned values based on their order within the alphabet, the first nine letters assigned values 1–9, the next nine assigned values 10–90, and the subsequent letters assigned multiples of 100.

Although numerology of various forms, and in particular gematria, has formed the basis of many misguided attempts to discover hidden meanings within the biblical text, there appear to be explicit uses of gematria in Rev. 13:18 and, some suggest, in John 21:11. If the number 666 is an actual example of gematria, no consensus has been reached over the identity of the referent.

Most of the other supposed examples of gematria within the pages of the Bible are unconvincing, largely because the texts wherein such examples are found make good sense without resorting to obscure and uncertain interpretations, and partly because it runs counter to the notion that God speaks to make his will known (e.g., Deut. 29:29).

Although the Bible is dominated by a patriarchal perspective, as one would expect from the ancient Near East, there is also a valuing of women that comes to the surface. Although this falls short of what we would call “gender equality” today, the Bible does make overtures in that direction. Already in the Genesis creation story, men and women are described as the two halves of humanity, who together participate in the mandate to fill and subdue the earth (Gen. 1:26–28). Eve is created from the side of Adam, indicating equality in their very beings (2:21–23).

In his own ministry, Jesus includes women in ways that were unusual for his context. In first-century Palestine, learning from spiritual teachers was a privilege reserved exclusively for men. However, in the story of Mary and Martha (Luke 10:38–42), Jesus commends Mary for breaking her expected role as a woman in order to follow him and learn at his feet. Martha, however, receives a sharp rebuke for allowing domestic duties to hinder her discipleship. Jesus’ first resurrection appearance is to women in all of the Gospels, even though the testimony of a woman was generally not considered valid in legal matters in first-century Palestine (although rabbinic literature suggests it was considered valid testimony for a woman to confirm a man’s death). Jesus takes particular efforts to elevate the position of women, despite a possible tarnishing of his public image.

The concern for greater gender equality extends into the rest of the NT. Paul says that in Christ all are one regardless of ethnicity, status, or gender (Gal. 3:28). Paul also refers to women as coworkers in the gospel (Rom. 16:3) and as deacons (16:1). Although frequently cited in order to support a hierarchal family structure, the household codes (Eph. 5:21–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1; Titus 2:1–10; 1 Pet. 2:18–3:7) are a step toward gender equality in the Greco-Roman culture, since secular household codes usually placed responsibilities on wives, not husbands. That Paul gives responsibilities to husbands is a significant shift toward a mutuality of devotion and obligation.

A biblical genealogy is a listing of names showing the interrelationships of individuals, clans, or nations. They are found mainly, though not exclusively, in the Pentateuch, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles. The arrangement of names in such listings is most often forward in time, from ancestor to descendant (e.g., Ruth 4:18–22, tracing a family line down to David), and this is the genealogy proper. At other times, names are listed in the opposite direction, backward in time, from the individual to ancestor (e.g., Ezra 7:1–5, where Ezra’s ancestry is traced back to Aaron “the chief priest”), and this is, strictly speaking, a pedigree. The unusually lengthy pedigree (even by biblical standards) of Ezra “the priest” is an effective way to highlight his temple interest when he is first introduced to the reader. The pedigree of 1 Chron. 6:33–47 shows the impeccable Levitical credentials of Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, who served before the ark of the covenant under the leadership of David. Genealogical information is always supplied for a reason.

Types of Genealogies

The two main terms used in the OT are toledot (“genealogical history”; e.g., Gen. 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; NIV: “account”) and yakhas (“genealogical record”; only in Neh. 7:5, but the related verb, “to register by genealogy,” occurs in Ezra 2 // Neh. 7 and elsewhere). In Ezra-Nehemiah the supplying of a credible genealogy is necessary for acceptance as an Israelite (Ezra 2:59–60) or for securing priestly privileges (Ezra 2:61–63). The concern is not racial purity as such, but rather Israel’s theological integrity (Ezra 9:1–2). The pejorative references to “genealogies” in 1 Tim. 1:4 and Titus 3:9 do not condemn the OT lists but instead reject the concocted genealogies in the mythic speculations of Jewish intertestamental books such as Jubilees.

Lineage is almost invariably traced through the male line. Most often in biblical narrative an individual is supplied only with a patronym (e.g., “Isaiah son of Amoz” [Isa. 1:1]), or sometimes three generations are specified (e.g., “Bezalel son of Uri, the son of Hur” [Exod. 35:30]). In Exod. 6:16–20 the foreshortened genealogy of Aaron and Moses is not to be understood as saying that there were only four generations between them and Levi.

Some genealogies involve ethnic and geographical relations—for example, between the nations of the ancient world in Gen. 11, and between Israel and surrounding peoples in Gen. 19:37–38; 25:1–4. In lists, the father-son relation can be broader than immediate descent and may refer to remote ancestors (grandson, great-grandson, etc.) (e.g., Ezra 5:1; cf. Zech. 1:1).

The Importance of Genealogies

Genealogies are an important feature of biblical storytelling. The modern reader should not simply leap over them, and the works of J. R. R. Tolkien show that genealogy is not dead in literary terms. When a biblical genealogy is supplied, it has a narratorial role. It contributes something essential to the presentation of the biblical writer. For example, 1 Chron. 1 is not a bare listing of names but rather, beginning with Adam, provides a world context for the history of Israel that follows; and 1 Chron. 2–9 emphasizes the twelve-tribal structure of God’s people, thus preventing the misapprehension that Chronicles is just a history of the southern kingdom of Judah. Also, lists are usually not just names; they include thematically significant material contributing to the overall message of the particular book—for example, the technological advances of Cain’s descendants told in Gen. 4:17–22 and the military exploits recounted in 1 Chron. 5:18–22.

The ten-generation genealogy of Gen. 5 bridges the antediluvian and the deluge eras. The repeated refrain “and he died” depicts the reign of death over the human race. Another ten-generation genealogy joins the flood generation to Abram (Gen. 11:10–26). In this case, the deleterious effect of sin on humans is shown by the gradual decrease in human life span. There is often an element of schema in biblical genealogies (e.g., the limitation of generations to ten). Genesis 5 displays the convention of the seventh generation, which is deemed worthy of special attention (Enoch). There is also the Bible’s delight in multiples of seven—for example, the seventy nations in Gen. 10, the 3 × 14 generational schema in Matt. 1, and the seventy members in the pedigree of Christ in Luke 3:23–38. Hence, none of these genealogies should be understood as comprehensive in scope; rather, they are highly selective and stylized. Their purpose is to support and underscore the writer’s theological message.

Because it is rare for females to be mentioned in biblical genealogies, when they are there is special significance—for example, Sarai in Gen. 11:29: though barren, she will become the mother of the line of promise; Rebekah in Gen. 22:23: she will become the wife of Isaac; the daughters of Zelophehad in Num. 26:33: their story will be elaborated in Num. 27; 36; the five women in the genealogy of Jesus (Matt. 1): several of them are non-Israelites, suggesting that Jesus comes as the Savior of the world.

The commander of an army, second in command after the king (cf. Rev. 6:15; 19:18). Israel’s army became more centralized during the monarchy. Abner, Amasa, and Joab are each referred to as the commander (NLT; cf. NIV) or general (NET) under Saul and David (1 Sam. 14:50; 2 Sam. 17:25; 20:23; cf. 1 Chron. 27:34 KJV). The Assyrian general bore the name or title “Tartan” (2 Kings 18:17; NIV: “supreme commander”).

Generation has three primary meanings in the Bible: (1) a length of time, (2) a group of people of the same period of time, and (3) a stage in the line of a person’s lineage. It also has three metaphorical or secondary uses.

First, “generation” as a length of time generally involves the duration of time between a person’s birth and the birth of that person’s children. The number “forty” is often associated with the length of a generation because God made the Israelites wander in the wilderness for forty years so that one generation would pass away and another arise (cf. Num. 32:13). However, two points should be noted. First, the actual number of years was determined to be forty because the people had spied out the land for forty days (Num. 14:34), not because a generation lasted forty years. Second, the forty years applied to those who were age twenty or older. Since the purpose of the forty years in the wilderness was to allow one generation of adults to pass on (14:30–35), the forty years may represent the upper limit of the expected length of an adult’s life in the wilderness conditions, which would be sixty years. In fact, when Moses speaks to Israel on the plains of Moab, he mentions that Israel crossed the Zered Valley thirty-eight years after the wilderness wanderings had begun, and that the entire previous generation had died (Deut. 2:14). This comment shows that forty years has less to do with a generation than with the expected life span of an adult in the wilderness. Other passages provide no hints for the length of a generation, such that the specific length of a generation is not recorded in the Bible. Furthermore, since a generation represents the duration of time between a person’s birth and the birth of that person’s children, it is also not a fixed number but rather represents an imprecise period of time. In one passage “generations” are even set alongside “ages,” which represent longer durations of an indefinite period of time (Col. 1:26).

Second, “generation” often is used to represent a group of people of the same period of time. It may refer to a group of people who live during the same time (Gen. 7:1) or those who were born at approximately the same time (Exod. 1:6; Num. 32:13; Deut. 1:35).

Third, “generation” is also commonly used to represent a stage in the line of a person’s lineage. This use often is preceded by an ordinal number (first, second, third, etc.). On several occasions it occurs in a context highlighting the severity of sin. It occurs in the formulaic statement of God’s self-revelation found in Exod. 20:5; 34:7 and repeated in Num. 14:18; Deut. 5:9. God is described as loving, merciful, and forgiving, but also as jealous, not leaving the guilty unpunished to the third and fourth generation. It also occurs in legal contexts concerning the inclusion of Gentiles into the assembly of the Lord (Deut. 23:1–8). Its use in this way highlights the continuity of God’s work even through the transitions of a family from one generation to another.

Finally, the word “generation” often is used in a secondary way or in a formulaic statement. First, several times the word describes one aspect of God’s relationship to a particular person and his descendants or a nation. Sometimes it describes the long-lasting nature of God’s promise (Gen. 9:12; 17:7); at other times, it describes the long-lasting responsibility of the person and his descendants or a nation, especially as it relates to Israel and the law given at Sinai (Gen. 17:9–21; Exod. 12:14; 16:32–33; 27:21; 29:42). Second, the word may emphasize the continuous nature of a condition or obligation (Exod. 3:15; 17:16; Esther 9:28; Pss. 33:11; 45:17; 49:11; 72:5; 79:13). Third, the word refers to a particular class or type of people, such as the righteous (Pss. 14:5 [in some translations]; 112:2) or the wicked (Deut. 32:5; Prov. 30:11 [in some translations]; Matt. 11:16; Mark 8:38; Luke 9:41; Acts 2:40).

On the northwestern shore of the Sea of Galilee, Gennesaret (Matt. 14:34) gives its name to the surrounding fertile plain and to the lake (Luke 5:1).

The word “Gentiles” is often used to translate words meaning “nations” or “peoples.” It has a Latin etymology from gens, meaning “clan” or “family” and, eventually, “race” or “people.” The Greek word genos (“race, kind”) has a close relationship. In the Bible it loosely refers to nations or peoples other than Israel. English Bibles often translate it as “nations,” “peoples,” or “races.”

Old Testament

In general, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. God chose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:6–8; 10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership in the covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becoming part of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).

The OT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessing through Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping the law, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. The law is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenant that God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5; 20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6; 10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss. 119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).

Such law/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OT understanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel, the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in and through Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3; 17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specifically involves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]). Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subject to Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16; 14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed by Israel’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel, serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fear Israel’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5; 60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic. 7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages further elucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in the God of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer. 12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations “flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentile participation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa. 2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).

The Servant Songs in Isa. 40–55 also reflect this law/Israel-centered nature of salvation for the Gentiles. The servant, explicitly identified as Israel (41:8, 9; 42:18–19; 44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3; 54:17; see also 65:9; 66:14), serves as God’s instrument for reaching the nations (42:1, 6; 49:6; 52:15). The OT usually condemns Gentiles who remain separate from Israel to some form of judgment, especially Gentiles who have harmed Israel.

Second Temple Judaism and Early Christianity

Second Temple Jewish sources exhibit diverse views about Gentiles, their nature, their possible relation to God, and their fate at the end. Many reflect something resembling the OT views. Israel as God’s people defined by the law, variously understood and contested among Second Temple sources, generally continues to be the locus of God’s ultimate blessing activities.

Situating Jesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentile sensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread across the Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God of Israel in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentiles experience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.

Some Christians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought that Gentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God of Israel’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’s opponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from God and his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13; 1 Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation, especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin, lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32; Eph. 4:17–19; 1 Thess. 4:5; 1 Pet. 1:14, 18).

However, various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keep the law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’s ultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, has replaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and his death and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ by the Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true, redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheriting God’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25; 8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7; Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentiles attain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightly before God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30; 1 Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1 Thess. 4:3–8). Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles with respect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.

Debates about Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for these issues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocal saying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and some other NT writings.

The son of the Edomite ruler Hadad, he was born in Egypt while his father was living there following David’s conquest of his kingdom (1 Kings 11:20). Genubath’s mother was the sister of Tahpenes, the pharaoh’s wife.

(1) One of Benjamin’s sons (Gen. 46:21). (2) The father of Ehud, a judge over Israel (Judg. 3:15). (3) The father of Shimei, a member of Saul’s clan who cursed David (2 Sam. 16:5; 19:16, 18; 1 Kings 2:8). (4) The second son of Bela, Benjamin’s firstborn (1 Chron. 8:3). (5) Another son of Bela is also called Gera in 1 Chron. 8:5, but this may be a textual error. (6) The son of Ehud, a Benjamite, who lived at the time of the exile (1 Chron. 8:7).

The smallest weight in the OT, about one-twentieth of a shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25; Num. 3:47; 18:16; Ezek. 45:12).

The site where Abraham deceived Abimelek king of Gerar by claiming that his wife, Sarah, was his sister (Gen. 20:1–2). Isaac would also make the same claim with respect to his wife, Rebekah (26:7). In the Table of Nations, Gerar is used as a geographical border for the southern extremity of Canaan (10:19). In the time of King Asa, when Zerah the Cushite came out to attack him, Asa and his army pursued them as far as Gerar and destroyed all the villages around it (2 Chron. 14:13–14). The ancient site is located between Beersheba and Gaza. It appears on the late sixth-century AD Madaba Map.

An ancient city located on the east side of the Jordan River, known today as Jerash. This largely Hellenistic city was located on the strategically vital north-south King’s Highway. Gerasa was annexed by Roman Syria and later joined to the Decapolis. Josephus locates the city on the eastern border of Perea (J.W. 3.47). Jesus healed a demoniac in this region (Matt. 8:28–34; Mark 5:1–20; Luke 8:26–39). The problem with the miracle story is that Gerasa is some forty miles southeast of the Sea of Galilee, which is too distant from the shoreline where the events transpired. Mark and Luke probably mean the “region of Gerasa,” and the event could have transpired in Gadara (Matt. 8:28) or Gergesa (according to some manuscripts), which are closer to the Sea of Galilee. See also Gadarenes.

One of three principal variant names in all three Synoptic Gospels for the people of the region where Jesus healed demoniacs after sailing with his disciples across the Sea of Galilee (Matt. 8:28–34; Mark 5:1–20; Luke 8:26–39). See also Gadarenes; Gerasa.

One of three principal variant names in all three Synoptic Gospels for the people of the region where Jesus healed demoniacs after sailing with his disciples across the Sea of Galilee (Matt. 8:28–34; Mark 5:1–20; Luke 8:26–39). See also Gadarenes.

The twin peaks of Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal stand about forty miles north of Jerusalem in Samaria and flank the entrance to the Nablus Valley, the location of biblical Shechem. Gerizim, the southern mountain, rises 2,889 feet above sea level, and Ebal, the northern mountion, 3,083 feet. Together, they form a natural amphitheater.

Shechem was of strategic importance in antiquity because it sat on one of three major north-south trade routes through Canaan—the Ridge Route—and provided the only east-west passage in that area to the mountains of Ephraim. Abram took this route into the promised land, where the great trees of Moreh at Shechem became his first recorded stop. It was there, between Gerizim and Ebal, that he heard the voice of God and built an altar (Gen. 12:6–7). Although Shechem is rich in biblical history (e.g., Gen. 33:18–19; 34:2–26; Josh. 24:32; Judg. 8:31–9:57), each of the two mountains has specific individual significance.

Upon their entry into the promised land, Moses had commanded the Israelites to proclaim the blessings of obedience to the law on Mount Gerizim, and the curses of disobedience to the law on Mount Ebal (Deut. 11:29). Moses had further commanded that they build an altar of uncut stones on Ebal to bear the words of the law written in plaster (27:1–8). Moses had also specified that those six tribes descended from Jacob’s wives stand on Gerizim, and the five tribes descended from the maidservants plus Reuben (Gen. 49:4) stand on Ebal (Deut. 27:11–14). After the conquest of Jericho and Ai, Joshua led a covenant renewal at the twin peaks, thereby fulfilling the Mosaic requirements (Josh. 8:30–35).

The final explicit mention in the OT of Mount Gerizim occurs in Judges. There, Jotham son of Gideon challenged the Shechemites for their loyalty to his half brother, the treacherous Abimelek (Judg. 9:7–21). A ledge about halfway up the mountain is popularly called “Jotham’s Pulpit.”

The character of Mount Gerizim changed after the exile, when the Samaritans emerged as a separate people group at enmity with the Jews. The Samaritan Pentateuch substitutes Gerizim for Ebal in Deut. 27:4, so the Samaritans constructed their own temple there in the fourth century BC, during the reign of Alexander the Great (it later was destroyed by John Hyrcanus in 128 BC). During her conversation with Jesus, the woman at Jacob’s Well in Sychar, near Shechem, brought up the topic of ancestral worship on Mount Gerizim (John 4:4–38, esp. v. 20). See also Ebal.

(1) The elder son of Moses and Zipporah, born in Midian (Exod. 2:22; 18:3; 1 Chron. 23:15). His name, given by Moses, means “sojourner there,” reflecting Moses’ status as an alien in Midian. This Gershom is named as an ancestor of Jonathan, the priest of Micah and subsequently of the Danites (Judg. 17:7–18:30), as well as an ancestor to Shubael, called both chief and officer over the treasuries (1 Chron. 23:16; 26:24). (2) A descendant of Phinehas, he was among those who accompanied Ezra from Babylon to Jerusalem during the reign of Artaxerxes (Ezra 8:2). (3) An alternate spelling for Gershon son of Levi (see Gen. 46:11) in 1 Chron. 6. See also Gershon.

The descendants of Gershon (also spelled “Gershom”) son of Levi (Gen. 46:11) were Libni (also known as Ladan) and Shimei and their descendants (Num. 3:18, 21; 1 Chron. 6:17, 43; 23:7–11). The Gershonites were counted in a census (Num. 4:22, 38–41) and received thirteen cities from Issachar, Asher, Naphtali, and Manasseh as their territorial allotment (Josh. 21:6, 27; 1 Chron. 6:62, 71 [ESV, NRSV: “Gershomites”]). During the wilderness period they were responsible for all activities concerning the tabernacle coverings, screens, and hangings (Num. 3:25–26; 4:21–28; 7:6–7). They also carried the ark of the covenant (Num. 10:17; 1 Chron. 15:7, 11–15). See also Gershon.

Along with Kohath and Merari, Gershon was one of the three sons of Levi, and thus the ancestor of a group of Levites (Gen. 46:11). His name is spelled “Gershon” in Genesis, elsewhere in the Pentateuch (Exod. 6:16–17; Num. 3:17, 21), and in the initial listing of the genealogy in 1 Chron. 6 (v. 1). However, in the Hebrew the spelling reverts to “Gershom” in the remainder of the genealogy (1 Chron. 6:16, 17, 20, 43, 62, 71; see NIV mg.). See also Gershom; Gershonites.

The descendants of Gershon (also spelled “Gershom”) son of Levi (Gen. 46:11) were Libni (also known as Ladan) and Shimei and their descendants (Num. 3:18, 21; 1 Chron. 6:17, 43; 23:7–11). The Gershonites were counted in a census (Num. 4:22, 38–41) and received thirteen cities from Issachar, Asher, Naphtali, and Manasseh as their territorial allotment (Josh. 21:6, 27; 1 Chron. 6:62, 71 [ESV, NRSV: “Gershomites”]). During the wilderness period they were responsible for all activities concerning the tabernacle coverings, screens, and hangings (Num. 3:25–26; 4:21–28; 7:6–7). They also carried the ark of the covenant (Num. 10:17; 1 Chron. 15:7, 11–15). See also Gershon.

Part of the name of an unidentified place near Bethlehem (Jer. 41:17). As Johanan son of Kareah led a remnant of the people of Judah toward Egypt in order to flee from Babylonian forces, the Hebrew text states that they stopped at geruth kimham, which means “the lodging place of Kimham” (KJV: “the habitation of Chimham”). The place may be named for Kimham, the son of Barzillai (2 Sam. 19:37–40); it possibly stood on land granted to Kimham by David in order to repay Barzillai for his material support of David (see 2 Sam. 17:27–29; 19:32).

One of six children of Jahdai, along with Regem, Jotham, Pelet, Ephah, and Shaaph (1 Chron. 2:47). The family apparently descended from Caleb, although the connection between Caleb and Jahdai is unclear. Jahdai may indeed have been male or else one of Caleb’s concubines. The name “Geshan” appears as “Gersom” in the LXX. See also Geshem.

One of six children of Jahdai, along with Regem, Jotham, Pelet, Ephah, and Shaaph (1 Chron. 2:47). The family apparently descended from Caleb, although the connection between Caleb and Jahdai is unclear. Jahdai may indeed have been male or else one of Caleb’s concubines. The name “Geshan” appears as “Gersom” in the LXX. See also Geshem.

An Arab, king of Qedar, who resisted Nehemiah’s efforts to rebuild Jerusalem’s wall. He and his associates (Sanballat and Tobiah) appealed to the Persian king but ultimately were unsuccessful (Neh. 2:19; 6:1–2, 6). During the Persian period the Qedarites were located to the south of Palestine and in the Nile Delta region of Egypt. A reference to Geshem has been found on a silver container discovered at Tel el-Maskhuta in Egypt. “Gashmu” is an alternate spelling in Neh. 6:6 (see KJV).

(1) An agricultural region east of the Sea of Galilee, settled about 2000 BC, whose population was not expelled during the Israelite conquest (Josh. 13:11, 13) and increased in the eleventh century BC. As an independent Aramean kingdom, Geshur allied with David when he married the Geshurite princess Maakah (2 Sam. 3:3). Their son Absalom lived in Geshur for three years after killing his half brother Amnon (2 Sam. 13:37–38). Geshur later allied with Aram-Damascus to capture Israelite territory in Gilead (1 Chron. 2:22–23), but it was decimated by the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser III in 734 BC. (2) A region south of Philistia mentioned in Josh. 13:2 as territory yet to be taken in the Israelite conquest, but later won by David while he was among the Philistines (1 Sam. 27:8–11).

Two people groups, one located northeast of Israel (Josh. 13:13), one south of Philistia (Josh. 13:1–3). See also Geshur.

Two people groups, one located northeast of Israel (Josh. 13:13), one south of Philistia (Josh. 13:1–3). See also Geshur.

In the Bible, gestures are made with either parts of the body or items, such as clothing and rings, directly connected to the body. For this reason, it makes sense to classify biblical gestures in relation to the different body parts that are identified with the gestures. It is, however, challenging to know where to draw a line on classifying a gesture. For example, a devious person is described in Prov. 6:13 as one “who winks maliciously with his eye, signals with his feet and motions with his fingers.” It is unclear whether this is a single gesture or multiple ones, and whether all signify different things or the same thing.

Head

Gestures that relate to the head range from simple head motions to semiviolent acts such as hair pulling. Simple head motions include lifting of one’s head in honor (Gen. 40:13), bowing one’s head in mourning (Ps. 35:14), tossing one’s head in mockery and derision (2 Kings 19:21), and shaking one’s head as insult (Ps. 22:7; Mark 15:29).

A common action is the shaving of the head, which can be for purification (Lev. 14:8–9; Num. 6:9; 8:7 [includes all body hair]), 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 from shaving their heads even in mourning (Lev. 21:5; Ezek. 44:20), while the high priest is to wear a turban on his head during sacrificial duties (Exod. 29:6).

Anointing of 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 on a person (Eccles. 9:8). Blessing may also involve placing a hand on the head of the person being blessed (Gen. 48:14–18; Exod. 29:19), while the same gesture on the head of sacrificial animals is a symbolic means of transferring sin (Lev. 3:2, 8, 13; 4:4, 15, 24, 29, 33; 8:18, 22).

In the 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 a cause for disgrace (1 Cor. 11:5–6).

Face. Facial gestures range from expressions to actions such as touching or covering 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 (2 Chron. 20:18; Ps. 138:2), in subjection, supplication, reverence (1 Sam. 20:41; 25:41; 28:14; 2 Sam. 14:4, 22; 18:28; 24:20; 1 Kings 1:23; 1 Chron. 21:20), or in dread (e.g., Moses before Yahweh [Exod. 3:6]).

The face can be covered or veiled as an indication of uncleanness (Lev. 13:45), in grief/mourning (2 Sam. 19:4; Ezek. 24:17), in resignation (1 Kings 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).

God can be described as hiding or turning away his face against wickedness 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 withholding blessings (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 1 Sam. 5:3–4 the idol of the Philistine god Dagon falls facedown before the ark of the covenant, apparently overpowered by Yahweh.

Acts of 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 (1 Kings 22:24; 2 Chron. 18:23; Job 16:10; Lam. 3:30; Mic. 5:1), pulling a skirt up over someone’s face in shaming judgment (Jer. 13:26; Nah. 3:5), and hooking and dragging someone by the nose (2 Kings 19:28). Although being struck on the cheek is humiliating, Jesus instructs his disciples to “turn the other cheek” as a sign of resistance to violence (Matt. 5:39; Luke 6:29).

One can lift one’s face in worship (2 Kings 20:2; Job 22:26; Isa. 38:2) or in confidence (Job 11:15) and can fail to lift it in shame and disgrace (Ezra 9:6). Although the shaving of beards in mourning 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 (2 Sam. 10:4; 1 Chron. 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 and expectation (Pss. 121:1; 123:1).

Mouth. Pursed lips can characterize an evil person (Prov. 16:30), while a hand 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 desert tribes will bow and whose “enemies lick the dust” in defeat.

Ears. An Israelite slave for life is to have a hole punched through his or her earlobe, held against a doorpost, with an awl (Exod. 21:6; Deut. 15:17). Blood is sprinkled on the lobe of the right ear for purification (Exod. 29:20; Lev. 8:23–24; 14:17), while supplication can be described as asking for the turning of an ear (2 Kings 19:16; Ps. 31:2). Turning one’s ear signifies paying 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 in arrogance (Ps. 75:5 TNIV: “Do not lift your horns against heaven; do not speak with outstretched neck”). Jeremiah put a yoke on his neck as a prophetic sign of the approaching Babylonian conquest (Jer. 27–28). While putting someone’s neck in a yoke is an act of triumphal conquest (Ps. 105:18), stepping on the neck of a subdued enemy is an act of subjugation and humiliation (Josh. 10:24).

Body

Nakedness in 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 of promiscuity (Isa. 57:8; Ezek. 16:36). An unkempt body can be a sign of mourning, as it is for Mephibosheth (2 Sam. 19:24). A certain kind 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 an act of humiliation (2 Sam. 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 of sacrificial 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 in awe. The expression “outstretched arm” (Exod. 6:6; Deut. 4:34; 5:15; 7:19; 9:29; 11:2; 26:8; 1 Kings 8:42; 2 Kings 17:36; 2 Chron. 6:32; Ps. 136:12; Jer. 21:5; 27:5; 32:17, 21; Ezek. 20:33–34) indicates power, might, strength. It is often used of God to indicate his ability to defeat powerful armies and enemies. God is implored by the psalmist to lift his hand and act for the sake of the righteous (Ps. 10:12).

Since the right hand is the hand of power, the act of sitting at the right hand indicates being favored (1 Kings 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; 1 Pet. 3:22). When taking an oath, one places a hand under the thigh/crotch (Gen. 24:2; 47:29), most likely the right hand (see Gen. 48:14, 17–18; Lev. 8:23; 14:14).

Clapping the 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 claps his hand over his mouth in awe of God and in submission and repentance (Job 40:4–5).

Hands can be lifted in worship (1 Kings 8:22; 1 Tim. 2:8), to beseech (Ps. 28:2), to protect and bless (Ps. 10:12), in an oath (Deut. 32:40), or to harm (Exod. 24:11; 1 Sam. 24:6, 10; 2 Sam.1:14; 18:12).

Pilate washes his hands to proclaim his innocence over the death of Jesus (Matt. 27:24), while 1 Pet. 5:6 urges believers to humble themselves “under God’s mighty hand,” so that in due time they will be lifted up.

Buttocks. Exposure of the buttocks can serve as a humiliating insult and provocation, as happens to David’s men (2 Sam. 10:4; 1 Chron. 19:4) and Egyptian and Cushite captives (Isa. 20:4).

Leg. The leg or thigh is often a euphemism for the male reproductive organs, so that putting one’s hand under a thigh in oath (Gen. 24:2; 47:29) may involve actually grabbing the genitalia. Animal thighs are waved to God in offering before being consumed (Lev. 9:21; 10:14; Num. 6:20), while oaths administered to uncover adultery cause a guilty woman’s thighs to waste (Num. 5:2–27).

The most common gesture involving the knee is bowing, in worship or reverence (Deut. 33:3; Isa. 45:23; Rom. 11:4; 14:11; Phil. 2:10), in defeat (2 Sam. 22:40; Ps. 18:38; Isa. 60:14), in distress (Ps. 57:6), or in respect (1 Kings 1:31). In what seems to be a somewhat awkward position, Elijah puts his face between his knees in prayer (1 Kings 18:42).

Feet. Gestures involving the feet are probably the most common gestures in the Bible. Feet can be washed in hospitality (Gen. 18:4; 19:2; 24:32; 43:24; 1 Sam. 25:41), in ablution (Exod. 30:19, 21; 40:31), or in supplication (1 Sam. 25:41). Feet can be bathed in oil as a blessing (Deut. 33:24), uncovered in marriage proposals (Ezek. 16:8; cf. Ruth 3:4, 7), and stamped in remorse (Ezek. 25:6), and sandals can be removed from them in honor (Exod. 3:1–10) or disgrace (Deut. 25:9). The heavenly seraphs cover their feet in supplication before the throne of God (Isa. 6:2), while the feet of humans can signal deception (Prov. 6:13).

Enemies can be placed under one’s feet in subjugation (1 Kings 5:3; Pss. 8:6; 18:39; 45:5; 47:3; 110:1; Mal. 4:3; Rom. 16:20), have their 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 and defeat (Isa. 49:23). The righteous will bathe their feet in the blood of their enemies in revenge (Pss. 58:10; 68:23).

Those overwhelmed can grovel at the feet of the powerful (2 Kings 4:27, 37; Esther 8:3; Matt. 28:9; Mark 5:33; 7:25; Acts 10:25), while those emboldened can rise to their feet in confidence (Ezek. 2:1–2; 3:24; Dan. 8:18).

In the NT, dust can be shaken off one’s feet as an indication of divine judgment (Matt. 10:14; Mark 6:11; Luke 9:5), even as lying at a 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, wipes them with her hair, and kisses and perfumes them in what seems an act of love and repentance; but Jesus indicates that she has prepared his body for burial (Luke 7:38–46; John 11:2; 12:3). Jesus washes his disciples’ feet as instruction on servanthood and discipleship (John 13:5–14).

Fingers, Toes. Different fingers seem to have different roles assigned them. A finger 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 the right thumb and on the right big toe is for cleansing (Exod. 29:20; Lev. 8:23–24; 14:17, 25, 28).

One wears a signet ring as a sign of power (Esther 3:10) or a gesture of restoration and forgiveness (Luke 15:22). But fingers can also motion in deception (Prov. 6:13) or point in blame (Isa. 58:9). Jesus writes with his finger on the ground, apparently as a gesture of indifference to those pointing accusing fingers (John 8:6).

Clothes and Shoes

Garments. Garments attain significance as they are related to specific emotions. Wearing sackcloth and ashes in mourning is common (Gen. 37:34; Ezek. 7:18; 2 Sam. 3:31), while ripping garments in mourning is also frequently attested (Gen. 37:34; 44:13; Lev. 10:6; 21:10; Josh. 7:6; 2 Sam. 1:11; 3:31; 13:31; 1 Kings 21:27; 2 Kings 2:12; 19:1; Esther 4:1; Isa. 32:11; 37:1; Jer. 41:5).

Ripping someone’s clothing to expose nakedness (Ezek. 16:39; 2 Sam. 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’s clothes off can be a sign of fury (Matt. 26:65). Persons with defiling diseases are expected to warn off others by wearing torn clothes and shouting, “Unclean! Unclean!” (Lev. 13:45).

By laying their clothes at Saul’s feet, the crowd may be acknowledging 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 indicate giving up a right or as a transfer of property (Ruth 4:7–8). A sandal can also be removed in mourning (Ezek. 24:17) or be cast over a piece of land to claim ownership (Pss. 60:8; 108:9).

Prophetic Gestures

Prophetic gestures in the OT are mostly concerned with the call to repentance and approaching judgments upon failure to heed the warning. Jeremiah puts a yoke on his neck (Jer. 27–28; cf. Deut. 28:48), Ezekiel cooks with dung (Ezek. 4:12) and sleeps on his left side for 390 days and then on his right side for 40 days (4:5–6), Isaiah strips off his clothing (Isa. 20:2–3; 32:11), and Hosea marries an unfaithful wife (Hos. 1:1–3).

In the 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 drinks wine (Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19; 24:30, 35; Acts 2:46; 20:11; 27:35; 1 Cor. 11:24–25) and washes his disciples’ feet (John 13:1–13), thereby establishing symbolic Christian practices.

The third son of Aram, and a grandson of Shem (Gen. 10:23; 1 Chron. 1:17).

The place where Jesus, after agonized prayer, was betrayed by Judas and arrested by Jewish authorities. The name comes from the Aramaic word for “oil press,” and Gethsemane probably had an olive orchard and an oil press. It likely was located near the Mount of Olives (Matt. 26:30; Mark 14:26; Luke 22:39), although its precise location is unknown.

Only Matthew and Mark specifically call the place “Gethsemane” (Matt. 26:36; Mark 14:32); Luke does not mention Gethsemane, but he does, with them, indicate that the events took place on the Mount of Olives (Luke 22:39). John describes the site as a garden, although he also does not mention it by name (John 18:1).

In Gethsemane, the disciples fell asleep after Jesus warned them against temptation. Jesus prayed three times for deliverance, but he resisted temptation and remained obedient to the will of God.

A spy sent by Moses, he was the son of Maki of the tribe of Dan (Num. 13:15).

Located in the Aijalon Valley, Gezer guarded the route from the seacoast up to Jerusalem. Gezer (Tell Jezer, Tell Jazari) is a mound, thirty-three acres in size, situated in the foothills of Judah. It is known from biblical, Egyptian, and Assyrian sources. Gezer was a major Canaanite city-state throughout the second millennium BC. The city was destroyed around 1500 BC and rebuilt during the Late Bronze Age, when it came under Egyptian hegemony. Joshua defeated the king of Gezer, who was part of a Canaanite coalition (Josh. 10:33). Gezer remained in Canaanite hands throughout the period of the judges (Josh. 16:10; Judg. 1:29), even though it formed the boundary for Ephraim’s tribal allotment (Josh. 16:3) and was assigned as a Levitical city (Josh. 21:21). David fought against the Philistines near Gezer (2 Sam. 5:25; 1 Chron. 20:4).

Gezer was conquered by Egypt and given as a dowry to Solomon. Solomon fortified Gezer along with Jerusalem, Hazor, and Megiddo (1 Kings 9:15–17). Gezer was destroyed by Shishak (c. 950–925 BC). It was rebuilt and destroyed by the Assyrians under Tiglath-pileser III (733 BC). Gezer became known as Gazara in the Hellenistic period and became an important city for the Hasmonean rulers.

One of three people groups whom David raided while he was living in Philistine territory during the reign of Achish, king of Gath (1 Sam. 27:8). The Girzites, as well as the Geshurites and the Amalekites, lived to the southwest of Israel. In modern versions, the name also appears as “Gizrites” and “Gezrites.” The different readings are supported by two similar alternate spellings of the name preserved in Hebrew manuscripts.

An archaic expression for the word “spirit,” such as in “giving up of the ghost” (Job 11:20 KJV) or “child of the Holy Ghost” (Matt. 1:18 KJV). In modern translations the term is reserved for the Greek word phantasma (Matt. 14:26; Mark 6:49), which may refer to an apparition, and for a restricted sense of pneuma (often translated “spirit”), based on context (Luke 24:37, 39). In these occurrences the disciples potentially mistake Jesus for a ghost in the sense of being something less than what he had been before death—without flesh and bones (Luke 24:39). His passing through walls may have contributed to this misunderstanding (John 20:19). By eating a fish, however, Jesus demonstrates that his resurrected body is of a different order (Luke 24:42–43; cf. John 21:1–14). The Bible never denies the existence of ghosts, but it offers little about their origin and purpose. The Mesopotamians believed that neglect of the dead might result in the ghost’s malevolence, requiring a ritual. Those who died violently or tragically also required ritual. Evoking the spirits of the dead goes back at least as far as Homer. We find a similar view in the story of the raising of the spirit of Samuel by the medium at Endor (1 Sam. 28:1–25). The Bible condemns the practice (Lev. 19:31; Deut. 18:10–11; 1 Chron. 10:13–14).

A place of uncertain location near Gibeon and Jerusalem, mentioned in the account of Joab and Abishai’s pursuit of Abner (2 Sam. 2:24). It lay near the hill of Ammah, where Joab halted the pursuit. The reading “Giah” may have resulted from scribal error (various LXX manuscripts have Gai [“Ai”] or pharanx [“valley”]).

Various terms in the OT have been interpreted as references to giants. “Anakim,” “Emim,” and “Zamzummim” (ESV, NRSV, NKJV; NIV: “Anakites,” “Emites,” “Zamzummites”) are the names designated by individual nations (i.e., the Israelites, the Moabites, and the Ammonites) for the giant aboriginal inhabitants of their respective territories (Num. 13:31–33; Deut. 2:10–21). “Rephaim” and “Nephilim,” on the other hand, are more general designations that are not necessarily restricted to specific territories. The two terms are difficult to define, but they seem to designate certain types of people such as those with legendary qualities or reputation (Gen. 6:4; Num. 13:33; Deut. 2:11; 3:11; 1 Chron. 20:4). Thus, Rephaim and Nephilim are not necessarily people of gigantic proportions, but a gigantic person would certainly be regarded among them (Num. 13:33; Deut. 2:11; 3:11). It is likely that all these terms had pejorative meanings (e.g., “Nephilim” might literally mean “fallen ones”). Furthermore, these terms share a common literary function in that they designate people who must be destroyed or displaced. Their demise was something that God required or even executed himself (e.g., Deut. 2:21; 9:1–6; Amos 2:9).

Some scholars have theorized that the biblical references to giants are a form of military hyperbole, or that they are embellished legends stemming from the sight of megalithic structures, but these theories fail to account for the fact that the Bible represents giants as living simultaneously (and interacting) with the Israelites. The Bible even preserves the personal names of giants such as “Og,” “Talmai,” and “Goliath.” Although no gigantic skeletal remains have yet been recovered from excavations, there is some evidence for giants in Egyptian texts. Papyrus Anastasi I describes Canaanites who were four or five cubits tall (i.e., between 7 and 8.5 feet) in the late thirteenth century BC. The Execration texts also refer to a place called “Anaq” (cf. “Anakim”) in southern Canaan (c. 1800 BC).

The head of a clan that was part of the early return to Judah from Babylonian captivity in 539 BC or soon after (Ezra 2:20).

A city located in the tribal territory of Dan in west-central Israel (Josh. 19:44) and allotted to the Levites (21:23). In subsequent years the Philistines and the Israelites struggled to control the site. During the fighting at Gibbethon, Baasha slew Nadab and took the northern crown (1 Kings 15:27–28), and later Omri’s troops proclaimed him king there as well (1 Kings 16:15–17). Gibbethon is likely identified with Tell el-Melat, on the edge of the coastal plain, three and a half miles west of Gezer.

A grandson of Caleb and his concubine Maakah. His father was Sheva (1 Chron. 2:49).

(1) A town located within the borders of the tribe of Benjamin. Gibeah is infamous as the setting where the men of the city raped and murdered the concubine of a Levite who had lodged in the city for the night. In response to this brutal act, an army of Israelites from all the other tribes engaged in battle against Gibeah and the Benjamites, killing all but six hundred men and burning the city (Judg. 19–20). Hosea refers to these events when he compares the sins of Israel in his time to the depravity of Gibeah (Hos. 9:9; 10:9).

Gibeah was the hometown of Saul (1 Sam. 10:26; 15:34; Isa. 10:29), and as such it played a central role during his reign. It was to Gibeah that the elders of Jabesh sent messengers to Saul requesting help (1 Sam. 11:1–5), and from Gibeah that Saul directed his campaign against the Philistines (1 Sam. 13–14). Later, David handed over two of Saul’s sons and five of his grandsons to the Gibeonites to be hanged in Gibeah in retaliation for Saul’s misdeeds (2 Sam. 21:5–6). The final biblical references to Gibeah appear in Isaiah and Hosea in connection with the impending invasion of Assyria (Isa. 10:29; Hos. 5:8).

Some references to Gibeah are problematic. Since gibe’ah is the Hebrew word for “hill,” there is some question whether “Gibeah of God” in 1 Sam. 10:5 (NIV) is a reference to Saul’s hometown or to a high place and should thus be translated as the “hill of God” (KJV, NASB). Similarly, the word gibe’ah in the Benjamite town list in Josh. 18:28 might better be translated as “hill.” Although the NIV translates “Gibeah and Kiriath” here, indicating two distinct towns, the Hebrew MT reads gibe’at qiryat and may refer to the hill of Kiriath Jearim, where the ark of the covenant was located for several years (1 Sam. 7:1–2). Finally, Gibeah occasionally is mentioned in close connection with a town called “Geba,” and some uncertainty exists whether these are distinct cities or linguistic variants of the same name (cf. Judg. 20:10; 1 Sam. 13:3, 16).

Gibeah is identified by most scholars with modern Tel el-Fûl, located about three miles north of Jerusalem. Excavations by W. F. Albright in 1922–23 and 1933 and by P. W. Lapp in 1964 identified five periods of occupation dating from Iron Age I (1200–1000 BC) to the early Roman era (c. AD 70). Finds from the second period (Iron Age IIA, 1000–900 BC) include the remains of a fortress that Albright attributed to Saul, although others suggest it was built by the Philistines and later occupied by Saul. Remains of a second fortress from Iron Age IIA and a third from Iron Age IIB–C (900–586 BC) were also found.

(2) A town located within the borders of the tribe of Judah (Josh. 15:57).

(3) A town located in the hill country of Ephraim that had been given to Phinehas, the son of Eleazar and the grandson of Aaron. Eleazar was buried there (Josh. 24:33).

The site identified by the prophet Samuel as the location of Saul’s encounter with a group of prophets and his subsequent filling by the Spirit of the Lord (1 Sam. 10:5–6). Other versions render the Hebrew phrase gibe’at ha’elohim as “hill of God” (KJV, NASB) or “Gibeath-elohim” (NRSV). See also Gibeah.

The KJV preserves this alternative Hebrew spelling of the city Gibeah in Josh. 18:28. See also Gibeah.

The place where Joshua performed circumcision on a group of Israelites, hence the Hebrew name, meaning “hill of the foreskins” (Josh. 5:3 KJV, NET). After crossing the Jordan River into Canaan near Jericho, God commanded Joshua, before continuing the conquest, to make knives of flint (found in the region) and circumcise the Israelite males who had been born during the wilderness journey (Josh. 5:4–7).

A resident of Gibeah. In 1 Chron. 12:3, Shemaah is referred to as a Gibeathite.

The town of Gibeon has been located at the site of el-Jib, an Arab village, about five and a half miles north of Jerusalem. The site was first identified by Edward Robinson in 1838 and was verified by several archaeological digs in the 1950s and 1960s. The discovery most helpful in positively identifying Gibeon was the numerous jar handles found inscribed with the name “Gibeon,” which apparently were part of a royal storehouse there.

Geographically, Gibeon was significant because it guarded an important crossroad between the main thoroughfare running east up into the hills from the coastal plain and the main road running north to Bethel and south to Jerusalem. The town lies within the territory of the tribe of Benjamin, although it likely did not become part of Benjamin until after the beginning of the monarchy, when the tribal designation would have been less important. Because of its strategic location approximately halfway between Bethel and Jerusalem, Gibeon was the site of numerous battles between the northern and southern kingdoms.

Gibeon first appears in the Bible when the Gibeonites, using old clothes, old shoes, and moldy bread, pretended to be foreigners from far away and tricked Joshua into a peace treaty. Joshua honored the treaty, although he relegated the Gibeonites to do menial labor (Josh. 9:3–10:15). When their neighbors attacked the Gibeonites, the Israelites fulfilled their obligations and went to the Gibeonites’ defense (Josh. 10:1–15).

Gibeon factors in several events during the lives of Saul, David, and Solomon. Men loyal to Saul’s household and David’s men faced off in a strange contest around the “pool of Gibeon.” Twelve pairs of men fought, with each contest resulting in both men dying (2 Sam. 2:12–17). In James Pritchard’s excavations of Gibeon, he found what is undoubtedly the pool referred to in this story. The pool was thirty-seven feet in diameter and eighty-two feet deep, with a spiral staircase on the side. The pool gave the city access to freshwater within its walls. It was part of the water defenses of the city, which also included a tunnel leading to a spring that provided additional water to the city. Gibeon was also the site of several of the events in Absalom’s revolt against David.

Gibeon also was an important cultic center and high place in the early monarchy. The tabernacle was situated in Gibeon for some time (1 Chron. 16:39). God twice appeared to Solomon at Gibeon. Once, God appeared in order to ask Solomon what he wanted, to which Solomon responded that he wanted wisdom (2 Chron. 1:2–13). On another occasion, God assured Solomon that he had heard his prayer (1 Kings 9:2–9). This second encounter with God took place after the construction of the temple, which suggests that Gibeon was religiously important even after the temple was built. Gibeon is recorded as one of the cities captured by Shishak during his campaign against Israel shortly after the death of Solomon.

Although Gibeon is rarely mentioned after the partition of the kingdom, the archaeological data suggest that the city was a vital economic asset during the entire monarchy. Gibeon was also the site of Gedaliah’s assassination. Gedaliah was the Babylonian-appointed Jewish governor after the destruction of Jerusalem. Some Gibeonites were taken to Babylon during the exile and then returned with Nehemiah to help him build Jerusalem’s wall (Neh. 3:7–8).

Besides the pool, the tunnel, and jar handles, several other archaeological discoveries at Gibeon have been found. Other handles have been found that are inscribed with different common Jewish names, and several have what appear to be royal-seal stamps. An industrial area has been excavated, revealing several large-scale wineries and wine cellars, indicating that Gibeon was a center for wine production and distribution. The fortifications of Gibeon have also been excavated, exposing a large wall all the way around the city, measuring thirteen feet in width in some places.

The town of Gibeon has been located at the site of el-Jib, an Arab village, about five and a half miles north of Jerusalem. The site was first identified by Edward Robinson in 1838 and was verified by several archaeological digs in the 1950s and 1960s. The discovery most helpful in positively identifying Gibeon was the numerous jar handles found inscribed with the name “Gibeon,” which apparently were part of a royal storehouse there.

Geographically, Gibeon was significant because it guarded an important crossroad between the main thoroughfare running east up into the hills from the coastal plain and the main road running north to Bethel and south to Jerusalem. The town lies within the territory of the tribe of Benjamin, although it likely did not become part of Benjamin until after the beginning of the monarchy, when the tribal designation would have been less important. Because of its strategic location approximately halfway between Bethel and Jerusalem, Gibeon was the site of numerous battles between the northern and southern kingdoms.

Gibeon first appears in the Bible when the Gibeonites, using old clothes, old shoes, and moldy bread, pretended to be foreigners from far away and tricked Joshua into a peace treaty. Joshua honored the treaty, although he relegated the Gibeonites to do menial labor (Josh. 9:3–10:15). When their neighbors attacked the Gibeonites, the Israelites fulfilled their obligations and went to the Gibeonites’ defense (Josh. 10:1–15).

Gibeon factors in several events during the lives of Saul, David, and Solomon. Men loyal to Saul’s household and David’s men faced off in a strange contest around the “pool of Gibeon.” Twelve pairs of men fought, with each contest resulting in both men dying (2 Sam. 2:12–17). In James Pritchard’s excavations of Gibeon, he found what is undoubtedly the pool referred to in this story. The pool was thirty-seven feet in diameter and eighty-two feet deep, with a spiral staircase on the side. The pool gave the city access to freshwater within its walls. It was part of the water defenses of the city, which also included a tunnel leading to a spring that provided additional water to the city. Gibeon was also the site of several of the events in Absalom’s revolt against David.

Gibeon also was an important cultic center and high place in the early monarchy. The tabernacle was situated in Gibeon for some time (1 Chron. 16:39). God twice appeared to Solomon at Gibeon. Once, God appeared in order to ask Solomon what he wanted, to which Solomon responded that he wanted wisdom (2 Chron. 1:2–13). On another occasion, God assured Solomon that he had heard his prayer (1 Kings 9:2–9). This second encounter with God took place after the construction of the temple, which suggests that Gibeon was religiously important even after the temple was built. Gibeon is recorded as one of the cities captured by Shishak during his campaign against Israel shortly after the death of Solomon.

Although Gibeon is rarely mentioned after the partition of the kingdom, the archaeological data suggest that the city was a vital economic asset during the entire monarchy. Gibeon was also the site of Gedaliah’s assassination. Gedaliah was the Babylonian-appointed Jewish governor after the destruction of Jerusalem. Some Gibeonites were taken to Babylon during the exile and then returned with Nehemiah to help him build Jerusalem’s wall (Neh. 3:7–8).

Besides the pool, the tunnel, and jar handles, several other archaeological discoveries at Gibeon have been found. Other handles have been found that are inscribed with different common Jewish names, and several have what appear to be royal-seal stamps. An industrial area has been excavated, revealing several large-scale wineries and wine cellars, indicating that Gibeon was a center for wine production and distribution. The fortifications of Gibeon have also been excavated, exposing a large wall all the way around the city, measuring thirteen feet in width in some places.

An ancient Phoenician city, also known as Gebal (modern Jbeil or Jubayl), situated on a promontory of the foothills of Lebanon, about forty miles north of Sidon. Its historical significance as an international trade hub connecting Egypt, Greece, and Syria-Palestine has been demonstrated by ample evidence. One famous Egyptian tale (Wen-Amon) describes Byblos as the most powerful port and the main exporter of cedar wood to Egypt. Later, Byblos became a major distribution center for the Egyptian papyrus trade and supplied writing materials to the Greek world (thus the Greek name “Byblos,” or “book,” from which the English word “Bible” derives).

Byblos is mentioned in Josh. 13:5 as part of the land still unconquered. The men of Byb­los aided the construction of the Solomonic temple (1 Kings 5:18). In an oracle against Tyre, Ezekiel mentions the men of Byblos as skillful shipbuilders (Ezek. 27:9). Byblos, or Gebal (ESV, NRSV, KJV), in Ps. 83:7 has been taken to denote a different place near Petra, southeast of the Dead Sea (based on statements from Eusebius and Josephus), but it is better understood as referring to the Phoenician city.

One of the fourteen sons of Heman, King David’s seer (1 Chron. 25:4). When twenty-four lots were cast during the time of David to allocate musical duties for the worship of God, Giddalti and his sons and relatives received the twenty-second lot (1 Chron. 25:29).

(1) One of the ancestors of the temple servants (Nethinim) who returned to Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity under the leadership of Zerubbabel in 539 BC or soon after (Ezra 2:47; Neh. 7:49). The fact that many of the names in the list of ancestors are foreign has led to the belief that they were originally prisoners of war who were pressed into service to perform menial tasks as they assisted the Levites. (2) An ancestor of a family that belonged to the “servants of Solomon” (Ezra 2:56; Neh. 7:58) and returned with Zerubbabel in 539 BC or soon after. Little is known about this group except that it likely performed menial functions at the temple, since it is grouped with the “temple servants” (see Nethinim). The name of the group suggests that it was formed during the period of Solomon, though it could have been so named because Solomon built the first temple.

The fifth judge described in the book of Judges (6:1–8:35). After Deborah’s victory over the Canaanites, Israel again falls into sin, so God turns Israel over to a new oppressor, the Midianites and their allies.

In the past, when Israel has repented as they do in Judg. 6:7, God has immediately brought them a judge to rescue them. This time, however, God first sends a prophet, who berates them for their continual apostasy (6:8–10). Still, the narrative next focuses on Gideon, whom God commissions to rescue Israel from Midian (7:14). Like Barak before him (4:8), however, Gideon does not immediately agree, but rather sets conditions for his participation, asking for a sign. Even after receiving the sign, he first of all acts only locally, tearing down his father’s idolatrous shrine and building a proper altar to Yahweh (6:26–27). Although the people want to punish Gideon out of fear of the Midianites, his father defends him and renames his son “Jerub-Baal,” which means “Let Baal contend with him” (6:32).

At this point, the conflict grows more serious as the Midianites and their allies amass against Israel. Even after the Spirit of the Lord comes upon Gideon, he still sets conditions on God asking for yet another sign, this time putting a fleece in front of God and asking that it be wet while the ground is dry. Even though God meets this condition, Gideon demands a second trial, and only after that is successful does he proceed.

The successful battle against the Midianites is best known for the prebattle dismissal of many of the Israelite troops. Many respond to Gideon’s call to arms. As God demands, Gideon insists that fearful troops leave, but even after ten thousand men leave, twenty-two thousand remain. Ultimately, God instructs Gideon to have the troops drink from the waters of the Wadi Harod. The three hundred who drink water by lapping it with their hands to their mouths are chosen, and with these Gideon wins a great victory. There is nothing special about these three hundred troops. God knows that Gideon has a propensity to self-glorification (“by my hand” [Judg. 6:36]), and God wants to ensure that Israel will not boast in its own strength and will know that it is God who has brought deliverance.

Although Gideon is hesitant and apparently distrustful in answering God’s call, events during and after the battle show his true nature. His humility is in evidence (cf. Judg. 6:15) when he refuses the Israelites’ request to be their king (though later he names one of his sons “Abimelek,” meaning “My father is king”), insisting that God alone will rule them (8:22–23). However, a request of his own becomes an occasion for Israel to plunge back into idolatry when he fashions an ephod from plundered enemy gold, which the Israelites then worship (8:24–27). Even so, the book of Hebrews (11:32) considers him an example of faith.

The father of Abidan, who was the tribal leader of Benjamin during the wilderness wanderings (Num. 1:11; 2:22; 7:60, 65; 10:24). See also Abidan.

A place mentioned in connection with the Israelite pursuit of warriors of the tribe of Benjamin. After routing the Benjamites, the men of Israel pursued them eastward from Gibeah toward the wilderness “as far as Gidom” (Judg. 20:45). Six hundred Benjamites escaped to the rock of Rimmon (20:47). Gidom’s exact location remains unknown.

Both speaking in tongues and interpreting tongues are listed among the various gifts of the Spirit that God may choose to give to believers according to his will (1 Cor. 12:10, 28). The act of speaking in tongues is referred to as “glossolalia” (from Gk. glōssa [“tongue”] and laleō [“speak”]).

Narrative Record

Instances in which believers exercise the gift of tongues are recorded in three biblical narratives, with Acts 2 detailing the most notable occurrence. When the Holy Spirit first was poured out upon Christian believers gathered at Pentecost, visible tongues of fire were accompanied by a Spirit-enabled ability to speak in languages that were foreign to them (2:3–4). In this instance, the tongues spoken are identified as the actual human languages and dialects of various people groups who resided throughout the Mediterranean world (2:8–11). The phenomenon resulted in the ability of many to hear the wonders of God in their native languages and prompted both curiosity and scoffing (2:12–13).

A similar outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon Cornelius and his fellow Gentiles in connection with the ministry of Peter was accompanied by speaking in tongues (Acts 10:44–46). This ability to speak in tongues provided undeniable evidence that God had indeed poured out the Holy Spirit upon Gentile Christians by manifesting the Spirit’s presence in a way comparable to the initial Pentecost experience of the Jewish Christians (11:15–18). A final account from the Pauline ministry notes the coming of the Holy Spirit upon a dozen disciples in Ephesus with the accompanying ability to speak in tongues (19:6). The text does not reveal what languages were spoken in either of these latter episodes.

It is sometimes argued that the gift of tongues normally accompanies Christian salvation or baptism with the Holy Spirit and is a gift that believers should earnestly seek. However, this argument cannot be sustained by the historical narratives of Acts. All three recorded instances of tongues detail the gift coming upon groups of people rather than individuals, and the gift is poured out upon them without their praying for it or seeking it out in any way. Furthermore, these are the only three instances in Scripture where tongues clearly accompany salvation, whereas numerous other Lukan accounts of the salvation of various individuals (Acts 2:41; 4:4; 8:36–39; 13:12, 48; 16:14, 34), including Paul (9:1–19; 22:6–16), contain no mention of the gift of tongues.

Paul’s Teaching

The first-century Corinthian church exercised a variety of spiritual gifts, including the gift of tongues. When Paul writes to that church, he includes teaching designed to correct various abuses of these spiritual gifts. A lengthy discussion about spiritual gifts in 1 Cor. 12–14 affirms the practice of speaking in tongues in the Corinthian assembly under certain conditions (14:39–40) while also relegating it to a status lower than the gift of prophecy (14:5). By its very nature, Paul asserts, those who speak in tongues are not understood by their human audience; utterances in tongues speak to God, not to human beings (14:2). Therefore, on its own, glossolalia cannot edify those who hear it unless an interpretation is also provided for them. For this reason, Paul directs the Corinthians to other spiritual gifts (14:6) that can function to build up the church (14:12). Nonetheless, Paul affirms the practice of glossolalia in the Corinthians’ public worship when it is limited to two or three speakers, when it is done in an orderly manner with the speakers taking turns, and when it is coupled with interpretation so that the church can be edified by its message (14:26–27).

Contemporary Debates

Three questions dominate modern discussions about the gift of tongues: (1) What is the primary purpose of speaking in tongues? (2) What is the nature of the language spoken when the gift of tongues is exercised? (3) Does the gift of tongues continue beyond the apostolic era? Answers to these questions vary and reflect diverse theological positions.

Primary purpose. One position maintains that when the Spirit gives the gift of tongues, it is always a public exercise that produces infallible revelation from God. The primary, or perhaps sole, purpose of this gift of miraculous utterance is as a sign to authenticate the gospel proclamation and thus contribute to the common good of the church as a whole by reaching unbelievers with the gospel in a powerful way. Proponents of this view find support in 1 Cor. 14:22, where Paul speaks of tongues as a sign for unbelievers. Also, the Pentecost experience, narrated in Acts 2, can be understood as a use of tongues that fits into this framework. Opponents object to this interpretation by noting that it was Peter’s subsequent sermon rather than the gift of tongues itself that served an evangelistic purpose.

Others find biblical support for an additional private use of tongues by believers in their prayer and praise directed toward God (1 Cor. 14:2, 28). Although the teaching in 1 Cor. 14 focuses on whether and how tongues are to be used in the public assembly, some adherents of this position point to 14:14–19 for evidence of Paul’s own use of the gift of tongues in his devotional life. This use of tongues is thought to contribute to the common good of the church through the personal edification of the individual believers who practice this gift (14:4) and who make up the believing community.

Nature of the language. It is not entirely clear from Scripture whether the tongues spoken by those with the gift of tongues are human languages otherwise unknown to the speaker, whether they consist of otherworldly (heavenly, angelic, spiritual) languages, or whether both constitute valid options. The record of Pentecost in Acts 2 is the only scriptural narrative of tongues that explicitly identifies the languages spoken by those exercising the gift of tongues; they are human languages. However, three NT passages are cited in support of the broader view.

First, in 1 Cor. 13:1 Paul alludes to the possibility of speech “in the tongues of men or of angels.” While this may affirm the idea of an angelic language being spoken by believers with the gift of tongues, those who limit tongues to human languages see in this statement hyperbole rather than a description of reality.

Second, when Paul discusses tongues in 1 Cor. 14:2, he indicates that no one who hears understands the language. This statement is easily true if the language spoken is “angelic,” but it would also be true of a human language generally unfamiliar to those in the Corinthian worship assembly.

Finally, Rom. 8:26, by describing the Spirit’s intercession in prayer as groans and utterances too deep for words, may support the idea that the gift of tongues consists of a spiritual rather than a human language. Opponents argue that this text in no way speaks of the gift of tongues.

Continuation beyond the apostolic era. Finally, nowhere does Scripture expressly teach that the gift of tongues will continue throughout the entire church age, nor does it clearly state a time, be it the end of the apostolic period, the closing of the NT canon, or some other time, when the gift of tongues will cease. Because the NT describes the gift of tongues functioning among believers in the first century, many believe that the gift of tongues continues to be expressed by God’s new covenant people today.

Continuationists argue that Scripture nowhere anticipates a change in the Holy Spirit’s work or empowerment for ministry, and so the life of Christians today should be similar to that of NT believers with regard to the expected and empowering presence of tongues.

On the other hand, cessationists believe that passages such as Eph. 2:11–21 identify the first century as a unique, foundational time in salvation history, characterized by apostolic leadership and an open canon. Just as there are no longer apostles today, one should not be surprised if the practice of miraculous gifts, including the gift of tongues, should significantly decrease or stop entirely following that foundational time. Some also point to 1 Cor. 13:8 as evidence that a time will come when the gift of tongues will end.

Others opt for an intermediate position, arguing that while speaking in tongues is not the standard for the church era, it is possible that the gift continues to operate today on a more limited scale, most likely only in places where the gospel is making inroads for the first time, a situation comparable to that of the NT era.

The giving of gifts in the Bible has several nuances. It can refer to a goodwill gift or a peace offering given to a friend or relative (Prov. 18:16; 21:14). Thus, when Jacob seeks to make peace with his brother Esau, he sends gifts to him before they meet (Gen. 32:13; 33:10). Similarly, when Abigail intercedes with David on behalf of Nabal, she gives David a gift (1 Sam. 25:27).

Ezekiel 46:17 illustrates that some gifts are regulated if they came from an inheritance. There are several references in the NT to the gifts of one local church to another (Acts 11:30; 1 Cor. 16:3; 2 Cor. 8:12, 20; 9:5; Phil. 4:17). The giving of these gifts has a positive effect for both those in need and those who give the gift.

Gifts are a traditional part of bridal arrangements in the Bible. Thus, Shechem requests to know the bride-price and gift when he asks for Dinah as his wife (Gen. 34:11–12). Likewise, Pharaoh gives a captured city as a dowry for his daughter’s marriage to Solomon (1 Kings 9:16).

Gifts are integral in honoring another in hospitality and in approaching someone about a service. Israel instructs his sons to take gifts to Pharaoh when they go to purchase food (Gen. 43:11). It is customary to bring a gift to a man of God or prophet when asking for advice or prophetic insight (1 Sam. 9:7; 1 Kings 13:7; 2 Kings 5:15; 8:8–9). People bring Solomon gifts when they seek an audience with him (1 Kings 10:25). Additionally, gifts are part of the process of establishing a treaty (1 Kings 15:19; 2 Kings 16:8; 20:12).

Of course, gifts can be used for ignoble purposes as well. David sends a gift to Uriah in an effort to cover up his own sin (2 Sam. 11:8).

Sacrifices of every type are conceived of as a gift to the deity with the intent of seeking favor or making restitution for sin (Lev. 22:18; Num. 31:52). Even mandatory offerings and dedicated land are considered gifts under the notion that God, as the Creator, owns all (Ezek. 45:16; 48:12, 20). This idea of giving a gift to God demonstrates the cost involved in approaching the deity. Interestingly, the priests and Levites who are associated with the sacrifices are described as a gift from God to the rest of the people (Num. 18:6–7).

The intentions behind the gift are important to God. Jesus states that one cannot be giving gifts to God and simultaneously holding on to contention with another in the community of faith (Matt. 5:23–24). Jesus commands that thankfulness to God be followed with the prescribed sacrifice (Matt. 8:4). Yet, an unwillingness to help others should not be hidden behind an ostentatious dedication to giving to God (Matt. 15:5; Mark 7:11). Likewise, Jesus warns against being overly legalistic about gifts and their benefit (Matt. 23:18–19).

On a fundamental level, gift giving has its origin in the gracious nature of God. God is the giver of all good gifts (James 1:17). He gives children to mothers (Gen. 30:20). A good life and reward for work are also gifts from God (Eccles. 3:13; 5:19). Jesus describes himself as a gift of God (John 4:10). Likewise, the Holy Spirit is God’s gift (Acts 1:4; 2:38; 11:17) and cannot be purchased with money (Acts 8:20). This gift of the Holy Spirit is given to Jew and Gentile alike (Acts 10:45).

Both grace and salvation are gifts from God (Rom. 5:15–17; 6:23; Eph. 2:8; 3:7; Heb. 6:4; 1 Pet. 3:7). Finally, spiritual gifts are part of God’s good gifts (Rom. 1:11). These gifts are meant to help the church so that nothing needed for ministry is lacking in the body of Christ (Rom. 12:6; 1 Cor. 1:7; 7:7; 1 Tim. 4:14; 2 Tim. 1:6; 1 Pet. 4:10). Spiritual gifts are all governed by the greatest gift, that of love (1 Cor. 13:2; 14:1).

(1) The second of the four rivers that stemmed from the garden of Eden (Gen. 2:13). The identity of the Gihon River is unknown, though much debated. Scholars taking its reference to be more literal in its geography have argued for locations in Mesopotamia, assuming the ancient river to be long since dried up. Still others, believing this portion of Genesis to be more symbolic in intent, have argued for different locations from Egypt to India and even in Jerusalem itself.

(2) A spring located southeast of Jerusalem’s Old City. It lies on the eastern perimeter of the City of David in the modern village of Silwan. The Gihon spring was the primary source of water for Jerusalem in ancient times. Archaeological evidence suggests that the spring has been in use as far back as two thousand years before King David conquered Jerusalem (c. 1000 BC). Naturally connected to an underground cave, the Gihon siphons water once every few hours as the cave fills. This “gushing forth” (from which the name “Gihon” may have come) can occur as many as five times a day, producing up to three hundred thousand gallons of water in the rainy season.

Because of the Gihon’s importance, a series of underground water systems has been constructed to make use of its waters. One of these is King Hezekiah’s (727–698 BC) tunnel, which brought Gihon’s waters to the Pool of Siloam (2 Kings 20:20; 2 Chron. 32:30). It was at the Gihon that David had Solomon anointed to be king over Israel (1 Kings 1:28–48). The spring is also mentioned in connection to the wall that King Manasseh (698–642 BC) rebuilt (2 Chron. 33:14).

One of the musicians who took part in the ceremony dedicating Nehemiah’s wall (Neh. 12:36). Gilalai was an associate (or possibly a relative) of Zechariah son of Jonathan and was part of the first procession, led by Ezra.

A crescent-shaped hill at the northern end of the Israelite hill country where it borders the strategic and open Jezreel Valley. Gilboa’s location made it a natural staging ground for military action. Gideon brought his troops to the spring of Harod (Judg. 7:1) at the base of Gilboa before defeating the Midianites camped across the valley. Later, King Saul brought his troops to Gilboa to battle the Philistines camped across the valley, only to die with his sons on Gilboa (1 Sam. 28:4; 31:1, 8; 2 Sam. 1:6, 21).

The southern section of the Transjordan, with the Jordan River to the west, Bashan to the north, Ammon to the east, and Moab to the south. The Jabbok River ran across it from east to west, and “Gilead” could be used either more widely to describe the whole area or more narrowly to describe the land either south or north of the Jabbok. It was a high, fertile region, famed for its healing balm and spices (Gen. 37:25; Jer. 8:22; 46:11) as well as its pastures and livestock (Num. 32:1; 1 Chron. 5:9; Song 4:1; 6:5).

Jacob named Gilead after the heap of stones that witnessed his covenant with Laban (Gen. 31:21–55). “Gilead” also became a personal and clan name (Num. 26:29–30; 27:1) when, following the Israelites’ defeat of Sihon the Amorite on their way to Canaan (Deut. 2:36; Josh. 12:1–3), the region was allotted to Reuben, Gad, and part of Manasseh (Num. 36:1; Deut. 3:10–15).

Israel drew some of its national leaders from Gilead (Judg. 10:3; 11:1) and defended it keenly against Gentile enemies (1 Sam. 11). However, there was often tension between the tribes east and west of the Jordan (Josh. 22:10–34; Judg. 5:17; 12:1–7). When David fled from Absalom (2 Sam. 17:22), crossing into the Transjordan was viewed as having left the land (2 Sam. 17:22; 19:9). Returning across the river was like a reenactment of the conquest (2 Sam. 19:15). There is similar symbolism in the Jordan crossings made by Elijah, a prophet from Gilead, and his successor, Elisha (1 Kings 17:3; 2 Kings 2:8, 14).

After the division of the kingdom, Israel’s hold on the Transjordan became increasingly tenuous. Two alliances between Israel and Judah failed to win Ramoth Gilead back from the Arameans (1 Kings 22; 2 Kings 8:28–29), and Hazael later conquered the entire region (2 Kings 10:32–33). After a brief respite under Jehoash (2 Kings 13:25), Pekah lost Gilead to Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria (15:29).

Nevertheless, Gilead remained a prized possession of Yahweh (Pss. 60:7; 108:8; Jer. 22:6). Hosea may have condemned Gilead’s sinfulness (Hos. 6:8; 12:11), but the prophets also looked forward to a day when Gilead’s conquerors would be punished (Amos 1:3, 13) and its richness would be restored to Israel (Jer. 50:19; Obad. 1:19; Mic. 7:14; Zech. 10:10).

The southern section of the Transjordan, with the Jordan River to the west, Bashan to the north, Ammon to the east, and Moab to the south. The Jabbok River ran across it from east to west, and “Gilead” could be used either more widely to describe the whole area or more narrowly to describe the land either south or north of the Jabbok. It was a high, fertile region, famed for its healing balm and spices (Gen. 37:25; Jer. 8:22; 46:11) as well as its pastures and livestock (Num. 32:1; 1 Chron. 5:9; Song 4:1; 6:5).

Jacob named Gilead after the heap of stones that witnessed his covenant with Laban (Gen. 31:21–55). “Gilead” also became a personal and clan name (Num. 26:29–30; 27:1) when, following the Israelites’ defeat of Sihon the Amorite on their way to Canaan (Deut. 2:36; Josh. 12:1–3), the region was allotted to Reuben, Gad, and part of Manasseh (Num. 36:1; Deut. 3:10–15).

Israel drew some of its national leaders from Gilead (Judg. 10:3; 11:1) and defended it keenly against Gentile enemies (1 Sam. 11). However, there was often tension between the tribes east and west of the Jordan (Josh. 22:10–34; Judg. 5:17; 12:1–7). When David fled from Absalom (2 Sam. 17:22), crossing into the Transjordan was viewed as having left the land (2 Sam. 17:22; 19:9). Returning across the river was like a reenactment of the conquest (2 Sam. 19:15). There is similar symbolism in the Jordan crossings made by Elijah, a prophet from Gilead, and his successor, Elisha (1 Kings 17:3; 2 Kings 2:8, 14).

After the division of the kingdom, Israel’s hold on the Transjordan became increasingly tenuous. Two alliances between Israel and Judah failed to win Ramoth Gilead back from the Arameans (1 Kings 22; 2 Kings 8:28–29), and Hazael later conquered the entire region (2 Kings 10:32–33). After a brief respite under Jehoash (2 Kings 13:25), Pekah lost Gilead to Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria (15:29).

Nevertheless, Gilead remained a prized possession of Yahweh (Pss. 60:7; 108:8; Jer. 22:6). Hosea may have condemned Gilead’s sinfulness (Hos. 6:8; 12:11), but the prophets also looked forward to a day when Gilead’s conquerors would be punished (Amos 1:3, 13) and its richness would be restored to Israel (Jer. 50:19; Obad. 1:19; Mic. 7:14; Zech. 10:10).

The most famous place of this name was not far from Jericho. Eusebius placed it two miles from Jericho, it appeared on the ancient Madaba Map, early pilgrims claimed to have “seen the stones,” and from the seventh to twelfth centuries AD there was a church at the place of pilgrimage. However, archaeologists have not been able to identify the site definitively in modern times.

Gilgal was Israel’s first camp after crossing the Jordan, marked by a cairn of twelve stones from the riverbed (Josh. 4:19–20). It was called “Gilgal” because this sounds like the Hebrew word galal, meaning “to roll away.” When the people had been circumcised and had celebrated their first Passover in the promised land, God told them that he had “rolled away the reproach of Egypt” (5:9). It was at this base camp that Israel settled the question of Caleb’s inheritance (14:6–14) and fell for the Gibeonites’ deception (Josh. 9), and from which they set out on their southern campaign (Josh. 10). In the next generation, the angel of the Lord went up from there to Bokim to confront them with their sinfulness (Judg. 2:1).

The prophet Samuel visited Gilgal regularly to judge the people (1 Sam. 7:16), as well as to offer sacrifice (10:8) and to proclaim Saul as king (11:14–15). David returned to his kingdom through Gilgal after Absalom’s death, effectively retracing Joshua’s steps (2 Sam. 19:15, 40). Later, Elijah and Elisha passed through Gilgal just before Elijah miraculously crossed the Jordan eastward and Elisha then miraculously crossed back (2 Kings 2:1–14). On his return to Gilgal, Elisha removed poison from stew and multiplied bread for the famine-stricken people (2 Kings 4:38–44).

The stones at Gilgal were meant to be a perpetual reminder of God’s faithfulness in the conquest (Josh. 4:21–24; Mic. 6:5). However, when Ehud turned back at Gilgal to assassinate Ekron, they were already described as “the stone images [i.e., idols] near Gilgal” (Judg. 3:19). It was there that Saul forfeited his kingship first by offering sacrifice himself instead of waiting for Samuel to do so (1 Sam. 13) and then by setting aside captured livestock for sacrifice rather than destroying them according to God’s instructions (1 Sam. 15). By the eighth century BC, Gilgal was one of the cult sites of the northern kingdom and was notorious for false worship (Hos. 4:15; 9:15; 12:11; Amos 4:4; 5:5).

“Gilgal” could also mean, more generally, “stone circle,” so there may have been several places of this name. It is not clear, for instance, whether the Gilgal on the border of Judah (Josh. 15:7) and the Beth Gilgal from which temple singers came after the exile (Neh. 12:29) are the same as the famous Gilgal. Moses mentions a place called “Gilgal” in his directions to recite the covenant blessings and curses on Mounts Gerizim and Ebal (Deut. 11:30). Since Gilgal was not among mountains, either this is a different Gilgal or Moses is simply locating the mountains relative to Israel’s base camp in the Arabah, or Jordan Valley. See also Beth Gilgal.

A town located somewhere in the southern Judean hill country (Josh. 15:51), it was the home of David’s counselor Ahithophel (2 Sam. 15:12). Giloh’s precise location is unknown, but based on the known towns in the same list (Josh. 15:48–52), Giloh was perhaps fifteen to twenty miles southwest of Hebron.

A town located somewhere in the southern Judean hill country (Josh. 15:51), it was the home of David’s counselor Ahithophel (2 Sam. 15:12). Giloh’s precise location is unknown, but based on the known towns in the same list (Josh. 15:48–52), Giloh was perhaps fifteen to twenty miles southwest of Hebron.

A person from the Judean town of Giloh. David’s counselor Ahithophel was a Gilonite (2 Sam. 15:12).

A city in the northern Judean foothills conquered by the Philistines during the reign of King Ahaz (eighth century BC). A weakened Judah faced pressure from Israel and Aram to the north, and the Philistines and the Edomites were conquering parts of southern and western Judah (2 Chron. 28:17–19). Gimzo apparently is identified with modern Jimzu in the Aijalon Valley, approximately six miles north-northeast of Gezer.

The KJV translates two Hebrew words, pakh and moqesh, as “gin”; the NIV translates these terms as “trap” or “snare.” The two Hebrew terms are similar in meaning and sometimes appear in proximity to each other (Ps. 140:5; Isa. 8:14; Amos 3:5). See also Job 18:9; Ps. 141:9.

The father of Tibni, who apparently was killed while vying with Omri for the Israelite throne (1 Kings 16:21–22).

One of the priests who signed the covenant of renewal along with Nehemiah (Neh. 10:6). Ginnethon returned with Zerubbabel and Joshua (12:4). Meshullam is named as the head of Ginnethon’s priestly family in the days of Joiakim the high priest (12:16).

Descended from Ham the son of Noah (Gen. 10:16), the Girgashites comprised one of the original tribes of Canaan whose land was promised to Abraham (15:21). They were defeated by Joshua in the conquest (Josh. 24:11). A similar name is mentioned in the Ugaritic texts of Ras Shamra, nine miles north of modern Latakia.

One of three people groups whom David raided while he was living in Philistine territory during the reign of Achish, king of Gath (1 Sam. 27:8). The Girzites, as well as the Geshurites and the Amalekites, lived to the southwest of Israel. In modern versions, the name also appears as “Gizrites” and “Gezrites.” The different readings are supported by two similar alternate spellings of the name preserved in Hebrew manuscripts.

Along with his associate Ziha, Gishpa (KJV: “Gispa”) was in charge of the “temple servants” (KJV: “Nethinims”) after the Jews’ return from exile (Neh. 11:21). Since Ziha appears immediately before Hasupha in Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s parallel lists of ancestors of the temple servants (Ezra 2:43; Neh. 7:46), it is possible that Gishpa and Hasupha are the same person. Notice also that the spellings of the names “Gishpa” and “Hasupha” in Hebrew differ only by the first letter.

A town in Zebulun on the border with Naphtali (Josh. 19:13), the home of the prophet Jonah (2 Kings 14:25). It is identified with Khirbet ez-Zurra’, near the modern village of el-Meshhed, about three miles northeast of Nazareth (note connection of Jesus and Jonah in Matt. 12:39–41). An alternate spelling, “Gittah-Hepher,” reflecting an alternate Hebrew form, is found in some older translations of Josh. 19:13.

A Benjamite city to which the people of Beeroth fled and settled as aliens (2 Sam. 4:3). It is unknown when this occurred. Some of the returning Benjamites settled there after the exile (Neh. 11:33). The Gath mentioned in 1 Chron. 7:21; 8:13 appears to have been a Benjamite settlement. It is possible, though not certain, that Gittaim can be identified as that Gath. This Gath is not the same Gath where the Philistines temporarily held the ark of the covenant (1 Sam. 5:8). Ras Abu Humeid, near Lydda, has been suggested as the modern location of Gittaim.

A transliteration of a Hebrew word used in the superscriptions of Pss. 8; 81; 84. Its significance is uncertain. The word might designate a musical instrument or a musical sign denoting how the psalms were to be sung.

The giving of gifts in the Bible has several nuances. It can refer to a goodwill gift or a peace offering given to a friend or relative (Prov. 18:16; 21:14). Thus, when Jacob seeks to make peace with his brother Esau, he sends gifts to him before they meet (Gen. 32:13; 33:10). Similarly, when Abigail intercedes with David on behalf of Nabal, she gives David a gift (1 Sam. 25:27).

Ezekiel 46:17 illustrates that some gifts are regulated if they came from an inheritance. There are several references in the NT to the gifts of one local church to another (Acts 11:30; 1 Cor. 16:3; 2 Cor. 8:12, 20; 9:5; Phil. 4:17). The giving of these gifts has a positive effect for both those in need and those who give the gift.

Gifts are a traditional part of bridal arrangements in the Bible. Thus, Shechem requests to know the bride-price and gift when he asks for Dinah as his wife (Gen. 34:11–12). Likewise, Pharaoh gives a captured city as a dowry for his daughter’s marriage to Solomon (1 Kings 9:16).

Gifts are integral in honoring another in hospitality and in approaching someone about a service. Israel instructs his sons to take gifts to Pharaoh when they go to purchase food (Gen. 43:11). It is customary to bring a gift to a man of God or prophet when asking for advice or prophetic insight (1 Sam. 9:7; 1 Kings 13:7; 2 Kings 5:15; 8:8–9). People bring Solomon gifts when they seek an audience with him (1 Kings 10:25). Additionally, gifts are part of the process of establishing a treaty (1 Kings 15:19; 2 Kings 16:8; 20:12).

Of course, gifts can be used for ignoble purposes as well. David sends a gift to Uriah in an effort to cover up his own sin (2 Sam. 11:8).

Sacrifices of every type are conceived of as a gift to the deity with the intent of seeking favor or making restitution for sin (Lev. 22:18; Num. 31:52). Even mandatory offerings and dedicated land are considered gifts under the notion that God, as the Creator, owns all (Ezek. 45:16; 48:12, 20). This idea of giving a gift to God demonstrates the cost involved in approaching the deity. Interestingly, the priests and Levites who are associated with the sacrifices are described as a gift from God to the rest of the people (Num. 18:6–7).

The intentions behind the gift are important to God. Jesus states that one cannot be giving gifts to God and simultaneously holding on to contention with another in the community of faith (Matt. 5:23–24). Jesus commands that thankfulness to God be followed with the prescribed sacrifice (Matt. 8:4). Yet, an unwillingness to help others should not be hidden behind an ostentatious dedication to giving to God (Matt. 15:5; Mark 7:11). Likewise, Jesus warns against being overly legalistic about gifts and their benefit (Matt. 23:18–19).

On a fundamental level, gift giving has its origin in the gracious nature of God. God is the giver of all good gifts (James 1:17). He gives children to mothers (Gen. 30:20). A good life and reward for work are also gifts from God (Eccles. 3:13; 5:19). Jesus describes himself as a gift of God (John 4:10). Likewise, the Holy Spirit is God’s gift (Acts 1:4; 2:38; 11:17) and cannot be purchased with money (Acts 8:20). This gift of the Holy Spirit is given to Jew and Gentile alike (Acts 10:45).

Both grace and salvation are gifts from God (Rom. 5:15–17; 6:23; Eph. 2:8; 3:7; Heb. 6:4; 1 Pet. 3:7). Finally, spiritual gifts are part of God’s good gifts (Rom. 1:11). These gifts are meant to help the church so that nothing needed for ministry is lacking in the body of Christ (Rom. 12:6; 1 Cor. 1:7; 7:7; 1 Tim. 4:14; 2 Tim. 1:6; 1 Pet. 4:10). Spiritual gifts are all governed by the greatest gift, that of love (1 Cor. 13:2; 14:1).

A description given to Hashem, one of David’s mighty men. It only occurs once in the Bible, in 1 Chron. 11:34: “The sons of Hashem the Gizonite, Jonathan son of Shagee the Hararite.” The location of Gizon is unknown, but it may refer to one of the towns in Judah.

One of three people groups whom David raided while he was living in Philistine territory during the reign of Achish, king of Gath (1 Sam. 27:8). The Girzites, as well as the Geshurites and the Amalekites, lived to the southwest of Israel. In modern versions, the name also appears as “Gizrites” and “Gezrites.” The different readings are supported by two similar alternate spellings of the name preserved in Hebrew manuscripts.

The KJV rendering of the Greek word euangelizō, referring to the proclamation of the “good news” or “gospel” (Luke 1:19; 8:1; Acts 13:32; Rom. 10:15). See also Gospel.

Rarely mentioned in the Bible, glass is referenced once in the OT and four times in the NT. The OT reference (translated “crystal” in the NIV) occurs in Job as one of several precious commodities that cannot buy wisdom: “Neither gold nor crystal [glass] can compare with it, nor can it be had for jewels of gold. . . . The price of wisdom is beyond rubies” (Job 28:17–18). In the NT, all four references to glass occur in Revelation, with the first two passages describing a glassy sea, and the two others describing the city of the new Jerusalem. Both references to a glassy sea lead into a song that glorifies God. In Rev. 4 there is “what looked like a sea of glass, clear as crystal,” located before the throne of God (v. 6). Around this throne are situated four living creatures that sing to God. Revelation 15 describes those who had been victorious over the beast and his image standing beside “what looked like a sea of glass glowing with fire” (v. 2) and holding harps and singing to God. In Rev. 21 the new Jerusalem is described as a “city of pure gold, as pure as glass” (v. 18); and not only the city, but also its street: “The great street of the city was of gold, as pure as transparent glass” (v. 21).

Glaze is a vitreous (glasslike) substance applied as a liquid (slip) or powder to a ceramic vessel prior to firing. During firing, the glaze bonds permanently to the ceramic, making it less porous. Pottery making in biblical times incorporated a variety of glazes and slips, often in decorative patterns. These are important for the classification and dating of pottery by archaeologists. Proverbs 26:23 refers to an earthenware pot that has been glazed (NIV: “a coating of silver dross”) to resemble a more expensive metal vessel. Such vessels often were burnished after firing to increase this artistic effect.

Mosaic law prohibited farmers from harvesting the crops—usually grain, grapes, or olives—on the edges and corners of their land, going through the crops a second time, or picking up that which fell on the ground (Lev. 19:9–10). This prohibition was a means of providing for the poor and strangers among the people and for those who could not own land, who were then allowed to glean, or gather, what was left behind by the harvesters (Ruth 2:6–9). The prophets used gleaning figuratively to represent destruction (Isa. 17:5; Jer. 6:9; Mic. 7:1).

In Deut. 14:13 the KJV renders the Hebrew word ra’ah as “glede,” referring to a bird designated as unclean for the Israelites’ consumption. “Glede” was a name for the kite, a bird of prey; the second bird named in the KJV of Deut. 14:13, the “kite,” was a different bird of prey. The NIV renders the name of the first bird of Deut. 14:13 as “red kite” and the name of the second as “black kite.” The list of detestable birds in Lev. 11:13–19 does not include the bird called the “glede” in the KJV.

The tangible presence of God, experienced as overwhelming power and splendor. The main Hebrew word referring to glory, kabod, has the root meaning “heavy” (1 Sam. 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, 17–19). 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).

God’s glory is often associated with a cloud. Perhaps better stated, God’s glory often is intentionally obscured by a cloud so that people are not overwhelmed by the radiance of his presence. Such is the case on top of Mount Sinai as Moses ascends it (Exod. 24:15–18). God’s glory as associated with the cloud is also closely connected to the tabernacle and the temple. When the tabernacle is completed, God makes his presence known there by filling it with the cloud that represents his glory (Exod. 40:34–38). Later, the temple too is filled with God’s glory made manifest in the cloud (1 Kings 8:10–11). The ark of the covenant, the most potent symbol of God’s presence, is also seen as a manifestation of his glory (1 Sam. 4:21–22).

God’s glory is overwhelming, and human beings cannot experience its fullness and survive. Thus, glory is often connected with God’s acts of judgment. For instance, when Korah the Levite and Abiram the Reubenite rebel in the wilderness, God appears ready for judgment against the people in the form of the glory-cloud (Num. 16:19–21), though Moses’ intercession spares the bulk of the people from the judgment that comes on the leaders of the rebellion (see also 16:41).

The Psalms celebrate God’s glory. Psalm 24 is an example. The original setting of the psalm is likely the return of the ark of the covenant from the battlefield. The priest at the head of the army, led by the ark, asks a priest or gatekeeper, “Lift up your heads, you gates; be lifted up, you ancient doors, that the King of glory may come in.” The priestly gatekeeper asks, “Who is this King of glory?” eliciting the response, “The Lord strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle.” Many other psalms share this theme or call on Israel to glorify the Lord (see Pss. 29:9; 34:3; 63:3; 104:31 as examples).

The prophets have the privilege of intimate fellowship with God and profound experiences of God’s glory. Isaiah accepts his commission as a prophet in a vision of the throne room of God. He sees angelic figures calling out: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord Almighty; the whole earth is full of his glory” (Isa. 6:3). Ezekiel reports an amazing encounter with God in his glory that causes him to fall facedown on the ground (Ezek. 1:28).

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).

Both speaking in tongues and interpreting tongues are listed among the various gifts of the Spirit that God may choose to give to believers according to his will (1 Cor. 12:10, 28). The act of speaking in tongues is referred to as “glossolalia” (from Gk. glōssa [“tongue”] and laleō [“speak”]).

Narrative Record

Instances in which believers exercise the gift of tongues are recorded in three biblical narratives, with Acts 2 detailing the most notable occurrence. When the Holy Spirit first was poured out upon Christian believers gathered at Pentecost, visible tongues of fire were accompanied by a Spirit-enabled ability to speak in languages that were foreign to them (2:3–4). In this instance, the tongues spoken are identified as the actual human languages and dialects of various people groups who resided throughout the Mediterranean world (2:8–11). The phenomenon resulted in the ability of many to hear the wonders of God in their native languages and prompted both curiosity and scoffing (2:12–13).

A similar outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon Cornelius and his fellow Gentiles in connection with the ministry of Peter was accompanied by speaking in tongues (Acts 10:44–46). This ability to speak in tongues provided undeniable evidence that God had indeed poured out the Holy Spirit upon Gentile Christians by manifesting the Spirit’s presence in a way comparable to the initial Pentecost experience of the Jewish Christians (11:15–18). A final account from the Pauline ministry notes the coming of the Holy Spirit upon a dozen disciples in Ephesus with the accompanying ability to speak in tongues (19:6). The text does not reveal what languages were spoken in either of these latter episodes.

It is sometimes argued that the gift of tongues normally accompanies Christian salvation or baptism with the Holy Spirit and is a gift that believers should earnestly seek. However, this argument cannot be sustained by the historical narratives of Acts. All three recorded instances of tongues detail the gift coming upon groups of people rather than individuals, and the gift is poured out upon them without their praying for it or seeking it out in any way. Furthermore, these are the only three instances in Scripture where tongues clearly accompany salvation, whereas numerous other Lukan accounts of the salvation of various individuals (Acts 2:41; 4:4; 8:36–39; 13:12, 48; 16:14, 34), including Paul (9:1–19; 22:6–16), contain no mention of the gift of tongues.

Paul’s Teaching

The first-century Corinthian church exercised a variety of spiritual gifts, including the gift of tongues. When Paul writes to that church, he includes teaching designed to correct various abuses of these spiritual gifts. A lengthy discussion about spiritual gifts in 1 Cor. 12–14 affirms the practice of speaking in tongues in the Corinthian assembly under certain conditions (14:39–40) while also relegating it to a status lower than the gift of prophecy (14:5). By its very nature, Paul asserts, those who speak in tongues are not understood by their human audience; utterances in tongues speak to God, not to human beings (14:2). Therefore, on its own, glossolalia cannot edify those who hear it unless an interpretation is also provided for them. For this reason, Paul directs the Corinthians to other spiritual gifts (14:6) that can function to build up the church (14:12). Nonetheless, Paul affirms the practice of glossolalia in the Corinthians’ public worship when it is limited to two or three speakers, when it is done in an orderly manner with the speakers taking turns, and when it is coupled with interpretation so that the church can be edified by its message (14:26–27).

Contemporary Debates

Three questions dominate modern discussions about the gift of tongues: (1) What is the primary purpose of speaking in tongues? (2) What is the nature of the language spoken when the gift of tongues is exercised? (3) Does the gift of tongues continue beyond the apostolic era? Answers to these questions vary and reflect diverse theological positions.

Primary purpose. One position maintains that when the Spirit gives the gift of tongues, it is always a public exercise that produces infallible revelation from God. The primary, or perhaps sole, purpose of this gift of miraculous utterance is as a sign to authenticate the gospel proclamation and thus contribute to the common good of the church as a whole by reaching unbelievers with the gospel in a powerful way. Proponents of this view find support in 1 Cor. 14:22, where Paul speaks of tongues as a sign for unbelievers. Also, the Pentecost experience, narrated in Acts 2, can be understood as a use of tongues that fits into this framework. Opponents object to this interpretation by noting that it was Peter’s subsequent sermon rather than the gift of tongues itself that served an evangelistic purpose.

Others find biblical support for an additional private use of tongues by believers in their prayer and praise directed toward God (1 Cor. 14:2, 28). Although the teaching in 1 Cor. 14 focuses on whether and how tongues are to be used in the public assembly, some adherents of this position point to 14:14–19 for evidence of Paul’s own use of the gift of tongues in his devotional life. This use of tongues is thought to contribute to the common good of the church through the personal edification of the individual believers who practice this gift (14:4) and who make up the believing community.

Nature of the language. It is not entirely clear from Scripture whether the tongues spoken by those with the gift of tongues are human languages otherwise unknown to the speaker, whether they consist of otherworldly (heavenly, angelic, spiritual) languages, or whether both constitute valid options. The record of Pentecost in Acts 2 is the only scriptural narrative of tongues that explicitly identifies the languages spoken by those exercising the gift of tongues; they are human languages. However, three NT passages are cited in support of the broader view.

First, in 1 Cor. 13:1 Paul alludes to the possibility of speech “in the tongues of men or of angels.” While this may affirm the idea of an angelic language being spoken by believers with the gift of tongues, those who limit tongues to human languages see in this statement hyperbole rather than a description of reality.

Second, when Paul discusses tongues in 1 Cor. 14:2, he indicates that no one who hears understands the language. This statement is easily true if the language spoken is “angelic,” but it would also be true of a human language generally unfamiliar to those in the Corinthian worship assembly.

Finally, Rom. 8:26, by describing the Spirit’s intercession in prayer as groans and utterances too deep for words, may support the idea that the gift of tongues consists of a spiritual rather than a human language. Opponents argue that this text in no way speaks of the gift of tongues.

Continuation beyond the apostolic era. Finally, nowhere does Scripture expressly teach that the gift of tongues will continue throughout the entire church age, nor does it clearly state a time, be it the end of the apostolic period, the closing of the NT canon, or some other time, when the gift of tongues will cease. Because the NT describes the gift of tongues functioning among believers in the first century, many believe that the gift of tongues continues to be expressed by God’s new covenant people today.

Continuationists argue that Scripture nowhere anticipates a change in the Holy Spirit’s work or empowerment for ministry, and so the life of Christians today should be similar to that of NT believers with regard to the expected and empowering presence of tongues.

On the other hand, cessationists believe that passages such as Eph. 2:11–21 identify the first century as a unique, foundational time in salvation history, characterized by apostolic leadership and an open canon. Just as there are no longer apostles today, one should not be surprised if the practice of miraculous gifts, including the gift of tongues, should significantly decrease or stop entirely following that foundational time. Some also point to 1 Cor. 13:8 as evidence that a time will come when the gift of tongues will end.

Others opt for an intermediate position, arguing that while speaking in tongues is not the standard for the church era, it is possible that the gift continues to operate today on a more limited scale, most likely only in places where the gospel is making inroads for the first time, a situation comparable to that of the NT era.

A person who is habitually greedy or eats excessively. Gluttony is associated with stubbornness, rebellion, and drunkenness (Deut. 21:20). Excessive overeating or gluttony is condemned in Proverbs. Rather than be a glutton, one should “put a knife” to one’s throat (Prov. 23:2). The glutton will become sleepy, lazy, and poor (23:21), and the friend of gluttons “disgraces his father” (28:7). Jesus is derided as a “glutton and a drunkard” (Matt. 11:19; Luke 7:34) because of his lifestyle, which, unlike that of John the Baptist, is not ascetic. In this case, the accusation is in the general sense of a person given to excessive living in contrast to religious teachers who fasted and mourned frequently. In Titus 1:12 Cretans are said to be liars, evil, and “lazy gluttons.”

The act of grating or grinding one’s teeth together. The phrase is frequently found in the OT as an expression of anger. Most often the wicked gnash their teeth toward the righteous (Pss. 35:16; 37:12; 112:10; Lam. 2:16). In the teaching of Jesus, the gnashing of teeth is associated with a place of future punishment, especially in the Gospel of Matthew (8:12; 13:42, 50; 22:13; 24:51; 25:30). In the NT, gnashing of teeth is often associated with the place of outer darkness, where there is weeping. In this case, the gnashing of teeth may be an expression of anger and hence the continual refusal to repent. In the context of punishment, the picture may also express futility in the face of judgment.

A stick, often with a pointed end, used to control oxen or other animals. In the OT, “goad” translates two Hebrew terms. It is used of literal goads in 1 Sam. 13:21 (dorban); Judg. 3:31 (baqar). In Eccles. 12:11 goads are used in parallel with “embedded nails” to refer to the action of the “words of the wise,” meaning that the sages could give direction to one’s path in life, the metaphor perhaps also implying that their guidance could sometimes be painful. In Acts 26:14, “kick against the goads” refers to futile struggle against a greater power. This expression also appears in other Greek writings and thus probably is an idiom.

A place mentioned only in Jer. 31:39 (KJV: “Goath”) as being on the future, expanded border of the city of Jerusalem. Goah’s location is unknown; it possibly was to the southwest of the city, near the Hinnom Valley.

A cloven-hoofed ruminant, the domestic goat (Capra hircus) has been vital to the culture of Palestine. The considerable value of this animal is reflected in Jacob’s “gift” of two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, a symbolic restoration of what he stole from Esau (Gen. 32:14; cf. 1 Sam. 25:2–3; 2 Chron. 17:11).

The diverse by-products from goats illustrate their practical significance for life: milk (Prov. 27:27), goatskin bottles for water and wine (Mark 2:22), goat’s hair garments and tents (Exod. 35:26; 1 Sam. 19:13; Heb. 11:37), and the prized meat of the kid (Judg. 6:19; Luke 15:29). Sacrificially, numerous offerings required a goat, including burnt offerings (Lev. 1:10) and peace offerings (Lev. 3:12). Israel’s Day of Atonement required two goats: one for a sin offering and another delivered to Azazel (Lev. 16:6–26).

Goats generally are darker in color, while sheep tend to be white (Gen. 30:32; Song 1:5). The resilience of goats was superior to sheep, adding to their worth. Israel’s leaders are compared to goats who have abused the sheep (Zech. 10:3; cf. Dan. 8:5, 8, 21). NT eschatology replaces the “self-centered” goat with the “helpless” sheep (Matt. 25:31–46).

A place mentioned only in Jer. 31:39 (KJV: “Goath”) as being on the future, expanded border of the city of Jerusalem. Goah’s location is unknown; it possibly was to the southwest of the city, near the Hinnom Valley.

Mentioned twice in the NIV, goatskins serve to disguise Jacob as his brother and thus he receives Esau’s blessing from their aging father, Isaac (Gen. 27:16). In the book of Hebrews, goatskins are said to be the clothing of prior persecuted individuals of faith (Heb. 11:37).

This place is mentioned only in 2 Sam. 21:18–19 as the location where David’s warriors defeated Philistine champions in single combat. The parallel account in 1 Chron. 20:4–5 states differently that the first of these battles took place at Gezer rather than at Gob. The archaeological identification of Gob is uncertain, but suggestions have included Tel el-Melat (most likely Gibbethon) and Khirbet Qeiyafa (a tenth-century BC fort in the Valley of Elah).

A drinking vessel usually associated with wine. In Song of Solomon the man likens the woman’s navel to a goblet that never lacks wine (Song 7:2), using a word that elsewhere means “bowl” (Exod. 24:6). In Isaiah the cup of God’s wrath is described as a goblet of wine that makes people stagger (Isa. 51:17).

For Christians, God is the creator of the cosmos and the redeemer of humanity. He has revealed himself in historical acts—namely, in creation, in the history of Israel, and especially in the person and work of Jesus Christ. There is only one God (Deut. 6:4); “there is no other” (Isa. 45:5). Because “God is spirit” (John 4:24), he must reveal himself through various images and metaphors.

Imagery of God

God’s character and attributes are revealed primarily through the use of imagery, the best and most understandable way to describe the mysterious nature of God. Scripture employs many images to describe God’s being and character. Some examples follow here.

God is compared to the father who shows compassion and love to his children (Ps. 103:13; Rom. 8:15). The father image is also used by the prophets to reveal God’s creatorship (Isa. 64:8). Jesus predominantly uses the language of “Father” in reference to God (Mark 8:38; 13:32; 14:36), revealing his close relationship with the Father. God is also identified as the king of Israel even before the Israelites have a human king (1 Sam. 10:19).

The Psalter exalts Yahweh as the king, acknowledging God’s sovereignty and preeminence (Pss. 5:2; 44:4; 47:6–7; 68:24; 74:12; 84:3; 95:3; 145:1). God is metaphorically identified as the shepherd who takes care of his sheep, his people, to depict his nature of provision and protection (Ps. 23:1–4). The image of the potter is also employed to describe the nature of God, who creates his creatures according to his will (Jer. 18:6; Rom. 9:20–23). In Hos. 2:4–3:5 God is identified as the long-suffering husband of the adulterous wife Israel. In the setting of war, God is depicted as the divine warrior who fights against his enemy (Exod. 15:3).

God is also referred to as advocate (Isa. 1:18), judge (Gen. 18:25), and lawgiver (Deut. 5:1–22). The image of the farmer is also frequently adopted to describe God’s nature of compassionate care, creation, providence, justice, redemption, sanctification, and more (e.g., Isa. 5:1–7; John 15:1–12). God is often referred to as the teacher (Exod. 4:15) who teaches what to do, as does the Holy Spirit in the NT (John 14:26). The Holy Spirit is identified as the counselor, the helper, the witness, and the guide (John 14:16, 26; 15:26). God is often metaphorically compared to various things in nature, such as rock (Ps. 18:2, 31, 46), light (Ps. 27:1), fire (Deut. 4:24; 9:3), lion (Hos. 11:10), and eagle (Deut. 32:11–12). In particular, the Davidic psalms employ many images in nature—rock, fortress, shield, horn, and stronghold (e.g., Ps. 18:2)—to describe God’s perfect protection.

Last, anthropomorphism often is employed to describe God’s activities. Numerous parts of the human body are used to speak of God: face (Num. 6:25–26), eyes (2 Chron. 16:9), mouth (Deut. 8:3), ears (Neh. 1:6), nostrils (Exod. 15:8), hands (Ezra 7:9), arms (Deut. 33:27), fingers (Ps. 8:3), voice (Exod. 15:26), shoulders (Deut. 33:12), feet (Ps. 18:9), and back (Exod. 33:21–22).

Names and Attributes of God

The OT refers to God by many names. One of the general terms used for God, ’el (which probably means “ultimate supremacy”), often appears in a compound form with a qualifying word, as in ’el ’elyon (“God Most High”), ’el shadday (“God Almighty”), and ’el ro’i (“the God who sees me” or “God of my seeing”). These descriptive names reveal important attributes of God and usually were derived from the personal experiences of the people of God in real-life settings; thus, they do not describe an abstract concept of God.

The most prominent personal name of God is yahweh (YHWH), which is translated as “the Lord” in most English Bibles. At the burning bush in the wilderness of Horeb, God first revealed to Moses his personal name in sentence form: “I am who I am” (Exod. 3:13–15). Though debated, the divine name “YHWH” seems to originate from an abbreviated form of this sentence. Yahweh, who was with Moses and his people at the time of exodus, is the God who was with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Jesus’ testimony, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” is identified as the God “of the living” (Matt. 22:32). Hence, the name “Yahweh” is closely tied to God’s self-revelation as the God of presence and life. (See also Names of God.)

Many of God’s attributes are summarized in Exod. 34:6–7: “The Lord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.” Below are further explanations of some of the representative attributes of God.

Holiness. The moral excellence of God is the attribute that underlies all other attributes. Thus, all God’s attributes can be modified by the adjective holy: holy love, holy justice, holy mercy, holy righteousness, holy compassion, holy wisdom, and so forth. God is the only supremely holy one (1 Sam. 2:2; Rev. 15:4). God’s name is also holy; those who profane God’s name are condemned as guilty (Exod. 20:7; Lev. 22:32). God is depicted as the one who has concern for his holy name, which the Israelites profaned among the nations; God actively seeks to restore the holiness of his defiled name (Ezek. 36:21–23). God’s holiness is revealed by his righteous action (Isa. 5:16). Not only is God holy, but also he expects his people to be holy (Lev. 11:45; 19:2). All the sacrificial codes of Leviticus represent the moral requirements of holiness for the worshipers. Because of God’s character of holiness, he cannot tolerate sin in the lives of people, and he brings judgment to those who do not repent (Hab. 1:13).

Love and justice. Because “God is love,” no one reaches the true knowledge of God without having love (1 John 4:8). Images of the father and the faithful husband are frequently employed to portray God’s love (Deut. 1:31; Jer. 31:32; Hos. 2:14–20; 11:1–4). God’s love was supremely demonstrated by the giving of his only Son Jesus Christ for his people (John 3:16; Rom. 5:7–8; 1 John 4:9–10). God expects his people to follow the model of Christ’s sacrificial love (1 John 3:16).

God’s justice is the foundation of his moral law and his ways (Deut. 32:4; Job 34:12; Ps. 9:16; Rev. 15:3). It is also seen in his will (Ps. 99:4). God loves justice and acts with justice (Ps. 33:5). God’s justice is demonstrated in judging people according to their deeds—punishing wickedness and rewarding righteousness (Ezek. 18:20; Ps. 58:11; Rev. 20:12–13). God establishes justice by upholding the cause of the oppressed (Ps. 103:6) and by vindicating those afflicted (1 Sam. 25:39). God is completely impartial in implementing justice (Job 34:18–19). As with holiness, God requires his people to reflect his justice (Prov. 21:3).

God keeps a perfect balance between the attributes of love and justice. God’s love never infringes upon his justice, and vice versa. The cross of Jesus Christ perfectly shows these two attributes in one act. Because of his love, God gave his only Son for his people; because of his justice, God punished his Son for the sake of their sins. The good news is that God’s justice was satisfied by the work of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:25–26).

Righteousness and mercy. God’s righteousness shows his unique moral perfection. God’s nature, actions, and laws display his character of righteousness (Pss. 19:8–9; 119:137; Dan. 9:14). “Righteousness and justice” are the foundation of God’s throne (Ps. 89:14). God’s righteousness was especially demonstrated in the work of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:21–22). God’s righteousness will ultimately be revealed in his final judgment (Rev. 19:2; 20–22; cf. Ps. 7:11).

The English word “mercy” renders various words in the original languages: in Hebrew, khesed, khanan, rakham; in Greek, charis, eleos, oiktirmos, splanchnon. English Bibles translate these variously as “mercy,” “compassion,” “grace,” “kindness,” or “love.” The word “mercy” is chosen here as a representative concept (cf. Ps. 86:15). God’s mercy is most clearly seen in his act of forgiving sinners. In the Psalter, “Have mercy on me” is the most common form of expression when the psalmist entreats God’s forgiveness (Pss. 41:4, 10; 51:1). God’s mercy is shown abundantly to his chosen people (Eph. 2:4–8). Because of his mercy, their sins are forgiven (Mic. 7:18), their punishments are withheld (Ezra 9:13), and even sinners’ prayers are heard (Ps. 51:1; Luke 18:13–14). God is “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor. 1:3 NRSV).

God keeps a perfect balance between righteousness and mercy. His righteousness and mercy never infringe upon each other, nor does one operate at the expense of the other. God’s abundant mercy is shown to sinners through Jesus Christ, but if they do not repent of their sins, his righteous judgment will be brought upon them.

Faithfulness. God’s faithfulness is revealed in keeping the covenant that he made with his people. God “is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). God is faithful to his character, his name, and his word (Neh. 9:8; Ps. 106:8; 2 Tim. 2:13; Heb. 6:13–18). God’s faithfulness is clearly seen in fulfilling his promise (Josh. 23:14). God showed his faithfulness by fulfilling all the promises that he made to Abraham (Gen. 12:2–3; Rom. 9:9; Gal. 4:28; Heb. 6:13–15), by having Solomon build the temple that he promised to David (2 Sam. 7:12–13; 1 Kings 8:17–21), and by sending his people into exile in Babylon and returning them to their homeland (Jer. 25:8–11; Dan. 9:2–3). God’s faithfulness was ultimately demonstrated by sending Jesus Christ, as was promised in the OT (Luke 24:44; Acts 13:32–33; 1 Cor. 15:3–8).

Goodness. Jesus said, “No one is good—except God alone” (Mark 10:18). God demonstrates his goodness in his actions (Ps. 119:68), in his work of creation (1 Tim. 4:4), in his love (Ps. 86:5), and in his promises (Josh. 23:14–15).

Patience. God is “slow to anger” (Exod. 34:6; Num. 14:18), which is a favorite expression for his patience (Neh. 9:17; Pss. 86:15; 103:8; Joel 2:13). God is patient with sinful people for a long time (Acts 13:18). Because of his patient character, he delays punishment (Isa. 42:14). For instance, God was patient with his disobedient prophet Jonah and also with the sinful people of Nineveh (Jon. 3:1–10). The purpose of God’s patience is to lead people toward repentance (Rom. 2:4).

God of the Trinity

The Christian God of the Bible is the triune God. God is one but exists in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19). The Son is one with the Father (John 10:30); the Holy Spirit is one with God (2 Sam. 23:2–3). All three share the same divine nature; they are all-knowing, holy, glorious, and called “Lord” and “God” (Matt. 11:25; John 1:1; 20:28; Acts 3:22; 5:3–4; 10:36; 1 Cor. 8:6; 2 Cor. 3:17–18; 2 Pet. 1:1). All three share in the same work of creation (Gen. 1:1–3), salvation (1 Pet. 1:2), indwelling (John 14:23), and directing the church’s mission (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 16:6–10; 14:27; 13:2–4).

This expression refers to a particular scholarly theory concerning the patriarchs in Genesis and their worship of God. According to this theory, which is in harmony with the Documentary Hypothesis, in the patriarchal age the name “Yahweh” was not known. The patriarchs referred to God by various other names, of which the most general and theologically significant is “God of the fathers.” This technical phrase may be couched in the formula “God of [someone’s] father(s)” (Gen. 31:5, 29, 53; 46:3; Exod. 3:13; 4:5) or “God of [name of patriarch(s)]” (Gen. 24:12; 28:13; 32:9; 46:1; Exod. 3:6). God himself used both of these formulas when he revealed himself to Moses in the burning bush (Exod. 3:6). The relationship between “God of the fathers” and various names compounded with “El” (El Elyon, El Roi, El Olam, El Elohe Yisrael, El Bethel, and El Shaddai) is a matter of debate.

Ancient Near Eastern evidence shows that the formula “God of the fathers” referred to one’s personal god. In the Old Assyrian tablets from Abraham’s time, “A god of your father” (il abika) is invoked as a witness. These personal gods served as protective deities. Most scholars agree that the formula in the Bible originally referred to the personal protector god and family god of the patriarchs.

The phrase “God of the fathers” plays a theologically significant role throughout the Bible. This solemn formula emphasizes the intimate connection of the present with ancient history, namely, the faith of forefathers. In the story of the burning bush (Exod. 3), for example, the formula connects Moses’ generation to the promise and blessing that God gave to the patriarchs. In Deuteronomy (1:11, 21; 4:1; 6:3; 12:1; 26:7; 27:3), it emphasizes the continuity between the author’s generation and the earlier generation in Israel. For the exilic and postexilic generations, the phrase emphasizes the heinousness of their apostasy (see the pledge not to forsake “the God of their fathers” in 2 Chron. 34:32–33 NASB). Also, in the NT, the phrase reminds the Christians that the God of their experience is the same as the God revealed to the ancient patriarchs (Mark 12:26; Matt. 22:32; Acts 3:13; 5:30).

God’s “repenting” (KJV) or “relenting” (NIV) may seem to be in tension with his sovereignty, but it makes sense on several assumptions. God wills to accomplish certain overall ends, but he retains freedom to modify the path that he takes to achieve them, as needed. This in turn assumes that God’s interaction with humanity involves genuine give-and-take. Therefore, God’s way in history may be recounted as a story with surprise twists and turns that are integral to the plot. We may affirm all this and also uphold divine sovereignty if we understand both human prayer and God’s response as divinely ordained means for God to achieve his purposes.

Texts that speak of God relenting indicate that God is adopting a new course of action, a change of mind. In a sense, divine judgment itself represents a kind of “change of mind” from God’s basic, original intent to bless. Whereas judgment is “his strange work . . . his alien task” (Isa. 28:21), undertaken when necessary, God’s character is to be gracious and compassionate, to relent from sending calamity (Isa. 48:9; Joel 2:13), and to bring restoration after judgment (Gen. 9:11; Isa. 54:7–8; Hos. 2).

Terminology. To portray God relenting, the OT often uses the Hebrew word nakham, which carries a strong emotional content and an element of regret. On certain occasions, it refers to profound grief that God feels in reaction to human sin and calamity (Gen. 6:6–7; Judg. 2:18; 1 Sam. 15:35; 2 Sam. 24:16). This is not to suggest that God is making amends for wrongs or has the same kinds of regret for mistakes that humans have. But we should recognize that when nakham is used to speak of God “relenting,” it means something more than a change in the direction of the wind: it involves the heart of God, engaged deeply with his people’s welfare (cf. Hos. 11:8–9). Conversely, the human cry for God to relent is wrung from experiences of deep crisis (Job 6:29; Pss. 90:13; 106:44–45).

Exodus and Jonah. Two classic OT narratives about divine relenting may be contrasted. In Exod. 32 the Israelites’ idolatry with the golden calf is followed by God’s indictment and intention to destroy them. A dramatic turning point comes with Moses’ intercession, in response to which God relents. The book of Jonah turns this sequence on its head. Here the prophet resists his mission of announcing Nineveh’s doom because he fears that its people may repent, which they do (Jon. 3:5–9), and that God may then relent from bringing on them the judgment that he had sent Jonah to announce, which he does (4:2). The book of Jonah portrays the prophet as an antihero, out of step with the compassion and larger purposes of God, unhappy with the freedom of God. But it preserves the link between human repentance for sin and divine relenting from previously announced judgment, as seen in Exod. 32.

The prophets. Through the OT prophets, God wrestles with Israel, announcing one course of action, judgment, while often holding open the possibility of an alternate ending: if Israel repents (Jer. 18:8; 26:3, 13) or if a prophet (Amos 7:1–6) or a king (Jer. 26:19) intercedes, then God may relent. At the end of the day, relenting remains a move that God chooses to make or not to make (Isa. 57:6; Jer. 7:16–20; Ezek. 24:14), in faithfulness to his own purpose (Ps. 7:10–12; Jer. 23:20; 30:24; Zech. 8:14–15).

In the book of Amos, God does both. Amos 1–2 comprises a cycle of seven judgment speeches against Israel’s neighbors, culminating in the eighth, lengthiest judgment speech against Israel. Each speech opens with the formula “For three sins of X, and for four, I will not turn back [my wrath].” Here God declares that he has committed himself to carrying out judgment. With the use of the verb shub (“to turn, turn back”), any implied question of reprieve is answered immediately: the nation’s condemnation is irrevocable. But in 7:1–6 God is twice said to “relent” (nakham) from sending the locusts and fire that he has just shown Amos in visions. Granting stays from specific forms of punishment is not the same as forgiving Israel’s sin, however, and these temporary measures are followed by a reassertion of God’s determination to spare Israel no longer (7:7–9). Moreover, even though Israel’s doom is sealed, Amos can still urge his hearers to repent and turn to God, on the grounds that God may relent—that is, freely respond with mercy and allow some to survive the nation’s fall (5:4–6, 14–15).

Salvation and judgment. This divine freedom, compassion, and judgment that dovetail in OT accounts of God relenting are embodied in Jesus’ announcement of the kingdom, which signals both salvation and its corollary, judgment. Hence come his summons to “Repent and believe the good news” (Mark 1:15) and the apostolic call for hearers to escape their generation’s doom by repentance and faith in Jesus (Acts 2:40).

A technical term in NT times for a non-Jew who feared and recognized Israel’s God, the true God, but stopped short of becoming a full-fledged Jewish proselyte. “God-fearer” could also be used in a general sense of individuals from any background who reverence and respect God in a proper way. The book of Ecclesiastes illustrates this general usage when the author says, “I know that it will go better with those who fear God [NIV 1984: “God-fearing men”], who are reverent before him” (Eccl. 8:12).

Four verses in the book of Acts illustrate the specialized usage of this expression. The first two involve Peter’s sharing of the gospel with the Roman centurion Cornelius. In Acts 10:2 Cornelius and his family are described as being “devout and God-fearing,” and in 10:22 Cornelius himself is described as being a “righteous and God-fearing man, who is respected by all the Jewish people.” In 13:16 Paul addresses two groups of people present in the synagogue service at Antioch of Pisidia, “Fellow Israelites and you Gentiles who worship [lit., ‘fear’] God, listen to me!” Paul repeats this same distinction later in this same sermon: “Fellow children of Abraham and you God-fearing Gentiles” (13:26).

Throughout the OT there are occasional glimpses of God’s concern for all peoples. God promised Abraham that through his “offspring all nations on earth will be blessed” (Gen. 22:18). Many of the psalms reveal this same cosmic scope of God’s salvation, where “all the nations you have made will come and worship before you, Lord; they will bring glory to your name” (Ps. 86:9). Jonah is undoubtedly the classic story of outreach to the Gentiles. But it is in the book of Acts that this outreach reaches full stride, and it is these God-fearers who represent one key dimension in this fresh outpouring of God’s grace upon humanity.

In order to understand the God-fearers, it is important to know who they are and who they are not. They are Gentiles, like Cornelius (who is so important to the spread of the gospel that two entire chapters are devoted to him in Acts), who are attracted to what they hear about the wonder and marvel of God in the Jewish synagogues. At the same time, Cornelius and others like him are not Jewish proselytes. Although the OT is silent on the exact process by which a Gentile could become officially incorporated into the Jewish faith, Jewish practice had developed clear guidelines during the intertestamental period. A Gentile who wanted to convert to Judaism not only had to follow the Jewish beliefs and practices (including the food laws and Sabbath observance), but also had to make a trip to Jerusalem and offer a sacrifice in the temple. If a male, that person also had to be circumcised. For many Gentiles, it was the obstacle of circumcision that often was too much for them. Consequently, many remained in this in-between status: attracted to Judaism but not willing or able to go all the way toward becoming a full-fledged “naturalized citizen”—a Jewish proselyte. The good news of the NT was that God rewarded their spiritual hunger: the gospel was for them as well.

A term that refers to the essential fullness of God as one being in three persons. The suffix “-head” is archaic, such that the word can be understood as “Godhood.” The fullness of God’s being, the Godhead, dwells in Christ bodily (Col. 2:9). The Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (John 15:26). “Godhead” appears three times in the KJV, translating the Greek words theios (Acts 17:29; cf. 2 Pet. 1:3–4), theiotēs (Rom. 1:20), and theotēs (Col. 2:9), which more-recent versions render variously as “deity,” “divine being,” and “divine nature.”

That which is inconsistent with proper reverence and worship of God. In Rom. 1:18–32 Paul describes the nature of godlessness as he writes about people “who suppress the truth by their wickedness” (v. 18), who choose not to glorify God though they know he is God (v. 21). Other NT texts speak of godless myths (1 Tim. 4:7), godless chatter (1 Tim. 6:20; 2 Tim. 2:16), or godless people like Esau (Heb. 12:16). Several OT passages (e.g., Job 8:13; Prov. 11:9; Isa. 10:6) also speak against the godless, who are fundamentally at odds with God and his will.

The common English translation for the Greek term eusebeia, meaning “godliness” or “piety.” The Greek term appears ten times in the Pastoral Epistles (1–2 Timothy; Titus), four times in 2 Peter, and once elsewhere in the NT (Acts 3:12). It refers to appropriate honor and respect given to God and the kind of lifestyle that results from this piety. Paul encourages Timothy to have nothing to do with godless myths and old wives’ tales, but rather to “train yourself in godliness” (1 Tim. 4:7 NRSV). While physical exercise is of some profit, godliness “has value for all things” (4:8). Together with contentment, it results in great gain (6:6), far greater than the illusive power of riches. False teachers have an outward show of godliness, but their lifestyle denies its power (2 Tim. 3:5).

This infamous pair is known to most readers of the Bible from Rev. 20:8. They stand for all the nations of the world, which are enticed by Satan to attack the saints in the end times. This text universalizes Ezek. 38–39, where “Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshek and Tubal” (38:2–3), is the commander of a coalition (38:2–7) to be gathered in an unprovoked attack on a restored, defenseless Israel. He acts not on his own initiative but rather is impelled and ultimately destroyed by God (38:21–23; 39:2–6). Some have suggested that the mysterious Gog derives from the historical figure Gyges, a seventh-century BC king of Lydia located in western Asia Minor, or Gaga, a god mentioned in the Ras Shamra texts of ancient Ugarit. Others believe that the name “Gog” is derived from “Magog,” since Magog, the land “in the far north” from which Gog came (Ezek. 38:2, 15; 39:6), can be translated as “place of Gog.” Magog is associated in the Table of Nations (Gen. 10:2) with Meshek and Tubal, eponymous sons of Japheth whose territories are presumed to lie somewhere in the vicinity of modern Turkey.

This infamous pair is known to most readers of the Bible from Rev. 20:8. They stand for all the nations of the world, which are enticed by Satan to attack the saints in the end times. This text universalizes Ezek. 38–39, where “Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshek and Tubal” (38:2–3), is the commander of a coalition (38:2–7) to be gathered in an unprovoked attack on a restored, defenseless Israel. He acts not on his own initiative but rather is impelled and ultimately destroyed by God (38:21–23; 39:2–6). Some have suggested that the mysterious Gog derives from the historical figure Gyges, a seventh-century BC king of Lydia located in western Asia Minor, or Gaga, a god mentioned in the Ras Shamra texts of ancient Ugarit. Others believe that the name “Gog” is derived from “Magog,” since Magog, the land “in the far north” from which Gog came (Ezek. 38:2, 15; 39:6), can be translated as “place of Gog.” Magog is associated in the Table of Nations (Gen. 10:2) with Meshek and Tubal, eponymous sons of Japheth whose territories are presumed to lie somewhere in the vicinity of modern Turkey.

A transliterated plural form of the Hebrew word goy (“nation, Gentile”), and the name of several places. As a place name, it is also spelled Goiim. (1) As a plural noun, goyim occurs more than four hundred times in the OT, referring predominantly to non-Jewish peoples. Its Greek counterpart is ethnos, from which the English word “ethnic” comes. (2) The kingdom of King Tidal (Gen. 14:1, 9). In Gen. 14 King Tidal of Goyim joined King Kedorlaomer of Elam and two other kings in an effort to put down a rebellion in the Dead Sea region. When Abram’s nephew Lot and his household were captured, Abram rescued Lot and defeated the four-king coalition. Scholars have tried to identify King Tidal and his kingdom. Most believe that he was a Hittite king leading his own multination coalition, but there are other proposals. (3) A municipality in Gilgal appearing in the list of kings Joshua conquered (Josh. 12:23). “Goyim in Gilgal” is replaced by “Goiim in Galilee” in some translations (NRSV, ESV) that follow the LXX for this verse. If this is to be preferred, then this Goyim in Galilee is likely the same as in Isa. 9:1 (see next item). (4) A part of the Galilee region called “Galilee of the nations [goyim]” (Isa. 9:1; cf. Matt. 4:13–16). Here most translations render goyim as “Gentiles” or “nations.” Harosheth Haggoyim, the home of the Canaanite army commander Sisera (Judg. 4:2) and the site of his confrontation with the Israelite commander Barak, may also be linked to this location.

Probably located about twenty miles directly east of the Sea of Galilee, Golan is one of the OT cities of refuge (Deut. 4:43; Josh. 20:8). Golan is later given by Joshua, Eleazar the high priest, and the Israelite tribal family leaders to the Gershonites, a clan of Levites, out of the land originally allotted to the tribe of Manasseh (Josh. 21:27; 1 Chron. 6:71).

Made by Aaron while Moses was on Mount Sinai, the golden calf was an image fashioned from gold jewelry donated by the Israelites, who grew impatient waiting for Moses as he spent forty days and nights receiving instructions from God (Exod. 32). It became an object of idolatrous worship and a cause of corrupt behavior.

Opinions differ as to whether the calf was intended as a substitute for the absent Moses (who later appears literally “horned” [Heb. qaran] in Exod. 34:30 [cf. Douay-Rheims version; NIV: “radiant”]), or for Yahweh, or as a pedestal for Yahweh (like the cherubim above the ark of the covenant). The bovine form of the image is possibly due to Egyptian influence. The word “calf” could be the writer’s contemptuous term for what may have been thought of as a bull image (symbolizing strength), or it may have been intended to refer to a bull in its prime.

Moses’ response on seeing the image is to smash the two tablets containing the Ten Commandments, signifying the end of the covenant between God and Israel. He burned the image, pulverized it, scattered it on the water, and made the Israelites drink it. While initially it seemed uncertain whether there could be any future for the covenant, Exod. 33–34 serves to resolve this.

The episode of the golden calf lived long in Israel’s memory as the paradigm instance of apostasy (Ps. 106:19–20; Acts 7:41). King Jeroboam I repeated the offense, setting up golden calves at Dan and Bethel (1 Kings 12:28) to discourage citizens of the northern kingdom from traveling to the southern capital Jerusalem, where their allegiance might switch to the Davidic king.

Made by Aaron while Moses was on Mount Sinai, the golden calf was an image fashioned from gold jewelry donated by the Israelites, who grew impatient waiting for Moses as he spent forty days and nights receiving instructions from God (Exod. 32). It became an object of idolatrous worship and a cause of corrupt behavior.

Opinions differ as to whether the calf was intended as a substitute for the absent Moses (who later appears literally “horned” [Heb. qaran] in Exod. 34:30 [cf. Douay-Rheims version; NIV: “radiant”]), or for Yahweh, or as a pedestal for Yahweh (like the cherubim above the ark of the covenant). The bovine form of the image is possibly due to Egyptian influence. The word “calf” could be the writer’s contemptuous term for what may have been thought of as a bull image (symbolizing strength), or it may have been intended to refer to a bull in its prime.

Moses’ response on seeing the image is to smash the two tablets containing the Ten Commandments, signifying the end of the covenant between God and Israel. He burned the image, pulverized it, scattered it on the water, and made the Israelites drink it. While initially it seemed uncertain whether there could be any future for the covenant, Exod. 33–34 serves to resolve this.

The episode of the golden calf lived long in Israel’s memory as the paradigm instance of apostasy (Ps. 106:19–20; Acts 7:41). King Jeroboam I repeated the offense, setting up golden calves at Dan and Bethel (1 Kings 12:28) to discourage citizens of the northern kingdom from traveling to the southern capital Jerusalem, where their allegiance might switch to the Davidic king.

A modern term for Jesus’ maxim “Do to others what you would have them do to you” (Matt. 7:12; cf. Luke 6:31). Jesus emphasizes this point by stating that its practice encapsulates both the Torah and the Prophets—the foundation of Judaic culture (Matt. 7:12). Gold’s high value connotes the extreme worth of this guiding principle for human interaction.

The site of Jesus’ crucifixion, just outside the wall of Jerusalem. “Golgotha” is from an Aramaic word meaning “skull.” The three references to Golgotha in the Gospels (Matt. 27:33; Mark 15:22; John 19:17) also identify the location in Greek as “Place of the Skull” (kraniou topos). The English name “Calvary” is based on the Latin term calvaria (“skull”). The site is linked to skulls perhaps because it was regularly used for executions or, less likely, it physically resembled a skull. See also Calvary.

Goliath was the Philistine champion whom David killed in one-on-one combat with a stone hurled by a sling (1 Sam. 17). David’s victory led to a rout of the Philistines and personal rewards and prominence in Israel. Goliath was considered a giant. While the MT measures him at 9' 6" (NRSV: “six cubits and a span”), another textual tradition (preserved in the DSS, the LXX, and Josephus [Ant. 6.171]), give his height as 6' 9" (“four cubits and a span”). From a copying perspective, the 6' 9" height is easier to explain as original. The average Israelite was about 5' 3", but Saul was head and shoulders taller, perhaps 6'.

(1) The wife of Hosea the prophet. God commanded Hosea to marry Gomer, though he also describes her as “an adulterous wife” (Hos. 1:2). The purpose behind God’s command was to provide an illustration of his own relationship with his people, which, like a marriage, was to be intimate and exclusive. Israel, however, was worshiping other gods, just as Gomer was sleeping with other men.

It is uncertain whether Gomer was a prostitute at the time Hosea married her or whether she had promiscuous tendencies that she acted on after marriage. Some commentators even argue that Hosea did not really marry such a woman but that this part of the book of Hosea is a parable. Whichever is the case, more than Israel’s sin is illustrated by Hosea and Gomer’s relationship. In Hos. 3 God commands the prophet to buy her back and marry her again even though she is a prostitute. He is to prohibit her adulterous activities. In the same way, God will not completely break off his relationship with adulterous Israel.

(2) In the Table of Nations (Gen. 10) Gomer is the son of Japheth, the son of Noah. He typically is identified as the ancestor of the Cimmerians, an Indo-European people who lived in what is now southern Russia, north of the Black Sea, in the second millennium BC, but who threatened Assyria around 700 BC. Gomer is also mentioned along with Gog and Magog in Ezek. 38:1–6, representing Israel’s northern enemies.

After Abram (Abraham) realizes that the land between Bethel and Ai cannot support both him and Lot, he suggests that they part company. Abraham gives Lot first choice, and he decides to settle in the fertile cities of the Jordan plain on the outskirts of Sodom (Gen. 13:1–12). The text then describes Sodom’s inhabitants as “wicked” and “sinning greatly against the Lord” (13:13). In Gen. 18 God reveals to Abram his plan to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah because of the “outcry against” these cities and their “grievous” sin. God says, “I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me” (18:20). Abram pleads on behalf of Sodom and bargains with God to spare the righteous in the city.

Two angels of the Lord then arrive at Sodom to carry out the task of God’s investigation, and Lot meets them and invites them to stay the night with him. The men of Sodom then surround the house and demand that the visitors be brought out to them to be raped. Lot refuses and offers his daughters instead, intending to protect the visitors. The angelic messengers strike the wicked men of Sodom with blindness, and Lot, his wife, and his daughters flee the city. God destroys Sodom and Gomorrah with a rain of “burning sulfur” (Gen. 19:24).

In both the OT and the NT, the cities’ names become a symbol of warning against violent wickedness and of God’s wrathful response of fiery destruction (Deut. 29:23; Isa. 1:9; Rom. 9:29; Jude 7). The ancient site of the cities is disputed, though they likely were located near the Dead Sea.

A loud percussion instrument, perhaps a bell or a cymbal, Paul compares the sound of the gong (Gk. chalkos) to the use of the spiritual gift of tongues devoid of love. Literally, the gong is a “sounding brass” (1 Cor. 13:1; see KJV).

Whereas the Greeks identified the good as an abstract ideal toward which people should strive in all their actions, the Bible identifies goodness as an attribute of God, who is personal (Ps. 25:8–10). Therefore, God is the ultimate standard of goodness.

Creation itself expresses God’s goodness. Human beings are fearfully and wonderfully made (Ps. 139:14). We have been given the capacity to enjoy the many blessings of God’s creation (Ps. 145:9, 16), and to bring the potentialities of creation to their full expression by cultivating and subduing the earth (Gen. 1:28; Ps. 8). We are created in God’s image to do good by living according to God’s purposes. Evil came into the world when Adam and Eve looked to something in creation instead of God as the source of ultimate good (Gen. 3).

In his goodness, God has chosen goodness. If we were to shine God’s goodness through a prism, its color spectrum would include love, mercy, grace, kindness, faithfulness, righteousness, beauty, and perfection to redeem his people, who have lost their capacity for good through sin. Jesus is the good shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep (John 10:11). God showers his benevolence upon both the evil and the good (Matt. 5:45). For believers, God uses everything, even their suffering, to bring about their good, namely, Christlikeness (Rom. 8:28–29).

The English word “gospel” translates the Greek word euangelion, which is very important in the NT, being used seventy-six times. The word euangelion (eu = “good,” angelion = “announcement”), in its contemporary use in the Hellenistic world, was not the title of a book but rather a declaration of good news. Euangelion was used in the Roman Empire with reference to significant events in the life of the emperor, who was thought of as a savior with divine status. These events included declarations at the time of his birth, his coming of age, and his accession to the throne. The NT usage of the term can also be traced to the OT (e.g., Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1), which looked forward to the coming of the Messiah, who would bring a time of salvation. This good news, which is declared in the NT, is that Jesus has fulfilled God’s promises to Israel, and now the way of salvation is open to all.

The Gospel Message

The apostle Paul recognizes that the gospel is centered on the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:1–5). He states that this gospel is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes (Rom. 1:16), a sacred trust (1 Tim. 1:11), the word of truth (Eph. 1:13), and an authoritative pronouncement that requires a response (Rom. 10:16; 2 Cor. 11:4; 2 Thess. 1:8). The declaration of this good news is found on the lips of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 11:5; Luke 4:18), who calls people to respond in repentance and belief (Mark 1:15). The good news is also in the early apostolic preaching, where it is associated with the proclamation of Christ (Acts 5:42; 8:35; 11:20).

The records of apostolic preaching in Acts are records of the earliest public declaration of this gospel. The apostle Peter gives three such speeches (Acts 2:14–41; 3:11–4:4; 10:34–43), whose content can be summarized as follows. The age of fulfillment has dawned through the birth, life, ministry, and resurrection of Jesus Christ (2:22–31), which has ushered in the “latter days” foretold by the prophets (3:18–26). Jesus, by his resurrection, has been exalted to the right hand of God as the head of the new Israel (2:32–36), and the Holy Spirit has been given to the church as the sign of Christ’s present power and exaltation (10:44–48). This age will reach its consummation at the return of Christ (3:20–21), and in response to this gospel an appeal is made for repentance, with the offer of forgiveness, the Holy Spirit, and salvation (2:37–41).

This declaration of the gospel is concerned primarily with what was preached rather than what was written. Itinerant preachers of this gospel were known as “evangelists,” which in Greek is closely related to the term euangelion (Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; 2 Tim. 4:5). Some scholars believe that during the stage of oral transmission, the gospel accounts developed a certain form through repetition, which helps explain some similarities between later written accounts of the gospel.

From Oral to Written Gospel

Later, this “oral” gospel was written down, for several reasons. With the rapid spread of Christianity, as recorded in the book of Acts, a need arose for a more efficient dissemination of the message of Jesus than was available by oral means. Furthermore, there was a need to keep the message alive because some of the apostles had died (e.g., James in Acts 12:2) and many churches were facing opposition and persecution. The written Gospels would facilitate catechetical and liturgical needs and encourage persecuted Christians to continue following Jesus by telling the story of his faithfulness through great suffering. These written Gospels would also contain examples of those who persevered in following Jesus and of those who denied him and betrayed him. These accounts about Jesus and those who followed him became foundational documents for the early church.

It should be noted that the gospel was not written down in order to give it greater authority. The first-century context was largely an oral culture, in which storytelling and the rehearsal of facts was integral. Papias, a leader of the church in Hierapolis in Asia Minor who died around AD 130, states his preference for oral tradition rather than written information about Jesus: “For I did not think that information from books would help me as much as the word of a living and surviving voice” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.39.4). There is, however, a traceable trajectory from the gospel preached by the apostles to the written accounts that bear the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It is generally held that the authors/editors of the four canonical Gospels were using oral and/or written sources (Luke 1:1–4), and that their respective Gospels were written in the second half of the first century.

The majority of biblical scholars hold that Mark was the first Gospel to be written (c. AD 66). According to tradition, its editor/author was John Mark, a close friend of the apostle Peter (1 Pet. 5:13) and a part-time companion of the apostle Paul (Acts 12:12; Col. 4:10; 2 Tim. 4:11). This tradition is not without basis. Papias says, “Mark, who had indeed been Peter’s interpreter, accurately wrote as much as he remembered, yet not in order, about that which was either said or done by the Lord” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.39.15). This tradition is also outlined by Clement of Alexandria, who, around AD 200, wrote, “When Peter had publicly preached the word at Rome, and by the Spirit had proclaimed the gospel, then those present, who were many, exhorted Mark, as one who had followed him for a long time and remembered what had been spoken, to make a record of what he said; and that he did this, and distributed the Gospel among those that asked him” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 6.14.5–7; cf. 2.15.1–2).

It is widely held that Matthew and Luke used Mark as one of their sources: of the material in Mark, over 97 percent is repeated in Matthew and over 88 percent in Luke. Matthew and Luke also contain material that appears to come from a common written source that is not found in Mark. Scholars have named this source as “Q” (from the German Quelle = “source”), although this may be a collection of sources rather than a single document.

Furthermore, the association of the Fourth Gospel with the apostle John goes back to Irenaeus (c. AD 180), who states, “John, the disciple of the Lord, who leaned on his breast, also published the gospel while living at Ephesus in Asia” (Haer. 3.1.1, as cited in Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.8.4). By the second century, the term “gospel” is used for the written accounts of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus (e.g., Did. 11.3; 15.4). Justin Martyr (c. AD 140) refers to the “memoirs of the apostles” (1 Apol. 67) and Irenaeus (c. AD 180) mentions the four canonical Gospels by name (Haer. 3.11.7).

The Purpose and Genre of the Gospels

Purpose. The Gospels were written to convey theology and to create and confirm faith. They do not give an objectively neutral account of the life of Jesus; they enthusiastically endorse their protagonist and condemn those who oppose him. They differ from traditional biographies in that they give little information about the chronology of Jesus’ life. Only two of the Gospels, Matthew and Luke, tell of the events surrounding Jesus’ birth. Luke alone tells of an event in Jesus’ childhood (Luke 2:41–52). It is virtually incidental that Jesus worked as a carpenter and had brothers and sisters (Mark 6:3). A large percentage of each of the four canonical Gospels is devoted to the last week of Jesus’ life; of the sixteen chapters of Mark’s Gospel, six are devoted to the one week from Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem until his resurrection.

The primary intentions of the authors/editors of the written Gospels were not to give biographical details but rather to lead the reader to an acknowledgment of the identity of Jesus and a belief in the purpose of his mission (Luke 1:4; John 20:31). Their theological purposes, however, do not necessarily compromise their commitment to historical accuracy. Jesus is presented as a real, historical figure who lived within a specific historical time frame. Luke appears to be more concerned than the other evangelists with historical details, giving a rough date for Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1–2) and a more specific time for Jesus’ baptism (3:1–2).

Genre. The discerning reader of the Gospels is forced to ask questions concerning the literary genre(s) of these texts. Such a discussion is imperative, as the interpretation of a section of any piece of literature will largely be determined by the function of the text within a certain literary genre. Prior to the 1970s, most NT scholars believed that the Gospels formed a unique literary genre and were therefore distinct from other first-century literary forms. This conclusion was based on the belief that the written Gospels were collections of smaller sections sewn together by the evangelists, and that the documents as a whole lacked coherence. Since then, this presupposition has been challenged, largely because scholars have seen that the Gospel writers were real editors and authors who were not just collecting primitive source material but were using that material to write a larger story about Jesus. The written Gospels therefore have overall coherence and purpose; they were written in such a way as to bring about a desired response in the reader. Such an overall intention may have stronger similarities with different genres in the Greco-Roman world of the NT.

The Gospels have been associated with several genres. They bear some resemblance to aretalogies, which were narratives about divine persons in antiquity from which flowed moral instructions. These stories often involved miraculous events at the subject’s birth or death or during life, and they included the presence of both disciples and opponents. Within these aretalogies, the narrative was secondary to the morality. An association with aretalogies, therefore, would encourage the reader to give greater attention to moral teaching than to events in which this teaching is embedded. Similarly, others have seen the Gospels as essentially a collection of wisdom sayings set in a historicized narrative; this view again gives priority to sayings and is doubtful of the historicity of the narrative. Such views that downplay the narrative, and particularly the miracles in Jesus’ life, have led others to argue the opposite extreme, which sees the Gospels, and Luke-Acts in particular, as examples of ancient novels, with their focus on miracle stories. Many scholars have rejected the emphasis on either sayings or narrative, arguing that the literary genre that the Gospels most closely resemble is ancient biographies (bioi). These contained praise for the protagonist, rhetoric, moral philosophy, and a concern for character.

Although the Gospels use different literary motifs that are reflective of different genres of the Greco-Roman world, they do not exactly replicate a known genre. They contain material not found in other Hellenistic literature of the time—for example, the fulfillment of OT expectations and their desire to address particular issues faced by the early church, such as opposition; the Gentile mission; the need to redefine Israel in the light of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection; and the nature of Christian discipleship. Unlike other literature of the time, they do not name their authors, and with the exception of Luke, they lack traditional literary devices such as prefaces. They are therefore to be seen as unique, or at least as a distinct subgenre of ancient biographies.

Canonical and Noncanonical Gospels

The progression from the events of Jesus’ life to the oral preaching of this gospel to the first-century writing of the story led to the acceptance of the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John into the NT canon. There is also a significant body of literature that is normally referred to as the noncanonical gospels. These later documents were neither widely accepted nor viewed as authoritative, but they provide useful insights into the nature of early Christianity. A significant noncanonical gospel is the Gospel of Thomas, which is part of a large collection of works discovered at Nag Hammadi (Egypt) in 1945. The Gospel of Thomas does not contain a resurrection account and is primarily a collection of sayings.

The canonical Gospels are not more authoritative than other sections of Scripture, but because they focus on Jesus’ ministry, with particular attention to his death and resurrection, they draw the attention of the reader to the fulfillment of God’s purpose in the life and work of Jesus, the Messiah. They are therefore of great importance within Scripture.

The KJV uses “goodman” five times to translate the Greek word oikodespotēs, referring to the owner or master of a house or estate. The goodman was responsible for defense of the house (Matt. 24:43; Luke 12:39) and might employ people to work his land (Matt. 20:11). See also Mark 14:14; Luke 22:11. In Prov. 7:19 the KJV reads “the goodman” as opposed to “my husband,” the reading in the LXX and most modern versions (the Hebrew reads literally, “the man”).

The wood that many Bible versions identify as being used to construct Noah’s ark. “Gopher” is a transliteration of the Hebrew word goper, found only in Gen. 6:14. The NIV renders it “cypress,” acknowledging that the meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain. Other suggested translations include “pine,” “cedar,” “fir,” “reed,” and “willow.”

(1) A region in northeast Egypt along the eastern Nile Delta. The extent of the region is uncertain, but it is identified with the area around Wadi Tumilat up to Lake Timsah. The LXX translates “Goshen” as “Gesem of Arabia” (Gen. 45:10) and may identify it with the Egyptian name for Arabia. Geshem of Arabia, a foe of Nehemiah, may be associated with this area (Neh. 2:19). Ramesses II built his capital on the ruins of the Hyksos capital Avaris and called it Pi-Ramesses, which is probably the same Rameses that the Israelite slaves built (Exod. 1:11). Goshen was either roughly equated with the “land of Rameses” or a part of it (Gen. 47:6). Joseph settled his family there because it was “the best of the land,” good for tending herds, and was near him (Gen. 45:10, 18; 46:34). Goshen later became the place of Israel’s enslavement. While Egypt faced the plagues, Goshen was spared (Exod. 8:22).

(2) A region in southern Judah conquered by Joshua (Josh. 10:40–42; 11:16). (3) A town in the southern hill country of Judah (Josh. 15:51).

The English word “gospel” translates the Greek word euangelion, which is very important in the NT, being used seventy-six times. The word euangelion (eu = “good,” angelion = “announcement”), in its contemporary use in the Hellenistic world, was not the title of a book but rather a declaration of good news. Euangelion was used in the Roman Empire with reference to significant events in the life of the emperor, who was thought of as a savior with divine status. These events included declarations at the time of his birth, his coming of age, and his accession to the throne. The NT usage of the term can also be traced to the OT (e.g., Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1), which looked forward to the coming of the Messiah, who would bring a time of salvation. This good news, which is declared in the NT, is that Jesus has fulfilled God’s promises to Israel, and now the way of salvation is open to all.

The Gospel Message

The apostle Paul recognizes that the gospel is centered on the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:1–5). He states that this gospel is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes (Rom. 1:16), a sacred trust (1 Tim. 1:11), the word of truth (Eph. 1:13), and an authoritative pronouncement that requires a response (Rom. 10:16; 2 Cor. 11:4; 2 Thess. 1:8). The declaration of this good news is found on the lips of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 11:5; Luke 4:18), who calls people to respond in repentance and belief (Mark 1:15). The good news is also in the early apostolic preaching, where it is associated with the proclamation of Christ (Acts 5:42; 8:35; 11:20).

The records of apostolic preaching in Acts are records of the earliest public declaration of this gospel. The apostle Peter gives three such speeches (Acts 2:14–41; 3:11–4:4; 10:34–43), whose content can be summarized as follows. The age of fulfillment has dawned through the birth, life, ministry, and resurrection of Jesus Christ (2:22–31), which has ushered in the “latter days” foretold by the prophets (3:18–26). Jesus, by his resurrection, has been exalted to the right hand of God as the head of the new Israel (2:32–36), and the Holy Spirit has been given to the church as the sign of Christ’s present power and exaltation (10:44–48). This age will reach its consummation at the return of Christ (3:20–21), and in response to this gospel an appeal is made for repentance, with the offer of forgiveness, the Holy Spirit, and salvation (2:37–41).

This declaration of the gospel is concerned primarily with what was preached rather than what was written. Itinerant preachers of this gospel were known as “evangelists,” which in Greek is closely related to the term euangelion (Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; 2 Tim. 4:5). Some scholars believe that during the stage of oral transmission, the gospel accounts developed a certain form through repetition, which helps explain some similarities between later written accounts of the gospel.

From Oral to Written Gospel

Later, this “oral” gospel was written down, for several reasons. With the rapid spread of Christianity, as recorded in the book of Acts, a need arose for a more efficient dissemination of the message of Jesus than was available by oral means. Furthermore, there was a need to keep the message alive because some of the apostles had died (e.g., James in Acts 12:2) and many churches were facing opposition and persecution. The written Gospels would facilitate catechetical and liturgical needs and encourage persecuted Christians to continue following Jesus by telling the story of his faithfulness through great suffering. These written Gospels would also contain examples of those who persevered in following Jesus and of those who denied him and betrayed him. These accounts about Jesus and those who followed him became foundational documents for the early church.

It should be noted that the gospel was not written down in order to give it greater authority. The first-century context was largely an oral culture, in which storytelling and the rehearsal of facts was integral. Papias, a leader of the church in Hierapolis in Asia Minor who died around AD 130, states his preference for oral tradition rather than written information about Jesus: “For I did not think that information from books would help me as much as the word of a living and surviving voice” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.39.4). There is, however, a traceable trajectory from the gospel preached by the apostles to the written accounts that bear the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It is generally held that the authors/editors of the four canonical Gospels were using oral and/or written sources (Luke 1:1–4), and that their respective Gospels were written in the second half of the first century.

The majority of biblical scholars hold that Mark was the first Gospel to be written (c. AD 66). According to tradition, its editor/author was John Mark, a close friend of the apostle Peter (1 Pet. 5:13) and a part-time companion of the apostle Paul (Acts 12:12; Col. 4:10; 2 Tim. 4:11). This tradition is not without basis. Papias says, “Mark, who had indeed been Peter’s interpreter, accurately wrote as much as he remembered, yet not in order, about that which was either said or done by the Lord” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.39.15). This tradition is also outlined by Clement of Alexandria, who, around AD 200, wrote, “When Peter had publicly preached the word at Rome, and by the Spirit had proclaimed the gospel, then those present, who were many, exhorted Mark, as one who had followed him for a long time and remembered what had been spoken, to make a record of what he said; and that he did this, and distributed the Gospel among those that asked him” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 6.14.5–7; cf. 2.15.1–2).

It is widely held that Matthew and Luke used Mark as one of their sources: of the material in Mark, over 97 percent is repeated in Matthew and over 88 percent in Luke. Matthew and Luke also contain material that appears to come from a common written source that is not found in Mark. Scholars have named this source as “Q” (from the German Quelle = “source”), although this may be a collection of sources rather than a single document.

Furthermore, the association of the Fourth Gospel with the apostle John goes back to Irenaeus (c. AD 180), who states, “John, the disciple of the Lord, who leaned on his breast, also published the gospel while living at Ephesus in Asia” (Haer. 3.1.1, as cited in Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.8.4). By the second century, the term “gospel” is used for the written accounts of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus (e.g., Did. 11.3; 15.4). Justin Martyr (c. AD 140) refers to the “memoirs of the apostles” (1 Apol. 67) and Irenaeus (c. AD 180) mentions the four canonical Gospels by name (Haer. 3.11.7).

The Purpose and Genre of the Gospels

Purpose. The Gospels were written to convey theology and to create and confirm faith. They do not give an objectively neutral account of the life of Jesus; they enthusiastically endorse their protagonist and condemn those who oppose him. They differ from traditional biographies in that they give little information about the chronology of Jesus’ life. Only two of the Gospels, Matthew and Luke, tell of the events surrounding Jesus’ birth. Luke alone tells of an event in Jesus’ childhood (Luke 2:41–52). It is virtually incidental that Jesus worked as a carpenter and had brothers and sisters (Mark 6:3). A large percentage of each of the four canonical Gospels is devoted to the last week of Jesus’ life; of the sixteen chapters of Mark’s Gospel, six are devoted to the one week from Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem until his resurrection.

The primary intentions of the authors/editors of the written Gospels were not to give biographical details but rather to lead the reader to an acknowledgment of the identity of Jesus and a belief in the purpose of his mission (Luke 1:4; John 20:31). Their theological purposes, however, do not necessarily compromise their commitment to historical accuracy. Jesus is presented as a real, historical figure who lived within a specific historical time frame. Luke appears to be more concerned than the other evangelists with historical details, giving a rough date for Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1–2) and a more specific time for Jesus’ baptism (3:1–2).

Genre. The discerning reader of the Gospels is forced to ask questions concerning the literary genre(s) of these texts. Such a discussion is imperative, as the interpretation of a section of any piece of literature will largely be determined by the function of the text within a certain literary genre. Prior to the 1970s, most NT scholars believed that the Gospels formed a unique literary genre and were therefore distinct from other first-century literary forms. This conclusion was based on the belief that the written Gospels were collections of smaller sections sewn together by the evangelists, and that the documents as a whole lacked coherence. Since then, this presupposition has been challenged, largely because scholars have seen that the Gospel writers were real editors and authors who were not just collecting primitive source material but were using that material to write a larger story about Jesus. The written Gospels therefore have overall coherence and purpose; they were written in such a way as to bring about a desired response in the reader. Such an overall intention may have stronger similarities with different genres in the Greco-Roman world of the NT.

The Gospels have been associated with several genres. They bear some resemblance to aretalogies, which were narratives about divine persons in antiquity from which flowed moral instructions. These stories often involved miraculous events at the subject’s birth or death or during life, and they included the presence of both disciples and opponents. Within these aretalogies, the narrative was secondary to the morality. An association with aretalogies, therefore, would encourage the reader to give greater attention to moral teaching than to events in which this teaching is embedded. Similarly, others have seen the Gospels as essentially a collection of wisdom sayings set in a historicized narrative; this view again gives priority to sayings and is doubtful of the historicity of the narrative. Such views that downplay the narrative, and particularly the miracles in Jesus’ life, have led others to argue the opposite extreme, which sees the Gospels, and Luke-Acts in particular, as examples of ancient novels, with their focus on miracle stories. Many scholars have rejected the emphasis on either sayings or narrative, arguing that the literary genre that the Gospels most closely resemble is ancient biographies (bioi). These contained praise for the protagonist, rhetoric, moral philosophy, and a concern for character.

Although the Gospels use different literary motifs that are reflective of different genres of the Greco-Roman world, they do not exactly replicate a known genre. They contain material not found in other Hellenistic literature of the time—for example, the fulfillment of OT expectations and their desire to address particular issues faced by the early church, such as opposition; the Gentile mission; the need to redefine Israel in the light of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection; and the nature of Christian discipleship. Unlike other literature of the time, they do not name their authors, and with the exception of Luke, they lack traditional literary devices such as prefaces. They are therefore to be seen as unique, or at least as a distinct subgenre of ancient biographies.

Canonical and Noncanonical Gospels

The progression from the events of Jesus’ life to the oral preaching of this gospel to the first-century writing of the story led to the acceptance of the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John into the NT canon. There is also a significant body of literature that is normally referred to as the noncanonical gospels. These later documents were neither widely accepted nor viewed as authoritative, but they provide useful insights into the nature of early Christianity. A significant noncanonical gospel is the Gospel of Thomas, which is part of a large collection of works discovered at Nag Hammadi (Egypt) in 1945. The Gospel of Thomas does not contain a resurrection account and is primarily a collection of sayings.

The canonical Gospels are not more authoritative than other sections of Scripture, but because they focus on Jesus’ ministry, with particular attention to his death and resurrection, they draw the attention of the reader to the fulfillment of God’s purpose in the life and work of Jesus, the Messiah. They are therefore of great importance within Scripture.

Traditionally appearing after Matthew, Mark, and Luke in the NT canon, the Gospel of John is also referred to as the Fourth Gospel. Because of its many unique features, John is often discussed in distinction from the other three Gospels, which are grouped together as the Synoptic Gospels.

Authorship

Technically, the Gospel of John is anonymous. The author, however, identifies himself with the Beloved Disciple (21:24). In light of the nearly unanimous testimony of the early church that the Fourth Gospel was penned by the apostle John, the son of Zebedee, and that no formidable argument has been set forth against this position, the majority of conservative scholars agree that the Beloved Disciple is John the apostle.

Evidence for apostolic authorship is multifaceted. First, the external evidence weighs heavily in favor of the traditional view that John the apostle penned this Gospel. There is some evidence that title pages with an accompanying ascription identifying the author date back very close to the time of the origin of the Gospels themselves. Such ascriptions may have been necessitated as a means of distinguishing the Gospels from one another. With regard to the Fourth Gospel, the earliest manuscripts uniformly ascribe it to the apostle John.

The evidence from the early church fathers also supports the traditional viewpoint. Ignatius appears to have been familiar with the language of the Fourth Gospel. Also, the Shepherd of Hermas alludes to it. Justin appears to be the first orthodox writer to quote John (1 Apol. 61.4–5, quoting from John 3:3–5). Irenaeus is the first to overtly assert Johannine authorship: “John the disciple of the Lord, who leaned back on his breast, published the Gospel while he was resident at Ephesus in Asia” (Haer. 3.1.1). This position finds further support in Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 200). The Muratorian Canon (AD 180–200) tells us that John was urged by his disciples, and that Andrew had a dream that John should write. Eusebius’s silence on the questions of the authenticity, authorship, and canonicity of John speaks loudly, since it was his objective to address the doubtful cases. In all, there is unquestioned acceptance by the end of the second century that the Fourth Gospel was written by John the apostle.

Second, the internal evidence corresponds with the identification of John the son of Zebedee as the author in that he appears to meet all the requirements for authorship. John was one of the Twelve and, along with Peter and James, a member of the inner circle of Jesus’ disciples. This close association with Peter makes John the best candidate for the Beloved Disciple. Also, the call narrative of 1:35–51, when compared with Mark 1:16–20, supports the identification of the unnamed disciple with John. Several personal allusions in the Fourth Gospel are best accounted for if the author is John the apostle. For example, in 1:14; 19:35 the author suggests that he has personally witnessed Jesus. The author provides details that suggest this Gospel was written by an eyewitness, and some of these details serve no purpose except to affirm that an eyewitness saw or experienced them. These include a proclivity for specifying the time or day of an event (1:19–28, 29, 35, 39, 43; 2:1; 4:6, 52; 18:28; 19:14; 20:19); the number of water jars (six) at Cana (2:6); the distance (twenty-five or thirty stadia) that the disciples rowed (6:19); the number of fish (153) caught (21:11); and the distance of the boat from land at the postresurrection appearance of Jesus (21:8, 11).

Furthermore, the author of the Fourth Gospel is aware of Jewish customs and history as well as the geography of first-century Palestine. This too accords with our knowledge of John the apostle. For example, he is aware of customs regarding cleansing (2:6), laws concerning the Sabbath (5:10), and the Feast of Tabernacles (7:37). The writer of the Fourth Gospel is also familiar with history (the number of years spent rebuilding the temple [2:20]), Jewish politics (the attitude toward Samaritans [4:9]), Jewish authorities (Annas and Caiaphas [18:13]), and the geography of Palestine (the pool at Bethesda with five porticoes [5:2], the Pool of Siloam [9:7], Sychar [4:5], the two Bethanys [1:28; 11:1, 18; 12:1], Ephraim [11:54]).

The question remains as to why the apostle John would have written anonymously and used such a cryptic means of identifying himself as “the beloved disciple” (21:20; NIV: “the disciple whom Jesus loved”). It is conceivable that John’s readers knew his name, and that in keeping with the Semitic custom of anonymity, John used this alternative designation. Why, though, in an effort to humbly remain anonymous, would someone choose a designation that seemingly connotes superiority?

In response, some have suggested that John may have used the title with a sense of wonder about how Jesus loved him. The stress would then be one of amazement: John, instead of mentioning his own name, draws attention to what he owes Jesus. This title is also combined with other, more modest titles: “another disciple” (18:15); “the other disciple” (20:2); “the man who saw it” (19:35). Finally, others have noted that the designation “the beloved disciple” may simply have been a title by which John was known throughout the churches of Asia.

Furthermore, if the apostle John is not the author of the Fourth Gospel, then we must account for his absence from the narrative. The failure to mention James and John (aside from the somewhat passing reference to the “sons of Zebedee” [21:2]) is striking. According to the Synoptic Gospels, these brothers are two of the most prominent disciples in the ministry of Jesus. If John’s readers were familiar with James and John and their general role in the life of Jesus, then by not naming himself, John could keep his own role subordinate in the narrative. John, as an eyewitness, needed to mention himself, for doing so would help to establish the historical credibility of this Gospel. This designation allowed him to write a biography of Christ and not mention himself by name.

Time and Place of Writing

Though the conclusion is ultimately uncertain, it is widely believed that John penned the Fourth Gospel from Ephesus somewhat late in the first century (c. AD 85–95). It appears from 21:19, 23 that a measure of time has gone by, and that Peter has already died. It has been argued that the Gospel of John was written before the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in AD 70 (on the basis of references suggesting that the temple is still standing [cf. 5:2]), but this argument from silence does not necessarily establish the point that it attempts to prove. Supporting a date late in the first century is the external evidence. The early church fathers claimed that John was written last, at the urging of his disciples, and that he wrote from Ephesus.

The suggestion that John was written sometime well into the second century has been rejected by nearly all scholars. The discovery of a very early manuscript, P52 (dated around AD 125), confirms that the Fourth Gospel was written and circulating early in the second century. Copies of the Bodmer Papyri P66 and P75 further establish that the Gospel of John was circulating in Egypt as early as AD 140.

Outline

I. Prologue (1:1–18)

II. Preparation for Jesus’ Ministry (1:19–51)

III. Jesus’ Public Ministry: Signs and Teaching (2:1–12:50)

IV. The Last Supper and Farewell Discourse (13:1–17:26)

V. The Passion and Resurrection Narratives (18:1–21:25)

Purpose and Message

The Gospel of John states its purpose in 20:31: “But these [signs] are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” The Greek text of this verse is relatively ambiguous (something that was noticed from a very early date and has resulted in some discrepancy among the earliest manuscripts). It raises the question of whether John wrote so that his readers might come to believe or that they should continue in their belief. A number of leading scholars have concluded that John was intentionally ambiguous and that he wrote with both purposes in mind.

The Gospel of John clearly focuses on the person, work, and identity of Jesus Christ. John intends to clarify and affirm exactly who the Messiah/Christ/Son of God really was and why he came. For John, the answer is evident: Jesus Christ is the physical manifestation of God, and he came to be crucified.

The thesis statement of the Fourth Gospel appears at the close of the opening prologue: “the one and only Son, who is himself God” has “made him [the Father] known” (1:18). John demonstrates this by affirming that what God is, the Word is (1:1); what the Father does, the Son does (5:19); the Son and the Father are one (10:30); the Son speaks what the Father has told him (8:28; 12:49; 14:10); and the Son is in the Father, and the Father is in the Son (14:10–11). The climactic statement, then, is Jesus’ proclamation: “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (14:9).

Several proposals have set forth various secondary intentions for the Gospel of John. Many of these have some measure of legitimacy, though it is difficult to establish any of them as forthright in the mind of John. For example, it has been suggested that the Fourth Gospel was written to combat a growing form of gnosticism. Although this Gospel has traces of evidence that support this contention, and there is even some external evidence in its favor, it is difficult to establish that this was an explicit intention of John. Gnosticism as a developed system did not arise until the second century. Others have argued that this Gospel was written as an anti-Jewish polemic. A close reading, however, suggests that this was not one of John’s purposes. Perhaps the most plausible secondary proposition is that John’s Gospel was written to complement the Synoptic Gospels.

John and the Synoptics

The relationship between John and the Synoptics is essential for our understanding of the Fourth Gospel. That John is independent from the Synoptics is evident in that the Fourth Gospel has a detailed knowledge of events beyond those recorded in the Synoptics. John knows of lengthy discourses after miracles (e.g., 6:26–58), a wedding in Cana (2:1–11), conversations with Nicodemus (3:1–21) and a Samaritan woman (4:7–37), repeated confrontations with the Jews (e.g., 8:12–59), the raising of Lazarus from death (11:1–44), and more. Nothing in chapters 3–5 is paralleled in the Synoptics; and of the material in chapters 1–5, only the ministry of John the Baptist and the cleansing of the temple are found in the Synoptics. Compared to the Synoptics, John has a distinct vocabulary (e.g., truth, witness, abide, love, believe, light, life).

Also in contrast to the Synoptics, John focuses on Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem, has Jesus beginning his ministry before the arrest of John the Baptist (3:22–24 [cf. Mark 1:14]), shows Jesus’ ministry being of longer duration than in the Synoptics, records no parables of Jesus and no transfiguration, and scarcely mentions the kingdom of God (3:3, 5; 18:36). Furthermore, John’s theology and explicit identification of Jesus with God are unique among the Gospels.

Despite the differences, however, the Gospel of John reflects significant parallels with the Synoptic accounts. John is aware of the Synoptic traditions regarding the Spirit’s anointing (1:32–33), John the Baptist (1:19–34; 3:22–36), the feeding of the five thousand (6:1–13), and Jesus’ walking on water (6:15–21). Furthermore, the Fourth Gospel seemingly intends to explain features that are obscure in the Synoptics. For example, why did the disciples follow Jesus when he came to them and said, “Follow me”? John explains that many of them were disciples of John the Baptist, and that they had met Jesus earlier (1:19–51). That Jesus had an extensive ministry in Judea explains why the Jerusalem authorities were so angry with Jesus and were plotting to kill him when he came into Jerusalem for the Passover. The central charge that Jesus taught against the temple (cf. Mark 14:58; 15:29) is also explained by John.

In all, it appears that John and his readers were aware of the Synoptics. John may even have been written to complement them and to explain aspects of the Synoptic accounts that were obscure. Thus, the parenthetical insertions in 3:24 and 11:2 may have been intended for readers who were familiar with the Gospel of Mark. Most significantly, John complements the Synoptics by presenting the significance of the person of Jesus beyond what is found in the Synoptics.

Jesus in the Gospel of John

The most significant feature of John is its high Christology. John intends to specify precisely the person and identity of Christ. The equating of Jesus with God undergirds the entire Fourth Gospel. In no other Gospel is Jesus so clearly identified as God. The Gospel begins with the affirmation that the Word was in the beginning with God, and “the Word was God” (1:1). Later, Thomas confesses Jesus as “my Lord and my God” (20:28).

John, however, identifies Jesus with a wide variety of titles and designations. He is the Word (1:1, 14), the one and only God (1:18), the one and only Son (3:16, 18), the Son of God (1:34, 49; 11:27; 20:31), the Son of Man (3:13–14; 5:19–27), the teacher from God (3:2), the prophet (4:19; 6:14; 7:40; 9:17), the Messiah (1:41; 4:29; 11:27; 20:31), the King of Israel (1:49; 6:15; 12:13), the King of the Jews (19:19), the Holy One of God (6:69), the Lamb of God (1:29, 36), the coming one (11:27; 12:13), the sent one of God (3:16–17, 34; 5:30; 7:16–18; 10:36), the I Am (see below), Paraclete (14:16), rabbi (20:16), Lord (6:68; 20:18; 21:7), and Lord and God (20:28).

Perhaps the most significant title applied to Jesus is the identification of him with the divine name for God: “I Am” (Gk. egō eimi [cf. Exod. 3:14]). John employs this designation for Jesus to buttress his claims that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s role. On seven occasions, the “I am” is followed by a predicate: bread of life (6:35); light of the world (8:12); gate (10:9); good shepherd (10:11, 14); resurrection and the life (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); true vine (15:1, 5).

John also employs the phrase “I am” in an absolute construction (i.e., without a predicate) in parallel to use in the LXX as a title for God. On some of these occasions, John uses the absolute construction as a common means of identification (18:5–8). Most intriguing, however, is John’s employment of this designation in the extended dialogue with the Jewish authorities (8:24, 28, 58). In 8:24, 28 the sense seems incomplete, and the form is more a title. This becomes explicit only when compared with the final and most significant use of this title in 8:58. On this occasion, Jesus’ intent is not missed, and the Jews respond with the desire to stone him for blasphemy (8:59).

The Old Testament in the Gospel of John

The Gospel of John has only fourteen direct references to the OT, fewer than any of the Synoptics. Nonetheless, one of the key features of John’s portrait of Jesus is Jesus’ fulfillment of the OT not just as the Messiah but also in terms of the institutions, symbols, and festivals of Judaism. In Jesus “the old has gone, the new is here” (2 Cor. 5:17). Thus, in John’s Gospel the old purifications are replaced with the new wine (2:1–11), the old temple with the new temple (2:12–25), the old birth with the new birth (3:1–21), the old water with the living water (4:7–15), and worship in Jerusalem and Gerizim with worship “in the Spirit and in truth” (4:20–24). Often Jesus’ activities are dated in relation to a feast. Throughout chapters 5–10, John affirms that Jesus has fulfilled and replaced the Jewish festivals—Sabbath: related to work (5:1–47); Feast of Passover: bread (6:1–71); Feast of Tabernacles: water and light (7:1–9:41); Feast of Dedication: temple (10:22–39).

Also, John builds upon a typological emphasis of Jesus. He is the true temple (2:21), the antitype of the bronze serpent (3:14), the true manna (6:32–35), the true water-giving rock (7:37), and the new Torah (13:34). Thus, the entire Gospel is framed around Jesus’ visits to Jerusalem, where John presents Jesus as the fulfillment of Israel’s hope and central to the life of the nation. Furthermore, this Gospel is replete with references to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses. Despite the relative lack of OT citations, the message of the OT is interwoven into the substructure of the Fourth Gospel.

Symbols and the Gospel of John

Closely related to understanding the Gospel of John and the OT is the manner in which John utilizes symbols to convey his message. For example, water often signifies life, cleansing, refreshment, renewal, the newness that Jesus ushers in, and ultimately the life-giving Spirit. Thus, Nicodemus must be reborn in water and the Spirit (3:5). Jesus turns water into wine (2:8) and promises living water to the woman at the well (4:10).

John also sees in Jesus’ miracles a greater significance than appears from the physical phenomena. Thus, he uses the designation “signs” (see, e.g., 2:11) to reference the miracles of Jesus. By means of this designation, John focuses on the significance of the miracle and not merely the power of Jesus. John informs us that the signs of Jesus are christological; they signify who he is, not merely what he does. For example, from Jesus’ multiplying of the bread we learn that he is the giver of eternal life and the source of our sustenance (6:26–27).

Irony and Misunderstanding in John

Another key to understanding the Gospel of John is found in its use of irony and misunderstanding. Irony is a literary technique evidenced in John in instances in which opponents of Jesus make statements about him that are derogatory, sarcastic, and so forth and yet are more true or meaningful than they suppose. John presents such statements but leaves them unanswered, supposing that his audience will see the deeper truth. For example, many of the Jews missed the very Messiah they were looking for (1:11, 45; 5:39–40); they claim to know where Jesus is from (7:27), and yet they refuse to accept the truth that he is from God (7:28). The most famous use of irony appears in Pilate’s famed “Here is the man!” (19:5).

Misunderstandings are occasions when Jesus makes a remark that is ambiguous or metaphorical and his partner in conversation responds by taking the remark literally, thus showing that the spiritual meaning has eluded that person. John then explains to his readers the true meaning. John uses this technique to bring his readers to a greater knowledge of who Jesus is: God in flesh. Examples of misunderstandings are found in 2:19–21; 3:3–5; 4:10–15, 31–34; 6:32–35, 51–53; 7:33–36; 8:21–22, 31–35, 56–58; 11:11–15, 23–25; 12:32–34; 13:36–38; 14:4–6, 7–9; 16:16–19.

Anti-Semitism in John?

The contention that John displays an anti-Semitic agenda in which the burden for the crucifixion of Jesus is placed on the Jewish people results from a misreading of the Fourth Gospel. A thorough reading of John confirms that the designation “Jews” often reflects the generic term “Israelites.” The term “Jew” is used in a neutral sense in 4:22 (salvation is from the Jews); 8:31; 11:45; 12:11 (many Jews believed); and 2:13; 5:1; 6:4 (feast of the Jews). When the designation “Jew” appears in a negative sense in John, it refers particularly to the Jewish leaders and authorities (7:13; 9:22; 19:38; 20:19). Consequently, John’s use of the term is not based on an inherent degradation of the people, but instead reflects the historical reality of Jesus’ confrontation with Jewish authorities.

That John does not place all the blame on the Jews in an effort to exonerate the Romans is also evident from the fact that Pilate is portrayed as one who disregards justice. He has an innocent man beaten and crucified (“I find no basis for a charge against him” [19:6]). John does not record this cry from the Jewish people: “His blood be on us and on our children” (Matt. 27:25 ESV, NRSV). Consequently, the charge of anti-Semitism in the Gospel of John is unfounded.

Theme

The Gospel of Luke has been traditionally known as the Gospel that portrays Jesus as the perfect man who came to bring salvation to all humanity (2:32; 3:6; 4:25–27; 9:54; 24:47). This thematic focus is captured in the frequent use of the words “gospel” or “good news” (1:19; 2:10; 3:18; 4:18, 43; 7:22; 8:1; 9:6; 16:16; 20:1) and “salvation” (1:69, 71, 77; 3:6; 19:9). By way of contrast, the word “salvation” does not appear in either the Gospel of Matthew or the Gospel of Mark. The author aptly summarizes the focus of the third Gospel in Luke 19:10: “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”

Authorship, Recipient(s), Date

The author of this Gospel also penned the book of Acts (cf. Luke 1:1–4; Acts 1:1–3). These two books comprise almost one-third of the NT. Luke is not directly named as the author of this Gospel, but the early church attributed it as well as the book of Acts to him. The author of Acts included himself in the “we” passages of that book (Acts 16:10–17; 20:5–15; 21:1–18; 27:1–28:16). According to these passages, the narrator was a companion of Paul. This harmonizes with other Scriptures in which Paul identified Luke as one of his coworkers (Col. 4:14; 2 Tim. 4:11; Philem. 24). Luke accompanied Paul on part of his second missionary journey (Acts 16:10–17) and on his journey to Rome when the apostle experienced shipwreck on the island of Malta (Acts 27–28). Even after some of the other missionaries deserted Paul, Luke remained at his side to minister to his needs (2 Tim. 4:11). Apparently, Luke was a Gentile physician (Col. 4:14). This would explain why he described sicknesses with such precision.

Luke addressed his Gospel to Theophilus, who possibly was a patron or government official and undoubtedly a believer and follower of Christ. His name means “lover of God.” Although Theophilus was the immediate recipient, Luke no doubt had a larger audience in view.

The dating of the Gospel of Luke is contingent upon the date ascribed to the book of Acts, which was written after the Gospel account (cf. Luke 1:1–4; Acts 1:1). In his Gospel, Luke portrays the destruction of Jerusalem as a future event (Luke 21). This implies that the Gospel was written before AD 70. In addition, Acts was written probably before the death of Paul, since the apostle was still alive in Rome at the end of that account (Acts 28:30). It is traditionally held that Paul was executed during his second imprisonment in Rome around AD 67 (2 Tim. 4:6). Leaving time for Paul’s travels and ministry between his first and second Roman imprisonments would place the writing of Acts around AD 63. While Paul was a prisoner in Caesarea, Luke would have had a two-year period to interview witnesses and research sources in order to write his former account (Acts 24:27). This would place the authorship of the Gospel of Luke around AD 60 in either Caesarea or Rome.

Purpose

Luke is unique among the Gospel writers in declaring his purpose at the outset of his writing. He informs his readers that he has used several sources available to him when composing his Gospel. These sources were written by “eyewitnesses and servants of the word” and were already being handed down to others (1:2). Luke maintains that he investigated these sources thoroughly and gleaned from them the information that he then put into an “orderly account” (1:3). Luke’s purpose was to instruct Theophilus about the “certainty” of the events that surrounded the life and ministry of Jesus the Messiah (1:4). The chronological data provided in 1:1–4; 2:1; 3:1–2 reinforce this purpose.

Beyond his specific instructions to Theophilus, the content of this Gospel reveals that Luke had a universal audience in mind. Although his audience likely included Jews, he appears to be writing primarily for Gentiles (2:32; 3:6; 4:25–27; 9:54; 24:47). The following observations make this clear: he explains the location and names of places that would have been common knowledge to the Jews (8:26; 21:37; 23:51; 24:13); he locates John’s ministry in the reign of the Roman caesar (1:5; 2:1); he uses words that Gentiles would understand, such as “teacher” instead of “master” or “rabbi” (3:12; 6:40; 7:40; 8:49; 9:38; 10:25; 11:45; 18:18; 19:39; 21:7; 22:11); he usually quotes from the LXX, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (2:23–24; 3:4–6; 4:4, 8, 10–12, 18–19; 10:27; 18:20; 19:46; 20:17, 28, 37, 42–43; 22:37). Luke seeks to show that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus are indeed the fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel, but the salvation that he has accomplished is for all people everywhere.

Luke’s Narrative

Jesus’ childhood. Scholars have praised Luke’s literary excellence, historical sensitivity, and social concern. Luke records more information about the birth and early years of Jesus than any of the other canonical Gospels. The account begins some four hundred years after the last events of the OT with the angel of the Lord announcing to Zechariah the birth of John the Baptist, the forerunner of the Messiah (1:11). Six months later the angel Gabriel announces to Mary the birth of Jesus, the heir to the throne of David who “will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever” and whose “kingdom will never end” (1:26, 31–33). Historically, Luke ties Jesus’ birth to the reign of Caesar Augustus and his ministry to the rule of Tiberius Caesar (2:1; 3:1). His interpretation of these events is that God has prepared salvation “in the sight of all nations” (2:30–31) and “all people will see God’s salvation” (3:6). In these early chapters the narrator links Christ’s humanity and his salvation purpose all the way back to Adam (3:23–38). Yet the humanity of Jesus is carefully balanced with his deity. The term “Lord” is used nineteen times in reference to God at the beginning of the Gospel, but it is also applied to Christ in 2:11. In Gabriel’s announcement to Mary, the child is called “the Son of the Most High” (1:32). He was recognized as such also by demons (4:34, 41; 8:28), by Jesus himself (10:22; 22:70), and by God the Father (3:22; 9:35).

The writer also accentuates the ministry of the Holy Spirit by revealing that key characters such as John the Baptist, Mary, Elizabeth, Zechariah, Simeon, and Jesus were filled with the power of the Spirit (1:15, 35, 41, 67; 2:25–27; 3:16, 22; 4:1, 14, 18; 24:49).

Jesus’ ministry in Galilee. In chapters 4–9, Luke chronicles Jesus’ ministry in Galilee. His early miracles and ministry serve as messianic credentials that substantiate his authority and message, demonstrating that he is the Messiah and that in him the kingdom of God has drawn near (1:33; 4:40–43; 6:20; 7:28; 8:1, 10; 9:2, 11, 27, 60, 62). Prayer is a discipline that Jesus practices from the beginning of his ministry to the end (3:21; 5:16; 6:12; 9:18, 29; 22:32, 40–42). The Messiah’s initial popularity is countered by jealousy and growing opposition, especially from the religious establishment (4:28–30, 36–37; 5:15, 20–22, 26; 6:11; 7:16, 30, 39). In these early chapters, Jesus calls his disciples and begins to prepare them for the full implication of what it will mean to follow him (5:1–11, 27; 6:12–16).

Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. In 9:51–19:27, Luke records an extended account of Jesus’ journey toward Jerusalem from Galilee. This section contains several parables and narratives not found in any of the other Gospels. Throughout this section the narratives, miracles, and parables point to a Messiah who came expressly to seek out and save the lost, especially the disadvantaged, the underprivileged, and those outside the Jewish establishment, such as the Samaritans, women, children, notorious sinners, and the poor. Luke records more about Jesus’ view of money and material things than any other book of the NT. Joy and salvation characterize the ministry of the Messiah (1:14; 8:13; 10:17, 21; 13:17; 15:5, 9, 32; 17:15–16; 19:37). But the establishment in Israel, particularly the Pharisees, rejects his claims (4:28–29; 5:21–24, 30; 6:7–11; 7:30, 39; 8:36–37; 9:7–9, 53; 10:25, 29; 11:15–16, 37–53; 13:31; 14:1; 15:1; 16:14). As this rejection and opposition increase, he begins to reveal to his followers his coming death and calls them to an ever-increasing commitment to his purpose and person (9:22–26, 57–62; 10:1–3; 14:25–35).

Jesus’ death and resurrection. Once Jesus reaches Jerusalem, the stage is set for the official presentation of the king to the nation (19:28–44). But rather than joyfully accepting the Messiah, the nation’s leaders hotly contest his claims (19:39; 20:1–2, 19, 20, 27). Jesus weeps over the city (19:41) and announces its future judgment and his future coming in glory (21:6–36). Luke brings his narrative of Jesus’ ministry to a close by recording the events that lead up to the death of the Messiah: the betrayal by Judas (2:1–6), the Last Supper (22:7–23), Jesus’ arrest (22:47–53), the denial by Peter (22:54–62), Jesus’ crucifixion, and finally his death and burial (23:26–56). However, this unjust and tragic end is trumped by Jesus’ glorious resurrection (24:1–12). Luke alone records the postresurrection conversation on the Emmaus road, where Jesus reveals himself to the two disciples and subsequently explains his victory over death (24:25–26, 45–49). The account closes with the Messiah’s ascension into heaven (24:50–53), preparing the reader for the sequel that continues in the book of Acts (Acts 1:1–5).

Outline

I. The Prologue (1:1–4)

II. The Birth and Childhood of Jesus Christ (1:5–2:52)

III. John Prepares the Way for Christ (3:1–4:13)

IV. The Ministry of the Son of Man in Galilee (4:14–9:50)

V. The Son of Man Faces Rejection on His Way to Jerusalem (9:51–19:27)

VI. The Ministry of the Son of Man in Jerusalem (19:28–21:38)

VII. The Passion of the Son of Man (22:1–23:56)

VIII. The Resurrection of the Son of Man (24:1–53)

Mark’s Gospel is a fast-paced, action-packed narrative that portrays Jesus as the mighty Messiah and Son of God, who suffers and dies as the servant of the Lord—a ransom price for sins. Mark’s purpose is to provide an authoritative account of the “good news” about Jesus Christ and to encourage believers to follow Jesus’ example by remaining faithful to their calling through persecution and even martyrdom. A theme verse is Mark 10:45: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Narrative Structure (Plot) and Main Themes

Mark’s narrative may be divided into two main parts. The first half of the story demonstrates that Jesus is the mighty Messiah and Son of God (1:1–8:26); the second half reveals that the Messiah’s role is to suffer and die as a sacrifice for sins (8:27–16:8).

Messiah and Son of God. Unlike Matthew and Luke, Mark does not begin with stories of Jesus’ birth but instead moves directly to his public ministry. As in the other Gospels, John the Baptist is the “messenger” who prepares the way for the Messiah (cf. Isa. 40:3; Mal. 3:1). John preaches a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins and announces the “more powerful” one, the Messiah, who will come after him (1:7). When Jesus is baptized by John, the Spirit descends on him, empowering him for ministry. After his temptation (or testing) by Satan in the desert, Jesus returns to Galilee and launches his ministry, proclaiming the “good news” (gospel) that “the time has come. . . . The kingdom of God has come near” (1:15).

During his Galilean ministry, Jesus demonstrates extraordinary authority in teaching, healing, and exorcism. He calls fishermen from their occupation, and they drop everything and follow him (1:16–20). He claims authority to forgive sins (2:10) and authority over the Sabbath command (2:28). He reveals power over natural forces, calming the sea (4:35–41), walking on water (6:45–52), and feeding huge crowds with a few loaves and fishes (6:30–44; 8:1–13). The people stand “amazed” and “astonished” (a major theme in Mark) at Jesus’ teaching and miracles, and his popularity soars.

Jesus’ authority and acclaim provoke opposition from the religious leaders of Israel, who are jealous of his influence. The scribes and Pharisees accuse him of claiming the prerogative of God (2:7), associating with undesirable sinners (2:16), breaking the Sabbath (2:24), and casting out demons by Satan’s powers (3:22). They conspire to kill him (3:6).

A sense of mystery and awe surrounds Jesus’ identity. When he calms the sea, the disciples wonder, “Who is this?” (4:41), and King Herod wonders if this might be John the Baptist risen from the dead (6:16). Adding to this sense of mystery is what has come to be called the “messianic secret.” Jesus silences demons who identify him as the Messiah and orders those he heals not to tell anyone what has happened. This secrecy is not, as some have claimed, a literary device invented by Mark to explain Jesus’ unmessianic life; rather, it is Jesus’ attempt to calm inappropriate messianic expectations and to define his messianic mission on his own terms.

Messiah’s role to suffer and die. The critical turning point in the narrative comes in 8:27–33, when Peter, as representative of the disciples, declares that Jesus is the Messiah. The authority that Jesus has demonstrated up to this point confirms that he is God’s agent of salvation. Yet Jesus startles the disciples by announcing that his messianic task is to go to Jerusalem to suffer and die. Peter rebukes him, but Jesus responds, “Get behind me, Satan! . . . You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns” (8:33). Jesus will accomplish salvation not by crushing the Roman occupiers, but by offering his life as a sacrifice for sins.

In the second half of the Gospel, Jesus journeys to Jerusalem, three times predicting that he will be arrested and killed (8:31–32; 9:31; 10:33–34). The disciples repeatedly demonstrate pride, ignorance, and spiritual dullness (8:33; 9:32–34; 10:35–41), and Jesus teaches them that whoever wants to be first must become last (9:35); that to lead, one must serve (10:45); and that to be Jesus’ disciple requires taking up one’s cross and following him (8:34).

When he comes to Jerusalem, Jesus symbolically judges the nation by clearing the temple of merchants (11:15–17) and by cursing a fig tree (representing Israel), which subsequently withers (11:12–14, 20–21). He engages in controversies with the religious leaders (chaps. 11–12) and teaches the disciples that Jerusalem and the temple will be destroyed (chap. 13). Judas Iscariot, one of Jesus’ own disciples, betrays him. Jesus is arrested and brought to trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin, which finds him guilty of blasphemy. That council turns Jesus over to the Roman governor Pilate, who accedes to his crucifixion (chaps. 14–15).

The crucifixion scene in Mark is a dark and lonely one. Jesus is deserted by his followers, unjustly condemned, beaten by the soldiers, and mocked by all. Apparently deserted even by God, Jesus cries out from the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (15:34). Yet the reader knows by this point in the story that Jesus’ death is not the tragedy that it seems. This is God’s means of accomplishing salvation. Upon Jesus’ death, the curtain of the temple is torn, opening a new way into God’s presence. The Roman centurion at the cross cries out, “Surely this man was the Son of God!” (15:39). The death of the Messiah is not a defeat; it is an atoning sacrifice for sins. Three days later Jesus rises from the dead, just as he has predicted. When Jesus’ women followers come to the tomb, the angel announces, “He has risen! He is not here” (16:6). Jesus the Messiah has turned tragedy into victory and has defeated sin, Satan, and death.

Literary Features

Mark writes with a rough Semitic style characterized by colorful detail and dramatic effect. He emphasizes Jesus’ actions rather than extended teaching. For its length, Mark’s Gospel records more miracles and less teaching than the other Gospels. The author’s fondness for the term “immediately” (euthys) and use of the Greek historical present tense give the narrative a fast-paced, vivid, and realistic style.

One of Mark’s favorite literary techniques is intercalation, a sandwiching method whereby one episode is interrupted by another, with the two mutually interpreting each other. One example of this is the clearing of the temple, which is sandwiched between the cursing and withering of the fig tree (11:12–25). Both episodes symbolically represent Israel’s spiritual failure and coming judgment. Other intercalations appear in 3:20–35; 5:21–43; 6:7–30; 14:53–72.

Mark is also fond of groups of three, or triads. Three boat scenes illustrate the disciples’ lack of faith and comprehension (4:35–41; 6:45–52; 8:14–21). In three cycles of events, Jesus predicts his death and then teaches his disciples about servant leadership (8:31–38; 9:31–37; 10:32–45). In the Olivet Discourse, Jesus three times tells his disciples to be alert (13:33, 35, 37), and then three times he finds them sleeping in Gethsemane (14:37, 40, 41). Peter denies Jesus three times (14:68, 70, 71), and three three-hour intervals are mentioned during the crucifixion (15:25, 33, 34). These and other literary devices provide color to Mark’s narrative and carry the story forward.

Authorship

Early church tradition identifies the author of this Gospel as John Mark, son of Mary (Acts 12:12), cousin of Barnabas (Col. 4:10), missionary companion of Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13:5), and later companion of Peter (1 Pet. 5:13). Church tradition claims that Mark became Peter’s interpreter while working with him in Rome and put into writing Peter’s version of the Gospel.

Most scholars consider Mark to have been the first Gospel written and think that Matthew and Luke both used Mark as one of their sources.

Audience, Life Setting, and Date

The specific audience of Mark’s Gospel is uncertain, although the author’s tendency to explain Jewish customs and terms suggests a primarily non-Jewish (Gentile) readership. Mark also sometimes provides Latin equivalents for Greek terms. This would agree with the church tradition that the Gospel was composed by John Mark in Rome and was intended for the Roman church.

A Roman setting and destination also fit well with the theme of faithfulness through suffering that runs through Mark’s story. Many scholars place the origin of Mark’s Gospel in Rome in the mid-60s AD, in the context of the emperor Nero’s persecution of Christians. Mark writes to encourage his readers to endure suffering for the gospel, to take up their crosses and follow Jesus, for “even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45).

Outline

I. The Preparation of the Son of God (1:1–13)

II. The Authoritative Ministry of the Son of God in and around Galilee (1:14–8:26)

A. The kingdom authority of the Son of God (1:14–3:12)

B. The disciple family of the Son of God and those outside (3:13–6:6)

C. The mission of the Son of God (6:7–8:26)

III. The Suffering of the Son of God as Servant of the Lord (8:27–16:8)

A. The confession of Peter and the servant Messiah (8:27–10:52)

B. The Son of God confronts Jerusalem (11:1–13:37)

C. Climax: The death of the Son of God (14:1–15:47)

D. Resolution: The resurrection of the Son of God (16:1–8)

E. Appendix (16:9–20)

Author

Although strictly anonymous, the first Gospel has always been known as “according to Matthew,” and no evidence exists that it ever circulated without this name. The author is traditionally the apostle Matthew, a former tax collector (9:9). Mark (2:14) and Luke (5:27) identify him as “Levi,” probably his earlier name. This may be further established by the noticeable references to money in the first Gospel: the parables of the unmerciful servant (18:23) and of the daily pay of workers (20:1), the bribe paid to the guards at the tomb to get them to lie (28:12), and Judas’s return of the thirty silver coins (27:5). These stories, unique to Matthew, relate the morality of money in an unequivocal way, indicating Matthew’s own interests from his former life.

Matthew’s Gospel appears first in almost every extant witness to the NT, and it was considered the preeminent Gospel by the early church. It is the Gospel most quoted by the early church fathers. Of the four Gospels, Matthew’s is most oriented toward a Jewish audience.

Sources

A cursory reading of the Gospels reveals that the first three, Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the Synoptic Gospels), share much of the same material. Yet each has its own collection and order of events, reflecting its own theological emphasis. This is quite to our benefit: by examining the differences between the three Gospels, not only do we see different facets of Jesus, but also we can discern and filter the idiosyncrasies of each writer. If Matthew records an event later in his Gospel, there must be a reason consistent with his purposes.

Most current research holds that Mark was written first and provided material for both Matthew and Luke. Matthew tends to smooth out the “rough” Greek of Mark; he also compresses many of the stories, and in a few places he “fixes” passages in Mark that might have seemed unclear or offensive. Material from Mark used by Matthew is generally narrative of Jesus’ life.

Matthew and Luke also contain similar material not found in Mark, the so-called Q material (“Q” is from the German Quelle, which means “source”). No Q document is extant. If it ever existed, it may represent an oral tradition. The Q material in Matthew has strong ethical content, such as the Sermon on the Mount, many of the parables, and the Olivet Discourse. Additionally, Matthew and Luke contain material unique to their own Gospels: M in Matthew, L in Luke. The M material includes the birth and infancy narratives, some of the stories surrounding Jesus’ death and resurrection, and a few of the parables.

The use of Mark (not an apostle) by the apostle Matthew is not as surprising as it may seem. Papias reported that Mark wrote the reminiscences of Peter, a member of Jesus’ inner circle and the leader of the apostolic group. Surely Matthew would have no problem using Mark’s Gospel as a starting point for his own.

Date

Dating the Gospels is difficult. If Matthew borrowed from Mark, then the date of Mark and how long it would have taken to circulate to Matthew are important in the discussion. The first convincing use of Matthew by an external author is Ignatius, early in the second century. This places Matthew in the period between the early 60s to the early 90s.

Internal evidence includes, as in most NT literature dating, Matthew’s relationship to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. If Matthew wrote after this date, we might expect to see this reflected in some passages, especially in the Olivet Discourse, Jesus’ prophecy of the Jewish war. The mention of a city being burned in retribution in 22:7 is casual enough to suggest that Matthew did not know of this happening to Jerusalem. There also are many references to the temple that might have merited a mention of its subsequent loss.

The mention of the temple tax in 17:24 is important. Before AD 70, paying the tax supported the Jewish temple and showed solidarity with Israel. After AD 70, the revenue was diverted to the temple of Jupiter in Rome. Jews were required to continue paying under duress and considered it support of idolatry. Had this been Matthew’s world, he likely would have explained this critical point to his readers.

Arguments for a late date include references to the church (Matthew alone among the Gospel writers uses the term ekklēsia), possibly indicating an interest in church order that developed later; historical tensions between the church and the Jews, which only peaked in AD 85; and thoughts of a later date for Mark. For some, Matthew’s account of Jesus’ predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem is so vivid that it would have to have been written afterward. Many consider the theology of Matthew so sophisticated that it would require a later date.

External evidence includes the early church tradition that Matthew was written early, though part of this thinking is that Matthew was written first of the Synoptics. Still, an early date for Matthew seems the best, though the evidence is far from conclusive.

Structure

Matthew’s literary pointers do not necessarily align with his themes, making for a rich, complex structure that is hard to outline. The following are some of the structures that scholars have proposed.

By discourse. Matthew has five clear sections of Jesus’ discourses, set apart by a concluding phrase along the lines of “when Jesus had finished saying these things” (7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1). The five discourses alternate with related narratives of Jesus’ deeds. These discourses should not be thought of as intact, recorded sermons; they are compilations of Jesus’ teachings assembled by Matthew. The parallels in the other Gospels of this material differ: some of it is together as Matthew has it, but much of it is scattered in the other accounts. Matthew organized his material into types of stories and types of ministry by Jesus. Early on, Jesus is the ethical teacher; later, he is the stern lecturer warning Israel of impending judgment.

By story line. Another proposed structure concerns the story line of the Gospel. Matthew twice uses the concluding phrase “from that time on Jesus began to . . .” (4:17; 16:21). But these two instances, particularly 16:21, are in the middle of the narrative line and cannot be thought of as major literary structural markers. It is likely that Matthew uses this phrase to notify his readers of a new phase of the story, and possibly of a new approach in ministry by Jesus.

By geography. This concept revolves around the geography and movement of Jesus from his birth, through the ministry in Galilee, around Galilee, and to Jerusalem.

Outline

The following outline offers a thematic organization of Matthew’s Gospel:

I. The Miraculous Beginnings of Jesus (1:1–4:11)

II. Ethical Teachings and Miracles (4:12–10:42)

III. Confrontation and Reactions (11:1–16:20)

IV. The Messiah Must Suffer (16:21–20:28)

V. Jesus Claims Authority and Receives Praise (20:29–25:46)

VI. The Death of Jesus (26:1–27:66)

VII. The Resurrection of Jesus (28:1–28:20)

I. The miraculous beginnings of Jesus (1:1–4:11). Jesus’ genealogy and childhood show him to be the fulfillment of OT prophecy. His baptism demonstrates this fulfillment; his forty days of testing in the desert identify him with Israel.

II. Ethical teachings and miracles (4:12–10:42). This section begins with a geographical change, as Jesus returns to Galilee. Having instructed his disciples, he sends them out as an extension of his own mission.

III. Confrontation and reactions (11:1–16:20). This section also involves a change of geography. Jesus first is questioned by John’s disciples, then by the Pharisees, and finally by the people in his own town. The questions are resolved by Peter’s confession.

IV. The messiah must suffer (16:21–20:28). This is the third section that begins “from that time on Jesus began to. . . .” Jesus explains to his disciples that he will die at the hands of the Jews but be raised on the third day. This section includes the transfiguration and many parables concerning judgment and reward. The climax is at the end, when Jesus declares that he has come “to give his life as a ransom for many.”

V. Jesus claims authority and receives praise (20:29–25:46). Another geographical shift occurs, as Jesus and his disciples leave Jericho. Jesus acknowledges the title “Lord, Son of David,” cleanses the temple, and argues with the Pharisees about the source of his authority. The parables concern sonship and responses to authority. The Pharisees try to entrap Jesus. Jesus teaches about authority, then rebukes the Pharisees. Chapter 24 describes the consequences of the ultimate rejection of authority. The climax is the parable of the sheep and the goats.

VI. The death of Jesus (26:1–27:66). Matthew’s Gospel has built-in intensity up to the passion narrative. This section builds again within itself, from the anointing of Jesus in Bethany to the hush as the tomb is closed and sealed.

VII. The resurrection of Jesus (28:1–28:20). The accounts of the resurrection and postresurrection appearances are brief but significant and contain several details not found in the other Synoptics.

The Unique Contributions of Matthew

Among the unique contributions of Matthew are his genealogy of Jesus (which differs significantly from Luke’s); the birth/infancy narrative of 1:18–2:23, which includes the rec-ord of the angel appearing to Joseph, the magi from the East, the slaughter of the innocents, and the flight to Egypt; the Great Commission, where Jesus commands his followers to “go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (28:19); and the Sermon on the Mount (chaps. 5–7), the largest block of the teachings of Jesus in the NT (Matthew contains large blocks of Jesus’ teaching in the other discourses as well).

Use of the Old Testament

Matthew’s use of the OT is remarkable. Matthew is concerned with showing Jesus as the fulfillment of the OT and God’s salvation history. This can be seen in the so-called fulfillment quotations (1:22–23; 2:15, 17–18, 23; 4:14–16; 8:17; 12:17–21; 13:35; 21:4–5; 27:9–10; see also 2:5–6; 13:14; 26:54, 56, and 3:3; 22:31–32) as well as in the narrative portions of the book, particularly in the sweeping statement of 26:56: “This has all taken place that the writings of the prophets might be fulfilled.”

Matthew immediately appeals to the OT in recounting the genealogy of Jesus. He divides the history of Israel into three eras: the first culminates in David, the second with the exile—clearly two of the most significant turning points in Israel’s history—the third in Jesus, the Christ.

The quote “Out of Egypt I called my son” (2:15), from Hos. 11:1, is an excellent example of Matthew’s commitment to fulfillment. The passage in Hosea clearly is not looking forward to this verse, but Matthew employs this short sentence to identify Jesus as the fulfillment of Israel and uses the return from Egypt of the holy family to illustrate the parallels in Jesus’ life with the experience of the Jews. Matthew’s use of the OT here, and in general, follows ancient, particularly Jewish, interpretive conventions.

Matthew contains a number of OT quotations not found in the other Synoptics. These appear generally as asides from Matthew himself—his own reflections, as it were, not the words of Jesus. Matthew clearly sees the relationship between Jesus and the OT in both directions: Jesus is the total fulfillment of the OT, and the OT is deeply concerned with pointing the way to Jesus.

Matthew then applies OT passages to the life of Jesus: Jesus is the virgin’s son in Isa. 7:14 (Matt. 1:22–23), the one coming from Bethlehem to rule over Israel in Mic. 5:2 (Matt. 2:5–6), and the son called out of Egypt in Hos. 11:1 (Matt. 2:15); the slaughter of infants reflects the fall of Judah seen in Jer. 31:15 (Matt. 2:17–18); and Jesus is the great light on Zebulun and Naphtali of Isa. 9:1–2 (Matt. 4:13–16).

Jesus’ Relationship to Jewish Leaders

Matthew’s Gospel is almost universally negative toward the religious leaders, even where parallel passages do not reflect this antagonism (compare Matt. 23:37 with Luke 13:31). Matthew records many groups of leaders: teachers of the law (scribes), Pharisees, Sadducees, chief priests, and elders; he often combines terms, “scribes and Pharisees” being his favorite combination. Matthew portrays the Pharisees as the most hostile to Jesus, identifying them as a “brood of vipers” (3:7).

Yet, the Gospel of Matthew is far from being an anti-Jewish work. Jesus is the fulfillment of the OT; he was sent “only to the lost sheep of Israel” (15:24); people praise the God of Israel for his healing demonstrations. Matthew’s point is that it is Israel’s leaders and those who reject their Messiah who are bringing judgment upon themselves.

This brutal practice effectively ended a person’s military career, even if only performed on one eye (1 Sam. 11:2; cf. 4Q51 10; Josephus, Ant. 6.71). It could also be punitive (2 Kings 25:7; 4 Macc. 5:30). The loss of both eyes made one a dependent or slave, since only the simplest work could be done (so with Samson [Judg. 16:21]). Eye gouging also refers figuratively to either enslaving or deceiving someone (Num. 16:14) and to the severe measures to take against one’s own sin (Matt. 5:29; 18:9).

A hard-skinned fruit related to melons, cucumbers, and squash. When Elisha instructed his servant to make stew, one of the prophets unknowingly gathered poisonous gourds, which were cut up and added to the mix. After the mistake was discovered, Elisha threw meal into the pot so that it would not poison those who ate it (2 Kings 4:38–41). In the story of Jonah, although some versions follow the LXX by calling it a “gourd” (Gk. kolokynthē), the miraculous shade plant that he encountered after he left Nineveh probably was a castor-oil plant, which can quickly grow to five or ten feet (Jon. 4:6, 9). In Solomon’s temple ornamental gourds were carved into the cedar paneling and the bronze sea (1 Kings 6:18; 7:24).

The term “government” may refer to the philosophy that shapes a nation or people’s institutions, customs, and laws or, more specifically, to actual offices and structures to enact this philosophy. Generally speaking, government serves to bring order and direction to a people. This can be accomplished through the rule of one, or a few, or many. As a constituent portion of bringing order, some sort of entity for enforcement and protection must be created. This usually takes the form of a military or police force.

The biblical worldview emphasizes the rule of God over everything, inherent in his position as the Creator. Since, however, God did imbue humanity with authority over creation and with the capacity for relationship, his government can find expression in the actions and decisions of human beings (1 Sam. 8:7–9; Rom. 13:1–4). The successful ruler will be the individual who understands his or her place before God and who desires to lead God’s people with humility and justice (1 Kings 3:7–9).

Before the Monarchy

Clan. The earliest forms of governmental relations apparently were in the extended family or clan. The progenitor of the clan normally was the patriarch, who led several families, all of which were to some degree related to him. The patriarch was responsible for land allotments and maintenance of the family’s spiritual life and well-being (Gen. 13:8–9; 31:22–35; Job 1:4–5). He was responsible for forming contractual agreements under which the family functioned, in relation both to land acquisitions and to marriages (Gen. 21:22–34; 24:1–11; 26:26–33). He alone decided to whom the patriarchy passed when he died, and his power was almost absolute (Gen. 27), though there is some indication that God desired a husband’s first responsibility to be to his spouse rather than to his father (Gen. 2:24).

Tribe. Beyond the clan, the next larger societal unit was the tribe. Although tribes were for the most part still related genetically, the distance of the relationship permitted the inclusion of persons from outside the family. This may have been the case with Caleb, who is identified both as a member of the tribe of Judah (Num. 13:6) and as a descendant of the Kenizzites, who were Edomites (Gen. 36:9–11; Num. 32:12). If modern nomadic tribes are any indication, the governmental structure of the related tribes was a type of confederation coming together for defensive purposes. The decisions would have been made by a group of elders from the various clans. Like the clan chief of the smaller structures, the tribal elders could make covenants and were responsible for keeping order in the tribe (Deut. 21:19; Ruth 4:1–12; 2 Sam. 5:3).

During the period following the exodus and before the time of the judges, Israel’s tribal structure was maintained, though with a single leader. The leadership of Moses and Joshua was in many ways a precursor to the offices of both judge and king. The men had considerable power, and opposition to their leadership often was dealt with harshly (Num. 12; 16). Yet, their rule was established through presence of the Spirit of God rather than physical lineage. The weight of leading such a large body of people had its difficulties, and it is related that Moses delegated some of his authority to judges who rendered decisions for the people (Exod. 18).

Judges. The period of the judges witnessed a devolution of sorts in the governmental structures of Israel. The relationship between the various tribes was somewhat strained, and it seems clear from the narrative that no judge ever led more than a handful of tribes. Although these judges were like Moses and Joshua in that they were imbued with power by the Spirit of God, their focus was almost solely military in nature, and the everyday aspects of governance seem to have been left to the individual tribes. There was little sense of ordered society, and lawlessness and anarchy seem to have been the order of the day. In two cases, those of Gideon and Abimelek, attempts were made to found petty kingdoms (Judg. 8:22–23, 30–31; 9:1–21). Similarly, Jephthah seems to have established a minor kingdom east of the Jordan, in Gilead (Judg. 11:6–11). However, these attempts were transitory in nature and lacked the stability that grows out of a unified identity. Indeed, one of the roles of the judges seems to have been to solidify the people’s resolve for permanent leadership in the form of a monarch, which they hoped would raise them to greatness and standing in the world (1 Sam. 8:1–6).

The Monarchy

The period of the monarchy represented a strong centralized government invested in the mind and decisions of a single man. The term “king” was applied symbolically to any great leader, but above all it was applied to God, to whom Israel’s throne rightfully belonged (1 Chron. 28:5; 29:23; Ps. 2). With the office of the king came a bureaucracy designed to increase efficiency, but which sometimes involved corruption.

Establishing the monarchy. The first ruler called “king” was Saul, son of Kish, though he is often referred to as a prince or a chieftain rather than a king (1 Sam. 13:13–14). It is difficult to say whether this related specifically to the level of office that he possessed or if it was a sort of disparaging comparison to David, who was viewed by the biblical writer as a true king. As king, David took possession of the great fortress of Jerusalem. In many ways, he combined the ecclesiastical and the military headship of the nation through the movement of the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem and the purchase of the threshing floor for the temple. Solomon attempted to further break down the old tribal divisions by dividing the whole country into administrative districts (1 Kings 4:7), not according to tribal divisions, but instead after the pattern established during the Egyptian hegemony of Canaan that had existed several centuries earlier. The kingdom was divided into two separate kingdoms at the death of Solomon, but for the people of God the monarchy had become the standard of government through which God ruled. This monarchial expectation found expression in the messianic hope of Israel (Ezek. 47).

The role of the king. The chief duty of the king was to act as the commander in chief of the army. With the establishment of a monarchy, the people gained a standing army that could be kept in the field for protection of the nation (1 Sam. 13:2). The king was also intimately connected with the religious organization of the people. He was considered a central component of the cult, so that major moments in his life were cause for worship (Pss. 2; 45; 110). It is certain that the king, especially after David, performed priestly functions. David wore an ephod (1 Chron. 15:27), and Solomon addressed the people in the temple (1 Kings 8:14). Indeed, the coronation itself identified the king as both priest and king (Ps. 110:4). The fact that Solomon built the temple and played a significant role in its dedication shows the intimate relation that the king had with the national sanctuary, which was attached to his palace. The king also served as judge (1 Kings 3:16–28; 7:7) over his people, and he determined the economic structures of the society, including taxes, monetary weights, and covenants with other nations. The king did not hold absolute authority, however, and like the rest of Israel, he was subject to the law (Deut. 17:14–20).

Successors and officers. Once the kingship had been established, the hereditary principle arose naturally. Saul’s son Ish-Bosheth maintained a small kingship of northern tribes for some time after Saul’s death (2 Sam. 2:8–10). Still, the king appears to have had the right to select which of his descendants would be his successor (1 Kings 1). When the decision was made, the people often proclaimed their satisfaction at the result (1 Kings 1:25; 2 Kings 14:21), and a ceremony of anointing took place. Sometimes the anointing was a private affair (2 Kings 9:6), but the presence of certain psalms related to the ceremony itself suggests that, generally speaking, it was a national event and time of worship (Ps. 2:2).

The bureaucracy that came with the king meant the installation of several new offices. The chief officer of the king was the commander of his army (2 Sam. 2:8; 8:16). Another high-ranking military officer was the captain of the bodyguard, who was not placed under the orders of the commander of the army (2 Sam. 8:18; 23:22–23). The king also had more domestic officers, such as the officer over the household (2 Kings 18:18), the court historian, the court secretary, various deputies and advisers, and the king’s friend (2 Sam. 8:16–18; 1 Kings 4:1–6).

Revenue. The means of sustaining the state varied by era and king. While it is true that the king had his own flocks and land (1 Sam. 8:15–17; 1 Chron. 27:25–28), he could also, depending on how strong he was, raise revenue through gifts from vassals (1 Kings 4:21; 10:25) and through the spoils of war (2 Chron. 27:5). Starting with the control and regulation of trade routes during the reign of Solomon, the king maintained a stream of revenue through taxation of merchants moving through the land and trade with other nations.

After the Exile

The period following the exile witnessed a transition in the government of Israel. Apart from a very short period from about 160 to 60 BC, Israel was under the control of foreign powers. These various empires ruled with a variety of methods, determined by their own philosophy of government.

Persian rule. The Persians established a rule based largely on a sort of benevolent dictatorship, though there are multiple accounts of vicious responses to any notion of rebellion from its vassals. In 539 BC Cyrus permitted the Jews to return from their captivity in Babylon to Jerusalem and showed them certain favors. One of his successors, Darius I (r. 522–486 BC), continued the liberal policy of Cyrus toward the Jews and played a major role in the rebuilding of the temple at Jerusalem (Ezra 5:13–17; 6:1–15). He also organized the Persian Empire to facilitate the easy collection of tribute from subject nations. He ultimately divided the kingdom into twenty provinces ruled by governors, a system maintained through the remainder of his dynastic line. Another important development during this period was the increase in power of the Jewish priesthood. With no Jewish monarchy in place, governmental power in Israel became concentrated in the office of the high priest.

Greek and Roman rule. Alexander the Great and his successors brought Hellenism into the Jewish experience. His acquisition of power was distinctly different because it was not simply a political one. Its cultural and spiritual influence was much more significant. The people were subjected to new language, art, thought, and philosophy. The struggle that ensued divided the Jewish population into competing groups, one dedicated to the preservation of the old ways and one more receptive to the Hellenistic life.

The coming of the Romans brought with it a more complex balance of power, with authority shifting between the high priest, vassal kings appointed by the Romans, and Roman governors called “prefects” and “procurators.” Among the kings of this period, Herod the Great was the most successful and important. Herod gained control of the region with the help of Augustus Caesar and Marc Antony, being invested with the office by the Roman senate and then winning an important military victory over Jerusalem in 37 BC. Herod was hated by the Jews because of his pagan commitments, his cruelty, and his desire to Hellenize Judea. His children did not enjoy his success or his power, however, and following his death Roman influence and intervention in Judea became more direct and significant.

The priestly class also held significant power in the office of the high priest and in the Jewish high court, the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin addressed issues such as legal procedure, verdicts, and decrees of a political nature and also dealt with questions relating to the temple, priesthood, and sacrifices. The Sanhedrin was in many respects the highest political authority (although its control was always mitigated by Roman power and presence). It could deal with most criminal cases, though its authority was limited in capital cases.

The Roman presence in the region was represented by the governance of prefects and procurators. These governors were appointed by Rome over Judea after the removal of Archelaus in AD 6, and over all of Palestine at the death of Herod Agrippa. Prefects and procurators were the highest power in their province, but they answered to the legate and ultimately to Caesar. They lived primarily in Caesarea, but they traveled to Jerusalem for high festivals or in the case of civil unrest. They tended to have as little contact as possible with the Jews unless their own personal interest demanded it. Decisions concerning everyday life were left to the Jewish authorities. With Roman citizens living in their areas, the procurators had direct influence; however, such citizens could go over the procurator’s head and appeal to Caesar if they did not receive the sentence that they desired.

Old Testament

The English word “governor” is used to translate a number of Hebrew words. The term indicates one who has been designated with authority over a certain region, especially under the rule of a king or emperor. The position of governor is found throughout the Pentateuch, the Writings, and the Prophets. Notable in the OT are the governors appointed by the foreign kings both at home and in occupied territories.

There are several notable governors in the OT. After being sold into slavery in Egypt, Joseph was exalted to governor of Egypt, second only to the king. Thus, his brothers bowed before him (Gen. 42:6). Solomon, during his reign, established twelve governors, each one responsible for supplying provisions to the king one month out of the year (1 Kings 4:7), and Solomon received tribute from them (1 Kings 10:15; 2 Chron. 9:14).

One notable governor was Gedaliah, ruler of the Jewish remnant left in Judah during the deportation, who reported to the king of Babylon (Jer. 40:11). Later, he was assassinated by Ishmael (Jer. 41:2). This provoked great fear, causing some to flee to Egypt (Jer. 41:17–18).

Another notable individual who governed the Jewish people upon their return to Jerusalem after the captivity was Sheshbazzar, governor under Cyrus (Ezra 5:14). He had been entrusted with the vessels for the house of God in Jerusalem that had been taken by Nebuchadnezzar (1:7–8). This same Sheshbazzar had begun building the foundation of the temple by the legal decree of Cyrus the king (5:14–6:6). Subsequently, Zerubbabel (under Darius I) became governor and completed the foundation and the rest of the temple (Ezra 3–6; see also Hag. 1:1–15). He and the other workers are said to have had their spirits stirred to do the work (Hag. 1:14).

Nehemiah, who led the people in restoring the wall of Jerusalem for the safety and restoration of the city, was governor over his people (under Artaxerxes I) and had a true heart of compassion toward the poor. His sympathy for them was so deep that he did not take the regular allotment of food and other goods that the other governors took by right (Neh. 5:14–15). The governors who had gone before ruled and taxed heavily. Nehemiah deemed this an illegitimate way to live among God’s people. At the reading of the law along with Ezra the priest and the other Levites, Nehemiah directed the attention of the people to the proper response to the word of God (Neh. 8:9–10).

New Testament

In the NT, the most common word for governor is hēgemōn. As in the OT, governors were appointed by higher authorities who delegated to them the authority to rule.

The office of governor was very important in Israel during the NT period. Herod the Great had ruled Israel during the years 37–4 BC. At his death in 4 BC, three of his sons took over the kingdom with the approval of Caesar Augustus. Archelaus ruled Judea and Samaria, Herod Antipas (Herod the Tetrarch) was tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, and Philip was tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitus (see Luke 3:1; Josephus, J.W. 2.93–97). The Jewish people revolted against Archelaus in the ninth year, and he was stripped of his rulership and banished in AD 6 (Josephus, J.W. 2.111). His kingdom was turned into a Roman province, with Coponius ruling as governor. From this time until the reign of Herod Agrippa I, Judea was ruled by a line of governors (called “prefects” or “procurators”). In AD 41 Herod Agrippa I began to rule and eventually governed roughly the same territory as did Herod the Great, his grandfather. His rule, however, lasted only three years. In the period AD 44–66 governors again ruled in Judea, among them Felix and Festus, with whom the apostle Paul had audience.

Of note among these governors was Pontius Pilate, appointed in AD 26 by Tiberius. Pilate’s fortunes seemed to wax and wane with those of General Sejanus, with whom he shared many political and social views. When he first arrived in Palestine, Pilate provoked protests by secretly bringing army standards bearing the images of Roman emperors—idols in Jewish eyes—into Jerusalem (Josephus, Ant. 18.55–59). On another occasion demonstrations broke out when Pilate used money from the temple treasury to build an aqueduct for Jerusalem (Josephus, Ant. 18.60–62). Pilate sent soldiers to surround and attack the protestors, many of whom were killed. Luke 13:1 refers to a similar episode near the temple mount in which Pilate massacred some Galileans, “whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices.” Typical of the Romans, Pilate met protest with ruthless and overwhelming force. At Jesus’ trial, though Pilate knew that Jesus was innocent (John 18:38), he condemned Jesus to crucifixion to avoid antagonizing the religious leaders. This kind of action was characteristic of Pilate. He was an unscrupulous and self-seeking leader who loathed the Jewish leadership but feared antagonizing them. Josephus notes that during the tumult of the Samaritans (to assemble at Mount Gerizim), Pilate put them to flight, killing some of them. The Samaritans complained about Pilate’s murderous ways to Vitellius, who was friendly to them, and he recalled Pilate to Rome to answer before Tiberius, but Pilate took so long getting there that Tiberius was dead when he finally arrived (Josephus, Ant. 18.85–89). Pilate was eventually removed from office, and we hear nothing else from him.

Two other Judean governors who appear in the NT are Felix and Festus, who played a role in the apostle Paul’s trial (Acts 24–26). Felix’s wife, Drusilla, was a Jewess, and she was with him at Paul’s second hearing. On this second occasion Paul reasoned powerfully with Felix, so much so that Felix became frightened about the future and sent Paul away. His fear notwithstanding, Felix sought to exploit the situation for monetary gain (no doubt, bribes were common), but Paul made no response. Two years later Felix was replaced by the next governor, Porcius Festus. Festus heard the defense of Paul (Acts 26) and sent him to Rome after his appeal, though both Festus and Herod agreed that Paul could have been set free had he not appealed to Caesar (Acts 26:30–32).

On one occasion in the NT, the word “governor” is translated from the word ethnarchēs. Aretas of the Nabateans was the ethnarch in Damascus and laid siege to capture the apostle Paul, but Paul escaped through a window in the wall, probably at night (2 Cor. 11:32–33).

As opposed to a governor, a “proconsul” (anthypatos) was a ruler of a senatorial province and so was appointed by the Roman senate rather than the emperor. These provinces were usually more loyal and peaceful and thus had little need of a strong military presence. Such was the case with the proconsul on Cyprus who lived in Paphos, Sergius Paulus. This man is noted by Luke as intelligent and ready to hear the message of Paul and Barnabas. The sorcerer Elymas (Bar-Jesus) sought to turn the proconsul from the faith and so was struck blind at Paul’s command. This Roman proconsul, a man of political stature on Cyprus, then became a believer (Acts 13:4–12). Another proconsul, Gallio, ruled in Achaia during Paul’s sojourn there on his second missionary journey. From information gained from ancient written sources, chiefly the Gallio Inscription, the beginning of his tenure as proconsul in Achaia occurred between AD 50 and 52. When Paul was brought to trial before Gallio, Gallio tossed the case out as a religious squabble (Acts 18:12–16). In another reference to the proconsulate, Paul’s detractors in Ephesus were told by the town secretary to take their complaints against Paul to the proconsuls of that area, lest they be accused of provoking a riot and an illegal assembly (19:38–41).

Jesus himself had previously prophesied that the disciples would testify before kings and governors (Matt. 10:18), something that was fulfilled by Paul as he spoke before Herod, Felix, Festus, and Nero. Additionally, Luke noted Quirinius as the governor of Syria when the first census was taken, around the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:2).

The apostles note that the community of faith is to submit to rulers such as governors as they execute their God-ordained task, since the praise of good and punishment of evil is also the interest of the divine creator and ordainer of such persons (1 Pet. 2:14; cf. Rom. 13:1–5). The community of faith is also to pray for all in authority (including governors, though not mentioned specifically), so that the church will be able to lead a quiet existence in godliness (1 Tim. 2:1–2).

A transliterated plural form of the Hebrew word goy (“nation, Gentile”), and the name of several places. As a place name, it is also spelled Goiim. (1) As a plural noun, goyim occurs more than four hundred times in the OT, referring predominantly to non-Jewish peoples. Its Greek counterpart is ethnos, from which the English word “ethnic” comes. (2) The kingdom of King Tidal (Gen. 14:1, 9). In Gen. 14 King Tidal of Goyim joined King Kedorlaomer of Elam and two other kings in an effort to put down a rebellion in the Dead Sea region. When Abram’s nephew Lot and his household were captured, Abram rescued Lot and defeated the four-king coalition. Scholars have tried to identify King Tidal and his kingdom. Most believe that he was a Hittite king leading his own multination coalition, but there are other proposals. (3) A municipality in Gilgal appearing in the list of kings Joshua conquered (Josh. 12:23). “Goyim in Gilgal” is replaced by “Goiim in Galilee” in some translations (NRSV, ESV) that follow the LXX for this verse. If this is to be preferred, then this Goyim in Galilee is likely the same as in Isa. 9:1 (see next item). (4) A part of the Galilee region called “Galilee of the nations [goyim]” (Isa. 9:1; cf. Matt. 4:13–16). Here most translations render goyim as “Gentiles” or “nations.” Harosheth Haggoyim, the home of the Canaanite army commander Sisera (Judg. 4:2) and the site of his confrontation with the Israelite commander Barak, may also be linked to this location.

A city-state to which many Israelites were deported by the Assyrians following the defeat of the northern kingdom of Israel and Samaria in 722 BC (2 Kings 17:6; 18:11; 19:12; 1 Chron. 5:26). Gozan probably was located in northwestern Mesopotamia on the Habor River, one of the tributaries of the Euphrates (identified as the “river of Gozan” in 1 Chron. 5:26; today, the Khabur River). The city probably is to be identified with Tel Halaf, an archaeological site on the southern banks of the river. Assyrian documents discovered at Tel Halaf have Hebrew-sounding names on them, perhaps the names of exiles deported from Samaria.

Grace is the nucleus, the critical core element, of the redemptive and sanctifying work of the triune God detailed throughout the entire canon of Scripture. The variegated expressions of grace are rooted in the person and work of God, so that his graciousness and favor effectively demonstrated in every aspect of the created realm glorify him as they are shared and enjoyed with one another.

The biblical terminology informing an understanding of grace defines it as a gift or a favorable reaction or disposition toward someone. Grace is generosity, thanks, and goodwill between humans and from God to humans. Divine expressions of grace are loving, merciful, and effective. The biblical texts provide a context for a more robust understanding of divine gift. The overall redemptive-historical context of grace is the desire of the eternal God to bring glory to himself through a grace-based relationship with his creation. The Creator-Redeemer gives grace, and the recipients of grace give him glory.

Old Testament

Genesis. The grace of the creation narratives is summarized with the repeated use of the term “good” (Gen. 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). God is good, and he made a good creation with abundant gifts for Adam and Eve to enjoy. When Adam and Eve rebelled against God, he righteously judged and graciously provided for an ongoing relationship. God clothed the naked Adam and Eve (3:21) and announced that the seed of the woman would yield a redeemer (3:15).

Grace in the postcreation narratives (Gen. 4–6) is focused on individuals. God looked with favor on Abel and his offering (4:4), and Noah found grace in God’s eyes (6:8). God looked at and had regard for the offering of Abel (Gen. 4). Jacob confessed to Esau that God graced him with descendants and with possessions (33:5).

Grace and graciousness also characterize interaction between individuals. The Jacob and Esau exchange uses grace vocabulary for the gift and the disposition of grace. Jacob invited Esau to accept his gift if he had a favorable disposition toward him (Gen. 33:11). The covenant son Joseph received favorable treatment from the prison warden because of his disposition toward him (39:21).

Exodus. The exodus narrative recounts how the seed of Abraham multiplies, is redeemed, and then is given the law, which defines the relationship of God to Israel. All these events are tied to the gracious promises that God made to Abraham and his descendants (Gen. 12; 15; 17; see also Gen. 21; 27).

The grace associated with the redemption of Israel from Egypt is celebrated in the song of Exod. 15. God’s victory over the Egyptian army and his covenant fidelity to the patriarchs are the song’s themes. Moses and the Israelites sing because God heard Israel’s groaning; he remembered his covenant with Abraham and looked on Israel with concern (2:24). God made Egypt favorably disposed toward Israel (3:21) and parted the sea for Israel to escape (11:3; 12:36). The confession “He is my God . . . my father’s God” ties together major sections of redemptive history and affirms the constancy of God’s grace throughout the periods (15:2). God’s tenacious covenant loyalty (khesed) to the nation and his covenant grace (15:13) to Israel cannot be merited.

The giving of the law in Exod. 20 is prefaced by a gracious and powerful presentation of God to the nation in Exod. 19. In the organization and development of Exod. 19–20, grace themes emerge. The grace associated with redemption and covenant life is marked in Exod. 19. God took Israel from Egyptian bondage, redeemed it, and brought the nation to himself (19:4). Through this action, the nation will become a special treasure, a holy nation, a kingdom of priests (19:5–6). In sum, Israel exists because God created, loved, and redeemed it.

Second, the Decalogue of Exod. 20 follows upon the redemption effected by God, defining how Israel will relate to its God. In this sense, law is viewed as a gift that expresses the divine will. When compared and contrasted with ancient Near Eastern laws, Torah reflects the grace of God’s character and his genuine concern for the poor, slaves, aliens, and widows. In addition, there is a grace ethic that motivates obedience to the law. The motivational statements in the Decalogue in Exod. 20 relate to the grace of redemption (v. 2), the righteousness of God (vv. 4–7), the creation work of God (vv. 8–11), and long life (v. 12).

Exodus 32–34 is a key passage that links the covenant with grace terminology. This section begins with the story of the golden calf (chap. 32) and ends with the account of Moses’ radiant face (34:29–35). The grace terminology is observed in 33:19; 34:6–7. The context of 33:19 involves Moses meeting with God face-to-face. According to 33:12–17, Moses wanted to know who would be left after the purge of 33:5. He acknowledged God’s favor in his life and wondered who else might enjoy it. Moses reminded God that the nation was his people (33:13). The grace of this account is God’s assurance of his presence with Israel and the unmerited purposeful expression of his grace.

Exodus 34:6–7 employs a series of adjectives in a grace confessional statement. This statement arises out of God’s instructions to Moses to cut two new tablets of stone like the first ones (34:1; see also 24:12), which were broken after the incident of the golden calf (32:19). God descended in a cloud, stood with Moses, and proclaimed his name to him (34:5). The rhetoric of the passage emphasizes the speech of God, who defines himself in connection with covenant making. God is merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and distinguished by steadfast love.

Grace and covenant loyalty. These key passages are foundational for understanding the grace and steadfast loyalty of God expressed in the subsequent events of covenant history. Grace and khesed are expressed in connection with covenant curse implementation (Num. 14:18; Hos. 4:1; 6:4, 6), in the overall structure of Deuteronomy (5:10; 7:9, 12), in the Davidic covenant (2 Sam. 7:15; 1 Chron. 17:13), in the future hope of Israel (Isa. 54:8), in restoration (Jer. 32:18), in the new covenant (Jer. 31:31), and in exile (Dan. 9:4).

To round out the OT discussion, we may note that covenant siblings were to be gracious and loyal in their ongoing relationships with one another. The book of Ruth illustrates covenant grace in action (2:2, 10, 13). In addition, grace is to be expressed toward the poor (Prov. 28:8), the young and the old (Deut. 28:50), and those who suffer (Job 19:21).

New Testament

The NT focus of grace is developed in keeping with the foundation laid in the OT. The triune God is the center and source of grace: it is the grace of God (Rom. 1:7), the Spirit of grace (Heb. 10:29), and the grace of Christ (John 1:17). The grace of God revealed in the OT is unveiled uniquely in the person and work of Christ.

The Gospel of John. The canonical development of the grace theme between the Testaments is explained in the opening chapter of John’s Gospel. Jesus Christ is the Word, who was with God, who is God, and who created the world (John 1:1–3). Christ then became flesh and dwelled among us (1:14). In doing so, he made known the glory of God to us. At this point in the development of chapter 1, John connects Christ (the Word) with the adjectives describing God in Exod. 34:6 to affirm that Christ has the very same virtues that God has. The assertion in John 1:17 that Jesus is full of grace and truth parallels the statement in Exod. 34:6 of God’s steadfast love and faithfulness. In Christ we are able to see the glory that Moses hoped to see in God (John 1:18). Christ is both the message and the messenger of grace and truth.

The Epistles and Acts. The NT Epistles develop the “full of grace and truth” statement about Christ (John 1:14) in several ways. The grace and truth found in Christ are given to his servants (1 Cor. 1:4) and are a reason for praise (2 Cor. 8:9; Gal. 1:6, 15; Eph. 4:7; 1 Tim. 1:2; 2 Tim. 2:1). This grace from Christ is effective in bringing about redemption and sustaining a life of godliness. Ephesians 2:8–9 is the classic statement affirming that God’s favor is the source of salvation. Paul makes this point by repeating “it is by grace” in 2:5, 8 and clarifying the grace of salvation with the “it is the gift of God” statement in 2:8. This design of salvation celebrates the incomparable riches of Christ’s grace and the expression of his kindness to us (cf. Eph. 1:7). Salvation is devoid of human merit, gifts, or favor (2:8). Keeping the law as a means of entrance into a relationship with God and as a means of gaining favor with God is antithetical to the nature of grace. God’s favor expressed to people in salvation is an expression of his sovereign will.

Romans 5 declares many of the same themes found in Eph. 2. In Rom. 5 Paul contrasts the action and result of Adam’s transgression with the obedience of Christ. Salvation is God’s grace and gift brought by the grace of one man, Jesus Christ (v. 15). The gift and grace of Christ brought about justification.

The effective operation of God’s grace in salvation is illustrated in the historical narratives of Acts. The men involved in the heated debate of the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:2) affirmed the salvation of the Gentiles by grace after hearing the report of Barnabas and Paul (15:12). Those in Achaia (18:27) are another illustration of an effective operation of grace.

The grace of God that saves is also the grace that sanctifies. Titus 2:11 declares that redemptive grace instructs the redeemed to say no to a life of ungodliness. The instructional nature of grace is highlighted in the development of the Titus 2 context. The teacher in 2:1–10, 15 is Titus, who is to nurture godly people. There is a change of instructors in 2:11, with grace now teaching. Redemptive grace works in harmony with sanctifying grace to provide for godly living.

According to Titus 3:8, those who trust in the generosity of God’s grace should devote themselves to doing what is good. By God’s grace, justified sinners will find their delight and satisfaction in the promises of God for a life of persevering godliness.

Grace also functions as an enablement for life and ministry. Paul often rehearses this feature of grace in his letters. In Rom. 1:5 Paul testifies about the grace associated with a commission to be an apostle. When reflecting on his role in the church, he affirms that by God’s grace he has been able to lay a foundation (1 Cor. 3:10). Paul’s testimony in 1 Cor. 15:10 demonstrates the essential role of grace in making him who he is and effectively enabling what he does. Giving is also viewed as an exercise of grace (2 Cor. 8:7) reflecting the grace received by individual believers. This gift of grace for life and ministry is somehow recognizable. Peter, James, and John recognized it in Paul (Gal. 2:9). It was upon the apostles (Acts 4:33), and it was seen in the church of Antioch (11:23).

Given the source and the effective nature of grace, one can understand the appropriateness of appealing to grace in greetings and salutations (Rom. 1:7; 16:20; Gal. 1:3; 6:18).

Common grace. Finally, grace does operate beyond the context of the elect and the work of salvation and sanctification. Theologians define this as “common grace.” God’s sending rain and giving creatures intellectual and artistic abilities are expressions of common grace.

To transplant plant tissue from one plant to another. Paul employs an extended metaphor in Rom. 11:16–24 using the language of arboriculture. The olive tree was used to symbolize Israel in the OT (Jer. 11:16; Hos. 14:5–6) and was widely cultivated in the ancient world for fruit production. In contrast, the “wild olive shoot” (Rom. 11:17) was uncultivated and symbolizes Gentiles (11:13). The normal arboricultural procedure was grafting cultivated branches into an uncultivated plant. Here, however, Paul intentionally reverses this procedure and describes the splicing in of Gentiles like a wild branch on an established plant (Rom. 11:19; cf. Ps. 92:12–13) with the intention of rejuvenating the tree. Although this could conceivably lead to Gentile boasting, Paul’s reversal implies that even the branches that are now cut off still belong to the tree (Rom. 11:24).

Grain formed the staple of the Israelite diet and was imperative for sustaining life (Gen. 42:2). Families harvested and brought grain to the threshing floor, where it was winnowed. It was eaten parched or raw, in the form of bread or porridge (Lev. 23:14). The most common types were wheat and barley, but others such as emmer and millet are attested (Ezek. 4:9). Grain also formed an integral part of the sacrificial system (Lev. 2; Num. 7). See also Heads of Grain.

A component of the ritual for determining the marital unfaithfulness of a wife (Num. 5:15). See also Bitter Water.

Granaries and silos were used for grain storage. They were constructed above or below ground. During the Late Bronze Age (1550–1200 BC) and the Iron Age (1200–586 BC), they were often found as pits, stone-lined or plastered. Some were smaller, used in private family compounds, while others were for public use and extremely large, such as the one at Megiddo dated to 725 BC. The biblical description places the public granaries in particular buildings called “storehouses” or “barns” (Deut. 28:8; 2 Chron. 32:28). These buildings often were strategically located in specific cities throughout the kingdom designated for storage (2 Chron. 8:4, 6; 17:2).

The normal foodstuff of livestock in biblical times, grass consisted of various kinds of fast-growing, ground-covering plants (Num. 22:4; 1 Kings 18:5). Several types of grass were native to Israel, including short-lived grasses that sprang up during the rainy season and died down shortly afterward, as well as longer-lasting dune grasses. Dried grass, or hay, does not appear to have been harvested but needed to be removed before the new growth appeared (Prov. 27:25). The various words for “grass” can also indicate other vegetation, some of which was suitable for pasture, and some of which was even used for human consumption (Gen. 3:18; Matt. 13:26).

Because of its shallow roots, grass is quick to grow and quick to wither. This transience provides a suitable metaphor for human mortality (Ps. 90:5–6; Isa. 40:6; 1 Pet. 1:24), in contrast with the permanence of God’s word. It also illustrates the fleeting success of the wicked (Ps. 92:7), in contrast to the security of the righteous. Grass is the quickest indicator of changes in growing conditions, and thus it was also a barometer of God’s blessing on his people (Ps. 72:16). Grass is considered the most mundane of plants, of little value, yet even this plant is valued by God, who is said to clothe the grass with the splendor of lilies (Matt. 6:28–30).

“Grate” (KJV) or “grating” (other versions) is the term used for the “bronze network” of the tabernacle’s altar of burnt offering. The grating had rings at its corners that housed carrying poles. See Exod. 27:4; 35:16; 38:4–5, 30; 39:39.

“Grate” (KJV) or “grating” (other versions) is the term used for the “bronze network” of the tabernacle’s altar of burnt offering. The grating had rings at its corners that housed carrying poles. See Exod. 27:4; 35:16; 38:4–5, 30; 39:39.

A response of grateful people toward a gracious God. In the OT, thanksgiving is conspicuously absent from the patriarchal narratives, where the characters often appear ungrateful. Thanksgiving appears in the Pentateuch only in Lev. 7:12–15, where thanksgiving is one kind of fellowship offering given in public worship, usually for deliverance from peril. Thanksgiving becomes a prominent exhortation in the Psalter, where it occurs over fifty times. Worshipers are encouraged to thank God (in public worship) for deliverance from the physical perils common to being outside the safety of one’s community (Ps. 107) and from perils within (Ps. 103). Later, prophets (Isa. 51:3; Jer. 30:19), the Chronicler (1 Chron. 23:30), and twenty-eight other psalms speak of thanksgivings by offering songs rather than sacrifices. Thanksgiving, however, is still in the context of public (cultic) worship.

Later Jewish literature expanded expressions of thanksgiving outside a sacrificial context to include the individual or family at home before each meal (b. Ber. 35a). Similarly, Jesus offers thanks before a meal (Matt. 15:36; 26:27).

The other major occurrences of thanksgiving in the NT are found in Paul’s letters. While Greco-Roman letters occasionally began with thanksgiving to a deity for providing health or safety, Paul offered far longer and more frequent thanksgivings than any known writer. Thanksgiving must be considered one of the distinguishing characteristics of Paul’s writings and teachings. Both OT and NT examples and teachings indicate that thanksgiving to God is expressed in front of others and not merely in silent individual prayers to God.

The grave refers to the physical place of burial or metaphorically to death (Job 3:22; 5:26; Jer. 20:17; Nah. 1:14) or to devouring destructiveness (Ps. 5:9; Jer. 5:16). The main types of graves used by the Israelites were holes dug in the ground, natural caves, or hewn chambers. The ossuary, or bone box, came into use in Roman times. Christians also made use of catacombs.

Israelite custom, and that of the Semitic peoples generally, was burial. They did not practice embalming, as the Egyptians did, nor cremation, like the Greeks and the Romans. Burial was an important part of respecting the dead, lest the body be desecrated by enemies or animals. And while the body might be washed or perfumed, it was not preserved. After the body decayed, the bones might be relocated. Touching the dead, their bones, or a grave brought seven days of uncleanness (Num. 19:16). It was a disgrace for a body to be eaten by animals (Ps. 79:2).

Due to the speed of decomposition, burial took place as soon as possible, typically within twenty-four hours. A nomadic way of life favored in-ground burial, with the gravesite possibly covered with stones or marked by a monument. Advanced preparation for a site could be made by securing a cave or hewing out an area of soft rock. Greco-Roman influence led to more-elaborate tomb architecture. The outer walls might be whitewashed, which perhaps protected from defilement due to accidental contact. But the contrast between their outer appearance and their contents made such tombs a point of comparison for rebukes from Jesus and Paul (Matt. 23:27; Acts 23:3).

Upon Sarah’s death, Abraham purchased the cave of Machpelah for use as a family gravesite (Gen. 23). Jacob, however, buried Rachel in the ground for the sake of immediacy and marked her grave with a pillar that survived into the monarchy (Gen. 35:20; 1 Sam. 10:2).

The embalming of Jacob and Joseph was unique, because of Joseph’s prominence in Egypt. Embalming permitted Jacob’s body to be transported to the family gravesite (Gen. 50:13). Joseph also gave instructions for his bones to be moved when Israel left Egypt (Gen. 50:25; Exod. 13:19). In Egyptian theology, proper burial and close association with Pharaoh were important for the afterlife. Joseph’s instruction about his gravesite represents both his confidence that God would take Israel out of Egypt and his rejection of Egyptian religion.

Burning the bodies of Saul and his sons was unusual. The men of Jabesh Gilead retrieved the decomposing bodies, which the Philistines had placed on display; they burned them, buried the bones, and then fasted during the seven-day period of defilement for handling a dead body. David later had the bones reburied at their family gravesite (2 Sam. 21:14).

Most graves were outside the cities, though the kings of Judah were buried inside the city of David (2 Chron. 16:13).

The tourist site of the “tomb of Absalom” in Jerusalem is from the wrong century, as is true of other famous gravesites.

Loose particles of stones, worn or pounded by water. Gravel is used metaphorically in Prov. 20:17 to refer to the worthlessness of things obtained by fraud. According to Lam. 3:16, gravel is strong enough to break one’s teeth.

An image or likeness of a deity, whether carved from wood, molded from metal, or even formed in one’s mind. Although idols are not strictly equivalent to the gods they represent—even pagans recognized that idols are only the physical medium through which a spirit reveals itself—the Bible does not distinguish between worshiping idols, worshiping other gods, or worshiping Yahweh through images.

In contrast to other ancient religions, the Bible rejects worship of all images as incompatible with worship of God. This includes images of Yahweh, since he is transcendent and cannot be represented by anything in creation. As Moses reminded Israel, they saw no form at Sinai but only heard God’s voice (Deut. 4:12). No form can adequately represent Yahweh, as he is incomparable. The Bible similarly forbids worshiping images of other deities because it elevates them to the status reserved for God alone. Thus, the second commandment prohibits making and worshiping idols in the image of anything found in heaven, on earth, or in the water (Exod. 20:4–5).

Idolatry is regularly likened to spiritual adultery or prostitution because it marks a breakdown of God’s covenant relationship with his people (Deut. 31:16; Ps. 106:36–39; Hos. 4:12–19). This corresponds to the fact that idol worship often included cultic prostitution and fertility rites. Prophets and psalmists alike ridiculed idols as things fashioned by human hands that were unable to see, hear, or otherwise help those who made them. Rather, these “gods” depended on humans for transportation and protection (Ps. 115:4–8; Isa. 40:19–20; 44:9–20). Idolaters were warned that they would become as worthless as the things they worshiped. While declaring that idols amount to nothing, both Testaments nevertheless consider them spiritually dangerous. This is because idols lead people away from properly worshiping Yahweh and expose them to demonic influences.

Despite its warnings against idolatry, the Bible records that Israel regularly failed to keep itself pure. Right after God’s supreme revelation at Sinai, Aaron led the nation in making and worshiping a golden calf (Exod. 32). The book of Judges shows how society had become degraded to the point that a man, Micah, and a tribe, Dan, engaged in idol worship (Judg. 17–18). When the monarchy was divided after Solomon’s rule, Jeroboam revived calf worship to preserve the loyalty of his people (1 Kings 12:25–33). Both historical and prophetic books cite idolatry as a major reason for the exile.

By NT times, idol worship was no longer a problem for Jews, but it remained an important issue for the growing church because many believers came from idolatrous backgrounds. Thus, the apostles included idolatry in lists of sins to be judged, warned their readers to flee from it, and addressed eating food sacrificed to idols. Indicating that idolatry went beyond worship of images, they linked it with the love of money (Matt. 6:24) and greed (Col. 3:5). The NT authors believed that their readers could turn from idols to worship the true and living God, praised them for doing so, and looked to the time when all idol worship would cease.

In Exod. 32:4 the KJV renders the Hebrew word kheret as “graving tool” (NIV: “tool”; NET: “engraving tool”), referring to an implement that Aaron used in constructing the golden calf, either to shape the idol itself (KJV) or to make a mold to form the molten gold (NRSV).

The Bible does not have a generic term for the idea of color, but it does use various colors for descriptive and symbolic purposes, and it also refers to different coloring processes. Items can be described as “dyed” (Exod. 25:5), “multicolored” (Ezek. 27:24), or “speckled” (Gen. 30:32) to indicate changes or variety of color.

Certain colors are commonly used in the Bible (listed below), while others occur rarely (e.g., brown and yellow) or not at all (e.g., orange), reflecting the range of colors and dyes available in the ancient Near East. Colors are most often used for two purposes: to describe luxury items indicating wealth and power, and to describe the earthly and heavenly dwelling places of God. Ordinary people and places are not usually described in terms of the colors of their appearance. Exceptions to this include Esau (Gen. 25:25), David (1 Sam. 17:42), and the male lover in Song of Songs (5:10–11).

The following colors have particular significance or symbolic meaning in the Bible:

White. Used to describe the symptoms of leprosy (Lev. 13:3–4), white much more commonly has a positive association, being the color of purity (Isa. 1:18; Rev. 3:4) and glory (Dan. 7:9; Matt. 17:2; Rev. 1:14). Angels appear white (Matt. 28:3) or are dressed in white (Mark 16:2; Acts 1:10). The multitude of worshipers in heaven will wear white robes (Rev. 7:9), having been washed in the blood of the Lamb.

Black. The female lover in the Song of Songs admires the raven black hair of her beloved (Song 5:11). However, black things usually have less positive connotations: storm clouds (1 Kings 18:45), diseased skin (Job 30:30), and the effects of the plague of locusts (Exod. 10:15). Blackness can also be a sign of judgment (Rev. 6:5, 12).

Red. Red is the color of the earth, the color of wine, and the color of blood. Red dyes could be made from crushed insects, plants, and minerals, giving a wide range of different shades (red, scarlet, and crimson are common in the Bible). Scarlet yarn and red-dyed animal skins were included in the offerings made for the construction of the tabernacle (Exod. 25:3–5). Red was used to symbolize sin (Isa. 1:18) and was also associated with warfare (Nah. 2:3; Rev. 6:4).

Blue. Blue tassels adorned every Hebrew garment as a reminder of God’s commandments (Num. 15:38). In the Persian court the royal colors were blue, white, and purple (Esther 1:6; 8:15), and blue garments were worn by the young Assyrian governors (Ezek. 23:6).

Purple. Purple dye was very expensive, so purple cloth was used as a sign of wealth (Prov. 31:22; Acts 16:14) and a sign of authority: the kings of Midian wore purple garments (Judg. 8:26); the wedding carriage of King Solomon was upholstered in purple (Song 3:10); the Babylonian king Belshazzar offered purple robes as a reward for service (Dan. 5:7). Purple robes were put on Jesus before his crucifixion in a mockery of his kingship (John 19:2–5).

Blue, purple, and scarlet were each separately associated with wealth and power, but when used together these three colors were the epitome of opulence and, as such, were associated with the divine presence. The tabernacle curtains were woven from blue, purple, and scarlet yarn (Exod. 26:1), as were the high-priestly garments (28:4–15, 33). The same colors were later used in the temple curtains (2 Chron. 3:14). Blue, purple, and red cloths were used for covering the Ark of the Covenant and its furnishings (Num. 4:6–12). Jeremiah describes idols adorned in blue and purple, an attempt to conceal their worthlessness (10:9).

Gray. Gray hair indicated old age and thus wisdom (Ps. 71:18; Prov. 16:31).

Green. Green is the color of plants and thus was associated with life-giving food and therefore God’s blessing. Green plants were given by God for food (Gen. 1:30), so their removal or destruction was a devastating judgment (Exod. 10:15; Ezek. 17:24; Rev. 8:7). People could be symbolized as green plants when they were fruitful and blessed (Ps. 92:14; Jer. 17:8) or when they were easily destroyed (2 Kings 19:26; Ps. 37:2).

A title often given to leaders by virtue of their military, cultural, or administrative accomplishments. Notable biblical examples are Cyrus the Great, Darius the Great, Alexander the Great, and Herod the Great. In Acts 8:9–10, the Samaritan magician Simon Magus is given the title “the Great Power of God” (NIV) or “the power of God that is called Great” (NRSV), thus perhaps identifying him as either God himself, a lesser god, or a powerful representative of God.

The major body of water dividing Europe and Africa, extending eastward from the Atlantic Ocean well over two thousand miles to the western shore of Israel. The Mediterranean is almost completely surrounded by land. Though in some places this sea has a width of six or seven hundred miles, it is only nine miles wide at the Strait of Gibraltar, which gives access from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic Ocean. Related bodies of water include the Nile River in Egypt, which flows into the Mediterranean, and the Adriatic and the Aegean seas, adjacent to the north. The Mediterranean is dotted with thousands of islands. Some are notable (Cyprus, Crete, Malta, Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica), while others are very small. Situated between the Middle East, Europe, and Africa, the Mediterranean Sea made possible a quicker means of trade between these three great landmasses. Cities of note in Scripture on or near the Mediterranean include Alexandria, Caesarea, Joppa, Tyre, Sidon, and Tarsus. The great city of Rome was twenty miles inland from the sea.

The Mediterranean Sea (known as the Great Sea, the Western Sea, and the Sea of the Philistines) plays a major role for Israel in both Testaments. It is noted as the Western boundary for the inheritance of Israel (Deut. 11:24; Josh. 1:4) and thus forms the border of Judah (Josh. 15:12, 47). Also, in Josh. 9:1 the Mediterranean coast is noted as the territory of the pagan kings before the conquest. Later in the same book, God gives to the Israelites the land of the nations that he has cut off, from the Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea (23:4). The prophet Joel declares that God will work in behalf of Israel; he will fight for it and push its enemies in all directions, including westward into the Mediterranean Sea (Joel 2:20).

In the NT, the Mediterranean Sea is mentioned in Acts, where Luke relates the story of Simon Peter staying with Simon the tanner in Joppa, which is “by the sea” (10:6, 32). And later in Acts, Luke chronicles the path of the ship taking Paul to Rome, a trip on the Mediterranean starting from Caesarea and passing through Myra, Cnidus, Crete, Malta (after shipwreck in a storm), Syracuse, Rhegium, Puteoli, and Three Taverns (the latter two are in Italy) before concluding in Rome (27:1–28:14).

This term can refer to Greek influence of various sorts, including language, culture, or religion. In the NIV 1984 the Greek term hellēnistai is translated “Grecian Jews” (NIV: “Hellenistic Jews”), referring to Greek-speaking Jewish Christians (Acts 6:1) or Greek-speaking Jews (Acts 9:29). See also Hellenists, Hellenistic Jews.

Ancient Greece was a federation of several loosely affiliated city-states located on the islands of the Aegean Sea, the land south of the Balkan Peninsula, west Asia Minor, and Crete.

The Minoan Civilization (c. 2000–1400 BC)

Archaeological evidence shows that as early as the fourth millennium BC there were already human inhabitants in the Aegean basin. Early migrants from Asia Minor came to settle in Crete (c. 2600 BC) and started its civilization at Knossos and Phaistos. It was called “Minoan,” after the mythical king Minos. The Minoan civilization reached its peak around 1600 BC, when sophisticated palaces, highly developed metal work, and fine pottery were produced. The popular religion was the worship of the Mother Goddess. Not only did the Minoans excel in arts and crafts, but also they were literate and developed a syllable-based (non-Greek) writing system known as Linear A. Minoan culture came to a sudden end around 1400 BC, probably due to internal turmoil, natural disasters, and foreign invasion.

The Mycenaean Civilization (c. 1450–1200 BC)

The Mycenaeans may have arrived in the Early or Middle Bronze Age, and eventually they took over the Cretan palace settlement in 1450 BC and thus dominated the Aegean region for a time. The discovery of the city of Mycenae gave rise to the name “Mycenaean.” During this period, the Greek mainland enjoyed prosperity. While retaining their own culture, the Mycenaeans were greatly influenced by the Minoans, as indicated by their pottery, luxury items, and religious symbolism. They were great engineers who built remarkable bridges and citadels. One of the finest examples of their handiwork was the gold masks that were buried together with their warriors. They employed a form of Greek language, known as Linear B, evidence of which has been discovered at Knossos, Pylos, Tiryns, Mycenae, Thebes, and elsewhere. Between 1250 and 1150 BC, for unknown reasons, all the Mycenaean palace citadels were destroyed.

The Age of Expansion (c. 1200–800 BC)

Already in the thirteenth century, the Greeks were scattered all over the eastern Mediterranean, as far as the coast of southern Palestine. Migration increased around 1200 BC, driven by population growth and the accompanying demand for food and space, which led to colonization in other regions. By the eighth century BC, great cities (e.g., Troy) along the northwest coast of Asia Minor had been taken by the Aeolians. The Dorians dominated the south of the Balkan Peninsula and eventually founded Sparta, while the Ionians settled in the east-central area of the Balkan Peninsula and founded Athens. This period was known as the Dark Age because of a lack of cultural advancements, and the art of writing was largely lost after the Mycenaean civilization was destroyed.

The Archaic Period (c. 800–500 BC)

Great changes took place in this period. The rise of the city-state (polis) not only provided stability, where leagues were formed among individual city-states, but also brought forth the establishment of institutions such as gymnasiums, symposiums, and temples. Trading with the Phoenicians allowed the Greeks to adopt and perfect their alphabet. Military defense was enhanced with huge city walls, and architecturally sophisticated buildings of various kinds were constructed. The first Olympian games were held during this period, in 776 BC. Science and philosophy began to be taught; lyric poetry expressing human emotions was created; and various gods (e.g., Zeus) were honored in their sanctuaries, which were overshadowed by mystery religions in the sixth century BC (e.g., Demeter, Dionysus, and Orpheus).

Greek settlements were established in southern Italy, the northern Aegean, and along the northern coast of Africa. At this time, two important city-states representing two very different cultures came into the picture. Sparta was made up of unwalled villages and ruled by kings, while Athens was a walled city governed first by the aristocrats, later by tyrants. Sparta was famous for its disciplined army, while Athens boasted of its superior naval force. The social structure of Sparta produced a political system that upheld the interest of the states, while Athens developed a legal system that laid the foundation for democracy.

Perhaps most important in this age were the Persian Wars. As the Greeks continued to expand into the southern Balkan Peninsula and to the north of the Black Sea, and to establish colonies in the Mediterranean, they encountered the superpower of that time. By 500 BC, Darius I of Persia controlled the Greek world, except the mainland of the Balkan Peninsula. Although on several occasions the Persians tried to invade mainland Greece, Athens (in alliance with Sparta) was able to successfully defeat them, rendering them powerless for a long period.

The Classical Period (c. 500–338 BC)

After the Persian Wars, Greek civilization advanced significantly into what is now known as Classical Greece. Political leadership shifted from Sparta to Athens, which held naval hegemony, dominating the Aegean islands and the coast of Asia Minor. According to the Athenian historian Thucydides, the growth of Athenian power, which posed a threat to neighboring city-states, caused the Peloponnesian War (c. 431–404 BC). With the aid of the Persians, Sparta defeated Athens, tearing down its Long Walls, which guarded the city and its port of Piraeus, and making it an ally.

This period was a golden age for the Greeks, with the flowering of democratic institutions, architecture, literature, and art. Massive buildings were constructed, such as the Parthenon (447–438 BC), the Athena Nike (427–424 BC), the Erectheion (421–407 BC) on the Acropolis, and the Theseion (449 BC) on the Agora. Greek writings of history, poetry, philosophy, comedy, and tragedy flourished. Thanks to the works of great historians such as Herodotus and Thucydides, events that transpired in ancient Greece have been made known to us. The four greatest Greek playwrights, Aeschylus, Aris-tophanes, Euripides, and Sophocles, were products of this period. Some of the greatest plastic arts were produced during this time, such as the statue of Athena Promachos (458 BC). Great thinkers, such as Socrates and Plato, were born during this period. The end of Classical period Greece, however, was marked with endless civil wars and wars with the outside forces.

The Hellenistic Period (338–146 BC)

Philip II of Macedon defeated the Greeks at the battle of Chaeronea in 338 BC and took control of the entire Balkan Peninsula. His son Alexander the Great further expanded his territory all the way to India. Although his empire crumbled after his death (at the age of thirty-three), Alexander contributed so much to the furtherance of Greek culture and language that this age is known as the Hellenistic period, a time when Greek culture and language became widespread and dominant. Greece became a region of Macedon until 196 BC, when Rome declared it independent.

The Roman Period (146 BC–AD 100)

In 148 BC Rome defeated Macedon, making it a Roman province. Two years later, Rome further took control of Greece, and in 46 BC the province of Achaia was created. These two provinces were not only strategic for Rome; they also became the centers of the NT church. The Greek language became the lingua franca and the language of the NT. Paul’s second and third missionary journeys brought him to Macedonia and Achaia (Acts 16:11–20:6). During the Roman period, Greece continued to be a cultural and intellectual center, and Greek influence even went beyond that of early Christianity.

The OT was written in Hebrew, with some parts in Aramaic, but the NT comes to us exclusively in Greek. Greek developed from an Indo-European language spoken by the people referred to in the Iliad as the Achaeans. It is suggested that primitive Greek speakers migrated from the area north of the Black Sea and began to settle in the Aegean Sea area around 2000 BC. These people groups called themselves “Hellenes.” Later the Romans called them “Greeks.”

Classical versus Koine

Classical Greek is commonly dated to the years 900–330 BC. Although three notable dialects of Greek were prevalent (Doric in the west, Aeolic in the north, and Ionic in the east), a dialect of the Ionic family known as Attic, the language of Athens and the great writers Thucydides, Herodotus, Plato, Aristotle, and Demosthenes, eventually gained supremacy. It was this form of Greek that Alexander the Great took with him on his conquests.

Koine (lit., “common”) Greek became the new lingua franca in the years 330 BC–AD 500. Koine Greek, which itself was influenced by the Hebrew and Aramaic of the OT, was closely related to the language of the LXX. This common form of Greek is in part the result of the imposition of Greek upon nonnative Greek speakers. The Koine Greek of the NT reflects the style of writing found in the papyri and ostraca discovered in the Egyptian desert. These writings are more a nonliterary Koine—found in wills, deeds, receipts, and private letters—and not the polished Greek of the literary works. While the literary writers of the day tried to imitate the Attic models by means of an artificial literary tradition, the Greek of the NT has much more in common with the spoken Greek of the average person.

One of the distinctive elements of Koine Greek at the time of the NT was the tendency toward greater simplicity. Although this is a natural occurrence within a language over time, it became accelerated when the Greek language was forced upon nonnative Greek speakers. The Koine Greek of the NT, then, may be characterized by the relative absence of subtle nuances among words, the replacement of complex forms by simpler ones, and the almost complete disappearance of the optative mood. Other changes include the increase in the use of pronouns as subjects, more adverbs, pronunciation and vocabulary differences, and the tendency toward more-explicit expressions.

Features of Biblical Greek

Greek is a highly inflected language. Inflection refers to changes that words undergo in accord with their grammatical function in a sentence. With regard to verbs, the changes reflect the word’s aspect (similar to the English tense [see below]), voice (active or passive), and mood (generally speaking, mood refers to the author’s attitude toward the kind of reality behind the statement: whether the action actually took place or whether it is merely a potentiality). For nouns and adjectives, these changes reflect the word’s gender (masculine, feminine, or neuter [similar to the English pronouns “he,” “she,” “it”]), number (singular or plural), and case (nominative, genitive, dative, and accusative [technically, a fifth but rarely used case is the vocative]). It cannot be overstated that grammar is always secondary to context. Thus, one should not seek to find too much meaning in the form of a word, or the meaning of a word, without contextual warrant.

Verbs: tense, aspect, and mood. Whereas English verbs employ tense (past, present, future, past perfect, etc.), which strongly links the action of the verb to a time, Greek verbs reflect a verbal aspect. Aspect primarily refers to the way the action of the verb is viewed by the author. Consequently, the time (past, present, future, etc.) is secondary at best. This distinction is especially important for verbs that are not in the indicative mood (the mood utilized by an author to speak in terms of reality rather than potentiality). In the indicative mood, the aspect generally reflects the time of the event.

For years, one of the most debated features of biblical Greek was the verb in the aorist tense (aspect). It often was suggested that the aorist reflects a onetime event that occurred in the past. Modern scholarship is nearly unanimous today that the aorist serves instead as the default aspect. That is, authors used the aorist when not wishing to make any specific pronouncement regarding the action of the verb. The aorist functions as the simple or undefined aspect. Therefore, in biblical Greek the statement “I studied Greek,” if in the aorist, would have been the author’s way of simply stating that this event occurred. The use of the aorist alone would not have made any assertion about the duration of the action (I studied for ten minutes, months, or years) or as to whether this act was completed (I know Greek well). Thus, John 11:35 says, “Jesus wept.” The use of the aorist here does not tell us how long he wept. Some have argued that since the aorist is used in reference to Christ’s death (Rom. 5:6), it means that Jesus died once and for all. Although this conviction is true, its truth derives not from the use of the aorist, but rather from the context of Scripture.

Two other aspects occur in the Greek NT. The imperfective aspect regards an action as a process or as habitual. The perfective aspect views the action as completed with ensuing results (I have studied Greek [and still remember it]).

Biblical Greek employs two moods. The mood of a Greek verb indicates whether the author viewed the action as one that actually occurred or one that was merely potential. Greek verbs in the indicative mood tend to suggest that the author viewed the action as something that either has happened, is happening, or will happen. It is very important to note that in the Greek NT verbs consistently have temporal relations only in the indicative mood. The potential mood in biblical Greek displays a variety of potentialities. The subjunctive mood often expresses a contingency, a hope, or a desire for the event to occur. The optative mood, which was prominent in Classical Greek but had fallen almost completely out of use by the time of the NT, expresses a possibility or a wish. The imperative mood is the mood for a command or prohibition.

Nouns and adjectives: case. Nouns and adjectives are inflected by means of various cases, depending on the function of the noun or the adjective in the sentence.

The nominative case is used primarily for the subject of a Greek sentence. In the absence of a noun or noun phrase in the nominative case, the subject of the Greek sentence is found in the pronominal suffix of the verb. Pronouns in the nominative, though much more common in biblical Greek than in Classical Greek, are not grammatically necessary, and thus they often express a degree of accent or stress (cf. the use of “you” and “I” in the Greek text of John 7:8, 28, 34, 36, 47; 8:14, 15, 22, 23, 31, 38, 41, 44, 46, 47, 49, 54).

The genitive case is the most varied in its use. Generally speaking, it is the case of possession, source, or separation. Nouns and adjectives in the genitive case are often translated into English by adding the preposition “of.” The ambiguity inherent in the genitive case is evidenced even in English. Note, for example, Rev. 1:1: “The revelation of [NIV: “from”] Jesus Christ” (in Greek, “Jesus Christ” in the genitive case). Does this mean that the revelation is from Jesus Christ or about Jesus Christ?

The dative case is used to indicate location, instrumentality, accompaniment, or reception, as well as for the indirect object of the verb. Nouns and adjectives in the dative case are often translated into English by adding the preposition “to” or “for.”

The accusative case serves as the primary case for the direct object of the verb. This case generally connotes the ideas of extension or limitation of an act or movement.

A fifth case, less common than the others, is the vocative. The vocative is reserved for the purpose of direct address. It often serves as a discourse marker, as in “My dear children” in 1 John 2:1, 12, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4; 5:21.

Word order. One of the important by-products of the inflections found in biblical Greek is the measure of freedom afforded to authors in regard to word order (the order of words in a sentence is referred to as syntax). This relative freedom allows authors to emphasize words or phrases by means of their location in the sentence.

The color primarily associated with vegetation (Gen. 1:30; 9:3; Exod. 10:15), particularly the new growth after rain (2 Kings 19:26; Isa. 37:27; Mark 6:39). See also Colors.

Greeting Customs in Biblical Times

We know of greeting customs in biblical times from narrations of greetings and from instructions on greeting.

In biblical Hebrew, the phrase usually translated “to greet” is literally “to inquire of someone’s well-being [shalom]” (e.g., Exod. 18:7; 2 Sam. 20:9 [cf. the English greeting “How are you?”]). In some instances, we see people “blessing” one another as a form of greeting: “Just as he finished making the offering, Samuel arrived, and Saul went out to greet [lit., ‘bless’] him” (1 Sam. 13:10). Ruth 2:4 provides an example of the words that passed between individuals in such a greeting: “Just then Boaz arrived from Bethlehem and greeted the harvesters, ‘The Lord be with you!’ ‘The Lord bless you!’ they answered.” The formula had changed little by the first century AD, when Gabriel said to Mary, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you” (Luke 1:28). Luke reports that “Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be” (1:29), though the source of her consternation is unclear, since the angel’s greeting closely approximates that of Boaz. Perhaps this is the very point: the angel was speaking in a distinctively “biblical-sounding” vernacular, which raised the concerns of the young, first-century AD woman.

Paul often instructs the recipients of his letters to greet one another with a “holy kiss” (Rom. 16:16; 1 Cor. 16:20; 2 Cor. 13:12; 1 Thess. 5:26; see also 1 Pet. 5:14). Tragically, a kiss of greeting was the signal by which Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus (Matt. 26:48–49). Other examples of greeting with a kiss include Gen. 29:11, 13; 33:4; 45:15; Exod. 4:27; 18:7; 2 Sam. 20:9; Prov. 7:13. In other cases, kisses were exchanged as a farewell greeting (Gen. 31:28, 55; 48:10; 50:1; Ruth 1:9, 14; 1 Sam. 20:41; 2 Sam. 19:39; 1 Kings 19:20; Acts 20:37). Jesus taught his disciples to be generous with their greetings; after all, even pagans will greet their brothers and sisters, but a Christian must extend greetings even beyond the narrow circle of kinship (Matt. 5:47). When entering a home, Jesus taught, his disciples were to greet the inhabitants (Matt. 10:12). At other times, however, Jesus told his disciples to forgo greetings along the road in the interest of arriving quickly at their destination (Luke 10:4).

Greeting and Social Rank

In the examples of Ruth 2:4 and Luke 1:28 above, the greeting is initiated by the person of higher status. Boaz was a wealthy landowner greeting fieldworkers, and Gabriel was an important angel greeting a young, unmarried woman. An analogy may be drawn to another social norm, the notion that it was appropriate for the greater person to bless the lesser: “Without doubt the lesser is blessed by the greater” (Heb. 7:7). Elsewhere in the Bible, the opposite practice is referred to, when Jesus criticizes the teachers of the law and the Pharisees because, among other honors, “they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplace and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others” (Matt. 23:7). When Paul went to Rome, believers from that city traveled about forty miles to meet and greet him as he approached the city (Acts 28:15), thus according to him the honors due a traveling dignitary in antiquity (cf. Mark 9:15; 1 Thess. 4:17).

Epistolary Greetings

Like modern letters, ancient correspondence began with a salutation (Acts 15:23; 23:26; James 1:1) (see Salutation). In particular, Paul used the greeting at the beginning of his epistles as an occasion for theological elaboration in addition to its use as the identification of the writer and the recipients of the letter. To the end of his letters, Paul often appended individually directed greetings, as well as greetings in the name of friends with whom he sent the letter (Rom. 16:3–16; 1 Cor. 16:19–21; 2 Cor. 13:12–13; Phil. 4:22–23; Col. 4:10–15; 2 Tim. 4:19–21; Titus 3:15; Philem. 1:23; see also Heb. 13:24; 1 Pet. 5:13; 2 John 13; 3 John 14).

In Prov. 30:31 the KJV translates the Hebrew phrase zarzir motnayim (lit., “that which is girded in the loins,” thus “narrow-waisted”) as “greyhound,” but most modern versions prefer “strutting rooster” (as in the Targum).

One of the cooking implements used for preparing grain offerings to God (Lev. 2:5 [KJV: “pan”]). It was a flat frying surface, distinct from the “pan” (Lev. 2:7 [KJV: “fryingpan”]). See also Lev. 6:21; 7:9.

Grief is great sadness or sorrow or the circumstances that produce such; mourning refers to expressions of grief. Grief and mourning are often thought of in conjunction with death, but they may occur with regard to any personal or national tragedy (2 Sam. 13:19), the impending prospect of tragedy (Esther 4:3; Isa. 37:1), or repentance prompted by prophetic word of tragedy, sorrow over sin, or both.

The expressions of mourning in the Bible include weeping (Gen. 23:2), wailing (Esther 4:3; Isa. 15:3; Mark 5:38), tearing clothes and wearing sackcloth (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31), lying on the ground (2 Sam. 13:31), putting dust and ashes on the head or sitting on dust and ashes (Ezek. 27:30), fasting (2 Sam. 3:35; 12:16), singing songs of lament (2 Sam. 1:17–27; 3:32–35), pulling hair out of one’s beard (Ezra 9:3), cutting the hair (Jer. 7:29), uncovering the head (Lev. 10:6), removing sandals (Ezek. 24:17, 23), covering the lips or mouth (Ezek. 24:17, 22; Mic. 3:7), and employing professional mourners (Jer. 9:17; Matt. 9:23; Mark 5:38). Some pagan mourning practices were prohibited, such as slashing the body, cutting patterns into the body (tattooing?), and the somewhat obscure act of making the forehead bald (Lev. 19:28; Deut. 14:1; cf. 1 Kings 18:28).

Thus, grief and mourning were anything but stoic and brief. Grief was expressed both physically and vocally, often loudly, with expressions ranging from inarticulate groaning to poetic compositions in song. Although women may have been prominent among professional mourners, expressing grief was not considered unmasculine. Several times David was a leader in expressing grief. That the expression of grief should be brief, relatively dispassionate, and primarily characteristic of women was a Greek development that entered the church through people such as Augustine, who, for example, felt grieved that he had very briefly grieved the loss of his mother.

Paul’s admonition that believers should not grieve as do those who have no hope (1 Thess. 4:13) should not be construed as a dictum that it is wrong to grieve. The thought of the resurrection is a comfort in, not a replacement for, grief. Even Jesus wept at the death of Lazarus, knowing full well that he would soon resurrect him (John 11:25, 35, 40). Further, saints who have died and gone to heaven lament (Rev. 6:10). Grief is restricted for active-duty priests and once for Ezekiel, but these are clearly special circumstances and illustrate the normalcy of giving expression to grief. Ezekiel was to moan with a groaning for the dead (often misread as groaning silently) when his wife died, but he was not to engage in any mourning rites (Ezek. 24:15–27). This illustrated to Judah the circumstances that they would face, without opportunity to mourn properly for their dead. Ezekiel 8:14 indicts the women of Jerusalem for “mourning for Tammuz,” a pagan ritual involving the cycle of life, death, and rebirth of the Babylonian god Dumuzi.

Songs of lament are common in the OT. David composed a song of lament honoring the deaths of Saul and Jonathan (2 Sam. 1:17–27). After Joab’s unauthorized killing of Abner, David also sang a lament for Abner and required Joab to participate in mourning rituals (3:31–37). David also mourned his own sons: the unnamed son of Bathsheba (12:16–18), Amnon (13:30–33), and Absalom (18:33–19:4). In the case of Bathsheba’s son, David mourned in advance of the boy’s death, which had been prophetically proclaimed through Nathan. As the consequences of his sins continued, he progressively became undone in the mourning of his other sons. Also, funeral songs are used as the form of some prophetic material (Ezek. 19:1–14; 26:17–18; 27:2–9, 25–36; cf. Jer. 22:18; Amos 5:16). Not all laments are funeral songs per se. Compare also the book of Lamentations and the psalms of lament, also known as complaint psalms.

Expressions of grief and mourning were called for as part of repentance, combining both fear of punishment and depth of sorrow over sin (2 Chron. 34:19; Isa. 15:3; Joel 1:13).

In Gen. 31:10, 12; Zech. 6:3, 6 the KJV translates the Hebrew term barod as “grisled,” referring to animals that are “spotted” or “dappled” (NIV).

In some texts the KJV, following the LXX and the Vulgate, mistranslates the Hebrew word ’asherah as “grove” (Deut. 16:21; Judg. 6:25–26; 1 Kings 16:33). Behind the word is an outlawed tree or wooden cult symbol of the Canaanite goddess Asherah.

(1) The dregs or residue, used metaphorically to speak of people’s remaining impurities (Ezek. 24:6, 11–12). (2) An amount of money or other valuable entrusted to another (Matt. 25:27; Luke 19:23; 2 Tim. 1:14) or used as a down payment. In three instances in the NT the Greek word arrabōn is used to refer to the Holy Spirit as the deposit that guarantees what is still to come (2 Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph. 1:13–14). The last of these passages notes that the deposit of the Spirit in view is the redemption of God’s people, their future inheritance.

God puts Adam in the garden of Eden to literally “guard” it (Heb. shamar, Gen. 2:15; NIV “take care of it”), but on account of sin he must be removed. God places cherubim to guard against intruders (cf. 1 Sam. 26:15; Song 5:7; Isa. 21:11), to guard the way to the tree of life (Gen. 3:24). God “preserves” the faithful (Ps. 31:23) and “guards” their lives (Prov. 24:12) from trouble (Ps. 32:7), from violent people (Ps. 140:1, 4), and from the enemy’s plan (Ps. 64:1). The noun mishmeret derives from shamar and is found in both military (2 Sam. 20:3; Neh. 7:3; Isa. 21:8) and cultic (Num. 8:26; 1 Chron. 9:27; Ezek. 40:46) contexts.

Several verbs are used in the NT to render the sense “to guard.” Most pertinent is phylassō, which is used of “guarding” prisoners (Luke 8:29; Acts 12:4; 28:16) and personal property (Luke 2:8; 11:21; Acts 22:20). Paul exhorts Timothy to guard the deposit of faith entrusted to him (1 Tim. 6:20; 2 Tim. 1:12), and people are encouraged to guard themselves against covetousness (Luke 12:15), idols (1 John 5:21), and lawlessness (2 Pet. 3:17). God also serves as a guard who safely delivers his people (John 17:12; 2 Pet. 2:5) and promises to protect them from the evil one (2 Thess. 3:3).

In Greco-Roman society, children were accompanied by a custodian (paidagōgos, lit., “pedagogue”) who was entrusted with guardianship and instruction of the youth in goodness and morality. The judgment of the paidagōgos was considered to be the norm for the youth’s actions. As such, the custodian was responsible for the social actions of the youth in public and could be punished for them when they were inappropriate. Libanius records one such incident: “Diogenes, on seeing a youth misbehaving, struck his paedagogus, adding: ‘Why do you teach such things?’ ” (Progymnasmata 3).

The term paidagōgos is translated a variety of ways in the NT: “guardian” (NIV, ESV), “custodian” (RSV), “schoolmaster” or “instructor” (KJV), “tutor” (NASB), “disciplinarian” (NRSV), and so on. The apostle Paul refers to the law as a paidagōgos (Gal. 3:24–25) and to custodians or guardians (in contrast to fathers) in Christ (1 Cor. 4:15). The law’s role in Israel’s upbringing was to provide proper protection and guidance for growing up rightly. However, this custodial role was for Jews before the time of Christ, and now that Christ has come, no one needs or is required to submit to it in order to enter, remain, or go on in the Christian life.

Deuteronomy 10:7 lists Gudgodah among the encampments of the Israelites during their wilderness journey. This listing corresponds to Num. 33:32, which suggests that Hor Haggidgad is an alternate appellation. The site cannot be identified, although some have conjectured a linguistic connection to Wady Gudaghid, west of Petra.

One who receives hospitality at another’s home or table. Hospitality was a matter of honor in ancient times. It was shameful to mistreat a guest (Judg. 19:23). A guest received special portions at the table (1 Sam. 9:22–24; Esther 1:3), although the guest of a Levitical priest was not allowed to eat the sacred offering (Lev. 22:10). Job’s misfortunes alienated him from his guests (Job 19:15), but the guests of the metaphorical Woman Folly fared worse (Prov. 9:18).

Guests abound in Jesus’ parables about banquets and weddings (Matt. 22:10–11; Mark 2:19; Luke 14:16; 19:7). Jesus himself was often a guest (Luke 7:49; 14:7; 22:11; John 2:10). King Herod’s misguided concern for his dinner guests caused the death of John the Baptist (Matt. 14:9; Mark 6:22, 26).

A room for guests to lodge or dine in. The same Greek word, katalyma, is used for the inn (probably actually a guest room in a private residence) that was unavailable for Mary to give birth to Jesus (Luke 2:7) and for the upper room made available for the final Passover meal of Jesus with his disciples (Mark 14:14; Luke 22:11). Paul requests that Philemon prepare him a guest room (Philem. 22).

Deceitful cunning, usually employed in taking advantage of others through scheming and underhanded methods (e.g., Exod. 21:14; Pss. 32:2; 34:13; 55:21; 2 Cor. 12:16 KJV; 2 Macc. 12:24; 1 Pet. 2:1 NRSV). Although Nathaniel is not initially impressed with Jesus’ messianic credentials, Jesus nevertheless praises him for his straightforwardness: “Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile” (John 1:47 KJV [NIV, NRSV: “no deceit”]). The reference to an Israelite may be a pun on the meaning of Jacob’s name, which means “deceiver” (see Gen. 25:26; 27:35–36; cf. Gen. 28:12 with John 1:51). Judas Iscariot is an unfortunate contrast (John 12:6). God cannot lie (Titus 1:2), and therefore his word is without guile or “pure” (cf. 1 Pet. 2:1–2; 3:10).

Although the concepts of sin and guilt often overlap, a basic distinction between the two can be established. In the biblical sense, sin is basically violation of divine stipulations (what a person does or does not do), whereas guilt is the resulting state, or one’s “legal” status (what that person has become as a result). In essence, one commits sin and becomes guilty (Hab. 1:11).

The state of being guilty is further distinguished from the punishment that it draws, because one can be pronounced guilty and still be exempted from punishment. Nor should guilt be mistaken for the emotional response of the culprits toward themselves and their victims. No matter how sincere it may be, remorse does not eliminate the guilt.

In the biblical sense, guilt is something objective and separate from the will or intention of the culprit. One can pay back debt and render the obligation fulfilled. One cannot, however, cancel one’s own guilt. In the sacrificial system of the OT, the offender must perform restitution to the victim and also give a guilt offering to God. This reflects the notion that in committing sinful acts in violation of God’s laws, the culprit has offended not only the victim but also God. This is what David means in Ps. 51:3–4 (with his sin in full display before God, David realizes that he has sinned against God and God alone).

This is why those who scoff at the guilt offering are fools (Prov. 14:9). By doing this, they insult God’s being and character. Such a biblical view of guilt implies that forgiveness and restoration should come from without, from source(s) other than the culprit and victim. The Bible affirms that the only one capable of offsetting the cost of human sin is the sinless Christ, “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). His life was laid on the cross and offered as the acceptable sacrifice for the totality of guilt, and as a result it freed those who believe in him from the obligation of the guilt.

The words “sacrifice” and “offering” often are used interchangeably, but “offering” refers to a gift more generally, while “sacrifice” indicates a gift consecrated for a divine being. In biblical Hebrew “sacrifice” is more narrowly equated with the peace offering. All other “sacrifices” are referred to as gifts. Sacrifices were offered to honor God, thanking him for his goodness. More important, they enabled persons to be made right with God by atoning for their sins. Whereas sin upset the fellowship God desired to have with people and kindled his wrath, sacrifice restored the relationship.

Old Testament

OT offerings included cereals (whether the grain was whole, ground into flour, or mixed with other elements), liquids (wine, oil, or water), and animals (or parts thereof, such as the blood and fat). Although the Bible acknowledges that other ancient Near Eastern people had their own sacrificial rites, it rejects them as unworthy of the God of Israel. The people of God therefore were instructed how to sacrifice properly while at Sinai. Even so, offerings and sacrifices are recorded as taking place before the law was given.

Prior to the law. Cain and Abel brought the earliest offerings. Contrary to a common interpretation, Cain’s offering was not rejected because it did not include blood; the Hebrew word for the brothers’ gifts, minkhah, usually denotes grain offerings. A better conclusion is that Cain only brought some of his produce (no mention of firstfruits), while Abel brought the best of the best (the fat portions from the firstborn of the flock).

Immediately after the flood, Noah built an altar and presented the first burnt offering mentioned in the Bible (Gen. 8:20). That this (and other sacrifices) was received as a “pleasing aroma” indicates that God approved of and accepted it. It is significant that immediately after the offering, God made a covenant with Noah, his descendants, and every living creature. Sacrifices are closely related to covenant relationships, as can be seen in the story of Abraham enacting a covenant ceremony in Gen. 15 and in Israel receiving many instructions about sacrifice while at Sinai (cf. Gen. 31:43–54).

Sacrificial laws in Leviticus. Sacrificial laws are found throughout the Pentateuch, the most being in Lev. 1–7. As Leviticus makes clear, Israel understood sacrifice to have a number of different purposes. It was a means to bring a gift to God, to express communion with him and others in the community, to consecrate something or someone for God’s use, and to deal with personal uncleanness or sin. These ideas are developed in the descriptions of the different sacrifices that Israel was required to bring to God. In general, the sacrifices were made of clean animals raised by the one making the offering or of grain or wine produced by the person. In some cases, the offering was connected with the person’s economic ability, a poorer person being allowed to present doves or even cereal if a lamb or goat was unaffordable for a sin offering (Lev. 5:6–13). In all cases, only the best—what was “without defect”—was to be offered.

Priest as mediator. Three parties were involved in the sacrifices: the worshiper, the priest, and God. The worshiper—the person who had sinned or become unclean in some way—brought an animal to God, laid a hand upon it, and then killed it. Whether the animal’s death represents the death that the worshiper deserves due to sin or whether the sin is transferred to the animal that bears it instead is unclear. The priest served as a mediator who offered the blood of the sacrifice to God and, in many instances, burned all or part of the offering. In response to the offering, God, who had graciously given the sacrificial system so that those who had sinned could be restored to fellowship with him, forgave the person. Uniquely in the ancient world, Israelite sacrifices were not considered magical acts that could manipulate God to act on behalf of the worshiper. Presenting an improper sacrifice while exhibiting an improper attitude or motive resulted in rejection.

Types of sacrifices. Leviticus introduced five main sacrifices: the ’olah (1:1–17; 6:8–18), the minkhah (2:1–16; 6:14–23), the shelamim (3:1–17; 7:11–36), the khatta’t (4:1–5:13), and the ’asham (5:14–6:7). Most of these focused on uncleanness or sin. The worshiper who brought such an offering was not allowed to eat any of it, as it was wholly given to God. Even when priests were allowed to eat part of a sacrifice, their portion was “waved” before God, indicating that it belonged to him.

1. The ’olah, or burnt offering, is the basic OT sacrifice connected with atonement for sin (Lev. 1:4). When rightly offered, it was accepted as “an aroma pleasing to the Lord.” The worshiper brought a male animal (young bull, sheep, goat, dove, or young pigeon) without blemish, laid a hand upon it, and then killed it. After the priest sprinkled some of the blood on the altar, the rest was burned up.

2. The minkhah is simply a gift or offering. The Hebrew word is often used for a present given to another person or tribute to a ruler. When used of sacrifice, it is usually rendered as “grain offering” or “meal offering.” A minkhah can, on occasion, include flesh or fat (Gen. 4:4; Judg. 6:18–21). Considered “an aroma pleasing to the Lord,” it consisted of unground grain or fine flour mixed with oil and incense and was presented either cooked or uncooked. Part of the offering was burned as a “memorial portion,” the rest being given to the priests (Lev. 2:1–3). It usually was accompanied by a drink offering—wine poured out on the altar. Grain offerings frequently complemented burnt offerings or fellowship offerings. The showbread may have been considered a grain offering.

3. The shelamim (NIV: “fellowship offering”) has traditionally been called the “peace offering,” as the term is related to shalom. This offering most likely indicated that the worshiper was at peace with God and others; all the worshiper’s relationships were whole. Classified into three types, it could be used to express thanksgiving, to signify the fulfillment of a vow, or simply to denote one’s desire to bring an offering to God out of free will. Only those who made a vow were required to offer a shelamim; the other forms were wholly optional. The worshiper brought a male or female animal (ox, sheep, or goat) without blemish, laid a hand on its head, and slaughtered it. The priest sprinkled its blood on the sides of the altar and burned the fat surrounding the major organs. It is described as “an aroma pleasing to the Lord.”

This offering significantly recognized the covenant relationship existing between those who shared in it. God received the fatty portions, the officiating priest received the right thigh, the other priests the breast, and the remainder was shared among members of a family, clan, tribe, or some other group. According to Leviticus, a thanksgiving offering was to be eaten on the day it was offered, and a vow or freewill offering could be eaten within two days. Anything not eaten in the prescribed time period was to be burned.

4. The khatta’t, or sin offering, atoned for the sin of an individual or of the nation and cleansed the sacred items in the tabernacle that had been corrupted by sin. Since a sin offering could purify ceremonial as well as moral uncleanness, people who were unclean due to childbirth, skin diseases, bodily discharges, and so forth also brought them (Lev. 12–15).

The kind of animal sacrificed and the sacrificial ritual varied with the offender and the offense. If a priest or the entire congregation sinned, a bull was sacrificed and its blood was sprinkled before the veil of the tabernacle and on the incense altar in the holy place. The rest was burned, leaving nothing to be eaten. Leaders who sinned sacrificed a male goat. Its blood was sprinkled on the bronze altar, and the remainder was given to the priest. A commoner brought and slaughtered a she-goat or lamb, the priest sprinkled its blood on the horns of the altar, and the fat was burned for God and the rest given to the priests. A poor person could bring two doves or pigeons, and the very poor could bring a grain offering. This differentiation apparently indicated that the sins of some members of the community had more serious consequences than others. Those in closest contact with the tabernacle contaminated it at a deeper level, requiring a more costly sacrifice. The poor were not required to bring more than they could afford.

5. The ’asham, or guilt offering, provided compensation for sins. A ram without blemish was sacrificed, its blood was sprinkled on the altar, and its fatty portions, kidneys, and liver were burned. The rest was given to the priest. In addition, the value of what was misappropriated plus one-fifth of its value was given to the person wronged or to the priests.

Altars. According to Leviticus, only the Aa-ron-ic priests could handle the blood or other parts of a sacrifice brought to the altar at the tabernacle. Even so, throughout Israel’s history other sacrificial altars were built. While some of these were illicitly used for syncretistic practices, others were constructed at God’s instruction (Josh. 8:30–35; Judg. 6:25–26). Some of these were used by priests making rounds so that people from different areas could sacrifice to God (1 Sam. 7:17). Others were used by individuals who were not priests yet desired to call upon the name of the Lord or sacrifice for communal meals. The solitary altars were mainly used for burnt offerings and peace offerings, although grain and drink offerings also were known. Sin and guilt offerings were offered only at the tabernacle or temple.

Times and purposes. The OT regulates a number of different occasions upon which regular sacrifices were to be made. Burnt offerings were presented every morning and evening (Exod. 29:38–41; Num. 28:1–8). Additional offerings were sacrificed on the Sabbath and the new moon (Num. 28:9–15). Special sacrifices were brought to celebrate the major festivals of the year (Num. 28:16–29:39), particularly the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16). Sacrifices might also accompany requests for safety or deliverance or in response to God’s deliverance. Thus, burnt and fellowship offerings could be brought along with prayers that God would put an end to a plague (2 Sam. 24:18–25). King David brought burnt offerings and fellowship offerings when the ark of the covenant was returned after having been captured by the Philistines (2 Sam. 6:1–19).

Sacrifices could also be made to consecrate people or things for a special task. When the tabernacle was consecrated, special offerings were brought for twelve continuous days (Num. 7). Later, fellowship, burnt, and grain offerings were sacrificed when the temple was dedicated (1 Kings 8:62–64). Sin offerings were presented when a priest was ordained (Lev. 8–9). Those who completed a vow dedicating themselves as Naz-i-rites brought sacrifices to God so that they could again become a normal member of the congregation (Num. 6:9–21). Fellowship offerings often accompanied the announcement of or installation of a king (1 Sam. 11:14–15; 1 Kings 1:9, 25).

Although the sacrificial system was intended to bring the Israelites back into fellowship with God, at times their misuse of it separated them from him. When his people showed more interest in sacrificial ritual than in obeying God’s instructions, they were chastened (1 Sam. 15:13–22; Jer. 7:21–28). When the people of Israel were guilty of confusing the worship of Yahweh with Canaanite fertility cults, God sent prophets to warn them (Isa. 1:11–16; Amos 4:4–5). Prophetic statements denouncing sacrificial rites were aimed at the misuse of sacrifices rather than their existence. Jeremiah and Ezekiel were so positive about sacrificial worship that they looked forward to a time when it would be reestablished in its pure form (Jer. 17:26; Ezek. 43:18–27; 46:1–24).

New Testament

The NT indicates that the OT sacrificial system was still in place in the early first century AD. Following directions given in Leviticus, Mary brought a sacrifice to the temple in Jerusalem so that she could be purified after giving birth to Jesus (Luke 2:21–24; cf. Lev. 12:3, 8). Mary and Joseph would have sacrificed and eaten a Passover lamb during their annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem to celebrate the Feast of Passover. It is not recorded whether Jesus always went with them, but he did join them at the Passover celebration when he was twelve years old. It is safe to assume that at this time and after he grew up, Jesus took part in the sacrifices when he visited Jerusalem to celebrate the feasts.

Jesus’ disciples attend several feasts with him. In addition, after his resurrection they frequently went to the temple to pray at the time when sacrifices were made. Encouraged by the Jerusalem church leaders, Paul went to the temple to join in and pay for the purification rites of some men who had taken a vow, perhaps to serve as Nazirites (Acts 21:23–26). He later testified before Felix that he had returned to Jerusalem in order to bring gifts to the poor and present offerings in the temple (24:17). Although Gentile believers were exempt from these practices (15:1–29), early Jewish believers clearly saw no contradiction between believing the gospel of Jesus Christ and engaging in sacrificial rituals. They likely followed Jewish piety until the destruction of the temple in AD 70, when all sacrifices at the temple ceased.

Even so, Christians quickly came to understand Christ’s death as the final sacrifice that completed the OT system. Various NT authors consider the nature of Christ’s death and metaphorically relate it to OT sacrifices, but the writer of Hebrews develops this in the most detail. According to Hebrews, the sacrificial system was merely the shadow that pointed to Jesus. Although the blood of animals could not adequately deal with sins, Jesus’ sacrifice could (Heb. 10:1–10). Jesus is regularly identified as the sacrificial lamb whose blood purifies humanity from sin (John 1:29, 36; Rom. 8:3; 1 Cor. 5:7; Eph. 5:2; 1 Pet. 1:19; 1 John 1:7; Rev. 5:6, 12; 7:14; 12:11; 13:8). His sacrifice is considered a propitiation that turns away God’s wrath (Rom. 3:25; 1 John 2:2).

The end of the OT sacrificial system does not mean that those who come to God through Jesus Christ no longer bring sacrifices. Instead of animal and grain offerings, spiritual sacrifices are to be made (1 Pet. 2:5). Emulating their Savior, Christ’s followers should offer themselves as living sacrifices, devoted to God (Rom. 12:1). This implies that everything done in this life could be considered a sacrifice. Simply believing the gospel makes one an acceptable offering to God (Rom. 15:16). Labor for the sake of the gospel, or perhaps martyrdom, can be viewed as a drink offering (Phil. 2:17). The author of Hebrews identifies three types of sacrifices that believers should offer: praise, good deeds, and sharing with those in need (13:15–16). In line with the last of these points, Paul counts the gift sent by the Philippian church as a fragrant offering that pleases God (Phil. 4:18).

A large inlet of an ocean similar to a bay but generally longer and more enclosed by land. The term appears only once in the NIV, with reference to the “gulf of the Egyptian Sea” (Isa. 11:15). The term is also used in the KJV in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus for the “chasm” (NIV; NRSV) that separates the rich man’s place of torment from Lazarus’s place of bliss at Abraham’s side (Luke 16:26).

A gulf in the northeastern part of the Red Sea. It is bordered by Midian on the east and by the Sinai Peninsula on the west. At the northern tip is Ezion Geber, where Solomon built his fleet (1 Kings 9:26–28; 2 Chron. 8:17–18).

A seabird listed as one of the unclean birds (Lev. 11:16; Deut. 14:15; KJV: “cuckow”).

Gum is a sticky, elastic substance formed from the breakdown of certain elements in the cell wall of plants. To harvest it, the bark of certain trees was cut and removed, which allowed the gum to exude and be collected. As can be seen from the contents of the Ishmaelite caravan (Gen. 37:25 NASB, ESV; NIV: “spices”), gum was an important trade commodity in the ancient Near East. Gum is similar to resin, and together they create a type of gum resin, of which frankincense is the most prominent biblical example. Referred to in the KJV and several other versions as “stacte,” gum resin (Heb. natap) was used in the priestly perfume (Exod. 30:34). This perfume symbolized the presence of God in the sanctuary, and its abuse was punishable by ostracism (Exod. 30:38).

Gum is a sticky, elastic substance formed from the breakdown of certain elements in the cell wall of plants. To harvest it, the bark of certain trees was cut and removed, which allowed the gum to exude and be collected. As can be seen from the contents of the Ishmaelite caravan (Gen. 37:25 NASB, ESV; NIV: “spices”), gum was an important trade commodity in the ancient Near East. Gum is similar to resin, and together they create a type of gum resin, of which frankincense is the most prominent biblical example. Referred to in the KJV and several other versions as “stacte,” gum resin (Heb. natap) was used in the priestly perfume (Exod. 30:34). This perfume symbolized the presence of God in the sanctuary, and its abuse was punishable by ostracism (Exod. 30:38).

The effort to limit the private citizen’s access to firearms, with special reference to handguns and assault rifles. The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution forbids the federal government from disarming its citizens entirely, because light-infantry weapons are needed in defense of free states. Nevertheless, the public policy debate continues, given the periodic use of firearms against innocent people, especially in schools, churches, and public facilities. Advocates of gun control argue that criminalizing the sale and possession of deadly weapons would reduce violent crime. Advocates of gun owners’ rights make the opposite claim: violent criminals would offend less often if ordinary people were allowed to carry concealed weapons for self-defense. The Bible does not forbid deadly self-defense in all cases, particularly where one’s very life may be threatened (Exod. 22:2–3), but deadly force, using any sort of weapon, is the option of last resort.

(1) The son of Naphtali (Gen. 46:24; 1 Chron. 7:13) and eponymous ancestor of the Gunites (Num. 26:48). (2) The grandfather of Ahi, a chief of Gad (1 Chron. 5:15).

A clan in the tribe of Naphtali mentioned during the second census in the wilderness (Num. 26:48).

The ascent located near Ibleam where King Jehu pursued and fatally wounded King Ahaziah (2 Kings 9:27). It has been suggested Gur should be identified with Khirbet en-Najjar, locating it on the east side of Wadi Belameh.

The village where Uzziah, king of Judah, received assistance from God in his campaign against the Philistines and the Arabs (2 Chron. 26:7). The Philistines located to the west and the Arabs to the south of Israel were likely threatening the borders of Uzziah’s kingdom. Gur Baal possibly is located among Judah’s southern tribes on the border between Judah and Philistia, but others have suggested an alternative location to the east, in the region of Edom.

A water channel incorporated into the architecture of a building or town. Archaeologists have uncovered extensive and elaborate water systems in several sites of the biblical era. In 2 Sam. 5:8 David proposes the invasion of Jebusite Jerusalem through its water channels.

In the ancient world, a place for physical training and Greek education. The English word “gymnasium” comes from the Greek word gymnos, meaning “naked,” referring to the fact that Greeks exercised in the nude. As a foundational institution of the Greek city and inseparable from the Greek way of life, the gymnasium was a sign of Hellenism within Israel and a point of conflict with those who viewed Hellenism as a violation of the law. In 175 BC Jason the high priest asked Antiochus IV to build a gymnasium (1 Macc. 1:14; 2 Macc. 4:9). Many Jews, including priests, embraced Hellenism and participated in the gymnasium (2 Macc. 4:14). Some even underwent surgery to remove signs of their circumcision (1 Macc. 1:15). This cultural clash contributed to the Maccabean revolt. By the first century AD, the activities of the gymnasia were well known in Jewish culture. Philo of Alexandria (20 BC–AD 50), a Jewish philosopher and commentator, spoke positively of the training received in a gymnasium (Dreams 69). Paul used the activities of the gymnasium as metaphors for Christian living: running (1 Cor. 9:24–27), boxing (1 Cor. 9:26), and wrestling (Eph. 6:12). In 1 Tim. 4:8 Paul uses the Greek term gymnasia to mean “physical training” and acknowledges its value.

Within the gymnasium complex athletes trained in multiple sports, including running, boxing, wrestling, and javelin throwing. The gymnasium combined physical training with education in literature, philosophy, rhetoric, and music. Though open to all male citizens, it was primarily used by boys between the ages of fifteen and twenty.

The gymnasium complex contained a running track and a palaistra, a central courtyard surrounded by colonnades with rooms for dressing, oiling, and powdering. The complex also included baths and classrooms. A library was usually nearby or a part of the complex.

The gymnasiarch, who was elected to a one-year term, supervised all aspects of training and education and provided for the needs and supplies of the gymnasium. He also employed professional trainers and teachers.