A grandson of Judah through Shelah, he was the father of Mareshah and the brother of Er (1 Chron. 4:21).

(1) A grandson of Levi through Gershon (1 Chron. 23:7; 26:21). Ladan is sometimes called “Libni” (Exod. 6:17; Num. 3:18; 1 Chron. 6:17, 20). In 1 Chron. 23:8–9, three sons of Ladan (Jehiel, Zetham, Joel) are listed, but then follow three sons of Ladan’s brother, Shimei (Shelomoth, Haziel, Haran) and the words “these were the heads of the families of Ladan.” (2) A descendant of Ephraim through Tahan (1 Chron. 7:25–26).

(1) Rebekah’s brother (Gen. 24:29) and Rachel and Leah’s father (29:16). Laban is involved in the betrothal of Rebekah to Isaac (24:29–51), but he is best known for his deceitfulness and trickery, especially in his dealings with his nephew Jacob (29:1–31:55). Jacob, following his own crafty acquisition of Esau’s birthright and Isaac’s blessing, fled to Laban’s home in Harran, located in Paddan Aram. After his arrival, Jacob agreed to serve Laban for seven years in order to marry his younger daughter, Rachel. Similar to Jacob’s deception of his blind father, Laban secretly gave Jacob his oldest daughter, Leah, instead of Rachel on his wedding night. To justify his actions, Laban appealed to the societal custom that the oldest must be married first, and he demanded seven more years of labor from Jacob in order for him to marry Rachel.

Laban is characterized by this type of self-centeredness throughout the narrative. He continued to cheat Jacob, knowing that Jacob was the key to his own prosperity. Jacob remained in Laban’s home for twenty years (Gen. 31:41) but afterward fled with his family and possessions. Laban stopped Jacob on the way, and the two made a covenant (31:43–54).

(2) One of the places named to identify the location of Moses’ speech to the Israelites concerning God’s commands (Deut. 1:1).

God the Worker

A biblical theology of work starts with God as the creator of all things. In the OT, the verb bara’ (“to create”) is used only with God as subject. The first verb in the Bible (Gen. 1:1), it occurs also in many other texts that describe God accomplishing what only God can do. Other terms such as yatsar (“to form, fashion”) and ’asah (“to make, do”) are used numerous times throughout the OT with either God or humans as subjects.

These three terms reinforce the portrayal of God as worker in Gen. 1–2 (cf. Isa. 45:7). God creates light and darkness; sky and earth; sun, moon, and stars; land and sea; plant and animal life; and humankind—in sum, all that is. He forms the “man” (Heb. ’adam) from the dust of the ground, bringing him to life by breathing into him the breath of life.

Elsewhere in the OT God is said to build, build up, or rebuild/restore (Heb. banah [e.g., Pss. 102:16; 147:2; Jer. 24:6; Amos 9:11]). Interestingly, God takes a rib from the man, which he then makes (lit., “builds into” [Heb. banah + le]) a woman (Gen. 2:22). He founds (Heb. kun) the earth (Isa. 45:18) and stretches out (Heb. natah) the heavens (Zech. 12:1). Further, wisdom is God’s “craftsman” (Heb. ’amon), taking part in the world’s creation (Prov. 8:30). The NT reveals Christ as the one through whom God creates all things (John 1:1–3; Col. 1:16). This brief sketch suggests the range of ways in which God’s work is described.

Human Labor

Ideally, work is performed as service to God (Col. 3:17, 22–24). Work is one way we express the divine image. God’s creation mandate to fill, subdue, and rule the earth implies work (Gen. 1:26–28), and God places the man in the garden “to work it and take care of it” (Gen. 2:15). The importance of work for human dignity as well as survival undergirds the laws of gleaning that make provision for the poor to gather their own food (e.g., Deut. 24:19–22). The expansion of human technologies and occupations (mela’kah [see Exod. 12:16]) reflects that dignity and God’s own diverse workmanship. Job 28 celebrates human industry and achievement while subordinating all to the prevailing value of wisdom, rooted in “the fear of the Lord.” Given the indispensable role of work within the limits of human life, diligence is commended (Eccles. 3:9–10), idleness condemned (Prov. 10:4; 12:24; 21:5; 2 Thess. 3:6–10). Work is essentially God’s good gift to us in creation.

But work now has negative aspects. In response to Adam’s sin, God curses the ground, introducing “painful toil” into the work cycle (Gen. 3:17–19; 5:29). We now eke out our living by hardship, finding frustration instead of bounty—a lifelong reminder that we are made of dust and will return to dust. The book of Ecclesiastes echoes this note of futility and raises sharp questions about the lasting value of human labor (1:2–3, 14; 2:4–11, 17–23; 3:9; 4:4–6; 8:16–17). Sin and death haunt the unfolding occupations in Gen. 4, and the episode of the tower of Babel in Gen. 11 signals God’s judgment on human pretension (cf. James 4:13–16). Excessive toil (workaholism) is a pitfall, not a virtue, for it expresses reliance on self rather than on God, who builds, protects, and gives rest (Ps. 127:1–2). Oppressive, unjust working conditions are cause for lament, and they incur God’s judgment (Exod. 5:6–19; Prov. 14:31; James 5:4–6).

Thus, Israel’s labor policy is to reflect God’s covenant faithfulness, generosity, and concern for the vulnerable. Moses’ law places limits on employers/masters to protect employees, slaves, and foreign workers from exploitation. The primary limit is God’s command that Israel keep the Sabbath holy by a complete cessation of labor (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15). This move prioritizes God’s covenant above human labor and sets a rhythm of work and rest. Exodus grounds the Sabbath in God’s rest from his work of creation on the seventh day. Deuteronomy ties it to Israel’s history of slavery in Egypt and deliverance by God; by keeping the Sabbath, Israel shows gratitude to God and guards against replicating Egypt’s oppressive policies.

Exodus 31–32 portrays work in its best and worst lights. The proper interplay of work and rest is seen in chapter 31, which narrates the divinely empowered work on the tabernacle, followed by a strong reminder to keep the Sabbath as a “sign” between God and Israel. In contrast, chapter 32 portrays artisanship put to the worst use, the making of a golden idol. Aaron fashions gold with a tool and makes the calf image, but later he tells Moses, “I threw [their gold jewelry] into the fire, and out came this calf!” (32:24). This remark anticipates the prophets’ later mockery of idol-makers (e.g., Isa. 44:9–20) and raises the issue of personal responsibility for the outcome of one’s labor: Aaron seeks to avoid being implicated in Israel’s idolatry by concealing his own role in the project.

Public labor issues increase in complexity when Israel adopts human kingship and engages in international trade (e.g., 1 Sam. 8; 1 Kings 9:15–23). Babylon deals a decisive blow to Judah’s statehood by deporting leaders and skilled workers. Many of these establish such viable, productive new lives in Babylon that when Cyrus later allows the exiled Judeans to return, they choose to remain.

The NT assumes the legitimacy of work and adopts the OT’s view that within proper limits work is a good gift of God. Jesus, however, has come to do his Father’s “work” (John 5:16–18), which entails calling some people away from their normal occupations to follow him, as well as a new approach to Sabbath observance (Mark 2:21–27; 3:4). These moves signal the urgency and newness of the kingdom of God. Consequently, the apostles are “co-workers in God’s service” (1 Cor. 3:9), and Christians are “God’s handiwork” (Eph. 2:10). In light of the resurrection, we offer to God work (Gk. ergon) and labor (Gk. kopos), not in futility but in hope (1 Cor. 15:58; cf. Rev. 14:13).

Cord (KJV: “lace”) was used to bind together certain items in the high priest’s garments. By running blue cord through rings on the breastpiece and the ephod, Moses’ craftsmen attached the breastpiece to the ephod’s waistband so that the breastpiece would not “swing out from the ephod” (Exod. 28:28; 39:21). Blue cord also fastened a gold plate, inscribed with the words “Holy to the Lord,” to the high priest’s turban at the forehead area (Exod. 28:36–38; 39:30–31).

Lachish was in the foothills of the Shephelah, thirty miles to the southwest of Jerusalem, and it controlled the road that ran from the north to the south hill country. It is usually identified with modern Tell el-Duweir, which has been extensively excavated.

Before the monarchy. Lachish is mentioned in Egyptian sources as early as the fifteenth century BC. These sources include letters from the kings of Lachish. We first hear of Lachish in the OT at the time of the conquest when, under its king Japhia, it formed part of a coalition of five Amorite city-states. Joshua defeated the coalition, killed the kings, and totally destroyed the cities (Josh. 10:1–35; 12:11). Archaeologists have found evidence of Canaanite occupation prior to this time, and also of the destruction of the city in the late second millennium BC. After the conquest, Lachish was allotted to the tribe of Judah (15:39), but there is no archaeological evidence of Israelite occupation until the time of the monarchy.

During the monarchy. During the monarchy, Lachish was the most important of a double line of fortified cities guarding the western approaches to Jerusalem. It probably was one of Solomon’s chariot cities (1 Kings 9:19; 10:26) and certainly was fortified by Rehoboam (2 Chron. 11:9). Amaziah fled to Lachish from a conspiracy against him in Jerusalem, but he was followed and killed there (2 Kings 14:19; 2 Chron. 25:27). When Sennacherib of Assyria invaded Judah in Hezekiah’s reign, he besieged and captured Lachish, making it his headquarters for further threats against Jerusalem, which were miraculously averted in answer to prayer (2 Kings 18:13–19:37; 2 Chron. 32:1–22; Isa. 36–37).

Lachish plays an important role in Micah’s lament over the cities of Judah (Mic. 1:13), where it is closely linked to Jerusalem. Using a wordplay on the similarity between the name “Lachish” and a rare Hebrew word for a chariot “team” of horses, Micah says that Lachish must harness its chariots, presumably for flight, because it was “where the sin of the Daughter Zion began.”

The archaeological data from Lachish in this period are rich. The layer known as Level V probably was destroyed during Shishak of Egypt’s campaign against Rehoboam in 925 BC (2 Chron. 12:2–4); the next layer, Level IV, seems to have been destroyed not in warfare but rather by a natural disaster such as an earthquake. In the eighth century BC, Lachish (Level III) was at its largest, richest, and most heavily defended, but this was the city that Sennacherib destroyed and burned in 701 BC. Archaeologists have found not only jars with seals from Hezekiah’s reign, a deep well for freshwater, the massive double city walls and the gatehouse, but also evidence of the battle, including the attackers’ huge siege ramp and the smaller ramp on the other side of the walls built by the defenders, weaponry from the battle, ashes lying three feet thick, and mass graves.

Sennacherib was so proud of his victory over Lachish that he decorated his palace in Nineveh with vivid reliefs of it, which can be seen in London’s British Museum. These show the fortifications of the city and the siege engines positioned on the ramp. While the Assyrian army attacks, the Judeans hurl flaming torches from the walls, only for the Assyrians to extinguish them with ladles of water. Prisoners, including women and children, are led out of the city past gruesome scenes of execution, and objects connected with Judah’s worship are carried away as spoils of war. Sennacherib also left a written account of his campaign, in which he claimed to have deported two hundred thousand people from the city.

When the city was next rebuilt (Level II), probably in Josiah’s day, it was much smaller and less fortified. It held out against the Babylonians longer than most (Jer. 34:7) but eventually fell. The Lachish letters are military communications found in the gatehouse, describing the system of beacons used to communicate between the defensive hill forts as the enemy closed in.

After the exile. After the Babylonians destroyed and burned the city, archaeological evidence suggests it lay abandoned for some time. Nehemiah reports that it was resettled after the return from exile (Neh. 11:30). Archaeological remains from the Persian and Hellenistic periods indicate that this rebuilding (Level I) was in use until the second century BC.

(1) A grandson of Levi through Gershon (1 Chron. 23:7; 26:21). Ladan is sometimes called “Libni” (Exod. 6:17; Num. 3:18; 1 Chron. 6:17, 20). In 1 Chron. 23:8–9, three sons of Ladan (Jehiel, Zetham, Joel) are listed, but then follow three sons of Ladan’s brother, Shimei (Shelomoth, Haziel, Haran) and the words “these were the heads of the families of Ladan.” (2) A descendant of Ephraim through Tahan (1 Chron. 7:25–26).

While sleeping at Bethel, the patriarch Jacob had a dream in which a “ladder” (NRSV, KJV, NASB) or “stairway” (NIV, NET) extended from earth to heaven. In Jacob’s dream, angels of God were ascending and descending the ladder, and God himself stood atop the ladder as he blessed Jacob (Gen. 28:10–15). Jesus alluded to this incident, likening himself to the ladder in Jacob’s dream (John 1:51).

The KJV and RSV term for the recipient of the letter of 2 John (v. 1). Not much is known about the identity of this “lady chosen by God” (NIV), though there are several possibilities. The phrase may refer to a personal friend or a prominent church member of John’s acquaintance, along with her biological children. More probably, however, John uses the phrase as a metaphor for a particular church community and its members, a usage consistent with other NT images of the church (see Eph. 5:25–27; cf. Rev. 21:2).

The father of Eliasaph (Num. 3:24). Eliasaph was the head of the Gershonite clan of the Levites, the clan that cared for and transported the curtains associated with the sanctuary.

A descendant of Judah through Jahath. Descendants of Lahad and his brother, Ahumai, were among “the clans of the Zorathites” (1 Chron. 4:2).

A place in the Negev whose exact location and meaning are uncertain. It appears first in the narrative of Gen. 16, where Hagar is fleeing from Sarai, her mistress. After the death of Abraham, Beer Lahai Roi becomes the residence of Isaac (Gen. 24:62; 25:11). All three narratives that speak of this place support a location toward the Egyptian border (between Kadesh and Bered). The water source that gave rise to the name was located on the way to Shur (Gen. 16:7). The most likely translation is “well of the Living One who sees me.”

A city allotted to the tribe of Judah after the Israelite conquest of Caanan (Josh. 15:40). Lahmas lay in the fertile Shephelah region, between the central highlands and the Mediterranean coast, in southern Palestine. Some English versions (NRSV, KJV, ESV), following an alternate manuscript tradition, have “Lahmam” rather than “Lahmas.” Confusion in the manuscript copying process likely arose due to the similar appearance of the Hebrew letters samek and final mem.

A city allotted to the tribe of Judah after the Israelite conquest of Caanan (Josh. 15:40). Lahmas lay in the fertile Shephelah region, between the central highlands and the Mediterranean coast, in southern Palestine. Some English versions (NRSV, KJV, ESV), following an alternate manuscript tradition, have “Lahmam” rather than “Lahmas.” Confusion in the manuscript copying process likely arose due to the similar appearance of the Hebrew letters samek and final mem.

According to 1 Chron. 20:5, Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite was a Philistine who carried a huge spear. Lahmi and three other gigantic descendants of Rapha in Gath were killed in battle by David’s men. Elhanan son of Jair was responsible for Lahmi’s death (see 2 Sam. 21:18–22; 1 Chron. 20:4–8). According to 2 Sam. 21:19, the verse parallel to 1 Chron. 20:5, Elhanan killed Goliath the Gittite, but the text makes no mention of Lahmi (see NIV mg.). Copyist error may have given rise to the discrepancy, as the Hebrew for “Bethlehemite [killed] Goliath the Gittite” (2 Sam. 21:19) is very similar to “[killed] Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite” (1 Chron. 20:5).

(1) The father of Paltiel the second husband of Michal, daughter of King Saul (1 Sam. 25:44; 2 Sam. 3:15). Saul had earlier given Michal to David in marriage, then later to Paltiel when David fell out of favor. (2) A city in the upper Jordan Valley in far northern Israel, conquered by the tribe of Dan during the time of the judges and renamed “Dan” (Judg. 18:2, 7–10, 27–29). In Josh. 19:47 the original name is given as “Leshem” instead of “Laish.” The location is identified with Tel Dan, the site of several copious springs that form the headwaters of the Jordan River. Excavations show that settlement began about 3000 BC, and a sudden change in the material culture at the time of the judges probably reflects the Danite conquest.

A town within the tribal allotment to Benjamin, near Jerusalem, mentioned only in Isa. 10:30 in connection with Gallim and Anathoth. In his prophecy, Isaiah tells Laishah to “listen” (NIV) or “pay attention” (NASB) as it nervously anticipates the devastating impact of the Assyrian army approaching Jerusalem from the north.

Eschatology is the study of last things. The word “eschatology” comes from the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last.” From this same Greek word is derived the term “eschaton,” which is sometimes used to refer to the end times.

Eschatology deals with such future events as the end of the world, Jesus’ return, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the afterlife in heaven or hell. The tribulation and the millennium also belong to eschatology, but their timing and nature vary with different views. Although from one perspective human history entered its final phase in NT times so that people today are already living in the “last days,” eschatology normally focuses on the unfulfilled prophecies that remain still in the future for present-day believers.

Eschatology deals with questions regarding the future. Every religion and philosophy of life has offered answers to these questions. Plato taught about the immortality of the soul. Buddhism has its nirvana, Islam its sensual paradise, and Native Americans their happy hunting grounds. The belief that the soul survives death is widely held. Even atheists and materialists have their own views of eschatology. Yet only in Christianity does eschatology become the crown and capstone of everything else that God has been doing throughout history, when he will be perfectly glorified, Christ completely victorious, the power of sin entirely overcome, and the people of God given a complete salvation.

Yet it is difficult to find a topic on which Christians are more divided. Frequently, people studying eschatology fall into one of two opposite traps: unwarranted dogmatism or simple avoidance. Yet eschatology should be a source of comfort and hope to believers as well as an ongoing reminder of the lateness and urgency of the hour. Consequently, eschatology deserves most careful attention and should create a sense of excitement and anticipation.

Reasons for Controversy

Eschatology is by no means a simple discipline. The sheer magnitude of this topic is a significant challenge involving hundreds of different unfulfilled prophecies from virtually every book of the Bible. Difficulties in interpreting these prophecies with their figures of speech, apocalyptic language, and complicated symbolism create still greater complications. Then there is the challenge of organizing these individual prophecies together into a coherent timeline when each will be fulfilled. Discerning the period of fulfillment for some prophecies is relatively clear and easy, but for others it is much less certain.

Even the question of how many periods of future time remain in God’s timetable has often been the source of considerable debate. For example, will there be a future period of tribulation, or were these prophecies already fulfilled in AD 70, or perhaps more generally throughout church history, with its countless martyrs? Similar questions have been raised about the millennium: is this to be understood in a still future sense, as premillennialists assert, or is it already in the process of being fulfilled, as amillennialists and postmillennialists claim? The fact that there is no common agreement even on these fundamental questions virtually guarantees that believers will remain divided on this issue.

Then too there is the final step of trying to assign specific unfulfilled prophecies into this grid of prophetic time slots. For example, is the prophecy “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox” (Isa. 65:25) a symbolic picture of God’s blessings in this present church age, in a future millennium, or in eternity itself? The vast majority of these unfulfilled prophecies contain few clues regarding the precise time of their fulfillment, and interpreters often are left with little to guide them. We should not be surprised that eschatology leaves believers more divided than do other areas of theology.

Jesus’ Return and the Tribulation

The fact of Jesus’ return is clear. When Jesus was taken up from his apostles at the end of his earthly ministry, two angels promised them, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Today believers look forward to Jesus’ second coming, as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). The common understanding has always been that this return will be personal, visible, and bodily—just as real as his first coming two thousand years ago.

Christians, however, have been divided over the timing of Jesus’ return and the tribulation. Here there are five interrelated questions.

1. The first question is whether Jesus’ return is a single event or will occur in two stages. Dispensationalists distinguish two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture that removes the church from a period of intense tribulation involving Israel here on earth, and then a later public second coming in judgment at the end of the tribulation, when he will establish his kingdom. A number of recent “left behind” books and movies have popularized this approach. Yet this two-stage model is difficult to document in Scripture, and many understand Scripture to describe Jesus’ return as a single unified event.

2. How one answers this first question has implications for the second question of the timing of Jesus’ return relative to the tribulation. Here there are three popular options regarding the timing of Jesus’ return: pretribulational (before the tribulation), midtribulational (in the midst of the tribulation), and posttribulational (after the tribulation). Yet if Jesus’ return is pretribulational or midtribulational, logic would require that there be two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture either before the tribulation (for pretribulationalism) or in the middle of it (for midtribulationalism), and then a separate public return at the conclusion of the tribulation to establish his kingdom. Thus, a two-stage return of Jesus goes hand in hand with pretribulationalism and midtribulationalism, and a single return with posttribulationalism.

3. A third question focuses on the nature of the tribulation period. There are three main views. Pretribulationalists assume that the tribulation will be a period (usually seven years) of great suffering such as this world has never seen. Midtribulationalists believe that Jesus will return after three and a half years of less intense tribulation, followed by a considerably more intense second period of three and a half years of wrath, from which believers will be spared. Posttribulationalists see this tribulation as the suffering and persecution of Christians at various times and places around the world, with possibly some intensification in the final days. Consequently, how one understands the intensity of the tribulation is another factor affecting the choice of one tribulational view or another.

4. A fourth interrelated question involves whether one believes that Jesus may return suddenly and unexpectedly at any moment (Matt. 24:42) or whether there are still unfulfilled prophecies that must take place first (initially including at least Peter’s death [John 21:19] and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem). Pretribulationalists pride themselves on how their view of a secret rapture allows for Jesus to return imminently without any intervening signs or other warnings. Midtribulationalists believe that the church will need to experience three and a half years of moderate tribulation, so there is less emphasis on an imminent return (although one could argue that the first period of tribulation is potentially more ambiguous in nature). Posttribulationalists are divided into two groups. Many have held that the tribulation will be a period of significant tribulation, so typically they have downplayed the idea of imminence. However, other posttribulationalists (sometimes called “pasttribulationalists” or “imminent posttribulationalists”) assume that the tribulation described in Scripture may already be fulfilled either at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or more generally throughout church history, and therefore Jesus may return at any time.

5. The fifth question focuses on how literally or figuratively one should interpret the two key passages of Scripture related to the nature of the tribulation: the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24 pars.) and Rev. 6–19. Much of the Olivet Discourse focuses on the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and many have understood at least parts of Revelation as being fulfilled historically either in John’s own day or during church history. The more one assumes that at least portions of these prophecies were already fulfilled, the less one awaits a future fulfillment. A more literal approach to these prophecies will predispose one toward pretribulationalism or possibly midtribulationalism, and a more figurative approach toward posttribulationalism.

Hyperpreterism, or consistent preterism, has emerged in the last few decades with a still different approach to the timing of Jesus’ return. The driving force behind this movement is Jesus’ apparent promise to return within a generation of his death (Matt. 24:34). Consequently, hyperpreterism has assumed that all the future prophecies in the NT must have been fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, including Jesus’ return, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment, and the new heaven and new earth. The bottom line is that in order to take literally Jesus’ promise to return within a generation, everything else in eschatology needs to be reinterpreted as having been fulfilled in one way or another within that same generation. A more moderate preterism sees many, but not all, of these eschatological events fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus returned as the Son of Man in judgment against Israel in these first-century events, but the final judgment of all people and the new heaven and new earth await his second coming.

The Resurrection and the Final Judgment

The bodily resurrection takes place at the time of Jesus’ return. Although many other religions and philosophies have assumed the immortality of the soul, whereby the nonmaterial part of human nature survives death, Christianity is distinctive in its strong commitment to the idea of a bodily resurrection. Death marks the separation of the body from the soul and the time when believers are immediately ushered into God’s presence (Eccles. 12:7). Thus, Jesus was able to promise the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). However, people do not immediately receive new resurrection bodies at the time of death, but must wait until the time of Jesus’ return, when “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1 Thess. 4:16). This bodily resurrection is the precursor to the final judgment of the saved and the lost, when “all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28–29). At that time, Christ “will judge the living and the dead” (2 Tim. 4:1).

This theme of judgment is foundational to Christianity, although Christians remain divided about the exact number and character of these judgments. Yet the time will come when all people will be judged, both “the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), when “we will all stand before God’s judgment seat” (Rom. 14:10), and “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (14:12). God himself will be the judge, and Christ will be given a special place in presiding over the final judgment and separate those who truly belong to him from those who do not. Even though this judgment will be “according to what they have done” (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12), these deeds are simply an outward demonstration of whether a living faith is present, so there is no contradiction between justification by faith and the necessary place for a changed life in the believer. Yet, as Jesus warns, some will be surprised: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). God’s judgment will be both just and inescapable.

Christians remain divided about the number of resurrections. Premillennialists who are also pretribulationalists or midtribulationalists would conclude that there is a minimum of a resurrection of believers at the time of the rapture, when Jesus returns for his church; another resurrection when Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation for believers who came to faith and died during the tribulation; as well as another resurrection at the end of the millennium for “the rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5). Premillennialists who are also posttribulationalists would conclude that there are as few as two resurrections: one at Jesus’ return and another at the end of the millennium. An amillennialist or a postmillennialist would assume that there may be only a single bodily resurrection when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom.

There is one other aspect that completes this theme: God’s judgment also includes the destruction of the devil in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10). Someday sin and evil will be forever removed from God’s creation.

The Millennium

The millennium is a thousand-year reign of Christ described most clearly in Rev. 20. Again, there are sharp differences of opinion regarding this topic.

Premillennialists believe that Jesus’ return will be “pre” (before) the millennium, and that this millennial kingdom will be a golden age of unprecedented glory and splendor. Dispensational premillennialists, with their emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church, have focused on the fulfillment of all the remaining OT prophecies made to Israel. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, lack this sharp distinction between Israel and the church and see themselves as being in continuity with the view of a future reign of Christ on earth found throughout church history. In recent years, premillennialism has become the leading view in American Christianity.

Postmillennialists believe that God will build his church for “a thousand years” and then Jesus will return “post” (after) this millennium. The millennium here is comparable to a silver age involving significant and unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialists remain divided about how literal this thousand-year period might be and whether this period has already begun or not. Postmillennialism has had a significant following throughout most of church history but more recently has become a minority view.

Amillennialists believe in a different kind of millennium. Here there are two different varieties. Some believe that those reigning with Christ in Rev. 20 are simply believers living here in this present life experiencing the intimacy of Christ’s presence in their daily lives. Others see this period as involving departed believers, who are currently reigning with Christ in the intermediate state between death and his return. The millennium here is neither the golden age of the premillennialist nor the silver age of the postmillennialist; it is simply life today.

Again there are predisposing factors. Those who place more weight on potentially unfulfilled OT prophecies will tend to be premillennial, whereas those who place more weight on the words of Jesus and Paul will tend to be amillennial or possibly postmillennial. Those who see more of a distinction between Israel and the church will tend to be dispensational premillennialists, whereas those who emphasize the unity among God’s people throughout redemptive history will choose one of the other alternatives. Those who tend toward a more literal approach to interpreting Scripture will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who give more weight to symbolic and figurative language will choose one of the other options. Those who tend to be more pessimistic about the future and believe that things are getting worse will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who are more optimistic about what God is doing in this world and who emphasize the transforming power of the gospel will tend to be postmillennialists. One’s eschatological convictions are the logical outgrowth of many other earlier commitments and persuasions.

Each of these millennial views also has implications for a number of other topics: the nature and intensity of Satan’s binding in Rev. 20, the number of different resurrections, and the number of different judgments. The ultimate question, again, is which approach does the best job of putting together all the prophecies of Scripture and consequently is most faithful to God’s word.

Heaven and Hell

God’s judgment inevitably leads either to final and permanent torment in hell or to untold blessings in the new heaven and new earth (Matt. 25:46).

The ultimate hope of believers involves the bodily resurrection and a new earth to go along with these glorified bodies. The glad time will come when God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” and “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). There will be the joys of physical bodies healed and restored, seeing friends and loved ones, but the greatest joy of all will be seeing the Lord himself in all his glory and majesty.

Hell will be the very opposite, experienced by those who deliberately rejected and avoided God during their earthly lives. They will find themselves rejected by God and cut off from his presence (and all the blessings that go along with his presence). Although there are various debates about how literal or figurative some of the biblical descriptions of hell are in terms of unquenchable fire and worms that do not die (Mark 9:48), it seems safe to say that hell will be the greatest of all possible tragedies and far worse than any of these descriptions suggest.

Annihilationism or conditional immortality, with its assumption that the souls of the lost will cease to exist at some point after death, represents an attempt to soften the explicit teachings of Scripture. Universalism—the belief that ultimately everyone will be saved—is another human strategy to avoid the clear teaching of Scripture. Ultimately, there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and human choices do make a difference for time and eternity.

The Benefits of Eschatology

Eschatology should give balance and perspective to life so that the affairs and accomplishments of this present life do not take on an inappropriate importance. Whenever people are caught up with materialism and a this-worldly perspective on life or become complacent about their lack of spiritual growth or the spiritual condition of others, the underlying cause is often a lack of attention to eschatology. Although many difficult and controversial questions surround the nature and timing of the return of Jesus Christ, Scripture is clear about the fact of his return and the final judgment. A new life with Christ that will last for all eternity is described in Scripture as the greatest of all possible blessings. At the same time, a life apart from God both in this life and in the life to come is described as the greatest possible tragedy in life. Perhaps even the spiritual deception and confusion around us, whereby many “will abandon the faith” (1 Tim. 4:1) and “not put up with sound doctrine” (2 Tim. 4:3), are a sign of the lateness of the hour. A proper appreciation of eschatology can be a means that God uses to change people’s lives.

A large, freshwater lake in the northern, Galilee region of Israel measuring thirteen miles long, eight miles wide, and between 80 and 150 feet deep. Because it is shaped like a harp, the OT refers to it as the “Sea of Kinnereth,” which comes from the Hebrew word for “harp” (Num. 34:11; Deut. 3:17; Josh. 13:27; 19:35). It is also called “Lake of Gennesaret,” which derives from the lush Plain of Gennesaret nearby (Matt. 14:34), and the “Sea of Tiberias,” which comes from the name of the most prominent city on its banks (John 6:1; 21:1).

The Sea of Galilee is located about sixty miles north of Jerusalem and is fed by the Jordan River. It is surrounded by mountain peaks and cliffs, except on the southern side, where the Jordan River flows out of it. These peaks form a valley and make for strong, frequent, and unexpected storms as the Mediterranean winds blow down the western slopes and swirl across the sea. Jesus demonstrated his power over nature as he calmed such violent storms (Matt. 14:22–33; Mark 6:45–51; John 6:16–21).

The Sea of Galilee boasted a large fishing industry, which provided the ideal location for Jesus to call his first disciples—Peter, Andrew, James, and John, who were fishermen (Mark 1:16–20). Much of Jesus’ ministry in the Synoptic Gospels took place in the towns around the Sea of Galilee. The Sea of Galilee provided an abundance of fishing illustrations (Matt. 13:48) and lessons on discipleship. Its shore may have provided a convenient location for the feeding of the five thousand (Matt. 14:13–21; Mark 6:35–44; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:1–13). After Jesus’ resurrection, his disciples briefly returned to their fishing nets on this lake, resulting in the miraculous catch of 153 fish (John 21:11).

A town on the border of the tribal allotment to Naphtali. It was the closest named point on Naphtali’s border to the Jordan River, named immediately after Adami Nekeb and Jabneel (Josh. 19:33). It lay just south of the Sea of Galilee.

The Aramaic translation of Ps. 22:1, which Jesus cried out on the cross (Matt. 27:46; Mark 15:34), meaning, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Jesus may have continued on and quoted the rest of the psalm. The Gospel writers, in any case, pattern part of their account of the crucifixion on elements of Ps. 22.

How is it that God forsakes Jesus, or forsakes at all? Verses such as Josh. 1:5, where God promises to “never forsake,” tend to get more attention than God’s threats to abandon. Speaking through Azariah to Asa in 2 Chron. 15:2, God made his presence conditional and warned that he would forsake Asa if Asa forsook him. In Jer. 23:33 God is forthright: “I will forsake you, declares the Lord.” So, what does it mean for God to be with or to forsake someone? The promise to Joshua was that God would give him success in the task of conquering Canaan (Josh. 1:5; cf. 6:27; 14:12), and even for Joshua the promise was conditional (7:12). A principal meaning of God being with someone is that God will give that person success in a task. In the OT, when God is said to abandon an individual, it refers to a task or role, not absolute abandonment from relationship. David knew that God had abandoned King Saul (1 Sam. 15:26; 16:14, 23; 18:12; 28:16). So after his adultery with Bathsheba and murder of Uriah, David pled with God, “Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me” (Ps. 51:11). His plea was that he might retain his role as king.

Psalm 22 presents a question, not a prophetic declaration, but the psalmist’s perception depends on the idea that God can forsake him. The psalm is Davidic and certainly applies to the royal line and extends to Jesus. When on the cross, Jesus had been left by God to the devices of his foes. The agonizing question and the following description of affliction as well as the confidence of being heard by God are fitting for the Davidic heir on the cross.

The Aramaic translation of Ps. 22:1, which Jesus cried out on the cross (Matt. 27:46; Mark 15:34), meaning, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Jesus may have continued on and quoted the rest of the psalm. The Gospel writers, in any case, pattern part of their account of the crucifixion on elements of Ps. 22.

How is it that God forsakes Jesus, or forsakes at all? Verses such as Josh. 1:5, where God promises to “never forsake,” tend to get more attention than God’s threats to abandon. Speaking through Azariah to Asa in 2 Chron. 15:2, God made his presence conditional and warned that he would forsake Asa if Asa forsook him. In Jer. 23:33 God is forthright: “I will forsake you, declares the Lord.” So, what does it mean for God to be with or to forsake someone? The promise to Joshua was that God would give him success in the task of conquering Canaan (Josh. 1:5; cf. 6:27; 14:12), and even for Joshua the promise was conditional (7:12). A principal meaning of God being with someone is that God will give that person success in a task. In the OT, when God is said to abandon an individual, it refers to a task or role, not absolute abandonment from relationship. David knew that God had abandoned King Saul (1 Sam. 15:26; 16:14, 23; 18:12; 28:16). So after his adultery with Bathsheba and murder of Uriah, David pled with God, “Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me” (Ps. 51:11). His plea was that he might retain his role as king.

Psalm 22 presents a question, not a prophetic declaration, but the psalmist’s perception depends on the idea that God can forsake him. The psalm is Davidic and certainly applies to the royal line and extends to Jesus. When on the cross, Jesus had been left by God to the devices of his foes. The agonizing question and the following description of affliction as well as the confidence of being heard by God are fitting for the Davidic heir on the cross.

A title of Jesus used in the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. This title and its image represent a particular insight of some early Christian communities into the identity and mission of the Messiah.

The phrase first appears in John 1:29, where John recognizes Jesus as the one “who takes away the sin of the world,” and then again in John 1:36, when John’s outcry causes two of his disciples to become the first followers of Jesus. “Lamb of God” is essentially an expansion and reinterpretation of a number of OT traditions and their application to Jesus.

The main reference is to the Passover feast, during which John places the passion narrative, at which a lamb is slaughtered and eaten. This is a celebration and an echo of the original Passover, in which the Hebrew people smeared lamb’s blood on the frames of their doors so that the judgment upon Egypt’s firstborn would not strike the Hebrews (Exod. 12:1–15). The salvation that John envisions, however, is different from the exodus narrative in many respects. The enemy from which God’s people are saved is no longer a geopolitical oppressor but rather sin itself. Israel has now been expanded to contain the entire human race. The “lamb” has undergone quite a transformation and is now to be identified with the Messiah and even God himself. For NT believers, Jesus’ death and resurrection are a completion of the Passover. Rather than saving one people from one specific danger, God’s salvation reaches universal efficacy in Jesus Christ, taking away the sin of the world.

The other figure that feeds meaning into “Lamb of God” is the Suffering Servant of Isa. 53. Isaiah says, “He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth” (53:7). John perhaps means to fulfill this verse specifically in John 19:9. Lambs were also a part of the cultic worship of Israel and were acceptable for more than one offering (e.g., Lev. 3:7; 4:32; 5:6).

The Suffering Servant, the paschal (Passover) lamb, and the lambs for ritual sacrifice are not merely victims but vicarious victims that take on themselves the punishment, guilt, and suffering of others. Thus, others are freed from their burdens. This is the logic that John applies to the death of Jesus.

While that may be the most obvious meaning of the title “Lamb of God,” there is a deeper, subtler meaning that the book of Revelation draws out completely. A lamb is powerless, vulnerable, and small, and yet that is how God works. The image of a lamb highlights the reversal of the world’s expectations for any savior. While the world might expect, as the Hebrews of Jesus’ day did, a holy conqueror to overpower all enemies, the world received a lamb, sacrificed on our behalf. “See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has triumphed. . . . Then I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain” (5:5–6). The juxtaposition of the announcement of the “Lion of the tribe of Judah” and the reception of a “Lamb, looking as if it had been slain” is striking. Only the lamb is “worthy to take the scroll . . . because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased for God persons” (5:9). Remembering that Jesus is the Lamb of God and not the Lion of God gives Christians pause to remind themselves that it is not in the great things of the world that God does his work but rather in the broken faithfulness of his Son. For this reason, the image of a lamb taking the reins of history by holding the heavenly scroll became popular in early Christian worship.

A title of Jesus used in the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. This title and its image represent a particular insight of some early Christian communities into the identity and mission of the Messiah.

The phrase first appears in John 1:29, where John recognizes Jesus as the one “who takes away the sin of the world,” and then again in John 1:36, when John’s outcry causes two of his disciples to become the first followers of Jesus. “Lamb of God” is essentially an expansion and reinterpretation of a number of OT traditions and their application to Jesus.

The main reference is to the Passover feast, during which John places the passion narrative, at which a lamb is slaughtered and eaten. This is a celebration and an echo of the original Passover, in which the Hebrew people smeared lamb’s blood on the frames of their doors so that the judgment upon Egypt’s firstborn would not strike the Hebrews (Exod. 12:1–15). The salvation that John envisions, however, is different from the exodus narrative in many respects. The enemy from which God’s people are saved is no longer a geopolitical oppressor but rather sin itself. Israel has now been expanded to contain the entire human race. The “lamb” has undergone quite a transformation and is now to be identified with the Messiah and even God himself. For NT believers, Jesus’ death and resurrection are a completion of the Passover. Rather than saving one people from one specific danger, God’s salvation reaches universal efficacy in Jesus Christ, taking away the sin of the world.

The other figure that feeds meaning into “Lamb of God” is the Suffering Servant of Isa. 53. Isaiah says, “He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth” (53:7). John perhaps means to fulfill this verse specifically in John 19:9. Lambs were also a part of the cultic worship of Israel and were acceptable for more than one offering (e.g., Lev. 3:7; 4:32; 5:6).

The Suffering Servant, the paschal (Passover) lamb, and the lambs for ritual sacrifice are not merely victims but vicarious victims that take on themselves the punishment, guilt, and suffering of others. Thus, others are freed from their burdens. This is the logic that John applies to the death of Jesus.

While that may be the most obvious meaning of the title “Lamb of God,” there is a deeper, subtler meaning that the book of Revelation draws out completely. A lamb is powerless, vulnerable, and small, and yet that is how God works. The image of a lamb highlights the reversal of the world’s expectations for any savior. While the world might expect, as the Hebrews of Jesus’ day did, a holy conqueror to overpower all enemies, the world received a lamb, sacrificed on our behalf. “See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has triumphed. . . . Then I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain” (5:5–6). The juxtaposition of the announcement of the “Lion of the tribe of Judah” and the reception of a “Lamb, looking as if it had been slain” is striking. Only the lamb is “worthy to take the scroll . . . because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased for God persons” (5:9). Remembering that Jesus is the Lamb of God and not the Lion of God gives Christians pause to remind themselves that it is not in the great things of the world that God does his work but rather in the broken faithfulness of his Son. For this reason, the image of a lamb taking the reins of history by holding the heavenly scroll became popular in early Christian worship.

A condition or ailment that renders one unable to function properly (most often in movement), or a term for an individual affected by such a condition or ailment (Job 29:15; Prov. 25:19; 26:7; Isa. 33:23; Matt. 15:30–31; 21:14; Luke 14:13, 21; John 5:3). In the OT, lame humans were not allowed to come near the altar (Lev. 21:18), nor was it allowed to sacrifice lame animals to the Lord (Deut. 15:21). Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan and grandson of Saul, was lame because in his youth he was dropped by his nurse (2 Sam. 4:4; 19:26). The Major and the Minor Prophets speak of God’s redemption of Israel in terms of the correction of lameness (Isa. 35:6; Jer. 31:8; Mic. 4:6–7; Zeph. 3:19). To John the Baptist’s question of whether he was the Christ, Jesus responded, “The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor” (Matt. 11:5; Luke 7:22).

(1) A descendant of Cain and the husband of both Adah and Zillah, and thus the first polygamist (Gen. 4:18–24). After killing a man who had wounded him, he sings to his wives, boasting of his violent deed. He has three sons: Jabal, the first herdsman; Jubal, the first to play the harp and the flute; and Tubal-Cain, the first metalworker. (2) A descendant of Seth, a son of Methuselah, and the father of Noah (Gen. 5:25–31). He prophesied that Noah would bring relief from the curse on the ground. Genesis records his life span as 777 years. He is listed as an ancestor of Jesus (Luke 3:36).

A condition or ailment that renders one unable to function properly (most often in movement), or a term for an individual affected by such a condition or ailment (Job 29:15; Prov. 25:19; 26:7; Isa. 33:23; Matt. 15:30–31; 21:14; Luke 14:13, 21; John 5:3). In the OT, lame humans were not allowed to come near the altar (Lev. 21:18), nor was it allowed to sacrifice lame animals to the Lord (Deut. 15:21). Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan and grandson of Saul, was lame because in his youth he was dropped by his nurse (2 Sam. 4:4; 19:26). The Major and the Minor Prophets speak of God’s redemption of Israel in terms of the correction of lameness (Isa. 35:6; Jer. 31:8; Mic. 4:6–7; Zeph. 3:19). To John the Baptist’s question of whether he was the Christ, Jesus responded, “The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor” (Matt. 11:5; Luke 7:22).

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).

Although the Bible never describes the lamps used by ancient Israel or the early church, archaeology informs us what they were like. Early lamps were small pottery bowls with a slight lip for a wick. Some had multiple wick holders to produce more light (Zech. 4:2). Over time, the lip became a spout to one side. By the Persian period, lamps with a covered oil reservoir were imported from Greece. Some lamps, like the seven-branched golden menorah of the tabernacle, were made of metal. During the Roman era, pottery and metal lanterns were developed for outside illumination, replacing torches, which had been used previously (Judg. 7:16). Those who sought Jesus in Gethsemane carried both torches and lanterns (John 18:3).

Lamps were commonly found in family dwellings (2 Kings 4:10; Matt. 5:15). They also played an important role in the tabernacle and temple (Exod. 25:31–39; 1 Kings 7:49), where they not only illuminated their interiors but also, having the shape of a tree, symbolically evoked memories of Eden. Lamps could be carried or placed on a shelf or stand. Since they could hold only enough olive oil to burn for several hours, a woman who ensured that “her lamp does not go out at night” would have been particularly diligent (Prov. 31:18).

The Bible frequently uses lamp or light metaphorically. It can symbolize life (Job 18:6; 21:17; Prov. 13:9; 20:20; 24:20) or the continuation of the Davidic line (2 Sam. 21:17; 1 Kings 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kings 8:19). Jesus is the light of the world, who gives spiritual life (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46; cf. 1:9; 3:19). John the Baptist was a lamp illuminating the way to the Messiah (John 5:35). Jesus’ followers should shine as lights so that the world can see their good works and praise God (Matt. 5:14–16). God’s word is a lamp to guide one’s way (Ps. 119:105; Prov. 6:23). God himself is a light who enables people to live in difficult times (2 Sam. 22:29; Job 29:3). In one of Jesus’ parables, the foolish virgins who did not prepare enough oil to keep their lamps burning serve as a warning for people to be ready for Christ’s return (Matt. 25:1–13).

Although the Bible never describes the lamps used by ancient Israel or the early church, archaeology informs us what they were like. Early lamps were small pottery bowls with a slight lip for a wick. Some had multiple wick holders to produce more light (Zech. 4:2). Over time, the lip became a spout to one side. By the Persian period, lamps with a covered oil reservoir were imported from Greece. Some lamps, like the seven-branched golden menorah of the tabernacle, were made of metal. During the Roman era, pottery and metal lanterns were developed for outside illumination, replacing torches, which had been used previously (Judg. 7:16). Those who sought Jesus in Gethsemane carried both torches and lanterns (John 18:3).

Lamps were commonly found in family dwellings (2 Kings 4:10; Matt. 5:15). They also played an important role in the tabernacle and temple (Exod. 25:31–39; 1 Kings 7:49), where they not only illuminated their interiors but also, having the shape of a tree, symbolically evoked memories of Eden. Lamps could be carried or placed on a shelf or stand. Since they could hold only enough olive oil to burn for several hours, a woman who ensured that “her lamp does not go out at night” would have been particularly diligent (Prov. 31:18).

The Bible frequently uses lamp or light metaphorically. It can symbolize life (Job 18:6; 21:17; Prov. 13:9; 20:20; 24:20) or the continuation of the Davidic line (2 Sam. 21:17; 1 Kings 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kings 8:19). Jesus is the light of the world, who gives spiritual life (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46; cf. 1:9; 3:19). John the Baptist was a lamp illuminating the way to the Messiah (John 5:35). Jesus’ followers should shine as lights so that the world can see their good works and praise God (Matt. 5:14–16). God’s word is a lamp to guide one’s way (Ps. 119:105; Prov. 6:23). God himself is a light who enables people to live in difficult times (2 Sam. 22:29; Job 29:3). In one of Jesus’ parables, the foolish virgins who did not prepare enough oil to keep their lamps burning serve as a warning for people to be ready for Christ’s return (Matt. 25:1–13).

A lance (NIV) or lancet (KJV) is a sharp-pointed object with a shaft. While lances normally were used as weapons (e.g., Job 39:23; 41:29; Jer. 50:42), the prophets of Baal used lances and swords to cut themselves in order to arouse their god to action (1 Kings 18:28).

A lance (NIV) or lancet (KJV) is a sharp-pointed object with a shaft. While lances normally were used as weapons (e.g., Job 39:23; 41:29; Jer. 50:42), the prophets of Baal used lances and swords to cut themselves in order to arouse their god to action (1 Kings 18:28).

The Hebrew word ’erets occurs 2,505 times in the OT and is most frequently translated “country” or “land.” “Earth” renders the Greek word gē in the NT. Not surprisingly, ’erets appears 311 times in Genesis alone, the book that initiates Israel’s landed covenant (Gen. 15:18). The primary uses of ’erets are cosmological (e.g., the earth) and geographical (e.g., the land of Israel). Other uses of ’erets include physical (e.g., the ground on which one stands) and political (e.g., governed countries) designations. Less frequently, “earth” translates the Hebrew word ’adamah (“country, ground, land, soil”).

Heaven and Earth

Israel shared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. This worldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon the primeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having four rims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rims were sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters. God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth and shaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12–13). Similarly, the Akkadian text Hymn to the Sun-God states, “You [Shamash] are holding the ends of the earth suspended from the midst of heaven” (I:22). The earth’s boundaries were set against chaos (Ps. 104:7–9; Isa. 40:12). In this way, the Creator and the Savior cannot be separated because, taken together, God works against chaos in the mission of redemption (Ps. 74:12–17; Isa. 51:9–11). The phrase “heavens and earth” is a merism (two extremes representing the whole) for the entire universe (Gen. 1:1; Ps. 102:25). Over the earth arched a firm “vault” (Gen. 1:6). Heaven’s vault rested on the earth’s “pillars,” the mountains (Deut. 32:22; 1 Sam. 2:8). Below the heavens is the sea, part of the earth’s flat surface.

There was no term for “world” in the OT. The perception of world was basically bipartite (heaven and earth), though some tripartite expressions also occur (e.g., heaven, earth, sea [Exod. 20:11; Rev. 5:3, 13]). Though rare, some uses of ’erets may refer to the “underworld” or Sheol (Exod. 15:12; Jer. 17:13; Jon. 2:6). The earth can be regarded as the realm of the dead (Matt. 12:40; Eph. 4:9). However, the OT is less concerned with the organic structure of the earth than with what fills the earth: inhabitants (Ps. 33:14; Isa. 24:1), people groups (Gen. 18:18; Deut. 28:10), and kingdoms (Deut. 28:25; 2 Kings 19:15). The term ’erets can be used symbolically to indicate its inhabitants (Gen. 6:11). However, unlike its neighbors, Israel acknowledged no divine “Mother Earth,” given the cultural associations with female consorts.

The Theology of Land

In biblical faith, the concept of land combines geography with theology. The modern person values land more as a place to build than for its productive capacities. But from the outset, human beings and the “earth” (’erets) functioned in a symbiotic relationship with the Creator (Gen. 1:28). God even gave the land agency to “bring forth living creatures” (Gen. 1:24). The “ground” (’adamah) also provided the raw substance to make the human being (’adam [Gen. 2:7]). In turn, the human being was charged with developing and protecting the land (Gen. 2:5, 15). Showing divine care, the Noahic covenant was “between [God] and the earth” (Gen. 9:13). Thus, land was no mere onlooker; human rebellion had cosmic effects (Gen. 6:7, 17). The land could be cursed and suffer (Gen. 3:17; cf. 4:11).

Israel’s promised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen. 13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing, fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orienting points for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise, “flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27). Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity and judgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationship with God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; this could ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits” people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).

For Israel, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen. 15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithful obedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1 Kings 2:1–4). Conditionality and unconditionality coexisted in Israel’s relationship of “sonship” with Yahweh (Exod. 4:22; Hos. 11:1). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen. 18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was the supreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance” to give (1 Sam. 26:19; 2 Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). The Levites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did the other tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20; Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter and to occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3). Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when they accused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing with milk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however, no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance” (Josh. 13:1).

Land possession had serious ethical and religious ramifications (Deut. 26:1–11). Israel was not chosen to receive a special land; rather, land was the medium of Israel’s relationship with God. Land functioned as a spiritual barometer (Ps. 78:56–64; Lam. 1:3–5). The heavens and earth stood as covenant witnesses (Deut. 4:26). Blood, in particular, could physically pollute the land (Num. 35:30–34). National sin could culminate in expulsion (Lev. 26:32–39), and eventually the land was lost (Jer. 25:1–11). For this reason, Israel’s exiles prompted a profound theological crisis.

Inheritance

The notion of inheritance connected Israel’s religious worship with practical stewardship. Land was not owned; it was passed down through patrimonial succession. God entrusted each family with an inheritance that was to be safeguarded (Lev. 25:23–28; Mic. 2:1–2). This highlights the serious crime when Naboth’s vineyard was forcibly stolen (1 Kings 21). It was Israel’s filial sonship with Yahweh and Israel’s land tenure that formed Yahweh’s solidarity with the nation. The law helped limit Israel’s attachment to mere real estate: Yahweh was to be Israel’s preoccupation (see Jer. 3:6–25). When the nation was finally exiled, the message of the new covenant transcended geographical boundaries (Jer. 32:36–44; Ezek. 36–37; cf. Lev. 26:40–45; Deut. 30:1–10). In postexilic Israel, sanctuary was prioritized (Hag. 1:9–14).

It was Israel’s redefinition of land through the exile that prepared the way for the incorporation of the Gentiles (Ezek. 47:22–23), an integration already anticipated (Isa. 56:3–7). The prophets saw a time when the nations would share in the inheritance of God previously guarded by Israel (Isa. 60; Zech. 2:11; cf. Gen. 12:3). Viewed as a political territory, land receives no substantial theological treatment in the NT; rather, inheritance surpasses covenant metaphor. Using the language of sonship and inheritance, Paul develops this new Gentile mission in Galatians (cf. Col. 1:13–14). The OT land motif fully flowers in the NT teaching of adoption (cf. 1 Pet. 1:3–5). Both curse and covenant are resolved eschatologically (Rom. 8:19–22). Inheritance is now found in Christ (Eph. 2:11–22; 1 Pet. 1:4). In the economy of the new covenant, land tenure has matured in fellowship (koinōnia). Koinōnia recalibrates the ethical significance of OT land themes, reapplying them practically through inclusion, lifestyle, economic responsibility, and social equity.

Beyond cosmological realms, heaven and earth are also theological horizons still under God’s ownership. What began as the creation mandate to fill and subdue the earth (Gen. 1:28) culminates in the new creation with Christ (Rom. 8:4–25). Under the power of Satan, the earth “lags behind” heaven. Christ’s mission brings what is qualitatively of heaven onto the earthly stage, often using signs of the budding rule of God (Matt. 6:10; Mark 2:10–11; John 3:31–36; Eph. 4:9–13; Heb. 12:25). As Israel was to stand out in a hostile world (Deut. 4:5–8), now those of Abrahamic faith stand out through Christian love (John 13:34–35; Rom. 4:9–16). According to Heb. 4:1–11, Israel’s initial rest in the land (see Exod. 33:14; Deut. 12:9) culminates in the believers’ rest in Christ (Heb. 4:3, 5). The former inheritance of space gives way to the inheritance of Christ’s presence. The OT theme of land is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus’ exhortation to “abide in me” (John 15).

Earthquake–In Palestine there have been about seventeen recorded major earthquakes in the past two millennia. One of the major sources of these earthquakes is believed to originate from the Jordan Rift Valley. In antiquity earthquakes were viewed as fearful events because the mountains, which represented everlasting durability, were disturbed. The confession of faith is pronounced in association with such phenomena (“We will not fear, though the earth give way” [Ps. 46:2]). An earthquake must have made a great impact in Amos’s day (“two years before the earthquake” [Amos 1:1; cf. Zech. 14:5]).

An earthquake has many symbolic meanings. First, the power of God and his divine presence are manifested through it (Job 9:6; Ps. 68:8; Hag. 2:6). It accompanied theophanic revelation (Exod. 19:18; Isa. 6:4; 1 Kings 19:11–12) when the glory of the Lord appeared (Ezek. 3:12). His divine presence was especially felt when earthquakes occurred during the time of the crucifixion and the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Matt. 27:54; 28:2). It led the centurion to confess of Christ, “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54). God’s salvation power is represented when an earthquake comes at the appropriate moment, such as when it freed Paul and Silas from prison (Acts 16:26).

Second, it is used in the context of God’s judgment (Isa. 13:13; Amos 9:1; Nah. 1:5). It becomes the symbol of God’s anger and wrath (Ps. 18:7). God brought earthquakes upon the people to destroy evil in the world and to punish those who had sinned against him (Num. 16:31–33; Isa. 29:6; Ezek. 38:19). Earthquake activity possibly explains the background to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 19:24).

Third, earthquakes are said to precede the end of time (Matt. 24:7; Mark 13:8; Luke 21:11). In the apocalyptic book of Revelation, earthquakes are regular occurrences (Rev. 6:12; 11:13, 19; 16:18).

A region generally identified with the landmass between ancient Syria and Egypt, including parts of the Sinai Peninsula, Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean, and southern Phoenicia (modern Lebanon). Although there is some discussion about the origin of the name “Canaan” and its meaning, the name apparently arises from the primary inhabitants of the region prior to Joshua’s incursion into the land, since it is primarily used in connection with the phrase “the land of,” indicating that the descendants of Canaan possess it. Because the identity of the land of Canaan was linked as much to its inhabitants as it was to any sort of fixed borders, the boundaries are identified in various ways throughout the biblical text. Such descriptions vary from a rather limited area of influence (as suggested by Num. 13:29) to a larger land spanning an area from the Euphrates to the Nile (Gen. 15:18; Exod. 23:23). Because of its strategic position as a buffer between Egypt and Mesopotamia and between Arabia and the sea, it served as a primary trading outpost and the location of numerous important historical events both prior to and after Israel’s appearance in the land.

In the Bible, the geographical reference “the land of Canaan” finds primary expression, not surprisingly, in Genesis through Judges. The promise to Abraham that his descendants would inherit the land of the Canaanites (Gen. 15:18–21) is the theological focal point of the uses of the term “Canaan” throughout these biblical books. Once that inheritance was achieved and Israel became a viable state, the term’s use seems to serve the double purpose of being both a geographical marker and a reminder of the nature of its former predominant inhabitants. The prophets drew upon the term to remind Israel of the land’s former status, both in its positive (Isa. 19:18) and negative (Isa. 23:11; Zeph. 2:5) connotations. The term is transliterated twice in the NT in the recounting of OT history (Acts 7:11; 13:19). One further connection between Canaan and the perspectives communicated concerning it in the OT is the apparent association of the land with corrupt trade practices. That is, while some believe that the word “Canaan” always meant “merchant” or some similar word, its use in Scripture suggests that the tradesmen of Canaan were of such disrepute in the recollection of ancient Israel that the term became a synonym for “unjust trader” (Job 41:6; Ezek. 16:29; 17:4; Zeph. 1:11; Zech. 14:21).

History

The proximity of Canaan to Egypt meant that from its earliest periods it found itself beholden to the pharaohs of Egypt. The Egyptian Execration texts from the Old Kingdom era tell of Egypt’s influence over Canaan in the early second millennium. After the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt, the pharaohs of the New Kingdom asserted their control over the land. Most famous among these records is Thutmose III’s account of his defeat of Megiddo through the implementation of both cunning and skill. This same pharaoh would establish a system of dividing Canaan and its inhabitants for taxation and administration that would be so successful that Solomon would reimplement the same system during his reign (1 Kings 4:7–19). Even in the weaker days of Egypt following the New Kingdom, pharaohs such as Necho and Shishak and their successors the Ptolemies would often seek to revisit the days of glory in campaigns into Canaan.

In addition to Egypt, other outside forces found their way into Canaan and exerted influence on its development. The earliest settlers seem to have come from Mesopotamia, and Semitic influence is witnessed as early as 3000 BC. In the period between Egypt’s control of Canaan during the Old Kingdom and its later reassertion after expelling the Hyksos, Canaan witnessed a massive influx of Amorites from the north and also incursions by the Hittites and the Hurrians. As Egypt’s power waned toward the end of the New Kingdom, the Philistines came in from the sea and the Israelites from across the Jordan. All these societies were absorbed into the Canaanite culture or were themselves modified by the Canaanites. Israelite success in removing mention of the Canaanites as an identifiable entity would not be firmly established until late in the eighth century under Hezekiah.

The story of Israel’s predominance in the area of Canaan begins, of course, with the infiltration into the land under Joshua and persists until the fall of the temple in AD 70 at the hands of the Romans. During that period, Canaan endured as a place of importance as a staging ground for controlling both Mesopotamia and Egypt and therefore witnessed campaigns by most of the great leaders of Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome. Of course, with each campaign came alterations in both the political and the cultural landscape of the land and reinforcement of the view that the area was the center of the world. Indeed, it is in Canaan, in the Jezreel Valley, that Scripture turns its focus for the final battle between God and the forces of Satan at Armageddon.

Geography and Climate

Geography. Though small in scope, the region of Canaan encompassed a surprisingly wide variety of environments. Within its topography one could find perilous deserts, snow-capped mountains, thick forests, lush plains, coastal beaches, rugged hills, deep valleys, and separate water sources full of both life and minerals. The Shephelah, or coastal plain, lacks any natural harbor areas that would have led to the early exploitation of the Mediterranean in the south that is so well known in the northern areas of Phoenicia. It does, however, provide wide-open, fertile areas fed by the rain runoff from the central hill country, which allowed it to be a useful source of farming and civilization from a very early period.

The central hill country is essentially a ridge that runs parallel to the coast and undulates in elevation from the mountainous north to the rugged but less elevated regions of the south. This ridge served as a natural barrier against travel from west to east, so it is not surprising that important military towns such as Hazor cropped up in places where valleys in this ridge allowed travelers to move from the coast to the inland regions as necessary to reach Mesopotamia from Egypt. One such valley of significance through the history of the land of Canaan is the Esdraelon or Jezreel Valley. It provides a wide swath of land that moves from Akko in the west (  just north of the Carmel Range) to the Sea of Galilee in the east, with access points in the north and south. Within this valley were settlements such as Megiddo and Hazor in earlier times, and Nazareth and Tiberias in later times.

Along the eastern edge of the central hill country is the Jordan Rift Valley. The elevation drops dramatically from cities in the hill country, such as Jerusalem at about 2,500 feet above sea level, to cities in the valley, such as Jericho at about 1,000 feet below sea level, within the span of about fifteen miles. The valley itself is part of a much larger rift that starts in southeast Turkey and continues all the way to Mozambique in Africa. Waters from snowy Mount Hermon and a couple of natural springs feed into the Sea of Galilee and then flow into the Jordan River, which snakes its way down into the Dead Sea. The lands around the Jordan River were once very fertile in the north and probably included abundant forests and wildlife. Toward the south of the Jordan River, one approaches the wilderness surrounding the Dead Sea, a region well known for its mineral contents.

The southernmost section of Canaan, known as the Negev, is an unforgiving region with mountains, deserts, and interspersed oases throughout. It opens up into the Arabian Desert to the east and the Sinai Peninsula to the southwest. Its primary cities of importance in biblical times were Beersheba and Raphia. As the gateway from Egypt to Canaan, the Negev played a significant role in biblical history.

Climate. The climate of Canaan played a significant role in its religion and history. It is generally recognized that climate change played a rather momentous role in population movements by nomads, in destabilization of powerful governments, and in the capability, or lack thereof, of nations to participate in the trade that was at the heart of Canaan’s growth, spread of influence, and success. Within Canaan itself, because the natural water sources were on the wrong side of the central hill country, most of its water came from rainfall. It is not surprising, therefore, that many of the discussions that take place in both Canaanite and Israelite religious expressions concerning the power of their gods found utterance in terms of a god’s ability to grant rain (see 1 Kings 17–18). The rainy season began in October and typically continued through April. The other months of the year witnessed little or no rainfall. Although in a temperate zone within which one might expect high temperatures, the coastal plains were kept relatively cool by winds coming in off the sea. The coastal mountain areas, such as Carmel, were the most likely to receive rainfall, so when they were without it, all the land suffered (Amos 1:2).

Culture and Politics

The history of Canaan begins with an archaeological record that travels back into the first signs of human settlement anywhere in the world. Such early attestation exists within the confines of Palestine itself at Jericho and Megiddo, both sites of natural springs that would have attracted settlers. The pre-Israelite civilizations of Canaan are well attested during the Bronze Age (c. 3300–1200 BC). Their culture as represented in the art and architecture of the land demonstrates a developed people who were metropolitan in taste and gifted in style. Furthermore, because of the placement of the land between Egypt and Mesopotamia and the numerous incursions by outside forces throughout its history, Canaan reveals a people with a high tolerance for change and a willingness to absorb other viewpoints into their perspectives and practice. Archaeological finds reveal a mixture of Egyptian, Sumerian, Amorite, Hittite, and Akkadian influences in their literature, material wealth, and religion.

Though unified in terms of a worldview and religious expression, the people of Canaan were politically committed to independent expressions of their power and influence. The greater cities seem to have served as hubs around which smaller communities and cities organized and remained separate from each other. The Amarna letters of the fourteenth century BC reveal leaders who did not trust each other and who sought the Egyptian pharaoh’s favor as they vied for position and strength. As one would expect, different city-states held more sway in different eras. Ebla flourished in the period of 2500–2000 BC and then again around 1800 BC. Likewise, Byblos flourished in the period of 2500–1300 BC. It is in the Middle Bronze Age (2200–1550 BC) that cities more directly involved with the biblical narrative started to flourish. For instance, Jerusalem, Jericho, Hazor, and Megiddo reached their height of power and influence around 1700–1500 BC, and each of these is mentioned in various texts of the time that give us some insight into Canaan’s role in the greater political history. It is Ugarit/Ras Shamra, which flourished in 1400–1200 BC, however, that has granted us the greatest amount of textual knowledge and information about the religion and literature of Canaan.

Religion

The excavations of Ras Shamra (beginning in 1929), and the accompanying discovery of its archive of clay tablets, granted modern scholars a perspective into Canaanite religion that had been hinted at in the biblical text but previously had remained somewhat of a mystery. The tablets themselves date between 1400 and 1200 BC. They reveal a highly developed religion with identifiable, well-defined deities. These deities represent religious practice and thought in the region that go back to at least 2000 BC, and the Mesopotamian religions they are dependent on go back well beyond that.

Canaanite deities. The primary gods identified in the text include El, Baal, Asherah (at Ugarit, Athirat), Anath (at Ugarit, Anat), and Ashtoreth (at Ugarit, Astarte). El was the supreme Canaanite deity, though in popular use the people of Canaan seem to have been more interested in Baal.

The relationship between the Canaanite use of the name “El” for their supreme god and Israel’s use of the same in reference to its own God (Gen. 33:20; Job 8:3; Pss. 18:31, 33, 48; 68:21) is something that biblical authors used at various points in their writings (Ps. 81:9–10; Nah. 1:2), never in the sense of associating the two as one and the same, but solely for the purpose of distinguishing their God, Yahweh, from any associations with the descriptions and nature of the Canaanite El (Exod. 34:14). Practically speaking, the coincidence probably resulted from the fact that the Hebrew word ’el had a dual intent in its common usage, similar to the way a modern English speaker will sometimes use “god” as either a common or a proper noun.

Like “El,” the term “Baal” had a dual function in its use. Because the word means “master” or “lord,” the people of Canaan could apply “Baal” to either the singular deity of the greater pantheon or to individual gods of a more local variety. Local manifestations included Baal-Peor, Baal-Hermon, Baal-Zebul, and Baal-Meon. The OT acknowledges the multiplicity of Baals in some places (Judg. 2:11; 3:7; 1 Sam. 7:4) but also seems to allude to a singular ultimate Baal (1 Kings 18; 2 Kings 21:3), called “Baal-Shamen” or “Baal-Hadad” elsewhere. The fact that Baal was recognized in the Ugaritic texts as the god of the thunderbolt adds an interesting insight to the struggle on Mount Carmel, in which one would suppose that had he been real, the one thing he should have been able to do was bring fire down from the sky; but he could not (1 Kings 18). Recognition that the term “Baal” could refer to a number of gods or to one ultimate god may also help one understand the syncretism that took place in Israel between Yahweh and Baal addressed by the prophet Hosea (Hos. 2:16). To the common person who recognized the multiplicity of the term “Baal” and yet also heard of his supremacy, the assignment of the name to Yahweh and the resulting combining that would occur would seem a natural progression, though still sinful in the eyes of God.

The synthesis of Baal and Yahweh is demonstrated in Scripture as being a temptation from national Israel’s earliest encounters with Baalism. The events at Peor (Num. 25) demonstrate a propensity toward this type of activity, but the confusion between Yahweh and Baal became strongest once Israel entered into the land. Gideon had a second name, “Jerub-Baal” (Judg. 6:32), and the people themselves worshiped Baal-Berith (“Baal of the covenant”) as an indication that they believed their covenant to be with Baal, not Yahweh. Saul, Jonathan, and David all had sons named for Baal: Esh-Baal, Merib-Baal, and Beeliada respectively. Jeroboam I made the connection even more explicit in his setting of shrines at Dan and Bethel with the golden calves that were common icons for Baal in the era, but that he apparently viewed as being appropriate representations of Yahweh. By the time of the prophets, such confusion evidently was entrenched into the very heart of both Israel and Judah; however, Yahweh was able to utilize the false assessments of his character to clarify his true character and ultimately bring Israel back to him.

Asherah was the wife of El in Ugaritic mythology, but apparently because of Baal’s accessibility and ubiquitous nature, she was ultimately given to Baal as a consort among Canaanites in the south. Apparently, her worship was also linked to trees, and the mentioning of “Asherah poles” (Exod. 34:13; Deut. 7:5; Judg. 6:25) in Scripture suggests that such a linkage had been stylized into representative trees at sacred locations. Asherah had prophets (1 Kings 18:19) and specific instruments of worship in Israel (2 Kings 23:4) and became so ensconced in practice and thought that her form often was replicated in the form of items known as Asherim. The previously mentioned synthesis between Baal and Yahweh seems also to have found expression regarding Asherah within Israel. At Kuntillet Ajrud a famous graffito reads “Yahweh of Samaria and his Asherah.” This example of the people granting a consort to Yahweh is yet another instance where the biblical revelation is so distinct among surrounding cultures because of the absence of such imagery regarding God.

Anath was understood as both Baal’s sister and his lover in Canaanite mythology. Given her apparent replacement in the thought of the southern Canaanite tribes by Asherah, it is not surprising that the only place we find Anath mentioned is in appellations, such as “Beth Anath” (lit., “the house of Anath” [Josh. 19:38; Judg. 1:33]). She also seems to have played a role in the tone of Baal worship in that she functioned as a goddess of both warfare and sexuality. Her portrayal in Ugaritic texts and in inscriptions from Egypt suggests a lasciviousness that has become the defining characteristic of Canaanite worship and also seems to be at the center of the methodology implemented by Hosea to reach Israel, which had become ensnarled in a similar outlook regarding Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).

The descriptions of Ashtoreth at Ugarit portray her in much the same light as Anath. Some cultures such as Egypt and later Syria seem to have even melded them together into one being. Whether this combining was a part of the Israelite conceptions is difficult to determine, although such a combination may explain why only Ashtoreth is mentioned in the biblical text as an individual deity and not Anath. In any case, Ashtoreth apparently was a primary figure in the corruption of worship during the reign of Solomon (1 Kings 11:5, 33; 2 Kings 23:13).

Summary. By the time the Israelites entered the land, they found a religion that was already well established and accustomed to absorbing various viewpoints into its expression and practice. Additionally, they found a religion that catered to the more base and animalistic tendencies to which all humanity is drawn since the fall. The commonality of such practices among almost all ancient cultures serves as a potent reminder of the distinctiveness and power of the biblical worldview. The narratives, poems, and prophetic oracles of the OT demonstrate a knowledge of these beliefs and an acknowledgment of their place in the lives of everyday Israelites, but they never demonstrate a submission to them in their portrayal of the true God and his expectations of his people.

The grave or place of the afterlife. Nearing death, the psalmist asks whether God can be praised by the dead, and if God’s wonders and deliverance can be known in the grave (Ps. 88:10–12).

The land of Israel is strategically located on a land bridge between significant geopolitical powers. About the size of New Jersey, it is geographically diverse, ranging from fertile mountains in northern Galilee to the arid Negev steppe. It was indeed the “testing ground of faith” in which God planted his people.

The “Land Between”

The Mediterranean Sea to the west and the great Arabian Desert to the east confined the flow of military and commercial traffic to this land bridge. Throughout most of Israel’s history, Egypt and the succession of political entities in Mesopotamia were intent on expanding their empires; Israel was in between. To a lesser extent, this also involved invaders coming from or through Anatolia (modern Turkey).

The sea and the desert also affect the weather patterns as Israel is dependent on rainfall in the winter months and dew in the summer for its continued agricultural fertility. The promises regarding the “early and latter rains” (autumn and spring) indicate blessing (Deut. 11:14; Jer. 5:24; Joel 2:23). The prospects of drought and famine hover over the land. These vulnerabilities to enemy attack and potential lack of rainfall figure prominently in God’s challenge to faithful obedience (Deut. 11:10–17; 28:25).

Geographical Regions

There are four north-south longitudinal zones that help to define the geography of Israel. From west to east, they are the coastal plain, the hill country, the Jordan Rift Valley, and Trans-jordan. South of these zones lies the Negev, a marginal region between Israel proper and Sinai.

Coastal plain. The coastal plain extends almost the entire length of Israel, with the exception of Mount Carmel’s promontory, jutting out into the Mediterranean Sea. Because of the straight coastline, there are no natural good harbors as there are farther north in Lebanon. This region characteristically was controlled by more cosmopolitan and generally hostile non-Israelites, the most notable being the Philistines in the south. As a result of these factors, the Israelites generally were not a seafaring people, and in fact they seemed to view the sea as a place of chaos and danger (e.g., Pss. 42:7; 74:13–14; Jon. 2:2–7).

Much of the coastal plain was swampy in antiquity due to calcified sandstone ridges along the coastline that prevented runoff from the hills from flowing unimpeded into the sea. In addition, sand dunes along the coast were obstacles to travel. Because this region was relatively flat and easily traversed along the eastern edge, the International Coastal Highway skirted the swamps and dunes and carried the major traffic through the land. Erosion from the hill country to the east brought excellent soil to the plain. Once the swamps were drained in the twentieth century, the plains became fertile farming areas.

The coastal plain has significant subdivisions. To the north of Mount Carmel, the Plain of Akko includes a crescent-shaped area around the city of Akko and extends to Rosh HaNikra, a promontory at the boundary with Lebanon. Immediately south of Mount Carmel is the small Plain of Dor, generally under the control of foreigners and not significant in the biblical text. The Crocodile River separates the Plain of Dor from the Sharon Plain. In the early first century AD, Herod the Great built Caesarea Maritima on the site of Strato’s Tower along the coast of the Sharon Plain and constructed an immense artificial harbor (Josephus, Ant. 15.331–41). It was Herod’s intent for Caesarea to serve as the entry point for Roman culture into what he considered to be the backwaters of Palestine. In God’s plan, however, the process was reversed: Caesarea became a major Christian center, and the gospel went out through the entire Roman Empire.

The Yarqon River, with its source at Aphek, separates the Sharon and the Philistine plains. Because this created a bottleneck for the International Coastal Highway, whoever controlled Aphek had a military and commercial advantage. It is significant that the Philistines were at Aphek when the Israelites took the ark of the covenant to battle (1 Sam. 4). The Philistine Plain extends fifty miles south to Besor Wadi (dry riverbed) in the western Negev (see below). Its width ranges from about ten miles in the north to twenty-five miles in the south. The five significant Philistine cities were Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Gath, and Ekron.

Hill country. A mountainous spine runs from the north to the south, with several aberrations due to seismic activity in the distant geologic past. The hill countries of Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, and Manasseh are in the southern two-thirds of the country. Because the terrain is rugged, with steep V-shaped valleys, these regions are somewhat more isolated and protected, especially in Judah and Ephraim. Travel in the interior is along the north-south ridge, often called the “way of the patriarchs” because Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob journeyed this route, stopping at Shechem, Bethel, Salem (Jerusalem), Hebron, and finally Beersheba at the southern end of the mountain range. Agriculture in the hill country is excellent when there is sufficient rainfall. The hard limestone bedrock means that springs are bountiful and the eroded terra rossa soil is productive. The triad of crops that appears in the Bible includes grain (“bread”), new wine, and oil (Deut. 11:14; Joel 1:10), noted in the order in which they are harvested.

West of the Judean hill country are lower, rolling foothills known as the Shephelah. Cut through by five significant east-west valleys, this region was a buffer zone between the people living in the hill country and the Philistines or other foreign forces passing through on the International Coastal Highway. When Israel was particularly vulnerable, these valleys served as invasion routes into the heartland of Judah. The most famous of these, the Elah Valley, was the site of the face-off between David and the Philistine warrior Goliath (1 Sam. 17).

On the eastern side of the hill country, especially in the tribal areas of Judah and Benjamin, lies the wilderness. Because most of the precipitation falls on the western slopes of the mountain range, rainfall for the regions right around the Dead Sea (in the “rain shadow”) is less than four inches per year. Sparsely inhabited, the wilderness was occasionally a place of refuge, as when David was fleeing from Saul (1 Sam. 23–26). Generally, it was viewed as a place to pass through. When the Israelites conquered the land, they traversed the wilderness to get to the central Benjamin Plateau (Josh. 10:9–10). David fled through the wilderness when Absalom took over the kingdom (2 Sam. 15–16). When Jesus traveled from Jericho (below sea level) to Jerusalem, he climbed through the wilderness to an elevation of about twenty-five hundred feet above sea level. Shepherds grazed their flocks in this area during the winter wet months and then migrated farther north and west as the dry season advanced. Some chose to withdraw into the wilderness, most notably the Qumran community along the northwestern shore of the Dead Sea and the later monastic communities.

The major city in the rugged hill country of Ephraim was Shiloh, a well-protected location for the tabernacle and the ark of the covenant early in Israel’s history (Judg. 18:31; 1 Sam. 1–4). In fact, the decision to take the ark out to battle against the Philistines at Aphek was catastrophic. The tribal territory of Manasseh, north of Ephraim, was more open to foreign influence. The major cities were Shechem, lying between Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal, locations for the renewal of the covenant (Josh. 8:30–35; 24:1), and Samaria, eventually the capital of the northern kingdom. When Omri moved the capital west to Samaria (1 Kings 16:24), it was a bid for more connection with cosmopolitan coastal communities and particularly with the nation of Phoenicia to the northwest. Omri’s son Ahab married the Phoenician princess Jezebel, cementing the alliance and bringing Baal worship to Israel with even greater force.

Mount Carmel, to the northwest of Samaria, served as the effective boundary between Israel and the expanding power of the Phoenicians. It was the perfect stage for the confrontation between Elijah and the prophets of Baal and Asherah (1 Kings 18). Due to its elevation (over seventeen hundred feet at its highest point), it normally receives about thirty-two inches of rain per year. At Elijah’s word, however, the rain had ceased for more than three years (1 Kings 17:1; James 5:17), and the glory of Carmel had withered (cf. Isa. 33:9; Amos 1:2; Nah. 1:4). This was a direct challenge to the supposed powers of Baal, the god of storm and rain. The contest apparently took place near the heights of the promontory overlooking the Mediterranean Sea (1 Kings 18:42–43). There are, however, three sections in the entire twenty-four-mile range, each separated from the next by a chalk pass, providing access through the mountain range. At the southeastern end of Mount Carmel lies the Dothan Valley, location of one of the routes connecting the International Coastal Highway with the major Transjordanian highway (see Gen. 37; 2 Kings 6:8–23).

The Dothan Valley rests between Mount Carmel and Mount Gilboa to the east. These two mountains, along with the Jezreel and Harod Valleys on their northern flanks, create a natural barrier between the central hill country and Galilee. Because of the strategic importance of this region, the Israelites fought early defensive battles against the forces of Jabin king of Hazor (Judg. 4) and against the Midianites camped in the Jezreel Valley (Judg. 7). Later, the Philistines swept through this valley, dividing the southern tribes from those in the north. Saul and his sons lost their lives on Mount Gilboa in this confrontation (1 Sam. 31). The night before the battle, Saul was so troubled by God’s silence that he ventured behind enemy lines on Mount Moreh (directly north of Mount Gilboa) to the town of Endor and requested a medium to summon the prophet Samuel (1 Sam. 28). The city of Megiddo, situated on the edge of the Jezreel Valley at the base of Mount Carmel, guarded the most important pass through the mountain and was the site of numerous battles. It may be the basis for the name “Armageddon,” “Har Megiddo” in Hebrew (Rev. 16).

North of the Jezreel and Harod Valleys, Galilee can be divided into lower and upper Galilee. The latter is called “upper” because it is both farther north and significantly higher in elevation. Upper Galilee is rugged and relatively isolated. As a result, few biblical events unfolded there. In fact, Galilee is seldom mentioned in the OT, with the exception of Isa. 9:1, the passage that Matthew quotes in speaking of the inauguration of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee (Matt. 4:13–16).

The western part of lower Galilee has ridges that run east to west, providing natural conduits for the winds from the Mediterranean Sea as they sweep eastward. This contributes to sudden and strong storms on the Sea of Galilee. The town of Nazareth is nestled near the top of the southernmost ridge, overlooking the Jezreel Valley from the north. This would have afforded Jesus a panoramic view of a historical stage as he was growing up. Nearby was Gath Hepher, hometown of the prophet Jonah (2 Kings 14:25). As Jesus looked east, he would have seen Mount Tabor (Judg. 4–5) and Mount Moreh (Judg. 7; 1 Sam. 31). The “brow of the hill” at Nazareth (Luke 4:29) is a sharp precipice overlooking the Jezreel Valley. Although not mentioned in the Gospels, the Roman city of Sepphoris was only about three miles northwest of Nazareth, and it might have been the place where Joseph was employed as a builder. Eastern lower Galilee is characterized by beautiful rolling hills and valleys that slope down toward the Jordan Valley. Just west of the Sea of Galilee are the cliffs of Arbel, past which the International Coastal Highway made its way as it ran from the Jezreel Valley around Mount Tabor and down into the Jordan Rift Valley.

Jordan Rift Valley. The Jordan Rift Valley, ranging in width from about four to fourteen miles, is a remarkable geological cleft in the earth that extends well beyond the immediate area of Israel. The Arabah, the Dead Sea, the Sea of Galilee, and the Huleh Valley north of the Sea of Galilee lie in the Jordan Rift Valley. In modern times, the Arava (Arabah) refers to the wasteland between the Dead Sea and the Gulf of Eilat (Aqaba), but in the OT the term also included the barren desert north of and around the Dead Sea (Josh. 8:14; 11:2; 1 Sam. 23:24; 2 Sam. 2:29; 4:7). The Dead Sea was called the “Sea of the Arabah” in texts that indicate its role as a boundary marker (Deut. 3:17; 4:49; Josh. 12:3; 2 Kings 14:25).

In the Hebrew Bible, the Dead Sea is called the “Sea of Salt.” The mineral content exceeds 30 percent, compared to normal sea salinity of 3–5 percent. These minerals include calcium, potassium, magnesium, and sodium chlorides. Nevertheless, some algae and bacteria do survive in the sea. Bitumen (asphalt) also seeps from the sea floor, especially when there is more seismic activity in the region. The salinity varies, depending on the level of the Dead Sea, which does fluctuate with variations in rainfall. The level is currently receding rapidly, at a rate of almost three feet per year. One reason for this is the increasing demand for water from the headwaters of the Jordan River. The north end of the sea, at about thirteen hundred feet below sea level, is the lowest place on earth, and the depth of the water at that point is more than one thousand feet.

The Jordan River Valley north of the Dead Sea is approximately sixty-five miles long, and the Jordan River winds for over 120 miles. The name “Jordan” comes from the Hebrew word yarad, which means “to descend.” The Sea of Galilee is 690 feet below sea level, so there is a significant drop between that point and the north end of the Dead Sea.

Key cities in the Jordan Valley include Jericho, just north of the Dead Sea, and Beth Shan, at the junction of the Harod and Jordan valleys. The first city to be conquered (Josh. 6), Jericho represented the vulnerable “underbelly” of Canaan and paved the way for the campaigns that swept first through the south and then the north (Josh. 9–11). Beth Shan was under Philistine control in the early Israelite period. Later, it became the one Decapolis city west of the Jordan River and was known as Scythopolis.

The Jordan Valley has three sections. The entire expanse is called the “Ghor,” an Arabic name. The river valley itself is called the “Zhor,” and it includes the “pride” or thickets of the Jordan, a dense tangle of lush underbrush in which lions could be found in the biblical period (Jer. 12:5; 49:19; 50:44; Zech. 11:3). In between the Ghor and the Zhor is the Qatarra, lifeless marl terraces. In antiquity, during flood stage the Jordan River could be a mile wide. The Israelites crossed the Jordan in the springtime, near Passover, when the river was at flood stage (Josh. 3:15; 5:10).

The Jordan River has its headwaters north of the Sea of Galilee at the base of Mount Hermon. It provides a constant source of freshwater coming into the seven-by-thirteen-mile body of water. In addition, there are salt springs in the northwestern corner. These contribute to the good fishing in that part of the sea. The Hebrew name is “Yam [Sea of] Kinnereth” (Num. 34:11; Josh. 12:3; 13:27). It was also known as the Sea of Tiberias (John 6:1; 21:1) and the Lake of Gennesaret (Luke 5:1). This last name comes from the fertile plain around the northwestern corner of the lake and the city of Gennesaret on that plain.

The ministry of Jesus unfolded around the Sea of Galilee after he moved his base of operations from Nazareth to Capernaum (Matt. 4:13), at the northern end of the sea. Nearby were the cities of Bethsaida and Chorazin, which, along with Capernaum, Jesus condemned for not believing even though he worked miracles in their midst (Matt. 11:20–24). The city of Capernaum profited from the industries of fishing and oil pressing. It was also a likely place for a tax collector, as it was close to the border between Herod Antipas’s Galilee and Herod Philip’s territories to the east. Across the lake, in non-Jewish territory, was the town of Gergesa, perhaps the site where Jesus sent the legion of demons into a herd of pigs (Mark 5:1–20 pars.).

Just north of the Sea of Galilee is an elevated sill, formed by a basalt flow across the Golan Heights and over this section of the Jordan Rift Valley. Hazor, a major site of some two hundred acres, sat astride the sill and dominated the northern region in the Late Bronze and Israelite periods. Hazor is mentioned in texts from both Mari in Mesopotamia and El Amarna in Egypt.

The Huleh Valley, north of the sill, is twenty miles in length and receives about twenty-four inches of rain per year, making it a marshland swamp in antiquity that was called “Lake Semechonitis.” The International Coastal Highway made its way along the western edge of the valley, turned eastward past Mount Hermon, and continued to Damascus.

Transjordan. On the eastern side of the Jordan Rift Valley, at the very northern extent of Israel, Mount Hermon rises to nine thousand feet. Abundant precipitation percolating through the limestone results in prolific springs at its base. These are the headwaters of the Jordan River, the two most important of which are at Dan and Caesarea Philippi. With the abundance of water and lush surroundings, it is not surprising that Dan was a tempting location for the tribe of Dan to resettle, given their precarious position between the tribe of Judah and the Philistines to the west. The idols set up at that point (Judg. 18:30–31) established a precedent for Jeroboam’s choice to position one of the golden calves there as an alternative to worship in distant Jerusalem (1 Kings 12:29–30). Another name for Caesarea Philippi is “Panias” (modern Arabic, “Banias”), in celebration of the god Pan. The rock face from which the spring poured forth is covered with niches for pagan gods; Herod the Great also built a temple to Augustus. In this context, Peter declared that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the “living” God (Matt. 16:16).

The region south of Mount Hermon was Bashan in the OT period. In the NT era it consisted of a number of small provinces. One of those was Gaulanitis, which is recognizable in the modern name “Golan.” With significant annual rainfall (about forty inches per year), the natural vegetation includes trees and rich pasture that supports large herds (cf. the “bulls of Bashan” in Ps. 22:12; Ezek. 39:18).

Separating the region of Bashan from Lower Gilead is the Yarmuk River Gorge, a significant natural boundary. There was an ongoing contest between the northern kingdom of Israel and Syria to the northeast to control the key site of Ramoth Gilead (1 Kings 22; 2 Kings 9). Cutting through the elevated Dome of Gilead is the Jabbok River, the site of Jacob’s wrestling match with God (Gen. 32).

The area to the east and south of the Dead Sea includes the plains of Moab (Mishor), extending north of the Arnon River Gorge; geopolitical Moab, between the Arnon and the Zered rivers; and Edom, reaching from the Zered down to the northern end of the Gulf of Eilat (Aqaba). To the east of the Mishor lay the kingdom of Ammon. According to Gen. 19, Moab and Ammon were descendants of Lot by his daughters. When they fled eastward from Sodom and Gomorrah, this was the general area they settled.

Transjordan was significant in the OT as the Israelites skirted Edom, conquered the cities of the Amorites and the king of Bashan, and encountered Moab en route to the promised land (Num. 20–25). The tribes of Reuben and Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh requested the right to settle in Transjordan after the conquest of the land was completed (Num. 32). In the ensuing centuries these tribes suffered the ravages of war on the eastern front (Judg. 10:8; 1 Sam. 11:1; 2 Kings 15:29; 1 Chron. 5:23–26). In the intertestamental period most of northern and central Transjordan came under Hellenistic control. Decapolis cities were located in Bashan, Gilead, and as far south as Philadelphia, at the site of modern Amman.

Negev. To the south of the Judean hill country lies the Negev, whose name means both “dry” and “south.” The biblical Negev is a smaller region shaped somewhat like a bowtie, with Beersheba at the center, Arad in the eastern basin, and Gerar controlling the western basin. The south end of the Philistine plain merges with the western Negev. In the patriarchal period there were tensions over water rights between the herdsmen of Abraham and Isaac and those of the Philistine king Abimelek (Gen. 21:22–34; 26:12–33). Although the region only receives eight to twelve inches of rainfall per year, this was sufficient to sustain small populations, especially if they conserved water. The soil of the Negev is loess, a windblown powder from which the water simply runs off unless catch basins are constructed.

The biblical Negev is bounded by the greater Negev to the south, where rugged limestone ridges predominate. An artificial line drawn from Gaza to Eilat, at the northern end of the Gulf of Eilat, defines the southwestern boundary of the greater Negev; the Jordan Rift Valley is the eastern boundary. The Negev was historically a corridor for spice trade coming from southwestern Arabia and India on the “ship of the desert” (the camel) to reach the Mediterranean markets. The Nabateans, Arab commercial nomads who knew the secrets of the desert, flourished in the spice trade from the fourth to the first centuries BC. Once the Romans co-opted the spice trade, the Nabateans built cities, developed water conservation techniques, and grew extensive vineyards.

The Testing Ground of Faith

Because the land is marginal in terms of both sufficient rainfall and national security, God’s covenant people faced the constant challenge of obedience. The temptations to worship the Canaanite gods for agricultural fertility and to form alliances with more-powerful neighbors instead of putting their trust in God were powerful. Often they succumbed and then experienced God’s chastisement that they might return to him (Lev. 26). Even the land itself would experience pollution due to the sins of its inhabitants (Lev. 18:25). In sum, the land was much more than living space; it was an integral part of the Israelites’ identity as God’s covenant people. When it was flowing with “milk and honey,” the people experienced the shalom of God.

The grave or place of the afterlife. Nearing death, the psalmist asks whether God can be praised by the dead, and if God’s wonders and deliverance can be known in the grave (Ps. 88:10–12).

A boundary stone (KJV: “landmark”; NRSV: “boundary marker”; Heb. gebul literally means “border”) is an object used to mark the boundaries of property. Boundary stones were to remain in place over generations (Deut. 19:14). Moving a boundary stone was a serious offense; those who move boundary stones were cursed in the same breath as those who dishonor their parents and those who lead the blind astray (Deut. 27:16–18). Wisdom literature speaks strongly against those who move boundary stones. Job cites the moving of boundary stones as an indication of the depravity of humankind (Job 24:1–4). Proverbs assures that God will not allow such an act of theft to go unnoticed (Prov. 22:28; 23:10).

In the Lukan parable of the great banquet, some versions use “lane” to translate the Greek word rhymē (Luke 14:21 KJV, NRSV, NASB), referring to an alleylike roadway within the city from which a servant was to collect disabled people. The NIV uses “country lane” in the same parable (14:23) to translate the Greek word phragmos, which actually is a fence or hedge but here indicates a path along it.

Scripture is written in three languages: Hebrew and Aramaic, two related Semitic languages, in the OT; and Koine (common) Greek in the NT. From the sixth century to the end of the fourth century BC, Aramaic was the lingua franca (trade language) of major portions of the ancient Near East, until Greek became the major trade language, from the end of the fourth century BC through the first century AD and beyond. Modern versions and dialects of all three languages are spoken today. Hebrew has been the national language of Israel since its re-creation in 1948. Aramaic dialects are spoken by small pockets of people—certain villages in the Anti-Lebanon area, groups in Azerbaijan and Kurdistan, and remnants of the gnostic sect of the Mandaeans. Greek is spoken by more than fifteen million Greeks, Cypriots, and others. Even though each language has changed and adapted over the centuries, most modern speakers would still recognize much of their language’s ancient forms. The main differences are in grammar, vocabulary, and, for Hebrew, writing script.

Hebrew is a North Semitic language written from right to left, having twenty-two consonants, and originally written without vowels. It is difficult to know how long Classical (or biblical Hebrew) was used, but the earliest extant Hebrew texts come from the twelfth (’Izbet Sartah Abecedary) and tenth centuries (Gezer Calendar) BC and extend at least until about AD 132–35 (manuscripts from Murabba’at caves).

Aramaic is also a North Semitic language, is very similar to Hebrew, and uses the same alphabet and often the same writing script. There are very few portions of the OT written in Aramaic (Dan. 2:4b–7:28; Ezra 4:8–6:18; 7:12–26; and a few phrases in Gen. 31:47; Jer. 10:11). It was most likely the common language spoken by Jesus and the disciples.

Following the conquests of Alexander the Great, Koine Greek became the lingua franca to help unify the Greek Empire. This highly inflected language (i.e., changes to words indicate grammatical function) is complex and precise, capable of expressing fine nuances and abstract ideas. The verb system has three voices (active, middle, passive), six aspects that convey the time of action (past, present, future) and the kind of action (durative: “I was eating”; completed: “I have eaten”; undefined: “I ate”), four moods that denote actuality or potentiality (indicative, subjunctive, imperative, optative), and participles and infinitives. See also Aramaic; Greek Language; Hebrew Language.

In John 18:3 the detachment of soldiers and officials from the chief priests and Pharisees carried two illuminating devices as they arrested Jesus at night in the garden of Gethsemane. The lantern differed from the torch in that the former included something to protect its fire from the elements.

An ancient city in Asia Minor founded by Antiochus II in the third century BC and named for his wife, Laodice. It was located on the Lycus River at the head of the Maeander Valley. Paul and Epaphras had some contact with the church in Laodicea (Col. 2:1; 4:13, 15–16), and Paul probably sent a letter to the believers in that locale. Although no letter by this name appears in the NT, Col. 4:16 asks the Colossian believers, who lived about ten miles up the Lycus Valley from Laodicea, to share their letter with the Laodiceans and also to “read the letter from Laodicea.” Because the second-century heretic Marcion believed that Ephesians was written to Laodicea, some scholars identify Ephesians as “the letter from Laodicea.” A later, apocryphal Epistle to the Laodiceans, written in Latin, is of dubious authenticity. Most likely the genuine letter from Laodicea has not been preserved from antiquity.

Laodicea is also the location of one of the seven churches to which John was instructed to send a letter containing his vision (Rev. 1:11). The specific address to Laodicea rebukes the Christians there, most likely for a compromised faith resulting in an ineffective witness, and it issues a call for them to repent. Among his indictments, John reproves the church for being lukewarm, accuses it of relying on its own wealth, describes it as naked and in need of white clothes, and alludes to its blindness that should be healed with eye salve (Rev. 3:16–18).

Historical information about the city provides insight into the appropriateness of the metaphorical details that John includes in his description of the Laodicean church. While nearby Hierapolis boasted hot springs and Colossae accessed a supply of cold, running water, Laodicea’s location required that its water be piped in via aqueduct from a spring several miles away. By the time the water arrived, it was tepid, barely drinkable, and emetic. Ruins of these aqueducts still visible in the area are caked with mineral deposits. Furthermore, Laodicea was the wealthiest city in its region during Roman times. It was known for banking, such that even Cicero is reported to have stopped there to cash drafts in 51 BC. When Laodicea was destroyed by an earthquake in AD 60, the self-sufficient city relied on its own abundance and refused assistance from the Roman senate. Laodicea was recognized for its textile industry, which included the production of glossy black wool that was exported throughout the Mediterranean world. Finally, a medical school is associated with Laodicea and is known for ophthalmology and its production of an eye salve.

An ancient city in Asia Minor founded by Antiochus II in the third century BC and named for his wife, Laodice. It was located on the Lycus River at the head of the Maeander Valley. Paul and Epaphras had some contact with the church in Laodicea (Col. 2:1; 4:13, 15–16), and Paul probably sent a letter to the believers in that locale. Although no letter by this name appears in the NT, Col. 4:16 asks the Colossian believers, who lived about ten miles up the Lycus Valley from Laodicea, to share their letter with the Laodiceans and also to “read the letter from Laodicea.” Because the second-century heretic Marcion believed that Ephesians was written to Laodicea, some scholars identify Ephesians as “the letter from Laodicea.” A later, apocryphal Epistle to the Laodiceans, written in Latin, is of dubious authenticity. Most likely the genuine letter from Laodicea has not been preserved from antiquity.

Laodicea is also the location of one of the seven churches to which John was instructed to send a letter containing his vision (Rev. 1:11). The specific address to Laodicea rebukes the Christians there, most likely for a compromised faith resulting in an ineffective witness, and it issues a call for them to repent. Among his indictments, John reproves the church for being lukewarm, accuses it of relying on its own wealth, describes it as naked and in need of white clothes, and alludes to its blindness that should be healed with eye salve (Rev. 3:16–18).

Historical information about the city provides insight into the appropriateness of the metaphorical details that John includes in his description of the Laodicean church. While nearby Hierapolis boasted hot springs and Colossae accessed a supply of cold, running water, Laodicea’s location required that its water be piped in via aqueduct from a spring several miles away. By the time the water arrived, it was tepid, barely drinkable, and emetic. Ruins of these aqueducts still visible in the area are caked with mineral deposits. Furthermore, Laodicea was the wealthiest city in its region during Roman times. It was known for banking, such that even Cicero is reported to have stopped there to cash drafts in 51 BC. When Laodicea was destroyed by an earthquake in AD 60, the self-sufficient city relied on its own abundance and refused assistance from the Roman senate. Laodicea was recognized for its textile industry, which included the production of glossy black wool that was exported throughout the Mediterranean world. Finally, a medical school is associated with Laodicea and is known for ophthalmology and its production of an eye salve.

Deborah is identified as “the wife of Lappidoth” (Judg. 4:4). The Hebrew word for “wife” also means “woman,” and lapid is a torch, perhaps indicating something of Deborah’s character.

In Lev. 11:19; Deut. 14:18 the KJV translates the Hebrew word dukipat as “lapwing,” referring to one of the unclean birds that the Israelites were forbidden to eat. More-recent versions translate the Hebrew word as “hoopoe.” The bird is characterized by an erectile crest on its head and the ability to produce a foul-smelling secretion. The hoopoe became the national bird of Israel in 2008.

Six times the KJV translates the Greek word aselgeia as describing the evil behavior of “lasciviousness.” The NIV translates the Greek word in these same contexts as “lewdness” (Mark 7:22), “debauchery” (2 Cor. 12:21; Gal. 5:19; 1 Pet. 4:3), “sensuality” (Eph. 4:19), and “license for immorality” (Jude 4).

A town mentioned in Luke’s narrative of Paul’s sea voyage to Rome (Acts 27:8). Lasea was on the south side of Crete, near the harbor of Fair Havens.

A town on the border of the early Canaanite settlements. Lasha appears last in the description of Canaan’s borders, being preceded by Sidon in the northwest, Gerar and Gaza in the southwest, and Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboyim in the southeast near the Dead Sea (Gen. 10:19). Lasha’s exact location is unknown, but the geographical sequence of the preceding cities indicates that it was on the northeastern extremity of Canaan.

A city west of the Jordan River that Joshua and the Israelites conquered (Josh. 12:18). The KJV notes that “Sharon” is an alternative reading for “Lasharon” based on the LXX text of Josh. 12:18, which reads “king of Aphek of Sharon.” If one accepts the LXX reading, then this verse refers to only one city and the number of conquered kings in the list drops to thirty, which differs from the total of thirty-one offered in Josh. 12:24. Modern translations render the word as “Lasharon,” without comment.

Eschatology is the study of last things. The word “eschatology” comes from the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last.” From this same Greek word is derived the term “eschaton,” which is sometimes used to refer to the end times.

Eschatology deals with such future events as the end of the world, Jesus’ return, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the afterlife in heaven or hell. The tribulation and the millennium also belong to eschatology, but their timing and nature vary with different views. Although from one perspective human history entered its final phase in NT times so that people today are already living in the “last days,” eschatology normally focuses on the unfulfilled prophecies that remain still in the future for present-day believers.

Eschatology deals with questions regarding the future. Every religion and philosophy of life has offered answers to these questions. Plato taught about the immortality of the soul. Buddhism has its nirvana, Islam its sensual paradise, and Native Americans their happy hunting grounds. The belief that the soul survives death is widely held. Even atheists and materialists have their own views of eschatology. Yet only in Christianity does eschatology become the crown and capstone of everything else that God has been doing throughout history, when he will be perfectly glorified, Christ completely victorious, the power of sin entirely overcome, and the people of God given a complete salvation.

Yet it is difficult to find a topic on which Christians are more divided. Frequently, people studying eschatology fall into one of two opposite traps: unwarranted dogmatism or simple avoidance. Yet eschatology should be a source of comfort and hope to believers as well as an ongoing reminder of the lateness and urgency of the hour. Consequently, eschatology deserves most careful attention and should create a sense of excitement and anticipation.

Reasons for Controversy

Eschatology is by no means a simple discipline. The sheer magnitude of this topic is a significant challenge involving hundreds of different unfulfilled prophecies from virtually every book of the Bible. Difficulties in interpreting these prophecies with their figures of speech, apocalyptic language, and complicated symbolism create still greater complications. Then there is the challenge of organizing these individual prophecies together into a coherent timeline when each will be fulfilled. Discerning the period of fulfillment for some prophecies is relatively clear and easy, but for others it is much less certain.

Even the question of how many periods of future time remain in God’s timetable has often been the source of considerable debate. For example, will there be a future period of tribulation, or were these prophecies already fulfilled in AD 70, or perhaps more generally throughout church history, with its countless martyrs? Similar questions have been raised about the millennium: is this to be understood in a still future sense, as premillennialists assert, or is it already in the process of being fulfilled, as amillennialists and postmillennialists claim? The fact that there is no common agreement even on these fundamental questions virtually guarantees that believers will remain divided on this issue.

Then too there is the final step of trying to assign specific unfulfilled prophecies into this grid of prophetic time slots. For example, is the prophecy “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox” (Isa. 65:25) a symbolic picture of God’s blessings in this present church age, in a future millennium, or in eternity itself? The vast majority of these unfulfilled prophecies contain few clues regarding the precise time of their fulfillment, and interpreters often are left with little to guide them. We should not be surprised that eschatology leaves believers more divided than do other areas of theology.

Jesus’ Return and the Tribulation

The fact of Jesus’ return is clear. When Jesus was taken up from his apostles at the end of his earthly ministry, two angels promised them, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Today believers look forward to Jesus’ second coming, as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). The common understanding has always been that this return will be personal, visible, and bodily—just as real as his first coming two thousand years ago.

Christians, however, have been divided over the timing of Jesus’ return and the tribulation. Here there are five interrelated questions.

1. The first question is whether Jesus’ return is a single event or will occur in two stages. Dispensationalists distinguish two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture that removes the church from a period of intense tribulation involving Israel here on earth, and then a later public second coming in judgment at the end of the tribulation, when he will establish his kingdom. A number of recent “left behind” books and movies have popularized this approach. Yet this two-stage model is difficult to document in Scripture, and many understand Scripture to describe Jesus’ return as a single unified event.

2. How one answers this first question has implications for the second question of the timing of Jesus’ return relative to the tribulation. Here there are three popular options regarding the timing of Jesus’ return: pretribulational (before the tribulation), midtribulational (in the midst of the tribulation), and posttribulational (after the tribulation). Yet if Jesus’ return is pretribulational or midtribulational, logic would require that there be two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture either before the tribulation (for pretribulationalism) or in the middle of it (for midtribulationalism), and then a separate public return at the conclusion of the tribulation to establish his kingdom. Thus, a two-stage return of Jesus goes hand in hand with pretribulationalism and midtribulationalism, and a single return with posttribulationalism.

3. A third question focuses on the nature of the tribulation period. There are three main views. Pretribulationalists assume that the tribulation will be a period (usually seven years) of great suffering such as this world has never seen. Midtribulationalists believe that Jesus will return after three and a half years of less intense tribulation, followed by a considerably more intense second period of three and a half years of wrath, from which believers will be spared. Posttribulationalists see this tribulation as the suffering and persecution of Christians at various times and places around the world, with possibly some intensification in the final days. Consequently, how one understands the intensity of the tribulation is another factor affecting the choice of one tribulational view or another.

4. A fourth interrelated question involves whether one believes that Jesus may return suddenly and unexpectedly at any moment (Matt. 24:42) or whether there are still unfulfilled prophecies that must take place first (initially including at least Peter’s death [John 21:19] and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem). Pretribulationalists pride themselves on how their view of a secret rapture allows for Jesus to return imminently without any intervening signs or other warnings. Midtribulationalists believe that the church will need to experience three and a half years of moderate tribulation, so there is less emphasis on an imminent return (although one could argue that the first period of tribulation is potentially more ambiguous in nature). Posttribulationalists are divided into two groups. Many have held that the tribulation will be a period of significant tribulation, so typically they have downplayed the idea of imminence. However, other posttribulationalists (sometimes called “pasttribulationalists” or “imminent posttribulationalists”) assume that the tribulation described in Scripture may already be fulfilled either at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or more generally throughout church history, and therefore Jesus may return at any time.

5. The fifth question focuses on how literally or figuratively one should interpret the two key passages of Scripture related to the nature of the tribulation: the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24 pars.) and Rev. 6–19. Much of the Olivet Discourse focuses on the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and many have understood at least parts of Revelation as being fulfilled historically either in John’s own day or during church history. The more one assumes that at least portions of these prophecies were already fulfilled, the less one awaits a future fulfillment. A more literal approach to these prophecies will predispose one toward pretribulationalism or possibly midtribulationalism, and a more figurative approach toward posttribulationalism.

Hyperpreterism, or consistent preterism, has emerged in the last few decades with a still different approach to the timing of Jesus’ return. The driving force behind this movement is Jesus’ apparent promise to return within a generation of his death (Matt. 24:34). Consequently, hyperpreterism has assumed that all the future prophecies in the NT must have been fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, including Jesus’ return, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment, and the new heaven and new earth. The bottom line is that in order to take literally Jesus’ promise to return within a generation, everything else in eschatology needs to be reinterpreted as having been fulfilled in one way or another within that same generation. A more moderate preterism sees many, but not all, of these eschatological events fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus returned as the Son of Man in judgment against Israel in these first-century events, but the final judgment of all people and the new heaven and new earth await his second coming.

The Resurrection and the Final Judgment

The bodily resurrection takes place at the time of Jesus’ return. Although many other religions and philosophies have assumed the immortality of the soul, whereby the nonmaterial part of human nature survives death, Christianity is distinctive in its strong commitment to the idea of a bodily resurrection. Death marks the separation of the body from the soul and the time when believers are immediately ushered into God’s presence (Eccles. 12:7). Thus, Jesus was able to promise the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). However, people do not immediately receive new resurrection bodies at the time of death, but must wait until the time of Jesus’ return, when “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1 Thess. 4:16). This bodily resurrection is the precursor to the final judgment of the saved and the lost, when “all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28–29). At that time, Christ “will judge the living and the dead” (2 Tim. 4:1).

This theme of judgment is foundational to Christianity, although Christians remain divided about the exact number and character of these judgments. Yet the time will come when all people will be judged, both “the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), when “we will all stand before God’s judgment seat” (Rom. 14:10), and “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (14:12). God himself will be the judge, and Christ will be given a special place in presiding over the final judgment and separate those who truly belong to him from those who do not. Even though this judgment will be “according to what they have done” (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12), these deeds are simply an outward demonstration of whether a living faith is present, so there is no contradiction between justification by faith and the necessary place for a changed life in the believer. Yet, as Jesus warns, some will be surprised: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). God’s judgment will be both just and inescapable.

Christians remain divided about the number of resurrections. Premillennialists who are also pretribulationalists or midtribulationalists would conclude that there is a minimum of a resurrection of believers at the time of the rapture, when Jesus returns for his church; another resurrection when Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation for believers who came to faith and died during the tribulation; as well as another resurrection at the end of the millennium for “the rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5). Premillennialists who are also posttribulationalists would conclude that there are as few as two resurrections: one at Jesus’ return and another at the end of the millennium. An amillennialist or a postmillennialist would assume that there may be only a single bodily resurrection when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom.

There is one other aspect that completes this theme: God’s judgment also includes the destruction of the devil in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10). Someday sin and evil will be forever removed from God’s creation.

The Millennium

The millennium is a thousand-year reign of Christ described most clearly in Rev. 20. Again, there are sharp differences of opinion regarding this topic.

Premillennialists believe that Jesus’ return will be “pre” (before) the millennium, and that this millennial kingdom will be a golden age of unprecedented glory and splendor. Dispensational premillennialists, with their emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church, have focused on the fulfillment of all the remaining OT prophecies made to Israel. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, lack this sharp distinction between Israel and the church and see themselves as being in continuity with the view of a future reign of Christ on earth found throughout church history. In recent years, premillennialism has become the leading view in American Christianity.

Postmillennialists believe that God will build his church for “a thousand years” and then Jesus will return “post” (after) this millennium. The millennium here is comparable to a silver age involving significant and unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialists remain divided about how literal this thousand-year period might be and whether this period has already begun or not. Postmillennialism has had a significant following throughout most of church history but more recently has become a minority view.

Amillennialists believe in a different kind of millennium. Here there are two different varieties. Some believe that those reigning with Christ in Rev. 20 are simply believers living here in this present life experiencing the intimacy of Christ’s presence in their daily lives. Others see this period as involving departed believers, who are currently reigning with Christ in the intermediate state between death and his return. The millennium here is neither the golden age of the premillennialist nor the silver age of the postmillennialist; it is simply life today.

Again there are predisposing factors. Those who place more weight on potentially unfulfilled OT prophecies will tend to be premillennial, whereas those who place more weight on the words of Jesus and Paul will tend to be amillennial or possibly postmillennial. Those who see more of a distinction between Israel and the church will tend to be dispensational premillennialists, whereas those who emphasize the unity among God’s people throughout redemptive history will choose one of the other alternatives. Those who tend toward a more literal approach to interpreting Scripture will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who give more weight to symbolic and figurative language will choose one of the other options. Those who tend to be more pessimistic about the future and believe that things are getting worse will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who are more optimistic about what God is doing in this world and who emphasize the transforming power of the gospel will tend to be postmillennialists. One’s eschatological convictions are the logical outgrowth of many other earlier commitments and persuasions.

Each of these millennial views also has implications for a number of other topics: the nature and intensity of Satan’s binding in Rev. 20, the number of different resurrections, and the number of different judgments. The ultimate question, again, is which approach does the best job of putting together all the prophecies of Scripture and consequently is most faithful to God’s word.

Heaven and Hell

God’s judgment inevitably leads either to final and permanent torment in hell or to untold blessings in the new heaven and new earth (Matt. 25:46).

The ultimate hope of believers involves the bodily resurrection and a new earth to go along with these glorified bodies. The glad time will come when God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” and “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). There will be the joys of physical bodies healed and restored, seeing friends and loved ones, but the greatest joy of all will be seeing the Lord himself in all his glory and majesty.

Hell will be the very opposite, experienced by those who deliberately rejected and avoided God during their earthly lives. They will find themselves rejected by God and cut off from his presence (and all the blessings that go along with his presence). Although there are various debates about how literal or figurative some of the biblical descriptions of hell are in terms of unquenchable fire and worms that do not die (Mark 9:48), it seems safe to say that hell will be the greatest of all possible tragedies and far worse than any of these descriptions suggest.

Annihilationism or conditional immortality, with its assumption that the souls of the lost will cease to exist at some point after death, represents an attempt to soften the explicit teachings of Scripture. Universalism—the belief that ultimately everyone will be saved—is another human strategy to avoid the clear teaching of Scripture. Ultimately, there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and human choices do make a difference for time and eternity.

The Benefits of Eschatology

Eschatology should give balance and perspective to life so that the affairs and accomplishments of this present life do not take on an inappropriate importance. Whenever people are caught up with materialism and a this-worldly perspective on life or become complacent about their lack of spiritual growth or the spiritual condition of others, the underlying cause is often a lack of attention to eschatology. Although many difficult and controversial questions surround the nature and timing of the return of Jesus Christ, Scripture is clear about the fact of his return and the final judgment. A new life with Christ that will last for all eternity is described in Scripture as the greatest of all possible blessings. At the same time, a life apart from God both in this life and in the life to come is described as the greatest possible tragedy in life. Perhaps even the spiritual deception and confusion around us, whereby many “will abandon the faith” (1 Tim. 4:1) and “not put up with sound doctrine” (2 Tim. 4:3), are a sign of the lateness of the hour. A proper appreciation of eschatology can be a means that God uses to change people’s lives.

Judgment Day in the Bible

The book of Revelation concludes with a harrowing vision of final judgment. On that day, when the God of all creation sits on his great white throne and holds court, the dead will rise and answer for their deeds, whether good or bad (20:11–13). The record of each person’s conduct appears in books, one of which is the Book of Life (20:12–13). Anyone whose name does not appear in the Book of Life is thrown into the lake of fire (20:15).

The apostle Paul refers to this same event in Acts 17:30–31. All human beings will face their scheduled day in court, as God certified by raising Christ from the dead. It will be a day of wrath, among other things, when God’s righteous anger against sin is fully displayed (Rom. 2:5). In the presence of this God, Isaiah proclaimed himself to be ruined because of his sinfulness before the one who is called “Holy, holy, holy” (Isa. 6:1–5). We therefore confess with the author of Hebrews, who says, “It is [and will be] a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb. 10:31).

Many other texts of Scripture forecast the same event: judgment day is coming, and nothing can stop it. They also describe this day in equally frightening terms, anticipating fire, darkness, and weeping for some, but everlasting joy and peace for others. Even Christians will be judged on this day, notwithstanding the promise of everlasting life for everyone who believes (e.g., John 3:16; 5:24; Rom. 3:21–24; 8:1–2; 2 Cor. 5:21). In Rom. 14:10–12 Paul says, “For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat,” at which time, “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.” Similarly, in 2 Cor. 5:10 Paul warns, “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.”

Justification and Judgment

In these texts, an apparent tension exists between the promise of justification, upon which all Christian hope stands, and the certainty of final judgment, including the judgment of believers. It will not do simply to downplay the one or the other, as if the biblical writers had not really intended one or both of them. These texts say what they say, the good news no less plainly than the bad. Yet, closer inspection shows that the tension is merely apparent.

We must first recognize that Scripture treats piety as the evidence of regeneration and saving faith. Jesus says that a “good tree,” which is a genuine disciple, bears good fruit (Matt. 7:17). That is, the observable righteousness of such a disciple will surpass the hypocritical casuistry of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 5:20). On judgment day, therefore, no actual conflict will or ever could arise between the general tendency of the believer’s conduct and his or her position in Christ. Over a lifetime, the believer’s habitual behavior will have differed fundamentally, though never satisfactorily, from that of a lost person. As for unrepentant sinners, they will be sentenced to eternal damnation because of their lawlessness (Rom. 3:9–19). Their conduct demonstrates that they have rejected the gospel and are deserving of wrath (Heb. 2:3). This linkage between justification and right conduct accounts for James’s polemical statement: “You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone” (James 2:24). Abraham’s positional righteousness, secured by faith in what God would do on his behalf, became publicly evident through his obedience (James 2:21–22).

We should also note the different purpose that God has in judging his church. One aspect of it certainly is to grasp the enormity of our sins, so that we might properly acknowledge the depth of his mercy on that day. But also this judgment will occur in order to mete out the differing rewards that Scripture anticipates for the people of God. The definitive text in this regard is 1 Cor. 3:1–17, which connects the believer’s rewards and losses to the quality of his or her behavior within the body of Christ. Some are building on Christ, the sure foundation, using the available materials, and they receive their proper reward. Others build selfishly on themselves, with the result that they are saved, “though only as one escaping through the flames” (1 Cor. 3:15). In both cases, however, the question seems to be one of greater and lesser reward, as opposed to salvation or damnation. Even in hell itself, various degrees of suffering come into play. According to Jesus, one can receive a heavy or light “beating” for disobedience, based on one’s prior knowledge of the master’s will (Luke 12:47–48). Judgment day, therefore, should not frighten Christians. Jesus really did suffer the full measure of God’s wrath against our sin. But this day reminds us that we are accountable for what we do as his disciples, and it motivates the evangelism that we are commanded to practice.

According to the Gospels and Paul, Jesus had a final meal with his closest followers the night before his crucifixion, which is remembered as the “Last Supper” (Matt. 26:26–29; Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:15–20; 1 Cor. 11:23–26; cf. John 13:1–30, which mentions the meal but describes and focuses on Jesus washing his disciples’ feet and elaborates on the betrayal by Judas Iscariot). The Synoptic and Pauline accounts of the meal fit into two distinct groups according to their representation in the NT: Matthew/Mark and Luke/1 Corinthians. The unique aspects of Luke/1 Corinthians include “do this in remembrance of me,” the “new covenant in my blood,” and “which is poured out for you.” Matthew/Mark include Jesus’ command to “take” the bread, his giving “thanks” before taking up the cup, and his referring to the cup as “my blood of the covenant” and his blood poured out for “many.”

Two further issues involve when this meal took place and whether it was a Passover meal. According to the Gospels, Jesus was crucified on a Friday (Matt. 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:31, 42). However, in the Synoptic Gospels the supper was a Passover meal (Matt. 26:17–19; Mark 14:12–16; Luke 22:7–15), but John 13:1, 29; 18:28; 19:31 imply that the trial and crucifixion took place before Passover. It may be that John is correct, and Jesus had a quasi-Passover meal ahead of the actual Passover because he knew that he would not live long enough to celebrate it. Or perhaps the Synoptics are correct, and John altered the chronology in order to have Jesus crucified on the same day the Passover lambs were sacrificed, thus making a theological point about Jesus as the Lamb of God. In any event, the meal was symbolic of the new exodus, the renewal of the covenant, and the atonement that Jesus would achieve through his death.

In the early church this commemorative meal became an integral part of the fellowship and worship of the first Christians. It was variously referred to as giving thanks (lit., “Eucharist,” [from the Greek word for “thanks”]) (Matt. 26:27; Mark 14:23; Luke 22:17, 19; 1 Cor. 11:24), “the breaking of bread” (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7, 11), “communion” (1 Cor. 10:16 KJV), the “Lord’s table” (1 Cor. 10:21), the “Lord’s Supper” (1 Cor. 11:20), and a “love feast” (Jude 12). See also Lord’s Supper.

Eschatology is the study of last things. The word “eschatology” comes from the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last.” From this same Greek word is derived the term “eschaton,” which is sometimes used to refer to the end times.

Eschatology deals with such future events as the end of the world, Jesus’ return, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the afterlife in heaven or hell. The tribulation and the millennium also belong to eschatology, but their timing and nature vary with different views. Although from one perspective human history entered its final phase in NT times so that people today are already living in the “last days,” eschatology normally focuses on the unfulfilled prophecies that remain still in the future for present-day believers.

Eschatology deals with questions regarding the future. Every religion and philosophy of life has offered answers to these questions. Plato taught about the immortality of the soul. Buddhism has its nirvana, Islam its sensual paradise, and Native Americans their happy hunting grounds. The belief that the soul survives death is widely held. Even atheists and materialists have their own views of eschatology. Yet only in Christianity does eschatology become the crown and capstone of everything else that God has been doing throughout history, when he will be perfectly glorified, Christ completely victorious, the power of sin entirely overcome, and the people of God given a complete salvation.

Yet it is difficult to find a topic on which Christians are more divided. Frequently, people studying eschatology fall into one of two opposite traps: unwarranted dogmatism or simple avoidance. Yet eschatology should be a source of comfort and hope to believers as well as an ongoing reminder of the lateness and urgency of the hour. Consequently, eschatology deserves most careful attention and should create a sense of excitement and anticipation.

Reasons for Controversy

Eschatology is by no means a simple discipline. The sheer magnitude of this topic is a significant challenge involving hundreds of different unfulfilled prophecies from virtually every book of the Bible. Difficulties in interpreting these prophecies with their figures of speech, apocalyptic language, and complicated symbolism create still greater complications. Then there is the challenge of organizing these individual prophecies together into a coherent timeline when each will be fulfilled. Discerning the period of fulfillment for some prophecies is relatively clear and easy, but for others it is much less certain.

Even the question of how many periods of future time remain in God’s timetable has often been the source of considerable debate. For example, will there be a future period of tribulation, or were these prophecies already fulfilled in AD 70, or perhaps more generally throughout church history, with its countless martyrs? Similar questions have been raised about the millennium: is this to be understood in a still future sense, as premillennialists assert, or is it already in the process of being fulfilled, as amillennialists and postmillennialists claim? The fact that there is no common agreement even on these fundamental questions virtually guarantees that believers will remain divided on this issue.

Then too there is the final step of trying to assign specific unfulfilled prophecies into this grid of prophetic time slots. For example, is the prophecy “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox” (Isa. 65:25) a symbolic picture of God’s blessings in this present church age, in a future millennium, or in eternity itself? The vast majority of these unfulfilled prophecies contain few clues regarding the precise time of their fulfillment, and interpreters often are left with little to guide them. We should not be surprised that eschatology leaves believers more divided than do other areas of theology.

Jesus’ Return and the Tribulation

The fact of Jesus’ return is clear. When Jesus was taken up from his apostles at the end of his earthly ministry, two angels promised them, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Today believers look forward to Jesus’ second coming, as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). The common understanding has always been that this return will be personal, visible, and bodily—just as real as his first coming two thousand years ago.

Christians, however, have been divided over the timing of Jesus’ return and the tribulation. Here there are five interrelated questions.

1. The first question is whether Jesus’ return is a single event or will occur in two stages. Dispensationalists distinguish two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture that removes the church from a period of intense tribulation involving Israel here on earth, and then a later public second coming in judgment at the end of the tribulation, when he will establish his kingdom. A number of recent “left behind” books and movies have popularized this approach. Yet this two-stage model is difficult to document in Scripture, and many understand Scripture to describe Jesus’ return as a single unified event.

2. How one answers this first question has implications for the second question of the timing of Jesus’ return relative to the tribulation. Here there are three popular options regarding the timing of Jesus’ return: pretribulational (before the tribulation), midtribulational (in the midst of the tribulation), and posttribulational (after the tribulation). Yet if Jesus’ return is pretribulational or midtribulational, logic would require that there be two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture either before the tribulation (for pretribulationalism) or in the middle of it (for midtribulationalism), and then a separate public return at the conclusion of the tribulation to establish his kingdom. Thus, a two-stage return of Jesus goes hand in hand with pretribulationalism and midtribulationalism, and a single return with posttribulationalism.

3. A third question focuses on the nature of the tribulation period. There are three main views. Pretribulationalists assume that the tribulation will be a period (usually seven years) of great suffering such as this world has never seen. Midtribulationalists believe that Jesus will return after three and a half years of less intense tribulation, followed by a considerably more intense second period of three and a half years of wrath, from which believers will be spared. Posttribulationalists see this tribulation as the suffering and persecution of Christians at various times and places around the world, with possibly some intensification in the final days. Consequently, how one understands the intensity of the tribulation is another factor affecting the choice of one tribulational view or another.

4. A fourth interrelated question involves whether one believes that Jesus may return suddenly and unexpectedly at any moment (Matt. 24:42) or whether there are still unfulfilled prophecies that must take place first (initially including at least Peter’s death [John 21:19] and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem). Pretribulationalists pride themselves on how their view of a secret rapture allows for Jesus to return imminently without any intervening signs or other warnings. Midtribulationalists believe that the church will need to experience three and a half years of moderate tribulation, so there is less emphasis on an imminent return (although one could argue that the first period of tribulation is potentially more ambiguous in nature). Posttribulationalists are divided into two groups. Many have held that the tribulation will be a period of significant tribulation, so typically they have downplayed the idea of imminence. However, other posttribulationalists (sometimes called “pasttribulationalists” or “imminent posttribulationalists”) assume that the tribulation described in Scripture may already be fulfilled either at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or more generally throughout church history, and therefore Jesus may return at any time.

5. The fifth question focuses on how literally or figuratively one should interpret the two key passages of Scripture related to the nature of the tribulation: the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24 pars.) and Rev. 6–19. Much of the Olivet Discourse focuses on the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and many have understood at least parts of Revelation as being fulfilled historically either in John’s own day or during church history. The more one assumes that at least portions of these prophecies were already fulfilled, the less one awaits a future fulfillment. A more literal approach to these prophecies will predispose one toward pretribulationalism or possibly midtribulationalism, and a more figurative approach toward posttribulationalism.

Hyperpreterism, or consistent preterism, has emerged in the last few decades with a still different approach to the timing of Jesus’ return. The driving force behind this movement is Jesus’ apparent promise to return within a generation of his death (Matt. 24:34). Consequently, hyperpreterism has assumed that all the future prophecies in the NT must have been fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, including Jesus’ return, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment, and the new heaven and new earth. The bottom line is that in order to take literally Jesus’ promise to return within a generation, everything else in eschatology needs to be reinterpreted as having been fulfilled in one way or another within that same generation. A more moderate preterism sees many, but not all, of these eschatological events fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus returned as the Son of Man in judgment against Israel in these first-century events, but the final judgment of all people and the new heaven and new earth await his second coming.

The Resurrection and the Final Judgment

The bodily resurrection takes place at the time of Jesus’ return. Although many other religions and philosophies have assumed the immortality of the soul, whereby the nonmaterial part of human nature survives death, Christianity is distinctive in its strong commitment to the idea of a bodily resurrection. Death marks the separation of the body from the soul and the time when believers are immediately ushered into God’s presence (Eccles. 12:7). Thus, Jesus was able to promise the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). However, people do not immediately receive new resurrection bodies at the time of death, but must wait until the time of Jesus’ return, when “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1 Thess. 4:16). This bodily resurrection is the precursor to the final judgment of the saved and the lost, when “all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28–29). At that time, Christ “will judge the living and the dead” (2 Tim. 4:1).

This theme of judgment is foundational to Christianity, although Christians remain divided about the exact number and character of these judgments. Yet the time will come when all people will be judged, both “the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), when “we will all stand before God’s judgment seat” (Rom. 14:10), and “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (14:12). God himself will be the judge, and Christ will be given a special place in presiding over the final judgment and separate those who truly belong to him from those who do not. Even though this judgment will be “according to what they have done” (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12), these deeds are simply an outward demonstration of whether a living faith is present, so there is no contradiction between justification by faith and the necessary place for a changed life in the believer. Yet, as Jesus warns, some will be surprised: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). God’s judgment will be both just and inescapable.

Christians remain divided about the number of resurrections. Premillennialists who are also pretribulationalists or midtribulationalists would conclude that there is a minimum of a resurrection of believers at the time of the rapture, when Jesus returns for his church; another resurrection when Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation for believers who came to faith and died during the tribulation; as well as another resurrection at the end of the millennium for “the rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5). Premillennialists who are also posttribulationalists would conclude that there are as few as two resurrections: one at Jesus’ return and another at the end of the millennium. An amillennialist or a postmillennialist would assume that there may be only a single bodily resurrection when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom.

There is one other aspect that completes this theme: God’s judgment also includes the destruction of the devil in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10). Someday sin and evil will be forever removed from God’s creation.

The Millennium

The millennium is a thousand-year reign of Christ described most clearly in Rev. 20. Again, there are sharp differences of opinion regarding this topic.

Premillennialists believe that Jesus’ return will be “pre” (before) the millennium, and that this millennial kingdom will be a golden age of unprecedented glory and splendor. Dispensational premillennialists, with their emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church, have focused on the fulfillment of all the remaining OT prophecies made to Israel. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, lack this sharp distinction between Israel and the church and see themselves as being in continuity with the view of a future reign of Christ on earth found throughout church history. In recent years, premillennialism has become the leading view in American Christianity.

Postmillennialists believe that God will build his church for “a thousand years” and then Jesus will return “post” (after) this millennium. The millennium here is comparable to a silver age involving significant and unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialists remain divided about how literal this thousand-year period might be and whether this period has already begun or not. Postmillennialism has had a significant following throughout most of church history but more recently has become a minority view.

Amillennialists believe in a different kind of millennium. Here there are two different varieties. Some believe that those reigning with Christ in Rev. 20 are simply believers living here in this present life experiencing the intimacy of Christ’s presence in their daily lives. Others see this period as involving departed believers, who are currently reigning with Christ in the intermediate state between death and his return. The millennium here is neither the golden age of the premillennialist nor the silver age of the postmillennialist; it is simply life today.

Again there are predisposing factors. Those who place more weight on potentially unfulfilled OT prophecies will tend to be premillennial, whereas those who place more weight on the words of Jesus and Paul will tend to be amillennial or possibly postmillennial. Those who see more of a distinction between Israel and the church will tend to be dispensational premillennialists, whereas those who emphasize the unity among God’s people throughout redemptive history will choose one of the other alternatives. Those who tend toward a more literal approach to interpreting Scripture will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who give more weight to symbolic and figurative language will choose one of the other options. Those who tend to be more pessimistic about the future and believe that things are getting worse will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who are more optimistic about what God is doing in this world and who emphasize the transforming power of the gospel will tend to be postmillennialists. One’s eschatological convictions are the logical outgrowth of many other earlier commitments and persuasions.

Each of these millennial views also has implications for a number of other topics: the nature and intensity of Satan’s binding in Rev. 20, the number of different resurrections, and the number of different judgments. The ultimate question, again, is which approach does the best job of putting together all the prophecies of Scripture and consequently is most faithful to God’s word.

Heaven and Hell

God’s judgment inevitably leads either to final and permanent torment in hell or to untold blessings in the new heaven and new earth (Matt. 25:46).

The ultimate hope of believers involves the bodily resurrection and a new earth to go along with these glorified bodies. The glad time will come when God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” and “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). There will be the joys of physical bodies healed and restored, seeing friends and loved ones, but the greatest joy of all will be seeing the Lord himself in all his glory and majesty.

Hell will be the very opposite, experienced by those who deliberately rejected and avoided God during their earthly lives. They will find themselves rejected by God and cut off from his presence (and all the blessings that go along with his presence). Although there are various debates about how literal or figurative some of the biblical descriptions of hell are in terms of unquenchable fire and worms that do not die (Mark 9:48), it seems safe to say that hell will be the greatest of all possible tragedies and far worse than any of these descriptions suggest.

Annihilationism or conditional immortality, with its assumption that the souls of the lost will cease to exist at some point after death, represents an attempt to soften the explicit teachings of Scripture. Universalism—the belief that ultimately everyone will be saved—is another human strategy to avoid the clear teaching of Scripture. Ultimately, there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and human choices do make a difference for time and eternity.

The Benefits of Eschatology

Eschatology should give balance and perspective to life so that the affairs and accomplishments of this present life do not take on an inappropriate importance. Whenever people are caught up with materialism and a this-worldly perspective on life or become complacent about their lack of spiritual growth or the spiritual condition of others, the underlying cause is often a lack of attention to eschatology. Although many difficult and controversial questions surround the nature and timing of the return of Jesus Christ, Scripture is clear about the fact of his return and the final judgment. A new life with Christ that will last for all eternity is described in Scripture as the greatest of all possible blessings. At the same time, a life apart from God both in this life and in the life to come is described as the greatest possible tragedy in life. Perhaps even the spiritual deception and confusion around us, whereby many “will abandon the faith” (1 Tim. 4:1) and “not put up with sound doctrine” (2 Tim. 4:3), are a sign of the lateness of the hour. A proper appreciation of eschatology can be a means that God uses to change people’s lives.

In the KJV “latchet” refers to the portion of a sandal that bound the walking surface to the wearer’s foot (NIV, NASB: “strap”). John the Baptist said that he was unworthy of the menial task of loosing the latchet of Jesus’ sandals (Mark 1:7; Luke 3:16; John 1:27).

The language of the Roman Empire. John 19:20 reports that the inscription on the cross of Jesus was written in Latin as well as Greek and Aramaic (cf. Luke 23:38 KJV, which includes the reading, found in some Greek manuscripts, “in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew”).

An outhouse or a place of undisposed waste. The temple of Baal was torn down and then converted into a latrine by Jehu (2 Kings 10:27), a definitive act that demonstrated to witnesses the superiority of Yahweh over Baal.

Eschatology is the study of last things. The word “eschatology” comes from the Greek word eschatos, meaning “last.” From this same Greek word is derived the term “eschaton,” which is sometimes used to refer to the end times.

Eschatology deals with such future events as the end of the world, Jesus’ return, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the afterlife in heaven or hell. The tribulation and the millennium also belong to eschatology, but their timing and nature vary with different views. Although from one perspective human history entered its final phase in NT times so that people today are already living in the “last days,” eschatology normally focuses on the unfulfilled prophecies that remain still in the future for present-day believers.

Eschatology deals with questions regarding the future. Every religion and philosophy of life has offered answers to these questions. Plato taught about the immortality of the soul. Buddhism has its nirvana, Islam its sensual paradise, and Native Americans their happy hunting grounds. The belief that the soul survives death is widely held. Even atheists and materialists have their own views of eschatology. Yet only in Christianity does eschatology become the crown and capstone of everything else that God has been doing throughout history, when he will be perfectly glorified, Christ completely victorious, the power of sin entirely overcome, and the people of God given a complete salvation.

Yet it is difficult to find a topic on which Christians are more divided. Frequently, people studying eschatology fall into one of two opposite traps: unwarranted dogmatism or simple avoidance. Yet eschatology should be a source of comfort and hope to believers as well as an ongoing reminder of the lateness and urgency of the hour. Consequently, eschatology deserves most careful attention and should create a sense of excitement and anticipation.

Reasons for Controversy

Eschatology is by no means a simple discipline. The sheer magnitude of this topic is a significant challenge involving hundreds of different unfulfilled prophecies from virtually every book of the Bible. Difficulties in interpreting these prophecies with their figures of speech, apocalyptic language, and complicated symbolism create still greater complications. Then there is the challenge of organizing these individual prophecies together into a coherent timeline when each will be fulfilled. Discerning the period of fulfillment for some prophecies is relatively clear and easy, but for others it is much less certain.

Even the question of how many periods of future time remain in God’s timetable has often been the source of considerable debate. For example, will there be a future period of tribulation, or were these prophecies already fulfilled in AD 70, or perhaps more generally throughout church history, with its countless martyrs? Similar questions have been raised about the millennium: is this to be understood in a still future sense, as premillennialists assert, or is it already in the process of being fulfilled, as amillennialists and postmillennialists claim? The fact that there is no common agreement even on these fundamental questions virtually guarantees that believers will remain divided on this issue.

Then too there is the final step of trying to assign specific unfulfilled prophecies into this grid of prophetic time slots. For example, is the prophecy “The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox” (Isa. 65:25) a symbolic picture of God’s blessings in this present church age, in a future millennium, or in eternity itself? The vast majority of these unfulfilled prophecies contain few clues regarding the precise time of their fulfillment, and interpreters often are left with little to guide them. We should not be surprised that eschatology leaves believers more divided than do other areas of theology.

Jesus’ Return and the Tribulation

The fact of Jesus’ return is clear. When Jesus was taken up from his apostles at the end of his earthly ministry, two angels promised them, “This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). Today believers look forward to Jesus’ second coming, as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). The common understanding has always been that this return will be personal, visible, and bodily—just as real as his first coming two thousand years ago.

Christians, however, have been divided over the timing of Jesus’ return and the tribulation. Here there are five interrelated questions.

1. The first question is whether Jesus’ return is a single event or will occur in two stages. Dispensationalists distinguish two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture that removes the church from a period of intense tribulation involving Israel here on earth, and then a later public second coming in judgment at the end of the tribulation, when he will establish his kingdom. A number of recent “left behind” books and movies have popularized this approach. Yet this two-stage model is difficult to document in Scripture, and many understand Scripture to describe Jesus’ return as a single unified event.

2. How one answers this first question has implications for the second question of the timing of Jesus’ return relative to the tribulation. Here there are three popular options regarding the timing of Jesus’ return: pretribulational (before the tribulation), midtribulational (in the midst of the tribulation), and posttribulational (after the tribulation). Yet if Jesus’ return is pretribulational or midtribulational, logic would require that there be two phases to Jesus’ return: a secret rapture either before the tribulation (for pretribulationalism) or in the middle of it (for midtribulationalism), and then a separate public return at the conclusion of the tribulation to establish his kingdom. Thus, a two-stage return of Jesus goes hand in hand with pretribulationalism and midtribulationalism, and a single return with posttribulationalism.

3. A third question focuses on the nature of the tribulation period. There are three main views. Pretribulationalists assume that the tribulation will be a period (usually seven years) of great suffering such as this world has never seen. Midtribulationalists believe that Jesus will return after three and a half years of less intense tribulation, followed by a considerably more intense second period of three and a half years of wrath, from which believers will be spared. Posttribulationalists see this tribulation as the suffering and persecution of Christians at various times and places around the world, with possibly some intensification in the final days. Consequently, how one understands the intensity of the tribulation is another factor affecting the choice of one tribulational view or another.

4. A fourth interrelated question involves whether one believes that Jesus may return suddenly and unexpectedly at any moment (Matt. 24:42) or whether there are still unfulfilled prophecies that must take place first (initially including at least Peter’s death [John 21:19] and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem). Pretribulationalists pride themselves on how their view of a secret rapture allows for Jesus to return imminently without any intervening signs or other warnings. Midtribulationalists believe that the church will need to experience three and a half years of moderate tribulation, so there is less emphasis on an imminent return (although one could argue that the first period of tribulation is potentially more ambiguous in nature). Posttribulationalists are divided into two groups. Many have held that the tribulation will be a period of significant tribulation, so typically they have downplayed the idea of imminence. However, other posttribulationalists (sometimes called “pasttribulationalists” or “imminent posttribulationalists”) assume that the tribulation described in Scripture may already be fulfilled either at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or more generally throughout church history, and therefore Jesus may return at any time.

5. The fifth question focuses on how literally or figuratively one should interpret the two key passages of Scripture related to the nature of the tribulation: the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24 pars.) and Rev. 6–19. Much of the Olivet Discourse focuses on the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and many have understood at least parts of Revelation as being fulfilled historically either in John’s own day or during church history. The more one assumes that at least portions of these prophecies were already fulfilled, the less one awaits a future fulfillment. A more literal approach to these prophecies will predispose one toward pretribulationalism or possibly midtribulationalism, and a more figurative approach toward posttribulationalism.

Hyperpreterism, or consistent preterism, has emerged in the last few decades with a still different approach to the timing of Jesus’ return. The driving force behind this movement is Jesus’ apparent promise to return within a generation of his death (Matt. 24:34). Consequently, hyperpreterism has assumed that all the future prophecies in the NT must have been fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, including Jesus’ return, the bodily resurrection, the final judgment, and the new heaven and new earth. The bottom line is that in order to take literally Jesus’ promise to return within a generation, everything else in eschatology needs to be reinterpreted as having been fulfilled in one way or another within that same generation. A more moderate preterism sees many, but not all, of these eschatological events fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus returned as the Son of Man in judgment against Israel in these first-century events, but the final judgment of all people and the new heaven and new earth await his second coming.

The Resurrection and the Final Judgment

The bodily resurrection takes place at the time of Jesus’ return. Although many other religions and philosophies have assumed the immortality of the soul, whereby the nonmaterial part of human nature survives death, Christianity is distinctive in its strong commitment to the idea of a bodily resurrection. Death marks the separation of the body from the soul and the time when believers are immediately ushered into God’s presence (Eccles. 12:7). Thus, Jesus was able to promise the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). However, people do not immediately receive new resurrection bodies at the time of death, but must wait until the time of Jesus’ return, when “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1 Thess. 4:16). This bodily resurrection is the precursor to the final judgment of the saved and the lost, when “all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:28–29). At that time, Christ “will judge the living and the dead” (2 Tim. 4:1).

This theme of judgment is foundational to Christianity, although Christians remain divided about the exact number and character of these judgments. Yet the time will come when all people will be judged, both “the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42), when “we will all stand before God’s judgment seat” (Rom. 14:10), and “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God” (14:12). God himself will be the judge, and Christ will be given a special place in presiding over the final judgment and separate those who truly belong to him from those who do not. Even though this judgment will be “according to what they have done” (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12), these deeds are simply an outward demonstration of whether a living faith is present, so there is no contradiction between justification by faith and the necessary place for a changed life in the believer. Yet, as Jesus warns, some will be surprised: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21). God’s judgment will be both just and inescapable.

Christians remain divided about the number of resurrections. Premillennialists who are also pretribulationalists or midtribulationalists would conclude that there is a minimum of a resurrection of believers at the time of the rapture, when Jesus returns for his church; another resurrection when Jesus returns at the end of the tribulation for believers who came to faith and died during the tribulation; as well as another resurrection at the end of the millennium for “the rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5). Premillennialists who are also posttribulationalists would conclude that there are as few as two resurrections: one at Jesus’ return and another at the end of the millennium. An amillennialist or a postmillennialist would assume that there may be only a single bodily resurrection when Jesus returns and establishes his kingdom.

There is one other aspect that completes this theme: God’s judgment also includes the destruction of the devil in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10). Someday sin and evil will be forever removed from God’s creation.

The Millennium

The millennium is a thousand-year reign of Christ described most clearly in Rev. 20. Again, there are sharp differences of opinion regarding this topic.

Premillennialists believe that Jesus’ return will be “pre” (before) the millennium, and that this millennial kingdom will be a golden age of unprecedented glory and splendor. Dispensational premillennialists, with their emphasis on the distinction between Israel and the church, have focused on the fulfillment of all the remaining OT prophecies made to Israel. Historic premillennialists, on the other hand, lack this sharp distinction between Israel and the church and see themselves as being in continuity with the view of a future reign of Christ on earth found throughout church history. In recent years, premillennialism has become the leading view in American Christianity.

Postmillennialists believe that God will build his church for “a thousand years” and then Jesus will return “post” (after) this millennium. The millennium here is comparable to a silver age involving significant and unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialists remain divided about how literal this thousand-year period might be and whether this period has already begun or not. Postmillennialism has had a significant following throughout most of church history but more recently has become a minority view.

Amillennialists believe in a different kind of millennium. Here there are two different varieties. Some believe that those reigning with Christ in Rev. 20 are simply believers living here in this present life experiencing the intimacy of Christ’s presence in their daily lives. Others see this period as involving departed believers, who are currently reigning with Christ in the intermediate state between death and his return. The millennium here is neither the golden age of the premillennialist nor the silver age of the postmillennialist; it is simply life today.

Again there are predisposing factors. Those who place more weight on potentially unfulfilled OT prophecies will tend to be premillennial, whereas those who place more weight on the words of Jesus and Paul will tend to be amillennial or possibly postmillennial. Those who see more of a distinction between Israel and the church will tend to be dispensational premillennialists, whereas those who emphasize the unity among God’s people throughout redemptive history will choose one of the other alternatives. Those who tend toward a more literal approach to interpreting Scripture will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who give more weight to symbolic and figurative language will choose one of the other options. Those who tend to be more pessimistic about the future and believe that things are getting worse will tend to be premillennialists, whereas those who are more optimistic about what God is doing in this world and who emphasize the transforming power of the gospel will tend to be postmillennialists. One’s eschatological convictions are the logical outgrowth of many other earlier commitments and persuasions.

Each of these millennial views also has implications for a number of other topics: the nature and intensity of Satan’s binding in Rev. 20, the number of different resurrections, and the number of different judgments. The ultimate question, again, is which approach does the best job of putting together all the prophecies of Scripture and consequently is most faithful to God’s word.

Heaven and Hell

God’s judgment inevitably leads either to final and permanent torment in hell or to untold blessings in the new heaven and new earth (Matt. 25:46).

The ultimate hope of believers involves the bodily resurrection and a new earth to go along with these glorified bodies. The glad time will come when God “will wipe every tear from their eyes” and “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). There will be the joys of physical bodies healed and restored, seeing friends and loved ones, but the greatest joy of all will be seeing the Lord himself in all his glory and majesty.

Hell will be the very opposite, experienced by those who deliberately rejected and avoided God during their earthly lives. They will find themselves rejected by God and cut off from his presence (and all the blessings that go along with his presence). Although there are various debates about how literal or figurative some of the biblical descriptions of hell are in terms of unquenchable fire and worms that do not die (Mark 9:48), it seems safe to say that hell will be the greatest of all possible tragedies and far worse than any of these descriptions suggest.

Annihilationism or conditional immortality, with its assumption that the souls of the lost will cease to exist at some point after death, represents an attempt to soften the explicit teachings of Scripture. Universalism—the belief that ultimately everyone will be saved—is another human strategy to avoid the clear teaching of Scripture. Ultimately, there is a heaven, and there is a hell, and human choices do make a difference for time and eternity.

The Benefits of Eschatology

Eschatology should give balance and perspective to life so that the affairs and accomplishments of this present life do not take on an inappropriate importance. Whenever people are caught up with materialism and a this-worldly perspective on life or become complacent about their lack of spiritual growth or the spiritual condition of others, the underlying cause is often a lack of attention to eschatology. Although many difficult and controversial questions surround the nature and timing of the return of Jesus Christ, Scripture is clear about the fact of his return and the final judgment. A new life with Christ that will last for all eternity is described in Scripture as the greatest of all possible blessings. At the same time, a life apart from God both in this life and in the life to come is described as the greatest possible tragedy in life. Perhaps even the spiritual deception and confusion around us, whereby many “will abandon the faith” (1 Tim. 4:1) and “not put up with sound doctrine” (2 Tim. 4:3), are a sign of the lateness of the hour. A proper appreciation of eschatology can be a means that God uses to change people’s lives.

A window through which air could pass but was protected by a structure of criss-crossed wood or metal strips. As elsewhere in the ancient Near East, window scenes in biblical literature often forebode ill fate. The motif of the woman at the window is commonly attested in the ancient Near East, and there are several biblical examples of such women and their perils (Josh. 2:15–21; Judg. 5:28; 1 Sam. 19:12; 2 Sam. 6:16–23; 2 Kings 9:32). The window portends danger for men also, though not in forms as tragic as those that women faced (Gen. 8:6; 26:8; 2 Kings 1:2; 13:17; Prov. 7:6; Acts 20:9).

In the Bible, “laugh” rarely denotes a response to humor. Most prominent in the Scriptures is the laugh of scorn or derision. Animals and humans can laugh at danger (Job 5:22; 39:7; Prov. 31:25). God laughs at those who oppose him (Pss. 2:4; 37:13; 59:8), and Wisdom laughs at those who ignore her (Prov. 1:26). People can become laughingstocks to others (Exod. 32:25; Lam. 3:14). Jesus was laughed at in ridicule (Matt. 9:24; Mark 5:40; Luke 8:53).

Laughter is prominent throughout the narrative of Isaac’s birth. Both Abraham (Gen. 17:17) and Sarah (18:12) laughed when they heard that Isaac would be born to them in their old age. When Isaac, whose name means “he laughs” (see 17:19 NIV mg.), was born, Sarah spoke of the laughter that God had brought to her and that others would have (21:6).

Furthermore, the biblical writers often contrast laughter with mourning. In such instances, laughter represents feelings of happiness or joy (Eccles. 3:4; Luke 6:21, 25; James 4:9).

The road to the Washerman’s Field (NIV: “Launderer’s Field” in Isa. 7:3; 36:2) locates where Ahaz was inspecting Jerusalem’s water supply in preparation for an attack by Syria and Israel (Isa. 7:3), and where the Assyrian commander stood (2 Kings 18:17; Isa. 36:2). Jerusalem was supplied by a series of pools connected by channels. The launderer’s occupation of cleaning cloth required much water (cf. Mal. 3:2). The field was located outside the city, at its southern end.

A water-containing vessel (NIV: “basin”) used at the tabernacle and the temple. The laver at the tabernacle stood on a bronze stand, between the tent of meeting and the bronze altar (Exod. 30:18). Whenever the Israelite priests went into the tent of meeting or approached the bronze altar, they were to wash their hands and feet with the water in the laver. Failure to do so meant death (Exod. 30:19–21). Solomon’s temple had ten bronze lavers that sat on movable bronze stands (1 Kings 7:30, 38). Each laver was approximately six feet in diameter and held about 230 gallons of water (see 1 Kings 7:31, 38 NIV mg.). The wicked king Ahaz removed these lavers from their stands during his reign (2 Kings 16:17).

Terminology

The word “law,” often referred to as “Torah,” occurs 220 times in the OT and derives from a Hebrew root that means “to teach or instruct.” Biblical law is the body of instructions or teachings that serve to govern and maintain the covenant relationship between God and Israel. The distinctive relationship that Israel enjoyed with God was unparalleled in the ancient Near East. Unlike the Gentile nations, Israel received from Yahweh an instrument outlining his expectations of them, a set of guidelines by which to sustain that covenant relationship (Deut. 4:6–8). Outside the OT, the “Torah” or “Law” often refers to the first five books of the Bible, called the “Pentateuch” (Matt. 5:17–18; Luke 2:22). Second Temple Judaism commonly referred to the Pentateuch in this way.

The term “Torah” is not limited to cultic or ceremonial practice, but embraces civil and social law. In addition, the Torah refers to the prophetic word and more broadly incorporates the idea of parental instruction. The Hebrew word torah is employed in a variety of expressions, variously rendered in English versions: “the law” (Deut. 1:5; 4:8, 44; 2 Kings 23:24), the “Book of the Law” (Deut. 28:61; 29:21; Josh. 1:8; 2 Kings 22:8), the “Book of the Law of Moses” (Josh. 8:31; 23:6), the “law of Moses” (Josh. 8:32; 1 Kings 2:3), the “Book of the Law of God” (Josh. 24:26), and the “law of the Lord” (2 Kings 10:31)—all of these indicate the divine origin of the instructions or reinforce the association of the Torah with Moses as Israel’s mediator. The OT notes that Moses “wrote a Book of the Law,” which was placed by the ark for reference (Deut. 31:26) and read aloud every seven years, during the Feast of Tabernacles, to all the assembly (Deut. 31:9–13). The book is not mentioned again until its discovery in the temple during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kings 22:8). The discovery of the book initiated a religious reform by Josiah that focused on the centralization of worship and the destruction of idols.

The OT employs a number of close synonyms for “law,” including “commandments,” “testimony,” “judgments,” “statutes,” “ordinances,” “decrees,” and “precepts.” Each of these terms reflects varying nuances or particular aspects of the divine instruction. Unfortunately, all these words as translated into English subtly misrepresent the “law” as an odious external set of rules that inhibit human freedom and require punishment for disobedience. This perspective suggests that obedience to the divine law was coerced by the threat of divine judgment. Contrary to this misconception, the people of Israel rejoiced in following Yahweh’s instructions because their greatest desire was to please and live in harmony with him. Yahweh’s people enjoyed the privilege of receiving divine revelation consisting of directions that assured divine favor. Although perfect adherence to these instructions proved to be an impossible task, Yahweh’s covenant stipulations provided an ideal toward which his people were expected to make progress as they constantly strived to fulfill that ideal. The Torah in its broadest sense reflects a verbal expression of the character, nature, and will of God.

Types of Law

In general, Torah may be subdivided into three categories: judicial, ceremonial, and moral, though each of these may influence or overlap with the others. The OT associates the “giving of the Torah” with Moses’ first divine encounter at Mount Sinai (Exod. 19–23) following the Israelites’ deliverance from the land of Egypt, though some body of customary legislation existed before this time (Exod. 18). These instructions find expansion and elucidation in other pentateuchal texts, such as Leviticus and Deut. 12–24, indicating that God’s teachings were intended as the code of conduct and worship for Israel not only during its wilderness wanderings but also when it settled in the land of Canaan following the conquest.

More specifically, the word “law” often denotes the Ten Commandments (or “the Decalogue,” lit., the “ten words”) (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4) that were delivered to Moses (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). These commandments reflect a summary statement of the covenant and may be divided into two parts, consistent with the two tablets of stone on which they were first recorded: the first four address the individual’s relationship to God, and the last six focus on instructions concerning human relationships. Despite the apparent simplistic expression of the Decalogue, the complexity of these guidelines extends beyond individual acts and attitudes, encompassing any and all incentives, enticements, and pressures leading up to a thing forbidden. Not only should the individual refrain from doing the prohibited thing, but also he or she is obligated to practice its opposite good in order to be in compliance.

Judicial law. The Book of the Covenant (Exod. 20:22–23:33), closely associated with the Ten Commandments, immediately follows the Decalogue and may be subdivided into casuistic, or “case,” law (21:2–22:17) and a variety of miscellaneous laws, many which are apodictic, or absolute, commands. The divine instructions cannot address an infinite range of circumstances; consequently, the casuistic laws describe the judicial process in light of general situations, which form the precedence upon which future specific judgments can be made. Apodictic instructions, generally identified by imperatives or volitional forms, set forth a strict prohibition followed by the consequences of disobedience. Government in early Israelite history revolved around the authoritative decisions of judges, who declared a verdict based on custom or precedent (Exod. 18:13–27). The moral emphasis of the Decalogue and the Book of the Covenant provides the underlying theological reasons for obeying God’s law and forms an important part of the ethical foundation of pentateuchal discussions and elaborations of law.

Ceremonial law. Ceremonial, or cultic, law includes the instructions guiding the construction and preparation of the tabernacle for worship combined with the Levitical guidelines dictating the proper execution of ritual sacrifice and cultic practice. The significance of the tabernacle as a portable sanctuary of Yahweh and its integral connection with God’s promise to dwell among the Israelites are reinforced by the tabernacle’s association with the appearance of Yahweh at Sinai and the inauguration of the covenant. The tabernacle becomes the place where the people meet God through a mediator and seek continued divine favor through ritual purification, sacrifice, and atonement.

Leviticus systematically outlines the procedure for priestly selection and succession, details the consecration of cultic vessels and priests, describes conditions for participation and the celebration of sacred festivals (Lev. 16; 23–25), and addresses other issues such as blasphemy, sexual behavior, and false prophecy. The sacrificial regulations cover sin offerings (6:25), guilt offerings (7:1, 7), burnt offerings (6:9), grain offerings (6:14), and fellowship offerings (7:11). The book of Leviticus also provides extensive instruction concerning the designation of “clean” (consecrated) and “unclean” (profane), reinforcing the separateness of God’s chosen people (e.g., 11:46; 12:7; 13:59; 14:2, 32; 15:32–33). Uncircumcised foreigners were excluded from participation in Israel’s sacred assemblies.

Moral law. Economic hardship presented numerous challenges in Israelite society that were resolved through laws concerning debt and slavery. A series of laws sought to protect the property and rights of those indebted to creditors (Exod. 22:25–27; Deut. 24:6, 10–13; 2 Kings 4:1; Amos 2:8). Those who were enslaved in order to compensate for their debts had to be released after six years of service (Exod. 21:2, 11; Deut. 15:12–18). Property and persons who were turned over to creditors could often be redeemed (Lev. 25:25–28, 47–55). Those who harvested crops were instructed to leave the corners of fields and the remnants of crops for gleaning by the poor (Deut. 24:19–22; Ruth 2:2–6). The systematic mistreatment of the marginalized in society led to widespread corruption among the judiciary, angering Yahweh and leading to the exile (Isa. 1:15–17; Amos 2:6–7; 11–13). It is clear that this type of law was reenacted during the postexilic period (Neh. 5:1–13; Jer. 34:8–16).

Torah in Wisdom Literature and in the Prophets

OT wisdom literature develops the concept of Torah as human instruction for daily living, underscoring the dynamic character of the law and its permeation of all areas of life. Vigilant obedience to the law results in wise and godly conduct. In Proverbs, the son is admonished by the father to obey the Torah (Prov. 3:1; 4:2; 6:23), and the pupil is instructed by the teacher to respect the law (13:13) and to resist the company of those who do not obey the Torah (28:4), with such observance resulting in God’s blessings (29:18) and answers to prayer (28:9). The wise woman familiarizes herself with the Torah because the responsibility for instruction of her household lies with her (31:26).

The book of Psalms contains three compositions typically classified as Torah psalms (1; 19; 119). In Ps. 1 continual reflection on the Torah manifests itself in the prosperity and the wisdom of the obedient. Psalm 19 celebrates the benefits of keeping the Torah, including wisdom, joy, enlightenment, life, and moral discernment. In a lengthy acrostic arranged according to the Hebrew alphabet, Ps. 119 exploits the attitudes, effects, and practicality of the Torah as exemplified in the life of the faithful.

In the prophetic material, Torah refers to teaching administered in the name of Yahweh, either by the priests or the prophets. Moral decline, manifested by the social injustice of Israel’s leader-ship coupled with idolatry and syncretistic worship, was directly attributed to the failure of the priests to uphold the Torah and their negligence in instructing the community (Jer. 2:8; 8:8; Ezek. 7:26; 22:26; Hos. 8:1–12; Amos 2:4). The prophetic emphasis on justice and righteousness as characteristic qualities of God’s people highlights the importance placed on fair and equitable treatment (e.g., Isa. 5:23–24; 26:1–11; 48:17–19; 58:6–9; 59:9–14). The Torah provided the authoritative point of departure in the composition of prophetic messages and teachings, undergirding the authority and genuineness of the prophetic proclamations and exhortations to the contemporary audience. The messages of the prophets were in fact not new, but were simply the adaptation and transformation of pentateuchal texts already generally accepted by the community as authoritative.

Biblical Law and Ancient Near Eastern Sources

Biblical law did not develop in isolation from other legal systems; rather, it appears to follow long-established, widespread, and standardized patterns of Mesopotamian law. A persuasive number of parallels between customs and familial relationships addressed in the Nuzi tablets and archaic elements in the patriarchal narratives seem to suggest that the patriarchs operated under Hurrian law. The Nuzi tablets clarify the subjects of adoption, marriage, and economic transactions, apparently exerting an influence on the lives of the early OT patriarchs. The wife-sister accounts of Abram and Isaac, in which the marriage eligibility of Sarai and Rebekah arise (Gen. 12; 26), as well as Abraham’s proposed adoption of his servant Eliezer as an heir (Gen. 15:2–4) and his siring of Ishmael through Sarai’s servant Hagar (Gen. 16), reflect customary practice described in these documents.

A vast range of legal documents regulating judicial procedures provides material for comparative analysis with biblical texts. Included among these discoveries are a number of law collections, generally named after the ruler who commissioned them. Archaeologists have uncovered evidence, from as early as the twenty-first century BC, of two surviving Sumerian legal collections affirming the ancient origins of societal governance. The Laws of King Ur-Nammu, recorded during the last great period of Sumerian literacy (2111–2095 BC), are preserved in scribal copies from Nippur dated between 1800 and 1700 BC and consist of a fragment and two partial stone tablets. Written in a casuistic format, the texts attest to twenty-nine stipulations, including legislation addressing weights and measures; protections for widows, orphans, and the impoverished; sexual offenses; marital laws; slavery; false testimony; and property abuses.

A second Sumerian law collection dating from the nineteenth century BC, that of King Lipit-Ishtar, the fifth ruler of the Isin dynasty in lower Mesopotamia, consists of a prologue, thirty-eight wholly or partially restored laws, and an epilogue. These laws, bequeathed to Lipit-Ishtar by the Sumerian deities Anu and Enlil in order to “establish justice in the land,” represent civil laws governing business practices, slavery, property, family, and inadvertent injury to an individual. What appear to be an additional thirty-eight laws, comprising the second half of the code, have been destroyed along with part of the prologue. All these laws were recorded in a casuistic format.

The Laws of Eshnunna, written in Akkadian, consist of two tablets containing approximately sixty different laws. The authorship and date of origin remain unknown, but historians suggest that this law collection, which has no prologue or epilogue, was contemporary with the Code of Hammurabi (1728–1686 BC). Though written in a casuistic format, this artifact assigns penalties on the basis of social status.

The Code of Hammurabi, named for the sixth of eleven kings of the Old Babylonian dynasty, is perhaps the most famous and most complete of the ancient Mesopotamian collections. In 1902, French archaeologists discovered the code on a black diorite stela, nearly eight feet tall, in what was ancient Susa. Multiple copies of the code have been preserved. Written in Akkadian cuneiform, the law collection consists of 282 legal paragraphs created to promote public welfare and the cause of justice. The format of the code, which includes a prologue, an epilogue, and a category of cursings for disobedience and blessings for obedience, closely mirrors the structure of the book of Deuteronomy. The casuistic format addresses laws governing public order and individual private law. The penalties prescribed for capital offenses, of which there were thirty, were harsh and often cruel, including bodily mutilation, multiple punishments, and vicarious punishment. Retaliatory consequences for the protection of private property were exceptionally cruel, taking the form of torture or excessive fines. Often, those who were presumed guilty would be thrown into the river; survival indicated innocence, while drowning demonstrated guilt. A predominant feature was the lex talionis (the law of retaliation, or measure for measure), whereby a corresponding penalty was exacted against the offender based on the crime. For instance, if a child was killed, the death of the offender’s child was required. Capital crimes included theft of property and adultery. Contrary to biblical law, Hammurabi’s code made financial provision for the loss of life, whereas in the OT the value of life was immeasurable.

The argument from silence suggests that in the absence of a full biblical law code, legal instructions and stipulations in the biblical text consist primarily of codicil emendations, that is, additions and innovations to already existing laws. For example, the discussion on divorce in Deut. 21 describes the execution of a document without giving details concerning the content or form of such a document. The passage also mentions a yet undiscovered “book of divorce.” The absence of legal material on commercial and business law as well as specifics concerning inheritance and other common subjects points to a more comprehensive body of unwritten law reflecting preexisting societal norms. Israelite society was therefore indebted to its Mesopotamian predecessors for its implementation of law as a means of protecting citizens, and for many legal provisions eventually adapted by the biblical text.

The Character of Biblical Law

Although Israelite law was in some ways influenced by the legal codes of other ancient Near Eastern cultures, biblical law retained a distinct identity centered on the relationship between Yahweh and his chosen people. Law in the OT is presented not as secular instruction but rather as divine pronouncement, receiving its authority as an expression of the divine will. The entirety of the divine instruction originates with God, and he is both author and guarantor of the covenant with his people. The people of Israel, then, are held responsible to God for their actions and not just to a legislative body or human ruler. The will of the Israelite is wholly surrendered to the will of God to such a degree that every aspect of an individual’s life is inextricably connected to the divine teachings. God assigns the stipulations and requirements of the law to the entire corporate body of Israel. The responsibility for covenant fidelity does not lie solely with the community leadership; rather, it is shared by every individual in the community, whose dual role includes ensuring both the fair execution of justice in the community and personal observance of the law. God’s instructions are proclaimed publicly and apply equally to all social strata without distinction, apart from specific direction concerning slaves.

Torah becomes the corpus of teaching directed toward the entire community. The didactic purpose of the law is evident by the motive clauses appended to many apodictic and casuistic instructions that elaborate on the ethical, religious, or historical reasons for covenant faithfulness. The pedagogical aim serves to appeal to the Israelite conscience as a means of motivating obedience. In addition, the teaching that humanity is created in the divine image reinforces the sacredness of human life as a foundational concern of the law. Religious rather than economic values prevail, eliminating the death penalty for all property crimes. Individual culpability predominates in the biblical corpus, abolishing the notion of vicarious punishment advocated in extrabiblical legislation. Each offender pays the consequences of his or her behavior. Each person, created by God and enjoying equal status with all others, receives fair and equitable treatment.

The Law and the New Testament

The contemporary significance of the Torah is recognized in the NT by Jesus’ declaration that his incarnation served to fulfill the law (Matt. 5:17). He affirms the continued legitimacy of the law (Matt. 5:19) and appeals to the law as the governing authority for proper practice and behavior (Matt. 12:6, 42; Luke 4:1–11; Mark 7:9–12; 10:17–19).

The relationship between gospel and law in both Testaments demonstrates far greater continuity than is recognized by many Christians. Covenant theologians affirm that the Mosaic law described a “covenant of works,” which functions differently from the NT’s “covenant of grace,” while dispensationalists often teach that grace supersedes and abolishes the demands of the law. The conditional nature of the Mosaic covenant differs from that of the Abrahamic covenant, since the unconditional promise of the Abrahamic covenant suggests that the blessings promised to Abraham and his seed would be realized not because of human obedience but rather through divine fidelity (Gal. 3:15–27). The Mosaic covenant, or covenant of law, is not contrary to the promises of God (Gal. 3:21); instead, God graciously entered into relationship with the people of Israel, redeemed them from Egypt, and then gave them the law so that they would respond in humble obedience to his redeeming work. Thus, Mosaic law provided through a mediator a way for God to reveal himself to Israel. Consequently, the idea that Israelite religion was legalistic is mistaken. It did not teach that one could earn salvation by “keeping the law”; rather, an individual entered into the covenant with God by grace. When God established the covenant with his people, he forgave their sins. He did not demand a certain level of attainment as a prerequisite for entering into that relationship, nor did Israel have to obey the law perfectly in order to achieve salvation. Instead, the covenantal arrangement instituted a means of forgiveness through the sacrificial system, making the removal of the barrier of sin available to the people. Israel’s obedience to the law was a response to God’s gracious and redeeming work. Law and covenant were complementary.

Ongoing discussions explore the question concerning the relevance of the law for Christians today. Many scholars from past centuries, such as Martin Luther, claimed that the believer is freed entirely from the law of Moses, including its moral requirements. The OT law is binding only insofar as it agrees with the NT and mirrors natural law. John Calvin, on the other hand, maintained that the moral laws of the OT are obligatory for the believer, and he asserts that this is the principal function of law. Calvin’s sense of keeping the moral law does not compromise the message of grace, for keeping the moral law, as opposed to the ceremonial or civil law, does not earn salvation but instead forms the acceptable response of the believer to God’s grace. Other Reformation scholars suggested that the law was abolished with the coming of Christ, and, as a result, while the moral norms remain in effect, the ceremonial laws have been fulfilled with the coming of Christ. Although the penalties originally prescribed for disobedience are no longer effective, keeping the moral law reflects the proper outcome of a life lived by the Spirit of God. See also Ten Commandments; Torah.

Terminology

The word “law,” often referred to as “Torah,” occurs 220 times in the OT and derives from a Hebrew root that means “to teach or instruct.” Biblical law is the body of instructions or teachings that serve to govern and maintain the covenant relationship between God and Israel. The distinctive relationship that Israel enjoyed with God was unparalleled in the ancient Near East. Unlike the Gentile nations, Israel received from Yahweh an instrument outlining his expectations of them, a set of guidelines by which to sustain that covenant relationship (Deut. 4:6–8). Outside the OT, the “Torah” or “Law” often refers to the first five books of the Bible, called the “Pentateuch” (Matt. 5:17–18; Luke 2:22). Second Temple Judaism commonly referred to the Pentateuch in this way.

The term “Torah” is not limited to cultic or ceremonial practice, but embraces civil and social law. In addition, the Torah refers to the prophetic word and more broadly incorporates the idea of parental instruction. The Hebrew word torah is employed in a variety of expressions, variously rendered in English versions: “the law” (Deut. 1:5; 4:8, 44; 2 Kings 23:24), the “Book of the Law” (Deut. 28:61; 29:21; Josh. 1:8; 2 Kings 22:8), the “Book of the Law of Moses” (Josh. 8:31; 23:6), the “law of Moses” (Josh. 8:32; 1 Kings 2:3), the “Book of the Law of God” (Josh. 24:26), and the “law of the Lord” (2 Kings 10:31)—all of these indicate the divine origin of the instructions or reinforce the association of the Torah with Moses as Israel’s mediator. The OT notes that Moses “wrote a Book of the Law,” which was placed by the ark for reference (Deut. 31:26) and read aloud every seven years, during the Feast of Tabernacles, to all the assembly (Deut. 31:9–13). The book is not mentioned again until its discovery in the temple during the reign of King Josiah (2 Kings 22:8). The discovery of the book initiated a religious reform by Josiah that focused on the centralization of worship and the destruction of idols.

The OT employs a number of close synonyms for “law,” including “commandments,” “testimony,” “judgments,” “statutes,” “ordinances,” “decrees,” and “precepts.” Each of these terms reflects varying nuances or particular aspects of the divine instruction. Unfortunately, all these words as translated into English subtly misrepresent the “law” as an odious external set of rules that inhibit human freedom and require punishment for disobedience. This perspective suggests that obedience to the divine law was coerced by the threat of divine judgment. Contrary to this misconception, the people of Israel rejoiced in following Yahweh’s instructions because their greatest desire was to please and live in harmony with him. Yahweh’s people enjoyed the privilege of receiving divine revelation consisting of directions that assured divine favor. Although perfect adherence to these instructions proved to be an impossible task, Yahweh’s covenant stipulations provided an ideal toward which his people were expected to make progress as they constantly strived to fulfill that ideal. The Torah in its broadest sense reflects a verbal expression of the character, nature, and will of God.

Types of Law

In general, Torah may be subdivided into three categories: judicial, ceremonial, and moral, though each of these may influence or overlap with the others. The OT associates the “giving of the Torah” with Moses’ first divine encounter at Mount Sinai (Exod. 19–23) following the Israelites’ deliverance from the land of Egypt, though some body of customary legislation existed before this time (Exod. 18). These instructions find expansion and elucidation in other pentateuchal texts, such as Leviticus and Deut. 12–24, indicating that God’s teachings were intended as the code of conduct and worship for Israel not only during its wilderness wanderings but also when it settled in the land of Canaan following the conquest.

More specifically, the word “law” often denotes the Ten Commandments (or “the Decalogue,” lit., the “ten words”) (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4) that were delivered to Moses (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). These commandments reflect a summary statement of the covenant and may be divided into two parts, consistent with the two tablets of stone on which they were first recorded: the first four address the individual’s relationship to God, and the last six focus on instructions concerning human relationships. Despite the apparent simplistic expression of the Decalogue, the complexity of these guidelines extends beyond individual acts and attitudes, encompassing any and all incentives, enticements, and pressures leading up to a thing forbidden. Not only should the individual refrain from doing the prohibited thing, but also he or she is obligated to practice its opposite good in order to be in compliance.

Judicial law. The Book of the Covenant (Exod. 20:22–23:33), closely associated with the Ten Commandments, immediately follows the Decalogue and may be subdivided into casuistic, or “case,” law (21:2–22:17) and a variety of miscellaneous laws, many which are apodictic, or absolute, commands. The divine instructions cannot address an infinite range of circumstances; consequently, the casuistic laws describe the judicial process in light of general situations, which form the precedence upon which future specific judgments can be made. Apodictic instructions, generally identified by imperatives or volitional forms, set forth a strict prohibition followed by the consequences of disobedience. Government in early Israelite history revolved around the authoritative decisions of judges, who declared a verdict based on custom or precedent (Exod. 18:13–27). The moral emphasis of the Decalogue and the Book of the Covenant provides the underlying theological reasons for obeying God’s law and forms an important part of the ethical foundation of pentateuchal discussions and elaborations of law.

Ceremonial law. Ceremonial, or cultic, law includes the instructions guiding the construction and preparation of the tabernacle for worship combined with the Levitical guidelines dictating the proper execution of ritual sacrifice and cultic practice. The significance of the tabernacle as a portable sanctuary of Yahweh and its integral connection with God’s promise to dwell among the Israelites are reinforced by the tabernacle’s association with the appearance of Yahweh at Sinai and the inauguration of the covenant. The tabernacle becomes the place where the people meet God through a mediator and seek continued divine favor through ritual purification, sacrifice, and atonement.

Leviticus systematically outlines the procedure for priestly selection and succession, details the consecration of cultic vessels and priests, describes conditions for participation and the celebration of sacred festivals (Lev. 16; 23–25), and addresses other issues such as blasphemy, sexual behavior, and false prophecy. The sacrificial regulations cover sin offerings (6:25), guilt offerings (7:1, 7), burnt offerings (6:9), grain offerings (6:14), and fellowship offerings (7:11). The book of Leviticus also provides extensive instruction concerning the designation of “clean” (consecrated) and “unclean” (profane), reinforcing the separateness of God’s chosen people (e.g., 11:46; 12:7; 13:59; 14:2, 32; 15:32–33). Uncircumcised foreigners were excluded from participation in Israel’s sacred assemblies.

Moral law. Economic hardship presented numerous challenges in Israelite society that were resolved through laws concerning debt and slavery. A series of laws sought to protect the property and rights of those indebted to creditors (Exod. 22:25–27; Deut. 24:6, 10–13; 2 Kings 4:1; Amos 2:8). Those who were enslaved in order to compensate for their debts had to be released after six years of service (Exod. 21:2, 11; Deut. 15:12–18). Property and persons who were turned over to creditors could often be redeemed (Lev. 25:25–28, 47–55). Those who harvested crops were instructed to leave the corners of fields and the remnants of crops for gleaning by the poor (Deut. 24:19–22; Ruth 2:2–6). The systematic mistreatment of the marginalized in society led to widespread corruption among the judiciary, angering Yahweh and leading to the exile (Isa. 1:15–17; Amos 2:6–7; 11–13). It is clear that this type of law was reenacted during the postexilic period (Neh. 5:1–13; Jer. 34:8–16).

Torah in Wisdom Literature and in the Prophets

OT wisdom literature develops the concept of Torah as human instruction for daily living, underscoring the dynamic character of the law and its permeation of all areas of life. Vigilant obedience to the law results in wise and godly conduct. In Proverbs, the son is admonished by the father to obey the Torah (Prov. 3:1; 4:2; 6:23), and the pupil is instructed by the teacher to respect the law (13:13) and to resist the company of those who do not obey the Torah (28:4), with such observance resulting in God’s blessings (29:18) and answers to prayer (28:9). The wise woman familiarizes herself with the Torah because the responsibility for instruction of her household lies with her (31:26).

The book of Psalms contains three compositions typically classified as Torah psalms (1; 19; 119). In Ps. 1 continual reflection on the Torah manifests itself in the prosperity and the wisdom of the obedient. Psalm 19 celebrates the benefits of keeping the Torah, including wisdom, joy, enlightenment, life, and moral discernment. In a lengthy acrostic arranged according to the Hebrew alphabet, Ps. 119 exploits the attitudes, effects, and practicality of the Torah as exemplified in the life of the faithful.

In the prophetic material, Torah refers to teaching administered in the name of Yahweh, either by the priests or the prophets. Moral decline, manifested by the social injustice of Israel’s leader-ship coupled with idolatry and syncretistic worship, was directly attributed to the failure of the priests to uphold the Torah and their negligence in instructing the community (Jer. 2:8; 8:8; Ezek. 7:26; 22:26; Hos. 8:1–12; Amos 2:4). The prophetic emphasis on justice and righteousness as characteristic qualities of God’s people highlights the importance placed on fair and equitable treatment (e.g., Isa. 5:23–24; 26:1–11; 48:17–19; 58:6–9; 59:9–14). The Torah provided the authoritative point of departure in the composition of prophetic messages and teachings, undergirding the authority and genuineness of the prophetic proclamations and exhortations to the contemporary audience. The messages of the prophets were in fact not new, but were simply the adaptation and transformation of pentateuchal texts already generally accepted by the community as authoritative.

Biblical Law and Ancient Near Eastern Sources

Biblical law did not develop in isolation from other legal systems; rather, it appears to follow long-established, widespread, and standardized patterns of Mesopotamian law. A persuasive number of parallels between customs and familial relationships addressed in the Nuzi tablets and archaic elements in the patriarchal narratives seem to suggest that the patriarchs operated under Hurrian law. The Nuzi tablets clarify the subjects of adoption, marriage, and economic transactions, apparently exerting an influence on the lives of the early OT patriarchs. The wife-sister accounts of Abram and Isaac, in which the marriage eligibility of Sarai and Rebekah arise (Gen. 12; 26), as well as Abraham’s proposed adoption of his servant Eliezer as an heir (Gen. 15:2–4) and his siring of Ishmael through Sarai’s servant Hagar (Gen. 16), reflect customary practice described in these documents.

A vast range of legal documents regulating judicial procedures provides material for comparative analysis with biblical texts. Included among these discoveries are a number of law collections, generally named after the ruler who commissioned them. Archaeologists have uncovered evidence, from as early as the twenty-first century BC, of two surviving Sumerian legal collections affirming the ancient origins of societal governance. The Laws of King Ur-Nammu, recorded during the last great period of Sumerian literacy (2111–2095 BC), are preserved in scribal copies from Nippur dated between 1800 and 1700 BC and consist of a fragment and two partial stone tablets. Written in a casuistic format, the texts attest to twenty-nine stipulations, including legislation addressing weights and measures; protections for widows, orphans, and the impoverished; sexual offenses; marital laws; slavery; false testimony; and property abuses.

A second Sumerian law collection dating from the nineteenth century BC, that of King Lipit-Ishtar, the fifth ruler of the Isin dynasty in lower Mesopotamia, consists of a prologue, thirty-eight wholly or partially restored laws, and an epilogue. These laws, bequeathed to Lipit-Ishtar by the Sumerian deities Anu and Enlil in order to “establish justice in the land,” represent civil laws governing business practices, slavery, property, family, and inadvertent injury to an individual. What appear to be an additional thirty-eight laws, comprising the second half of the code, have been destroyed along with part of the prologue. All these laws were recorded in a casuistic format.

The Laws of Eshnunna, written in Akkadian, consist of two tablets containing approximately sixty different laws. The authorship and date of origin remain unknown, but historians suggest that this law collection, which has no prologue or epilogue, was contemporary with the Code of Hammurabi (1728–1686 BC). Though written in a casuistic format, this artifact assigns penalties on the basis of social status.

The Code of Hammurabi, named for the sixth of eleven kings of the Old Babylonian dynasty, is perhaps the most famous and most complete of the ancient Mesopotamian collections. In 1902, French archaeologists discovered the code on a black diorite stela, nearly eight feet tall, in what was ancient Susa. Multiple copies of the code have been preserved. Written in Akkadian cuneiform, the law collection consists of 282 legal paragraphs created to promote public welfare and the cause of justice. The format of the code, which includes a prologue, an epilogue, and a category of cursings for disobedience and blessings for obedience, closely mirrors the structure of the book of Deuteronomy. The casuistic format addresses laws governing public order and individual private law. The penalties prescribed for capital offenses, of which there were thirty, were harsh and often cruel, including bodily mutilation, multiple punishments, and vicarious punishment. Retaliatory consequences for the protection of private property were exceptionally cruel, taking the form of torture or excessive fines. Often, those who were presumed guilty would be thrown into the river; survival indicated innocence, while drowning demonstrated guilt. A predominant feature was the lex talionis (the law of retaliation, or measure for measure), whereby a corresponding penalty was exacted against the offender based on the crime. For instance, if a child was killed, the death of the offender’s child was required. Capital crimes included theft of property and adultery. Contrary to biblical law, Hammurabi’s code made financial provision for the loss of life, whereas in the OT the value of life was immeasurable.

The argument from silence suggests that in the absence of a full biblical law code, legal instructions and stipulations in the biblical text consist primarily of codicil emendations, that is, additions and innovations to already existing laws. For example, the discussion on divorce in Deut. 21 describes the execution of a document without giving details concerning the content or form of such a document. The passage also mentions a yet undiscovered “book of divorce.” The absence of legal material on commercial and business law as well as specifics concerning inheritance and other common subjects points to a more comprehensive body of unwritten law reflecting preexisting societal norms. Israelite society was therefore indebted to its Mesopotamian predecessors for its implementation of law as a means of protecting citizens, and for many legal provisions eventually adapted by the biblical text.

The Character of Biblical Law

Although Israelite law was in some ways influenced by the legal codes of other ancient Near Eastern cultures, biblical law retained a distinct identity centered on the relationship between Yahweh and his chosen people. Law in the OT is presented not as secular instruction but rather as divine pronouncement, receiving its authority as an expression of the divine will. The entirety of the divine instruction originates with God, and he is both author and guarantor of the covenant with his people. The people of Israel, then, are held responsible to God for their actions and not just to a legislative body or human ruler. The will of the Israelite is wholly surrendered to the will of God to such a degree that every aspect of an individual’s life is inextricably connected to the divine teachings. God assigns the stipulations and requirements of the law to the entire corporate body of Israel. The responsibility for covenant fidelity does not lie solely with the community leadership; rather, it is shared by every individual in the community, whose dual role includes ensuring both the fair execution of justice in the community and personal observance of the law. God’s instructions are proclaimed publicly and apply equally to all social strata without distinction, apart from specific direction concerning slaves.

Torah becomes the corpus of teaching directed toward the entire community. The didactic purpose of the law is evident by the motive clauses appended to many apodictic and casuistic instructions that elaborate on the ethical, religious, or historical reasons for covenant faithfulness. The pedagogical aim serves to appeal to the Israelite conscience as a means of motivating obedience. In addition, the teaching that humanity is created in the divine image reinforces the sacredness of human life as a foundational concern of the law. Religious rather than economic values prevail, eliminating the death penalty for all property crimes. Individual culpability predominates in the biblical corpus, abolishing the notion of vicarious punishment advocated in extrabiblical legislation. Each offender pays the consequences of his or her behavior. Each person, created by God and enjoying equal status with all others, receives fair and equitable treatment.

The Law and the New Testament

The contemporary significance of the Torah is recognized in the NT by Jesus’ declaration that his incarnation served to fulfill the law (Matt. 5:17). He affirms the continued legitimacy of the law (Matt. 5:19) and appeals to the law as the governing authority for proper practice and behavior (Matt. 12:6, 42; Luke 4:1–11; Mark 7:9–12; 10:17–19).

The relationship between gospel and law in both Testaments demonstrates far greater continuity than is recognized by many Christians. Covenant theologians affirm that the Mosaic law described a “covenant of works,” which functions differently from the NT’s “covenant of grace,” while dispensationalists often teach that grace supersedes and abolishes the demands of the law. The conditional nature of the Mosaic covenant differs from that of the Abrahamic covenant, since the unconditional promise of the Abrahamic covenant suggests that the blessings promised to Abraham and his seed would be realized not because of human obedience but rather through divine fidelity (Gal. 3:15–27). The Mosaic covenant, or covenant of law, is not contrary to the promises of God (Gal. 3:21); instead, God graciously entered into relationship with the people of Israel, redeemed them from Egypt, and then gave them the law so that they would respond in humble obedience to his redeeming work. Thus, Mosaic law provided through a mediator a way for God to reveal himself to Israel. Consequently, the idea that Israelite religion was legalistic is mistaken. It did not teach that one could earn salvation by “keeping the law”; rather, an individual entered into the covenant with God by grace. When God established the covenant with his people, he forgave their sins. He did not demand a certain level of attainment as a prerequisite for entering into that relationship, nor did Israel have to obey the law perfectly in order to achieve salvation. Instead, the covenantal arrangement instituted a means of forgiveness through the sacrificial system, making the removal of the barrier of sin available to the people. Israel’s obedience to the law was a response to God’s gracious and redeeming work. Law and covenant were complementary.

Ongoing discussions explore the question concerning the relevance of the law for Christians today. Many scholars from past centuries, such as Martin Luther, claimed that the believer is freed entirely from the law of Moses, including its moral requirements. The OT law is binding only insofar as it agrees with the NT and mirrors natural law. John Calvin, on the other hand, maintained that the moral laws of the OT are obligatory for the believer, and he asserts that this is the principal function of law. Calvin’s sense of keeping the moral law does not compromise the message of grace, for keeping the moral law, as opposed to the ceremonial or civil law, does not earn salvation but instead forms the acceptable response of the believer to God’s grace. Other Reformation scholars suggested that the law was abolished with the coming of Christ, and, as a result, while the moral norms remain in effect, the ceremonial laws have been fulfilled with the coming of Christ. Although the penalties originally prescribed for disobedience are no longer effective, keeping the moral law reflects the proper outcome of a life lived by the Spirit of God. See also Ten Commandments; Torah.

Law, more properly labeled “Torah,” is instruction. In the Bible, Moses is portrayed as the lawgiver par excellence, dispensing God’s Torah from Sinai (Exod. 20:1–17) and delegating legal matters to others (18:24–26). The Ten Commandments are distinct from other forms of Torah in that they are described as having been given by “the finger of God” (Exod. 31:18). That is, Moses functions as an agent of God, the true lawgiver. Unlike law in the broader cultural environment, Torah came to Israel with God’s authority. Yet even this authority had to be recast for each generation (Deut. 29:1; Num. 36:13).

Jesus’ instruction in the Sermon on the Mount includes the important statement “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Matt. 5:17). Although some of his detractors have perceived him as antinomian, Jesus assures his listeners that his teaching is in continuity with OT law. Indeed, the OT law finds its eschatological climax in the instruction by Jesus, who, like Moses, dispenses law from the mountainside.

“Lawless” and “lawlessness” are English renderings of the Greek noun anomia, which literally means “without law” (cf. anomos in 1 Tim. 1:9) but often refers more generally to sinfulness or wrongdoing of any kind (e.g., Ps. 5:4 [5:5 LXX]; Matt. 7:23; Heb. 10:17; 1 John 3:4). Paul speaks about a man who so personifies evil that he can be called the “man of lawlessness” (2 Thess. 2:3–10). The “secret power of lawlessness” is already at work and will manifest itself in the appearance of this man, the antichrist (2 Thess. 2:7). Some Bible versions (e.g., NIV, NRSV) also use “lawless” to translate the Greek adjective athesmos (2 Pet. 2:7; 3:17; also 3 Macc. 5:12 LXX). This word, which occurs much less often in the Bible than anomia, is translated as “unprincipled” in the NASB.

“Lawless” and “lawlessness” are English renderings of the Greek noun anomia, which literally means “without law” (cf. anomos in 1 Tim. 1:9) but often refers more generally to sinfulness or wrongdoing of any kind (e.g., Ps. 5:4 [5:5 LXX]; Matt. 7:23; Heb. 10:17; 1 John 3:4). Paul speaks about a man who so personifies evil that he can be called the “man of lawlessness” (2 Thess. 2:3–10). The “secret power of lawlessness” is already at work and will manifest itself in the appearance of this man, the antichrist (2 Thess. 2:7). Some Bible versions (e.g., NIV, NRSV) also use “lawless” to translate the Greek adjective athesmos (2 Pet. 2:7; 3:17; also 3 Macc. 5:12 LXX). This word, which occurs much less often in the Bible than anomia, is translated as “unprincipled” in the NASB.

A Jewish expert in the Mosaic law (e.g., Matt. 22:35; Luke 7:30; 11:52). The term is used frequently in Luke’s Gospel, usually with a negative connotation. The experts in the law frequently tested Jesus with questions, and he often condemned the scribes for burdening the people. Lawyers or scribes were tasked to study the Mosaic law, teach the law to others, often in the synagogues and schools, and decide disputes regarding the law. The term could also be used in the general sense of “jurist” (Titus 3:13).

Laying hands on someone/something has two literal uses and two with symbolic significance. (1) Literally, to take something (e.g., Exod. 22:8–11; Esther 9:10–16; Matt. 26:51; Luke 9:62) or someone—that is, to make an arrest (e.g., Neh. 13:21; Matt. 26:50; Mark 14:46; Luke 20:19; 21:12; 22:53; John 7:30, 44; Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1; 21:27). (2) Literally, to lay hands on persons (or things) so as to hurt or destroy them (e.g., Gen. 22:12; 37:22; 1 Sam. 22:17; 24:5–13; 26:9–23; Job 1:12; 9:33; Isa. 11:14; Jer. 15:6; Ezek. 39:21). (3) Laying a hand over one’s mouth as a symbolic gesture of amazement (Mic. 7:16) or humility (Job 40:4). (4) A gesture to symbolize the transfer of something from one person to another. Transfer symbolism applications include the transfer of representative identity in sacrificing (e.g., Exod. 29:10–19; Lev. 1:4; 16:21; Num. 8:10–12; 2 Chron. 29:23–24), of authority in commissioning (ordination) (e.g., Num. 27:18–23; Deut. 34:9; Acts 6:6; 13:3), of blessing (e.g., Gen. 48:13–20; Matt. 19:13–15), of life and health (e.g., Matt. 8:3, 15; 9:18, 25, 29; 20:34; Mark 6:5; 7:32–33; 8:22–26; 16:18; Luke 4:40; 7:14; 13:13; 22:51; Acts 8:17; 9:12, 17; 28:8), and of the Holy Spirit and spiritual gifting (Acts 8:17–19; 9:17; 19:6; 1 Tim. 4:14; 2 Tim. 1:6).

Three additional things should be noted about this transfer symbolism. First, the laying on of hands is symbolic rather than purely causative. This is evidenced when Jesus and the apostles credit faith, and not mere touch, for healings (e.g., Matt. 9:22, 29–30; Luke 17:19; Acts 3:12–16; 14:9; cf. Matt. 13:58), when healings occur from a distance (e.g., Matt. 8:5–13; 15:21–28; John 4:46–54) and/or with no apparent touch involved (e.g., Matt. 8:28–34; 9:1–8, 32–33; 12:22; 17:14–21; Mark 1:23–28; Luke 17:11–19; John 5:1–9; 11:1–44; Acts 5:15; 9:32–35, 40–41; 14:8–10; 16:18), when the Holy Spirit comes upon people without touch (e.g., Acts 10:44–45), and when Peter strongly rebukes Simon Magus for assuming that the Holy Spirit is dispensed by mere touch (Acts 8:17–24).

Second, the early church used the laying on of hands for commissioning church workers (Acts 6:6), missionaries (Acts 13:3), and elders (Acts 14:23 [the Greek word used for “appointing,” cheirotoneō, is derived from the words for “extend,” teinō, and “hand,” cheir; cf. 2 Cor. 8:19). Since the act was conducted by apostles (Acts 6:6), by prophets and teachers (Acts 13:1–3), by Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:23; 2 Tim. 1:6), and by church elders (1 Tim. 4:14), we may conclude that the early church had no established hierarchy for ordination.

Third, the NT has some guidelines for commissioning Christian workers (cf. Heb. 6:2). Church leaders have weighty responsibilities (Acts 20:28; 1 Tim. 3:1–13; 5:17; Titus 1:5–9; 1 Pet. 5:1–4), so it is not surprising that a church elder/overseer must not be a recent convert (1 Tim. 3:6) or hastily ordained (1 Tim. 5:22), and that a deacon must first be tested (1 Tim. 3:10).

(1) The brother of Mary and Martha and a resident of Bethany, his story is told in John 11:1–44, and he appears again in John 12:1–11 at a supper given in Jesus’ honor. Lazarus is described as one whom “Jesus loved,” prompting speculation that he is to be identified as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (cf. John 13:23; 19:26; 20:2–3, 8; 21:7, 20–24). When an illness led to Lazarus’s physical death, Jesus traveled to Bethany and grieved. Four days after Lazarus’s death, Jesus asked mourners to remove the tombstone, prayed, and called for Lazarus to come out. Miraculously restored to life, Lazarus emerged from the tomb still wrapped in his grave clothes.

Later, Lazarus attended a banquet in honor of Jesus, where some were drawn to see him in addition to Jesus. Lazarus’s miraculous resurrection prompted many Jews to believe in Jesus. According to Eusebius, the tomb of Lazarus was a pilgrimage site for Christians in his day, and tradition about its location stems from an early date.

(2) A beggar in one of Jesus’ parables (Luke 16:19–31). Generally, characters in parables are literary creations and remain unnamed. The naming of Lazarus may suggest that he was a historical figure, but it may also serve to emphasize the role reversal between the named Lazarus and the unnamed rich man, who overlooked him in life but sought his aid after death.

Outgrowth(s), usually green, of the stem of a plant. In Gen. 8:8–11, an olive leaf in the beak of a dove signals to Noah that the waters of the flood are receding. Many OT passages contain references to leaves as a metaphor for prosperity (Ps. 1:3; Prov. 11:28) as well as for destitution (Job 13:25; Isa. 1:30; 34:4; 64:6). A key difference between the two metaphors depends on whether the leaf is withered. The righteous will thrive like a green leaf (Prov. 11:28), whereas Job, discussing his suffering, refers to himself as a windblown leaf (Job 13:25). In the NT, Jesus curses a fig tree that has leaves but no fruit, immediately causing it to wither (Matt. 21:18–22; Mark 11:13–14, 20–25). Leaves are also used as an illustration by which Jesus teaches about expectations for the Son of Man to return (Mark 13:26–28). In Revelation, the leaves of the tree of life are for the healing of the nations (22:2).

An alliance or covenant. “League” appears most often in the KJV (e.g., Josh. 9:6–16; 2 Sam. 3:12–13; Dan. 11:23), and not at all in the NIV, which prefers “treaty,” “covenant,” “compact,” “agreement.”

The older of Laban’s two daughters (Gen. 29:16) and a wife of Jacob (29:23). The biblical description of Leah, whose name means “cow,” is not altogether flattering. Her marriage to Jacob resulted from Laban’s deception of Jacob, who expected to marry Laban’s younger, more attractive daughter, Rachel, which he did soon thereafter (29:26–28). Genesis explicitly says that Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah (29:30). However, God, because Leah was less loved, opened her womb (29:31). As a result, she bore six of Jacob’s sons, Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun (35:23), and also a daughter, Dinah, who is the subject of Gen. 34. Leah’s fertility was the cause of the barren Rachel’s strife (Gen. 29–30). Needless to say, a palpable tension is depicted between the two sisters, who also relinquished their maidservants to Jacob as secondary wives for the purpose of having more children. Leah was buried in the cave at Machpelah with Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, and Rebekah (49:30–31).

According to the superscription of Ps. 88, the psalm was to be performed according to “mahalath leannoth,” possibly a musical tune (NIV note: “The Suffering of Affliction”). The meaning of the Hebrew phrase is uncertain, but the word leannoth here seems to refer to affliction.

A material made from the skin of animals, leather was used for various articles, including belts (2 Kings 1:8) and sandals (Ezek. 16:10). Leviticus gives detailed instructions on how to deal with contaminated leather articles and textiles (Lev. 13:48–59). John the Baptist’s leather belt and garment of camel’s hair recalled Elijah’s style of dress (Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).

The instructions for building the tabernacle refer frequently to takhash skin (NIV: “durable leather”; Exod. 25:5; 26:14; 35:7, 23; 36:19; 39:34; Num. 4:6, 8, 10–12, 14, 25), a fine leather also used for sandals (Ezek. 16:10). Various suggestions for the animal represented by this term include badger (KJV), porpoise (NASB), sea cow (NIV 1984), dolphin (MSG), manatee (HCSB), seal (ASV), goat (ESV), and others. Perhaps the most likely candidate is the dugong, a large marine animal that lives in the Red Sea. Its skin would be hard enough to protect the tabernacle and its furniture as well as to be made into shoes. Other interpreters suggest that takhash actually refers to the color of the skin.

In biblical Israel, leaven used for making bread was a fermented lump of dough saved from an earlier batch. Like sourdough starter, it was added to a new batch of bread, which rose due to the fermentation process. Although the word “yeast” is found in some translations of the Bible, there is no clear evidence that ancient Israel was familiar with it.

Biblical teaching often views leaven as something to avoid. This may be because fermentation was linked with corruption, which to Israel implied uncleanness. Leaven was prohibited during Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread to remind the people of Israel that they left Egypt in haste, with no time for bread to rise (Exod. 12:15–20, 39). Leavened bread was forbidden in burnt offerings (Lev. 2:11). It was allowed, however, when brought as firstfruits, a thank offering, a peace offering, or as a wave offering during the Feast of Weeks (Lev. 2:12; 7:13; 23:17). This was possibly because it would be eaten by the worshipers and priests and not burned on the altar.

In the NT, leaven usually retains its negative connotations. Jesus instructed his disciples to beware the leaven—the teaching—of the Pharisees and the Sadducees (Matt. 16:6–12). Paul taught that the sin of one, like leaven, could corrupt the many (1 Cor. 5:6–8). He also wrote that legalism perverts the gospel just as leaven works through a batch of dough (Gal. 5:9). Positively, Jesus compared the growth of God’s kingdom to leaven, which invisibly spreads through a large quantity of dough (Matt. 13:33).

Outgrowth(s), usually green, of the stem of a plant. In Gen. 8:8–11, an olive leaf in the beak of a dove signals to Noah that the waters of the flood are receding. Many OT passages contain references to leaves as a metaphor for prosperity (Ps. 1:3; Prov. 11:28) as well as for destitution (Job 13:25; Isa. 1:30; 34:4; 64:6). A key difference between the two metaphors depends on whether the leaf is withered. The righteous will thrive like a green leaf (Prov. 11:28), whereas Job, discussing his suffering, refers to himself as a windblown leaf (Job 13:25). In the NT, Jesus curses a fig tree that has leaves but no fruit, immediately causing it to wither (Matt. 21:18–22; Mark 11:13–14, 20–25). Leaves are also used as an illustration by which Jesus teaches about expectations for the Son of Man to return (Mark 13:26–28). In Revelation, the leaves of the tree of life are for the healing of the nations (22:2).

A transliteration of the Hebrew phrase leb qamay, which occurs only in Jer. 51:1. Although the phrase is theoretically translatable as “the heart of those rising against me” (cf. KJV), most modern commentators recognize here a coded name for the Kasdim (Chaldeans), inhabitants of ancient Babylon. The phrase results from a simple substitution scheme, known as atbash, whereby the first letter of the alphabet is replaced by the last letter, the second letter with the next to last, and so on.

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 2:45; “Lebana” in Neh. 7:48). The fact that many of the names in the list 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.

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 2:45; “Lebana” in Neh. 7:48). The fact that many of the names in the list 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.

Geography and economy. Biblical Lebanon is the region that consists of two parallel mountain ranges north of Israel, whose boundaries are very similar to modern-day Lebanon. The south-southwest range is called “Lebanon,” and the north-northeast range “Anti-Lebanon” (i.e., “all Lebanon to the east” [cf. Josh. 13:5]). Between the two ranges is the Valley of Lebanon, where the city of Baal Gad was located (Josh. 11:17; 12:7). At the southern end is Mount Hermon, where the snowcapped peaks probably gave rise to its name, which in Hebrew means “to be white” (Jer. 18:14). Biblical references probably have in view Mount Lebanon (Judg. 3:3), with an elevation of ten thousand feet. Historically, the region was not as prosperous as the coastal Phoenician cities, although it was well known for its lumber industry. The fruits (Ps. 72:16), wine (Hos. 14:7), flowing waters (Song 4:15), and animals (Song 4:8) are described effusively in the OT. The region marks the northern boundary of the promised land (Deut. 1:7; 3:25; 11:24; Josh. 1:4; 9:1), which Joshua never conquered (Josh. 13:5; Judg. 3:1–3). Later, Solomon seems to have built cities in it (1 Kings 9:19; 2 Chron. 8:6).

Archaeological evidence indicates that trees found in the region, such as pine, cypress, and cedar, were greatly sought after from the time of the Middle Bronze Age (2200–1550 BC) to the Byzantine period (AD 324–638) for use in the construction of buildings and boats (cf. Ezek. 27:5). Cedar wood from the forests of Lebanon was shipped to Solomon by the king of Tyre for building the temple in Jerusalem (1 Kings 4:33; 5:6–10; 2 Kings 14:9; 2 Chron. 2:8–16; Song 3:9). When the forest belonged to the king of Persia, he authorized cedar wood to be sent for the building of the second temple (Ezra 3:7).

Metaphorical use of “Lebanon.” Important to the present discussion is the metaphorical use of the term “Lebanon,” particularly in the OT, where the term occurs over seventy times (the name does not appear in the NT). First, associated with the mountainous range in the region, Lebanon evokes images of glory, fertility, and abundance. For example, the high elevation gives Lebanon the sense of majesty and glory (Isa. 35:2; 60:13; cf. 2 Kings 19:23), which is further equated with the glory of Jerusalem (Isa. 60:13; Ezek. 17:3, 22; cf. Isa. 10:34; Zech. 11:1) and the restored Israel (Zech. 10:10–11; cf. Jer. 22:6). The melting snows, plus the annual rainfall, ensure abundance and fertility (Ps. 104:16; Song 4:15; Jer. 18:14; cf. Ps. 72:16). The glory of Lebanon is linked with Sharon, Bashan, and Carmel in the territory of Israel (Isa. 2:13; 35:2; cf. Isa. 33:9; Nah. 1:4).

Second, of all the coniferous trees in the forest of Lebanon, cedars receive the greatest attention and have been regularly used to indicate stature and beauty. For example, their sweet smell describes the desirability of renewed Israel (Song 4:11; Hos. 14:7), and their magnificence reminds one of the beautiful trees in Eden (Ps. 104:16; Ezek. 31:9, 16). These towering evergreens are a fitting image of humankind. The righteous people are compared to a cedar of Lebanon (Ps. 92:12–15); the legs of the bridegroom are as noble as the cedars (Song 5:15); and even kings, both Davidic (Isa. 14:8; Ezek. 17:3) and foreign (Isa. 10:34; Ezek. 31:3–18), as well as their subjects (Judg. 9:15), are likened to the cedars of Lebanon. Quite often, they are symbols of political entities (Isa. 2:13; 40:16), such as Judah (Ezek. 17:3), Assyria (Ezek. 31:3), and Tyre (Ezek. 27:5).

Third, Lebanon, together with its forest, is used to depict negative images. For example, all its glories and riches combined are not enough for a sacrificial offering to God (Isa. 40:16). The barrenness of Lebanon is the result of God’s judgment (Isa. 33:9). Prophetic oracles are often associated with Lebanon. The cutting down or withering of the choicest trees is spoken of as judgment against the proud (Isa. 2:13; 33:9; Ezek. 31:15; Nah. 1:4), against the wicked nation of Tyre (Ezek. 27:1–9) and Judah (Jer. 22:6–7).

Fourth, exegetical traditions resulting from the metaphorical richness of Lebanon are found in later Jewish literature. For example, based on the root (lbn) of the term “Lebanon,” which means “to be white,” the rabbis interpreted it to refer to the temple, for it whitens the sin of Israel (b. Yoma 39a). The sweet fragrance of the cedars in Lebanon (Hos. 14:6) causes interpreters to connect it with the smell of the youth of Israel exhaled in the last day (b. Ber. 43b).

This town is mentioned for the first time in the book of Joshua in its abbreviated form, Lebaoth. Joshua 15:32 identifies Lebaoth as part of the tribe of Judah, while 19:6 has Beth Lebaoth as one of the cities belonging to the tribe of Simeon. Probably due to a scribal error, the city appears as Beth Biri in a Simeonite genealogy (1 Chron. 4:31).

One of the twelve apostles, according to the KJV of Matt. 10:3. Other English versions read “Thaddaeus.” The KJV, following a different Greek manuscript tradition, lists “Thaddaeus” as Lebbaeus’s surname. This apostle is elsewhere called “Judas son of James” (Luke 6:16).

Probably associated with modern Lebweh, Lebo Hamath is located in the northern Beqaa Valley, near one of the sources of the Orontes, about fourteen miles northeast of Baalbek. Lebo Hamath, whose name means “entrance to Hamath,” marked the northernmost boundary of Israel (Num. 34:8; Ezek. 47:15) and separated Israel from the land of Hamath (2 Kings 23:33). The area from Lebo Hamath to the Wadi of Egypt or to the Sea of the Arabah represented “all Israel” (1 Kings 8:65; 2 Kings 14:25). The twelve Israelite spies went as far north as Lebo Hamath (Num. 13:21). After the conquest, portions of land that remained to be conquered extended to Lebo Hamath (Josh. 13:2–5). Some of the nations left to test Israel lived in the area (Judg. 3:1–3). David campaigned as far north as Hamath and was sent gifts by King Tou of Hamath (1 Chron. 18:3, 9). Jeroboam II later restored the boundaries of Israel to Lebo Hamath (2 Kings 14:25). Remnants of Israel settled in Hamath (Isa. 11:11), and Gentiles from Hamath settled in Israel (2 Kings 17:24).

This city is located about ten miles north of Bethel and ten miles south of Shechem. Shiloh stands about three miles to its southeast. This city is mentioned only in Judg. 21:19, but since it can be identified with modern el-Lubban, it is helpful in fixing the location of biblical Shiloh.

The son of Er from the tribe of Judah (1 Chron. 4:21). Lekah may also be a town in the tribe of Judah.

A bloodsucking animal mentioned in Prov. 30:15. The proverb metaphorically says that the leech has two daughters, who cry, “Give! Give!”

A vegetable relative of the onion for which the Israelites cried out during their wilderness wanderings. Although God provided manna for the Israelites, they began to complain about the lack of variety in their diet, noting that in Egypt they had eaten many different kinds of foods, including leeks (Num. 11:4–6).

The thick, syrupy sediment at the bottom of a wineskin of aged wine (sometimes “lees” in the KJV, RSV). The term is used negatively in reference to judgment of those who will drink fully from God’s cup of wrath (Ps. 75:8; Isa. 51:17) or to symbolize laziness or complacency (Jer. 48:11; Zeph. 1:12). Only once is it used positively, to symbolize God’s abundant provision for his people (in Isa. 25:6 [NIV: “aged wine”; KJV, RSV: “lees”]).

The ancient Near Eastern world was oriented toward the east. Thus, in the Bible “left” sometimes means “north” (as the NIV translates the Hebrew word semo’l in Gen. 14:15). Often, “left” has a negative connotation. In Eccles. 10:2 a fool is inclined to the left, and in Matt. 25:33 the goats are separated from the sheep by being put on the left. However, in many texts “left” has no negative association. For example, in Prov. 3:16 Wisdom holds riches and honor in her left hand.

The ancient Near Eastern world was oriented toward the east. Thus, in the Bible “left” sometimes means “north” (as the NIV translates the Hebrew word semo’l in Gen. 14:15). Often, “left” has a negative connotation. In Eccles. 10:2 a fool is inclined to the left, and in Matt. 25:33 the goats are separated from the sheep by being put on the left. However, in many texts “left” has no negative association. For example, in Prov. 3:16 Wisdom holds riches and honor in her left hand.

Excepting the table legs in Exod. 25:26, legs in the Bible belong to animals, people, statues, or angelic creatures. God gives instructions for the ceremonial dispensation of animal legs (Exod. 12:9; Lev. 1:9, 13; 4:11; 8:21; 9:14) or their role in distinguishing clean from unclean animals (Lev. 11:21–23). Leg meat is a choice portion for guests (1 Sam. 9:22–24). The legs of humans, statues, or angels epitomize strength (1 Sam. 17:6; Ps. 147:10; Dan. 2:33; 10:6; Rev. 10:1), weakness (Deut. 28:35; Prov. 26:7; Dan. 5:6; Hab. 3:16), immodesty (Isa. 47:2), or sensuality (Song 5:15; 7:1). Roman soldiers broke the legs of people being crucified in order to hasten their death (John 19:31–33).

A Roman army division consisting of approximately six thousand soldiers. Jesus once encountered a demon-possessed man who, when asked his name, replied, “My name is Legion, . . . for we are many” (Mark 5:9). Jesus cast the evil spirits out of the man and into a herd of pigs, and the entire herd, about two thousand animals, drowned (Mark 5:1–20; Luke 8:26–39). When Peter attempted to fight those who arrested Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane, Jesus ordered him to put away his sword, saying that he could immediately have twelve legions of angels at his disposal (Matt. 26:53).

One of the seven groups of descendants of Noah through Mizraim. “Lehabite” presumably comes from “Lehab,” their eponymous ancestor, who is known only through the reference to his descendants (Gen. 10:13; 1 Chron. 1:11).

One of the seven groups of descendants of Noah through Mizraim. “Lehabite” presumably comes from “Lehab,” their eponymous ancestor, who is known only through the reference to his descendants (Gen. 10:13; 1 Chron. 1:11).

One of the seven groups of descendants of Noah through Mizraim. “Lehabite” presumably comes from “Lehab,” their eponymous ancestor, who is known only through the reference to his descendants (Gen. 10:13; 1 Chron. 1:11).

A transliteration of a Hebrew word (lekhem) meaning “bread” or “food.” Though most often translated as a reference to bread, the Hebrew word can also form part of a place name, such as “Jashubi Lehem” (1 Chron. 4:22) or “Bethlehem” (e.g., Ruth 1:1; 1 Sam. 17:12). The latter name, from beth (“house”) and lekhem, appears as two words in Hebrew and literally means “house of bread.”

A transliteration of a Hebrew word (lekhi) meaning “jawbone,” Lehi was also a site in Judah where Samson struck down one thousand Philistines with a donkey’s jawbone. After Samson’s victory over the Philistines, God opened up a spring in Lehi so that Samson could quench his severe thirst (Judg. 15:9–19 [see NIV footnote at v. 17]).

Leisure time offers a respite from work, those essential duties of life such as paid employment and maintaining a household, to pursue other activities. Such nonobligatory pursuits range from entertainment to fine art, from peaceful relaxation to physical activity.

From the beginning, humankind was intended to work (Gen. 1:28; 2:15), but God also set apart one day per week for his creatures to share in his divine rest (Gen. 2:2–3; Exod. 20:8–11). This weekly rest should bring to mind God’s creation and the final rest in the age to come (Heb. 4:9–11). Although leisure time and Sabbath observance are not identical, both are opportunities to give thanks, worship, and put hope in God. They also refresh and enrich earthly life.

Indeed, every good thing is a gift from the Father (James 1:17), including time off from daily duties. How one uses leisure time is thus a matter of stewardship, much like one’s use of money and working time (cf. Matt. 25:14–30). Thus, although the Bible does not discuss playing sports or writing poetry, it does proclaim Christ as Lord over all spheres of life. Therefore “whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God” (1 Cor. 10:31).

The son of Er from the tribe of Judah (1 Chron. 4:21). Lekah may also be a town in the tribe of Judah.

The basic activities of banking include amassing capital and deposits, extending credit, and brokering the transmission of funds. The Bible describes and comments on such practices in both Testaments but ascribes them to bankers only in the NT.

In ancient Israel trading and mercantilism were facilitated by the use of silver, gold, and livestock as stores of value, media of exchange, and means of payment (Gen. 13:2; 17:12; 23:15). Buying and selling among individuals with payment in silver was particularly common (Gen. 37:28; 1 Sam. 13:21), as was exporting and importing among nations (1 Kings 10:28–29; 2 Chron. 1:16–17; Neh. 13:16). However, livestock was acceptable currency in the settlement of taxes, sacrifices, and other obligations (Num. 31:28–40). What it lacked in portability it made up for in practicality; unlike precious metals, herds grew and multiplied.

By the time of the monarchy, not only was there a treasury of wealth dedicated to God and funded through offerings (Josh. 6:19, 24; 1 Kings 7:51), but also the king maintained his own treasury (1 Kings 15:18; 2 Kings 12:18; 14:14; 16:8; 18:15; 20:13). From both, Judah paid tributes and fines. In times of subjugation both were plundered.

The OT stresses honesty in commercial dealings, which requires both fair scales (Lev. 19:36; Prov. 11:1; 16:11; Hos. 12:7; Amos 8:4–6) and an established system of weights and measures. The basic unit of weight for precious metals was the sanctuary shekel, which equaled twenty gerahs, about ten grams (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25). The largest unit of measurement was the talent, which equaled three thousand shekels (Exod. 38:24–26; Ezra 7:22; 8:26).

The law regulated lending practices primarily to protect the poor against exploitation. It did not permit the charging of interest by Israelite lenders to fellow Israelites, and it set up rules regarding the taking, holding, and return of collateral (Exod. 22:25; Deut. 23:19; 24:6, 10–13, 17; Neh. 5:1–13; Ezek. 33:15). Every seven years creditors were required to release obligors from their debts (Deut. 15:1–3). However, these rules did not apply when the borrowers were foreigners.

By NT times, banking activities were more developed and formalized. The NT describes the depositing of money for interest (Matt. 25:27; Luke 19:23). Coins were in widespread use in the Roman Empire, but locally minted and diverse. For example, the denarius was Roman, and the drachma Greek (Luke 20:24; Matt. 17:24). Thus, the services of money changers were commonplace. They usually set up their distinctive, grid-marked tables in and around temples and public buildings. The NT Greek word for “banker,” trapezitēs, comes from the word for “table,” trapeza. At the Jerusalem temple, the practices of the money changers famously provoked the righteous anger of Jesus, causing him to overturn their tables (Matt. 21:12; Mark 11:15; John 2:15).

The fourth-largest member of the cat family, easily recognized by its spotted coat (though some specimens are completely black), this animal was found throughout Africa and the Near East, though recently it has disappeared from the Palestine area. Leopards have adapted to environments from rain forest to desert terrain. Adult males can reach over seven feet (plus a three-foot tail) in length and weigh up to two hundred pounds. Whereas the larger lion hunts in packs, the leopard stealthily hunts alone. An opportunistic hunter, the leopard lives on almost any kind of meat but seems to prefer midsized antelopes.

In the Bible, the leopard often appears in parallel thoughts with the lion (Song 4:8; Hos. 13:7) or the wolf (Isa. 11:6; Jer. 5:6; Hab. 1:8). The peace of the messianic era is symbolized by the leopard and the goat lying down together (Isa. 11:6). The visions of Daniel (7:6) and of Revelation (13:2) both include beasts resembling leopards.

It is important to distinguish biblical leprosy, which was primarily a discoloration of the skin, from Hansen’s disease, what we today call “leprosy.” Lepers were ritually impure, which caused them to be ostracized by other Israelites and banished from God’s presence (Lev. 13:45–46). They were one of three types of people who were to be excluded from the camp of Israel (Num. 5:1–4). Moderns are slow to draw a correlation between physical illness and moral failure, but the ancients rarely made a distinction between the aesthetic and the moral: ugly is evil, beautiful is good. The leper’s physical deformation would have been perceived by many as the outworking of a moral flaw. Some believed that leprosy was God’s judgment for slander. God judged Miriam with leprosy (Num. 12:10). God healed Naaman from leprosy through Elisha (2 Kings 5:1–14). Jesus cleansed several people from leprosy (Matt. 8:1–4 pars.; Luke 17:11–19). Of special significance is his willingness to touch the leper, which, were it not for the emanating purity of the Holy Spirit, would have rendered him impure. But instead the leper was purified.

A city in northern Palestine that was later named “Dan” when the descendants of Dan conquered it during Joshua’s conquest of Canaan (Josh. 19:47).

A missive or epistle (2 Chron. 35:4; Ezra 4:7). Usually, ancient Near Eastern letters were written on perishable materials, as opposed to, for example, inscriptions in stone. Since there are few places where such material could survive (deserts or anaerobic bogs), one would expect few surviving letters; yet they number in the tens of thousands. The ancients were letter writers. Significantly, reading old letters has remained a significant aspect of the Christian faith. Today, many Christians regularly read someone else’s mail—the letters of the NT—and face the expected interpretation challenges.

Form

Old Testament letters. Although more than a dozen letters are embedded in the OT (e.g., 2 Sam. 11:15; 1 Kings 21:9–10; 2 Chron. 21:12–15), no OT book is in letter form. Embedded OT letters are truncated or summaries and tell us little of the typical ancient format. From the Lachish letters we infer that Hebrew letters generally opened with “To Addressee, greetings (or blessing),” a technical word of transition (“and now”), and no formal closing. By the Second Temple period, Aramaic letters were evolving into the structure seen in Greco-Roman style.

New Testament letters. Unlike the OT, the NT has twenty-one books in letter form: the thirteen traditional letters of Paul, the anonymous letter of Hebrews, James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John, and Jude. Two letters are embedded in Acts (15:23–29; 23:26–30). It is unlikely that the “letters” in Rev. 2–3 were ever dispatched letters. The NT also mentions other letters (Acts 18:27; 1 Cor. 5:9; 7:1; 16:3; 2 Cor. 2:3–4; Col. 4:16; 2 Thess. 2:2; 3:17).

Extant NT letters share the basic format of Greco-Roman letters, beginning with “Sender to Recipient, greetings [chairein].” A prayer (much less commonly a thanksgiving) transitioned into the letter body. The body of the letter opened with various phrases in a set format (stereotyped formula), such as disclosure: “I want you to know, brother(s), that . . .” (P.Oxy. 1493; Gal. 1:11); astonishment: “I am astonished how . . .” (P.Mich. 8.479; Gal. 1:6); petition, joy, and so forth.

The letter closed with final admonitions, greetings, good wishes, and sometimes a date. In addition to a set structure, the content was often far more stereotypical than letters today. Even letters to a family member had generic greetings, set phraseology, and standardized wishes for good health.

Yet, looking beyond the basic letter outline and the use of everyday language and formulas, it becomes clear that NT letters were not part and parcel with typical papyrus letters. Rather than the typical honor markers of rank or city, NT letter writers identified themselves by association with Jesus, sometimes describing themselves as slaves in his household (Rom. 1:1; James 1:1). The typical letter greeting (chairein) was Christianized into “grace” (charis), with the addition of “peace” (eirēnē)—the equivalent of Jewish shalom. A closing benediction was used instead of the typical final health wish/farewell. More significantly, most NT letters were far longer and more complex. The typical private letter of the poor averaged 87 words in length. Literary letters were much longer. Cicero averaged 295 words. Seneca led, with an average 995 per letter. Paul’s letter to Rome has 7,114 words. Paul averaged (including all 13 letters) 2,495 words. Not surprisingly, Paul’s opponents ridiculed his letters as “weighty” (2 Cor. 10:10).

Letters of the NT also assume that the audience is familiar with Jewish Christian tradition (e.g., Jude), inserting hymnic fragments, traditions, OT quotations/allusions, and so on, often without explanation or indication. The letters were to be read in front of the congregation (1 Thess. 5:27). Paul included longer and more complex thanksgivings than any known ancient writer, often using the opening thanksgiving to preview the letter’s main topics (e.g., 1 Cor. 1:4–7). Paul’s letters also contain large amounts of paraenesis (moral exhortation).

Although the typical papyrus letter was brief, thus keeping its cost reasonable, it was still not a trivial expense. For example, a soldier wrote a typical letter home to indicate that he had reached his assignment safely (P.Mich. 8.490), with a likely cost of about a half denarius, or in modern United States currency, about fifty dollars. Yet the length of many NT letters made them far more expensive. Writing to the Romans today would have cost Paul over two thousand U.S. dollars. A letter for public reading (Col. 4:16) needed quality papyrus in good handwriting, not some draft in hurried scrawl (Cicero, Att. 13.14–25). Appearances mattered. (For speakers, appearance was an important part of the rhetoric.)

The official Roman postal service was not for private use. The common person entrusted letters to someone already going to or near the desired destination. This method was popular, free, and surprisingly reliable, though haphazard (P.Mich. 8.499). Otherwise, sending a letter required dispatching a private carrier, often a slave, or a hired carrier (tabellarius). These carriers had advantages. They could guarantee the letter’s authenticity, since forgeries existed (2 Thess. 2:2). If able, they carried other items, often mentioned in the letter (P.Mich. 8.465–467) or the reply (Phil. 4:18). Carriers often provided additional (or confidential) details (so Col. 4:7; Cicero, Fam. 11.20.4; 11.26.5). The writer often commended the carrier as “trustworthy” to guarantee the carrier’s veracity. In Eph. 6:20–22, Paul wants it clear that he intended Tychicus to talk about Paul’s imprisonment (as proof that Paul was not ashamed of his chains), and not that Tychicus was merely revealing secrets, as sometimes was done (1 Cor. 1:11). Finally, Paul may have selected a specific carrier to facilitate that letter’s reception (Romans, Colossians). (See also Paul.)

Function

On the simplest level, letters had two primary functions. Expressions such as “I pray for your health and success” (P.Mich. 8.477) and “Write me how you are and what you want” (P.Mich. 8.498) were to start or keep a relationship with the recipient. Letters were also to inform (Cic-ero, Fam. 2.4.1), as when a son wrote his father, “While I was lying ill on the ship, they were stolen from me” (P.Mich. 8.468). Yet around the NT period, aristocratic writers (beginning with Cicero, then Seneca to Pliny) were modifying the simple private letter, lengthening it and elevating its style. They were using private letters to propagate religious, political, and philosophical ideas.

Scholarly study affected the study of NT letters for nearly one hundred years by arguing for a sharp distinction between “letters” (the letters of the lower classes, seen largely in the recently discovered papyri) and “epistles” (the literary letters of the aristocratic elite). Thus, Adolf Deissmann argued that the forms of NT letters (koine vocabulary, the diatribe, etc.) were indicators of the letter’s intended function: as private letters, they were artless, unschooled, and dashed off in the midst of a flurry of other activities. On the other hand, Cicero intended his “epistles” to Atticus to be read by the broader aristocratic community and thus wrote with that in mind, creating artfully composed treatises in letter form. Although they had the appearance of private letters, Cicero carefully crafted his “epistles,” knowing that others were reading over Atticus’s shoulder. NT letters were not “epistles”; they were spontaneous and should not be read as careful compositions. Yet biblical letters were not merely private documents. Even those addressed to individuals (1–2 Timothy, Titus) seem to speak to the church behind the recipient (3 John attempts to work around Diotrephes and address the church behind Gaius). Our categories of “public” versus “private” fit the ancient world poorly. Since the general function of letters was changing, NT letters should be seen as part of this shifting landscape.

Moreover, as Greco-Roman letters continued to be studied, NT letters seemed more than mere artless notes, scribbled in a spare moment. Indeed, seeing signs of careful rhetorical composition, scholars have noted similarities with categories outlined in Greco-Roman rhetorical handbooks for speeches: forensic (    judicial), epideictic (demonstrative), and deliberative. Arguing that letters were, in a sense, written speeches, various scholars have attempted to identify elements in NT letters that match the required outline for a specific rhetorical argument, meaning that a letter’s rhetorical form could indicate its function. Thus, identifying the rhetorical form would reveal the author’s motive for writing, whether the writer was intending to make a legal defense of personal status or to shape the behavior of the readers. While these studies generate lively debate and some interesting results, the usefulness of applying them to letters is still unclear. Rhetorical analyses of passages in the letters have proved to be more helpful than those categorizing an entire letter. Obviously, biblical letter writers were not writing in a vacuum, but biblical letters seem to mix purposes and not fit neatly into rhetorical categories.

Biblical letters were not dashed off with anything remotely resembling the rapid-fire pace at which email and text messages are sent today. Even phrases that seem to imply casual correspondence (1 Cor. 1:16) are more likely signs of careful rhetorical arguments. It is unlikely that biblical letters represent the work of just a long day or a few evenings. These letters show signs of careful composition (noticed more as scholars better understand ancient rhetoric and epistolary practices). The use of coworkers, secretaries, rough drafts, and revisions suggests that a NT letter was likely worked and reworked before being dispatched.

The Letter of James has been hailed as possibly the earliest, most Jewish, and most practical of all NT letters. James 3:13 aptly communicates the book’s theme: “Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, by deeds done in humility that comes from wisdom.” The terms “wise” and “wisdom” occur five times in the book (1:5; 3:13 [2×], 15, 17). Hence, the author instructed his readers on leading a life of faith that was characterized by a wisdom expressed through speech and actions (2:12).

Literary Features

The author’s employment of picturesque, concrete language has close affinities to OT wisdom literature and reflects Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon on the Mount.

James 1:2 – Matthew 5:10-12

James 1:4 – Matthew 5:48

James 1:5; 5:15 – Matthew 7:7-12

James 1:9 – Matthew 5:3

James 1:20 – Matthew 5:22

James 1:22 – Matthew 7:21

James 2:5 – Matthew 5:3

James 2:13 – Matthew 5:7; 6:14-15

James 2:14-16 – Matthew 7:21-23

James 3:12 – Matthew 7:16

James 3:17-18 – Matthew 5:9

James 4:4 – Matthew 6:24

James 4:10 – Matthew 5:3-4

James 4:11 – Matthew 7:1-2

James 5:2 – Matthew 6:19

James 5:10 – Matthew 5:12

James 5:12 – Matthew 5:33-37

Like the OT wisdom literature, the teaching in James has a strongly practical orientation. Although the book contains some lengthier paragraphs, much of it consists of sequential admonishments and ethical maxims that in some cases are only loosely related to one another. The sentences generally are short and direct. There are fifty-four verbs in the imperative. Connection between sentences is sometimes created through repeated words. Yet the overall topic of practical faith and wisdom links these exhortations together.

Background and Occasion

After the death of Stephen, many disciples were scattered into the regions of Judea and Samaria (Acts 7:54–8:3). In Acts 11:19 the narrator notes, “Now those who had been scattered by the persecution that broke out when Stephen was killed traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, spreading the word only among Jews.” James may have written this letter to instruct and comfort those scattered believers, as he addressed his letter to “the twelve tribes dispersed abroad” (1:1 NET). These Jewish Christians no longer had direct contact with the apostles in Jerusalem and needed to be instructed and admonished in their tribulations. Apparently, the rich were taking advantage of them (2:6; 5:1–6), and their trials had led to worldliness, rash words, and strained relationships (2:1; 4:1, 11; 5:9). In view of persecution, some may have been tempted to hide their faith (5:10–11). James exhorted them to demonstrate a lifestyle that would reflect their faith.

James’s View on Works and Salvation

Some readers of this letter have observed a seeming contradiction between James’s call for good works and Paul’s insistence on salvation by grace through faith apart from works (cf. James 2:14–26 with Eph. 2:8–10). The discussion is complicated by James’s argument that a faith without works cannot “save” and by his observation that Abraham was justified by what he did, not by faith alone (James 2:14, 20–24). Paul, by contrast, maintains that Abraham was justified exclusively by faith (Rom. 4:1–3).

Referring rhetorically to people who claim to have faith but have no deeds, James asks, “Can such faith save them?” (2:14). That is, can the kind of faith that results in no works be genuine? The expected answer is no. The kind of faith that produces no works cannot be genuine faith; rather, it is “dead” (2:17, 26) and “useless” (2:20). This kind of faith is “by itself,” meaning that it produces no lasting fruit (2:17). James’s point is that genuine faith will produce good works in the believer’s life. By way of contrast, a mere profession is not necessarily an indication of genuine faith. Even demons believe in God, but they are not saved; the kind of belief that they exhibit is merely an acknowledgment of God’s existence (2:19).

According to James, Abraham was justified not in the sense of first being declared righteous, but rather in the sense that his faith was demonstrated as genuine when he offered up Isaac (2:21). Paul, on the other hand, argues that salvation is obtained not through works but rather by faith alone. He quotes Gen. 15:6 to show that Abraham trusted God and was declared righteous several years before he offered up Isaac (Rom. 4:3).

According to Paul, Abraham was justified (declared righteous) before God when he believed God’s promise (Gen. 15:6), but for James, he was justified in the sense of giving observable proof of salvation through his obedience to God. Whereas Paul refers to the point and means of positional salvation, James refers to a subsequent event that confirmed that Abraham was justified.

I. Faith

A. Paul (Romans 4:1-3):

1. Is personal trust in God

2. Justifies one before God

3. Is not proof of Salvation

B. James (2:14-26)

1. Is a mere claim if there is no resulting fruit

II. Works

A. Paul (Romans 4:1-3):

1. Precede salvation

2. Attempt to merit salvation

3. Cannot justify before God

B. James (2:14-26)

1. Follow conversion

2. Are evidence of salvation

3. Confirm one’s salvation

It is important to keep in mind that each author wrote with a different purpose. Paul wrote against Judaizers, who taught that a man had to be circumcised and keep the OT law to be saved. James was warning against a mere profession of faith that leads to self-deception (1:22). John Calvin correctly expressed the biblical teaching that faith alone saves, but that kind of faith does not remain alone; it produces good works (cf. Rom. 3:21–6:14; Eph. 2:8–10; Titus 2:11–14; 3:4–7).

Authorship

The author identifies himself as “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (1:1). The NT mentions five persons having the name “James”: (1) James the son of Zebedee and the brother of John (Matt. 4:21); (2) James the son of Alphaeus (Matt. 10:3); (3) James “the younger” (Mark 15:40); (4) James the father of the apostle Judas (not Judas Iscariot; Luke 6:16); and (5) James the brother of Jesus (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3; Gal. 1:19).

James the brother of John was executed by Herod Agrippa I, who died in AD 44 (Acts 12:2). Since the Letter of James probably was written after this date, the brother of John could not have written it. Neither James the son of Alphaeus, James the younger, nor James the father of Judas was as prominent in the early church as the writer of this letter, who simply identified himself and assumed that his readers would know him (1:1). James the son of Alphaeus is mentioned for the last time in Acts 1:13, and nothing is known of James the father of Judas apart from the listing of his name in Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13. (It is uncertain whether James the younger should be identified with one of the other four or is a separate figure.) Thus, it is unlikely that any of them wrote the book. James the brother of Jesus is most likely the author of this letter.

James the Brother of the Lord

At the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, James, as well as his brothers Joses (Joseph), Judas, and Simon, did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3; John 7:5). However, they came to believe in him after the resurrection (Acts 1:14; 1 Cor. 15:7). Paul called James, along with Peter and John, the “pillars” of the church (Gal. 2:9). James does not claim to be an apostle in this letter; however, he is identified as one in Gal. 1:19. But there the term “apostle” probably refers to a group of leading disciples outside the Twelve (cf. Acts 14:4, 14; 1 Cor. 15:7; Gal. 2:9). Since the author of this letter employed many imperatives, his readers clearly accepted his authority. James, the brother of Jesus, who also became a key leader of the church in Jerusalem, possessed such authority (Acts 12:17; 15:13, 19; 21:18; Gal. 1:18–19; 2:9).

Date

Some scholars hold that the Letter of James was written around AD 62, while others argue that James wrote this letter sometime in AD 45–50. Those who favor the earlier dates point out that the Jewish character of this letter fits with this period when the church was mainly Jewish, based on the following criteria: (1) There is no mention of Gentile Christians in the letter. (2) The author does not refer to the teachings of the Judaizers. If the letter had been written at a later date, we would expect the author to address the issue of circumcision among Christians. (3) The mention of “teachers” (3:1) and “elders” (5:14) as the leaders in the church reflects the structure of the primitive church. (4) The word “meeting” in 2:2 is the same Greek word as for “synagogue.” It describes the gathering place of the early church. This implies a time when the congregation was still primarily Jewish (Acts 1–7).

Outline

I. Introduction (1:1)

II. The Wise Christian Is Patient in Trials (1:2–18)

A. How the Christian should face trials (1:2–12)

B. The source of temptations (1:13–18)

III. The Wise Christian Is a Practical Doer of the Word (1:19–2:26)

A. Hearers and doers of the word (1:19–25)

B. True religion (1:26–27)

C. Prejudice in the church (2:1–13)

D. Faith that works (2:14–26)

IV. The Wise Christian Masters the Tongue (3:1–18)

A. The power of the tongue (3:1–12)

B. The wisdom from above (3:13–18)

V. The Wise Christian Seeks Peace in Relationships (4:1–17)

A. The cause of quarrels (4:1–3)

B. Warning against worldliness (4:4–10)

C. Warning against slander (4:11–12)

D. Warning against boasting and self-sufficiency (4:13–17)

VI. The Wise Christian Is Patient and Prays When Facing Difficulties (5:1–20)

A. Warning to the rich (5:1–6)

B. Exhortation to patience (5:7–12)

C. The power of prayer (5:13–18)

D. The benefit of correcting those in error (5:19–20)

The Letter of Jude is a model of the Christian approach to those who come preaching another gospel.

Outline

I. Greetings (vv. 1–2)

II. Occasion (vv. 3–4)

III. How to Identify False Teachers (vv. 5–19)

IV. Save Some (vv. 20–23)

V. Glory to the One Who Keeps Us until That Day (vv. 24–25)

Authorship

The author identifies himself as “Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James” (v. 1). He was the brother of Jesus and the younger son of Mary and Joseph. Only James the brother of Jesus (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3; John 7:5; Acts 1:14) could be unambiguously identified by his first name alone. Both James and Jude call themselves “servants” of Christ (cf. James 1:1), not apostles (cf. Rom. 1:1; Titus 1:1). After leading the church in Jerusalem for over thirty years (cf. Acts 15), James was murdered in AD 62. Paul states that Peter and the brothers of Jesus traveled as missionaries together and were known to the church in Corinth (1 Cor. 9:5). This would most likely include Jude and his family. Acts implies that James never left Jerusalem.

In the third through the fifth centuries AD, some interpreters saw some difficulty in Jude’s citation of 1 Enoch, but the letter was eventually accepted as authentic.

Destination and Purpose

There is no indication of a destination. Our only clue is its association with 2 Peter. If 2 Pet. 3:1 refers to 1 Peter, then Jude’s letter may well have been written to the same Jewish Christians living in cities in northern Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey).

Jude says that he started to write a general letter of encouragement but had to write this letter instead due to the urgent situation created by the infiltration of false teachers into these communities. These false teachers denied Jesus Christ and turned God’s grace into an excuse to exceed God’s boundaries (v. 4). This would be a particularly powerful charge against false teachers who professed a higher law but whose personal lives were scandalous.

Jude identified these false teachers with a long list of deviant individuals from the past, establishing a pattern by which the reader could rightly evaluate them. This was directed to warn believers rather than persuade unbelievers. As such, it appears harsh. However, Jude’s passion was to see the believers stand firm, to strengthen the undecided, and to evangelize the false teachers (vv. 22–23). The overall goal was the salvation of all.

Opponents

Amid considerable speculation about the identity of Jude’s opponents, there have been few firm conclusions. The main characteristic of these false teachers is their immoral lifestyle and their tendency to turn the free grace of God into an excuse for licentiousness (v. 4). Some have suggested that they were gnostics, since some gnostic groups viewed the physical world as spiritually irrelevant and used this belief as an excuse for immorality and debauchery. But gnosticism as a developed system is not known to exist prior to the second century, and the characteristics that Jude describes were common to other groups as well. Although it is possible that these false teachers were “proto-gnostics” of one sort or another, this proposal must be viewed as tentative, and care should be taken not to (mis)interpret the letter on the basis of such a hypothesis.

Main Themes

Jude clearly asserts the sovereignty of God as a basis for Christian assurance, since it is God who keeps the believer (vv. 1, 24). He speaks in absolute terms of the believer’s blamelessness in Christ on judgment day (v. 24). By contrast, those who adhere to another gospel are deviants who violate God’s created order. The Christian response is to hold firm to the gospel and reject false teaching vigorously. Jude’s defense of the faith is exemplary. He has extensive knowledge of his opponents’ literature, myths, and teachings and is able to use this against them. Like Peter, he points his readers back to the eyewitness testimony of the apostles (vv. 3, 17), who predicted such challenges as an ongoing issue for Christians until Jesus returns. He urges believers to work together to maintain right doctrine, behavior, and an attitude of love (vv. 20–21) and to apply the grace of the gospel even to their opponents in hope of their salvation (vv. 22–23). Jude’s final words (vv. 24–25) constitute one of the most beautiful and reassuring doxologies of the Bible.

Late in life, while in prison, Paul wrote this letter to the slave owner Philemon concerning his runaway slave Onesimus. The main purpose of the letter was to straighten out problems between Philemon and Onesimus. Besides an implicit theology describing the relationships that fellow Christians have with one another, the book focuses on the changed relationship that a Christian slave had with his Christian master.

Outline

I. Opening Greeting (vv. 1–3)

II. Thanksgiving and Prayer (vv. 4–7)

III. Appeal for Onesimus (vv. 8–22)

IV. Final Greetings and Benediction (vv. 23–25)

Paul’s Appeal for Onesimus

Somehow Onesimus (whose name means “useful”) had become “useless” to Philemon (v. 11), having wronged his master and incurred a debt (v. 18). Subsequently, Onesimus had become a Christian due to Paul’s ministry in prison, whereby the apostle sends Onesimus back to Philemon with this letter, asking him to receive his slave as a brother in Christ (v. 16). Paul even requests that Philemon return Onesimus to him because the slave has proved “useful” to the imprisoned Paul (vv. 12–14). Paul offers to pay the debt owed by Onesimus, perhaps even hinting at his manumission (vv. 15–21). (It was customary at that time for masters to free their slaves at the age of thirty. Some slaves were required to purchase their freedom; others received it as a gift from their masters.)

We are not told how Onesimus had come into contact with Paul, but it appears that Onesi-mus has worked with Paul for some time (cf. Col. 4:9). Was Onesimus a runaway slave who happened to meet Paul in prison? Or did Onesi-mus seek out Paul, hoping that the apostle would act as mediator in regard to a grievance between him and his master? If the former is true, then Paul sends his letter in order to encourage Philemon not to punish the slave as a runaway—a crime punishable by death. If the latter is the case, then Onesimus is taking advantage of a Roman law that allowed slaves to appeal to a friend of their master when they had a grievance against the slave owner. Both scenarios are possible, but the latter seems more likely because Paul sends the letter to the entire congregation that meets in Philemon’s house, hoping to add social pressure to Philemon’s decision. Either way, Paul is convinced that One-si-mus’s conversion has changed everything, turning a master, a slave, and an apostle into equal brothers in Christ.

Relationship to Colossians

It is most likely that Philemon lived in Colossae, since both Onesimus (Col. 4:9; Philem. 10) and Archippus (Col. 4:17; Philem. 2) are mentioned in Paul’s letter to the Colossians as well. It is possible that Paul’s letter to Philemon was composed at the same time as his letter to the Colossians, and that Onesimus delivered both letters, one to his master Philemon and one to the church that met in Philemon’s house.

Colossians is a letter sent by Paul to a church in Colossae when he was in prison. The letter was Paul’s first direct contact with the church, which may have been started by one of his missionary associates, Epaphras (Col. 1:7). Epaphras was from Colossae (4:12), a city of Asia Minor located in the Lycus Valley, known for its fertile soil and green pastures. Some commentators suggest that Epaphras also started churches in Hierapolis and Laodicea (4:13), neighboring cities in the valley that were situated around the Lycus River about ten miles apart. Colossae was a free city located on the main Roman road that ran from Ephesus and Sardis toward the east, and it was populated by native Phrygians, as well as Greeks, Romans, and Jews. More than likely, the church was founded during Paul’s extended ministry in Ephesus, where persons from the region heard Paul’s gospel and from where Paul sent missionary associates such as Epaphras into the surrounding cities (Acts 19). Tychicus, the letter carrier (Col. 4:7–8), was also one of Paul’s associates from the same region; he decided to accompany Paul to Macedonia after the team left Ephesus (Acts 20:4).

The close association of these churches in Asia Minor and the time frame when the letters were written may explain why Paul’s letter to the Colossians is so similar in content to his letter to the Ephesians. Paul was in prison (probably in Rome) when he sent both of these letters (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10, 18). The instructions regarding Tychicus, the carrier for both letters, are identical, nearly verbatim (Eph. 6:21–22; Col. 4:7–8). The letters share the same outline, following some of the same themes, especially toward the end, where Paul gives instructions regarding the household. An affinity also exists between Colossians and Philemon, a letter sent to the patron of one of the house churches in Colossae. Most of the names mentioned by Paul appear in both letters: Timothy, Onesimus, Archippus, Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke (Col. 1:1; 4:9–17; Philem. 1, 10, 23–24). Paul was also in prison, along with Epaphras, at the time he sent his letter to Philemon. All of this indicates that these letters were written about the same time, from the same place, to the same region. Why did Paul send three letters to the same region, especially since letter production was so expensive? Why not send one letter to the entire region (like Galatians), to be read by all the house churches? Obviously, the problems of each church were so different that they required a separate authoritative word from their apostle.

Questionable Practices in Colossae

The Colossians were doing several things that Paul found troublesome, as we learn from Col. 2. They were judging each other for not keeping certain dietary regulations and holy days (2:16). Some were claiming superiority through personal worship experiences that involved visions of angels (2:18). Some subscribed to strict discipline of the human body, punishing themselves through various acts of self-abasement in order to curb fleshly appetites (2:23) and enhance their worship experiences (2:18). It seems that many of them were trying to live by an expanded version of the divine command given in the story of Adam, Eve, and the forbidden fruit: “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!” (2:21). Paul recognized that all these claims and rules had the “appearance of wisdom” but in reality were nothing more than traditions based on “self-imposed” religion, and that such ascetic practices were useless in denying fleshly appetites (2:22–23). Where did the Colossians get all these strange ideas that led to such bizarre behavior?

Paul described the false teaching as an imprisoning “through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces” in opposition to the teachings of Christ (2:8). Because the Colossian church was made up primarily of Gentile converts (1:27), many interpreters argue that the problems resulted from the meshing of the gospel with local, pagan ways. The Phrygians were known for their fascination with magical rituals, the ability to manipulate the powers (earth, wind, fire, spirits, angels, often referred to as “elementary principles of the world”) for human purposes. Paul’s description of the false teaching as a “hollow and deceptive philosophy” based on the “human tradition” may also reveal the influence of Greek ideas and Roman ways in the church. The Greeks operated with a dualistic worldview of spirit versus flesh, leading some philosophers to argue that punishing the body ensured purity of the soul. Furthermore, the Romans believed that the gods had given them power to rule the world, bringing fertility to the lands of conquered peoples. Worshiping Caesar brought economic rewards to devoted subjects of the empire. In other words, all this talk in the Colossian letter about power and sovereignty, philosophy and self-discipline was Paul’s way of dealing directly with the root of the problem: the syncretism of pagan ways and the gospel according to Paul.

Some interpreters believe that all these peculiar teachings derive not from pagan religions but rather from Judaism. After all, Paul’s references to observing the Sabbath, keeping commandments, and angelic worship point toward a Jewish context. Paul also affirmed that his Gentile converts were “circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands” (2:11), perhaps revealing his concern that Jewish ways were creeping into his Gentile church. He even put the church on notice, identifying those among “the circumcision” (Jews) who were trustworthy ministers of the gospel (he mentions only three, Barnabas, John Mark, and Jesus called Justus [4:10–11]). The implication, of course, was to ignore the rest of “the circumcision.” But if the troublemakers in Colossae were Jewish opponents of Paul, how does one explain all the mystical and ascetic elements of this false teaching? Some argue that the expression “worship of angels” was not an idolatrous practice of venerating angelic beings. Instead, the phrase should be translated “angelic worship,” implying that some Colossians claimed to have been transported to heaven and joined the angels in worship of God. This may have been similar to the experiences of an obscure form of Judaism: Jewish mystics who claimed to preserve esoteric revelations through out-of-body experiences of heavenly visions and auditions (see Paul’s description in 2 Cor. 12:1–7). Furthermore, the strict dietary code and sexual ethic of Jewish law were often interpreted by first-century pagans as promoting an ascetic lifestyle. In other words, Paul was countering a more cryptic branch of Judaism that flourished in a region known for its affinity for the mysterious.

Outline and Content

I. Introduction (1:1–14)

A. Greeting (1:1–2)

B. Thanksgiving (1:3–8)

C. Prayer (1:9–14)

II. The Person and Work of Christ (1:15–23)

III. Paul’s Role in Christ’s Mission to the Gentiles (1:24–2:5)

IV. False Teaching versus the Work of Christ (2:6–23)

V. Instructions on Life in Christ

A. In the church (3:1–17)

B. In the home (3:18–4:1)

VI. Generic Exhortations (4:2–6)

VII. Specific Instructions (4:7–9)

VIII. Final Greetings (4:10–17)

IX. Paul’s Signature (4:18)

Whatever the source of the false teaching referred to in Colossians, Paul attempts to correct the misbehavior of his Gentile converts by building an argument that the work of Christ is all-sufficient. Paul begins the letter by describing the person and work of Christ in cosmic terms (1:15–23). Next he recounts his role in the mission of Christ to bring the riches of the kingdom to Gentiles (1:24–2:5). After reminding the Colossians of their reception of the gospel, Paul juxtaposes the deceptive practices of the false teaching with the evidence of the work of Christ in them (2:6–23). Then he gives a number of instructions on what life in Christ is supposed to look like: in the church (3:1–17) and in the home (3:18–4:1). He concludes the letter with generic exhortations (4:2–6), specific instructions (4:7–9), and greetings (4:10–17). Finally, Paul signs the letter, obviously written by a secretary, with the simple request: “Remember my chains” (4:18)—a curious signature that makes the argument of his letter even more appealing.

The Power and Peace of Christ’s Kingdom

It is ironic that Paul chose to describe the work of Christ in such grandiose terms, picturing him as a mighty ruler over all creation, even while the apostle was in prison—an undeniable sign of Roman sovereignty. In Col. 1, in some of the loftiest language Paul ever used to describe Christ’s kingdom authority, the apostle reminds his converts that the Lord is “the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation” (v. 15), an obvious reference to Christ’s deity. Then Paul piles on the attributes, presenting Christ as the creator of all things, even angelic creatures (v. 16), the sustainer of all things (v. 17), the head of the church, the eternal one, the guarantor of the resurrection (v. 18), the fullness of God (v. 19), the reconciler of all things—the one who made peace with the enemies of God through his blood on the cross (vv. 20–22). Despite Paul’s circumstances and what Rome may claim, the apostle holds fast to the irrepressible sovereignty of Christ’s kingdom, displayed by Paul’s perseverance in the midst of suffering and the full assurance that every Colossian believer is “fully mature in Christ” (vv. 22–29). Indeed, all the treasures of Christ’s kingdom—love, knowledge, wisdom, discipline—are to be found in the life of his converts (2:1–5), unless someone “deludes” them into thinking otherwise.

Paul’s rhetorical strategy of extolling the power of Christ’s kingdom makes perfect sense in light of the false teaching that was plaguing the Colossian church. Apparently, the Colossians were persuaded to feel inadequate about their faith, vulnerable to the imposition of legalistic standards that ensured victory over fleshly indulgences. To counter his opponents, Paul unpacks the significance of the incarnation and the cross (2:9–15). Because Christ was God in flesh (in whom “all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form” [v. 9]), his death on the cross was a cosmic event that defeated all the powers that oppose God. Using military imagery, Paul argues that Christ canceled every debt against humanity when he nailed all “decrees” (even Caesar’s) to the cross. In that singular act of sacrifice, Christ disarmed the foes of God, humiliating them publicly by making a spectacle of them, triumphing over all powers (v. 15)—something that Caesar loved to do after successful military campaigns. Therefore, if Christ’s victory over all powers has been secured through his death, and since he rules as the firstborn of the dead (resurrection) over all creation, and since the Colossians are “fully mature in Christ” (1:28) because of their faith in him, then no pretense of self-abasement or angelic visions can diminish what Christ has done and will continue to do in the lives of Paul’s converts in Colossae. Christ is all they needed to overcome the powers.

In Col. 3, Paul tells how the Colossians draw upon the power of Christ when they “set [their] minds on things above, not on earthly things” (v. 2). The things on the earth are “sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed” (v. 5). Paul believes that his converts died with Christ (“hidden with Christ in God” [v. 3]) and therefore had set aside all these idolatrous practices when they put on the “new self,” being conformed to the image of Christ (vv. 8–10). This renewal will be found in all believers, regardless of ethnicity (v. 11), and will result in peace for all. Indeed, Paul sees the “peace of Christ” as the undeniable evidence of his reign exhibited in the hearts of those who believe (vv. 12–15). And what would that peace look like? Believers will be patient, forgiving one another with hearts full of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and love resulting in unity (vv. 12–14). Their worship of God will be characterized by songs of thankfulness and admonition, receiving the word with wisdom (v. 16). In their homes husbands, wives, and children will model deference and love, and masters and slaves will seek justice and fairness, as if they were serving Christ (3:18–4:1). The Colossians will be devoted to prayer, will treat outsiders fairly, and will be known for always speaking graceful words (4:2–6). In other words, where Caesar’s empire has promoted Roman peace by enforcing Roman law in provinces, cities, and households, Paul believes that the peace of Christ will rule the hearts of his subjects, establishing a kingdom of love and unity, in word and deed, in the home as well as the church. So, in his final greetings, Paul talks about faithful slaves and beloved siblings as sources of encouragement in the ever-expanding work of the kingdom of God (4:7–17), making his simple request, “Remember my chains” (4:18), sound more like an act of defiance than a pitiful plea.

Rising above the ordinary routine of church life, Paul pens a majestic letter calling Christians to remember what God has done for them in Christ and to walk worthy of their calling. Ephesians stands as an extremely significant and intensely practical book for today’s church.

Authorship

Paul claims to be the author of Ephesians (1:1–2; 3:1), and its authenticity is well attested in the early church. A good portion of Ephesians is presented in the first person (1:15–18; 3:1–3, 7–8, 13–17; 4:1, 17; 5:32; 6:19–22), including information related to his prayers, apostolic ministry, and comments about Tychicus, the letter carrier. In addition, Ephesians seems to have been quoted by many of the Apostolic Fathers and is included in early lists of the NT. Since the end of the eighteenth century, however, some have doubted the Pauline authorship of Ephesians for the following reasons (accompanied by counterarguments).

1. The author does not seem to know his audience personally (1:15; 3:2). The “impersonal nature” of the letter makes better sense, however, if it was intended for a wider audience (see “Destination” below).

2. The language and style of Ephesians do not match Paul’s other letters (i.e., unique words and phrases, cumbersome sentences). Yet there are more unique words in Galatians and Philippians, for their length, than in Ephesians. Paul’s style in this letter is undoubtedly more reflective, and he may also have used a trusted secretary (amanuensis), which could account for much of the unusual wording.

3. The many parallels between Ephesians and Colossians suggest that someone other than Paul wrote Ephesians as an imitation of Colossians. Yet parallels are to be expected between two letters sent to the same area at the same time when one deals with a doctrinal error (Colossians) and the other aims to prevent the error from spreading by reflecting on the deep truths of the faith (Ephesians).

4. The theology of Ephesians differs from his undisputed letters (e.g., emphasizing the universal church and deemphasizing justification by faith and the return of Christ). However, the overall purpose of the letter and the lack of an impending church crisis make these emphases fully understandable.

While these four arguments against Pauline authorship are to be taken seriously, the traditional view that Paul wrote Ephesians remains the preferred option. The explicit statements within the text, the unanimous support of the early church, the likely use of a secretary, the absence of a looming crisis, and the overall purpose of the letter offer good reasons to suppose that Paul wrote Ephesians.

Place of Origin and Date

Ephesians was written while Paul was a prisoner (see Eph. 3:1; 4:1; 6:20), but he had been imprisoned on more than one occasion. The traditional view locates Paul in Rome under house arrest when he pens the letter (along with the other Prison Epistles: Colossians, Philemon, and Philippians). Since Tychicus delivered Ephesians, Colossians, and likely Philemon, all three letters must have been written from the same place (Eph. 6:21–22; Col. 4:7–9). Acts 28:30–31 reports that Paul was held captive in Rome for two years, but he retained limited freedom to meet with people and to minister (Eph. 6:19–20; Phil. 1:12–13; Col. 4:3–4). Luke’s use of “we” in Acts 28 indicates that he was with Paul in Rome during that imprisonment (see also Col. 4:14; Philem. 24). Also, Aristarchus, who traveled with Paul to Rome (Acts 27:2), is mentioned in two Prison Epistles (Col. 4:10; Philem. 24).

The two leading alternatives to Rome for the place of origin are Ephesus itself and Caesarea. Because of Paul’s comment about fighting wild beasts in Ephesus (1 Cor. 15:32; cf. 2 Cor. 1:8–11), some have suggested that Paul was imprisoned there, but there is no clear evidence to support that theory. On the other hand, Acts does refer to a lengthy imprisonment for Paul in Caesarea (Acts 24:27). When Paul writes to Philemon, he requests a guest room for an upcoming visit (Philem. 22). In Caesarea, however, Paul had appealed to Caesar and expected a trip to Rome rather than release from prison (Acts 25:10–11). Overall, the traditional view that Paul wrote Ephesians from Rome has more support than the alternative views.

If the place of origin is Rome, then Paul wrote Ephesians during his first Roman imprisonment, around AD 60–62. Most likely, Paul wrote Ephesians about the same time he wrote Colossians and Philemon, in the early or middle part of that imprisonment.

Destination

Although Ephesians traditionally has been connected to the city of Ephesus, the words “in Ephesus” (1:1) are absent from some of the earliest and best Greek manuscripts. The letter itself even suggests that Paul may have been writing for a wider audience. In spite of living in Ephesus for several years, Paul mentions no church members by name (6:21–24), and he makes the awkward comments that he has “heard about” their faith and love (1:15) and assumes they have “heard about” how God has used him (3:2; cf. 4:21). Almost certainly Paul intended this general letter to circulate among several churches in Asia Minor, with each church “filling in the blank” as the letter was read publicly. Since Ephesus was the leading city, the letter became associated more permanently with Ephesus at an early stage. It is also possible that Ephesians is the “letter from Laodicea” mentioned in Col. 4:16, assuming that Tychicus first delivered the letter to Ephesus, with instructions to send it on to Laodicea and Colossae.

Purpose

Paul did not write Ephesians to solve a major problem or deal with any particular emergency in the church. Instead, he wrote a broadly reflective letter to help Christians remain strong in their faith. He had spent almost three years teaching and caring for some of these people, and he wanted to make sure that they continued to follow Jesus. Specifically, Paul wanted believers to have a deeper understanding and experience of three realities: (1) the new life in Christ; (2) the new community in Christ; (3) the new walk to which Christ called them.

Paul focuses on the new life experienced in Jesus Christ. The expression “in Christ” and parallel phrases such as “in the Lord” or “in him” are found almost forty times in Ephesians. God will unite and restore all of creation under one Lord, Jesus Christ (1:10). Paul also stresses the new community through words such as “unity,” “one,” and “with/together with” and concepts such as church, body, temple, and bride. When we are connected to Christ, we are also connected to a new community. This new community is called to a new walk that honors Christ, one characterized by love for God and for people.

Outline and Contents

I. Letter Opening (1:1–2)

II. Praise for Spiritual Blessings in Christ (1:3–14)

III. Prayer for Spiritual Understanding (1:15–23)

IV. New Life in Christ (2:1–10)

V. New Community in Christ (2:11–22)

VI. Paul’s Unique Role in God’s Plan (3:1–13)

VII. Paul’s Prayer for the New Community (3:14–21)

VIII. New Walk in Christ (4:1–6:20)

A. Walk in unity (4:1–16)

B. Walk in holiness (4:17–32)

C. Walk in love (5:1–6)

D. Walk in light (5:7–14)

E. Walk carefully (5:15–6:9)

F. Walk in the Lord’s strength (6:10–20)

IX. Letter Closing (6:21–24)

I. Letter opening (1:1–2). The letter opens in typical fashion by naming the author and the audience before adding a greeting. Paul, an “apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God,” writes to God’s people in Ephesus (and surrounding cities). He greets his readers with “grace and peace,” themes that appear throughout the letter.

II. Praise for spiritual blessings in Christ (1:3–14). Ephesians explodes in adoration and praise: “Praise be to [or ‘blessed be’] the God . . . who has blessed us . . . with every spiritual blessing in Christ.” God’s people praise him for their election (1:4–6), for their redemption and wisdom to understand God’s master plan (1:7–12), and for sealing them with the Holy Spirit (1:13–14). Each section ends with a similar phrase, “to the praise of his glory” (1:6, 12, 14), showing that the triune God in his essential character (his glory) is worthy of highest praise.

III. Prayer for spiritual understanding (1:15–23). After praising God for his blessings, Paul now asks for spiritual wisdom that his audience might comprehend those blessings (as described in both the previous section and the rest of the letter). As the Spirit enlightens their hearts, they come to know the hope of God’s calling, the glory of God’s inheritance, and the greatness of God’s power (1:18–19), which was supremely displayed in Jesus Christ’s resurrection and exaltation (1:20–23).

IV. New life in Christ (2:1–10). Paul now turns his attention to the new life available in Christ (2:1–10). First, he offers a lengthy description of a person’s spiritual state without Christ (2:1–3). Second, he explains how God came to the rescue of such helpless and hopeless people. Moved by his love and mercy, God has mysteriously allowed believers to participate in Christ’s death, resurrection, and exaltation (2:4–6). God’s purpose in saving people was to demonstrate the “riches of his grace” expressed to us in Jesus (2:7). There is perhaps no better summary of this salvation message than 2:8–10: the basis of salvation is God’s grace, the means of receiving salvation is faith, and the result of salvation is good works.

V. New community in Christ (2:11–22). God not only has given new life to individuals in Christ but also has created a new community, comprised of both Jews and Gentiles. As Gentiles, the Ephesians’ condition outside of Christ was desperate: no Messiah, no connection to God’s people, no promise of salvation, no hope, and no relationship with God (2:11–12). But now they have been brought near through Christ’s sacrifice on the cross (2:13). In Christ, Jews and Gentiles have now been reconciled to each other in a new spiritual community (2:14–18). They are full-fledged members of God’s kingdom and God’s family. What is more, they are even part of God’s holy temple (2:19–22).

VI. Paul’s unique role in God’s plan (3:1–13). After describing God’s strategy to unite Jewish and Gentile believers in Christ, Paul begins to pray for these believers (3:1). Almost immediately, however, he breaks off his prayer to explain more about God’s “secret plan” or “mystery” and his own role in that plan. Only the grace and power of God could transform a persecutor of the church into one of the church’s great leaders (3:2–9). Now God is using his multicultural church to announce his manifold wisdom to the heavenly powers (3:10–11). Since God is using Paul to fulfill his purpose, no one should be discouraged by Paul’s sufferings (3:12–13).

VII. Paul’s prayer for the new community (3:14–21). Paul now resumes his prayer (3:1) and asks that God may strengthen believers by the Holy Spirit in their inner being according to his glorious riches (3:16). They will know the prayer has been answered when Christ feels at home in their hearts and they experience his indescribable love more and more. The final purpose of the prayer is that they be filled with the “fullness of God” or become like Christ (3:17–19; cf. 4:13). Although it may appear that Paul has asked for too much, the doxology in 3:20–21 affirms that God is able to do more than can be imagined.

VIII. New walk in Christ (4:1–6:20). God’s gift of new life and his creation of a new community in Christ (chaps. 1–3) call for a new walk (chaps. 4–6). The important Greek word oun (“then, therefore”) in 4:1 marks a transition from the blessings and privileges of the church (chaps. 1–3) to the conduct and responsibilities of the church (chaps. 4–6). Obedience comes as a response to God’s grace.

A. Walk in unity (4:1–16). Believers are urged to live a life (or walk) worthy of their calling (4:1), and this worthy walk begins by maintaining the unity of the Spirit (4:3). The triune God perfectly exemplifies a diverse unity (4:4–6), and Paul suggests in 4:7–13 that diversity within the body of Christ actually enriches unity. All members are gifted, but they are gifted in different ways so as to benefit the body. The goal of unity is full maturity in Christ, resulting in discernment, truth, edification, and love (4:14–16).

B. Walk in holiness (4:17–32). Paul reminds his audience that rather than living like pagans (4:17–19), they have put off the old self (former life apart from Christ) and have put on “the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness” (4:20–24). Now they are called to live like the new people that they are in Christ. Paul offers a list of specific exhortations in 4:25–32 to illustrate what it means to walk in holiness.

C. Walk in love (5:1–6). Along with walking in unity and holiness, believers are called to walk in love. Positively, this means imitating the Father and loving sacrificially like the Son (5:1–2). Negatively, this means refusing to indulge in selfish sensuality (5:3–6). Paul closes this section by warning that immoral, impure, greedy, idolatrous people will inherit God’s wrath rather than God’s kingdom.

D. Walk in light (5:7–14). Although believers once lived in darkness, they are now light in the Lord and should walk as children of light (5:7–9). They need to discern what pleases the Lord and reject the useless deeds of darkness (5:10–11a). Instead, they are to expose and transform the darkness (5:11b–14).

E. Walk carefully (5:15–6:9). Paul, using three contrasts, cautions believers to walk carefully: not as unwise, but as wise (5:15); not as foolish, but with understanding (5:17); and not getting drunk, but being filled with the Spirit (5:18). Paul then specifies three results of being filled with the Spirit: worship, gratitude, and mutual submission (5:19–21). In 5:22–6:9 Paul explains how this final characteristic (mutual submission) is applied within the Christian household.

F. Walk in the Lord’s strength (6:10–20). Paul concludes with instructions about walking in the Lord’s strength. Christ has already won the victory over the powers of evil, but believers should expect continued attacks. Their task is to stand firm, using God’s armor of truth, righteousness, the gospel of peace, faith, salvation, and the word of God. Prayer is required to appropriate the armor of God. Paul began the letter by praying for his readers (1:15–23); now he asks them to pray that he will fearlessly declare the mystery of the gospel.

IX. Letter closing (6:21–24). Paul concludes with a commendation of Tychicus, the letter carrier, and a benediction of peace, love, and grace.

Galatians is often understood as the great letter teaching justification by faith in Christ alone. Paul inveighs against false teachers who teach Christians to supplement the work of Christ with their own keeping of the law as part of earning salvation.

This traditional reading has been powerful and edifying. However, setting Galatians within a plausible ancient social setting reveals further powerful functions of the letter. Galatians turns out to be more than a container delivering the timeless and vital doctrine of salvation by believing and not by doing. The approach to Galatians in this article seeks to establish plausible ancient social settings primarily through exploring a constellation of ancient Mediterranean cultural codes. This contextual orienting helps modern readers appreciate how issues that seem to us bizarre or insignificant might have been issues of life and death to people in different contexts.

Setting and Message

Cultural context. By the time of Galatians (mid-first century AD), a relatively common moral sensitivity existed among the diverse spectrum of Greco-Roman (pagan, Jewish, and Christian) intellectuals: self-mastery (enkrateia). The ideal person led a life of virtue by mastering powerful irrational passions, which led to excessive, weak, irrational, and evil behavior. Although people differed on the means to self-mastery, this general ideal defined broader notions about the successful life. Elites represented the ideal leader as one defined by self-mastery. This qualified such a person to rule others whose capacity for and attainment of self-mastery were inferior, to rule those who cannot even rule themselves. Authority figures projected this characteristic and perpetuated social worlds in which prestige and authority were bound up with the ideal of self-mastery. Many average people also made self-mastery an ideal, whether striving for it in their own lives or allocating authority and prestige to those perceived to have attained it. Various Jewish teachers presented Judaism, especially keeping its laws and studying its sacred writings, as the premier path to self-mastery and thus a happy life. Some pagans also conceived of Judaism, especially some of its laws, along these lines.

Certain Jewish views of Gentiles constitute another important cultural code. Many Jews read the OT as depicting the following concerning Gentiles: They were separated from Israel’s God and his promises for his people, the Jews (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13; 1 Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation, especially because they were idolaters 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). Jews, on the other hand, were by definition God’s special people, whom he had chosen over other nations (Deut. 7:6–8; 10:15; 26:18–19). He had watched over them and would ultimately rescue them. Gentiles would experience covenant blessing in and through Israel if they functionally became Jews by keeping the law, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. The law was that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenant that God had revealed to Israel, which defined Jews as Jews (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 had planned to restore the world through Israel, the locus of his saving activity. God would bless the nations in Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3; 17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). Various passages depict this happening as the nations were subjected to Israel, came to Israel, served Israel, presented Israel with their own wealth and possessions, and/or feared Israel’s God (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16; 14:2; 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 54:3; 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 (Gen. 17:9–14; Exod. 12:48; Isa. 2:2–5; 56:1–8; Jer. 12:14–17; Mic. 4:1–5; Zech. 14:16–21). God would condemn Gentiles who remain separate from Israel, especially Gentiles who harm Israel. For many Jews around the time of Galatians, salvation for Gentiles thus remained Israel-centered.

Many ancient Jews also construed the world through apocalyptic views of reality. This understanding conceived of the present visible world as characterized by the influence of evil supernatural beings (demons), suffering, and evil. One day God and his angels would completely triumph in the invisible heavenly reality; the events in this reality determine life in the lower visible world. Then the evil age of the present world of suffering would be over. Evil and suffering would be vanquished, God’s people would be rescued, the agents of suffering in the old age would be judged, the Spirit would be poured out, the nations would come to Israel’s God, and the heavenly reality would fully break in and renew the visible world. God’s people, Israel, would experience ultimate salvation, having been rescued from the evil age. The law remained a defining reality in God’s plans to rescue the world in most Jewish apocalyptic scenarios. Experiencing this salvation remained a matter of being part of God’s righteous people, Israel.

Situation of the letter. With these cultural codes in view, the following situation for the letter of Galatians seems plausible. Paul proclaimed to some of the predominantly Gentile population of Galatia the good news (“gospel”) of the God of Israel’s salvation through Jesus the Messiah (Gal. 1:8–9, 11; 4:13). Some accepted this message of faith and devoted themselves to Jesus and the God of Israel (1:2, 9; 3:1–6; 4:14–20). After Paul left, other Christian teachers came to Galatia. They possibly claimed association with the Jerusalem church and, perhaps, with Peter and James. In line with some of the Jewish views of Gentiles discussed above, they taught that the Gentile Christians in Galatia must functionally become Jews and keep the law (for other examples of such early Christian teachers, see Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5). These other teachers probably drew on Scriptures and traditions about Abraham to make their arguments. The God of Israel would save his people, “the righteous,” and through them the rest of the world, through the relationship that he had initially established with Abraham (Gen. 12:1–3; 17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). The teachers could easily show from the Scriptures that circumcision and the law defined God’s relationship with Abraham and were always intended to do so (17:9–14; 26:5). They, like most contemporary Jewish writers, thought that obedience to the law (26:5) defined Abraham’s faith toward God (15:6). If the Galatians were to be Abraham’s descendants, they too must keep the law and be circumcised like their new father, Abraham. The teachers could also deploy passages from the Scriptures to the effect that everyone who did not keep the law was cursed (Deut. 27:26; cf. Gal. 3:10), but that everyone who kept the law would live (Lev. 18:5; cf. Gal. 3:12). For these teachers, Jesus the Messiah was part of the final stage in the God of Israel’s law-shaped apocalyptic plan to rescue his people (the Jews) and, through them, the nations.

It seems that the teachers also capitalized on the moral sensitivity of self-mastery and the not uncommon understanding of the Jewish law as an ideal means for attaining it. Thus, they also urged the Galatians to keep the law through representing it as a means to attaining the prestigious moral and social ideal of self-mastery. Furthermore, the Galatians may have thought that the law offered them a concrete guide to life because of its numerous detailed prescriptions. It also provided substantive ways for the Galatians to reinforce their identity in the midst of their villages, especially because it commanded practices that could set them apart. As a result, at least some of the Galatian Christians decided to keep the law, perhaps seeking circumcision. They were persuaded that the God of Israel and Jesus only save those within the Jewish space defined by the law. These Galatians sought to keep the law, looking to its power for self-mastery.

Outline

I. Greeting (1:1–5)

II. The Law-Defined Gospel Is a Different Gospel (1:6–10)

III. Paul’s Gospel Is Straight from God (1:11–24)

IV. The Jerusalem Apostles Recognize Paul’s Law-Free Gospel (2:1–10)

V. Paul and Peter on Whether Gentiles Should Live Like Jews (2:11–21)

VI. Works of the Law or Christ’s Faithfulness? (3:1–5)

VII. Paul Addresses the Situation in Galatia (3:6–4:31)

A. Scriptural arguments to answer Paul’s question (3:6–14)

B. Incorporation into Christ means incorporation into Abraham (3:15–29)

C. Heirs versus slaves (4:1–11)

D. The Galatians’ past experience with Paul and the gospel (4:12–20)

E. Heirs versus slaves: Sarah and Hagar (4:21–31)

VIII. Summary and Restatement of Paul’s Argument (5:1–12)

IX. The Faithfulness of Christ and Communal Living (5:13–6:10)

A. Freedom in Christ (5:13–15)

B. Self-mastery (5:16–24)

C. The way of the Spirit and Christ’s cruciform faithfulness (5:25–6:10)

X. Conclusion and Summary (6:11–18)

Structure and Contents

I. Greeting (1:1–5). When Paul hears of this situation among the Galatian churches, he writes them a frustrated letter. He commences by stressing how Jesus, through giving himself for our sins, is God’s means for delivering us from the present evil age (1:3–4). As Paul will make clear, Jesus and the law represent mutually exclusive means of deliverance (3:21–22). In contrast to most Jews, Paul will thus shockingly dissociate the law from the God of Israel’s apocalyptic deliverance.

II. The law-defined gospel is a different gospel (1:6–10). Paul continues by making clear his point of view: despite what the other teachers say, their law-defined gospel is in fact a damnable “different gospel” (1:6–10).

III. Paul’s gospel is straight from God (1:11–24). While the other teachers may claim that their gospel comes from the authoritative Jerusalem church, Paul explains that his gospel comes straight from God and not from other men (1:11–24).

IV. The Jerusalem apostles recognize Paul’s law-free gospel (2:1–10). However, when he had met with the Jerusalem apostles, they had recognized his law-free gospel (1:18–2:10). Indeed, they had not forced Titus to be circumcised (2:3). Also, 1:18–2:10 represents Paul as an embodiment of the radical transforming power of the gospel. Whereas Paul previously had advanced far and zealously “in Judaism,” persecuting the church, now he steadfastly serves the church and boldly stands against Jews who zealously seek to impose the law (“Judaism”) on Gentile Christians.

V. Paul and Peter on whether Gentiles should live like Jews (2:11–21). Paul then narrates an account of an incident that speaks directly to the Galatian situation (2:11–21). Previously in Antioch Peter had acted so as to imply that Gentiles would have to live like Jews (e.g., keep the law) in order to truly be unified with God’s people (2:11–14). Paul, however, has rebuked Peter (2:14). Paul continues with a speech about how Gentiles are made righteous (“justified”) not within the space demarcated by the “works of the law,” but rather within the faithfulness of Jesus the Messiah (2:15–16). The works of the law, or the duties commanded by the law, do not define those who are “righteous”—that is, God’s true people who will be saved. Rather, the faithfulness of Christ defines God’s true people, the ones who believe in Jesus. Here Paul for the first time explicitly dissociates the law from the God of Israel’s apocalyptic salvation in Jesus (the) Christ. The law, which defines Gentiles as “sinners,” has been torn down in Christ’s crucifixion (2:17–18). Paul then presents himself as an embodiment of God’s saving work in Christ. In being crucified with Christ, he has died to the law. Paul no longer lives, but now Christ lives in him. The faithfulness of Christ, who loves him and has given himself for him, now defines Paul’s life, not the law (2:19–20). From a more traditional Jewish perspective, Paul has undermined God’s grace because he has marginalized the law, the premier means of grace and life that God has given to his people. In fact, however, the law is utterly opposed to Christ’s faithful saving death, which is the true means of God’s ultimate saving and gracious actions toward his people (2:21).

This understanding of 2:11–21 revolves around how Paul considers his entire discussion of justification, the faithfulness of Christ, and the words of the law to be dealing with the issue of whether Gentiles should be forced to live like Jews (2:14). This might seem surprising to us. Does this not reduce Paul’s discussion of the great doctrine of justification to dealing merely with social and identity issues? Within the logic of Jewish apocalyptic thought, however, issues of the identity of God’s people and what defines them are by definition ultimate salvation issues, not merely social issues. The God of Israel will rescue only his true people. Thus questions of who really constitutes his true people and how they are defined are paramount, life-and-death, salvation issues. Paul never abandons Jewish apocalyptic salvation logic; he simply redefines it around Christ and not the law.

This reading understands the phrase pistis Christou as “the faithfulness of Christ,” a shorthand reference to Jesus’ faithful saving death on the cross. Traditionally people translate the phrase as “faith in Christ.” In line with much recent scholarship, however, this discussion understands the phrase differently, while still recognizing that Paul considers belief in Christ to be of paramount importance: “so we also have believed in Christ Jesus in order to be justified by the faithfulness of Christ and not by the works of the law” (2:16 [all translations are the author’s]).

VI. Works of the law or Christ’s faithfulness? (3:1–5). So far, Paul has not addressed the powerful scriptural arguments and appeals to the law as a means to self-mastery through which the opposing teachers have gained influence. As becomes clear from the rest of the letter, Paul does not anchor his counterarguments ultimately in interpretations of the Jewish Scriptures, possibly because the scriptural arguments of the opposing teachers would have more cogency. Again, they draw on understandings about Gentiles that they can easily ground in the God of Israel’s sacred writings. Paul instead appeals directly to how the Galatians have experienced salvation initially. Have they received and experienced the workings of the Spirit “out of/from the works of the law, or from the message of (Christ’s) faithfulness” (3:1–5)? Paul, of course, knows that the answer is “from the message of Christ’s faithfulness” (often translated as “hearing with faith”) apart from the works of the law. Paul thus plays a trump card that undercuts the opposing teachers. The Galatians have received the Spirit, a classic end-time blessing for the God of Israel’s people, apart from the law. Thus, in Christ, God’s people clearly cannot be defined by the law (see also Acts 10:44–11:18; 15:6–11). The law-defined gospel of the opposing teachers simply cannot be right, since the Galatians have received the Spirit and experienced salvation apart from the law. One cannot overstate the importance of this obvious argument from the Galatians’ experience for Paul. This settles the entire issue within the logic of his letter. All of Paul’s following arguments using the Jewish Scriptures presuppose that his readings of them, depicting Gentile participation in the God of Israel’s people apart from the law, must be correct, and that the opposing teachers’ arguments from Scripture also must be wrong.

VII. Paul addresses the situation in Galatia (3:6–4:31). For the rest of 3:6–4:31, Paul continues to address the situation in Galatia within the cultural codes and kinds of concerns sketched above. In 3:6–13 Paul launches into a densely packed excursus of scriptural arguments to set up an answer to his rhetorical question “Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so out of/from the works of the law, or from the message of (Christ’s) faithfulness?” (3:5). He sets up the answer to his question, which comes in 3:14, by focusing on the nature of the Galatians’ Abra-hamic sonship—that is, the nature of their identity as the God of Israel’s special people. Paul argues that Christ’s faithfulness, and not the law, defines their Abrahamic sonship. Within this excursus it seems plausible that Paul draws upon and undercuts texts that the opposing teachers have used (Lev. 18:5; Deut. 27:26). In 3:15–29 Paul elucidates how the Galatians’ incorporation into Christ through his faithfulness can actually mean that they are incorporated into Abraham, become his descendants, and thus become “heirs according to promise” (3:29).

In 4:1–7 Paul restates parts of his preceding discussion in a different way, introducing the language of slavery. In 4:12–20 Paul returns to reminding the Galatians of their past experience with himself and the gospel. Paul has embodied Christ to them, and they to him. He has brought them Christ in his weakness, and they have accepted him as such. Their turn to the opposing teachers marks a departure from how they first received Paul.

VIII. Summary and restatement of Paul’s argument (5:1–12). In 5:2–6 Paul quickly summarizes the substance of his arguments thus far, while in 5:7–12 he resummarizes the situation.

IX. The faithfulness of Christ and communal living (5:13–6:10). In 5:13–6:10 Paul finally depicts the positive content of the faithfulness of Christ for the Galatians. This section, in which Paul focuses on how the Galatians live communally, has been his driving focus all along. Not only must he offer something in place of the law for self-mastery in order to wrench the Galatians from the influence of the opposing teachers, but also Paul considers it absolutely necessary for the Galatians to live together in ways embodying Christ’s other-oriented, cross-shaped faithfulness (2:19–20; 4:19; 5:13–6:10). Paul does not view the law simply as a neutral, ineffectual means to self-mastery; rather, he thinks that the law will positively work death, slavery, and irrational passions, the things that would bar the Galatians from inheriting the kingdom of God (5:22). Thus, 5:13–6:10 is the most important part of the letter for Paul. All his earlier arguments serve his purposes here.

Paul begins his positive sketch of the faithfulness of Christ in 5:13–15 by talking about their freedom in Christ (5:1). This freedom from the law by no means implies freedom from the obligation to live faithfully. In fact, this freedom paradoxically means freedom for the Galatians to become slaves to one another through love (5:13). This is what Paul means by the cross-shaped faithfulness of Christ defining God’s people. This is what Paul means when he writes that he longs for Christ to be formed in them (4:19). Christ’s faithfulness redefines the law itself, such that becoming slaves to one another through love by loving your neighbor fulfills the whole law (5:14; 6:2). In 5:13–14 Paul thus surprisingly informs the Galatians that freedom in Christ means other-oriented, love-driven (cf. 5:6), cross-shaped freedom. Cross-shaped faithfulness leading them to become slaves to one another through love is the only antidote to their biting and devouring one another (5:15), classic Greco-Roman language for describing the control of irrational passions.

Paul gets more specific in 5:16–25, explicitly moving his discussion within the discourse of self-mastery. His earlier arguments dissociating the Spirit and Christ’s faithfulness from the law inform this passage, as does Paul’s implicit association of the law and the opposing teachers with “flesh” in 4:29. Only by the Spirit can the Galatians overcome the desires of the flesh (5:16–17). In 5:18–19 Paul makes clear his association of the law with the desires of the flesh, especially in 5:19, where he speaks of the “works of the flesh,” an obvious play on his frequent phrase “works of the law.” The works of the flesh in 5:19–21 read like a catalog of the vices with which broader Greco-Roman moral discourse characterizes people who lack self-mastery. People who engage in such vices, who lack the struggle to self-mastery empowered by the Spirit, “will not inherit the kingdom of God” (5:21). Paul then spells out the positive content of the faithfulness of Christ for the Galatians in terms of the fruit of the Spirit. He concludes this list of virtues, which characterize people who have the Spirit, with enkrateia, “self-mastery” (5:22–23). He continues, “And the ones who belong to Christ have crucified the flesh, with its passions and desires” (5:24). Paul’s language here seems reminiscent of his earlier self-representation as one who has been crucified with Christ (2:19–20; see also 6:14–15). The Spirit, who belongs exclusively to those who are God’s children through Christ’s faithfulness and not the law (3:14; 4:4–6), empowers the Galatians to attain self-mastery. Not only does the law fail to help them attain self-mastery, but also, as part of the old “evil” age, it works with the desires of the flesh to produce everything contrary to self-mastery, everything that disqualifies people from inheriting the kingdom of God.

Paul continues in 5:25–6:10, stressing the way of the Spirit and Christ’s cruciform faithfulness. In 6:6–10 Paul underlines the ultimate importance of the Galatians living in accordance with the Spirit and not the flesh. For Paul, this does not imply that salvation and self-mastery result from the Galatians’ own autonomous effort. That would miss the point entirely. Only Christ’s faithfulness and the Spirit can bring about the cross-shaped lives and self-mastery of which Paul speaks. Apart from Christ’s faithfulness and the Spirit, the Galatians would remain people mastered by their passions and desires and cut off from God’s salvation and blessings, since they would not be Abraham’s descendants in Christ. At the same time, Paul writes the letter with such passion because he is convinced that where Christ’s other-oriented, cross-shaped faithfulness and self-mastery do not characterize people, God’s saving blessings are absent as well. Thus Paul “is again in the anguish of childbirth” until Christ is formed in them (4:19).

X. Conclusion and summary (6:11–18). Paul concludes in 6:11–18, summarizing most of his main points. The law and circumcision now count for nothing; only faithfulness working through love and new creation in Christ count for anything (5:6; 6:15).

For Paul in Galatians, the other-oriented, cross-shaped faithfulness of Christ offers a more concrete communal identity and practical way to life than the law ever could. The faithfulness of Christ and Spirit define the Galatians as a people of the new creation. Justification in Galatians involves more than the traditional doctrine. It involves the unification associated with the fruit of the Spirit, not the division and strife of the works of the flesh/law. It relates to and establishes the conditions for the radical and tangible other-oriented and cross-shaped communal faithfulness (of Christ) that must define God’s people.

The Letter to the Hebrews and the Letter to the Romans constitute the two great pillars of theology in the NT. Hebrews brings a high Christology and increases Christian understanding of Christ’s role as priest and pioneer of faith. From this book, deductions can be made regarding the early church’s understanding of OT interpretation and its view of typology.

Hebrews ends like a letter, but it does not begin like one. In particular, it lacks the names of the writer and the recipients. From the content, though, it is evident that this work is meant for a certain audience, familiar with the author. The author shows a loving pastoral concern for his readers, teaching them, exhorting them, and rebuking them when necessary. He gives them models of faith to encourage them and instructs them to encourage one another. The author describes the work as “my word of exhortation” (13:22). The book is often identified as a sermon.

Author

The letter is, strictly speaking, anonymous. No author is mentioned, and few clues as to his identity exist. He is known by his readers (13:19) and has a pastor’s heart for them (6:9). He and his audience are second-generation Christians; that is, they did not hear Jesus during his ministry but rather are dependent upon those who did (2:3). He is a companion of Timothy (13:23) and thus possibly in the circle of Paul. The letter shows that he has great organizational and rhetorical skills; he is intelligent and well educated; his writing indicates that he is likely from a Greek-speaking culture and is a converted Hellenistic Jew familiar with the Greek version of the OT. And he is a creative theologian with perspectives found nowhere else in the NT.

Early church tradition offers no name for the author. The letter’s later attribution to the apostle Paul probably granted it the authority necessary for canonicity, though problems with that view were readily apparent. The Greek is unlike Paul’s, and the rhetoric and theology are much different as well. The themes present in Hebrews are of only tangential interest to Paul. All the Pauline Epistles bear his self-identification, because he felt that his status as an apostle added authority to his words. And Paul did not consider himself to be a second-generation Christian, since he had seen the Lord himself (Gal. 1:12). Although the Catholic and Eastern Churches continue to ascribe the work to Paul, the Protestant Church has almost completely abandoned that idea.

In the absence of a known author, almost every name in the NT has been suggested, including Apollos, Barnabas, Luke, and Silas. While each name has merits and problems, too little is known to prove or disprove any prospective author. Yet, even without Pauline or other known authorship, the book maintains its authority.

Audience

The original readers almost certainly were a house church, part of a network of churches in an urban setting, likely either Jerusalem or Rome, with Rome being slightly preferred. The recipients were a specific group rather than the church at large as in the General Epistles (James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John, Jude); the author knew their circumstances (Heb. 10:32; 12:4; 13:17, 24). They were Jewish Christians who, possibly because of persecution, were in danger of drifting back into the Judaism they had left (see 10:32–39). The letter was written probably in the late 60s, as evidenced by the fact that there is no mention of the temple’s destruction, which occurred in AD 70. Given the reasoning of the author, it is quite hard to imagine that he would not mention this event were he writing after that date.

Themes

Hebrews presents two main themes. The first is faith and perseverance, especially in the face of persecution. Jesus is the pioneer of salvation through suffering (2:10) and can help those being tempted (2:18); he has been faithful to the one who appointed him (3:2) as the Son over God’s house (3:6), which is Christians who hold firmly to their confidence and hope (3:6). Christians share in Christ, if they hold their convictions firmly to the end (3:14). This is possible because Jesus is the great high priest, having ascended into heaven (4:14). A person falling away, not holding firmly, cannot be brought back again to repentance (6:4–6). Jesus has sacrificed himself once for all (7:27). Christians must hold unswervingly to the hope they profess, for the one who promised is faithful (10:23). Those who do will be richly rewarded (10:35–36).

Role models of faith are portrayed in chapter 11, the so-called Faith Chapter. The author presents Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and other OT figures as examples of living by faith. These serve as a “cloud of witnesses,” demanding “perseverance [in] the race marked out” for Christians (12:1). Jesus is the “pioneer and perfecter” of faith, enduring the cross and shame (12:2). Christians should endure hardship as discipline (12:7), which will produce a “harvest of righteousness” (12:11).

The second theme is the superiority of Christ, presented in a series of escalating comparisons between Jesus and every aspect of Judaism. The Son is a superior revelation from God (1:1–2). He is superior to the angels (1:4–14) and even to Moses (3:2–6). The Son’s Melchizedekian priesthood is superior to the Levitical priesthood (7:1–25). The new covenant brought by the Son is superior to the Mosaic covenant (8:6–13); the Son’s sacrifice is superior to the sacrifices offered under the Mosaic law (9:1–10:18).

Theology

The author brings his unique perspective to the work of Christ—his special roles as both high priest and sacrifice. Because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood (7:24), which is not a function of his ancestry but rather is “on the basis of the power of an indestructible life” (7:16). He meets the requirements of a priest, being “holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (7:26). He is a “priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek” (7:17, quoting Ps. 110:4). Melchizedek is a once-mentioned figure from Gen. 14:18. He was the king of Salem, a “priest of God Most High.” Abraham, and by extension Levi, paid him a tithe and received a blessing from him. Therefore, Melchizedek is superior to Levi, and his priestly order is superior to Levi’s. This priesthood, in fact, replaces the Levitical priesthood because the earlier priesthood could not produce perfection (Heb. 7:11), being “weak and useless” (7:18).

The Levitical priests had offered their sacrifices repeatedly, year after year, first for their own sins, then for those of the people. They had used the blood of bulls and goats to cleanse the tabernacle and accessories, because without the shedding of blood there can be no forgiveness of sin (9:22). There had been many priests, as death claimed each one. The priests, in all their weaknesses, had been appointed by the law. The sanctuary in which they serve is a “copy and shadow” of what is in heaven (8:5).

In contrast to the Levitical high priest, Jesus sits at “the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven” (8:1) and serves in the true tabernacle not made by human hands. He has been appointed not by the law but by the oath of God, which came after the law. He has no need to offer sacrifices day after day; his sacrifice was “once for all” (7:27), coming at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin (9:26). In fact, the repeated nature of the Levitical sacrifices serves as proof of their ineffectiveness. Had they been effective, they would have ceased. But “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins” (10:4), even when offered in accordance with the law (10:8). The worshipers had been left with the same guilty consciences. Christ had “entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood” and obtained eternal redemption for all believers (9:12), sprinkling their hearts to cleanse them from guilty consciences (10:22)

Because of this, Christ is the mediator of the new covenant, prophesied in Jer. 31:31, which is superior to the Mosaic covenant. The first covenant has been made obsolete and will soon disappear (Heb. 8:13), as the new covenant is “established on better promises” (8:6). The tabernacle had been designed to demonstrate that there was no way into the most holy place for anyone but the high priest. Now, the blood of Jesus has opened a way through the curtain, allowing believers to “draw near to God with a sincere heart and with the full assurance of faith” (10:22).

Exhortations

Hebrews consists of theology interspersed with exhortations to the readers to persevere in the face of persecution, not to drift away from their new faith. These hortatory passages also serve as warnings. Because the new covenant is superior to the old one, its violation carries proportional penalties: since every violation of the old covenant had been met with its just punishment, “how shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation?” (2:3). Believers must encourage one another, so that no one becomes “hardened by sin’s deceitfulness” (3:13). As recipients of new access to God, Christians must hold unswervingly to the hope, because God is faithful. This new access has completely replaced the old; there is no sacrifice remaining to forgive deliberate sinning. As those rejecting the law of Moses had died without mercy, those insulting the Spirit of grace will be punished more severely (10:29). Christians should consider “him who endured such opposition” so as not to “grow weary and lose heart” (12:3).

The author rebukes his readers for being lazy: “We have much to say about this, but it is hard to make it clear to you because you no longer try to understand” (5:11); but he patiently moves on beyond elementary teaching to teaching of Christian maturity (6:1). He warns them sternly that there is no reverse gear: those who have entered the sphere of Christian faith cannot fall away and then reenter at will; apostates would be “crucifying the Son of God all over again” (6:6). But then he softens the rebuke as a pastor: “Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are convinced of better things in your case— the things that have to do with salvation” (6:9).

The author also shows great interest in the Sabbath rest promised to Moses. Those who had disobeyed were denied the rest (3:18), but the promise of entering his rest still stands (4:1). In fact, the Sabbath rest that remains is superior, or else it would not still be offered (4:8), and Christians must make every effort to enter that rest so that no one will perish (4:11).

Outline

The Letter to the Hebrews is very organized yet difficult to outline, owing to the manner in which the author handles his transitional material. The main theological argument (the superiority of the Son) is presented as a series of overlapping and interlocked comparisons interspersed with pastoral exhortations to perseverance. The connection between sections is often a keyword used in one section and then picked up and expanded in the next.

I. Introduction (1:1–4)

II. The Son Is Superior to the Angels (1:5–14)

III. Warning: Do Not Reject the Word Spoken through God’s Son (2:1–4)

IV. Jesus Is the Perfect Pioneer of Salvation because of His Suffering (2:5–18)

V. The Son Is Superior to Moses (3:1–19)

VI. The Sabbath Rest Is Still Available and Is Superior to the OT Rest (4:1–13)

VII. The Son Is a Superior High Priest (4:14–5:10)

VIII. Rebuke: You Are Still Spiritual Children (5:11–6:3)

IX. Warning: There Is No Return to the Former Covenant (6:4–12)

X. Jesus Completes the Oath God Gave Abraham (6:13–20)

XI. Jesus Is a Priest of Melchizedek’s Order, Superior to Levi’s Priesthood (7:1–25)

XII. The Priestly Function of Jesus Is Superior to That of the OT Priest (7:26–8:6)

XIII. The New Covenant of Jesus Is Superior to the Mosaic Covenant (8:7–13)

XIV. The Tabernacle of the New Covenant Is Superior to the Old (9:1–7)

XV. The Sacrifice of Christ Is Superior to the OT Sacrifices (9:8–10:20)

XVI. Exhortation to Persevere (10:21–39)

XVII. Faith Models (11:1–40)

XVIII. Exhortation to Righteous Living (12:1–13:17)

XIX. Closing Personal Greetings (13:18–25)

Colossians 4:16 mentions “the letter from Laodicea,” usually understood as written by Paul. It no longer survives, and we have no clear evidence that it ever circulated among early Christians. Various people capitalized on this perceived opportunity by writing their own pseudonymous Letter or Epistle to the Laodiceans, attributing it to Paul. The practice of writing pseudonymous/forged letters and writings in the name of authoritative figures occurred cross-culturally in the ancient Mediterranean, including among some early Christians.

The Muratorian Canon fragment (second or fourth century AD) references, and rejects as a heretical forgery, one such Letter to the Laodiceans. A Latin pseudonymous Letter to the Laodiceans, written anywhere between the second and the fourth century AD and also attributed to Paul, survives. The short and intentionally nonspecific letter strings together various quotations from and allusions to Paul’s letters, especially Philippians.

For some early Christians, the Letter to the Ephesians possibly went by the name “Letter to the Laodiceans.”

One of the “prison epistles” of Paul (along with Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon). These are traditionally viewed as having been written during Paul’s first Roman imprisonment (AD 60–62), though some maintain that they were written either from Caesarea or Ephesus at an earlier date. In Philippians, Paul is writing to the church that he established on his second missionary journey (likely between AD 49 and 52), probably the first Christian church founded in Europe.

We read of Paul’s visit to Philippi in Acts 16:12–40. Paul, Silas, and (presumably) Luke first baptized Lydia, who sold purple cloth. Later they freed a slave girl from the spirit by which she predicted the future. When the owners of the slave girl became angry at their loss of income, Paul and Silas were thrown in jail. A miraculous earthquake freed them from the jail, but they did not flee. This was a powerful witness to the jailer, who believed and was baptized, along with his family. In the morning, Paul and Silas were ordered released. When Paul protested his treatment, citing his Roman citizenship, they were escorted from the prison. Paul visited the church at least once more, when he left Macedonia from Philippi (Acts 20:6; see also 1 Cor. 16:5).

Themes

The broad occasion for the letter is the return of Epaphroditus, a member of the Philippian church who had brought a financial gift to Paul (2:25–30). Epaphroditus had fallen ill while in Paul’s service, and the news had reached Philippi. Paul sends him home to be reunited with his loved ones and sends this letter along with him. Paul lauds the work of Epaphroditus in the ministry (2:29–30) and thanks the Philippians for their generous gift (4:10–20) and their partnership in his ministry for the gospel (1:5).

Paul also takes this opportunity to reassure his friends about his circumstances in prison. His imprisonment is serving to advance the gospel (1:12–14), both among the palace guard, whom Paul evangelizes, and among other Christians who are emboldened by Paul’s courage. It is the pastoral spirit in Paul that moves him to comfort his audience, though it is he who is in distress (1:19). Paul is not fearful for his future, whether it holds eventual freedom or death; either is acceptable to him (1:21–24).

Paul then tells his readers that the most important thing is to live their lives in a way worthy of the gospel (1:27). This will be evidenced by their standing firmly together as one, unafraid of any opposition. Whatever suffering comes their way is a gift from God, as is also the gift of belief in Christ (1:29).

The report from Epaphroditus must have reflected some troubles brewing in the church at Philippi. A quarrel between two women was spreading throughout the church (4:2), and Judaizers (Jewish Christian missionaries) were at work there, insisting that Gentile Christians must be circumcised (3:2).

Paul addresses the first concern with the beloved “Christ hymn” (2:1–11). From the Christian’s unity with Christ should flow unity with one another. Every believer should adopt the humble, unassuming attitude of Jesus, who emptied himself first of his divine prerogatives, then of his human dignity, then of his life. Rather than taking their salvation for granted, Christians must consider their position before God with fear and trembling (2:12).

Concerning the Judaizers, Paul gives a threefold warning: “Watch out for those dogs, those evildoers, those mutilators of the flesh” (3:2). These three insults are deliberately ironic. The Judaizers considered themselves defenders of the traditions of Moses and the Scriptures, yet Paul calls them “dogs,” an animal associated with uncleanness and Gentiles. They promote the “good work” of circumcision, but they are actually promoting the harmful work of confidence in worldly acts. “Mutilators of the flesh” refers to the insistence that Gentile Christians be circumcised. Paul mocks this idea, as circumcision is irrelevant in the new covenant. In fact, it is Christians, not Judaizers, who are the true circumcision—that is, the people of God.

The real problem with the Judaizers is that they put their confidence in the flesh—that is, in the tangible elements of religion, such as circumcision. But Paul explains that he has more reason than most to trust in these religious credentials. His are flawless: he had been circumcised on the eighth day, a learned Hebrew, even a Pharisee. Yet this “advantage” he disdains, knowing that Christ is worth far more. He rejects his previous religious standing, counting it as “garbage” or “dung” for the righteousness that comes from God based on faith (3:7–9). Paul offers himself as a model for the Philippians to follow (3:17).

To correct the contentious atmosphere in their church, the Philippians should focus on the positive aspects of their fellow believers: things they see that are noble, right, pure, lovely, and admirable. This and practicing their faith as they have learned from Paul will guarantee them peace from God.

The “Christ Hymn”

The context for this hymn begins in 1:27. Paul pleads with the Philippians to live as citizens of heaven, worthy of the gospel, standing firm in one Spirit, working closely together in the faith. Their gift is not only belief in Christ but also suffering for him, as they see Paul is doing.

Paul appeals to the Philippians to resolve their differences on four grounds. Are they encouraged by their own unification with Christ? Do they receive comfort from the love of Christ? Do they have some fellowship with each other in the Holy Spirit? Do they have any tenderness and compassion for their church family, whether they are in agreement or not? If any of these things are true, then Paul requests that they favor him personally by growing that unity, both spiritually and intellectually, until they find themselves “one in spirit” and “of one mind” (2:2).

This goal will be accomplished by the Philippians abandoning their own interests in favor of one another’s needs, valuing others above themselves. The supreme example of this is Christ Jesus, who had this attitude himself.

The hymn itself is found in 2:6–11. It is quite likely that this hymn was not written by Paul himself, but was an existing liturgical piece. Here is found some of the most profound Christology in the NT, describing Christ’s preexistence, humiliation, and subsequent exaltation. Some have analyzed the structure as three stanzas; some see it as six stanzas. Regardless, there is a clear chiastic shape to the hymn: Christ begins in an elevated position, then descends lower and lower in the middle, and then returns to exaltation by God.

The hymn provides rich theological content. Before the incarnation, Christ already existed in the form of God. He was willing to empty himself of this equality, so that the Creator could become a creature. He became a servant in human form. In this human form, he further humbled himself and accepted an imposed death, and this in the harshest, most cruel mode: crucifixion.

It is because of his ultimate submission that Christ is now elevated to the highest place, above every being in heaven and on earth. All will acknowledge his supremacy with worship and praise.

The Philippian Church

Paul demonstrates great warmth toward his offspring church. His greeting is longer and more effusive than in any of his other letters. He thanks God and prays for them every time he thinks of the Philippians. They have been Paul’s partners in the gospel from the founding of the church; they share in God’s grace with Paul. He longs for them and prays that their love will grow even more. Paul expresses his affection in the way he addresses his audience: “God’s holy people” (1:1); “I have you in my heart” (1:7); “brothers and sisters” (1:12; 3:1, 13, 17; 4:1, 8); “my dear friends” (2:12).

The church seems to have organized at an early stage. Paul sends his letter to the church at large, as well as to “the overseers and deacons” (1:1). The Philippians have always been faithful—while Paul was with them, and even more so without him (2:12). From the beginning of the church, when no other church contributed, they had helped Paul financially, even when he was in nearby Thessalonica (4:16). Now, Epa-phro-ditus has returned with yet another gift, which Paul calls “a fragrant offering, . . . pleasing to God” (4:18).

As soon as Paul learns his fate in prison, he plans to send his number one assistant, Timothy, who is like a son to him, to help them with the problems in their church (2:19). Paul has at least one vital colleague already in the church. He refers to his “true companion” to help reconcile Euodia and Syntyche, the two women who seem to be at the heart of a disagreement within the church (4:3).

Outline

I. Opening Greetings (1:1–11)

II. Paul’s Imprisonment Serves the Cause of Christ (1:12–30)

III. Living with the Attitude of Christ (2:1–18)

IV. Praise for Timothy and Epaphroditus (2:19–30)

V. Cautions about Judaizers and Their View of the Christian Faith (3:1–21)

VI. Living in the Peace of God (4:1–9)

VII. Paul Thanks the Philippians for Their Financial Support (4:10–19)

VIII. Closing Greetings (4:20–23)

Romans is a letter sent by Paul from Corinth to the house churches in Rome. The letter is unique in several ways. It is the longest of all Pauline letters, which explains why it appears first in the NT canon (Paul’s letters are arranged in length from longest to shortest and divided into two groups: to churches and to individuals). Romans is one of the last letters Paul wrote while he was a free man. Shortly after sending it, Paul traveled to Jerusalem, where he was arrested, and subsequently spent several years in prison in Caesarea and Rome. Romans is one of two letters Paul sent to churches that he had never visited (the other is Colossians, a church started by Paul through one of his missionary associates, Epaphras). But what sets Romans apart from the rest of his letters is this: it is the only letter Paul sent to establish contact with a church that he did not start. Since letter production was so expensive, why did Paul send this, his lengthiest letter, to a group of people he did not know? It seems perfectly reasonable for Paul to send letters to straighten out problems among his own converts while he was absent, but it seems odd that he would send a very long, sophisticated theological argument (with several warnings) to a group of house churches that did not know him, much less ask for his advice. Why did he do it?

Paul’s Purpose

Rome and Spain. Paul states his purpose for sending Romans at the beginning and toward the end of the letter. At first, he explains why he had not visited Rome, even though he wanted to come in order to “impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong” and “that I might have a harvest among you, just as I have had among the other Gentiles” (1:11–13). Paul’s intentions are revealing. He believes that since God has called him to be the apostle to the Gentiles (1:1), it is his duty to impart spiritual gifts to churches with Gentile members as well as add to their number by converting Gentiles in their region. In other words, although Paul had never visited Rome or had a hand in starting or guiding the Roman church to this point, he believes that he is responsible for it by virtue of his calling. Therefore, since he has been unable to do the work of an apostle by coming to them, he sends the Roman house churches a letter (15:14–16). But this is not the only reason for Romans. At the end of the letter Paul asks the Roman Christians to support his upcoming mission to Spain (15:22–29) and to pray that God will protect him during his visit to Jerusalem, for he expects trouble when he arrives there (15:30–32).

Paul’s request for financial support is a little unusual. Only a few churches helped him financially (Philippi and probably Antioch), and as far as we know, he did not ask for this assistance (Phil. 4:15–17; 2 Cor. 11:9). He preferred to support himself by working (1 Cor. 9:6–18; 2 Thess. 3:7–10). In Paul’s day, money came with strings attached; clients were obligated to “obey” their patrons—an arrangement that Paul would find intolerable. So, in light of Paul’s practice of self-support, why did he ask the Roman house churches for assistance with his planned mission to Spain? And if that were his primary purpose in writing, why did he send such a lengthy letter containing arguments that seem to have little to do with his request? A simple letter asking for help would have sufficed. Besides breaking from his usual practice of self-support, why would he ask the Roman church for help? Why not send a letter to churches that he himself had started and ask for their help? Paul had recently finished collecting a relief offering from his churches to help the poor in Jerusalem. Why did he not collect additional funds (or use part of the money) to expand his missionary efforts to Spain? If he was willing to be indebted to someone, why not let it be his own converts (especially the Philippians)? Indeed, there seems to be more to Paul’s letter than a request for financial aid. Apparently, Paul’s reasons for writing Romans go beyond his stated purposes.

The Roman churches. Paul’s relationship with the Roman house churches may have been more involved than what might be presumed. At the end of the letter Paul greets at least five house churches, naming several individuals (16:5, 10–11, 14–15). It is a long list of names, especially compared to other Pauline letters. These are persons Paul knew very well, not only Prisca and Aquila (cf. Acts 18:2; 1 Cor. 16:19), but also Epenetus, Ampliatus, and Stachys, whom Paul calls “my dear friend” (16:5–9) as well as Andronicus, Junia, and Herodion, who are called “my relatives” (16:7, 11; NIV: “my fellow Jews”). He even referred to a member of the church as “a mother to me” (16:13). Paul also knew about the problems in Rome (14:1–15:13) and felt obliged to clear up what others were saying about him in Rome (3:8). In other words, Paul and the Roman church were not strangers. He did not send the Roman letter to introduce himself in order to ask for help. Even though the apostle to the Gentiles had never visited Rome, Paul and the Roman church knew each other. He obviously had many friends among their number; several were key leaders (a group to which Paul was trying to add Phoebe [16:1–2]). Perhaps Paul’s influence in the church was so significant that he was compelled to send the Roman letter for the same reason he sent other letters: they needed his help in straightening out their problems. In particular, Jewish Christians were not getting along with Gentile Christians—a situation that Paul had faced several times before—which the apostle addresses in the last half of the letter (9:1–15:13). But if that is the main reason for Romans, what is the purpose of the first half of the letter—a lengthy, sophisticated theological argument concerning the righteousness of God that seems to have little to do with ethnic divisions among Roman Christians?

Theology. Since Romans contains the clearest and most substantive theological argument of all of Paul’s letters, scholars wonder why he wrote it. Some have thought that Paul was trying to get his beliefs down on paper before facing perilous times in Jerusalem. Others have argued, based on Paul’s appeal for financial support, that Romans is a condensed version of his gospel—a “this is what I preach so you can support me” letter. Recently, scholars have been emphasizing the correlation between chapters 1–8 and 9–16. That is to say, the first half of Romans is the theological foundation upon which Paul builds his argument for a unified church threatened by ethnic, social, and economic divisions. But what is the evidence of ethnic strife in the Roman letter? First of all, when Paul greets certain house churches, the grouping of names reveals that “birds of a feather flocked together.” Persons with Jewish names appear together (16:1–7), separated from those with slave names (16:8–10a), and distinguished from those with high-status Greek names (16:14–15). This conforms to the demographics of the first-century city, where Jews were segregated from their neighbors and the poor lived together in the least desirable part of Rome. The contentious debate over food and calendar between the “weak” and the “strong” reveals fault lines that conform to ethnic and social divisions within the church: weak = Jews, strong = Gentiles (14:1–15:13). At one point, Paul even singles out his Gentile readers by issuing a specific warning about ignoring the Jewish roots of their faith (11:13–24). With these issues in mind, scholars see how Paul front-loaded his warnings about ethnic strife with the theological argument of 1:1–8:39. Indeed, Romans is a pastoral letter with theological purpose.

Outline

I. Introduction (1:1–17)

A. Greeting (1:1–7)

B. Thanksgiving and prayer (1:8–15)

C. Thesis: the righteousness of God by faith (1:16–17)

II. The Righteousness of God by Faith (1:18–8:39)

A. Judgment of God against ungodliness and unrighteousness (1:18–3:20)

B. Righteousness of God in Christ by faith (3:21–5:11)

C. Questions regarding the righ-teous-ness of God in Christ by faith (5:12–8:39)

III. Living Righteously by Faith (9:1–15:13)

A. What about Israel? (9:1–11:36)

B. Present the body as a sacrifice (12:1–21)

C. Submit to God (13:1–14)

D. Accept one another (14:1–15:13)

IV. Conclusion (15:14–16:27)

A. Paul’s purpose (15:14–33)

B. Final greetings (16:1–27)

Paul’s Argument

The main point of Paul’s letter to the Romans is that the righteousness of God has been fully revealed in Christ Jesus. According to Paul, this is “good news” (gospel) for Jews and Gentiles. In fact, the entire letter is Paul’s explanation of why he believes that this new revelation of God’s righteousness in Christ is good news for all people, even his own kin. But what does Paul mean by “the righteousness of God”? Is he talking about how God makes individuals right by faith in Christ? Or is he defending God’s way of saving the world, saying that God is right to bring salvation to all people through the gospel? Does the phrase “righteousness of God” mean “personal justification that comes from God” or “the justice of God”? What makes Paul’s meaning even more confusing for speakers of English is that one Greek word (dikaiosynē) can be translated three ways: “righteousness,” “justice,” or “justification.” Thus, there are those who argue that Paul emphasizes personal righteousness—that is, how a person can have right standing with God. Others, however, maintain that Paul is arguing for his gospel as an undeniable demonstration of God’s justice—that is, how God’s character as a just God is revealed through the salvation of the world through Christ (not only sons of Abraham, not only sons of Adam, but all creation). The different emphases have significant implications for Paul’s argument.

Judgment of God against ungodliness and unrighteousness (1:18–3:20). Take, for example, Paul’s view of the law and how it functions in the first part of Romans (1:18–3:20). Some take 3:20 as the climax of this part of the argument, where Paul assigns one purpose to the law: to define sin. So according to this line of interpretation, Paul believes that God gave the law in order to show humanity’s need of Christ. Since no one is able to keep the whole law, especially those to whom it has been given, the Jews, then “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (3:23). The implication, of course, is that God gave the law in order to reveal to people Israel’s failure so that Israel would recognize their need for a righteousness that depends not on obedience but on God’s free gift through Christ. But there are two problems with this approach: Paul is offended by the idea that God gave the law to the Israelites in order to cause them to “stumble so as to fall” (11:11–12), and he also maintains that there were some who kept the law (Gentiles!), proving that “doers of the law will be justified” (2:13–14 NASB, NKJV). In other words, the law is God’s gift to Israel that is supposed to give it an advantage when it comes to righteousness (3:1–2). But the Jews disobeyed God (2:17–24), incurring his wrath ( just like the Gentiles [1:18–32]). So Paul makes the argument that God is right to punish Israelites (as well as the Gentiles) for their disobedience (2:1–12): “There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile” (2:9). In other words, 1:18–3:20 is not only an argument for the universality of sin (which neither Jew nor Gentile would deny) but also a justification of the revelation of God’s righteous wrath against all ungodliness and disobedience, even for the Jewish people. Paul is pointing out the justice of God by emphasizing his impartial punishment of sin.

But this is where an interlocutor (a hypothetical opponent of Paul) could raise an objection: “But we Jews have the covenant with God, consisting of laws and promises from God. God promised to bless the sons of Abraham and gave us the law—with all the prescriptions for sacrifices and atonement—to deal with sin. We will escape God’s wrath because God is faithful even though we are not.” Even though Paul’s interlocutor does not use these words, this is the basis of the argument that Paul puts into the mouth of his imaginary opponent in 3:1–8. The interlocutor essentially says, “If our sin reveals the righteous wrath of God, then Paul is saying that our disobedience serves his purpose. Why should we be judged as sinners?” In other words, what is the point of the covenant if God’s chosen people are no better off than pagans on the day of judgment? But this is the very point that Paul will contend with on two counts. First, who says that God’s chosen people do not have an advantage in preparing for the day of judgment (an argument that he will come back to in 9:1–11:32)? Second, who says that the law is God’s only requirement of the covenant (a question that he answers in 3:21–5:21)? Throughout the entire Roman letter Paul holds two seemingly contradictory ideas in tension: the fulfillment of God’s covenant promises to Abraham is not contingent upon Israel’s obedience (God is faithful), and not every descendant of Abraham will realize the covenant promises of God (only those who have faith like Abraham). The reason for the tension is that a new kind of righteousness has been revealed apart from the law (although predicted by the Law and the Prophets), fulfilling the salient requirement of the covenant. Those who believe that the righteousness of God is found in Christ will inherit the promises of God to Abraham, whether Jew or Gentile. Therefore, Christ’s followers are the sons of Abraham, the children of the covenant, justified by faith, not by law. All of this is by divine design—what Paul calls “predestination.”

Righteousness of God in Christ by faith (3:21–5:11). According to Paul, sacrifices prescribed by the law only deferred the wrath of God. “In his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished” (3:25). On the other hand, Jesus’ sacrificial death, a public display of God’s righteousness, atones for the sins of Jews and Gentiles “at the present time” (3:25–30). To describe the justification of Christ’s death as an act of redemption, Paul uses a technical word, “propitiation” (v. 25 [NIV: “sacrifice of atonement”]), which has two meanings: either God’s righteous requirement was “satisfied” by the blood of Christ, or God’s wrath was “appeased” by the blood of Christ. Either way, at this point we might have expected Paul to explain how Christ’s death satisfied the requirements of the law by offering the perfect sacrifice (much like the argument of Hebrews). Instead, he emphasizes the role of faith in this new revelation of God’s righteousness: both the faith(fulness) of Jesus and the faith of those who believe in him (the phrase often translated “faith in Jesus Christ” might also mean “faithfulness of Jesus Christ” [3:22, 26]). This does two things at once: it makes the righteousness of God available to Gentiles as well as Jews because it is based on faith (“Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too” [3:29]), and it elevates the role of faith above works of the law in the story of God’s covenant with Israel (“For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law” [3:28]). In other words, by privileging faith over works of law, Paul has made a way for Gentiles to realize the promises God made to Abraham and has established the supreme requirement of the Abrahamic covenant for Jews. This is why scholars say that 4:1–25 (Paul’s interpretation of God’s covenant with Abraham) is crucial to his argument for the righteousness of God in Christ.

Abraham was God’s first Gentile convert. That is to say, Abraham was an uncircumcised Chaldean when God established his covenant with the father of Israel. For Paul, the sequence of the story is pivotal to his argument. In 4:3 he quotes Gen. 15:6, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and points out that God’s righteousness was “credited” or “reckoned” to the patriarch because of his faith while he was still uncircumcised (Rom. 4:10–12). Abraham believed God’s promise of making him the father of many nations even though he had no son. Faith in God’s promise is what made this uncircumcised man righteous. Furthermore, because of his faith, the promise of God was fulfilled: Abraham not only became the father of Israel; he became the father of all nations (Gentiles) who have faith like Abraham. And what kind of faith is that? It is a resurrection faith—one who believes that God gives life to the dead, not only dead loins and a dead womb, but also a dead man (4:16–25). So the righteousness of God is “reckoned” for “us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification” (4:24–25). Faith in the promise of God is the requisite of covenant blessing. For if the covenant were based on works of law, then Israel would be the only beneficiary of God’s grace, and the promises God made to Abraham—that he would be the father of many nations—would be made void (4:13–15). “Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all” (4:16).

The death and resurrection of Jesus changed everything. It turned God’s enemies into friends. It brought peace to those who deserved God’s wrath. In Christ’s death, God loves the ungodly. In Christ’s resurrection, hope befriends the helpless. When Paul spells out the advantages of the righteousness of God in Christ in 5:1–11, it reads like a condensed version of all that is right with the gospel according to Paul. His favorite triad is there: faith, hope, love. He employs his favorite metaphors to explain the meaning of the sacrifice of Christ: justification and reconciliation. He writes of salvation in every tense: past, present, and future. In fact, the rest of the argument in 5:12–8:39 is Paul’s explanation of what he means in these few verses, gathering up issues raised at the beginning of the letter—the problem of sin, the law, and the righteousness of God.

Questions regarding the righteousness of God in Christ by faith (5:12–8:39). Paul once again begins with the human condition: the law of sin and death reigns in the world because of Adam. But where the first Adam failed, the second Adam (Christ) has succeeded: because of his obedience, grace reigns eternally through his righteousness (5:12–21). How does this righteousness apply to Christ believers, especially Gentiles without law? Sin was crucified with Christ so that believers can be slaves of righteousness, freed from the bondage of sin (6:1–23). Furthermore, believers have been freed from the law, a spiritual and holy gift that sin used to arouse the flesh, effecting death (7:1–25). What the law could not do (bring life) because of the weakness of the flesh, God did by sending his Son in human flesh in order to condemn sin, bring about justice/righteousness required by the law, and provide his Spirit to enable believers to have resurrection life (8:1–27). This has been God’s plan from the beginning (predestination): he will have a people (election) like Jesus Christ ( justification), who will share in his resurrection (glorification). And what God starts, he finishes. Nothing can frustrate the plans of God. His love is too great; his power is irrepressible (8:28–39). Since God is the one who justifies the “elect,” no charge can be brought against them (8:33).

Paul’s Advice

The conclusion to Paul’s argument—believers in Christ can do nothing to jeopardize God’s love for them as his “elect”—brings to mind the problem of Israel’s rejection of the gospel (9:1–11:32). If Paul believes that God’s promises are irrevocable, should not the same apply to Israel? If the righteousness of God is found in Christ, what does this mean for Jews who do not believe in Jesus? Does their unbelief undermine God’s faithfulness? This was more than a theological problem for Paul. Ethnic issues threatened to divide the church in Rome. Evidently, Gentile believers were displaying an arrogant attitude toward Jewish members of the church (11:13–24), contemptuous of their dietary restrictions and Sabbath observances (14:3–6). Perhaps Paul’s notorious reputation as a lawbreaker (3:8) added fuel to the fire of ethnic strife and emboldened Gentile believers to disregard Jewish sensibilities with smug confidence, especially in a place such as Rome, where tensions between Jews and Gentiles were prevalent. Or, maybe Paul had nothing to do with it; Gentile contempt for Jewish people and their ways was an unfortunate by-product of the argument for Gentile inclusion: the law no longer defined righteousness (“Who needs the Jews and their law?”). Whatever the cause, Israel’s rejection of the gospel coupled with the historical problem of Jew versus Gentile was a delicate issue that required a carefully nuanced answer from Paul (9:1–11:32), setting up his advice for house churches that needed to learn how to get along with one another (12:1–15:13).

What about Israel? (9:1–11:36). Paul uses Isaiah’s idea of a faithful remnant to explain how God’s promises to Abraham are fulfilled despite Israel’s disobedience (9:27–11:10). In this case, the disobedient of Israel are made evident by their refusal to believe in the gospel according to Paul (10:5–21). Because they prefer a righteousness of their own (a Jewish kind of righteousness), zeal for the law has made them ignorant of the righteousness of God in Christ (9:30–10:4). But does Jewish unbelief compromise God’s faithfulness, jeopardizing God’s promise to Abraham? No, for according to Paul, not every descendant of Abraham inherits the covenant blessings (e.g., Ishmael and Esau [9:6–26]). So, if Gentiles are grafted into the tree of Abraham’s descendants by faith, and Jews who deny the righteousness of God in Christ are branches broken off the tree of promise, does this mean that God has given up on Israel (11:11–24)? No, because Paul believes that “Israel has experienced a hardening in part” (11:25). Eventually, the hearts of the Jews will soften to the gospel, because they will be jealous of God’s covenant blessing extended to Gentile believers, and “all Israel will be saved” in the end; the natural branches cut off from the olive tree will be grafted back into Abraham’s family tree (11:11–15, 24–32). Here Paul inverts the Jewish eschatological expectation that Gentiles will be saved before the end of the world because of their jealousy of God’s blessings for his people, Israel (Isa. 19:23–25; 49:6–7). In the end, then, God’s mercy triumphs over all disobedience (whether Jewish or Gentile) because “God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable” (Rom. 11:29).

Present the body as a sacrifice (12:1–21) and submit to God (13:1–14). Because of God’s mercies for Jews and Gentiles, Paul appeals to the house churches in Rome to sacrifice themselves for the cause of Christ (12:1–2). What does a life of surrender look like? It means keeping overinflated self-esteem in check (12:3) and affirming the diversity of the body of Christ, meeting the needs of all members, and overcoming evil with good by avoiding revenge, helping enemies, and submitting to Roman law (12:4–13:7). Love is the key to this life of sacrifice, in which the believer wears the Lord Jesus Christ like an armor of righteousness, knowing that the day of salvation draws near (13:8–14). In the meantime, believers must accept one another “just as Christ accepted you, in order to bring praise to God” (15:7). Indeed, for Paul, Christ is the supreme example of sacrifice because he “did not please himself” but rather took on the sins of the circumcised and the uncircumcised (15:3–9).

Accept one another (14:1–15:13). Thus, since Christ was a servant to Jews and Gentiles, how much more Jewish and Gentile Christ believers should serve one another. Jewish members of the Roman church should quit judging believers who eat meat, drink wine, and recognize every day as a holy day (14:1–12). Gentile members should stop parading their freedom to eat and drink whatever they want (14:13–23): “If your brother or sister is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy someone for whom Christ died” (14:15). Regarding these gray areas, each person should operate according to his or her own conviction before God (14:22–23). But when it comes to the bonds of fellowship, Paul encourages them to have “the same attitude of mind toward each other that Christ Jesus had” (15:5). So Paul’s innocuous request of the segregated house churches may reveal a unifying strategy: “Greet one another with a holy kiss” (16:16).

The Epistle to Titus, along with 1–2 Timothy, is among the Pastoral Epistles. These three letters from the apostle Paul are his instructions to the young pastors Timothy and Titus.

Somewhat surprisingly, Titus is not mentioned in Acts, but he often appears in the letters of Paul. He is Paul’s “partner and co-worker” (2 Cor. 8:23). He may have carried the “sorrowful letter” from Paul to the Corinthians (2:4) and probably was instrumental in the reconciliation between Paul and that church (7:6–7). Paul also entrusted him with collecting funds from the Corinthians for the Jerusalem church. Paul took the uncircumcised Titus with him to Jerusalem, where he became a demonstration of freedom in Christ (Gal. 2:3). Paul calls him “my true son in our common faith” (Titus 1:4), probably indicating that Titus was converted to Christianity by Paul himself. On the question of Paul’s authorship of the Pastoral Epistles (1–2 Timothy and Titus), see Timothy, First Letter to.

Occasion

Following his imprisonment recorded in Acts 28, Paul traveled with Titus, evangelizing Crete. As we see from Paul’s letter to Titus, although churches had been established, the work of appointing leaders was unfinished (1:5). Paul’s letter conveys his authority to Titus in both choosing elders and rebuking the rebellious (2:15). There was much rebellion to deal with (1:10), which Paul contrasts sharply with righteous living. That Paul entrusted the work of confronting the “circumcision group” to Titus is significant, given Titus’s role as a model of Christian freedom earlier.

Content

Paul’s greeting and self-identification are more expansive here than in any of his letters except Romans. He emphasizes that his apostleship and ministry lead to godly living, based on the knowledge of truth (1:1–2). Paul has been entrusted to preach by God; he now reinvests that trust in Titus and reminds Titus that his primary job is to establish leadership in the churches of Crete.

Paul lays out guidelines for elders, which focus on ethical living, evidence of leadership qualities, and a vigorous faith that may encourage others (1:6–9). These characteristics are important because the leaders will be required to stand up to many in the church who are rebellious, ruinous, and in need of rebuke (1:10).

The rebellious people on Crete probably are Judaizers, teaching against Paul’s instruction and enriching themselves in the process. They are to be rebuked, so as to bring them back into correct doctrine (1:13–14). However, after two rebukes, continuing offenders should be ignored; they are apostate (3:10–11).

The remedy for the false teaching is sound doctrine and holy living, so that the opposition has no valid criticism. Titus must set an example for all with his integrity, seriousness, and soundness of speech (2:7–8). This is made possible by the grace of God, which enables people to live “self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age” (2:12). We have been redeemed from wickedness and purified to be a people of God’s very own (2:14).

Titus must take complete charge of the church, allowing no one to marginalize him or limit his authority (2:15). In fact, the church needs to submit to all levels of authority in peace and humility (3:1–2). Paul reminds Titus that all were once as rebellious and divisive as the opposition; it is only the kindness and love of God that save and cleanse, changing the rebellious into heirs of eternal life (3:3–7).

Putting emphasis on these thoughts will keep the church focused on godly living, while arguing about minor points will be divisive and worthless. People who do the latter should be marginalized and rejected (3:8–11). This is a closing inclusio from Paul’s mention of the knowledge of truth leading to godly living (1:1).

Paul concludes with practical communications to Titus. Zenas and Apollos are likely the ones who brought the letter, and Paul encourages Titus and his church to assist them as a lesson to the church and a blessing for the travelers.

Outline

I. Greeting and Purpose (1:1–5)

II. Appropriate Characteristics of Elders (1:6–9)

III. False Teachers (1:10–16)

IV. Proper Christian Living (2:1–3:2)

V. We Are Saved by Grace (3:3–8)

VI. Warnings about Divisions (3:9–11)

VII. Concluding Thoughts (3:12–15)

A collection of three short letters, 1–3 John, most likely written by the same author and traditionally identified with the author of the Gospel of John. The letters probably were written after John’s Gospel, to deal with problems that had arisen in certain churches. They provide evidence of a Christian community consisting of a network of congregations that sprang from the same source and belonged more or less loosely together. These letters deal with a range of issues, including love, fellowship, the incarnation and atonement of Christ, hospitality, the Holy Spirit, and warnings against false teaching. First John and 2 John were written to address the same issues, whereas 3 John, although likely written at about the same time and by the same author, was written to deal with a different, although not completely unrelated, problem.

The letters provide valuable insights into the doctrinal issues facing the early church as well as the daily life of the various churches. They stem from the author’s concern to reassure Christians of their salvation in Christ (1 John 5:13) and to warn them of the folly of false teaching (1 John 2:26). The letters place heavy emphasis on Christian ethics. They show a concern for “walking in the light” (1 John 1:7), “walking in the truth” (2 John 4; 3 John 3–4), “work[ing] together for the truth” (3 John 8), doing what is “good” (3 John 11), and offering hospitality (3 John 8). The author’s primary concern is that the churches abide in “that which was from the beginning” (1 John 1:1). The letters demonstrate how the Christian confession that Christ has come in the flesh expresses itself in the doctrine and daily life of the church. See also John, First Letter of; John, Second Letter of; John, Third Letter of.

The descendants of Abraham through his wife Keturah and their grandson Dedan, as were the Ashurites and the Leummites. The tribal name is derived from the name of their forefather, Letush (Gen. 25:3).

The descendants of Abraham through his wife Keturah and their grandson Dedan, as were the Ashurites and the Leummites. The tribal name is derived from the name of their forefather, Letush (Gen. 25:3).

The descendants of Abraham through his wife Keturah and their grandson Dedan, as were the Ashurites and the Letushites. The tribal name is derived from the name of their forefather, Leum (Gen. 25:3).

The descendants of Abraham through his wife Keturah and their grandson Dedan, as were the Ashurites and the Letushites. The tribal name is derived from the name of their forefather, Leum (Gen. 25:3).

(1) A great-grandson of Abraham, grandson of Isaac, and the third son of Jacob by Leah (Gen. 29:34). Levi’s sons were Gershon, Kohath, and Merari (46:11). The Israelite Levites were descended from Levi. Levi’s only notable act was a brutal slaughter to avenge his sister Dinah’s honor. When Shechem “violated” Dinah (34:2), Levi and his brother Simeon duped all the males of the city in which Shechem lived by suggesting that they will be able to marry Israelite women, such as Dinah, if they will first be circumcised. As the men of the city lay in pain from the procedure, the two brothers killed the unsuspecting men (Gen. 34). From his deathbed, Jacob cursed Levi and his brother Simeon for their actions (49:5–7). (2) The great-grandfather of Joseph, Jesus’ earthly father (Luke 3:24). (3) A descendant of David through Simeon, also an ancestor of Joseph (Luke 3:29). (4) Also known as Matthew, Levi son of Alphaeus was one of Jesus’ twelve apostles and a tax collector by trade (Mark 2:14).

A transliteration of a Hebrew word (liwyatan) that refers to some kind of sea creature, variously mentioned in OT passages extolling God for his mighty work and power.

The word may not refer to the same creature in each OT verse in which it occurs. Psalm 104:26 may be describing a whale; however, in most of the OT, it is probable that “Leviathan” is the proper name of a mythical sea monster that also appears in ancient Ugaritic myths. In these documents, Leviathan is usually depicted as a multiheaded and chaotic dragon that wreaks havoc upon the cosmos and can be slain only by the gods. Drawing on this mythological background, Ps. 74:14 praises God because during his work of creation he “crushed the heads of Leviathan and gave it as food to the creatures of the desert.”

A similar idea is present in Job 41:1–34 (cf. 3:8). Here Leviathan is described as a creature that no mere human can defeat or even look upon (41:9). It breathes out fire and smoke (41:18–21), cannot be pierced by sword or spear (41:26), and fears no earthly being (41:33). Such hyperbolic descriptions are most intuitively explained in terms of Leviathan’s mythological background, used here to dramatically accent the all-encompassing power of God.

None of these passages implies the actual existence of the creature described; on the contrary, they draw on this material to metaphorically accent God’s unique and preeminent authority over the forces of chaos. Leviathan, and by extension the destructive power of the sea, represents a threat beyond the control of humanity. God alone is able to slay “the monster of the sea,” an act that signals God’s final judgment upon the wickedness of the earth (Isa. 26:20–27:1). Revelation may draw on this imagery as well, for God alone is able to destroy the beast and the seven-headed dragon (12:3; 13:1; 19:20) and thereby bring peace to the earth.

A custom whereby the brother of a man who died without sons married the man’s widow (Gen. 38; Deut. 25:5–10). The firstborn son from the union became the dead man’s heir. If the brother refused, he took part in a ceremony that released him from his obligation. Ruth 4 most likely describes a levirate marriage, although it is Ruth who marries Boaz, not Naomi, who is Elimelek’s widow. Levirate marriage is used by the Sadducees in their attempt to trap Jesus with a question about the law (Matt. 22:23–33 pars.).

A custom whereby the brother of a man who died without sons married the man’s widow (Gen. 38; Deut. 25:5–10). The firstborn son from the union became the dead man’s heir. If the brother refused, he took part in a ceremony that released him from his obligation. Ruth 4 most likely describes a levirate marriage, although it is Ruth who marries Boaz, not Naomi, who is Elimelek’s widow. Levirate marriage is used by the Sadducees in their attempt to trap Jesus with a question about the law (Matt. 22:23–33 pars.).

One of the twelve tribes of Israel, descended from Jacob’s third son, Levi. The smallest of the tribes during the wilderness wanderings, the Levites provided Israel with the priests who offered sacrifices to God and other ministers who cared for the tabernacle and its sacred furnishings. The term “Levite” is somewhat fluid in meaning, sometimes referring solely to the nonpriestly descendants of Levi and other times including the Aaronic priests. When used in the first manner, the Levites are almost always portrayed as assisting the priests in the service of the tabernacle or temple.

Old Testament. The Bible consistently states that only the priests could offer sacrifices to God and draw near to the ark and other holy items in the tabernacle. The other Levites were warned, on pain of death, not to come into contact with the holy things (Num. 18:3). Divided into three kinship groups—Kohathites, Gershonites, Merarites—they joined the priests in camping around the tabernacle in order to guard against anyone entering it, thus protecting it and their fellow Israelites from God’s wrath. Their duties included dismantling the tabernacle whenever Israel broke camp and transporting the tent, the ark of the covenant, and other sacred items to a new location, where they would reassemble the tabernacle.

Apparently the Levites were given their special realm of service in part due to their diligence in purging the camp of sinners after the episode of the golden calf (Exod. 32:26–29), and in part because at the time of the exodus their population was roughly equivalent to the number of firstborn males in all Israel, for whom they served as substitutes (Num. 3:39–43).

The Levites uniquely received no inheritance when the land of Canaan was divided. Their dispersal in forty-eight cities throughout Canaan and the Transjordan (Num. 35:1–8), while linked to Jacob’s curse against Levi and Simeon for acts of murder and cruelty (Gen. 49:5–7), positively allowed the Levites to represent God among the other tribes. Lacking their own land, they were dependent upon their fellow Israelites, who supported them with their tithes. The Levites in turn gave a tithe of their tithe to the priests.

During the time of David and Solomon, when worship was centralized in Jerusalem, the Levites received new roles because there was no longer any need to transport the tabernacle (1 Chron. 23:2–5, 25–32). Temple duties included purifying the sacred objects, providing the showbread and flour for the grain offerings, and bringing thanks and praise to God during the morning and evening sacrifices and at the festivals. Some Levites were appointed as prophets and musicians (1 Chron. 25:1). Others served the king as gatekeepers, treasurers, judges, scribes, and other officials. On occasion, Levites made up the king’s bodyguard (2 Chron. 23:7).

At various times during Israel’s history, certain Levites assumed the role of priest even though it was usually reserved for Aaron’s descendants. Judges tells how one man, Micah, hired a Levite as his personal priest. The context, which tells how Micah made a shrine, ephod, and some idols, makes it clear that this was inappropriate, as it took place when “everyone did as they saw fit” (Judg. 17:5–12). Micah’s mistake was multiplied when the tribe of Dan seized his idols and ephod and took the Levite to be their priest (18:14–21). Anticipating the reestablishment of worship in Israel after the exile, Ezekiel recounts that the Levites formerly abandoned worshiping Yahweh and led the nation in worshiping idols. Although they will no longer serve as priests, they will be allowed to perform other duties in the temple. Only Levites descended from Zadok could serve as priests (Ezek. 44:10–16).

New Testament. The NT says little about the Levites. Jesus’ parable of the good Samaritan castigates both Levites and priests, as representatives of Jewish religion, for failing to aid the robbed and injured man. The book of Hebrews demonstrates that Jesus’ priestly role is essential because the work of the Levitical priesthood is imperfect. It also insists that Christ’s work can be understood only in the context of the priests. Whereas the Levites as a class are occasionally portrayed negatively, Barnabas the Levite became an important leader in the early church (Acts 4:36).

Forty-eight cities allocated to the Levites in lieu of a larger inheritance of land like those afforded the other tribes of Israel (Josh. 13:1–14:5). The cities are listed in Josh. 21:1–42; 1 Chron. 6:54–81.

Included with the cities on the lists are six cities of refuge designated for fugitives from violent reprisal—the designated duty of the nearest male relative to the deceased—in cases of homicide without intent (Num. 35:6, 13–15). However, in cases of murder the boundaries of these cities offered no protection from the penalty of death. The cities of refuge were located on either side of the Jordan Valley (three on each side), facilitating access from the various parts of the nation.

In view of the absence of a substantial allotment of territory, there has been speculation concerning the Levites’ economic sustenance. It has been noted that, in addition to the Levitical cities, the Levites received from the other tribes parcels of land for pasture (Num. 35:1–8; Josh. 14:4). Beyond the raising of cattle (as suggested in the aforementioned texts), the Levites supported themselves with offerings from the other tribes (Num. 18:21–32; Deut. 18:1–5). Additional offerings may have been received by their being included with “the foreigners, the fatherless and the widows” as recipients of tithing (Deut. 14:27–29; 26:13).

The stated reason for excluding the Levites from a larger inheritance of land is their designation as servants in the sanctuary, assistants to the Aaronide priesthood (Num. 18:24; Deut. 10:8–9; Josh. 18:7). As such, God himself is their “inheritance.” This understanding comes to expression in the divine claim to the Levites as the “firstborn” among the tribes of the nation, a substitute for the divine claim to the firstborn, human and animal, from every Israelite household (Num. 3:11–13, 40–42). Another possible explanation, albeit one less prominent in the OT, is the scattering of Levi as a consequence of its eponymous ancestor’s affinity for (unjust) violence, so portrayed in the blessing of Jacob (Gen. 49:5–7). The reference is to Levi’s part in hostilities against the household of Hamor (Gen. 34:25–31).

A program of conscription (1 Kings 5:13 KJV) or a payment of tribute (Num. 31:28–41 NASB; 2 Chron. 36:3; 2 Kings 23:33 NIV) imposed on individuals or nations.

Lex talionis is a Latin term meaning “law of retribution.” The principle is that the penalty should equal the crime. As expressed in the Torah (“eye for eye, tooth for tooth . . .”; Exod. 21:24; Lev. 24:20), it sounds brutal, but in reality it restrains excessive punishment (see Gen. 4:23–24).

Liberality is the characteristic of being generous, the willingness to give of one’s possessions to help others. It relates both to the amount of the gift and the attitude of the giver: the gift consists of a proportionally great amount (2 Chron. 31:5; 2 Cor. 8:2), and the giver offers the gift freely and cheerfully (Deut. 15:10; 2 Cor. 9:7). Liberality is a characteristic of God (James 1:5) and the righteous (Ps. 37:21, 26; 2 Cor. 9:13).

A recurring theme in both Testaments involving freedom from bondage. God values liberty and expects his people to live in a way that exhibits and promotes this value. The event of the exodus (Exod. 12:31–14:31) is often referenced to encourage the people of God to live in a way that encourages liberty (e.g., Exod. 22:21; Lev. 25:10; Deut. 10:17–19; cf. Ezek. 46:17). Following God’s precepts is considered walking in liberty (Ps. 119:45). Jesus explains his ministry in terms of God’s liberation (Luke 4:16–20; cf. Gal. 5:1). Liberty is valued not for its own sake but rather for the freedom to follow God (Lev. 25:42; Rom. 14:7–8; 1 Cor. 6:12–20). Living in freedom must include living a life of love for others (1 Cor. 8:9; 10:29).

A synagogue in Jerusalem whose members argued with Stephen. After they were unable to prevail over Stephen, they instigated the accusations that led to his stoning. Luke mentions five groups in Acts 6:9: the Synagogue of the Freedmen, Jews of Cyrene and Alexandria, and Jews from the provinces of Cilicia and Asia. Some scholars suggest that the Synagogue of the Freedmen was composed only of members from Cyrene and Alexandria. Thus, Luke was referring to two synagogues in Jerusalem disputing with Stephen, the freedmen and those from Cilicia and Asia. Others suggest that Luke was referring to one synagogue attended by Jews from each of the four areas mentioned. The Synagogue of the Freedmen was named for those who had been liberated from slavery, and some have identified the freedmen as descendants of Pompey’s prisoners. Pompey was the Roman general who seized control of Judea for Rome in 63 BC.

A recurring theme in both Testaments involving freedom from bondage. God values liberty and expects his people to live in a way that exhibits and promotes this value. The event of the exodus (Exod. 12:31–14:31) is often referenced to encourage the people of God to live in a way that encourages liberty (e.g., Exod. 22:21; Lev. 25:10; Deut. 10:17–19; cf. Ezek. 46:17). Following God’s precepts is considered walking in liberty (Ps. 119:45). Jesus explains his ministry in terms of God’s liberation (Luke 4:16–20; cf. Gal. 5:1). Liberty is valued not for its own sake but rather for the freedom to follow God (Lev. 25:42; Rom. 14:7–8; 1 Cor. 6:12–20). Living in freedom must include living a life of love for others (1 Cor. 8:9; 10:29).

(1) A town in the Shephelah conquered by Joshua (Josh. 10:29) and then allotted to the tribe of Judah (Josh. 15:42). However, later it is mentioned as one of the Levitical cities allotted to the sons of Aaron (Josh. 21:13; 1 Chron. 6:57). The city revolted from Judean rule under King Jehoram (2 Kings 8:22), but it was again under Judean control during King Hezekiah’s reign when it was attacked by the Assyrian king Sennacherib (2 Kings 19:8; Isa. 37:8). Libnah is last mentioned as the hometown of King Josiah’s wife, Hamutal, the mother of both Jehoahaz (2 Kings 23:31) and Zedekiah (2 Kings 24:18; Jer. 52:1). No other ancient texts mention Libnah, and identifying its exact location is difficult. Three different tells have been identified as biblical Libnah (Tell es-Safi, Tell Judeidah, and Tell Bornat); however, all three have been called into question. At present, its identification remains uncertain. (2) An unidentified spot where the Israelites camped during the wilderness wanderings (Num. 33:20–21).

(1) A son of Gershon and grandson of Levi. Shimei was his brother, and Jahath was his son (Exod. 6:17; 1 Chron. 6:20). (2) A son of Mahli and great-grandson of Levi (1 Chron. 6:29).

Descendants of Libni, the son of Gershon and grandson of Levi (Num. 3:21; 26:58).

Ancient libraries played an important role in the transmission and preservation of the Bible. Our knowledge of the size and scope of ancient libraries continues to increase. Ancient libraries differed in size, ranging from small collections contained in well-to-do private residences to massive temple and palace archives. The larger collections usually contained texts in several different languages. The texts themselves could include various modes of writing, such as clay impressed with a stylus; broken pottery (potsherds) etched with a sharp tool; or papyrus or vellum (animal hide) inscribed with ink.

Old Testament Period

The most extensive libraries maintained during the time period of the OT consisted of cuneiform collections of clay tablets. We know of approximately three hundred libraries and archives dating from 1500 to 300 BC, extending over the entire Fertile Crescent from Elamite Anshan (northeast of the Arabian Gulf) at the southeast extremity, to Hittite Shapinuwa in modern Turkey at the northern extremity, to Egyptian Akhetaten at the southwestern extremity. Most of the Mesopotamian buildings were designed around a large inner courtyard, and the library most often was located in a room adjacent to this courtyard, which provided important access to good reading light. The lifetimes of these libraries also varied from those used only for a couple of years to two libraries used for 140 years.

Assyria and Babylonia. The largest collection of texts consisted of about thirty thousand clay tablets and fragments found in the libraries of Nineveh. The palace of Sennacherib (704–681 BC), located by the western wall on the northern side of the river that transected the city, included three libraries. The main library consisted of two adjacent rooms that housed most of the literary texts found in the city. Within a second library, around 450 clay seal impressions (bullae), with royal seal impressions on one side and indications of rope fasteners on the other side, were discovered that likely were attached to administrative documents written on scrolls or papyri that have long since disintegrated. The third library contained cuneiform documents, some of which contained Aramaic summaries of their contents. The palace of Ashurbanipal (668–627 BC) was located north of Sennacherib’s. This palace also contained one main library with a large number of literary texts and one smaller library housing documents for military officials. Although Ashurbanipal’s library received donations of texts from individuals such as Ashurbanipal’s brother and from the crown prince’s chief eunuch, it is unclear whether any policy of acquisition was in place.

The Assyrian capital city of Assur contained fifty-three different libraries and archives. In the temple to the god Assur, one library was kept by the supervisor of the temple offerings. One large library of 420 clay tablets, located in an administrative building near two of the prominent city temples, was kept by the stewards of several kings from Shalmaneser I (1273 BC) to Ashur-bel-kala (1056 BC). One small administrative archive with receipts and the like belonged to the cattle and sheep fattener. One small library of only 6 tablets appears to have been the handbook library for the exorcist of the king. One library of 140 clay tablets belonged to a prominent family in the city and consisted of various legal documents, such as loans, adoption certificates, inheritance contracts, and receipts. One of the city’s governors maintained a personal library with loan documents, inventory lists, and other administrative documents.

The city of Babylon contained some twenty libraries. One of these libraries, thought to be located near the famous hanging gardens of the south palace, contained 290 administrative rec-ords from Nebuchadnezzar’s reign (605–562 BC). Among these records is a list of prisoners of war mentioning King Jehoiachin of Judah, deported by Nebuchadnezzar. The north palace also contained a large library containing 950 loan and real-estate cuneiform documents from the Persian period (specifically, 465–404 BC). About 21 of these cuneiform documents have summary notes in Aramaic on them. There was also, unsurprisingly, a large library in the temple of Nabû, the patron god of scribes. The 1,500 school tablets found in this temple suggest that it was used as a scribal training school.

Ugarit. The seventeen archives and libraries discovered at Ugarit are significant for our knowledge of the Canaanites because it is from these texts that we have access to the myths of Baal and El written in the local language of Ugaritic. Most of the texts in this archive span a very short period (1230–1175 BC) during the reigns of three successive kings. There were eight different libraries in the royal palace, with the largest of these holding some 254 clay tablets, while the smallest contained only 14 clay tablets. Although most tablets were written in the local language of Ugaritic, many of the letters and administrative documents were written in Akkadian, the commercial lingua franca throughout the region at that time. In addition, a number of religious texts were written in Hittite or Hurrian. In this set of libraries we see the importance of bilingualism for the scribes, as evidenced in the exchange at the aqueduct with the Assyrian field commander (2 Kings 18:17–37, esp. v. 26).

Hebrew and Aramaic collections. In addition to the cuneiform libraries, a number of libraries have been discovered with Hebrew and Aramaic preserved on ostraca (broken pieces of pottery used for writing). The palace in the northern capital of Samaria contained an administrative library with 102 Hebrew ostraca from the eighth century BC. These documents are often referred to as the Samaria ostraca and are receipts and logs of the delivery of oil and wine to different locations. The city of Lachish had a small military library of letters, located to the right of the outer gate; the library was maintained by Yaosh, the commander of the city shortly prior to its invasion in 587/586 BC. Dating even later, from the fifth century BC, are documents left by a small Jewish community on the island of Elephantine, at the southern border of Egypt; this small group of private documents written both on ostraca and papyrus concern everything from dreams to payment of debts, and include a note about a garment left in the temple of Yahweh.

Certainly the royal palace at Jerusalem also contained libraries and archives, as was common throughout the region. The OT mentions various books that most likely were housed in libraries or archives of this sort. The Chronicler refers to “the book of the kings of Judah and Israel,” which the reader may consult for more information on a given king (e.g., 2 Chron. 25:26). Other books mentioned include “the Book of the Wars of the Lord” (Num. 21:14), “the Book of Jashar” or literally “the Book of the Upright” (Josh. 10:13), “the book of the annals of Solomon” (1 Kings 11:41), “the book of the annals of the kings of Israel” (1 Kings 14:19), and “the book of the annals of the kings of Judah” (1 Kings 14:29).

Alexandria. Whereas much of our knowledge about the aforementioned libraries comes from archaeological excavations of the sites, our knowledge of the library at Alexandria is only textual in nature, though it is varied and plentiful enough to provide credibility for its existence. Two main features that distinguish this library from its predecessors and make it more comparable to modern libraries are its use of full-time librarians and the focus of these librarians on acquisitions. The position of head librarian at Alexandria was by royal appointment and was held in high esteem. Ptolemy III (246–221 BC) borrowed books from rulers the world over for copying. Galen reports that customs officials in Alexandria had orders to confiscate any books that were aboard passing ships, which would then be copied. More often than not, the original texts were then deposited in the library, and it was the copies that were returned to the original owners, with Alexandria forfeiting the bond money that had been deposited for “borrowing” the books. This practice enabled the library at Alexandria to collect some four hundred thousand mixed scrolls with multiple works and another ninety thousand single scrolls by the time of Callimachus (305–240 BC).

This practice is also mentioned in the Letter of Aristeas as the motivation for Demetrius of Phalerum, the librarian of Alexandria, to commission the translation of the Pentateuch into Greek. Whether or not there is any historical validity to this claim in relation to the Pentateuch itself, the emphasis of the library at Alexandria on acquisitions and copying clearly was well known.

New Testament Period

One of the most important libraries related to the history of the Bible is the Dead Sea Scrolls, an archive of nine hundred parchment scrolls first discovered in caves near Qumran in 1947. These texts date from 150 BC to AD 70, overlapping the period of the NT. Although many scholars think that these caves served as a type of offsite storage facility for the library of the community that produced them, other scholars have suggested, on the basis of remains of a shelving system found within the caves, that these caves served as permanent libraries for the community. Biblical manuscripts make up about 40 percent of the archive (including portions of every OT book except Esther), and an additional 30 percent of the manuscripts are apocryphal or pseudepigraphical manuscripts. The remaining 30 percent of the archive has been classified as sectarian documents, including commentaries on different books of the OT and rules for proper living within the community.

There are different Hebrew words rendered as “Libya.” Classical writers used “Libyan” to refer to any African except an Egyptian. In the Bible, Libya is sometimes referred to as “Put” (KJV: “Phut”) (Gen. 10:6; Ezek. 27:10). Libyans served in the army of Egypt and Ethiopia (2 Chron. 12:3; 16:8; Nah. 3:9). Ezekiel prophesied that Libya (KJV: “Chub”) and other nations would be ruined (Ezek. 30:3–5). One of its cities was Cyrene, home of Simon who was forced to carry the cross of Christ (Matt. 27:32; Mark 15:21; Luke 23:26). Libyans were present at Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:10).

There are different Hebrew words rendered as “Libya.” Classical writers used “Libyan” to refer to any African except an Egyptian. In the Bible, Libya is sometimes referred to as “Put” (KJV: “Phut”) (Gen. 10:6; Ezek. 27:10). Libyans served in the army of Egypt and Ethiopia (2 Chron. 12:3; 16:8; Nah. 3:9). Ezekiel prophesied that Libya (KJV: “Chub”) and other nations would be ruined (Ezek. 30:3–5). One of its cities was Cyrene, home of Simon who was forced to carry the cross of Christ (Matt. 27:32; Mark 15:21; Luke 23:26). Libyans were present at Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:10).

Life is a complex, multifaceted concept in the Bible. Various Hebrew and Greek terms convey the idea of life. Life is described in both a natural and a theological sense.

Life in the Natural Sense

In its natural sense, “life” may convey the following: (1) the vital principle of animals and humans, (2) the length of time that one has life, (3) the complete plot and cast of characters of an individual’s lifetime, or (4) the means for maintaining life.

First, life is the vital principle of animals and humans. This use of the term is its popular sense. It refers to the quality of having an animate existence or the state of being animate. Therefore, it is expressed in terms of ability or power; one who has life has the power to act. On the other hand, “death” is its antonym; one who is dead no longer acts. In the Bible, life in this sense applies to both animals and humans; however, the quality of life differs because humans are made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26; 5:1; 9:6). Life is manifested in the breath of life, so that one who no longer has the breath of life no longer has life (Gen. 2:7; 6:17; Job 12:10; 27:3; Rev. 11:11). At the same time, life is seated in the blood. For this reason, blood should not be consumed but should instead be poured out and buried (Gen. 9:3–5; Lev. 17:10–16; Deut. 12:23–25). Although life may cease because of physical causes (whether disease, murder, accident, etc.), God is ultimately the Lord of life. He gives life through his breath of life (Gen. 2:7; Ezek. 37:4–14); he sustains life through his spirit (Ps. 104:29–30; cf. Gen. 6:3; 1 Cor. 15:45); he delivers from death (Gen. 5:24; Ps. 30:3; 1 Cor. 15); he gives life and puts to death (Deut. 32:39; 1 Sam. 2:6). Life, therefore, is first and foremost a gift from God.

In a discussion of life as the vital principle, it is important to address the question of the afterlife. The Bible affirms the significance of both the material and the immaterial components of a human being. The body is not merely a shell in which the true person is housed. Death is not the soul’s escape from the body’s prison, as evidenced by the resurrection of the dead (Ezek. 37:1–14; Dan. 12:2; Luke 14:14; 1 Cor. 15). Human beings are not created to live a disembodied existence ultimately. The fate for those who experience eternal life is the resurrection of the body made from an incorruptible source (1 Cor. 15, esp. vv. 42–50). For others, their fate lies in eternal death (Matt. 25:46; Rev. 20:6–15; 21:8).

Second, in both Testaments, “life” may also refer to the duration of animate existence—one’s lifetime. The duration of one’s life in this sense begins at birth and ends at death (Gen. 23:1; 25:7; 47:9, 28; Luke 16:25; Heb. 2:15). This period of time is brief (Ps. 90:10; James 4:14). The Bible describes two ways that one’s lifetime may be extended: first, God gives additional time to a person’s life (2 Kings 20:6; Ps. 61:6; Isa. 38:5); second, one gains longer life by living wisely and honoring God (Prov. 3:2; 4:10; 9:11; 10:27).

Third, sometimes “life” refers to the complete plot and cast of characters of an individual’s lifetime. In other words, “life” may refer to all a person’s activities and relationships (1 Sam. 18:18 KJV; Job 10:1; Luke 12:15; James 4:14).

Fourth, “life” rarely may refer to the means of livelihood (Deut. 24:6; Prov. 27:27; Matt. 6:25; Luke 12:22–23). These passages highlight two aspects of life in this sense: (1) people are responsible to guard life; (2) God gives this life because of his great concern, which exceeds his care for the birds and flowers.

Life as a Theological Concept

Beyond its natural sense, life is developed as a theological concept throughout the Bible.

Old Testament. The first chapters of Genesis set the stage for a rich theological understanding of life. First, God creates all things and prepares them for his purposes. He is the creator of life, and life is a gift from his hand. The pinnacle of his creative activity is the creation of humankind. God blesses the man (Adam) and the woman (Eve) whom he creates. God prepares a special place, a garden, for them, so that they may be able to live in perfect communion with him, under his blessing. At the center of the garden lies the tree of life. The tree of life demonstrates that the garden is both the sphere of God’s provision and the symbol of life itself. At the same time, God commands the man not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, “for when you eat from it you will certainly die” (Gen. 2:17).

At this point, life and death take center stage. What follows in the narrative (Gen. 3) is a presentation of the meaning of life and death as theological concepts. Adam and Eve disobey the divine commandment. As a result, they die. However, their death is not death in the natural sense. Instead, when they disobey God’s commandment, there are three results: (1) a curse is pronounced, (2) they are exiled from the garden away from God, and (3) they are prevented from eating from the tree of life (3:14–24). Death in this case is not ceasing to breathe and move but is curse and exile; in other words, to die is to be removed from the place of God’s presence and blessing and be placed under a curse. Life, then, is the opposite: to live is to be settled in the place of God’s presence and blessing.

It is also important to recognize in this narrative that obedience to God’s commandment leads to life, but disobedience to his commandment leads to death. This principle is picked up throughout the Bible. Its clearest expression is found in Lev. 18:5: “Keep my decrees and laws, for the person who obeys them will live by them.”

This narrative also draws an important connection taken up in other parts of the Bible, especially Proverbs: the connection between life and wisdom. In the garden there are two trees at the center: the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Although there is some question concerning what is precisely meant by the knowledge of good and evil, it is likely that wisdom is in view. Two pieces of evidence support this conclusion: (1) knowledge and wisdom as well as good and evil are central concerns for the book of Proverbs; (2) the narrative associates the tree with wisdom. When Eve considers eating from the tree, she notices that it is like the other trees in that it has a pleasant appearance and is good for food (Gen. 2:9), but it is also distinct from the other trees because it is desirable for making one wise (3:6). By eating the fruit, she and Adam attempt to gain wisdom contrary to God’s command. As a result, this type of wisdom leads to death. However, true wisdom has the opposite effect. It leads to life, being a tree of life itself (esp. Prov. 3:18; also 3:1–2; 4:10–23; 6:23).

Although these themes—life, blessing, obedience, and wisdom—are found in various places throughout the Bible, they come together most explicitly in Deuteronomy. There devotion and obedience to God are viewed as the means of attaining wisdom and understanding (Deut. 4:5–9). Following God leads to living in the land that God had promised and enjoying his blessings there (28:1–14); however, forsaking God leads to all kinds of curses and ultimately to utter defeat and exile from the land (28:15–68). The choice to follow God and obey him or to forsake God and disobey him results in either life or death, good or bad, blessing or curse (30:15–20).

Life as a theological concept therefore has the following characteristics: being in the presence of God rather than exile, and experiencing his blessings rather than his curses. Such life may be attained through devotion and obedience to God and through the wisdom that comes from God.

New Testament. This concept of life forms the background for that of the NT as well. The NT often speaks of eternal life, especially in the writings of John. Eternal life is being in fellowship with God the Father and Jesus Christ (John 17:3). One may experience eternal life before natural death and beyond it into the eternal future (John 3:36; 5:24; 6:54; 10:28). At the same time, eternal life may refer more narrowly only to the time of perfect fellowship with God that lies beyond natural life (Matt. 25:46; Mark 10:30; Rom. 2:7). Because life consists of being in fellowship with God and living in his blessings, John can state that the one who believes in Jesus “has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life” (John 5:24). In other words, the person who believes in Jesus has been transferred from God’s curse to his blessing, from death to life. Furthermore, Jesus declares that he is life, and that those who believe in him will live and not die; that is, they will never be removed from his presence and blessing (John 11:25–26).

The typical length of time that a person can be expected to live. Genesis claims remarkably long life spans for the generations immediately after the fall, with the longest life attributed to Methuselah—969 years, essentially a millennium (Gen. 5:27). However, the Bible assumes a general life span of 70 years, and in special cases 80 (Ps. 90:10). Isaiah describes the span as a “king’s life” (Isa. 23:15). Determining the average life span of the typical Israelite is difficult because of a dearth of evidence. However, archaeology suggests that many first-century people did not live past their fortieth birthday. In Rome, sepulchral inscriptions (which are biased in favor of the upper classes) suggest that the median age of death was about 34 years for wives and 46 years for husbands. Children were especially vulnerable to disease, hunger, and violence. About one-third of Roman children died before the age of ten.

When one or more of a person’s vital bodily systems fails to function without the aid of medical technology, physicians and family members must sometimes make the painful decision to either continue or end life support. Some people decide for themselves in advance and record their wishes in a living will.

This raises important ethical questions. When is a person dead? To what extent and with what measures should life be preserved? Does quality of life matter? More specifically, should “life” or “personhood” be defined by the ability to choose? By consciousness? By neocortical function?

In light of these dilemmas, the mind-body relationship deserves particular Christian reflection. Somehow, mind and body form an organic, unified creature made in God’s image. Human life is therefore of highest value in creation (Gen. 1:26; 9:6). Also worth consideration is the physical, bodily nature of the resurrection (1 Cor. 15). Scripture’s high regard for the body seems to call into question ethical paradigms that downplay the desirability of preserving it. In any case, the beginning and the end point for someone faced with difficult medical choices is the apostle’s exhortation to act in faith, hope, and love (1 Cor. 13:13).

The Hebrew expression “to lift one’s heel,” occurring in Ps. 41:9 (KJV; NIV: “turned against me”), represents a friend who has become an enemy. In John 13:18 (see NIV mg.) Jesus uses the phrase to describe the one who would betray him, noting the event as a fulfillment of Scripture.

Scientifically, light may be described as electromagnetic radiation, exhibiting qualities of both waves and particles, traveling 186,282 miles per second from a light source, such as the sun or a lightbulb. In contrast, ancient Mediterranean thought presupposes that light, a kind of fire and fundamental constituent of matter, emanates from the human eye like a beam; and for some, the intensity of its radiance and luminosity depends upon the morality and direction of the seer’s heart. Even today, many Europeans are fearful of the “evil eye,” when a person is able to curse other human beings by merely looking at them. Jesus refers to the evil eye as emanating from an evil heart (Mark 7:22 [NIV: “envy”]; see also Gal. 3:1). Contemporary experiences of this seemingly counterintuitive reversal of empirical reality are the common perception of being watched from behind (turning and seeing that, in fact, this was the case), the luminous screen of the imagination, dreams after closing one’s eyes, and expressions such as Shakespeare’s “death-darting eye.”

Jesus appropriates this popular assumption for the sake of his point: “The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are healthy, your whole body will be full of light” (Matt. 6:22). Another way of translating the verse is “If the eye is focused, your whole body will be enlightened.” In the larger context, Jesus is exhorting disciples to turn their eyes from Mammon (wealth as an idol) to God’s throne, where their real treasure is (Matt. 6:19–24). He claims that only those with pure hearts will see God (Matt. 5:8). Paul speaks of the “eyes of your heart” (Eph. 1:18), which are opened by the Holy Spirit—a phenomenon that he experienced on the way to Damascus, which, ironically, led to the temporary blindness of his eyes to see Christ, who was at the right hand of the Father in heaven (Acts 9:1–19; cf. 2 Cor. 3:7–18). The Bible does not require that light be limited to either the scientifically objective or the experientially subjective perspective; it appropriates the phenomenon to elucidate a deeper reality to creation and God, the possibility of seeing the light beyond light.

God begins his creation with light, which precedes the creation of sun, moon, and stars and throughout Scripture is an unqualified good (Gen. 1:3–5, 15–18; Exod. 10:23; 13:21). The comfort of light is more difficult to appreciate in a world that runs on electricity. In the ancient world, people rarely traveled at night and usually went to bed soon after sunset. The only light in the home was a small oil lamp set on a stand, which burned expensive olive oil. Light is a biblical synonym for life (Job 3:20; John 8:12). Seeing the light means living (Ps. 49:19; see also Job 33:30). Conversely, darkness is often a symbol of adversity, disaster, and death (Job 30:26; Isa. 8:22; Jer. 23:12; Lam. 3:2). Death is likened to the extinguishing of a flame (Prov. 13:9; Sir. 22:11). God initially overcame the chaotic darkness when he created light, and ultimately God’s own glory will replace light in the new heavens and earth (Rev. 21:23–25). It is therefore not surprising that God is often associated with light (James 1:13–18).

John, who offers perhaps the most profound meditations on light, claims that God is light (1 John 1:5). The predicate appropriates the intrinsic beauty of light, a quality that draws people’s hearts back to the author of beauty. For the apostle, light represents truth and signifies God’s will in opposition to the deception of the world (John 1:9; 12:46). Light stands for purity and signifies God’s holiness as opposed to the unrighteousness of the world (John 3:19–21). Light is where God is, and it radiates from the place of fellowship between God and his creation (John 1:7). See also Light of the World.

John’s Gospel features teachings of Jesus during the Festival of Booths (7:14–8:59). During this festival, four very large menorahs were set up in the court of women in the temple to provide light for dancing throughout the night (m. Sukkah 5:2). In the same location Jesus says, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life” (John 8:12; cf. Mark 12:41–44). The Mishnah notes that during this festival “there was not a courtyard in Jerusalem which was not lit up” (m. Sukkah 5:3). Jesus extends the range of the light to “the world.” He perhaps alludes to Isaiah, who prophesied that even the Gentiles, who live in darkness, will see a great light (Isa. 9:1–2, cited as a fulfillment of prophecy in Matt. 4:14–16). In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus applies the same epithet, “light of the world,” to his disciples, who are compared to a lighted city on a mountain (Matt. 5:14). Jesus probably describes an inner light—the effect of a purified heart—which he juxtaposes with the external “shining” of the scribes and the Pharisees (Matt. 6:1–2).

Although the Bible never describes the lamps used by ancient Israel or the early church, archaeology informs us what they were like. Early lamps were small pottery bowls with a slight lip for a wick. Some had multiple wick holders to produce more light (Zech. 4:2). Over time, the lip became a spout to one side. By the Persian period, lamps with a covered oil reservoir were imported from Greece. Some lamps, like the seven-branched golden menorah of the tabernacle, were made of metal. During the Roman era, pottery and metal lanterns were developed for outside illumination, replacing torches, which had been used previously (Judg. 7:16). Those who sought Jesus in Gethsemane carried both torches and lanterns (John 18:3).

Lamps were commonly found in family dwellings (2 Kings 4:10; Matt. 5:15). They also played an important role in the tabernacle and temple (Exod. 25:31–39; 1 Kings 7:49), where they not only illuminated their interiors but also, having the shape of a tree, symbolically evoked memories of Eden. Lamps could be carried or placed on a shelf or stand. Since they could hold only enough olive oil to burn for several hours, a woman who ensured that “her lamp does not go out at night” would have been particularly diligent (Prov. 31:18).

The Bible frequently uses lamp or light metaphorically. It can symbolize life (Job 18:6; 21:17; Prov. 13:9; 20:20; 24:20) or the continuation of the Davidic line (2 Sam. 21:17; 1 Kings 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kings 8:19). Jesus is the light of the world, who gives spiritual life (John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46; cf. 1:9; 3:19). John the Baptist was a lamp illuminating the way to the Messiah (John 5:35). Jesus’ followers should shine as lights so that the world can see their good works and praise God (Matt. 5:14–16). God’s word is a lamp to guide one’s way (Ps. 119:105; Prov. 6:23). God himself is a light who enables people to live in difficult times (2 Sam. 22:29; Job 29:3). In one of Jesus’ parables, the foolish virgins who did not prepare enough oil to keep their lamps burning serve as a warning for people to be ready for Christ’s return (Matt. 25:1–13).

References to lightning play a significant role in various theologically rich portrayals of God. God is sovereign over all creation and thus in control of the lightning. As one of God’s servants, lightning obeys his commands (e.g., Job 36:32; 37:15; 38:24–25; Pss. 18:12–14; 135:7). Lightning is also called upon to give praise to God (Ps. 148:7–8). God’s use of lightning against his enemies (Exod. 9:23–24; 2 Sam. 22:13–15; Pss. 78:48; 144:6) forms part of the OT picture of God as warrior. (Artwork from other ancient Near Eastern civilizations depicts their deities as making war on their enemies and holding lightning bolts in their hands, ready to hurl them down to the earth.)

Various theophanies (appearances of God) are accompanied by lightning (Exod. 19:16; 20:18). In other visionary theophanies, lightning is used either to describe the appearance of God’s attendant creatures or to describe God’s own appearance (Ezek. 1:4, 13–14; Dan. 10:6; Matt. 24:27; Luke 9:29; 17:24). God’s judgments are described either as being accompanied by lightning or as being like lightning (Hos. 6:5; Zech. 9:14; Rev. 4:5; 8:5; 11:19; 16:18).

Fragrant trees seen by Balaam in a vision from God (Num. 24:6 KJV). More-recent versions shorten the term to “aloes.”

A jewel placed in the third row of the high priest’s breastpiece (Exod. 28:19; 39:12). More-recent translations use the term “jacinth.”

The word “likeness” is used in various contexts. In 2 Kings 16:10, King Ahaz wanted to have the exact likeness and pattern of the altar from Damascus, indicating a physical replica. In 2 Chron. 4:3, “likeness of oxen” (NKJV; NIV: “figures of bulls”) is a physical reference. In Ezekiel’s visions the word “likeness” refers to visual similarities (Ezek. 1). Isaiah 13:4 speaks of “a noise on the mountains, like that of a great multitude,” referring to an auditory similarity.

The foundational concept, however, is found in Gen. 1:26: “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness.” This announces the high status of humans as the pinnacle of God’s creation (also Gen. 5:1–2). Genesis 5:3 says that Adam fathered Seth “in his own likeness, in his own image,” employing both words found in 1:26. The precise meaning of this has been much debated. Three things are to be noted. First, the expression “let us,” versus “let there be,” implies a personal aspect. It refers to the human capacity to relate to God in worship and obedience of his word (2 Cor. 4:4; Eph. 4:24). Second, the word “likeness” describes human beings as not simply representative of God but representational. Humankind is the visible, corporeal representative of the invisible, bodiless God. Third, being in God’s likeness/image sets human beings apart from everything else that God has made. Humankind’s supremacy and uniqueness are emphasized.

A descendant of Manasseh son of Joseph, Likhi was the third son of Shemida (1 Chron. 7:19), a clan head within Manasseh (Josh. 17:2; 1 Chron. 7:10).

In Isa. 34:14 the meaning of the Hebrew word lilit (NASB: “night monster”; NRSV: “Lilith”; ESV: “night bird”; KJV: “screech owl”) is uncertain. The LXX translates the Hebrew word with onokentauros, a sort of centaur, while the Vulgate has lamia (“witch”). It appears to be related to the Hebrew word for “night” but likely is drawn from ancient Near Eastern mythology, in which a lilith was a type of female demon, sometimes connected with sexual activity (hence Lilith’s portrayal in the Babylonian Talmud: Nid. 24b; B. Bat. 73a; Shabb. 151b; ‘Eruv. 100b). In later Jewish folklore, Lilith is depicted as Adam’s first wife, but outside of this text from Isaiah the name appears nowhere in the Bible.

A flowering plant esteemed by the Hebrews for its beautiful blossoms. Lily decorations were in the temple as part of the garden imagery connecting the temple to the garden of Eden (1 Kings 7:19, 22, 26). The lily is prominent in the poetry of the Song of Songs (Song 2:1–2; 5:13; 6:2–3), and God used it to picture the future prosperity of Israel (Hos. 14:5). Jesus alluded to the beauty and carefree existence of lilies as he encouraged listeners not to worry about clothing (Matt. 6:28; Luke 12:27).

Apparently a musical term of uncertain meaning that occurs in the headings of Pss. 60 (“lily”); 80 (“lilies”). More precisely, it is “lily of the testimony” (NLT, NKJV; NIV: “lily of the covenant”). It is possible that the two words should be read independently of each other: “Lily. Testimony.”

Architectural ornamentation resembling lily flowers that adorned the capital of two cast bronze pillars in Solomon’s temple (1 Kings 7:19, 22 KJV [NIV: “shape of lilies”). The lily-covered pillars, named “Jakin” and “Boaz,” stood at the portico of the temple (1 Kings 7:21; 2 Chron. 3:17).

A calcium oxide powder produced by the burning of limestone in kilns, useful as plaster or mortar. Inscriptions could be made on a stone surface coated with lime (Deut. 27:2, 4 NASB; cf. Dan. 5:5 [NIV: “plaster”]). Burning human bones down to a limelike substance (NIV: “ashes”) signified judgment or desecration (Isa. 33:12; Amos 2:1).

In Isa. 27:9 God announces that he will reduce pagan altars to chalkstone (NIV: “limestone”). Chalkstone is easily crushed, and the oracle predicts the destruction of these illegitimate altars.

The word “line” is used a number of ways in the Bible. Most commonly, “line” refers to the family line of descent, which emphasizes succession through fathers and sons (Gen. 19:32; Num. 26:11; Deut. 25:9–10; Ruth 4:18; 1 Sam. 2:31–32, 36; Ezra 2:6, 40; Ps. 89:4; Isa. 48:1; Luke 2:4). Secondarily, a line is a tool used by an artisan or a carpenter for measuring length (2 Chron. 4:2; Job 38:5; Isa. 44:13); it is used metaphorically, in conjunction with a plumb line, to signify God’s judgment (Isa. 28:17; 34:11). A battle line is an array of soldiers readied for an imminent conflict (1 Sam. 17:2, 8; 2 Chron. 13:3). A line is also a queue (Ruth 4:4) or a boundary (Ps. 16:6), including a standard for behavior (Gal. 2:14). Finally, it is a physical cord or thread (Josh. 2:18; Ezek. 40:3 KJV), such as a fishing line (Matt. 17:27).

This term is used in Luke 2:4 (KJV, RSV) to refer to the family descent of Joseph from David. The Greek term, patria, is translated by the NIV as “line.”

A type of cloth woven with fibers from the flax plant. Common in Palestine and known for its strength, coolness, and remarkable whiteness, linen served many uses, especially in the tabernacle (Exod. 25–28; 35–36; 38–39). Both wealthy and common people wore linen garments, but luxurious fine linens were worn by the rich (Isa. 3:23; Ezek. 16:10; Luke 16:19; Rev. 18:12, 16). In NT times, the Jews extensively used linen burial shrouds, as at Jesus’ burial (Matt. 27:59; Mark 15:46; Luke 23:53; John 19:40; 20:5–7).

The horizontal beam on top of a doorway. God commanded the Israelites to sprinkle lamb’s blood on their doorposts and lintels in preparation for the first Passover, the sight of which would identify the Israelite houses and spare them the destruction that God would bring upon the Egyptians (Exod. 12:7, 22–23 NRSV [NIV: “top of the doorframe”]). The lintel was part of a five-sided doorjamb for the olive-wood entrance door of Solomon’s temple (1 Kings 6:31 NRSV). Birds would roost on the lintels of Nineveh’s deserted doorways after its destruction (Zeph. 2:14 KJV).

A Roman Christian, with Pudens and Claudia, from whom greetings are relayed from Paul (2 Tim. 4:21). According to Irenaeus (Haer. 3.3.3) and Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 3.2), for twelve years this Linus was the first bishop of Rome after the apostles, ordained to that office by Peter and Paul and preceding Clement in it.

Several Hebrew words in the OT are translated as “lion,” most commonly ’ari, but also lebe’ (Ps. 57:4), layish (Prov. 30:30), and shakhal (Job 10:16). The terms kepir (Isa. 31:4) and gur (Deut. 33:22) probably refer to a young lion or cub, although the precise difference between the terms is not always clear. The only Greek term found in biblical texts is leōn. Lions appear to have lived widely throughout the ancient Near East in OT times, but by the time of the NT they appear to have been far less common in the wild, although the Romans used them for cruel entertainment.

The lion’s strength, ferocity, and unpredictability probably stand behind its symbolic use in reference to God (Job 10:16; Hos. 13:7), Israel’s enemies (Pss. 17:12; 22:21; Jer. 2:30; 5:6), and even the devil (1 Pet. 5:8). Overcoming a lion is a sign of strength and, in light of ancient Near Eastern royal connections, highlights the victor’s qualities as a leader (e.g., Judg. 14; 1 Sam. 17:34–37).

(1) A place of execution into which criminals were cast for a particularly painful death (Dan. 6:7). (2) The lair of a lion and cubs (Nah. 2:11). (3) A metaphorical representation of danger and/or wickedness (Ps. 10:9 KJV).

The soft outer flesh that surrounds the mouth. The Hebrew word translated “lip” usually refers to the upper lip, which was often covered by the hand or garment as a sign of sorrow (2 Sam. 19:4). In the OT, the lips are used to describe the demeanor of the person to whom they belong. Lips are often synonymous with speech or language (Job 12:20). For example, lips can be faltering (Exod. 6:30), flattering (Ps. 12:2), deceitful (Ps. 17:1), lying (Prov. 12:22), evil (Prov. 17:4), unclean (Isa. 6:5), honest (Prov. 16:13), truthful (Prov. 12:19), righteous (Prov. 10:21), and joyful (Ps. 71:23).

A portable chair or couch supported by horizontal poles and carried by porters to transport a single passenger in a public procession. Isaiah describes a future time when people from all nations will travel by litter and other vehicular means to Jerusalem to worship God (Isa. 66:20 KJV [NIV: “wagons”]).

An animate creation of God. The first reference to a living creature is in Gen. 1:20, where God creates sea life en masse. In this way, living creatures are set apart from the inanimate and plant life. As with all living beings, the living creatures on the land were to reproduce with their own kind (1:24). Humankind belongs to the category of living being but is also distinct by virtue of being created in the image of God. This is evident in God’s more personal involvement in humanity’s creation and in the authority given to humans over the rest of the living beings (1:26–27; 2:19). After the flood, God makes a unique covenant, one that is with all “living creatures” and not just humankind (9:10–16). There are also references to strange “living creatures” who appear to be angels. This designation may indicate that the beings are part of God’s creation but were not part of the created order subjected to the categorization and authority of humankind (Ezek. 1:5–22; Rev. 6:1–7; 7:11).

An animate creation of God. The first reference to a living creature is in Gen. 1:20, where God creates sea life en masse. In this way, living creatures are set apart from the inanimate and plant life. As with all living beings, the living creatures on the land were to reproduce with their own kind (1:24). Humankind belongs to the category of living being but is also distinct by virtue of being created in the image of God. This is evident in God’s more personal involvement in humanity’s creation and in the authority given to humans over the rest of the living beings (1:26–27; 2:19). After the flood, God makes a unique covenant, one that is with all “living creatures” and not just humankind (9:10–16). There are also references to strange “living creatures” who appear to be angels. This designation may indicate that the beings are part of God’s creation but were not part of the created order subjected to the categorization and authority of humankind (Ezek. 1:5–22; Rev. 6:1–7; 7:11).

A city that lay just east of the Jordan River. Scholars have suggested that Debir, mentioned in the tribal allotment to Gad (Josh. 13:26), may be the same city (the Hebrew here for “of Debir” is spelled with the same consonants as the Hebrew for “Lo Debar”). Mephibosheth was staying in Lo Debar at the house of Makir son of Ammiel when David was seeking to show kindness to a member of Saul’s family after Saul’s death. Summoned by David, Mephibosheth traveled southwest to Jerusalem and settled there, “because he always ate at the king’s table” (2 Sam. 9:1–13).

As David and his men fled from Absalom during Absalom’s rebellion, they came to Mahanaim, in the vicinity of Lo Debar, where Makir son of Ammiel came with Shobi son of Nahash from Rabbah of the Ammonites (present-day Amman, Jordan) and Barzillai the Gileadite from Rogelim to offer the weary fugitives a wide variety of provisions (2 Sam. 17:27–29). The northern kingdom later conquered Lo Debar in an unrecorded battle, which led to an ungodly joy and pride that Amos criticized (Amos 6:13).

The precise location of Lo Debar remains uncertain. Scholars have suggested a site within the Jordan River Valley, approximately ten miles south of the Sea of Galilee. This would place Lo Debar approximately sixty miles northeast of Jerusalem and forty-five miles northwest of Amman, at the northern end of the territory allotted to Gad.

A transliteration of the Hebrew phrase “not my people” (lo’ ’ammi), the name of Gomer and Hosea’s third child (Hos. 1:9). While this name symbolizes a stunning reversal of Israel’s relationship with God, a message of hope follows this declaration, promising that the child’s name will be changed to “Ammi,” “my people” (Hos. 2:23). See also Lo-Ruhamah.

A transliteration of the Hebrew phrase “not pitied,” or “not loved” (lo’ rukhamah), it occurs in Hos. 1:6 as the God-given name of Gomer and Hosea’s second child, a daughter. Lo-Ruhamah’s name indicates the perilous status of the northern kingdom before God in the time leading up to the exile. This pity carries the connotation of God’s motherly compassion for Israel, as other instances of the root word for this name are translated “compassion” and “womb.” Significantly, in Hos. 2:23 God changes her name from “Not Loved” to “Loved,” showing his endangered but enduring compassion on Israel. See also Lo-Ammi.

Though often involving money, a loan can be anything that one party lends to another party without relinquishing ownership. Loans are discussed as a way in which to provide for the needy within one’s community (Deut. 15:7). Although accruing debt is not desirable (Deut. 15:6; Prov. 22:7), loans are allowed and even commanded, albeit with regulations that mitigate some of the risk. A pledge may serve as collateral to help ensure that the loan will be repaid and then is to be returned upon repayment (Ezek. 18:7; 33:15). The pledge is optional (Ezek. 18:16), but when enacted, the item must belong to the debtor and not be provided by another party (Prov. 22:26). When waiting to receive a pledge, one must not enter the neighbor’s house but rather must wait outside (Deut. 24:10–11). An item needed for one’s livelihood is not an appropriate pledge (Deut. 24:6; Job 24:3). If the borrower is poor and uses a cloak as a pledge, the creditor should allow the person to use it for warmth at night (Exod. 22:26; Deut. 24:12–13; Amos 2:8).

Making loans is a means of providing for the neighbor in need and is not intended as a way to increase one’s wealth. When a loan is made between Israelites, no interest is to be exacted (Exod. 22:25; Lev. 25:35–38; Deut. 23:19; Neh. 5:7), although interest is allowed when lending to a foreigner (Deut. 23:20). Lending money without interest is expected of one whose walk is blameless and who does what is right (Ps. 15:1–5; Prov. 28:8). In Deuteronomy the community is encouraged to lend freely to needy neighbors so that all the needs within the community will be met and the community will enjoy blessings from God, who hears the cry of the needy (15:7–11).

While it is expected that loans be repaid, the goal of a loan is not repayment but rather provision. Loans therefore are not to endure for a lengthy period of time. Every seventh year all creditors are expected to cancel the loans made to fellow Israelites as a part of God’s time for canceling debts (Deut. 15:1–2).

In the KJV the “caul of the liver” describes the upper lobe or “covering” of that organ, reserved along with the kidneys and the fat on the kidneys and other visceral organs to be burned upon the altar as food for God (e.g., Exod. 29:13; Lev. 3:10 [NIV: “long lobe of the liver”]). In one text in the KJV “caul” denotes a headband (Isa. 3:18), and in another the covering or encasement of the heart (the pericardium), to be ripped open by God, rampaging like a mother bear robbed of her cubs (Hos. 13:8).

It is unclear exactly how widespread locks were, but they are biblically attested. A wooden bolt-and-tumbler lock was used to lock the doors of houses, granaries, temples, and palaces. The lock was fastened to the inside of the door and accessed by a hole into which the hand and key were placed (Song 5:4–6). The key was relatively large, ranging from ten to twenty inches and carried on the shoulder (Isa. 22:22). A wooden box with loose pins was attached to the inside of the door above the bolt. The wooden bolt had notches into which the pins would fall to lock the door. The key’s teeth would match the pins on the box, allowing them to be pushed up, which would free the bolt and unlock the door (cf. Judg. 3:24). Metal keys resembling modern ones were used no earlier than the Roman period.

A swarming insect notorious for its devastating effects on vegetation. Ten different terms are employed to describe locusts, nine in the OT and one in the NT. Several passages in the OT employ multiple terms for locusts. Sometimes a clear distinction appears in the text between various species of locusts, though the distinctions are not always apparent in English, as is evidenced by the various translations of the terms (Lev. 11:22; Joel 1:4; 2:25). The various types of locusts have been described as grasshoppers, crickets, katydids, locusts, great locusts, young locusts, and other locusts. Some suggest that several of the Hebrew terms represent various stages in the life cycle of a locust. At other times, the use of multiple terms for locusts in the OT likely reflects Hebrew parallelism, with the terms being used synonymously (Isa. 33:4; Nah. 3:15–17).

The swarming behavior of locusts appears in the OT as a trope for large human armies (Judg. 6:5; 7:12; Jer. 46:23; 51:14) and as an image and instrument of God’s judgment (1 Kings 8:37; Pss. 78:46; 105:34; Amos 7:1). Destructive locusts were the eighth plague of Egypt (Exod. 10:12–14), and they feature as one of the curses for covenant breaking in Deut. 28:38. They are also noted as acceptable for food in Lev. 11:22 and as part of the diet of John the Baptist (Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).

Some wrongly assume as inaccurate or prescientific the biblical description of the number of legs a locust has. However, Lev. 11:20–23 clearly explains both the total number of “legs” that locusts have and the distinction between the types of locusts that were considered unclean. Locusts that only crawl on the ground were considered unclean, while those that use their jointed legs to hop were considered clean and thus eligible for consumption. Thus, four of their legs were used for crawling, while two were used for hopping.

The use of locusts in the book of Joel is particularly significant. In fact, one’s interpretation of the book of Joel largely depends on the identity of the locusts described in chapters 1–2. Three explanations typically are given for the function of the locusts in Joel. Some interpreters have suggested that these are literal locust plagues described in both chapters (such plagues were common in the ancient Near East). Others have argued that both chapters refer to an enemy approaching from the north, which is usually identified with Babylon. Still others maintain that the locusts represent a future, eschatological army of God. However, a fourth option for the identity of the locusts in Joel is most consistent with the text as well as the overall context of Scripture. It seems most likely that 1:4 and 2:25 are describing literal waves of locust plagues; however, the locusts are only a precursor of the coming danger, which will be in the form of an enemy from the north (Babylon).

A Benjamite village (1 Chron. 8:12) in the northeast Philistine Plain region of Judah, eleven miles southeast of the seaport of Joppa. It was one of many towns repopulated by Jews returning from exile in Persia after the Babylonian captivity (Ezra 2:33; Neh. 7:37; 11:35). Located at the intersection of a major north-south international trade route and an east-west highway leading to Jerusalem, Lod was renamed “Lydda” in NT times. Peter healed the paralytic Aeneas in Lydda (Acts 9:32–34).

To spend the night while traveling, usually under a host’s roof (Gen. 24:23 KJV), but the word can also apply to sleeping out in the open (Judg. 19:20 KJV). It also means “to dwell or associate with” (Ruth 1:16 KJV); “to dwell metaphorically,” as evil thoughts in the heart (Ps. 55:15); and “to roost or nest,” as a bird (Matt. 13:32 KJV). To lodge a charge is to make a legal or public accusation (Ezra 4:6). As a noun, a “lodge” is a place to spend the night (Isa. 1:8 KJV).

The upper room of a house in 1 Kings 17:19 KJV.

(1) The smallest unit of liquid measure, about one cup, it was used to measure oil for a guilt offering in purification ceremonies for one cleansed from an infectious skin disease (Lev. 14:10, 12, 15, 21, 24). (2) A section of a tree trunk, such as the cedar and pine logs used for building the temple (2 Sam. 5:11; 1 Kings 5:8; 1 Chron. 14:1; 22:4; Ezra 3:7; see also Eccles. 10:9). Jesus uses hyperbole in contrasting metaphorical logs and sawdust in sinners’ eyes (Matt. 7:3–5 NRSV [NIV: “plank”]).

A Greek term meaning “word,” a title given to Jesus Christ that indicates his preexistent divine nature and his identity as the climactic revelation of God (John 1:1, 14; 1 John 1:1; Rev. 19:13).

Philosophical and Old Testament Backgrounds

The background of the Logos concept is complex. It has roots in both Greek philosophy (Stoicism) and the OT. Both of these likely influence to some degree the NT use of the term, but neither is decisive. The NT goes its own way in defining the Logos. The Logos is adapted to fit the unique NT context and redefined in a historical person, Jesus of Nazareth.

In Stoic thought, Logos was Reason, the impersonal rational principle governing the universe. Stoicism understood Logos as the omnipresent force used by God to create and sustain the world. Logos held the intricate workings of the world together. Philo, a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher, taught that the Logos was the ideal, primal human being from whom all other human beings derived.

Although the Stoic background of the Logos likely bears at least some influence on the NT use, the OT probably has a more direct influence. The Logos in the OT is closely associated with the Wisdom tradition (Prov. 8). Wisdom is personified as the “master worker” at God’s side during creation (8:30 NRSV). Similarly, Wisdom was “established from everlasting, from the beginning, before there was ever an earth” (8:23 NKJV). Wisdom, like the NT Logos, claims preexistence and participation in God’s creative activity.

The OT depiction of God’s Word as the agent of creation is perhaps an even more direct influence (Gen. 1). The phrase “In the beginning” (John 1:1) clearly echoes the introduction of the creation account (Gen. 1:1). The repeated phrase “And God said” in Gen. 1 illustrates how God is so powerful that he creates simply by speaking creation into existence. God’s Word is the powerful agent of creation (Ps. 33:6). In summary, God’s Wisdom and Word are both active agents in creation.

God’s Word is largely an impersonal force in Gen. 1, but it develops more personal characteristics in Isa. 55:9–11. God’s personified Word is sent by God in order to accomplish a specific divine purpose that will not fail (v. 11). It also returns to God, who sent it, after accomplishing its mission (v. 11). God’s Word functions as his personal and effective speech as it reveals God’s perfect will. Like Wisdom, God’s Word is personified and reveals God’s will to humanity, accomplishing its divinely ordained purpose. The Word of God as exemplified in Isa. 55 probably has the most direct influence on the NT use of the Logos.

New Testament Usage

Scholars debate which of the aforementioned concepts is the primary influence for the NT use of the Logos. Perhaps each bears at least some degree of influence, but more importantly, each is adapted and altered to fit the unique christological context of the NT. The NT goes its own way in defining the Logos; it is defined in the historical flesh-and-blood person of Jesus of Nazareth (John 1:14; 1 John 1:1; Rev. 19:13).

What is an impersonal force in Stoicism and the OT becomes profoundly personal in the NT. Similar to Stoic Reason, all creation is created by and through the Logos (John 1:3) and is even held together by him (Col. 1:16–17). But unlike Stoic Reason, the NT Logos is no abstract metaphysical principle but rather the historic person Jesus Christ. And unlike personified Wisdom, which was created by God (Prov. 8:22–25), the NT Logos exists eternally as God and was “with” God in the beginning (John 1:1–2). Where Wisdom is present with God and is one of his attributes, the NT Logos is God as the Second Person of the Godhead. Further, the Word of God in the Genesis creation narrative is largely an impersonal force by which God creates the universe, whereas Jesus is the personal agent of creation (John 1:3; Col. 1:16–17).

Finally, although Isaiah’s Word of God is God’s effective speech that leads to action and accomplishes its purpose, it remains impersonal. The NT language is strikingly similar to Isaiah’s Word of God, as Jesus is “sent” by the Father to do his will (John 4:34) and completes the work that God has given him to do (John 17:4). But while the Word of God in Isaiah remains a personification, the NT Logos refers to an actual historical person, the incarnate Lord Jesus Christ. The Word takes on flesh-and-blood humanity in Jesus and is the uniquely personal revelatory message of God. Jesus preached the Word with his mouth, enacted the Word with his actions, and embodied the Word in his person. “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us” (John 1:14).

Anatomically, “loins” refers to the waist and lower back. In the NIV, the term primarily refers to parts of sacrificial animals (Lev. 3:4, 10, 15; 4:9; 7:4). Generally, where the KJV uses “loins,” the NIV prefers “waist.” Sackcloth was worn around this part of the body to signify mourning (Gen. 37:34; 1 Kings 20:31–32) and a sword was hung here (2 Sam. 20:8). A garment made for the loin area, sometimes referred to as a loincloth (Job 12:18), was comparable to underwear (Exod. 28:42). The expression “gird the loins” is an idiom for readiness (Job 38:3; Prov. 31:17; Luke 12:35; Eph. 6:14 KJV) and a metaphor for nonphysical preparation (1 Pet. 1:13 KJV), since the belt was worn on the waist (near the loins) and garments were tucked into the belt for work, quick movement, and battle (Exod. 12:11; 1 Kings 18:46; Nah. 2:1). “Loins” also can refer to the genitalia (1 Kings 12:10 KJV [NIV: “waist”]; Jer. 30:6 KJV [NIV: “stomach”]) or be part of an idiom denoting descendants (Gen. 35:11; 46:26 KJV).

The devout Jewish Christian maternal grandmother of Timothy. Paul praises her faith as a legacy to both her daughter Eunice and her grandson (2 Tim. 1:5).

In the KJV the “caul of the liver” describes the upper lobe or “covering” of that organ, reserved along with the kidneys and the fat on the kidneys and other visceral organs to be burned upon the altar as food for God (e.g., Exod. 29:13; Lev. 3:10 [NIV: “long lobe of the liver”]). In one text in the KJV “caul” denotes a headband (Isa. 3:18), and in another the covering or encasement of the heart (the pericardium), to be ripped open by God, rampaging like a mother bear robbed of her cubs (Hos. 13:8).

Patience is a moral attribute that God possesses and that humans may possess. One who has patience allows time to pass while maintaining a positive disposition, often in the face of suffering (Hab. 3:16; 2 Tim. 3:10–11; James 5:10), as the KJV translation “longsuffering” implies (cf. Prov. 14:29 NASB: “slow to anger”). The Scriptures universally speak of patience as an admirable quality and associate patience with other virtues, such as inner peace (Ps. 37:7), wisdom (Prov. 19:11), persuasiveness (Prov. 25:15), humility (Eccles. 7:8), and kindness (Rom. 2:4; 1 Cor. 13:4).

Numerous passages praise God’s patience. Humans try (Isa. 7:13) and show contempt for (Rom. 2:4) God’s patience, sometimes by refusing to be patient with others even though they themselves have received mercy from God (Matt. 18:23–35). Nonetheless, God displays his patience by granting them eternal life through faith in Christ (1 Tim. 1:16). In fact, God has patiently delayed destroying the world because he is compassionate and wants all to come to repentance (2 Pet. 3:9). God’s patience is evident even toward those who are destined for destruction (Rom. 9:22; 1 Pet. 3:20).

Just as God is patient, he imparts patience to the Christian through his Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:22). Like Abraham, the prophets, and any farmer, Christians are to exhibit patience, bearing with people both inside and outside the church (Eph. 4:2; 1 Thess. 5:14–15) as they wait eagerly for Christ’s return (Heb. 6:12–15; James 5:7–10). Those in Christian leadership must model patience and encourage others with patience (2 Tim. 3:10; 4:2).

In Job 37:18 the KJV translates the Hebrew word re’i as “looking glass” (NIV: “mirror”). However, the item referred to here is a mirror formed of molten brass and steel. These mirrors were smooth and polished, made without the least flaw or crack. Here the “looking glass” represents the purity and brightness of the glory of God and the wonder of his celestial handiwork. See also Mirror.

Although the use of looms was widespread in biblical times, biblical references provide little detail, and so we must rely mostly on archaeological and anthropological evidence. There were essentially two types of looms, the horizontal and the vertical. The horizontal was older and more common. It consisted of two beams tied to four pegs driven into the ground. The warp was stretched between them. The vertical loom consisted of two vertical beams and one horizontal. On the vertical loom, the warp was strung from the horizontal beam and held taut by a perforated ball of clay or stone, called a “loom weight.” As the warp was held taut on the loom, the horizontal yarn—the woof, or weft—was passed over and under its strands. This is the picture that emerges from the story of Samson and Delilah. Delilah tries to take Samson’s strength by weaving his hair into the warp of the loom. She then fastens it with a loom pin (Judg. 16:13). It is likely that some of the artistic pieces discussed in Exod. 35:35 were made with a loom, showing the artistic talent of people in those days.

Fabric rings crafted according to God’s instruction for the purpose of fastening the tabernacle curtains. Two sets of fifty pairs each are prescribed to edge the curtains. Each pair of opposing loops was to be joined with a bronze clasp (Exod. 26:4–6, 10–11; 36:11–13, 17–18).

Old Testament

The Hebrew word for “Lord,” yhwh (usually pronounced “Yahweh”), occurs more than 6,800 times in the OT and is in every book except Ecclesiastes and Esther. “Yahweh” is God’s personal name and is revealed as such in Exod. 3:13–14. God tells Moses to declare to the Israelites in Egypt, “I am has sent me to you” (3:14). The Hebrew behind “I am” connotes active being; the Lord is the one who is there for his people and, in the book of Exodus, does so through miraculous events (14:13–14). This demonstrates the close association between one’s name and one’s character in the ancient world. Yahweh is one who is with his people (Exod. 3:12; 6:2, 4; Isa. 26:4). Although the divine name is used before the exodus (Gen. 12:1; 15:1), it is not until the time of Moses that God reveals its redemptive significance. Nonetheless, the divine name is used in Genesis in contexts where the immanence of God is evident. In Gen. 3:8 “the Lord God . . . was walking in the garden in the cool of the day.” Further, the Lord makes a covenant with Abraham (Gen. 12; 15; 17), and the Lord will remain faithful to his covenants for a thousand generations (Deut. 7:9). Later in Israel’s history, Micah, in the face of those who worship other gods, reassures the people of Israel that Yahweh is distinct from all others, and that they will walk in his name because he will one day act to effect justice for all (Mic. 4:3–5).

The divine name also occurs as a form of address in various prayers throughout the OT (Gen. 15:2, 8; Exod. 5:22; 2 Sam. 7:18; 2 Kings 6:17), most notably in the psalms, where it occurs over two hundred times. In the psalms an abbreviated form of the name is often seen in an exclamation of praise, hallelu yah, “praise Yah[weh]” (e.g., Pss. 149:1; 150:1).

It is interesting to note the origin of the pronunciation of yhwh as “Jehovah.” To avoid breaking the third commandment, against misusing the name of God, pious Jews did not pronounce the divine name yhwh, substituting the word ’adonay (“my master”) in its place. In medieval times Jewish scholars added vowels to the consonantal text of the Hebrew Bible to aid in correct pronunciation. For yhwh, they used the vowels of ’adonay, which, when pronounced, creates a name unknown to the biblical authors, “Jehovah.”

In the postexilic period the appellation “Yahweh” occurs far less frequently, being replaced by adonay (Hebrew) or kyrios (Greek). The latter is used for Yahweh over six thousand times in the LXX. In Hellenistic literature kyrios is used to describe various gods and goddesses. The Roman emperors were also called kyrios, often with implications of deity. Some argue that the early Christians employed the title polemically to refer to Christ, the true kyrios. A clear example is found in Phil. 2:11, where it is said that every tongue will confess that “Jesus Christ is Lord” (cf. 1 Cor. 8:5–8). Kyrios was also used nonreligiously to refer to a “master” of a slave and as a term of respect to address someone of superior status (“sir”). Peter addresses Jesus as “lord” when he washes Peter’s feet (John 13:6).

New Testament

In the NT, the majority of occurrences of “Lord” (kyrios) appear in Luke-Acts and the writings of Paul, perhaps due to the predominantly Hellenistic audiences of these texts, who would know well its Greco-Roman connotations. As for Paul, the use of “Lord” by Luke may point to the deity of Jesus. In the Lukan birth narrative, Elizabeth wonders why “the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Luke 1:43; cf. 7:19; 10:1). In Acts 1:21 the name “Jesus” is preceded by the definite form of “Lord,” reflecting an oft-repeated confessional title in Acts and Paul (Acts 15:11; 20:35; 2 Cor. 1:2). According to some, if Matthew intends a divine connotation by his use of the term “Lord,” it is more oblique. For instance, in Matt. 4:7 Jesus quotes Deut. 6:16, where “the Lord” is Yahweh and not Jesus (cf. Matt. 9:38). There are occasions in Mark where “lord,” although appearing to function in a nonreligious sense, does seem to point to Yahweh. In Mark 2:28 Jesus claims that “the Son of Man is lord even of the sabbath” (NRSV). Since the Sabbath belongs to Yahweh and falls under his sovereign authority (Exod. 20:8–11), it is quite probable that Mark’s readers would now ascribe that dominion to the Son of Man. This is not unlike his authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:10), which, as the scribes rightfully point out, is something that only Yahweh can do. In light of these usages, one cannot help but think that the use of the term in Mark 11:3, at the triumphal entry, also carries divine significance. In John, there are examples of both the nonreligious use of “lord,” as a reverent form of address (5:7; 9:36), and the religious, divine sense, particularly after the resurrection (20:28; 21:7).

It is quite likely that Jewish Christians, even before Paul, regarded Jesus as one who shares in Yahweh’s divinity. In his letter to the Corinthians, a Greek-speaking congregation, Paul uses the expression marana tha (1 Cor. 16:22), a Greek transliteration of an Aramaic phrase that means “Our Lord, come!” This term likely was a part of an early Jewish Christian liturgy. Further, there are places where Paul refers to Jesus simply as “the Lord,” suggesting a common understanding of the appellation among the early Christians (Rom. 14:6; 1 Cor. 3:5). In addition to Phil. 2:11, Paul expresses the divinity of Jesus by alluding to Deut. 6:4, the Shema, in 1 Cor. 8:6: “Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.” In the book of Revelation divine status is ascribed to Jesus. While in the vision of God in Rev. 4 the title is used of God (4:8, 11), at the conclusion of the book appears the invocation “Come, Lord Jesus” (22:20; cf. 22:21).

For Paul, a particularly important component of the lordship of Jesus is his resurrection, through which he becomes “the Lord of both the dead and the living” (Rom. 14:9; cf. 1:4), and his return marks the “day of the Lord,” which in the OT was the day of Yahweh (1 Thess. 5:2; cf. 5:23). Exactly how Jewish Christians could attribute such a status to Jesus and yet maintain a strict monotheism remains a matter of considerable debate. Is Christ included in the identity of the Godhead, or is he an intermediary figure (of which Second Temple Judaism had many), possessing a quasi-divine status? If Jesus is an intermediary figure, then his authority to do that which only Yahweh can (such as forgiving sins and fulfilling roles originally referring to God) suggests a very close identification between Yahweh and Jesus himself. See also Names of God; YHWH.

After Joshua and the Israelites defeated the Amalekites in Rephidim, Moses erected an altar and called it “Jehovah Nissi” (Heb. yhwh nissi), meaning “Yahweh is my banner” (Exod. 17:15 [NIV: “The Lord is my Banner”]). The suggestion is that the people should rally around God as an army gathers around its banner.

After Gideon was terrified at seeing an angel of the Lord, God said to him, “Peace! Do not be afraid” (Judg. 6:23). In response, Gideon built an altar in Ophrah and named it “Jehovah Shalom” (Heb. yhwh shalom), meaning “Yahweh is peace” (Judg. 6:24 [NIV: “The Lord Is Peace”]). It is equivalent to “Yahweh is well disposed.”

After Gideon was terrified at seeing an angel of the Lord, God said to him, “Peace! Do not be afraid” (Judg. 6:23). In response, Gideon built an altar in Ophrah and named it “Jehovah Shalom” (Heb. yhwh shalom), meaning “Yahweh is peace” (Judg. 6:24 [NIV: “The Lord Is Peace”]). It is equivalent to “Yahweh is well disposed.”

In Ezekiel’s vision of the new Jerusalem, restored and glorified, the city is called “Jehovah Shammah” (Heb. yhwh shammah) (Ezek. 48:35; cf. Rev. 21:3). It means “Yahweh is there” (NIV: “The Lord Is There”) and emphasizes the importance of God’s presence in the midst of his people when he returns to the forsaken temple.

The names of God given in the Bible are an important means of revelation about his character and works. The names come from three sources: God himself, those who encounter him in the biblical record, and the biblical writers. This article is concerned mainly with the names that occur in the OT, though the NT will be referenced when helpful.

In the Bible the meaning of names is often significant and points to the character of the person so named. As might be expected, this is especially true for God. The names that he gives to himself always are a form of revelation; the names that humans give to God often are a form of testimony.

Yahweh: The Lord

Pronunciation. Unquestionably, for OT revelation the most important name is “(the) Lord.” In English Bibles this represents the name declared by God to Moses at the burning bush (“I am who I am” [Exod. 3:13–15]) and the related term used elsewhere in the OT; in Hebrew this term consists of the four consonants YHWH and is therefore known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”). Hebrew does not count vowels as part of its alphabet; in biblical times one simply wrote the consonants of a word and the reader supplied the correct vowels by knowing the vocabulary, grammar, and context. However, to avoid violating the commandment in the Decalogue that prohibits the misuse of God’s name (Exod. 20:7; Deut. 5:11), the Jews stopped pronouncing it. Consequently, no one today knows its correct original pronunciation, but the best evidence available suggests “Yahweh,” which has become the conventional pronunciation (consider the Hebrew word “hallelujah,” which actually is “hallelu-Yah,” hence “praise the Lord”). In ancient Jewish tradition, “Adonai” (“my Lord”) was substituted for “Yahweh.” In fact, when Hebrew eventually developed a vowel notation system, instead of the vowels for “Yahweh,” the vowels for “Adonai” were indicated whenever YHWH appeared in the biblical text, as a reminder. Combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of “Adonai” yields something like “Yehowah,” which is the origin of the familiar (but mistaken and nonexistent) “Jehovah.” English Bibles typically use “Lord” (small capital letters) for “Yahweh,” and “Lord” (regular letters) for “Adonai,” which distinguishes the two.

Meaning. More vital than the matter of the pronunciation of YHWH is the question of its meaning. There seem to be two main opinions. One sees YHWH as denoting eternal self-existence, partly because it is suggested by the grammar of Exod. 3:14 (the words “I am” use a form of the Hebrew verb that suggests being without beginning or end) and partly because that is the meaning Jesus apparently ascribes to it in John 8:58. The other opinion, suggested by usage, is that YHWH indicates dynamic, active, divine presence: God’s being present in a special way to act on someone’s behalf (e.g., Gen. 26:28; 39:2–3; Josh. 6:27; 1 Sam. 18:12–14). This idea also appears in the episode of the burning bush (Exod. 3:12): when Moses protests his inadequacy to confront Pharaoh, God assures him of his presence, a reality noted with other prophets (1 Sam. 3:19; Jer. 1:8).

Perhaps the best points of reference for understanding the meaning of YHWH are God’s own proclamations. In addition to Exod. 3:13–15, at least two other passages in Exodus give God’s commentary (as it were) about the meaning of his name. An important one is Exod. 34:5–7. A key passage in the theology proper of ancient Israel, its themes echo in later OT Scripture (Num. 14:18–19; Ps. 103:7–12; Jon. 4:2). What is noteworthy about the texts cited is that all of them say something remarkable about the grace of God. This fits, for the revelation of Exod. 34:5–7 is given in the context of covenant renewal after the incident of the golden calf. Moses invokes God’s name in the Numbers text to avoid catastrophic judgment when the Israelites refuse to enter the promised land. The psalm text picks up this theme and connects it with God’s revelation of his ways to the chosen people. Jonah, remarkably, affirms that the same grace extends even toward a wicked Gentile city such as Nineveh.

Another such passage is Exod. 6:2–8. Here God reaffirms his redemptive purpose for captive Israel, despite the fact that Moses’ first encounter with Pharaoh has not gone well. God assures the prophet that he has remembered his covenant with the patriarchs, whom he says did not know him as “Yahweh,” which probably means that the patriarchs did not experience him in the way or character that their descendants would in the exodus event (though it is possible to translate the Hebrew here as a rhetorical question with an affirmative idea: “And indeed, by my name Yahweh did I not make myself known to them?”). God then proceeds to outline the redemptive experience in its fullness: deliverance from bondage, reception into a covenant relationship, and possession of the land promised to their ancestors (vv. 6–8). The statement is bracketed with this declaration: “I am the Lord” (vv. 2, 8). One stated purpose of this redemptive work is that Israel might come to understand this (v. 7). This is important to note because a central theme of Exodus as a book is the identity of the God of Israel. This concern prompts Moses to ask for God’s name at the burning bush (3:13), and this contempt for the God of the enslaved Hebrews causes Pharaoh to be dismissive at his first meeting with Moses and Aaron (5:2). Moses asks with the concern of a seeker and receives one of the most profound declarations of God’s identity in the Bible. Pharaoh asks with the contempt of a scorner and receives one of the most powerful displays of God’s identity in the Bible (the plagues). The contrast is both striking and instructive. The meaning of God’s name, then, is revealed in works as well as words, and his purpose is that not just his people but all peoples may come to understand who he is. Yet another majestic statement in the book of Exodus (9:13–16) makes this abundantly clear.

Based on this pattern of usage, the name “Yahweh” seems to signify especially the active presence of God to bless, deliver, or otherwise aid his people. Where this presence is absent, there is no success, victory, protection, or peace (Num. 14:39–45; Josh. 7:10–12; Judg. 16:20; 1 Sam. 16:13–14). The message that God not only is but also is present to save and deliver may well be the most important truth communicated in the OT, and it is only natural to see its ultimate embodiment in the person and work of Christ (Isa. 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:21–23).

Name used in combination. The name “Yahweh” also is used in combination with other terms. After God grants a military victory to Israel over the Amalekites, Moses names a commemorative altar “Yahweh Nissi,” meaning “the Lord is my Banner” (Exod. 17:15). In Ezekiel’s temple vision Jerusalem is called “Yahweh Shammah,” meaning “the Lord is there” (Ezek. 48:35). A familiar expression is “the Lord of hosts,” which is generally comparable to the expression “commander in chief” used in American culture (cf. 1 Kings 22:19–23).

Elohim

This is the first term for God encountered in the Bible, right in the opening verse. It is a more generic term, denoting deity in contrast to humans or angels. “Elohim” is a plural form; the singular terms “El” and “Eloah” are used occasionally, particularly in poetic texts. “El” is a common term in the biblical world; in fact, it is the name for the father of Baal in the Canaanite religion. This may explain why the Bible commonly uses the plural form, to distinguish the one true God, the God of Israel, from his pagan rivals. Others explain the plural form as a “plural of majesty” or “plural of intensity,” though it is uncertain just what this would mean. Some see the foundation for NT revelation of the Trinity (Gen. 1:26–27; 11:6–7; cf. John 17:20–22), but this is unlikely. The plural form also can serve simply as a common noun, referring to pagan deities (Exod. 12:12), angels (Ps. 97:7, arguably), or even human authorities (Exod. 22:28, possibly).

“El” also occurs in combination with other descriptive terms. The best known is “El Shaddai,” meaning “God Almighty” (Gen. 17:1). The precise meaning of “Shaddai” is uncertain, but it seems to have the notion of “great/powerful one.” The distressed Hagar, caught, comforted, and counseled by the mysterious personage at a well, calls God “El Roi,” which means “the God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). One of the most exalted expressions to describe God is “El Elyon,” meaning “God Most High.” This title seems to have particular reference to God as the owner and master of creation (Gen. 14:18–20).

Adonai

As noted above, this common word meaning simply “(my) lord/master” is used regularly in place of the personal name of God revealed to Moses in Exod. 3:14. And in the OT of most English Bibles this is indicated by printing “Lord” as opposed to “Lord” (using small capital letters). However, “Adonai” is used of God in some noteworthy instances, such as Isaiah’s lofty vision of God exalted in Isa. 6 and the prophecy of Immanuel in Isa. 7:14. In time, this became the preferred term for referring to God, and the LXX reflected this by using the Greek word kyrios (“lord”) for Yahweh. This makes the ease with which NT writers transfer the use of the term to Jesus (e.g., 1 Cor. 12:3) a strong indication of their Christology.

In Gen. 22:1–19 Abraham obeys God and prepares to sacrifice his son Isaac, but an angel of the Lord intervenes and provides a ram as a substitute for Isaac. As a result, Abraham names the place “Jehovah Jireh” (Heb. yhwh yir’eh), meaning “Yahweh provides” (v. 14 [NIV: “The Lord Will Provide”]).

Another name for Sunday, this term reminds us that this day belongs to the Lord and should be used for his honor and glory. The term itself is used only once in Scripture, where John mentions how he was in the Spirit “on the Lord’s Day” when Christ commissioned him to write the book of Revelation (Rev. 1:10). There are no other specific details clearly given in Scripture about the identification of this day or how it was observed. Our understanding of this term and how it fits in with other passages of Scripture touches on three separate issues.

A special day. First, should Christians today celebrate any day of the week in a special way? At least some believers throughout history have believed that it is possible to observe every day of the week as equally special in the sense that “this is the day that the Lord has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it” (Ps. 118:24 ESV). Paul regards the observance of special days for worship as an area of Christian freedom: “One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind” (Rom. 14:5). The same principle is found in Col. 2:16: “Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.” Nevertheless, most Christians have concluded that the expression “the Lord’s Day” clearly points to a specific day during the week when the Lord is to be worshiped in a special way.

A specific day. Second, which day of the week should we celebrate in a special way? When is the Lord’s Day? For OT believers, the answer is clear: it is the last, or seventh, day of the week. In the Bible, both the idea of a seven-day week and the setting apart of the seventh day are based ultimately on the creation account in Gen. 2:1–3. This Sabbath principle is codified in the Ten Commandments, which indicate that the Sabbath is to be kept holy by requiring people and their animals not to engage in work (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15). Observance of the seventh day, or Sabbath, continues among Jews in the present. More recently, other groups, such as Seventh-Day Adventists and Seventh-Day Baptists, have felt the weight of this OT evidence and have continued to observe Saturday as the proper day for worship.

Nevertheless, most Christians have been persuaded by the practice of the early church to gather together for worship on the first day of the week. Two key passages of Scripture provide support for this conclusion. In Acts 20:7 the church had gathered for the Lord’s Supper specifically “on the first day of the week,” and in 1 Cor. 16:2 Paul instructs the church at Corinth to collect an offering specifically “on the first day of every week” (presumably during its local weekly meetings). Thus, most Christians have concluded that they are no longer under the OT observance of the Sabbath as the seventh day of the week (cf. Rom. 14:5; Col. 2:16), and now they are to worship in honor of Jesus’ resurrection “on the first day of the week” (Matt. 28:1 pars.).

A sacred day. Third, how should we celebrate this day? The Puritans and others throughout church history have considered Sunday as the Christian Sabbath. In other words, they made the shift from the seventh day of the week in the OT to the first day of the week in the church age, but they believed that all the OT rules and regulations for the Sabbath were still binding on believers today. Nevertheless, most Christians today accept Sunday as the “Lord’s Day,” when they worship in a NT manner and not under the letter of the OT ceremonial law, with its focus primarily on resting or not working. Under the OT system there was no concept of people gathering together on a regular weekly basis for corporate worship. OT worship revolved around various annual feasts and festivals when people would gather together at the central temple in Jerusalem a few times each year. The idea of weekly worship services emerged only later, during the Babylonian captivity, with the development of the Jewish synagogue. Thus, most Christians have concluded that Sunday is no longer a transposed OT Sabbath, but rather the NT Lord’s Day, and consequently that it should be celebrated accordingly, as when “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer” (Acts 2:42).

This prayer, found but not named as such in Matt. 6:9–13; Luke 11:2–5 (see also Did. 8.2, which follows the Matthean version), is a version of the Jewish Qaddish prayer revised around the theme of the kingdom of God and is a paradigmatic model of prayer given by Jesus to his followers.

Jesus and Prayer

Prayer was a key element of Jewish piety and devotion to God. It was a large part of meetings in synagogues, annual festivals, worship in the temple, and daily recitals of the words of the law. Jesus is remembered as withdrawing into lonely and desolate places for times of prayer (Mark 1:35; 6:46), most poignantly in the garden of Geth-semane (Mark 14:32–42 pars.). Jesus’ time in the wilderness probably was a time of prayer and fasting as well (Mark 1:12–13 pars.). Besides the Lord’s Prayer, another prayer of Jesus celebrates God’s revelation to the disciples after their short itinerant mission (Matt. 11:25–26 // Luke 10:21).

The evangelist Luke emphasizes Jesus at prayer more than any other Gospel writer. Luke’s Gospel portrays Jesus as praying at his baptism (3:21), prior to his selection of the Twelve (6:12–13), prior to Peter’s confession of him as Messiah (9:18), at his transfiguration (9:28–29), prior to his teaching on the Lord’s Prayer (11:1), for Peter (22:32), and twice while on the cross (23:34, 46). Jesus also taught much about prayer, concerning how his disciples are or are not to pray and how to show genuine devotion in the kingdom community without hypocrisy (Mark 11:24–25; Matt. 5:44 // Luke 6:28; Matt. 6:5–8; Luke 11:5–13; 18:1–14; 21:36).

In the Fourth Gospel, Jesus’ prayers underscore the unique nature of the relationship between the Father and the Son (John 11:41–42; 12:27–28). Jesus’ high priestly prayer for the disciples concerns their preservation and the role of the Holy Spirit in their lives (17:1–26). A distinctive characteristic of Jesus’ prayers is that God is addressed by the Aramaic word abba (“father”), and this became common in early Christian worship (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6).

The Lord’s Prayer: Matthew and Luke

The Lord’s Prayer takes distinct forms in Matthew and in Luke (see table 2). The differences in the two prayers might be attributable to Jesus teaching two different versions. More likely, Matthew and Luke both knew the prayer from a common source (written or oral), and Matthew’s version is a more liturgical elaboration of Luke’s shorter and more “original” version. Matters are complicated somewhat by the fact that later Christian scribes had a propensity for harmonizing the two prayers and sometimes amended them in their respective manuscripts. Both prayers agree that (1) God is the Holy Father, (2) the kingdom is yet to come in its fullness, (3) followers of Jesus depend on God for their daily provisions, (4) followers of Jesus depend on God for forgiveness, (5) which is reciprocated in the forgiveness of others, and include (6) the supplication that God not let them fall into the final tribulation.

Table 2. The Lord’s Prayer in Matthew and Luke

Matthew 6:9-13….Luke 11:2-4

Our Father in heaven,….Father,

hallowed be your name,….hallowed be your name,

your kingdom come,….your kingdom come.

your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven….

Give us today our daily bread….Give us each day our daily bread.

And forgive us our debts,….Forgive us our sins,

as we also have forgiven our debtors….for we also forgive everyone who sins against us.

And lead us not into temptation,….And lead us not into temptation.

But deliver us from the evil one….

For your is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen. [added in some later manuscripts; see NIV mg.]….

The Lord’s Prayer: The Petitions

The prayer can be broken up into a number of petitions. First is the petition addressed to God as Father and self-sanctifier. God is invoked as Father, and his name represents both his character as a loving father and his authority as the master over all creation. The prayer is theocentric, and it reads literally “let your name be sanctified,” which is a plea that God’s holiness will become more and more evident. The Lord’s Prayer is not some kind of “I want” list, but rather a burst of praise expressing the hope that God’s sheer goodness and Godness will be acknowledged by all.

The second petition is for God to finally establish his kingdom. The “kingdom of God” is more akin to God’s reign, rule, or government. It is referred to rarely in the OT (e.g., Dan. 2:44; Obad. 21); much more prominent is the theme of God as “king.” In many of the psalms God already is king of Israel and the nations (e.g., Pss. 93–99), and yet the prophets could look forward to the day when Yahweh would again show himself to be king precisely through his deliverance of Israel, which would be the ultimate expression of the kingly power (e.g., Isa. 52:7; Zech. 14:9). The prayer for the coming of the kingdom of God is a prayer for God to establish his reign or rule in its final and full manifestation on earth. Although the kingdom was partially present during Jesus’ ministry by virtue of his exorcisms and healings (e.g., Mark 1:15; Luke 11:20), it still awaits its final consummation. Matthew’s version has “on earth as it is in heaven” and may indicate a millennial view of the kingdom as supplanting earthly kingdoms, resulting in the transformation of the present age. The petition does not promote escapism from the world but rather points toward its eventual redemption and transformation by the glorious power of heaven becoming a reality upon the earth.

Third is the petition for daily provision of physical needs. The “daily bread” petition looks to God as the provider and caregiver of his people. Elsewhere in the Sermon on the Mount/Plain, Jesus preaches dependence on God as a means of escaping the worry and lure of wealth and money (Matt. 6:25–33 // Luke 12:22–34). Bread was a powerful symbol for sustenance and life (e.g., Prov. 22:9; Lam. 2:12; John 6:35, 48; Sir. 29:21; 34:25). The petition assumes that God is interested in the most mundane aspects of human existence, and that he gives what is needed, not always what is wanted. God sustains his people in their hour of need as proof of his fatherly care and compassion.

Fourth is the petition for divine forgiveness in coordination with mutual forgiveness among the community of Jesus’ followers. The prayer does not ask God to forgive persons who then in turn forgive others; rather, in reverse, the prayer implies that God forgives in the same way that humans forgive each other (Matthew) or on the basis of humans forgiving each other (Luke). The role of mutual forgiveness within the new covenant community is spelled out clearly by Paul in Colossians: “Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you” (Col. 3:13).

Fifth is the petition to be spared eschatological tribulation and the malevolence of Satan. The word peirasmos can mean “testing,” “trial,” “temptation,” or even “tribulation” or “ordeal.” The prayer could constitute a plea for help in the face of personal trials and struggles in the believer’s life and in the journey of discipleship (e.g., 1 Cor. 10:13; James 1:2), or it could denote a request to be kept from the eschatological ordeal that will precede the final and full establishment of the kingdom of God (e.g., Mark 14:36, 38; Rev. 3:10). Importantly, what is feared in this prayer is not experiencing the peirasmos but rather succumbing to it—the fear of failure. In addition, the prayer asks to be delivered from ho ponēros, “evil,” or (more likely) “the evil one” (cf. Matt. 5:39)—that is, the devil or Satan. God tests his people to strengthen them and prove their faithfulness, while Satan tempts people to subdue and destroy them. This prayer acknowledges the fragility and helplessness of the human state in the face of human, spiritual, and cosmic evil. The prayer seeks liberation from evil in the coming reign of God’s eschatological kingdom.

The Lord’s Prayer: The Theology

The theological framework, ethical exhortation, and social dynamics created or presupposed by the prayer are as follows.

First, God is the Father of the followers of Jesus. This is axiomatic in the Gospels and is repeated by the Christian prayer that addresses God the Father as “Abba” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6).

Second, an overarching importance is attached to the kingdom of God as the context in which all prayer is prayed. The tension of the prayer—the very fact of needs and the threat of continuing perils—exists only because God’s plan to restore Israel and renew creation has not yet been put into full effect. God’s kingdom has broken into the world through the work of the Son of God and the giving of the Holy Spirit, and yet it still awaits a final consummation, when God is “all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28) and finally repossesses the world for himself. The prayer presupposes the “now” and the “not yet” of God’s saving action and balances prayers of triumph and lament in light of current temptations and the coming victory of God.

Third, in this prayer salvation not only is spiritual (understood as going to heaven when one dies) but also involves the physical well-being of a person and healthy relationships within the believing community. Just as God is concerned with physical human needs, so should humans be with their fellow humans. If human beings forgive, then God also forgives them. Human relations are to mirror the values of heaven and the vision of the kingdom.

Fourth, the world order currently exists in partial subjugation to evil powers opposed to God’s rule, which is simply part of the dire situation of “this age.” The prayer presupposes an apocalyptic worldview characterized by dualism (God/Satan, good/evil, present/future, etc.), the necessity of encountering and persevering against evil, and divine intervention to put the world order right and replace it with the kingdom of God.

Fifth, discipleship involves a variety of traits and characteristics. This prayer depicts the disciple as trusting and as exhibiting faith in God’s purpose and plan. The prayer presumes that disciples cling to God in dependence upon him in their day-to-day need. The prayer assumes that disciples try to imitate God in reflecting goodness, love, holiness, and peace in their respective communities. The prayer also admonishes endurance in the face of trials and persistence (not repetitiveness) in the discipline of prayer.

Sixth, although the prayer does not have an explicit Christology, one can be found implicitly. It seems implied that Jesus is a mediator between the Father and the disciples, and that he possesses an important role in the final manifestation of the kingdom. It is, after all, the disciples of Jesus who are promised a special place in the kingdom and a special relationship with the God of Israel.

Summary

The Lord’s Prayer has remained a common thread in the devotional life of followers of Jesus for two millennia because it is simple, memorable, poignant, and yet profound. It is not the prayer of an elite few; it belongs to all who cry out to God as Father and see the way to God in Jesus Christ, the exalted Lord and Messiah of Israel. As teachings of Jesus hold immeasurable significance for the life, faith, praxis, and service of his followers, this prayer encapsulates a motif of Jesus’ own mission: God as king and the love of God for his own people.

The meal of remembrance instituted by Jesus Christ during the Passover celebration (Matt. 26:26 pars.) prior to his crucifixion. While with his disciples, Jesus took bread and broke it and said, “Take and eat; this is my body” (Matt. 26:26). After this, he took wine, gave thanks, and then gave it to them and said, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:28). After Jesus’ death and resurrection, this breaking of bread and drinking of wine in his memory became a primary symbol of Christianity (1 Cor. 11:26). The apostle Paul had harsh things to say to the Corinthian church for inappropriately celebrating the Lord’s Supper, for some went hungry while others became drunk (1 Cor. 11:17–26), and thus the whole point of Jesus’ sacrificial death was lost. See also Last Supper.

A nephew of Abraham (Gen. 11:27–14:16) and a resident of Sodom (18:16–19:38). When God called Abraham to go to Canaan and leave his family behind, he still took Lot with him. Lot, however, proved to be a burden to his uncle in several aspects. Tensions arose between their herders, so Abraham graciously allowed Lot to choose his land first. Lot selected the fertile area near Sodom, just south of the Dead Sea, where he settled. When Lot and his family and property were captured in battle by King Kedorlaomer of Elam and his three allies, Abraham rescued his nephew, defeated the coalition, and restored Lot’s entire household.

When forewarned of God’s intentions to destroy Sodom, Abraham attempted to convince God not to destroy the city if ten righteous people could be found there. Presumably, Abraham’s efforts were based on his desire to protect Lot, who resided there. Apparently, not even ten righteous people were found in the city, but before the city was to be destroyed, two angels were sent to warn Lot and his family. When the messengers arrived, Lot would not allow them to spend the night in the town square, to protect them from the men of Sodom. All the men of the city surrounded Lot’s house and demanded that the guests be brought out so that they could have sex with them. Instead, Lot offered his two daughters. However, the angels struck the Sodomites outside with blindness, which frustrated their efforts, so they left Lot, his guests, and his daughters alone.

The next morning, the angels forced Lot and his wife and daughters out of the city, and then God rained sulfur and fire from heaven on Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot’s wife refused to heed the angel’s warning, and when she turned back to look, she became a pillar of salt. Lot’s two daughters, fearing that they would be unable to marry, got their father drunk, committed incest, and became pregnant; thus Lot became the father (and grandfather) of Moab and Ben-Ammi, ancestor of the Ammonites (Gen. 19:37–38). Jesus used the example of Lot, his wife, and the city of Sodom to illustrate how the kingdom of God will come (Luke 17:28–32). Lot’s sins relative to his daughters apparently are ignored in 2 Pet. 2:7, where he is called “righteous Lot.”

The first of seven sons of Seir the Horite (Gen. 36:20; 1 Chron. 1:38), he was a clan leader of the Horites (Gen. 36:29). Lotan’s sister was Timna (Gen. 36:22), the ancestor of the Amalekites with Esau’s son Eliphaz (36:12).

Possibly made of stone or wood, lots apparently were shaken or tossed from a container to help make decisions, on the assumption that God(s) directed the outcome (Prov. 16:33). Many peoples throughout the ancient Near East cast lots. Surprisingly, available sources do not make clear what exactly the lots were and how people cast them. Information from Mesopotamia and related terms in Arabic suggest that the lots were made of stone, whereas ancient Sumerian lots apparently were made of wood. The numerous references to Israelites casting lots give no indication of the material. Descriptions of the process in the Bible include the Hebrew terms for “cast” (Josh. 18:6), “make fall” (1 Chron. 24:31 [usually translated “cast”]), “be shaken” (Prov. 16:33 [also translated “cast”]), and “come out” (Josh. 19:1), which suggests that the items were put into some kind of container and shaken until the piece(s) chosen by God came out.

The casting of lots was one of several methods that ancient peoples used to get information from God(s) about the past, present, or future. Many such practices—including astrology, use of a divining rod, and examination of animal livers—were forbidden to the Israelites, apparently because these looked to other (supposed) gods for wisdom or direction. A few such practices, including the interpretation of dreams or the casting of lots, were allowed.

One finds the casting of lots in both Testaments in a number of different situations. Sometimes the lot was used to uncover truth about who had committed some wrong in the past (Achan [Josh. 7:14, 18]; Jonathan [1 Sam. 14:41–42]). Other times Israelites used lots to determine God’s choice (Saul as king [1 Sam. 10:20–21]; Matthias as a disciple [Acts 1:26]) or to divide things, such as tribal allotments of land (Num. 26:55–56). Tasks and services could be determined by casting lots (Levitical service at the temple [1 Chron. 26:13–16]; who would live in rebuilt Jerusalem [Neh. 11:1]). Non-Israelites also cast lots to determine guilt (Jon. 1:7), divide property captured in war (Nah. 3:10), and determine the best date for an event (when to massacre Jews [Esther 3:7; 9:24]). The concept that God directed the course of events also led to figurative use of the term “lot” as one’s fate in life (Ps. 16:5; Jer. 13:25). See also Urim and Thummim.

Mentioned only once, the biblical lotus plant is an aquatic tree broad enough to conceal a large, grass-eating mammal (perhaps a hippopotamus) that hides in its shade (Job 40:21–22).

Old Testament

Preconditions to love. According to the OT, three preconditions must exist for us to know what it means to love.

First, we have the capacity for relationships because we are made in the likeness of a personal God. God created us to reciprocate love back to him, in a relationship of mutual love.

Second, the true meaning of love depends on a true understanding of God, whose love causes him to pursue human beings even though their hearts have turned away from him for other substitute “loves.” This second point assumes that human beings still love, but they do so in a way distorted by sin. Sin causes human beings to live their lives as though God did not exist. However, God in his mercy has chosen to intervene through his redemptive acts in history and through revelatory speech in order to deliver people from the blindness and corruption of sin. His pursuit of his unfaithful sons and daughters gives us a picture of what true love looks like.

Third, God’s pursuit of human beings in history was by means of election and the establishment of a covenant. God chose to make himself known to a particular people, those who would descend from Abraham. God called Abraham to leave his country and go to a new place that he would inherit as a new homeland, where his descendants would be blessed (Gen. 12:1–3; 15; 17). God’s promise to Abraham took the form of an everlasting covenant, by which he guaranteed that he would fulfill what he had promised. He would be the God of Abraham’s descendants, and they would be his people. They would receive the land of Canaan as an inheritance (17:6–8). In response, Abraham’s descendants were to obey God’s covenant by circumcising their male children (17:9–14). This covenant would depend not on human faithfulness but on God’s faithfulness. God would redeem this people to be his own special people.

Several generations later, God addressed the people through Moses, telling them that he chose them for no other reason than that he loved them (Deut. 7:7–8). Through Moses, God freed the people from their slavery in Egypt and gave them the law. The law told them how to live holy lives in response to God. It also included the provisions for atonement through the sacrificial system. In short, loving God involved obeying his statutes.

Love in wisdom books. The OT wisdom books Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes give us further insight into the meaning of love. Proverbs exhorts its readers, “Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it” (4:23). One’s affections are the gateway to the allegiances of one’s heart. Once one’s affections have been hijacked by sinful passions, allegiance to God is subjugated to another “master.” To the degree that sin usurps the throne of the heart, it will steer the course of one’s actions (i.e., one’s “path”).

In the book of Job, Satan is convinced that Job serves God only because God blesses Job, so Satan challenges God to let him afflict Job. Satan insists that if God removes Job’s blessings, Job will curse God to his face (1:10–12). When God agrees to remove the hedge of protection and allows Job to suffer, the depth of Job’s love for God is vindicated. Although perplexed that God would allow him to endure such suffering, he endures without forsaking God. Job loved the giver more than his gifts, so his love did not turn to hatred when the gifts of God were removed.

In the book of Ecclesiastes, Qoheleth (the Teacher) reflects honestly on the many vain pursuits and unexplainable dissonances that characterize life “under the sun.” Only faith-filled love for God can enable one to live each moment of life with joy instead of striving to find meaning in “under the sun” pursuits. This love chooses to trust the inscrutable wisdom of God in the face of life’s many enigmas, uncertainties, and sufferings. One can do this honestly because of the belief that God’s just rule over the affairs of the universe will be vindicated at the future day of judgment (Eccles. 12:14).

Marriage metaphor. The Bible uses the metaphor of marriage to describe God’s covenant relationship with his people (Isa. 54:5–8). This metaphor captures the intimate character of the relationship that God desires to have with his people. Marriage is the most intimate human relationship in two ways. First, marriage is a relationship in which knowledge is the most intimate. A spouse can see many of the flaws that are hidden from others. Thus, each spouse must accept and love the other for who that person is, in spite of his or her imperfections. Second, the depth and passion of the expressions of love are most intimate in marriage. Consequently, there is no greater pain than that caused by unfaithfulness to this covenant.

Sadly, as the story of the OT unfolds, God’s “wife” betrays him. How so? His people worship idols in their hearts (Ezek. 14:1–5). Because God is jealous for the exclusive love of his people, idolatry is spiritual unfaithfulness. God wants both the allegiance and the affection of their hearts to be reserved exclusively for him. The people continue the formalities of worship, but their hearts have turned away from God. The book of Hosea illustrates the sense of betrayal that God feels when his people are spiritually unfaithful. God tells Hosea to marry a woman who will be unfaithful to him. Subsequently, she leaves Hosea for one lover after another. This story is intended to give God’s people a vivid picture of how painful their spiritual betrayal of him is. His heart is crushed by the rebellious and idolatrous condition of his people. Hosea’s wife ends up on the market as a prostitute, and God tells him to buy her back and love her again.

New Testament

The story of God’s love for his people is expanded by what the Father did centuries later when he sent Jesus to pay the ransom for the sins of his people so that they might be healed of their rebellion and receive eternal life (John 3:16; 17:24). The death and resurrection of Christ were necessary because sin had to be atoned for. This love is a free gift that comes to the one who trusts in Christ for forgiveness of sin and a new heart. The new heart inclines one to please God. The gift of the Spirit enables one to bear the “fruit” of love (Gal. 5:22–23). As Abraham’s engrafted children (Gal. 3:7), believers are called by God to live as pilgrims on their way to a heavenly promised land (Heb. 11:9–10; 1 Pet. 2:11).

Christ modeled genuine love by serving us (Mark 10:42–45). His love should motivate us and enable us to practice sacrificial service toward others (Matt. 22:39; 1 John 3:16). It should also cause us to practice forbearance, long-suffering, and forgiveness toward those who wrong us (Matt. 18:21–35). It should cause us to repay evil with good (Rom. 12:14). Our love for truth should motivate us to act in the best interests of others (1 Cor. 13:4–8) in the hope that they may become reconciled to God (2 Tim. 2:24–26).

The “love feast” (agapē) was a common meal shared by early Christians in conjunction with their celebration of the Eucharist, the Lord’s Supper. The term occurs in Jude 12 and, in some manuscripts, 2 Pet. 2:13. This type of gathering for fellowship evidently was a common feature of early Christianity. Jude exhorts the community to which he writes to rid itself of the immoral, godless people who “are blemishes at your love feasts.” A similar group appears to be infiltrating the “love feast” referred to in 2 Pet. 2:13. In 1 Cor. 11:17–34 is described some form of a common meal that included the Eucharist (cf. Acts 20:7), and it is likely that the Eucharist was very much a part of the love feasts mentioned in Jude and 2 Peter. Outside the NT, there is evidence in the letters of Ignatius of Antioch, in the early second century, that the Eucharist and love feast were held together. Ignatius says that the bishop must be present for both the feast (agapē) and baptism (Ign. Smyrn. 8).

Further into the second century, a distinction appears to be drawn between the Eucharist and the love feast. It is not clear whether the meal described in Did. 9–10 is the Eucharist or the love feast. Some think that the thanksgiving offered over the cup and the bread reflects the pattern of a love feast rather than the Eucharist, since it is the opposite of the sequence in the NT (Mark 14:22–23; cf. Luke 22:17–19). The phrase “after you have had your fill” (Did. 10.1), if interpreted literally, could also indicate a common meal. Yet Did. 14.1 clearly sets forth the celebration of the Eucharist on Sunday. Interestingly, Did. 14.2 contains an injunction, likely inspired by Matt. 5:23–24, to reconcile with another believer if need be before participating in the ritual. Justin Martyr records a regular Sunday service in which the Eucharist was celebrated following the reading of Scripture and a homily. In his description, found in First Apology, the Eucharist is clearly not a meal. Some suggest that the love feast occurred after the service of word and table. At that point the wealthy came with food for a communal meal with the poor. Tertullian, in the late second century, affirms that the love feast definitely benefited the poor.

The Hebrew word shepelah, translated “lowland” or “foothills,” generally refers to the low hills immediately west of the Judean hill country, although on two occasions it indicates similar topographical features in proximity to the hills of western Galilee (Josh. 11:2, 16). The region functioned as a buffer zone between the secure location in the hill country and the foreign powers on the coastal plain. The Shephelah of Judah is cut through by five east-west valleys that provide access into the interior. Four of these valleys, Aijalon, Sorek, Elah, and Lachish, figured prominently in significant confrontations in the history of Israel.

In the KJV of Nah. 3:9, a name for the people of Libya (NIV: “Libya”; NRSV: “Libyans”). Nahum’s oracle against Nineveh, the capital city of Assyria, recalls the destruction of Thebes. If strong allies such as Put and Libya could not rescue Thebes, then Nineveh would not be impregnable (Nah. 3:8–11).

The author of the third Gospel and the book of Acts; coworker, loyal friend, and periodic companion of Paul during his missionary journeys; and by profession a medical doctor.

Although Luke was not an eyewitness of Jesus’ earthly ministry (Luke 1:1–4), the use of the pronoun “we” indicates that he was present for some of the events critical to the missionary expansion of the early church (Acts 16:10–17; 20:5–15; 21:1–18; 27:1–28:16). Luke is mentioned in Paul’s letters, being identified as a “dear friend” and “doctor” (Col. 4:14) and, by inference, as a Gentile (Col. 4:11). He also provided support for Paul during his imprisonments in Rome (2 Tim. 4:11; Philem. 24).

Luke was an accomplished historian. His medical training of accurate observation and diagnosis served him well in composing both a biography of Jesus and the historical narrative of Acts. These books together contribute more than a quarter of the NT, more than any other writer.

The distinctive features of his writing reveal something of him as a person. He took a keen interest in individuals both rich and poor, men and women, respectable and outcast, the elderly and children. This interest served to demonstrate that in the gospel the fulfillment of OT promises was taking place. Hence, all kinds of people were entering into God’s kingdom through the apostolic preaching of the word of Jesus.

He was also a skillful apologist and diplomat who demonstrated that the Christian faith was no threat to Roman law and order.

Some translations (e.g., KJV), following the Vulgate, translate as “Lucifer” (Lat. “light-bearer”) the epithet of the king of Babylon in Isa. 14:12 (NIV: “morning star”). Originally, the term referred to Venus (the “shining one”), which appears as one of the brightest objects in the night sky. In medieval Christian theology Isa. 14:3–23 was interpreted (in light of Luke 10:18) as a history of the figure called “Satan” or “the devil” in the NT and in a handful of OT texts. As a result, the name “Lucifer” was applied to this figure.

(1) Lucius of Cyrene is among the prophets and teachers who hear the call of the Holy Spirit while worshiping in the church at Antioch. He is one of several believers who fast, pray, and lay hands on Paul and Barnabas to consecrate their departure for Paul’s first missionary journey (Acts 13:1–3). (2) A relative or compatriot of Paul who adds greetings to the Roman church in the letter that Paul writes to that church from Corinth (Rom. 16:21). Several church fathers have attempted to equate both men with the apostle Luke.

A son of Shem (Gen. 10:22; 1 Chron. 1:17); the plural form, “Ludim” or “Ludites,” refers to a Hamitic people descended from Mizraim (Gen. 10:13; 1 Chron. 1:11). Possibly, two distinct peoples are in view, or else the Ludites might be the Lydians of Asia Minor (as Josephus thought), the Ludbu of Assyria, or an otherwise unknown North African tribe. The mixed testimony of Scripture makes a firm identification impossible. Some passages associate them with African nations (Gen. 10:13; 1 Chron. 1:11; Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 30:5), others with peoples of Mesopotamia (Gen. 10:22; 1 Chron. 1:17), and others with both (Isa. 66:19; Ezek. 27:10). It remains possible that over time the group migrated from one area to another.

The OT prophets regarded the Ludites as warriors who were adept archers (Isa. 66:19; Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 27:10). At times they were allied with Tyre (Ezek. 27:10) and Egypt (Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 30:5). Ezekiel proclaimed that they would be judged along with Egypt, and Isaiah that they would be included among the nations to witness God’s glory.

A son of Shem (Gen. 10:22; 1 Chron. 1:17); the plural form, “Ludim” or “Ludites,” refers to a Hamitic people descended from Mizraim (Gen. 10:13; 1 Chron. 1:11). Possibly, two distinct peoples are in view, or else the Ludites might be the Lydians of Asia Minor (as Josephus thought), the Ludbu of Assyria, or an otherwise unknown North African tribe. The mixed testimony of Scripture makes a firm identification impossible. Some passages associate them with African nations (Gen. 10:13; 1 Chron. 1:11; Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 30:5), others with peoples of Mesopotamia (Gen. 10:22; 1 Chron. 1:17), and others with both (Isa. 66:19; Ezek. 27:10). It remains possible that over time the group migrated from one area to another.

The OT prophets regarded the Ludites as warriors who were adept archers (Isa. 66:19; Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 27:10). At times they were allied with Tyre (Ezek. 27:10) and Egypt (Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 30:5). Ezekiel proclaimed that they would be judged along with Egypt, and Isaiah that they would be included among the nations to witness God’s glory.

A son of Shem (Gen. 10:22; 1 Chron. 1:17); the plural form, “Ludim” or “Ludites,” refers to a Hamitic people descended from Mizraim (Gen. 10:13; 1 Chron. 1:11). Possibly, two distinct peoples are in view, or else the Ludites might be the Lydians of Asia Minor (as Josephus thought), the Ludbu of Assyria, or an otherwise unknown North African tribe. The mixed testimony of Scripture makes a firm identification impossible. Some passages associate them with African nations (Gen. 10:13; 1 Chron. 1:11; Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 30:5), others with peoples of Mesopotamia (Gen. 10:22; 1 Chron. 1:17), and others with both (Isa. 66:19; Ezek. 27:10). It remains possible that over time the group migrated from one area to another.

The OT prophets regarded the Ludites as warriors who were adept archers (Isa. 66:19; Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 27:10). At times they were allied with Tyre (Ezek. 27:10) and Egypt (Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 30:5). Ezekiel proclaimed that they would be judged along with Egypt, and Isaiah that they would be included among the nations to witness God’s glory.

A town of the eastern Dead Sea region of Moab through which fugitive Moabites passed, as prophesied in Isa. 15:5; Jer. 48:5. The location is uncertain; it is mentioned in conjunction with Zoar, a city at the southern tip of the Dead Sea.

The author of the third Gospel and the book of Acts; coworker, loyal friend, and periodic companion of Paul during his missionary journeys; and by profession a medical doctor.

Although Luke was not an eyewitness of Jesus’ earthly ministry (Luke 1:1–4), the use of the pronoun “we” indicates that he was present for some of the events critical to the missionary expansion of the early church (Acts 16:10–17; 20:5–15; 21:1–18; 27:1–28:16). Luke is mentioned in Paul’s letters, being identified as a “dear friend” and “doctor” (Col. 4:14) and, by inference, as a Gentile (Col. 4:11). He also provided support for Paul during his imprisonments in Rome (2 Tim. 4:11; Philem. 24).

Luke was an accomplished historian. His medical training of accurate observation and diagnosis served him well in composing both a biography of Jesus and the historical narrative of Acts. These books together contribute more than a quarter of the NT, more than any other writer.

The distinctive features of his writing reveal something of him as a person. He took a keen interest in individuals both rich and poor, men and women, respectable and outcast, the elderly and children. This interest served to demonstrate that in the gospel the fulfillment of OT promises was taking place. Hence, all kinds of people were entering into God’s kingdom through the apostolic preaching of the word of Jesus.

He was also a skillful apologist and diplomat who demonstrated that the Christian faith was no threat to Roman law and order.

A description of something, typically water, that is neither hot nor cold but rather a tepid mixture of the two. Jesus warns the church at Laodicea in the book of Revelation that their lukewarm, or apathetic, lifestyle will cause them to be spit out of Jesus’ mouth (Rev. 3:16).

In Matt. 17:15 the NASB translates the Greek verb selēniazetai as “he is a lunatic” to describe a demonically afflicted boy. The Greek word literally means “to be moonstruck” and is etymologically linked (as is the English word “lunatic”) to the belief that the moon’s phases provoke certain mental or spiritual afflictions. Several modern versions prefer translations of the Greek word that denote an epileptic condition (e.g., NIV: “he has seizures”; NRSV: “he is an epileptic”), as the context suggests (Matt. 17:14–21; Mark 9:14–29).

In modern cultures, lust typically is associated with indulging in illegitimate sexual fantasizing. In Scripture, however, the word “lust” is sometimes used to translate Greek and Hebrew words that have a wider range of meanings. “Lust” can refer to an inordinate (i.e., idolatrous) passion that rules one’s heart, whether or not one acts upon it. After Moses led the children of Israel in the desert for some time, they became tired of the manna that God was providing and began to “crave” the delicacies that they had enjoyed in Egypt. Their inordinate desire for meat caused them to become disgruntled and complain to Moses (Num. 11:4–9). The desire became idolatrous when it morphed from a legitimate desire into a demand.

The Bible distinguishes between temptation, which appeals to one’s desire (1 Cor. 10:13), and lust, which takes captive one’s affections and imagination, enslaving a person. “Each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death” (James 1:14–15). There are good desires that turn into sinful ones, but there are also desires that are inherently sinful. Jesus identified an inward yearning to have another person’s spouse as adultery, because affections and imagination have been hijacked by desire for emotional and sexual fulfillment outside the legitimate context of marriage (Matt. 5:28). By the Spirit, we are to mortify inordinate desires (Gal. 5:16–18).

The Bible often refers to songs, music, musical sounds and instruments, and dancing. We can infer several details about the instruments from their descriptions in the Bible as well as from archaeological finds and other ancient texts. NT references to music are scant; the OT material may be supplemented by ancient Near Eastern resources from Egypt, Canaan/Israel, Ugarit, and Mesopotamia.

Music

Style. In all likelihood, Israel’s music sounded much like that of its neighbors. This conjecture is particularly strengthened by findings from Ugarit, a city on the Syrian coast across from Cyprus. These findings, roughly from the time of the judges, mention some of the same musical instruments found in the Bible, some of which have been uncovered by archaeologists. The style of the poetry is very similar to the Song of Deborah (Judg. 5). Lyrically, some of the descriptions and titles used by the Canaanites for Baal are applied by Israel to Yahweh, to assert that he is the true God who has these attributes. Given these similarities in text, poetic style, and instrumentation, it is most probable that Israel’s music sounded much like that of its neighbors. Still, there is some evidence for regional styles. The direction to play psalms “according to gittith” (superscription to Pss. 8; 81; 84) may refer to the style of Gath, and similar regional interpretations are proposed for other directions in the psalms.

Lyrics. The lyric side of Israel’s songs exhibits rhythm and deliberate structure. The most obvious planned structure is the alphabetic acrostic, where the poet or songwriter composes one or more verses to begin with successive letters of the Hebrew alphabet. But the psalms exhibit many other structures involving symmetries and balance, such as equal halves, centered lines, symmetrical patterns of stanza length, and other features. The lines themselves usually demonstrate balance among their parts, having similar numbers of beats or accented syllables. Several lament poems exhibit a particular pattern known as qinah meter, which presumably also fits a musical template.

Performance. The performance of the psalms was, on at least some occasions, accompanied by multiple instruments and performed in a choir to achieve the volume necessary for community gatherings, which had no amplification equipment. It is generally assumed, though not known, that all choir members sang melody rather than in parts. They may well have integrated solo performances and musical interludes. From the poetry of the psalms, we observe different speaking voices. That is, in some instances, we hear the voice of the king, or of the people generally, or an official who addresses the audience, or a priestly or prophetic speaking voice, even the words of God himself. This is very suggestive that public performance may have brought different singers to the foreground at different times. There are also poems that employ a repeated refrain, suggesting an antiphonal performance, and others in which the priests or people in Jerusalem take up parts different from those of the arriving worshipers. While the exact execution of these songs is speculative, these elements suggest a certain amount of pageantry, at least for community settings. David is responsible for setting up Israel’s musical orders for the temple, with professional musicians with rotating responsibilities (1 Chron. 16; 25).

Instruments

Strings. The most frequently mentioned instrument is the kinnor, a lyre, also often referred to as a harp. The sound box of the harp is at the base, from which a straight or curved neck rises at a sharp angle so that the strings going from the box to the neck are of different length. The lyre has two uprights and a crosspiece on top, from which the strings of similar length stretch down to the sound box. The kinnor-lyre had eight to ten strings (based on Akkadian and Ugaritic findings and Jewish descriptions) and could be played with a pick or by hand. David’s “harp” was such a lyre. The “harp” mentioned in the NT (1 Cor. 14:7; Rev. 5:8; 14:2; 15:2) probably was also a lyre. Another OT lyre, or perhaps a harp, the nebel, complemented the kinnor-lyre. Jewish tradition about the strings implies that it produced a lower sound. The nebel-lyre is most often mentioned with other instruments, though occasionally alone. Another stringed instrument mentioned three times, the ’asor, may have been a harp or a lyre with ten strings (Pss. 33:2; 92:3; 144:9). In Pss. 45:8; 150:4 there is mention of “the strings,” which may refer to more than just the stringed instruments specifically mentioned in the Bible. The ancient world also had lutes, an instrument with a long, straight neck, fretted like a guitar or ukulele, proceeding from a small sound box.

Percussion. Timbrels, cymbals, and castanets or rattles are percussion instruments mentioned in the Bible. The timbrel, also known from Egypt and Ugarit, was a hand drum, like a tambourine but without metal jingles. The timbrel accompanies dancing and may have been used by the dancers (Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1 Sam. 18:6). Cymbals may have been paired or individual, but it is not certain whether these latter were suspended cymbals or finger cymbals, being four to six inches in diameter. In 2 Sam. 6:5 there is mention of another percussion instrument, mena’an’im (the root of this word means “to shake”), perhaps “sistrums” (NIV) or “castanets” (NASB) (although the KJV renders it as “cornets”). Egyptian sistrums were small, forked, metal instruments with three sliding crossbars that had hooked ends. Archaeologists have also found rattles made of pottery, with ceramic balls inside. Castanets were small hand-clappers joined with a string. Israel likely had all of these, though it is hard to know which is referred to in 2 Sam. 6:5. The cymbal is mentioned once in the NT (1 Cor. 13:1), though not as musically pleasing in that context.

Woodwinds and horns. The OT attests to both an animal horn, most frequently called a shopar, and a metal trumpet, the khatsotserah (Num. 10:2–10). The NT refers to a horn with a word used to translate both OT terms (salpinx). The ancient world had both flutes and shawms. Shawms have a bell-like flare at the end, while the shaft of a flute is straight to the end. What is likely a double-reed shawm is frequently translated “flute” (1 Sam. 10:5; 1 Kings 1:40; Isa. 5:12; 30:29; Jer. 48:36 [NIV: “pipes”]). It is unclear whether the instrument mentioned in Gen. 4:21; Ps. 150:4 commonly translated as “flute” is a woodwind or a stringed instrument. The NT also mentions a flute or reed instrument (Matt. 11:17; 9:23; 1 Cor. 14:7; Rev. 18:22) that could be played for dancing or mourning.

Simplicity and complexity. Instruments such as horns, trumpets, and some percussion instruments were not used only for making music. The blowing of the ram’s horn or the trumpet might be used to sound the alarm, convene an assembly, or in preparation for an announcement. Aaron was to wear metal bells on the hem of his robe when entering the holy place (Exod. 28:33–35). Some of the percussion instruments may have been used to augment dance and keep rhythm more than to make music for singing. The strings were the primary instruments to accompany singing, though they were not necessarily accompanied by song.

A few Assyrian texts treat the tuning and playing of music with technical notations. From their string designations and tuning directions we can infer that their scales utilized seven notes as in the modern octave (seven notes plus one repeating). The notes for tuning stringed instruments suggest that the tunings produced different scales. Musical theory, then, was not completely absent. Many of the pictorial representations of musicians from Egypt and Mesopotamia include multiple instruments being played together (cf. Nebuchadnezzar’s instructions in Dan. 3:5, 7, 10, 15 and David’s celebration in 2 Sam. 6:5). These are not simply multiple kinds of noisemakers, although community gatherings would require volume. Rather, they exhibit a sense of understanding which instruments complemented each other well. While the singing of the ancient Near East no doubt included chanting, singing with multiple instruments suggests something more melodious than mere chanting interspersed with the strumming of a lute. This music could be styled to fit different moods, to soothe, to celebrate, to mourn, to worship. It is reasonable to suggest that the music accompanying the psalms reflected the wide range of emotions mentioned in the text.

Dancing

The dancing mentioned in the Bible is usually celebratory and positive and is combined with singing or the playing of musical instruments. Such dancing may occur at any happy occasion but is mentioned most often in connection with victory or worship (e.g., Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1 Sam. 18:6). The women of Shiloh “join in the dancing” (Judg. 21:21) at an annual festival, which implies some manner of folk dancing. The dancing of Herodias’s daughter probably was erotic (Matt. 14:6; Mark 6:22), and the dancing of the Israelites around the golden calf probably was laden with sensuality as well (Exod. 32:19).

(1) A town whose Canaanite name Jacob changed to “Bethel” because of the dream theophany that he had there on his way to Paddan Aram (Gen. 28:19; 35:6; 48:3; see also Josh. 16:2; 18:13; Judg. 1:23). (2) A city built in Hittite territory by a Canaanite resident of Bethel (the Luz mentioned above) that was spared by the Israelites who attacked it during the conquest (Judg. 1:22–26). It is uncertain whether the Hittite territory mentioned in this passage was to the north in Syria or Lebanon, or in a Hittite enclave in the hill country of Palestine.

Paul’s missionary journeys took him through this region in south-central Asia Minor where the cities of Lystra and Derbe lay (Acts 14:6–22; 18:23; 19:1).

Paul’s missionary journeys took him through this region in south-central Asia Minor where the cities of Lystra and Derbe lay (Acts 14:6–22; 18:23; 19:1).

A Roman province in southwest Asia Minor where Paul and his companions boarded an Alexandrian ship en route to Rome (Acts 27:5–6).

This city, called “Lod” in the OT, lies about halfway between Jerusalem and Joppa in the coastal plain. A Benjamite settlement, it is mentioned in Neh. 11:35 in the resettlement. In the only NT reference to the city, Luke notes that it was at Lydda that Peter visited and healed Aeneas, a paralytic who had been bedridden for eight years (Acts 9:32–34). The witness of this miracle resulted in a great turning to the Lord (9:35).

(1) A “dealer in purple cloth” “from the city of Thyatira” who believed and was baptized when Paul came to Philippi on his second missionary journey (Acts 16:14). Luke records that Lydia was “a worshiper of God,” a designation that he uses elsewhere only in Acts 18:7. The description is similar to “God-fearing,” which applied usually to devout Gentile followers of the Jewish God (Acts 10:2; 17:17).

Paul shared the gospel with Lydia and her female companions at a place of prayer near a river. God “opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message” (Acts 16:14), and Lydia became the first named Christian convert in Europe. Lydia then invited Paul and his companions to stay at her house (16:15), indicating that she was a woman of some means. Paul, Luke, and the rest of the missionary band seem to have stayed at Lydia’s house until they left Philippi (16:40).

Lydia’s hometown, Thyatira, over two hundred miles from Philippi, is home to one of the seven churches of Revelation (Rev. 2:18–29).

(2) A region in western Asia Minor, mentioned in Jeremiah and Ezekiel in close connection with Cush and Put (Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 27:10; 30:5).

(1) A “dealer in purple cloth” “from the city of Thyatira” who believed and was baptized when Paul came to Philippi on his second missionary journey (Acts 16:14). Luke records that Lydia was “a worshiper of God,” a designation that he uses elsewhere only in Acts 18:7. The description is similar to “God-fearing,” which applied usually to devout Gentile followers of the Jewish God (Acts 10:2; 17:17).

Paul shared the gospel with Lydia and her female companions at a place of prayer near a river. God “opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message” (Acts 16:14), and Lydia became the first named Christian convert in Europe. Lydia then invited Paul and his companions to stay at her house (16:15), indicating that she was a woman of some means. Paul, Luke, and the rest of the missionary band seem to have stayed at Lydia’s house until they left Philippi (16:40).

Lydia’s hometown, Thyatira, over two hundred miles from Philippi, is home to one of the seven churches of Revelation (Rev. 2:18–29).

(2) A region in western Asia Minor, mentioned in Jeremiah and Ezekiel in close connection with Cush and Put (Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 27:10; 30:5).

A harsh alkaline mineral cleansing agent leached from wood ashes. In some Bible translations, lye is referred to metaphorically in conjunction with soap, a vegetable alkali mixed with oil, to emphasize the inadequacy of human effort to eradicate guilt before God (Job 9:3 [NIV: “cleansing powder”]; Jer. 2:22 [NIV: “soap”]) as opposed to God’s ability to cleanse and redeem sinners (Isa. 1:25 NASB).

The Bible often refers to songs, music, musical sounds and instruments, and dancing. We can infer several details about the instruments from their descriptions in the Bible as well as from archaeological finds and other ancient texts. NT references to music are scant; the OT material may be supplemented by ancient Near Eastern resources from Egypt, Canaan/Israel, Ugarit, and Mesopotamia.

Music

Style. In all likelihood, Israel’s music sounded much like that of its neighbors. This conjecture is particularly strengthened by findings from Ugarit, a city on the Syrian coast across from Cyprus. These findings, roughly from the time of the judges, mention some of the same musical instruments found in the Bible, some of which have been uncovered by archaeologists. The style of the poetry is very similar to the Song of Deborah (Judg. 5). Lyrically, some of the descriptions and titles used by the Canaanites for Baal are applied by Israel to Yahweh, to assert that he is the true God who has these attributes. Given these similarities in text, poetic style, and instrumentation, it is most probable that Israel’s music sounded much like that of its neighbors. Still, there is some evidence for regional styles. The direction to play psalms “according to gittith” (superscription to Pss. 8; 81; 84) may refer to the style of Gath, and similar regional interpretations are proposed for other directions in the psalms.

Lyrics. The lyric side of Israel’s songs exhibits rhythm and deliberate structure. The most obvious planned structure is the alphabetic acrostic, where the poet or songwriter composes one or more verses to begin with successive letters of the Hebrew alphabet. But the psalms exhibit many other structures involving symmetries and balance, such as equal halves, centered lines, symmetrical patterns of stanza length, and other features. The lines themselves usually demonstrate balance among their parts, having similar numbers of beats or accented syllables. Several lament poems exhibit a particular pattern known as qinah meter, which presumably also fits a musical template.

Performance. The performance of the psalms was, on at least some occasions, accompanied by multiple instruments and performed in a choir to achieve the volume necessary for community gatherings, which had no amplification equipment. It is generally assumed, though not known, that all choir members sang melody rather than in parts. They may well have integrated solo performances and musical interludes. From the poetry of the psalms, we observe different speaking voices. That is, in some instances, we hear the voice of the king, or of the people generally, or an official who addresses the audience, or a priestly or prophetic speaking voice, even the words of God himself. This is very suggestive that public performance may have brought different singers to the foreground at different times. There are also poems that employ a repeated refrain, suggesting an antiphonal performance, and others in which the priests or people in Jerusalem take up parts different from those of the arriving worshipers. While the exact execution of these songs is speculative, these elements suggest a certain amount of pageantry, at least for community settings. David is responsible for setting up Israel’s musical orders for the temple, with professional musicians with rotating responsibilities (1 Chron. 16; 25).

Instruments

Strings. The most frequently mentioned instrument is the kinnor, a lyre, also often referred to as a harp. The sound box of the harp is at the base, from which a straight or curved neck rises at a sharp angle so that the strings going from the box to the neck are of different length. The lyre has two uprights and a crosspiece on top, from which the strings of similar length stretch down to the sound box. The kinnor-lyre had eight to ten strings (based on Akkadian and Ugaritic findings and Jewish descriptions) and could be played with a pick or by hand. David’s “harp” was such a lyre. The “harp” mentioned in the NT (1 Cor. 14:7; Rev. 5:8; 14:2; 15:2) probably was also a lyre. Another OT lyre, or perhaps a harp, the nebel, complemented the kinnor-lyre. Jewish tradition about the strings implies that it produced a lower sound. The nebel-lyre is most often mentioned with other instruments, though occasionally alone. Another stringed instrument mentioned three times, the ’asor, may have been a harp or a lyre with ten strings (Pss. 33:2; 92:3; 144:9). In Pss. 45:8; 150:4 there is mention of “the strings,” which may refer to more than just the stringed instruments specifically mentioned in the Bible. The ancient world also had lutes, an instrument with a long, straight neck, fretted like a guitar or ukulele, proceeding from a small sound box.

Percussion. Timbrels, cymbals, and castanets or rattles are percussion instruments mentioned in the Bible. The timbrel, also known from Egypt and Ugarit, was a hand drum, like a tambourine but without metal jingles. The timbrel accompanies dancing and may have been used by the dancers (Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1 Sam. 18:6). Cymbals may have been paired or individual, but it is not certain whether these latter were suspended cymbals or finger cymbals, being four to six inches in diameter. In 2 Sam. 6:5 there is mention of another percussion instrument, mena’an’im (the root of this word means “to shake”), perhaps “sistrums” (NIV) or “castanets” (NASB) (although the KJV renders it as “cornets”). Egyptian sistrums were small, forked, metal instruments with three sliding crossbars that had hooked ends. Archaeologists have also found rattles made of pottery, with ceramic balls inside. Castanets were small hand-clappers joined with a string. Israel likely had all of these, though it is hard to know which is referred to in 2 Sam. 6:5. The cymbal is mentioned once in the NT (1 Cor. 13:1), though not as musically pleasing in that context.

Woodwinds and horns. The OT attests to both an animal horn, most frequently called a shopar, and a metal trumpet, the khatsotserah (Num. 10:2–10). The NT refers to a horn with a word used to translate both OT terms (salpinx). The ancient world had both flutes and shawms. Shawms have a bell-like flare at the end, while the shaft of a flute is straight to the end. What is likely a double-reed shawm is frequently translated “flute” (1 Sam. 10:5; 1 Kings 1:40; Isa. 5:12; 30:29; Jer. 48:36 [NIV: “pipes”]). It is unclear whether the instrument mentioned in Gen. 4:21; Ps. 150:4 commonly translated as “flute” is a woodwind or a stringed instrument. The NT also mentions a flute or reed instrument (Matt. 11:17; 9:23; 1 Cor. 14:7; Rev. 18:22) that could be played for dancing or mourning.

Simplicity and complexity. Instruments such as horns, trumpets, and some percussion instruments were not used only for making music. The blowing of the ram’s horn or the trumpet might be used to sound the alarm, convene an assembly, or in preparation for an announcement. Aaron was to wear metal bells on the hem of his robe when entering the holy place (Exod. 28:33–35). Some of the percussion instruments may have been used to augment dance and keep rhythm more than to make music for singing. The strings were the primary instruments to accompany singing, though they were not necessarily accompanied by song.

A few Assyrian texts treat the tuning and playing of music with technical notations. From their string designations and tuning directions we can infer that their scales utilized seven notes as in the modern octave (seven notes plus one repeating). The notes for tuning stringed instruments suggest that the tunings produced different scales. Musical theory, then, was not completely absent. Many of the pictorial representations of musicians from Egypt and Mesopotamia include multiple instruments being played together (cf. Nebuchadnezzar’s instructions in Dan. 3:5, 7, 10, 15 and David’s celebration in 2 Sam. 6:5). These are not simply multiple kinds of noisemakers, although community gatherings would require volume. Rather, they exhibit a sense of understanding which instruments complemented each other well. While the singing of the ancient Near East no doubt included chanting, singing with multiple instruments suggests something more melodious than mere chanting interspersed with the strumming of a lute. This music could be styled to fit different moods, to soothe, to celebrate, to mourn, to worship. It is reasonable to suggest that the music accompanying the psalms reflected the wide range of emotions mentioned in the text.

Dancing

The dancing mentioned in the Bible is usually celebratory and positive and is combined with singing or the playing of musical instruments. Such dancing may occur at any happy occasion but is mentioned most often in connection with victory or worship (e.g., Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1 Sam. 18:6). The women of Shiloh “join in the dancing” (Judg. 21:21) at an annual festival, which implies some manner of folk dancing. The dancing of Herodias’s daughter probably was erotic (Matt. 14:6; Mark 6:22), and the dancing of the Israelites around the golden calf probably was laden with sensuality as well (Exod. 32:19).

The ruler of Abilene, a Roman tetrarchy adjacent to the province of Syria, when John the Baptist’s public ministry began (Luke 3:1). Pontius Pilate, Herod (Antipas) tetrarch of Galilee, and Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis were Lysanias’s contemporaries.

A Roman tribune who provided a military escort for Paul’s transportation to Caesarea to appear before the governor Felix (Acts 23:23–25). Lysias sent a letter to Felix explaining the reasons for the arrest. Subsequently, Felix suspended judgment on Paul’s case until Lysias arrived in Caesarea (Acts 24:22).

A Lycaonian city one hundred miles north of the Mediterranean in what is now Turkey. On the first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas fled to the cities of Lystra and Derbe (and the surrounding area) to avoid execution in Iconium (Acts 14:1–6). In Lystra, Paul healed a lame man, causing a stir when the townspeople assumed that Paul and Barnabas were gods, Barnabas being Zeus and Paul being Hermes. After refusing their worship, Paul and Barnabas evangelized the people (Acts 14:7–17). Later, persuaded against Paul and Barnabas by some Jews from Antioch and Iconium, the people stoned Paul (Acts 14:18–19). After Paul recovered, the two men left for Derbe (Acts 14:20). Paul came though Lystra again on the second journey, this time circumcising Timothy, who then joined their team.