... with the Achaians. The grace of God recalls the beginning of Paul’s discussion of the collection, where he refers to “the grace of God given to the Macedonian churches” (8:1), thus providing closure for these two chapters. Ultimately, God is the one responsible for the tremendous outpouring of love and wealth for Jerusalem, and so the praise belongs to him. The Jerusalemites, for their part, reciprocate the love that is shown to them. Thus the gift of God produces a gift for Jerusalem, which, in turn ...
... this time he will act more decisively, if necessary. He does not spell out exactly what he might do at this point (see on 13:2; also 1 Cor. 4:21). While Paul hopes for the best, he fears the worst. Everything is contingent on the Corinthians’ response. In verse 20b, a vice catalogue follows, in which the apostle lists the sins of faction and sedition he fears may be characteristic of the Corinthian church when he comes. This vice list gives an important insight as to the nature of the situation in Corinth ...
... 1 Tim. 3; Titus 1), the lifestyle of the teacher was more important than the words he or she spoke. Teachers were primarily models, secondarily intellectual instructors. By claiming this status they put both life and words under God’s scrutiny, and he would hold them responsible for misleading the flock in word or deed. 3:2 The danger is compounded by the fact that we all stumble in many ways. James cites a proverb that means that Christians not only sin frequently but also sin in many ways. This truth is ...
... blood. The expression alludes to the making of the divine covenant in Exodus 24:3–8, in which the blood of the sacrifice was sprinkled on the people after they had promised to obey the Lord. Thus, on the human side, obedience expresses one’s response to the gospel’s proclamation of Christ’s saving act. On the divine side, the blood of Jesus Christ, that is, his sacrificial death, results in a new covenant being ratified between God and his people. Although the status of believers is that of pilgrims ...
... anyone within hearing to come to the rescue (e.g., Jer. 20:8; Job 19:7; Hab. 1:2). If no one responds, God becomes the last hope of help. Being singular, “outcry” here stands for all the cries of the oppressed blended into one horrific noise. In response, God was going to Sodom to investigate the cause to see if the volume of the cry matched the reality of the oppression. If the wickedness was as great as the outcry, he would have to wipe out these cities. God’s disposition in this account indicates ...
... defending a child. The word “worship” (ʿabad), which also means to serve as a servant, provides a more subtle contrast. Israel was the Lord’s servant, not Pharaoh’s. 4:24–26 A description of an assault by the Lord and Zipporah’s response comprises the third encounter. The interruption of the narrative with the words the LORD met Moses and was about to kill him is abrupt. The many ambiguities in the words that follow have led to hundreds of pages of scholarly conjecture about their original ...
... . Even the Egyptian officials’ temporarily believing the word of the Lord benefited their animals (as well as their slaves). The storm was persistent as well as destructive. In the midst of the continuous lightning and pounding thunder Pharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron. Pharaoh’s response was unprecedented, and the reader knows that everything he says is true. “I have sinned . . . The LORD is in the right, and I and my people are in the wrong . . . I will let you go; you don’t have to stay any longer ...
... that the Lord again hardened his heart. The Lord promised to harden Pharaoh’s or the Egyptians’ hearts in the future (“I will harden,” 4:21; 7:3; 14:4, 17). The balance of the references to his hard heart remind us that Pharaoh himself was responsible for his hard heart (7:13–14, 22–23; 8:15, 19, 32; 9:7, 34–35). He enslaved and oppressed the people of his own volition long before the Lord began this hardening. God claimed to harden the pharaoh’s heart (thereby prolonging the slavery of ...
... glory) and what he needed (knowledge of God’s goodness; 34:6–7). The text mutes the importance of the glory (34:5a), as God knew what Moses and the people needed was to know God’s goodness and name (i.e., God’s character, v. 19). The Lord’s response to Moses did not even mention glory. God said, “I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the LORD, in your presence.” What Moses saw would simply serve to support what he had heard (34:5–7). The Lord gave ...
... Skilled” (khakam leb, “wise of heart”) means “reflective and observant, integrating one’s intelligence and passion.” (See the commentary on the very similar list at 31:6b–10. On “skilled,” see the comments on 26:1 and 31:1–11). 35:20–29 The people responded with generous hearts. The response to the Lord’s forgiveness and call for obedience was a triumph for the people and the Lord’s work in the world. The travails of the whole book culminate in this offering. This was the voluntary ...
... Lord said to anoint; Moses did everything A′ vv. 17–33: Moses set up the tabernacle, in sevenfold detail B′ vv. 34–38: the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle This structure sets a general pattern of the Lord’s instruction (A) and Moses’ response (A′). The order of the verses of (A) and (A′) matches exactly. The Lord specified the placement of an item in the tabernacle (A) and Moses placed it there (A′). Verse 16 functions as both the fulfillment of the Lord’s instruction to anoint ...
... says the LORD” (cf. Isa. 6:5–7; Ezek. 2:9–3:4; Jer.1:9; 5:14). Fourthly, the true prophet carried God’s authority, for he or she would speak my words . . . in my name (v. 19). Therefore, those who heard the prophet heard God; whatever response they made to the prophet they made to God, and they would take the consequences. 18:20–22 All the marks of true prophets have been stated; now the danger of false prophets have to be faced. Two kinds of falsehood are defined. First, anyone who spoke in the ...
... says the LORD” (cf. Isa. 6:5–7; Ezek. 2:9–3:4; Jer.1:9; 5:14). Fourthly, the true prophet carried God’s authority, for he or she would speak my words . . . in my name (v. 19). Therefore, those who heard the prophet heard God; whatever response they made to the prophet they made to God, and they would take the consequences. 18:20–22 All the marks of true prophets have been stated; now the danger of false prophets have to be faced. Two kinds of falsehood are defined. First, anyone who spoke in the ...
... . His desperation is evident, for he spoke three names of God in the one brief prayer. Samson prayed only for revenge for his two eyes. Once again, and significantly at the end of the story, is a reference to Samson’s eyes, source of his weakness and ultimately responsible for his death. Samson’s final plea, that he might die (my emphasis) with the Philistines (v. 30), picks up on the theme first introduced in his mother’s words (13:7), repeated in 15:18 in the context of his other prayer and in 16:16 ...
... . This second appearance of God marks the endpoint of Solomon’s upward mobility and points us ahead to disaster. The place of the temple as a focal point for prayer is certainly assured, as Solomon had asked (v. 3; cf. 8:27–53), and there is a favorable response to his request about the future of the dynasty (vv. 4–5; cf. 8:25–26). The future of the temple and the dynasty, however—as well as possession of the very land itself (v. 7)—is made dependent upon obedience: the obedience of Solomon (9:4 ...
... . This second appearance of God marks the endpoint of Solomon’s upward mobility and points us ahead to disaster. The place of the temple as a focal point for prayer is certainly assured, as Solomon had asked (v. 3; cf. 8:27–53), and there is a favorable response to his request about the future of the dynasty (vv. 4–5; cf. 8:25–26). The future of the temple and the dynasty, however—as well as possession of the very land itself (v. 7)—is made dependent upon obedience: the obedience of Solomon (9:4 ...
... :1–4; 18:9–10; 22:1–28). The prophetic word, however, cannot be brought under human control. A man of God, precisely because he is a man of God, cannot be coerced by a mere king. The peremptory instructions of verses 9 and 11, therefore, meet with a fierce response, as Ahaziah comes to terms with the reality of the God of Carmel, who can send fire from heaven to consume his captains (vv. 10 and 12; cf. 1 Kgs. 18:38). The third captain accords Elijah the respect he is due as a prophet of the LORD and ...
... is able to offer Jehoash words of some comfort (vv. 15–19); however, they are qualified, apparently because the king’s response to prophetic commands is not unreserved. He begins well, doing exactly as he is told (cf. the emphasis on the complete ... s promise is that Jehoash will completely destroy (Hb. nḵh ʿaḏ-kallēh) the Arameans at Aphek. But because Jehoash chooses, in response to Elisha’s next command to strike (Hb. nḵh) the ground with the arrows, to strike only three times instead of five ...
... has once again raised a question about whether this state of affairs will continue forever, and 2 Kings 17:7–17 now sharpens the question still further. Both kingdoms have sinned, and both have received prophetic warnings (v. 13). The implication is that, in the absence of any response, Judah will indeed go the same way as Israel. The Davidic promise will not in the end protect it (cf. the threat of 1 Kgs. 9:1–9). Its determination to act like Israel (1 Kgs. 14:21–24; 2 Kgs. 8:16ff.; 16:1–4) will at ...
... has once again raised a question about whether this state of affairs will continue forever, and 2 Kings 17:7–17 now sharpens the question still further. Both kingdoms have sinned, and both have received prophetic warnings (v. 13). The implication is that, in the absence of any response, Judah will indeed go the same way as Israel. The Davidic promise will not in the end protect it (cf. the threat of 1 Kgs. 9:1–9). Its determination to act like Israel (1 Kgs. 14:21–24; 2 Kgs. 8:16ff.; 16:1–4) will at ...
... with the question: Now, who is willing to consecrate himself today to the LORD? It is clear that the Chronicler depended on the tabernacle narrative in Exodus 35:4–29, where Moses also requested some freewill offerings from the people to construct the desert sanctuary. 29:6–9 The response of the people and all the leaders is overwhelmingly positive. The Chronicler indicates that they all contributed willingly and abundantly. The subsection concludes with rejoicing: The people rejoiced at the willing ...
... to that time by means of a list of priests and Levites who officiated then. The priestly list in verses 1–7 has been extrapolated from the subsequent one in verses 12–21, which relates to a later period when Joiakim was high priest. The compiler responsible for the present list took the family names listed there and used them by themselves to represent the groups extant then. We may compare how 7:39–42 (= Ezra 2:36–39) lists only family names. However, the list of priests who returned in chapter 7 ...
... fit with what follows? For 56:9–57:13 has suggested that the obstacles between Yahweh and the community are now greater rather than smaller than they were in the previous chapters. In some circumstances (e.g., Exod. 32), Yahweh’s response is to determine to cast them off. Here the response is rather to redouble commitment to them. Yahweh is intent on reconstructing the way for them or to them. Yahweh speaks as the high and lofty One of 6:1 (NIV “high and exalted”; cf. also 52:13, where the words ...
... they may have been upset with Jeremiah as a supporter of Josiah’s move to centralize worship, thus putting many village priests out of work. 12:1–6 This event caused Jeremiah to reflect on his life and his work (12:1–4), which itself elicited a response from God (vv. 5–6). The connection with 11:18–23 is found in the reference to family members (those who lived in Jeremiah’s hometown of Anathoth) who have betrayed the prophet (see 11:21; 12:6). It appears that the plot evokes Jeremiah’s lament ...
... of Palestine. Similarly, God has brought up the Arameans from their place of origin in Egypt and Nubia to their home in Syria, verse 7. Israel can base no special pleading on its election at the time of the exodus. Rather, its election marked it with special responsibility for obedience and trust (cf. 3:2). Israel, like all the nations, will be shaken in the sieve of God’s judgment, as grain is shaken over a coarse mesh to sift it out from debris and pebbles, verse 9. But none in Israel will fall through ...