... will no longer stand as evidence against the justice of God. The ones who will escape on that day will be the people who fear the Lord, because God will spare them (3:17). The God-fearers who had made a public witness to their faith (3:16) are the subjects of the promise in 3:17–18. God describes them in terms previously used for the whole people of Israel, my treasured possession (Exod. 19:5; the king’s private treasure, as in 1 Chr. 29:3–5), and his son who serves him (Exod. 4:22–24; cf. the ...
... , those who have committed themselves totally to Christ’s service. Following Jesus is about committing yourself to a life of service--and sometimes at great cost. Stan Mooneyhan tells a famous story of an international congress held sometime back. The subject of the conference was the plight of Jews in the Soviet Union who were not permitted to leave that country and were suffering various types of persecution. Simon Wiesenthal, director of the Jewish Documentation Center in Vienna, famous for locating ...
... terrible storms, and we will be better people for it. “Suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope.” Popular author and speaker Charles Swindoll tells about having lunch with a businessman who runs his own company. As they talked, the subject of wisdom kept popping up in their conversation. So Swindoll asked this businessman, “How does a person get wisdom? I realize we are to be [people] of wisdom,” commented Swindoll, “but few people ever talk about how it is ...
... Samaria it is not to be. Perhaps in the hope of receiving the living water immediately, the woman tells Jesus that she has no husband. Jesus ironically commends her for telling the truth (vv. 17, 18) and so exposes her adultery (cf. Mark 10:12). The change of subject is not so abrupt as it appears. The narrative assumes a close connection between baptism in the Spirit and the forgiveness of sins (cf. Mark 1:4–8; Acts 2:38). Jesus, who will baptize in the Spirit, is “the Lamb of God, who takes away the ...
... is like a son apprenticed to a human father, learning by example and imitation (v. 20). His authority is absolute, not in spite of the fact that he does nothing by himself, but because of it. His authority is a derived authority. In all that he does he is subject to his Father and totally dependent on his Father’s power and love. In his response, Jesus begins speaking mysteriously of himself in the third person as the Son, in much the same way that he speaks of himself in all the Gospels as the Son of Man ...
... got into the boat. In that case, the purpose of the statement would be to explain why they finally left without him. But such assumptions are unnecessary if the statement is intended simply for the readers of the Gospel and not understood as reflecting the subjective impressions of the disciples, in or out of the boat. 6:19 Three or three and a half miles: lit., “about twenty-five or thirty stadia.” A “stadium” or “stade” was the length of a Roman stadium (i.e., about 607 feet or 185 meters ...
... in verse 38. If, on the other hand (as in version 3), the narrator is already responsible for most of verse 38, then in verse 39 he is commenting on his own appended words (i.e., the scripture quotation), not the words of Jesus. The subject of verse 39 is not Jesus (“he meant”) but the Scripture (“it meant”). The same Greek verb, eipen, is translated “said” (in reference to the Scripture) in verse 38b and “meant” in verse 39. It is difficult to decide among the three alternatives, and the ...
... implication that they are not already free. As Abraham’s descendants, they are proud of having never been slaves of anyone (v. 33). Jesus explains that he is using slavery as a metaphor for sin and death (vv. 34–36). Descendants of Abraham or not, they are subject to death like everyone else and, in that sense, slaves (cf. Heb. 2:14–15). Jesus’ promise to set them free is a promise of life, an alternative to the grim prospect of dying in their sins (cf. vv. 21, 24). Verse 51 will make the promise ...
... They do this by virtue of the appended discourses in which Jesus expounds their meaning. Those who reject the unified witness of Jesus’ deeds and words prove by their rejection that they are not Jesus’ sheep (i.e., that they do not belong to him and are not subject to his care). It is another way of saying they “do not belong to God” (8:47). With the words, because you are not my sheep (v. 26), Jesus returns to the imagery of verses 1–18. What follows in verses 27–30, however, is best understood ...
... through me. The simultaneous stress is on Jesus as the Way and on the Father as the Destination. The center of interest is no longer time (you will follow later) but persons (Jesus and the Father). The Question of Philip The Father now becomes the subject of the third interchange. The terms where I am going and the way have now been replaced by “the Father” and “the Son” respectively. Thus Jesus’ introductory statement, If you really knew me you would know my Father as well (v. 7), echoes Thomas ...
... but his very last word is But take heart! I have overcome the world (v. 33). It is likely that both the riddle of verse 16 and the parable of verse 21 were sayings of Jesus remembered by his disciples after his resurrection and subject to either of two interpretations, depending on the circumstances of the interpreters. A suffering or oppressed church might well read it according to the first paradigm; a church rejoicing in worship, with a strong consciousness of the presence of Christ in the Spirit, would ...
... priest could question anyone who had heard Jesus on any number of occasions—his own priestly associates in fact—and draw his own conclusions. The exchange ends, like the Sanhedrin trial in Mark (14:65) and Matthew (26:67), with Jesus being subjected to physical abuse (v. 22). The reasons, however, are different. There is no “mocking” scene here. Instead, one of the guards, interpreting Jesus’ response as a refusal to answer the high priest’s question, and therefore as a sign of contempt, rebuked ...
... cf. the related noun energeia, “power,” in 3:21). To act according to his good purpose: Gk. hyper tēs eudokias, “for the good pleasure.” It is not said expressly whose “good pleasure” is meant, but it is certainly God’s (since God is the subject of the clause). The noun eudokia has been used in 1:15 for the “genuine good will” with which some preach the gospel in Rome, but the sense here is rather different (despite those who think hyper tēs eudokias means “to promote good will”). Cf ...
... are charged. Similarly in 1 Corinthians 6:13, where Paul quotes the libertine epigram, “Food is for the stomach [koilia], and the stomach [koilia] is for food,” the context makes it plain that sexual license, not freedom from food restrictions, is the subject under discussion. If their god is their “appetites,” that means that their “appetites” are their ultimate concern; they do not say so expressly, but that is the implication of their way of life. Their glory is in their shame (a good ...
... over their hearts and … minds and keep anxiety and other intruders out: it will guard them in Christ Jesus. The peace of God may mean not only the peace that he gives (cf. Rom 5:1) but the serenity in which he lives: God is not subject to anxiety. Additional Notes 4:5 Gentleness: Gk. epieikes, neuter adjective; cf. the abstract noun epieikeia, “gentleness,” in 2 Cor. 10:1. Aristotle describes epieikeia as that which is not only just but even better than justice (Nicomachean Ethics 5.10.6). There are ...
... astray) the remaining Johannine Christians, but that it has succeeded in doing so, at least to the point of seriously shaking the confidence of the community with its erroneous claims. 2:27 Therefore, to assure the community, the Elder returns once again to the subject of the anointing, which he first mentioned in v. 20. This chrisma is the Holy Spirit, in the Gospel of John called the Paraclete (John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7). The author makes four assertions about this anointing: (1) It was received from ...
... the multiplicity and self-sufficiency of God. That is, God, who is superior to all the gods, embodies in himself the qualities of all the gods that make up a pantheon. The OT uses “create” (bara’) restrictively: only God serves as its subject, and the material out of which something is made is never mentioned. The terms “the heavens” and “the earth,” being at opposite ends of the spectrum, stand for the totality of what God created. “Universe” is another possible translation for this ...
... here, Cain’s offering would have been acceptable, especially if it were the grain of the firstfruits (Lev. 2:14; Deut. 26:1–4). But frequently this term refers to offerings in general. 4:7 This verse is filled with exegetical difficulties. The subject “sin” (fem.) is not in agreement with the verb “crouch, lie” (rbts). Some translators have solved this problem by taking the verb as a substantive. Then “crouching, being on the lurk” stands in apposition to sin: “there is at the door sin ...
... repetition of “I will demand an accounting” (’edrosh) underscores God’s determination. Since every human bears the image of God, “murder is direct and unbridled revolt against God” (Westermann, Genesis 1–11, p. 468). God therefore declared that a murderer is subject to capital punishment. This penalty is based on the principle of lex talionis and is warranted by the fact that the murderer has violated God’s image. 9:8–17 In this second speech God solemnly bound himself by a covenant ...
... Canaan together. 12:10–13 Up to this point Abram had journeyed from Haran through Canaan apparently without incident. Now, at the southern boundary of the land of promise, he discovered firsthand that this land has a major drawback. It is a land periodically subject to famine, since its rainfall is sporadic. During such a crisis many of the inhabitants had to migrate in order to keep themselves and their flocks alive. Therefore, as did occupants of Canaan before him, Abram went down to Egypt to find food ...
... cope with the shame of being childless, Sarai devised a plan by which Abram might have a blood heir (15:2) and she might build her own family. She suggested to Abram that he sleep with Hagar and have a son by her. In presenting the subject to Abram, Sarai revealed the depth of her distress by casting blame for her barrenness on Yahweh. The ancients believed that God’s blessing in bestowing fertility was necessary for conception to take place. In asking Abram to take this course Sarai was in effect telling ...
... ate. The next morning the servant tested the agreement that Rebekah should become Isaac’s bride. Possibly either she or her parents or her brother might feel differently and no longer be willing for her to go to Canaan. The servant therefore skillfully brought up the subject in order to learn their resolve. Speaking as though he was at their service, the servant asked them to send him back to his master. This was a very polite way of asking them to get Rebekah ready to go with him. Laban and her mother ...
... dust of the earth (cf. 13:16). They would spread out from Bethel, occupying the land in all directions (cf. 13:14–15). In Hebrew “spread out” (parats) is literally “burst forth,” conveying the coming explosive increase in his offspring. The shift in subject from Jacob to his descendants indicates that through them he was to occupy the full extent of the promised land. Finally, all peoples on earth would find blessing through him and his offspring (seed; cf. 12:3). Yahweh went on to give Jacob four ...
... relation to all other spiritual realities. God of gods and Lord of lords; like “heavens of heavens” in v. 14, these should be understood as superlative expressions. Yahweh is “the highest God and supreme Lord.” Whatever other spiritual realities exist, they are subject to Yahweh. Again the question of monotheism arises, and again it seems inadequate to say, as some commentators do, that only a relative mono-Yahwism is in view. For the text does not say merely that Yahweh is the only God for Israel ...
... System.” 13:7 The text makes the exclusiveness of Israel’s loyalty to Yahweh as valid worldwide as Yahweh’s own uniqueness is valid throughout the heavens (cf. 4:32). The word land should really be “earth” (exactly the same as in 28:64). The lordship of Yahweh was not subject to geographical limits or cultural relativities. The one universal God has global loyalty rights.