... is the most natural reading of 11:42, which is part of the concluding statement about the whole of Solomon’s reign. He is the only king in Kings who is described as ruling over “all Israel,” because he was, of course, the only king who did! In view of 11:42 in particular, “all Israel” in 12:1 must also refer to all the tribes. Rehoboam now comes to inherit the kingdom that his father had ruled. We are not explicitly told why he comes to Shechem. Shechem does not appear in the narrative in relation ...
... the meals passing by (v. 25). 13:31 Lay my bones beside his bones: It has sometimes been suggested that the old prophet simply desires to be remembered in the grave along with the man who spoke what was true. This view of the request tends to be allied to a view of the prophet as basically benevolent—a view that is difficult to square with the fact that he knowingly lied. Given the context, it is much more likely that his concern is not so much to be remembered in the grave as to be allowed to remain in ...
... hanneḇîʾîm, which is rendered by the NIV in 18:20 as he “assembled the prophets”—this is the only other place in the OT (apart from 2 Chron. 18:5, which is parallel to 1 Kgs. 22:6) where the same phrase occurs. This is very interesting, in view of the fact that 400 prophets are missing from the assembly on Mount Carmel (cf. the additional note on 18:19) and about four hundred turn up here (v. 6). Just as interesting is the way in which verses 6–7 are worded. Jehoshaphat seeks “the word of the ...
... “significant.” 6:1–7 Of the “sons of the prophets” already mentioned, it is the Gilgal group that is assuredly in view here (2 Kgs. 4:38–41; cf. in particular their “meeting” with Elisha, Hb. yšḇ lipnê, in 4:38 and 6: ... going badly (cf. 2 Kgs. 6:24–33). There is no evidence, on the other hand, that Elisha, or the authors, have changed their views about Jehoram since 2 Kgs. 3. He is an idolater throughout his reign, suffering those things that we expect wicked kings to suffer (reverses ...
... ” (Hos. 1:5; Jer. 49:35). 11:14 The pillar: Hb. ʿammûḏ has hitherto appeared only in 1 Kgs. 7, of the pillars of the Solomonic palace (7:2–3, 6) and temple (7:15–22, 41–42). Given the context, most likely either Jakin or Boaz are in view here (cf. 7:21). The emphasis on custom is interesting, for it is clearly one of the purposes of the authors throughout the chapter to stress the legitimacy of Joash’s claim to the throne. He is the rightful heir (vv. 2–3) and is regarded as king by Jehoiada ...
... s geʾulateka (“your next-of-kin”), but galuteka (“your exiles”). The confusion is not unlikely. Indeed, similar scribal errors do occur throughout Ezekiel. However, whether we choose to emend the MT or not, the intention of the text is clearly the same: in the view of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, Ezekiel and his fellows have gone “far away from the LORD” (v. 15). 11:16 For a little while. The NIV, like the NRSV, assumes that the Heb. word meʿat in v. 16 means “a little while.” While this ...
... of death in positive terms (such as Ps. 104:28–30), are the rare exceptions to the rule. All of this makes it difficult for us to find answers to the questions we would like to ask about how ordinary people in ancient Israel viewed death and the afterlife. Some have turned to archaeological evidence of burial practices in ancient Israel, hoping to shed light on the attitudes of ordinary Israelites by looking to this material evidence. Elizabeth Bloch-Smith argues that the evidence of family bench tombs ...
... do these things, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you have gone” (v. 22). As Greenberg observes, “Ezekiel remains true to his ruthless focus on the majesty of God, the safeguarding of which is, in his view, the prime motive of Israel’s history” (Ezekiel 21–37, p. 738). God’s action depends not on the worthiness, righteousness, or repentance of Israel, but on God’s own identity and character: “You will know that I am the LORD, when I deal with ...
... them in proper allegiance to Yahweh (Exod. 19–24). Obedience to the Torah was not a means of earning their redemption; it was the means of expressing loyalty to the God who had redeemed them. This basic portrait makes sense of Matthew’s positive view of the Torah and Jesus’ exhortations to his followers to obey it. The contrast in the six areas of Torah discussed in 5:21–48 is not between the Torah and Jesus’ teachings but between one way of understanding the Torah and Jesus’ own interpretation ...
... Sea of Galilee. The importance of highlighting the location likely stems from its close identification with the disciples’ confession of Jesus as the Messiah in the Gospel tradition (see Mark 8:27). 16:14 John the Baptist. Matthew has already narrated the view of Herod Antipas that Jesus is John the Baptist raised from the dead (14:1–12); here others think the same. Elijah. This identification fits the portrait of Yahweh sending “the prophet Elijah to [Israel] before that great and dreadful day of ...
... community (18:1–35). Bearing one’s cross, or self-denial, is not about holding a certain attitude; it is about doing actions (16:24–27), and, specifically, doing actions on behalf of others. It is not about self-loathing or eliminating the self from view; instead, it follows Jesus in mission and ministry wherever he leads. Illustrating the Text Jesus is truly Israel’s Messiah, but his way of being the Messiah is marked by cruciformity; he will die and be raised to inaugurate God’s reign in this ...
... point for Mark, when Jesus’s true significance begins finally to be recognized by his followers. 8:30 Jesus warned them not to tell anyone about him. This is a clear statement of the messianic secret after the ambiguous one in 8:26.1If the people’s view of him as a prophet has stirred up fervor, even more so would rumors that he is the Messiah. Jesus does not want his messianic office discussed in light of the false expectations noted above. He wants no part of fame and especially wants no political ...
... Amendment of the Constitution, must learn to boldly speak the truth in love. All Christians, wherever they live, must be willing to engage in the political process. Heaven: a different reality Humor: In one of his Far Side cartoons, Gary Larson depicts a stereotypical view of heaven. A man with angel wings and a halo is sitting on a cloud all by himself, looking completely bored. He is thinking, “Wish I’d brought a magazine.” In the movie All Dogs Go to Heaven, Charlie the German shepherd does not ...
... in 4:16–30, however, that there was a limit to his fellow villagers’ approval once the true nature of his mission became clear. Theological Insights Through this story runs the tension between Jesus being both Son of God and also son of Mary and Joseph. In view of Luke’s clear affirmation in 1:34–38 that Jesus was not the biological son of Joseph, it is remarkable that he is prepared to include references to Joseph as Jesus’s “father” in 2:33, 48 and to Mary and Joseph as Jesus’s “parents ...
... s preconceived ideas. What Jesus will go on to say about John does not suggest any more-ultimate “stumbling.” 7:24 A reed swayed by the wind? Perhaps this is to be taken literally: you did not go all that way just to admire the scenery. But in view of the following verse, it is probably also an implied characterization of John, who was not a man easily swayed by opposition. 7:25 A man dressed in fine clothes? Luke has not mentioned John’s rough garb (cf. Mark 1:6), but this would have been part ...
... I have argued, the discourse as a whole, including the coming of the Son of Man, relates to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. It is more difficult to explain for those who claim that 21:25–31 relates to the parousia. Some who hold this view claim that “this generation” refers back to 21:8–24, but not to the return of the Son of Man in 21:25–31. Others understand “this generation” to refer to the last generation before Christ returns, not to the disciples’ generation. Still others take ...
... ; 27:11; Mark 15:2). It should probably be taken as a “Yes, but . . .”: Jesus accepts the words that they have used, but not the meaning that they might read into them. 22:71 Why do we need any more testimony? From the point of view of Jewish orthodoxy, a man who accepts the title “Son of God,” and who makes the outrageous claim to share God’s heavenly authority, is dangerous. Despite Jesus’s careful wording, they have enough to justify their already decided intention (22:2) to eliminate him ...
... explanation (vv. 4–9). Understanding the Text In the past, some scholars have contended that Romans 14:1–15:13 is parenetic material that Paul includes in his letter at this point but that has no real connection to the churches at Rome.1According to this view, Paul rewrites and generalizes his earlier instructions in 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1 in Romans 14:1–15:13.2To be sure, there are similarities between Romans 14:1–15:13 and 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1: both address the “weak” (in faith); both ...
... on earth. As Hicks comments: There is thus a close similarity between the Christian and Stoic points of view in this period. The difference lies in the fact that in Paul’s view it is in Christ that social and national barriers are cast down whereas the Stoics ground their attitude ... in the belief that men are all human beings by nature and thus related to one another. Their view is founded not on a God in whom all are equal but on kinship through one’s very humanity.[5] Leftovers ...
... see, know, and love him. But if we are not careful, we will constantly seek to manufacture a god to bless our desires. Our view of God must include both the cross and the throne. Bible: Two great Old Testament prophecies point to the surprising work of the Messiah. ... ; 11:1; 14:17–18; 15:5; 16:7; cf. Ezek. 40–48). Although there is some debate about which altar is in view here (burnt offering or incense), there is only one altar in Revelation, and it seems to unite the themes of sacrifice and prayer. ...
... ” may mean that, unlike the previous case, they are uncertain whether a holy thing was desecrated. On this view, “they are guilty” means “they feel guilt,”4 having psychological turmoil over the possibility of a sacrilege: the ... when they . . . sin and feel guilty” or “when they feel guilty about having sinned.”5 N. Kiuchi’s view that ’ashem means “realize guilt”6 (the view reflected in the NIV, ESV, NRSV) fails because the defrauder, embezzler, and robber would each be quite aware of ...
... takes ‘edut to be related to the Akkadian cognate adu, which refers to a type of formal agreement.11In that case, the “ark of the ‘edut” is a synonym for “ark of the covenant [berit].” This alternative view seems more likely than the traditional view. Either way, the expression alludes to the copy of the Decalogue that is in the ark (Deut. 10:5; 1 Kings 8:9), which symbolizes or testifies to the covenant God made with Israel at Horeb/Sinai. It is because of God’s covenant relationship with ...
... ] God had been very angry while he was going.” The content of the dream-vision in verse 20 includes the donkey story in verses 22–35, in which Balaam sees himself heading out to curse Israel but is threatened with death by God for doing so. If this view is correct, the dream in verse 20 was expanded to explain in more detail how God actually reveals to Balaam that he can go with these princes from Moab on condition that he say/do only what God says. Verse 20b and verse 35a are the same revelation given ...
... out of Jacob and a scepter shall rise out of Israel [Num. xxiv, 17]. The scepter is the Prince of the whole congregation, and when he comes he shall smite all the children of Seth [Num. xxiv, 17]. (CD-A 7:18–21)1 The “star” in the view of this Qumran community is the “Interpreter of the Law,” and the “scepter” is the “Prince of the whole congregation,” who was still to come, not David. Later the text speaks of two messiahs, the “messiah out of Aaron and of Israel” (CD-A 12:23–13:1 ...
... where Dagon’s image falls before the ark without being damaged. But the second nuance makes better sense in verse 4, where Dagon’s image has been broken.9 5:4 His head and hands had been broken off. The decapitation of Dagon should probably be viewed as a military act, since conquerors sometimes decapitated their defeated enemies (1 Sam. 17:51; 31:9). The cutting off of the hands may also be interpreted in this light, since hands were sometimes cut off and counted following a battle. In a scene in an ...