... … has any value conveys the sense “there is no strength.” Paul, Not the Rival Evangelists, Is on the Galatians’ Side 5:7 Paul now changes his tactic somewhat and begins to use an approach common to persuasive speech—friendship through shared antipathy. Paul places himself and the Galatians in one camp against an opposition seeking to separate the Galatians from their goal. Paul affirms that in the past his readers were heading toward the goal in exemplary fashion—you were running a good race ...
... the twelve tribes, and gave them the strength and wisdom to build the temple for God's glory. God is a God of action who would manifest God's power, presence, and majesty within human history. This was not a god of inertia and apathy, a god of lethargy and antipathy. This God promised to act and make good on his promises. Elijah knew God's promise to Moses that "I will be with you." God would act in time and space, and his faith in God buoyed Elijah's conviction that God would do so. When priests of Baal ...
... unbelief. 3. Wrath (v. 28). The "wonder" of the beginning ended up in "wrath." The people were so angry with Jesus' sermon that they took him to a cliff and were about to throw him down head-first to his death. How could one sermon arouse so much antipathy? Since a prophet was of no honor among his own people, Jesus suggested that non-Jews would accept him. He gave two cases to prove his point: Elijah went to a Gentile widow for food and drink at a time of drought (1 Kings 17), and Elisha healed Namaan ...
... their unbelief. 3. Wrath (v.28). The "wonder" of the beginning ended up in "wrath." The people were so angry with Jesus' sermon that they took him to a cliff and were about to throw him down head-first to his death. How could one sermon arouse so much antipathy? Since a prophet was of no honor among his own people, Jesus suggested that non-Jews would accept him. He gave two cases to prove his point: Elijah went to a Gentile widow for food and drink at a time of drought (1 Kings 17), and Elisha healed Namaan ...
... keep a peace that does not exist, and there can be no peace -- not between races, or national governments, or theological sparring partners -- until the dividing walls in human hearts, not merely veneers, are brought down. The Apostle Paul, reflecting on the centuries-old antipathy between Jews and Gentiles in verse 14, proclaims Jesus to be the world's only source of hope for human reconciliation: "For he is our peace; in his flesh he has made both groups into one and has broken down the dividing wall ...
... that way. They probably wonder what you are doing getting up so early on Sunday morning. I am sure they assume it is all right to visit a church now and then, on holy days, weddings and funerals, but why join the Church? There is also that antipathy in our time toward "organized religion." Most people would say that they are religious, in some fashion, but they don't like organized religion. That reminds me of Will Willimon's anecdote from when he was the pastor of a church in South Carolina. His members ...
... demanding. Solomon said, "The lazy man will not plow because of winter..." (Prov. 20:4) It's always either too hot, too cold, too wet, or too dry to work. The point is, he always has an excuse. Thomas Edison, the epitome of a worker, and the antipathies to a sluggard, said, "Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work."4 Old Benjamin Franklin was right when he said, "I never knew a man who was good at making excuses who was good at anything else." The bottom ...
... " hasn't been accomplished. Why does this parable strike such a discordant note in and to our senses? Perhaps part of the problem is that we read and hear the story of the prodigal son as a tale about relationships, especially family relationships. Periodic antipathy between parents and children is a relational issue rooted deep in our emotional lives. The drama between the characters is an affair of the heart. We are pleased to see a loving heart and a forgiving nature bring harmony to discord. But today's ...
... " hasn't been accomplished. Why does this parable strike such a discordant note in and to our senses? Perhaps part of the problem is that we read and hear the story of the prodigal son as a tale about relationships, especially family relationships. Periodic antipathy between parents and children is a relational issue rooted deep in our emotional lives. The drama between the characters is an affair of the heart. We are pleased to see a loving heart and a forgiving nature bring harmony to discord. But today's ...
... for Peter to feel the full scope of that Forgiveness. But I believe, that in some sense, when their eyes locked for that eternal instant across that charcoal fire in the courtyard, that Peter didn't see condemnation at all. He didn't see ambivalence or antipathy or even empathy. I believe he saw compassion, love, understanding and most of all FORGIVENESS. And that's why Peter wept. He wept out of remorse and relief. Remorse for his weakness. Remorse for the pain it had to have caused Jesus even though Jesus ...
... magis’ question. Note that while Matthew’s text includes “all” of Jerusalem in Herod’s fear, and “all “ of the chief priests and scribes in this consultation, the gospel writer is alluding to the general culpability of these populations in Herod’s antipathy about a new ruler rather to any generic awareness of these events. Those who do respond to Herod’s inquiry provide him with the answer he seeks. “In Bethlehem of Judea” (as opposed to the lesser known Bethlehem located in Galilee ...
... magis’ question. Note that while Matthew’s text includes “all” of Jerusalem in Herod’s fear, and “all “ of the chief priests and scribes in this consultation, the gospel writer is alluding to the general culpability of these populations in Herod’s antipathy about a new ruler rather to any generic awareness of these events. Those who do respond to Herod’s inquiry provide him with the answer he seeks. “In Bethlehem of Judea” (as opposed to the lesser known Bethlehem located in Galilee ...
... loggerheads with Jesus (e.g., Luke 5:21, 30; 7:30; 11:53; 15:2; 16:14; see also Luke 11:39–52; 12:1; 16:15; 18:9–14), should now come to the defense of Jesus’ followers. There is ample evidence, however, that it had not been all antipathy between Jesus and the Pharisees (cf. Luke 7:36; 11:37; 14:1; John 3:1ff.; 7:50; 19:39), and in any case, the issue was now very different from the one that had divided them. Then, it had been a question of due regard for the law. The ...
... eat the food, therefore, was to run the risk of defilement—a risk that many Jews (and Jewish Christians) were not willing to take. It was in this connection that the revelation to Peter had its immediate application. There was, of course, more to the Jewish antipathy toward the Gentiles than simply a concern over food. The Gentiles themselves were considered unclean (cf. Gal. 2:15; see note on v. 28). But if Peter could be freed from his scruples over the dietary laws to the extent that he would enter a ...
... point is that in putting Jesus to death these people had unwittingly carried out all that was written about him (v. 29; cf. 2:23; for particular scriptures, see 4:11 and 8:32f.). But God had raised him from the dead—the familiar contrast between the human antipathy toward Jesus and his divine vindication (v. 30; cf. 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; 5:30f.; 10:40). And his resurrection could be verified, for Jesus had appeared (“who had appeared”; see note on 4:10) to his followers over a span of many days (v ...
... , no doubt in a spirit of thanksgiving for all that God had done with him in Corinth. Luke’s mention of this trivial matter may have been intended to show how unwarranted were the Jewish and even Jewish-Christian attacks upon Paul for his supposed antipathy to their traditions (see further the disc. on 21:23f.). Paul took ship at Cenchrea, whose harbor had been rebuilt shortly after 44 B.C. Lucius Apuleius (second century A.D.) describes it as “the most famous town of all the Corinthians, bordering upon ...
... , king of Cilicia, to marry her, but soon left him to return to her brother. Like Agrippa, she took the part of Rome in the Jewish War and became in turn the mistress of Vespasian and of Titus. She had expected to marry Titus, but the antipathy of the Roman people toward the Jews would not allow it (see Josephus, Antiquities 20.145–147; War 2.425–429; Juvenal, Satires 6.156ff.; Tacitus, History 2.81; Suetonius, Titus 7). 25:14–16 The royal couple had been with Festus several days when he broached ...
... immorality” and “debauchery” in 2 Corinthians 12:21. Debauchery means “wantonness” or “licentiousness.” In this context it suggests sexual licentiousness or abandon. 5:20 Although Paul wants to separate his converts from law keeping, he maintains the characteristic Jewish antipathy toward idolatry (cf. 1 Cor. 10:14). Paul knows there to be one God (Gal. 3:20) who cannot be worshiped in idols. Witchcraft has the sense of “magic” and the use of drugs for magical purposes, which might be ...
... whoever lives outside the land” (lit. is attracted to foreignness) is like “one who has no God . . . (and) worships the stars” (b. Ketub. 110b). Xenophobia, however, is not a peculiarly Israelite sin. Doubtless there are Moabites who feel just as much antipathy toward Naomi as later Bethlehemites do toward Ruth. 1:11 At any rate, Naomi confronts their resistance: Return home, my daughters. Why would you come with me? Am I going to have any more sons, who could become your husbands? Most commentators ...
... rested: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree” (Gal. 3:13). Those who proclaimed such a person to be the Lord’s anointed, as the disciples of Jesus did, were blasphemers; the well-being of Israel demanded their extinction. And, quite apart from Paul’s antipathy to all that Jesus stood for, how can one enjoy a personal relationship with someone who has died and whom one never knew? When God chose, on the Damascus road, to reveal his Son to Paul, the Son of God at the same time introduced himself ...
... is that Egyptians did not like foreign shepherds moving about, especially given the scarcity of arable land in Egypt. It is possible that Semitic shepherds, accustomed to moving about, did not sufficiently control their flocks around farm land, thus provoking strong antipathy from the Egyptians. 47:11 Goshen is identified as the region of Rameses, the name of Pharaoh in the nineteenth dynasty (thirteenth century B.C.). Rameses II built Tanis in the northeastern delta and put his capital there. This name ...
... was that he spoke of the alien who was the enemy—the powerful, oppressing enemy—Rome! The detail he added to his command makes it clear he meant the Romans (cf. Matt. 5:40f.). In the society that surrounded Jesus, Romans were viewed with the same antipathy that the Canaanites are spoken of in Deuteronomy, and for at least some sections of the population, commitment to the holiness of Israel required a fresh purging of the land of those latter-day idolatrous enemies of God and God’s people. Jesus set a ...
... , is a guess at a very problematic phrase, lit. “besides his sellings according to the fathers.” It has usually been taken to mean some income the Levite has gained from the sale of his patrimony. However, this has never seemed very satisfactory, given the antipathy in Israel to the selling of family land, and the fact that Levites did not have tribal territory, but towns and some pasturage around them. There is some merit, therefore, in the suggestion of L. S. Wright that it has nothing to do with ...
... of Gera . . .”) clearly implies that it is indeed this same Shimei who has joined Solomon’s party, and it is the natural assumption of the reader who has read thus far in Samuel—Kings. His presence in the Solomonic party is sufficiently explained by his likely antipathy to the Judean Adonijah, a king not likely to favor someone from Saul’s clan. Solomon is perhaps nothing more to him than the lesser of two evils. On the likelihood that Nathan was a prophet from the pre-David city of Jebus (2 Sam. 5 ...
... his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). If verse 13 has an antagonistic ring (“Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated”), it must be understood that the statement arose from centuries of antipathy between Israel (Jacob) and Edom (Esau). The source from which it is quoted makes this clear (Mal. 1:2–5; also Gen. 36:1). In the present context it simply attests to God’s unfettered, unconditional election of Israel and rejection of Edom in history ...