... ). The warning is appropriate for Christians who rest upon their religious profession without any apparent desire to live out its implications. The point of the parable is crystal clear. The servants of Christ, as they await his Parousia, have been entrusted with the responsibility of utilizing the gifts they have been given by the Master. To fail in this critical obligation is to be excluded from the kingdom when Christ returns. Additional Notes 25:14 In ancient days servants were often entrusted with ...
... of his Father and accompanied by angels, he will “repay every man for what he has done” (Matt. 16:27). Matthew closes Jesus’ fifth major discourse with a description of this apocalyptic event as a separation of sheep and goats (v. 33) on the basis of their response to the needs of these brothers of mine (v. 40). Final judgment allows no shades of gray. Each person will either enter into eternal life or be sent away into eternal punishment (v. 46). The Son of Man is pictured as a King seated on his ...
... the meal Jesus made the startling announcement that one of them would betray him. The disciples were “sick at heart” (v. 22, Rieu) and began to say one after the other, Surely not I, Lord? The form of the question in Greek indicates that a negative response is expected, although the possibility that it could be affirmative cannot be ruled out entirely (i.e., “I am not the one, Lord, am I?). The betrayer is one who has dipped his hand into the bowl with Jesus. In Eastern cultures, the sharing of a ...
... person to incriminate himself. The answer, “You have said so” (v. 64, RSV; Gk. sy eipas), has been variously interpreted. The parallel in Mark (a straightforward “I am,” 14:62) suggests that we not look for subtle innuendos. Gundry says that the response of Jesus “stoutly affirms that the questioner himself knows the affirmative answer as obvious” (p. 545). Jesus is saying to Caiaphas that his assumption that Jesus may be the Messiah is correct. What’s more, from that time on, he will see the ...
... is perhaps not quite so dark as the one in Isaiah 14 or the ones in Daniel 8 and 11, he is similar to the evil kings in those passages in incurring God’s wrath for his overweening pride. Belshazzar’s offenses against heaven triggered heaven’s response. God sent the hand that wrote the inscription (5:24). In previous times God appointed prophets to announce his word of condemnation on the kings of Israel and Judah. For example, God sent Micaiah to predict the death of King Ahab in battle (1 Kgs. 22:17 ...
... against the king of the South (11:14), this may refer to external forces, such as Philip V of Macedonia, who made an alliance with Antiochus, as well as to internal revolts that erupted at this time in Egypt. The uprisings came partly as a response to Agathocles, the highly unpopular minister who wielded great power earlier during the reign of Ptolemy IV. At the death of Ptolemy IV, Agathocles was poised to become even more oppressive, since Ptolemy V was too young to rule on his own. However, Agathocles ...
... that people should be free to give medical attention even on religious holy days. Rather, his question constitutes a challenge to his audience to decide whether his treating the Sabbath as a day for conducting his ministry is good or not. This is why the response of his critics is a sullen refusal to answer (3:4b–5). The real issue is not the principle of humanitarian aid on the Sabbath but the validity of Jesus’ message and implicit claim for himself. Mark’s reference to the critics (3:5) as having ...
... v. 19; cf. Deut. 25:5–10). The particular case described by the Sadducees (vv. 20–23) seems to be a variant on a story found in the book of Tobit (in the collection known as the Apocrypha, see Tobit 3:8, 15; 6:13; 7:11). In his response, Jesus accuses the Sadducees of knowing neither the Scriptures nor God’s power (v. 24). He proceeds to illustrate his point by describing the resurrection of the body as a transformation to a new kind of existence, like the angels in heaven, and by citing a well-known ...
... verses we have an abbreviated description of such cruelties heaped upon Jesus; however, Mark’s purpose is not to emphasize the physical sufferings endured by Jesus but rather the indignities he endured in spite of who he really is. Thus, Mark says virtually nothing about Jesus’ response to the things done to him, and the actions of the soldiers are all given as examples of mockeries of the idea of Jesus being the king of the Jews. Pilate’s mocking use of the title king of the Jews is repeated (v. 18 ...
... some will fall and some will rise (see Schweizer, p. 57), perhaps in the sense of reversal (see Tannehill, p. 29; and on p. 29, n. 37 Tannehill, in reference to Luke 2:34, refers to “upheaval within Israel”). By implication Israel will be divided in its response to Jesus (see Acts 28:24–25). 2:36 a prophetess, Anna: “Anna” is the Greek form of the Hebrew name Hannah. It has already been noted that the story of Hannah’s giving birth to and raising Samuel in 1 Samuel 1–2 contributed to Luke’s ...
... those who were entering. Thus, a double condemnation falls upon them. They are condemned because of their unbelief and hostility toward God’s messengers and what the Scriptures really teach, and they are condemned because they have failed in their responsibilities as true experts in the law. After this harsh accusation the Pharisees and the teachers of the law began to oppose him fiercely and besiege him with questions. With this acrimonious exchange the plot begins to thicken. Additional Notes 11 ...
... , but the tenants (=the religious authorities). They are the reason that God does not receive the fruit that is due. The people’s leaders are selfish and disobedient. They will have to be replaced with new leaders who are obedient and responsive to God. This leadership consists, of course, of those whom Jesus has taught. His disciples will replace the old Jerusalem establishment and will serve God and his people more faithfully (see note below). In the context of Jesus’ ministry this has reference ...
... to trap Jesus, because the real motive underlying the question had been readily apparent, the religious authorities this time sent spies, who pretended to be honest (or sincere). Their question is prefaced in v. 21 in such a way as to coax a frank, but dangerous, response from Jesus. It is as though they have told Jesus: “We know that you always tell the truth, no matter whose toes get stepped on.” Having said this, they ask Jesus if it is lawful (according to the law of Moses) to pay taxes to Caesar ...
... Paraclete of the exalted Christ. 3:2–3 A congregation whose life is not complete in the sight of my God is one that resists the Paraclete. The four imperatives, which follow the opening exhortation to wake up!, invite believers to a spiritual response different from the city, whose acropolis had fallen because of its lack of military readiness. In fact, the first of these imperatives, strengthen!, envisions an acropolis, and no doubt the one in Sardis that was built strong to protect a people from outside ...
... s triumph over evil (cf. Rev. 12:10; 19:1), here it refers to the victorious community of saints, who are ultimately delivered from the day of God’s wrath. This point has significance if the interpreter understands the present passage as a response to the question posed by the suffering lost: the vision identifies those left standing in victory rather than in defeat; it is eschatological Israel’s participation in the future vindication of God’s reign that all the angels … elders and the four living ...
... undoubted, but particularly in this polygamous situation, it was not enough to replace one child, let alone the ten he suggests it might. 1:9–16 The writers clearly and sensitively portray the deep distress of Hannah’s prayer at the door of the sanctuary. Prayer is the natural response to Hannah’s situation: it is God, the giver of life, who has closed her womb, and it is only God who can open it. Hannah’s prayer is not meant to be a bribe to God: “give me a son and I promise I’ll give him back ...
... . However, his decision was to prove disastrous for Saul. 13:13–14 There is no question of the kingship being taken away from Saul at this stage. However, Samuel informs him that his behavior means that he will never be able to found a dynasty. Samuel’s response may have had its root in his keen memories of the attempt of earlier military leaders to manipulate God by using the ark as a kind of good-luck charm. Saul’s action could be seen as following a similar pattern and making the same theological ...
... priests, but they could also have been only too well aware of Saul’s problems and had a clear perception of how unjust such action would be. Doeg had no such qualms, and the destruction that Saul had been unwilling to apply to the Amalekites in response to God’s command was applied without mercy to the little town of Nob. The repetition of herem language in verse 19 (cf. 15:3) shows that the writers were well aware of the irony of this parallel. Only one of the priests, Ahimelech’s son Abiathar ...
... priests, but they could also have been only too well aware of Saul’s problems and had a clear perception of how unjust such action would be. Doeg had no such qualms, and the destruction that Saul had been unwilling to apply to the Amalekites in response to God’s command was applied without mercy to the little town of Nob. The repetition of herem language in verse 19 (cf. 15:3) shows that the writers were well aware of the irony of this parallel. Only one of the priests, Ahimelech’s son Abiathar ...
... priests, but they could also have been only too well aware of Saul’s problems and had a clear perception of how unjust such action would be. Doeg had no such qualms, and the destruction that Saul had been unwilling to apply to the Amalekites in response to God’s command was applied without mercy to the little town of Nob. The repetition of herem language in verse 19 (cf. 15:3) shows that the writers were well aware of the irony of this parallel. Only one of the priests, Ahimelech’s son Abiathar ...
... s cruel joke (10:4) had had disastrous consequences for Ammon. Additional Notes 12:1 For comment on Nathan, see additional notes on 7:2. 12:1–7 Pss. 51 and 32 are indications of how well David learned the lessons about the horrific nature of sin, responsibility, and the need for and the possibility of repentance and forgiveness. The heading of Ps. 51 states that it was written after Nathan’s visit and, although the headings of the psalms are not part of the original text, there is no reason to doubt the ...
... it reflected deep sorrow at what had happened to David. 15:24 Abiathar, who had been with David since his previous days in exile, probably led the Jerusalem priests until he was deposed by Solomon (1 Kgs. 2:27). However, Zadok seems to have had special responsibility for the ark of God and therefore took the lead in this instance. The two men worked closely together over a long period of time. The mention of the covenant in relation to the ark reinforces David’s words concerning God’s control over the ...
... it reflected deep sorrow at what had happened to David. 15:24 Abiathar, who had been with David since his previous days in exile, probably led the Jerusalem priests until he was deposed by Solomon (1 Kgs. 2:27). However, Zadok seems to have had special responsibility for the ark of God and therefore took the lead in this instance. The two men worked closely together over a long period of time. The mention of the covenant in relation to the ark reinforces David’s words concerning God’s control over the ...
... (14:26), became his downfall. He was left, helpless and humiliated, hanging in a tree as his transport disappeared from beneath him. Everyone was aware of David’s wishes about Absalom’s safety, and because of this, no one would take the responsibility of killing him. Joab, with harsh realism, believed that Absalom had to die. He understood that the young prince, whom he had previously encouraged and supported, was too dangerous to be allowed to live. He took the initiative, and his personal bodyguard ...
... vv. 15, 22–23). Verse 39 is a comment of the narrator in any case, and such a comment makes good sense on the assumption that Jesus himself is still the speaker in verse 38. If, on the other hand (as in version 3), the narrator is already responsible for most of verse 38, then in verse 39 he is commenting on his own appended words (i.e., the scripture quotation), not the words of Jesus. The subject of verse 39 is not Jesus (“he meant”) but the Scripture (“it meant”). The same Greek verb, eipen, is ...