... the frenzy of ecstasy from the empowering of enthusiasm. “Therefore,” he offers a criterion for making a valid distinction. According to Paul genuine enthusiasm affirms the lordship of Jesus, whereas the practice of ecstasy generates behavior contrary or hostile to the affirmation of Jesus’ lordship. The recognition of the lordship of Jesus is the criterion that forms the parameters of legitimate enthusiasm. The Holy Spirit moves the one under the power of the Holy Spirit to declare, “Jesus ...
... this collection (esp. Rom. 15), reveal the real importance and theological significance of this act of Christian benevolence. Remarkably, Paul saw the difficulties suffered by members of the Jerusalem church as an opportunity to break down the wall of hostility and skepticism between conservative Jewish and less law-observant Gentile Christians, for in the giving and in the receiving of the collection both the givers and the recipients were mutually acknowledging the bond that existed between them in Christ ...
... lash out at those who are associated with the one who brought him down. The reader already knows from the flashback (12:6; and repeated in 12:13–14) that the church’s desert home symbolizes its tribulation, made even more difficult by the hostilities of the dragon. Yet, the reader also realizes that God provides resources of spiritual nurture to the embattled church to transform a desert into an oasis. Revelation 12:13–13:1a echoes the Exodus tradition to make John’s point: the wilderness region is ...
... of a murderer. Those who kill a person in this way are guilty of murder and are to be executed by the custom of blood vengeance. The same execution will await those who kill by shoving another or throwing something at him intentionally or if in hostility he hits him with his fist so that he dies. If, on the other hand, the shoving or throwing is unintentional or if the killer drops a stone on someone without seeing him, then a hearing is required. The assembly is apparently a judicial body that determines ...
... 16 do we learn he is Saul’s son.) Fortified by the success against the Ammonites, Jonathan took action against the Philistine outpost near Saul’s family home at Gibeah. The Philistines heard about it understates the Philistine reaction of outraged hostility: that they would respond fiercely was inevitable. There is no explicit criticism of Jonathan’s action, but his action contrasts with Saul’s careful planning (ch. 11). The portrait of Jonathan as an activist rather than a strategist—somewhat hot ...
... bodyguard. Arranging the killing at the sheepshearing party made it easier to get a drunken Amnon away from them than it would have been on their own territory. 13:39 This verse is obscure. The verb used here, “to go forth,” usually means to go in a hostile way and could mean that David, once the shock of his first grief had worn off, wanted to take action against Absalom. This interpretation fits better with ch. 14 as a whole. However, David had an ability to set the past aside; having lost one son, he ...
... understanding of the name is not necessary. It is perfectly reasonable to conclude that the name of this individual was Job. This ought not to obscure the fact, however, that the narrative at different points exploits the name and its meaning to emphasize the hostility between Job and his God. In 13:24, for example, Job considers God an “enemy” (ʾoyeb) and treats him as an “opponent” (tsar) in 16:9 and 19:11. The resumptive phrase this man was repeats the opening words with only slight variation ...
... ’s almost frantic words pour out in the anguish of . . . spirit and in the bitterness of . . . soul. He will not keep silent, but must complain while there is still time. Job establishes a negative tone here as he responds in “bitterness” to the hostility he senses from God. 7:12 Calling on creation imagery, Job compares the restriction and limitation he experiences with the boundaries God imposed on the chaotic waters at the very beginning. In forming the earth and firmament, God said to the surging ...
... , Bildad is confident that retribution will ultimately work. A righteous Job can consequently anticipate the ultimate resolution of his suffering in laughter and shouts of joy. Equally, those who oppose a righteous Job must also suffer the consequences of their hostility. Since God does not strengthen the hands of evildoers, Job’s opponents will be clothed in shame—in public disgrace—and in the end will be obliterated, since their tents (an allusion to their lives as temporary dwelling places) will ...
... for the terror that besets the wicked is his own relation to God (this is clearly intended as a warning to Job!). The accusation is two-fold and plays out over verses 25 and 26. The wicked person shakes his fist at God, taking a hostile attitude to him. In addition he vaunts himself—a use of the verb gbr, “be stronger,” in the Hitpael stem to mean “make himself stronger (than God).” Having convinced themselves of their superiority, the wicked are emboldened to launch an attack directly at the ...
... of death. The return in verse 26 to images of darkness and fire that consume his tent emphasizes the finality of his certain end. Bildad introduced these images in his last speech (18:6, 14, 15), and Job employed them himself to describe God’s hostile attack against him (19:8, 12). Zophar’s use of these same images here in his description of the complete and utter destruction of the wicked leaves little doubt about his intent to consign Job firmly to this category and its consequences. Although much of ...
... more important: a public acknowledgement of his essential righteousness, even in his impoverished state. Eliphaz continues by unpacking the value of God to a faithful Job in relational terms. Job will find delight in the Almighty, rather than the continuing hostility he currently experiences. The Hebrew here (ʿal shadday titʿaggag) means “to take exquisite delight in the Almighty.” The phrase appears only one other time, in Isaiah 58:14, in a very similar context. There Yahweh speaks through the ...
... a particular category. As Hartley (Job, p. 504) notes: “With these portraits Yahweh asserts his lordship over the entire earth—the cultivated land and the wilderness, the domesticated animals and the wild beasts. No part of the world lies outside his rule. No hostile forces exist beyond his authority.” 38:39–41 Do you hunt the prey for the lioness? God’s providence includes the animal world with which humans have little contact and for which they have less concern. Here, like a heavenly zookeeper ...
... is masculine singular, reflecting God’s address to Eliphaz. But God’s anger extends to the other friends as well: and your two friends. Note here that they are called “friends” of Eliphaz and not Job, perhaps revealing the author’s evaluation of the hostility of their comments towards Job. Note further that God does not include Elihu in this divine rebuke, a fact that leads many to assume his monologues are a late addition to the poetic portion of the book. Whether this absence of reference means ...
... 4–7), each with its own supporting reasons. The word order in the original Hebrew reveals the emphasis of the opening petition: “don’t in your anger rebuke me!” The psalm may not shun divine discipline as such, only its being done with hostility. Is this mention of rebuke a tacit admission of sin and guilt, an awareness that one suffers illness as a punishment? Because this identical petition opens Psalm 38, which explicitly refers to sickness (vv. 2–10, 17) and to sin and divine punishment (vv ...
... incline us to read this psalm as a unit. First, key terms and phrases appear in both sections, thus linking them together: Yahweh as “(the God of) my salvation” (Hb. yišʿî, vv. 1, 9), “my foes” (vv. 2, 12), “heart” (vv. 3, 8, 14), hostilities “rise up against me” (Hb. qwm ʿly/by, vv. 3, 12), “I seek” Yahweh’s presence (vv. 4, 8), and the term “life/living” (Hb. ḥyym, vv. 4, 13). Second, there are other psalms that make confessions of trust and also petition Yahweh to ensure ...
... the sick person to be transported to a sacred site. Rather, it was probably intoned at the bedside (see further Gerstenberger, Psalms, p. 164). The psalm does not merely describe the speaker’s anguish; the poem portrays it with several metaphors and images. God’s hostility is depicted as a military assault: arrows and a striking hand (v. 2). Guilt is likened to a burden too heavy to bear (v. 4). The expressions of the speaker’s emotional state are drawn from mourning rites for the dead (v. 6). His ...
... in my presence. The reason is to keep my tongue from sin. The form of sin is not spelled out—whether it reflects a temptation to join them (cf. 73:3), a denial of one’s faith and friends (cf. 73:13–15), or a lashing out with hostile words. Nevertheless, the speaker’s passion is aroused (My heart grew hot within me), and he breaks his vow but only to voice a prayer to God. He “keeps” his “tongue from sin” before “the wicked” by “speaking” with his tongue before God. Although not said ...
... ” in the Introduction; also cf. the warnings against trust in riches in 62:10 and 52:6–7). Given the character of the wicked as presented in these regular temple liturgies, the worshipers using the psalms, and this one in particular, should expect such typical hostilities from those who oppose the people of God. 62:1–4 We should probably read the opening verse not as a statement of confidence (so the NIV) but, as translated in verse 5, as advice or an exhortation to one’s self: “Toward God is ...
... grain into the barn. The enemy, as we shall soon find out, is the devil. As in the parable of the sower, where seed sown alongside the path is gobbled up by the birds, Satan is the one who obstructs the growth of the kingdom. He is a “hostile man” (echthros in v. 39 is a qualifier) who stands over against the “man who sowed good seed” (v. 24). The “seed” he has secretly sown in God’s field are all those who appear to be somewhat like Jesus’ followers but whose basic allegiance will be made ...
... 28–31). It is sometimes taken as an acted parable of Peter’s career (i.e., in his pride he fell and had to be rescued and restored by Jesus). Christian elaborations on the theme would see the boat as the church, the water as the hostile world, and Jesus descending from the mountain as the ascended Lord coming to dispel the fears of the troubled church. Once again we are reminded that presuppositions control exegesis. Our understanding of the text is conditioned by allowing it to speak for itself. Filson ...
... to ascertain. The references to the nations and the peoples (v. 3) in the first segment and to Edom in the second are linked in Isaiah 34:1–11; 63:1–6. These prophetic passages depict Edom as the quintessence of the nations who are hostile to Yahweh, and they foretell his final (perhaps eschatological) “day of vengeance.” Thus, the oracle (108:7–9), drawn from Psalm 60, probably foreshadows Yahweh’s establishment of his lordship among the nations. And the petition of verse 5, drawn from Psalm 57 ...
... . The disciples were perverse (Gk. diastrephō means “to make crooked/pervert”) in that they lacked the faith to believe that the power of God would work through them. Green suggests that their lack of faith must be attributed “to their involvement in a people hostile to Jesus and to what he stands for” (p. 156). The two rhetorical questions in verse 17 picture Jesus as visiting the world to establish his church. How long shall I stay with you? How long shall I put up with you? Jesus orders the ...
... I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go” (v. 8). Both psalms share a profound awareness of human sinfulness before God (32:1–5; 143:2) and show the need for God’s direction for the speaker’s life and for his protection from hostilities (32:6–7, 10). In our psalm, guidance is sought for the doing of your will (lit. “favor” or “pleasure,” cf. 25:4–5, 8–9, 12) in the context of “my enemies”—hence his preference for level ground (cf. 5:8; 27:11; 31:3). In effect ...
... are ways in which these two fundamental principles find expression. Additional Notes 22:34 Got together: Cf. the LXX of Ps. 2:2 (synēchthēsan epi to auto). It Matthew’s synēchthēsan epi to auto echoes the psalm, it emphasizes the hostile intent of the Pharisees. 22:36 Greatest: megalē (lit., “great”) is taken as a superlative, since in Semitic languages adjectives do not allow degrees of comparison. Poia (which) should perhaps be understood in the sense of “what kind of.” 22:37 šema’ is ...