... defied the will of God. But more is involved than merely the obligations of human relationships. The people Israel, represented by the nation of Judah in the time of Obadiah, is the chosen people of God. Elected by its deliverance from slavery in Egypt, Israel is God’s adopted son (cf. Exod. 4:22–23; Jer. 3:19; Hos. 11:1), the chosen medium for bringing God’s blessing on all the families of the earth (Gen. 12:3) and for shedding abroad the knowledge of God (Exod. 19:6) until it covers the earth as the ...
... out” as a present testimony to the readers of the Gospel. John the Baptist who once said, He … comes after me, etc., now says, From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another, etc. This variant reading was adopted by Westcott and Hort in their Greek New Testament of 1881 (New York: Harper & Brothers) but by no other Greek edition (it is preserved, however, in the New World Translation of 1961 [Brooklyn: Watchtower and Tract Society], and the 1979 translation by Richmond ...
... 1:31). It therefore testifies more faithfully to Christian than to Jewish traditions. 1:28 At Bethany on the other side of the Jordan: The place is otherwise unknown. It was a mystery even to Origen in the third century, who adopted instead the reading “Bethabara” (Commentary on John 6.40), a town east of the Jordan mentioned in other ancient sources. Pierson Parker (“ ‘Bethany beyond Jordan,’ ” JBL 74 [1955], p. 258) identified this Bethany with the Bethany just outside Jerusalem by translating ...
... glorified in him: These words are omitted in a number of significant ancient manuscripts. Though the omission might easily have happened by accident, because of the duplication of the clause God is glorified in him, the external evidence favors the shorter reading. If this reading is adopted, v. 32 is not a reiteration of v. 31 as a whole, but only of the clause “now is the Son of Man glorified,” i.e., God will glorify the Son in himself, and will glorify him at once (the words at once help explain the ...
... , and Thomas’ confession in 20:28 could be understood as bearing out this conclusion. A related, and more likely, suggestion is that the name is “I am” (Gr.: egō eimi; Heb.: ‘anî hû’), the self-designation of God in the OT (especially in Isaiah) that Jesus adopted at several crucial points in this Gospel and made his own (cf. 6:20; 8:24, 28; 13:19; 18:5–6; and above all, 8:58). 17:12 So that the Scripture would be fulfilled: The scripture fulfillment is mentioned in order to explain why there ...
... lays down his life for the sheep” (10:11, 15), and it is not surprising that the mention of Peter’s pastoral responsibility leads into a reflection on his eventual death (vv 18–19; cf. 13:36, “you will follow later”). Peter himself had adopted the terminology of the shepherd discourse in 13:37 (“I will lay down my life for you”), yet without any specific awareness of responsibilities to his fellow disciples. Now Jesus returns to the subject of Peter’s death in its proper context and against ...
... living on in the body may serve some good purpose?”). J. B. Lightfoot (ad loc.) proposes this last construction because “it seems to be in keeping with the abruptness of the context, and to present less difficulty than those generally adopted.” Fruitful labor renders Gk. karpos ergou, “fruit [harvest] of work” (cf “fruit of righteousness” in v. 11). Here the reference is to the result (especially in the lives of his converts and other fellow believers) of Paul’s ministry already accomplished ...
... Philippians 2:5–11,” in W. W. Gasque and R. P. Martin, eds., Apostolic History and the Gospel, pp. 264–76. He suggests the amplification touto to phronēma phroneite en hymin ho kai en Christō Iēsou, which he translates “Adopt towards one another, in your mutual relations, the same attitude which was found in Christ Jesus” (p. 265). This, together with his exegesis of the following verses, commends itself as an acceptable interpretation (it agrees, incidentally, with the NIV rendering). See to ...
... after the wedding, she has to provide a slave for her husband. That slave is to be sold after delivering the desired child. A text from Egypt recounts that a childless couple took a slave who bore three children to the family (A. Gardiner, “Adoption Extraordinary,” JEA 26 [1940], pp. 23–29). The laws regulating the lines of authority over such children and their inheritance rights varied. In many cases the head wife, rather than the natural mother, had the authority. In the Code of Hammurabi a son’s ...
... ordered Abram to leave his father’s household (lek-leka; 12:1). The phrase “whom you love” further underscores Abraham’s relationship to his son. God made sure that Abraham understood that he could fulfill this command only with Isaac, not with Eliezer (possibly an adopted son, 15:2), or with Ishmael, his son by Hagar. God told him to go to the region of Moriah, and that there he would point out the exact place for the sacrifice. The third command defined the crux of the test. God ordered Abraham ...
... 10). The danger of abandoning God because of surrounding idolatry (6:14–15). In 4:16–19 the warning was given to avoid being enticed into worshipping the heavenly bodies. Here Canaanite idolatry is in view. The temptation would be very strong to adopt the religion of the people of the land in order to reap any potential benefits. But that would be fundamentally incompatible with covenant loyalty and would therefore arouse the jealousy and anger of Yahweh (see commentary on 5:9). The danger of doubting ...
... for breath! Its conventional exhortation is also a stylistic clue that the preceding verses do in fact represent a climax and that we have thus come to the central point of the chapter’s argument. It has gone as follows: Israel needs to adopt a policy of complete renunciation of the Canaanites and their religion (vv. 1–5), because their identity and status as the people of Yahweh demands their distinctiveness from the nations (v. 6). Their distinctiveness is based on God’s electing love, promise to ...
... life toward the values, priorities, and will of God, including commitment to justice and compassion, to integrity and purity. The way of Yahweh meant all these things for Israel, so to go after other gods was to go a different way, to adopt different social, economic, political, and personal values. To turn from the true God is to turn from the truly human also. Godlessness and inhumanity are correlative. In a Christian context also, there is an ethical criterion of falsehood (one of the major factors ...
... of judges and the integrity of witnesses; hence the presence of the ninth commandment in the Decalogue and hence this direct and uncompromising attack upon perjury. Its deterrent effect is openly acknowledged as quite intentional (v. 20), and one wonders if the adoption of a remotely comparable law in relation to perjury would not have a salutary effect on the truthfulness of witness in modern courts. Additional Notes 19:2–3 On the concept and practice of asylum, cf. Greenberg, “Asylum. ” 19:4 On the ...
... who were living in the towns of Judah. If a straightforward distinction between the southern and northern kingdoms is indeed intended in this passage, it is not immediately clear why the authors do not simply say “Judah” in verse 17 and “Israel” in verse 20, adopting the language that is common later in the story (e.g., 15:1, 9, 25). Taking everything together, it seems much more likely that we are not being told here simply that the northern tribes seceded from the house of David whereas Judah did ...
... followed Solomon into sin, and as readers of both the exodus and Solomon stories know, this can bring only God’s judgment. For the LORD is in fact the living God who controls history. The LORD is not simply a convenient symbol that human rulers may adopt to further their own control of history. God cannot be captured in an image any more than be confined in a temple. And all moves designed to produce human security that fail to take this into account are doomed to failure. Trusting obedience is, after all ...
... feature of the Elisha stories in 2 Kgs. 3–8 that it is characteristically the politically powerless who are in touch with and open to what God is doing through Elisha, while the powerful (especially the kings) reveal only ignorance and arrogance, refusing to adopt a humble and respectful attitude towards him. Thus it is the maidservant of 2 Kgs. 5 who opens the way for Naaman to be healed; the king of Israel is unbelieving and Naaman himself (until persuaded by his servants) is unwilling to obey. The ...
... king himself (6:14). When they come again it will be in the “safety” of overwhelming numbers (6:24ff.). Additional Notes 6:9 The man of God sent word: Are we meant to think that since Elisha offers Jehoram his help and the king adopts a respectful attitude in v. 21, something has altered in the king-prophet relationship since 2 Kgs. 3? The evidence does not support such an interpretation. Jehoram is quite prepared throughout his story to treat prophets properly when things are going well (as here). He ...
... at the reminding of the prophet whose name embodies this truth (Hb. ʾelîšāʿ, “God saves”). The only proper response in the face of disaster . . . from the LORD is to wait for deliverance (v. 33; cf. Lam. 3, esp. vv. 24–30). Jehoram has thus far adopted such an attitude, even wearing the sackcloth his father Ahab wore when humbling himself before the LORD (v. 30; cf. 1 Kgs. 21:27). Faced with the horror about which he has just been told, however, the king is unwilling to wait any longer—even to ...
... in Isaiah (e.g., 40:1; and see on 26:3). Only here in Isaiah is a word repeated three times, such is the emphasis it needs (but see Jer. 7:4; 22:29). It is presumably the vision of Yahweh’s triple holiness and exaltedness that generates Isaiah’s adoption of “the Holy One of Israel” (see on 1:4) as his distinctive title for God, as well as his emphasis on the exaltedness of this holy one (e.g., 2:6–22; 5:15–16). 6:5 Holiness also means purity. Yahweh’s holiness could make a mere creature ...
... erecting of new images constituted an attempt to provide the gods with their means of being present with their worshipers. Israel had no need to go in for such projects because their relationship with God worked the other way round. God had taken the initiative in adopting Israel as servant. That is a position that demands a commitment on their part (as 42:1–4 will note), but before that it is a position that denotes a commitment on God’s part. David was Yahweh’s servant (37:35): that was a guarantee ...
... . R. M. Hals, Ezekiel (FOTL 19; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989), pp. 41–42, notes that, like Ezek. 6, chapter 7 falls into three parts (vv. 1–4, 5–9, 10–27), each ending with this recognition formula. Wevers, however, advocates the two-part structure we have adopted above: a two-part poem in vv. 1–9, and an “oracle expanding in detail the theme set forth in the introductory poem” in vv. 10–27 (Wevers, Ezekiel, p. 62; see also Greenberg, Ezekiel 1–20, p. 157). 7:10 Doom has burst forth. Block ...
... husband of Ishtar, goddess of fertility. It may be that the women, like the elders in Ezekiel’s vision, are bemoaning the Lord’s absence, and that by “mourning for Tammuz” they intend to express their sorrow (Block, Ezekiel 1–24, p. 295). However, by adopting a rite that is not only pagan, but also Babylonian, they too wind up providing just one more reason for the Lord’s departure. Yet, this is still not the climax: “You will see things that are even more detestable than this” (v. 15). 8 ...
... also gave them over to statutes that were not good and laws they could not live by” (v. 25). Interpreters have long struggled to defend God’s action here. The Aramaic of Targum Jonathan reads not that God gave Israel bad laws, but that the people adopted bad laws. Moderns, too, have often balked at the bald statement that God corrupted God’s own law, preferring to see this as an instance of human evil subsumed under God’s sovereignty, like God hardening Pharaoh’s heart (Exod. 9:16; e.g., Greenberg ...
... live in a “vending machine” culture built on a service economy. At most places we visit, there are people willing to meet our needs and desires for a dollar amount. If they do not, we can simply take our money elsewhere. It is easy to adopt this kind of consumer mentality in our understanding of discipleship. This often works itself out in people regularly wondering, “How is the church meeting my needs?” In the kingdom, however, we are called to be people who give, not people who simply consume. And ...