... (7:6–10). The stranglehold of futility and mortality forces Job to cry out to God in complaint, asking a fundamentally important theological question (7:11–21): why does God concern himself with humanity? Job revisits the common ancient Near Eastern notion of cosmic battle among divinities (7:12; cf. 3:8). He asks whether he is the “sea” (Hebrew yam) or “the monster of the deep” (Hebrew tannin). At Ugarit, divinized chaos creatures Yammu and Tannin, precise cognate parallels, are defeated. Job ...
... than others. He seems to recognize that, from others’ point of view, his situation has turned him into a laughingstock. Contempt quickly replaces respect among those who witness the fall of a respected person (12:5). Job further digs at his friends’ notion that they know more than he (12:7–10). In parody Job parrots their style and counsel, even using second-person singular deixis (“you” singular), which the friends use when they speak to Job. Job parodies their argument: even simpleminded animals ...
... (Job 3). Reacting to charges of guilt by all three friends, Job insists that nonhuman witnesses would attest to his guiltlessness (12:7–9). The real culprit is God, who is powerful and who abuses the world with that strength (12:14–25). Job revisits the notion of working out a case against God (13:13–28) but ends the first cycle focused on the desperation of the human condition, that humans die and reside in Sheol without help (Job 14). In his first speech of the second cycle, Job graphically details ...
... The space and territory each occupies affects their respective outlooks. (1) Even though God has not appeared to Job, Job nevertheless views God as looking in on him and humanity (31:4, 6, 14–15). God is “with” Job, though not physically. But God abolishes the notion that Job is truly with God (“Where were you?” 38:4). God purges Job from attendance at and knowledge associated with the foundations of the cosmos. Job is not close to God. (2) God’s and Job’s spaces are vastly different. Job’s ...
... to the three-hundred-year-old Solomonic temple. The call to reform is given without preamble but with specifics. Practicing justice—that is, the observance of honorable relations—is a primary requirement. Specifically, “doing justice” (as contrasted to the Western notion of “getting justice”) means coming to the aid of those who are helpless and otherwise the victims of mistreatment, often widows, orphans, and strangers. To shed innocent blood is to take life by violence or for unjust cause. The ...
... mind by forbidding prophetic intercession (11:14–17). The sense of verse 15 is that Judah/Israel, God’s beloved, has no business in his temple (perhaps meaning the land) because she has plotted numerous times against him. Sacrifices, which she still offers, are called “consecrated meat” to suggest her notion that only the outward matters. Now Israel, a highly desirable and potentially productive olive tree, is hit by a lightning storm and destroyed. Covenant curses have been activated.
... the people to work and pray (24:4–9). God is the ultimate agent of the exile. Jeremiah counsels the people to resume work because the exile will be long and not short, as the false prophets are announcing. His advice is also intended to forestall notions the exiles might have about revolting or assisting those who do. The exiles, who live in colonies (Ezek. 3:15), seem to have considerable freedom. To pray to God on behalf of the city (Babylon) is essentially to pray for one’s enemies. Prayer can be ...
... cry their hearts out. The collective group speaks in verse 10; but in verse 11 an individual, an inside observer who is deeply moved, speaks. Both questions of verse 13 suggest speechlessness. “Your wound is as deep as the sea” (2:13) conveys the notion not only that things could not be worse but that the catastrophe has no parallel. Prophets, had they been true prophets, might have averted the disaster, or if not, could now be comforters. But false prophets are disqualified. A true prophet’s function ...
... as the chief prince of Meshek and Tubal (38:2). A footnote to verse 3 in the NIV notes that the phrase may be read as “Gog, prince of Rosh, Meshek, and Tubal.” It is this particular rendition that has given rise to the notion, popular in some evangelical circles, that Rosh represents Russia, Meshek represents Moscow, and Tubal represents Tobolsk. Thus, it is claimed, here is an explicit prophecy in Scripture of the now defunct Soviet Union and its belligerence against Israel. This can hardly be the case ...
... of the causal preposition “for/because” sets the tone for this segment of the prophet’s message and further explains the relationship between the pointed denunciation of Edom and the more indefinite pronouncement of God’s wrath against the nations. The notion that crime punishes itself (“your deeds will return upon your own head,” v. 15), or the principle of retribution, is well founded in biblical teaching. The legislation of the Torah is rooted in the concept of lex talionis, or “an eye ...
... restored (Jesus, the Christ). In the genealogy, Matthew rehearses Israel’s history to emphasize that Davidic kingship is restored in Jesus the Messiah. Scholars have understood Matthew’s emphasis on the number fourteen in various ways. Its significance might rest in the notion of seven as indicating completion, either fourteen as a doubled seven or three sets of fourteen indicating that six cycles of seven lead into the time of the Messiah—a seventh seven (e.g., Dan. 9:24). More likely, given David ...
... River either to observe John’s baptism or to be baptized themselves (the Greek is ambiguous in this regard). John has strong words for these leaders who should be producing fruit in keeping with repentance—that is, in keeping with a return to covenant loyalty (3:8). The notion of bearing fruit is a common one in the Old Testament, focused especially on God’s expectation that Israel would produce fruit (e.g., Isa. 5:1–7; 27:2–6; 37:31–32; cf. Matt. 7:15–19; 12:33; 21:43). Thus John warns Israel ...
... for them deeply (10:29–31). Jesus exhorts his followers to single-minded allegiance to him—an allegiance that freely acknowledges and aligns itself with Jesus (10:32–33), an allegiance that is greater than loyalties to one’s family (10:34–37). This notion was quite countercultural in the first-century Jewish context, where family loyalties and obligations were paramount (cf. also 8:21–22). To be “worthy of [Jesus]” is to love Jesus more than all others and to take up one’s cross and follow ...
... kingdom—what God is doing in Jesus—from the wise but has revealed it to “little children” (11:25), and the Son (Jesus, who has been described already as “Son of Man” and “Son of God”) is the means of that revelation (11:27). This notion that God through Jesus reveals the nature of God’s reign to some while it is hidden to others emerges more fully in the Parables Discourse of Matthew 13, as well as at Peter’s climactic messianic declaration in 16:16–17. Matthew communicates Jesus as ...
... on the day of judgment (12:27). Two truths are emphasized: only one who is good can produce good words and actions; and one’s words (as well as actions) will be the basis of final judgment (cf. 16:27). Jewish theology was quite able to hold together the notion of God’s gracious salvation and a final accounting based on works (and words), since God’s salvation preceded and provided the basis for God’s covenant with Israel and Israel was called to remain faithful to that covenant to the end.
... 2:11). The meaning of the last line of the angels’ hymn in verse 14 has been construed in different ways. The translation of the NIV is correct: “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.” The notion that God’s peace extends to “men of good will” is a serious distortion of the doctrine of grace, and the King James Version rendering (“good will toward men”) is based on an inferior text The story shows the spontaneous obedience of the shepherds (2 ...
... . In effect, the Jews wish to see these, and Jesus complies: his diplomas are divine (7:14–24). The Synoptics attest to Jesus’s uncanny sense of authority (Matt. 7:28–29). Here Jesus explains the source of that authority. The Jewish notion of authority was specialized. No one possessed inherent authority; it was secondary and indirect. Authority was passed down and conferred to the rabbi through ordination. It was as if the authority of Moses was preserved through the generations. And if the chain ...
... vinedresser and assuming the prerogatives of God (e.g., John 5), Jesus is the vine (which formerly stood for Israel). Union with Jesus means participation in the new Israel, the people of God (cf. Paul, who uses a similar metaphor in Rom. 11:17–24). This theological notion has appeared elsewhere, in John 10:7 (“I am the gate for the sheep”) and in 14:6 (“I am the way”). Attachment to Jesus is the only means of access to God’s household. In other words, Jesus marks the beginning of the new Israel ...
... good conscience (13:5). In antiquity, the vast majority of people were powerless. Paul does not address the possibilities that citizens have in a participatory democracy, and he does not address the problem of secular states that explicitly or implicitly reject any notion of the rulers’ responsibility toward God (which both the Greeks and the pagans recognized). Paul is realistic, which is why he does not mention the Zealot option, which only ten years later led to the Jewish revolt against Roman rule and ...
... on the terms of his boast, to preach the gospel free of charge. But given independence from all, Paul has freely subjugated himself again, not to their support but to their way of life, in order to win them to faith. Though no longer bound by the notion of the law as a covenant enabling maintenance of the righteousness necessary for fellowship with God, Paul is nonetheless willing to follow many of the customs that are indifferent to one justified by faith (see also Rom. 3:21–22; Acts 18:18; 21:26) when ...
... 17:32). If this is so, then the crux of the issue was probably not a denial of the possibility of a life after death but an opposition (which was characteristic of Greeks and, on occasion, of Jews living in a Greek environment) to the notion of a bodily resurrection and the preference for an idea of immortality of the soul. Added to this was likely a remembrance that when Paul had originally spoken about the resurrection, he had done so with words about believers already being “raised with Christ” (Eph ...
... not to be “misled” by the opinions of those outside the church, for as even the pagan playwright Menander said, “Bad company corrupts good character” (15:33). Instead of a life lived in sin, which results from an excessive pursuit of the pleasures of the body, prompted perhaps by the notion that a spiritual union with Christ after the death of the body is assured, the Corinthians are called back from such shameful ignorance of the truth to the Christian use of right reason.
... what one has,” and not attempt out of a sense of zeal or pious duty to give what one “does not have” (8:12). Paul drives home the principle. His “desire” is not to pressure the Corinthians but instead to urge on them a uniquely biblical notion of equality that regards the “plenty” of one as that which exists to supply the “need” of another (8:13–14). The idea is then illustrated, in a fashion characteristic of the Corinthian letters, by an appeal to Scripture (8:15, based on Exod. 16:18 ...
... former enslavement to polytheism. He confronts them also with the inappropriateness of turning toward any other religious expressions designed to add to the saving work of Christ. His purpose seems to be to point out that whether they embrace Gentile religious notions or the ancient and holy traditions of Judaism, all of them are “weak and miserable forces [stoicheia; NIV note: “principles”]” (4:9; see 4:3), which have now been superseded by their position in Christ. Referring to the fact that they ...
... Satan-prompted opposition to Christ’s redemption he referred to at 1 Timothy 4:1–5. In 1 Timothy, legalism and asceticism were Paul’s target. In 2 Timothy, Paul aims at a range of ethical failings flowing from an overrealized eschatology (the mistaken notion that the resurrection is “already,” and there is no “not-yet”). To deny that sin must die one last death at Jesus’s return is, ironically, to open the floodgates to an unbridled religion of self. It is not accidental that Paul’s list ...