Sermon and Worship Resources

Isaiah 6:1-13 · Isaiah’s Commission

1 In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of his robe filled the temple. 2 Above him were seraphs, each with six wings: With two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying. 3 And they were calling to one another: "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord Almighty; the whole earth is full of his glory." 4 At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook and the temple was filled with smoke.

5 "Woe to me!" I cried. "I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty."

6 Then one of the seraphs flew to me with a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with tongs from the altar. 7 With it he touched my mouth and said, "See, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away and your sin atoned for."

8 Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, "Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?" And I said, "Here am I. Send me!"

9 He said, "Go and tell this people: " 'Be ever hearing, but never understanding; be ever seeing, but never perceiving.'

10 Make the heart of this people calloused; make their ears dull and close their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed."

11 Then I said, "For how long, O Lord?" And he answered: "Until the cities lie ruined and without inhabitant, until the houses are left deserted and the fields ruined and ravaged,

12 until the Lord has sent everyone far away and the land is utterly forsaken.

13 And though a tenth remains in the land, it will again be laid waste. But as the terebinth and oak leave stumps when they are cut down, so the holy seed will be the stump in the land."

A Man With Lips on Fire

Isaiah 6:1-13

Sermon
by R. Blaine Detrick

God’s chosen nation - through which he would send the world’s Redeemer - had been brought to a pinnacle of earthly glory by King David. When his son, Solomon, assumed the throne, he consolidated David’s gains and led Israel to a power and a prominence, a prosperity and a prestige, unequalled in the world of his day.

The Queen of Sheba, who had been told of the wealth of Solomon’s court, could not believe it. She was not convinced. She came to see for herself. Her verdict: "The half has never yet been told" (1 Kings 10).

Even Jesus referred to Solomon’s splendor and luxury when he told us to "consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: and yet, I say unto you that even Solomon, in all his glory, was not arrayed like one of these" (Matthew 6:28, 29).

After Solomon, however, there came strife and division - a civil war that should not be too hard for us in the United States to understand, because it was a civil war between the north and the south. The outcome was that Israel was split into two kingdoms.

The northern kingdom, consisting of ten tribes, was still called Israel. (After this point, we need to read the Bible carefully to determine whether "Israel" refers to the entire nation or just to the northern kingdom.) The much smaller southern kingdom, consisting of only two tribes, was called Judah - and here the line of David was kept unbroken.

The northern kingdom lasted for approximately 200 years, after which King Sennacherib, of Assyria, conquered it. He overthrew the capital of Samaria and carried the people away as captives. That was the end; they marched out of the Bible and out of history, and are known even today as the ten lost tribes of Israel.

The little kingdom to the south, with its capital at Jerusalem, lasted for approximately another 150 years. Finally that small kingdom too was overcome, Jerusalem destroyed, and its people taken captive by King Nebuchadnezzar, of Babylon.

During this extended period of civil war, chaos, conflict, and captivity, God raised up a special group of people - an unprecedented group, so unique that no other culture or civilization has ever known anything similar. We call them the prophets of Israel.

When our congregation voted for the ten favorite men of the Bible, they selected two of these prophets: Isaiah, whom we’ll look at in this chapter, and Daniel, whom we shall consider in the next chapter.

When our people voted for Isaiah, they must have voted for his book instead of the man. Really, we know very little about the man himself, his activities, or his career. What we know is exciting, but Isaiah is remembered primarily because of his writing. He is generally regarded as the greatest of the prophets, because his book is so amazing ... so wide-ranging ... so overwhelming ... so sweeping ... so universal ... so literally inspired of the Holy Spirit! If this chapter does no more than send you to his book, I will consider it successful.

The book of Isaiah is, in essence, a summary of the entire Bible. It is composed of 66 chapters. How many books are there in the Bible? That’s right, 66! Interestingly, the book of Isaiah is very distinctly divided into two sections: beginning with chapter forty, there is a new outlook, so completely different that some scholars have felt that the two sections were written by two different authors. Be that as it may, there definitely are two well-defined sections: the first 39 chapters and the final 27 chapters. How is the whole Bible divided? Two sections - the Old Testament and the New Testament, with 39 books in the Old and 27 in the New! Just a coincidence? Make up your own mind. I don’t think so. Coincidence or not, the book of Isaiah is the whole Bible in miniature.

The book of Isaiah is not an easy book to read. Its language is difficult; to translate it is difficult; to understand it is often difficult. It is disorganized; it has little continuity; it is mixed up, chronologically. But it is certainly worth all the time and all the effort that it will take to study it. It is a jewel!

Lips Set Aflame

Isaiah could be called a man with lips on fire - the reason is his own story of his call by the Lord (Isaiah 6). His hero, his ideal - the great king, Uzziah - had died. Isaiah went into the temple - to worship, perhaps to mourn. There in the temple, it happened for him, as it should happen for us: he saw the Lord! He said, "I saw the Lord ... high and lifted up." And he tried to describe the beauty of the scene that he beheld in his vision.

When he saw the Lord, he didn’t shout in ecstasy; he sobbed in remorse. It is easy to visualize Isaiah, the young nobleman, falling to his knees in the temple ... realizing the utter holiness of his God ... recognizing his own unworthiness ... and confessing his sin. "Woe is me," he cried, "for I am a man of unclean lips."

In his vision, he saw one of the seraphim fly over to the altar of sacrifice, lift one of the live coals with a pair of tongs, return, and touch that burning coal to his lips, symbolic of the cleansing forgiveness that he received that day.

Then he heard God ask for volunteers: "Who will go; whom shall I send?"

And Isaiah responded, "Here am I, send me."

That was the day his lips were set aflame. And ever after that experience, the lips of Isaiah were aflame with the glory of Christ. With the glory of Christ? Yes! And he lived over 700 years before Jesus was born, seven centuries before the Incarnation!

Aflame Throughout the New Testament

Those flaming lips of Isaiah are quoted upon the pages of the New Testament more frequently than any other Old Testament writer. At one time, if somebody had asked me, "What Old Testament book is the most quoted in the New Testament?", my off-hand answer would have been, "The book of Psalms." Not so, however. Research shows that it is the book of Isaiah.

John the Baptizer blazes his way into the New Testament with words from Isaiah: "The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord. Make straight in the desert a highway for our God" (Matthew 3:1-3; Isaiah 40:3-5).

When Jesus began his public ministry, what words did he use? He turned to Isaiah, and there in the synagogue at Nazareth, he read: "The spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the broken hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord" (Luke 4:16-20; Isaiah 61:1, 2).

And when Jesus came to the close of his earthly ministry, though he indirectly quoted from the Psalms while on the cross, the last direct quotation that he made was from the book of Isaiah, when he said (of himself) at the Last Supper: "He was numbered with the transgressors" (Luke 22:37; Isaiah 53:12).

As Paul, the apostle, closed his ministry (as reported in the book of Acts), he too used the words of Isaiah (Acts 28:25-27; Isaiah 6:9, 10).

In addition, some of the best-known passages from Saint Paul and from Saint John found their original expression in Isaiah. For instance, "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." Paul said it - but Isaiah said it first! (1 Corinthians 6:2; Isaiah 64:4).

"Now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation." Paul said it in Corinthians - but Isaiah said it first! (2 Corinthians 6:2; Isaiah 49:8).

Paul brilliantly described the Christian soldier (one of the finest analogies of the Bible) as wearing a "helmet of salvation and the breastplate of righteousness." He was using Isaiah when he wrote those expressions! (Ephesians 6:13-17; Isaiah 59:17).

"At the name of Jesus, every knee should bow ... every tongue should confess," Paul wrote - but he was borrowing from Isaiah! (Philippians 2:10; Isaiah 45:23).

Paul’s Easter cry of triumph was: "Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?" He was remembering Isaiah! (1 Corinthians 15:54, 55; Isaiah 25:8a).

John, the beloved disciple, saw many visions and revelations from the Lord. When he tried to find words to express those visions to people, he turned often to the book of Isaiah. John described, for example, "God’s wiping away all tears" - but Isaiah had seen a similar vision more than 700 years previously and used that very idea! (Revelation 7:17; 21:4; Isaiah 25:8b).

As John tried to describe the holy city and its streets of gold, he wrote that the gates of that city are never closed. Isaiah had said that! (Revelation 21:25; Isaiah 60:11).

John mentioned that there was no night there and that there was no need of the sun, for the light of the Lamb of God was sufficient. He used the words of Isaiah to describe that! (Revelation 21:23; 22:5; Isaiah 60:19).

John said that there would be a new heaven and a new earth. Isaiah had seen a similar vision, and John couldn’t find better words than Isaiah’s to explain his own vision! (Revelation 21:1; Isaiah 65:17; 66:22).

It is truly amazing to discover that many of the familiar verses of the New Testament have their roots in a man who had lived over 700 years before.

Aflame With the Whole Gospel

Those flaming lips of Isaiah, the prophet, inspired people in the days of the New Testament ... of Jesus ... of the apostles ... of the evangelists ... of the early church fathers ... and through the centuries of time.

If you appreciate music, you are aware that Handel’s Messiah would not be the Messiah if the words of Isaiah were removed. Many of the beautiful anthems and choruses from that famous oratorio are rooted in the book of Isaiah.

Some of our best loved hymns have their basis in the words of Isaiah: "Holy, Holy, Holy" (6:3) or "How Firm a Foundation" (41:10; 43:1, 2) or "Watchman, Tell Us of the Night" (21:11, 12).

The great Baptist preacher and evangelist of the city of London, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, was saved because he heard a text from Isaiah: "Look unto me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth" (Isaiah 45:22). And Spurgeon proclaimed the Gospel to multitudes of people because he did what Isaiah suggested: he looked - and he was saved!

Actually, in the book of Isaiah, the preacher (even in the twentieth century, more than 2,500 years after Isaiah died) can find text after text for any occasion. Do not think it an exaggeration to say that if all the rest of the Bible were destroyed, and only the book of Isaiah were preserved, that would be enough. Yes, a preacher could preach a whole ministry, and never turn aside from the book of Isaiah. Yes, a preacher could preach the whole Gospel, and never turn aside from the book of Isaiah. Here is found text after text, passage after passage, sufficient for preaching an entire lifetime, sufficient for preaching the well-rounded Gospel.

If one were called of God to preach, and wanted a text from Isaiah on Salvation, no better one (even in the Gospels or in Paul’s Epistles) could he found than this: "Come, now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord; though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they he red like crimson, they shall be as wool" (1:18).

To preach on Decision and Commitment: "Seek ye the Lord while he may be found; call ye upon him while he is near." Or "Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon" (55:6, 7).

To preach on Grace: "Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money, come ye, buy and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price" (55:1).

To preach on Faith: "I will trust and not be afraid" (12:2). Or "If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established" (7:9).

To preach on Social Justice: "Cease to do evil; learn to do well; seek justice; relieve the oppressed; judge the fatherless; plead for the widow" (1:16, 17).

To preach on Peace: "They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore" (2:4).

To preach on Witnessing: "O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountain. O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up; be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God" (40:9).

To preach about the Bible: "The grass withereth, the flower fadeth, but the word of our God shall stand forever" (40:8). Or "My word shall not return unto me void" (55:11).

To preach on Comfort: "Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God; Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem and say unto her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned" (40:1, 2). Or "As on whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you" (66:13).

All of this is in Isaiah - and much, much more. On and on we could continue. Whatever the theme, Isaiah has a passage that relates to it: Repentance (55:7; 44:22); Discipleship (30:21; 35:8); Missions (11:9; 49:6; 54:3; 60:3); Sin (59:2; 64:6); Judgment (1:20); Prayer (56:7); Renewal (40:31); Prophecy (42:9; 46:10); Millenium (11:6, 7).

The whole Gospel ... for all time ... for all people ... for all places ... is in the book of Isaiah!

Aflame With the Christ of Christmas

Isaiah had the amazing ability (under divine inspiration) of looking down the corridors of time and seeing the events of the future as if they were happening in his time. He saw more than he knew ... he said more than he knew ... he wrote more than he knew. After all, that is what inspiration is all about: the divine using the human to do or say or write for one age or circumstance, and yet have it apply to another age or circumstance; God using a person to do or say or write something which is far beyond that person’s human comprehension.

For instance, we scarcely are aware of how much of Isaiah we use during the Advent-Christmas season. When we celebrate the incarnation of thc Son of God, we repeatedly use Isaiah’s words.

"There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots" (11:1-5). How did Isaiah know this?

"Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." (7:14). How did Isaiah know this?

"The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light; they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined ... For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name shall be called Wonderful, counselor, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace" (9:2, 6, 7). How did Isaiah know this?

Remember, Isaiah wrote over 2,500 years before we were born and over 700 years before Jesus was born! How did he know so much? How was he able to write such words - words that still uplift and inspire, even in our generation? Only because of the anointing of the Holy Spirit!

Aflame With the Christ of Calvary

Even more astounding than Isaiah’s prophecies of the Messiah’s coming is his portrait of the Messiah’s atoning death. Where in the New Testament ... where in the four gospels ... where in the letters of Paul ... where anywhere will you find a more complete and accurate description of the sacrificial substitute, the suffering Savior, than in the 53rd chapter of Isaiah?

"He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; and we hid as it were our faces from him ... Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows ... He was wounded for our transgressions; he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes, we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all" (53:3-6). That’s Isaiah! But no, not really; it isn’t Isaiah - it’s Christ!

The message of those flaming lips was not given that men should admire Isaiah; the message was granted that men should turn to Christ: THE Sufferer ... THE Substitute ... THE Sacrifice ... THE Savior. The words of Isaiah 53 find their full fruition in such New Testament passages as these, which portray Christ, "the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29) ... "Christ, our Passover, sacrificed for us" (1 Corinthians 5:7) . . . Christ, who "died for (instead of) us" (Romans 5:8).

Christ, "the author and finisher of our faith, who ... endured the cross, despising the shame" (Hebrews 12:2) ... Christ, "who knew no sin, but was made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him" (2 Corinthians 5:21) ... Christ, "who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree" (1 Peter 2:24) ... Christ, the Son of God, who was sent "to be the propitiation for our sins" (1 John 4:10) ... Christ, who himself said, "This is my body, which is given for you ... This is my blood, which is shed for you" (Luke 22:19, 20).

The message of Isaiah commends you to Christ. His words beseech you to lift up your eyes and behold the Christ who gave himself for your sins, trusting him completely and eternally.

At this moment, if your soul is grieving, learn that Christ will carry your sorrows (53:4) ... if your soul is wayward, learn that Christ is the way (30:21) ... if your soul is sinful, learn that Christ was bruised for your iniquities (53:5) and will make your sins as white as snow (1:18). "Seek ye the Lord while he may be found" (55:6).

For personal reading:

2 Kings 19, 20

Isaiah 6, 7, 9, 11

Isaiah 36--39, 53

For public reading: Isaiah 6:1-8

Background

After Solomon (David’s son), the kingdom was divided, (1 Kings 12) 931 B.C.

North (Israel, ten tribes) defeated by Assyria, (2 Kings 18) 721 B.C.

South (Judah, two tribes) defeated by Babylon, (2 Kings 25) 586 B.C.

During this period, God spoke through the prophets

Outline

Lips Set Aflame (Isaiah 6)

Aflame Throughout the New Testament

Aflame With the Whole Gospel

Aflame With the Christ of Christmas (Isaiah 7, 9, 11)

Aflame With the Christ of Calvary (Isaiah 53)

Q-SHEET

Isaiah - A Man With Lips on Fire Isaiah 6, 36--39

QUIZ: (Fill in the blanks. Try first without a Bible; then use the verses to verify each answer.)

1. Isaiah had a great vision after King _________ died. (6:1)

2. This vision occurred in the _________. (6:1)

3, 4. He saw a number of ______, each of which had six _________. (6:2)

5, 6. A live coal was brought from the_________ and touched to his ________. (6:6, 7)

7-9. In the fourteenth year of the reign of King _______, the city of _________ was beseiged by __________, ruler of Assyria. (36:1, 2)

10, 11. Threatened with disaster, King ________ asked for advice from Isaiah and went into the temple to _________. (36:1-5, 14)

12-14. ________ Assyrians were slain in one night, forcing the king of Assyria, _________, to return to his home, where he was assassinated by two of his ________. (37:36-38)

15-17. The shadow of the __________ moving backward ten degrees was a sign that the life of King _________ was to be extended for ______ years. (38:5-9)

QUESTIONS: (for individual consideration and/or group discussion)

How does Isaiah’s experience compare with yours? (6)

What would happen if the United States was invaded? (36, 37)

When can we pray for the healing of the body? (38:1-8)

How powerful is prayer? (37:15, 21; 38:2, 5)

What was Hezekiah’s mistake in allowing the Babylonian envoys to see his prosperity? (39)

CSS Publishing Co., Inc., Favorite Men Of The Bible, by R. Blaine Detrick

Overview and Insights · The Call of Isaiah (6:1–13)

In Isaiah 6 the prophet has a direct encounter with the awesome, holy God, seated on his throne. Direct encounters with God like this are rather rare in the Old Testament. Moses falls down before God at the burning bush (Exod. 3:1–2), and Ezekiel sees God on his “chariot” throne amid the spinning wheels and …

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Isaiah 6:1-13 · Isaiah’s Commission

5 "Woe to me!" I cried. "I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty."

8 Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, "Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?" And I said, "Here am I. Send me!"

9 He said, "Go and tell this people: " 'Be ever hearing, but never understanding; be ever seeing, but never perceiving.'

11 Then I said, "For how long, O Lord?" And he answered: "Until the cities lie ruined and without inhabitant, until the houses are left deserted and the fields ruined and ravaged,

12 until the Lord has sent everyone far away and the land is utterly forsaken.

13 And though a tenth remains in the land, it will again be laid waste. But as the terebinth and oak leave stumps when they are cut down, so the holy seed will be the stump in the land."

Commentary · Isaiah’s Call

The prophet dates his vision of God’s glory (6:1–4) to the year in which King Uzziah died. Scholars have tried to understand the significance of this dating, but it is enough to recognize that this is one way of connecting chapter 6 to the context of the Syro-Ephraimite War (see Isa. 7:1). A vision of the Lord appears to the prophet. He sees Yahweh sitting on the throne, exalted in the temple. The prophet concentrates not on the throne or on the Lord seated on it but on “the train of his robe” as it fills the temple, which is filled with the glorious presence of the Lord. He touches the earth in his power and glory, and yet the earth and the earthly temple cannot contain him. The appearance of the Lord, transcendent in his majesty and yet immanent in his presence, is represented in the language of a theophany. It affects all things on earth: the doorposts and thresholds of the temple, for instance, shake as in an earthquake. When the Lord appeared on Mount Sinai, his revelation was preceded by an earthquake, lightning, and darkness (Exod. 19:16). Isaiah finds himself gazing at a ceremony in which the seraphim announce the glorious presence of the Holy One of Israel. The seraphim are like men in appearance, with faces and feet; however, they are unlike men in that they have six wings, with which they cover themselves in the presence of the Lord. As they hover in his presence, they call out, “Holy, holy, holy.”

The holiness of the Lord is a most important doctrine in the teaching of Isaiah. Yahweh’s holiness is an expression of his separateness from the corruption of his people. He is the Holy One of Israel, and in this sense he is the “wholly other” one. Israel and Judah will not be able to experience the loving-kindness of the Lord until they have been cleansed and sanctified; only then can they experience the presence of the Holy One of Israel. The seraphim ascribe holiness to “the Lord Almighty” (“the Lord of Hosts”). He is the great King over “the host” of heaven (Deut. 4:19; 1 Kings 22:19; Isa. 40:26) and over the earth, which as part of his kingdom “is full of his glory” (6:3). The word “glory” is also important to the message of Isaiah. It signifies the majesty and splendor of the presence of Yahweh. Over against all the wealth of the rich and the royal courts of earthly kings is the king of glory, whose judgment will destroy human kingdoms and frustrate human plans. When the king of glory establishes his kingdom and extends it from shore to shore, the fullness of his glory will become evident. The seraphim already see the whole earth full of his glory.

In an appropriate response to the impact of the vision of God’s holiness, presence, and glory, Isaiah calls out, “Woe to me!” (6:5). The prophet fears for his life, as he is particularly aware of his uncleanness—he represents the sinful nation (6:5–7). In response, one of the seraphs takes with special tongs a burning coal from the altar and touches Isaiah’s mouth. The ceremony is reminiscent of the incense altar (Exod. 30:1–10), which was lit by a burning coal taken from the altar (Lev. 16:12–13). Before Isaiah is able to speak to the Lord, he must be forgiven. This forgiveness is personal. Once Isaiah has been purified, he is permitted to speak in the heavenly council and receives his commissioning.

In his heavenly council Yahweh asks the question, “Who will go for us?” (6:8). Isaiah volunteers, and Yahweh immediately commissions him (6:8–13). The commission consists of a declaration that Isaiah’s ministry is going to be hard and long. His message will prick the conscience of people, but they will harden themselves against God and his word. Isaiah is shown the desolation of the land and the exile of the population. The emphasis is on judgment, devastation, and desolation. But there is hope, for the “holy seed” will remain. Isaiah begins chapter 1 with the “brood of evildoers” (literally “seed of . . .”) and concludes chapter 6 with a ray of hope (“holy seed”).

The messages of the first part of the triptych (chaps. 1–5—Judah’s sin, God’s judgment, the remnant, and the messianic kingdom; see beginning of commentary on 1:1–12:6) are not set in historical context. This changes with the historical reference to the year of Uzziah’s death (6:1), and the third part of the triptych (chaps. 7–12) begins with events associated with Ahaz. When Ahaz came to the throne, the Aramean (Syrian) power was about to be eclipsed. The Arameans were already feeling mounting pressure from the east, as the Assyrians were moving westward. God’s word comes to Israel, Aram, Assyria, and Judah. Everything that happens on earth results from God’s sovereign rule.

The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Isaiah’s Commission--To Stop People Hearing: The fact that this testimony comes here rather than as chapter 1 further reflects the fact that the book called Isaiah is arranged logically rather than chronologically. Chapter 6 takes up many of the motifs in chapters 1–5. It also opens a section of the book in which narrative is more dominant (6:1–9:7) and that stands at the center of chapters 1–12 as a whole. Yahweh’s holiness and the implications of that holiness are of key importance to the chapter.

6:1–4 Uzziah/Azariah died between 742 and 735 B.C. after an outstanding, prosperous 52-year reign and a period of co-regency with his son Jotham (2 Kgs. 15:5) but leaving Assyrian storm clouds on the horizon. Here Isaiah sees the real Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, king and sovereign of the whole of heaven and earth, the King, the LORD Almighty (v. 5). Three times Isaiah calls Yahweh “Lord,” Sovereign. The contrast between the limitlessness of Yahweh’s reign and the limitations of the earthly king’s reign might serve as reassurance at a time of transition. It will transpire that the message is less comforting. Isaiah is apparently in the temple, perhaps having gone there to seek God, or present for a “routine” occasion of worship, or for a great festival when Judah celebrated the kingship of the holy God over its own life and over the whole world, and recommitted itself to being Yahweh’s subjects (see, e.g., Ps. 98; 99). In the temple, the symbolism of worship with the incense swirling becomes a vision of the reality the symbolism pointed to.

Yahweh is the human king writ large, sitting in his palace (the secular meaning of the word temple), exalted on his throne above the level of mere subjects, arrayed in robes of state, flanked by adulatory attendants (we know nothing of the seraphim’s appearance), and possessing the power and authority to make his kingship more than the mere constitutional monarchy of a modern European democracy. The entire forces of the cosmos are at this real King’s disposal. Regardless of what is happening to the human monarchy, it is this monarch who counts. Isaiah sees Yahweh awesome in royal honor and splendor (see, e.g., Ps. 97). That glory is the outward manifestation of Yahweh’s being holy (see on 1:4). While the threefold holy compares with the threefold acknowledgment of God’s holiness in worship in Psalm 99:3, 5, 9, three occurrences of “holy” compare with the twofold repetition elsewhere 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 simply draw back. But because of who Yahweh is, holiness comes to have moral connotations (see on 5:16). Isaiah draws back from God’s holiness not just because of God’s awesome splendor and his own creatureliness. He also draws back because God is just and righteous and he and his people are polluted (tame’), like the king who died that year (2 Kgs. 15:5). They do not fulfill the demands of Psalm 24. The fact that his lips were the part of his person especially involved in serving God as a prophet may lie behind his linking pollution with his lips. But he links his pollutedness with his people’s, suggesting that he is identifying the pollution of his lips with Judah’s. He has already referred to a number of the wrongs of their lips (e.g., 1:15, 23; 2:6; 3:8; 5:19, 20, 24). In the context of worship, the first of these (1:15) would have been especially relevant. Whichever it is, Isaiah finds that a vision of the holy God shuts the mouth.

6:6–7 Isaiah’s instinct to infer that holiness will be the end of him turns out to be mistaken. He also learns that holiness can mean forgiveness. In keeping with his stress on fire as a means of judging/purging (1:25; 4:4), a coal from the incense altar touches the part of Isaiah’s body that he recognized to be the place of pollution (cf. Num. 16:46–47). The high and lofty One (the same phrase as in v. 1) dwells in a high and holy place, but also with those who are crushed and lowly in spirit (57:15). Merciful grace belongs as much to the essence of God’s holiness as justice and purity. Once more, a return to Yahweh is not the only requirement for a restored relationship with Yahweh, as chapter 1 might have seemed to imply (guilt/sin recur from 1:4). People who do nothing and presume on God’s forgiveness indeed fail to experience it; those who acknowledge the justice of God’s judgment and turn from the ways that earned it can escape it.

The sign of cleansing that Isaiah receives is absurdly inadequate. How could being touched with a coal effect this sort of purification? The insufficiency of the sign highlights the fact that the cleansing originates within the person of the holy God. Sacramental rites such as this are the means by which Yahweh incarnates grace to humankind.

6:8–10 It now becomes clear that holiness does mean judgment. Even if no specific pollution attached to Isaiah’s lips, if he is to function as a prophet there is a special appropriateness about his having his lips cleansed so that he can use them in God’s service. The image of Yahweh sending someone as messenger presupposes the model of Yahweh as the King surrounded by his court or cabinet. Usually it is permanent members of this cabinet that Yahweh sends to announce or execute the cabinet’s decisions (e.g., 1 Kgs. 22:19–23), and there is no presumption that Yahweh’s question in verse 8 expects a response from a mere human would-be aide. Whereas the accounts of Moses’ and Jeremiah’s commissioning stress their hesitation, Isaiah (like Ezekiel) is at the other extreme. He volunteers. A prophet is a human person who is admitted to Yahweh’s cabinet and thus becomes another means of executing heaven’s decisions on earth and a transmitter of messages between earth and heaven. This works both ways, for the prophet intercedes in the cabinet, speaking on earth’s behalf there, as well as bringing announcements of heaven’s decisions to earth.

It is a somber commission Yahweh then gives to Isaiah. Isaiah 6:1–8 is commonly read independently of what follows, simply as an instructive account of God’s call. This ignores where verses 1–8 lead. Like the story of Elijah hearing the gentle whisper (1 Kgs. 19:12), the chapter is about the way God implements judgment. Indeed, every account of a prophet’s call has this focus. Perhaps God hardly has need to call someone in this way for an ordinary, more pastoral ministry. Chapter 6 introduces 6:1–9:7, which functions as an explanation why people should take God’s word seriously. This is so with other accounts of the call of prophets, such as those of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, though it is especially clear in the account of Amos’s call (Amos 7:10–17). The content of the message of these prophets meant that it was not welcome, and people would be inclined not to believe that it came from God. The prophet therefore told of his call as one way of trying to get people to listen to his word. Thus the experience of a call is not something that other people would expect to have in common with a prophet. It is what makes a prophet different. The account of a call invites readers to see themselves not as prophets, called the way God called Isaiah, but rather as the audience of prophecy.

What then happens to them when they read on is frightening. Yahweh sends Isaiah to tell people that God is closing their minds (vv. 9–10). They have reached the point when God’s judgment must fall, and the closing of their minds is the form this judgment will take. After all, they are willfully closing their own minds, actively or indirectly (e.g., 1:4; 5:12–13, 19–21). As a judgment Yahweh wills that the natural result should follow. They are closing their minds, and God will let that have its natural effect. They will become unable to realize what God is doing with them. Nevertheless, the words in verses 9 and 10 may be ironic. They constitute a warning of where the people will find themselves unless they respond and turn. Isaiah says Be ever hearing, but never understanding (v. 9), but he does not mean it. His preaching of judgment resembles Jonah’s in Nineveh. It is designed to bring people to their senses, to repentance, and to forgiveness, even though it does not explicitly urge them to repentance and indicate that there is any way out. Isaiah will urge them to turn and will not merely repeat what 6:9–10 literally says, but he will meet a response that supports its truth (see ch. 7).

6:11–13 Even if judgment is inevitable, that is not the end of the story, for holiness also means faithfulness. For how long is the question that often appears in the Psalms, not as a request for information, but as a plea for mercy. Initially Isaiah receives only a somber reiteration of how devastating the judgment must be. This reaffirms earlier declarations (e.g., 1:7–9, 29–31; 2:12–13; 5:5–6, 9, 13, 17) and provides part of the justification for his delivering his subsequent tough message (e.g., 7:17–25). Soon, in 721 B.C., the capital of the northern kingdom, Samaria, will fall to the Assyrians. The decimation of Yahweh’s people as a whole when that happens could make Judah feel self-congratulatory. Even that is not the end (v. 13a). But this is not all Isaiah receives. Like the prophet, the people will find that God’s holiness has room for mercy, which they will experience after the most horrifying devastation if not before it. Even the felled tree can grow again. They were once a brood (zera’, lit. “seed”) of evildoers (1:4). Now they are (literally) “a seed of holiness,” who are promised that they will be the stump in the land that can become a tree again (v. 13b; cf. 62:12). Despite the nightmare prospect set up by 5:1–7, their once-for-all association with Yahweh means (as a particular sign of Yahweh’s mercy) that the word holy indeed applies to them, too (cf. 4:3). This tree will not be finally uprooted. Yahweh’s promise will be taken further in 11:1–12:6.

Additional Notes

6:2 They covered their faces so that they would not look at God (despite the sense in which Isaiah himself did) and covered their feet for modesty (if this is a euphemism for genitals).

6:8 For us: presumably the heavenly court (see 1 Kgs. 22).

6:9–10 NIV mg. notes that the LXX renders this as a prediction rather than a statement of the intention of Isaiah’s ministry (when Jesus repeats these words, Mark 4 gives a version like the Hb., while Matt. 13 gives one like LXX). This becomes in effect God’s intention insofar as God still sends Isaiah. It has thus been suggested that Isaiah wrote the account of his call in light of how things turned out, and that in reality it was only after the event that he saw that this was what he had been called to. It has also been suggested that God indeed revealed that this was what Isaiah was being called to, so that when it turned out thus, Isaiah would not be overwhelmed by his failure. Such theories reflect the sense of scandal interpreters feel at Isaiah’s words, but they start from a problem Isaiah evidently did not sense himself.

6:13 So the holy seed will be the stump in the land: lit., “the holy seed [is] its stump” or “its stump [is] the holy seed,” interprets the word stump (actually singular) in the previous line. “So” and “in the land” are NIV interpretations.

Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by John Goldingay, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Altar

Altars were places of sacrifice and worship constructed of various materials. They could be either temporary or permanent. Some altars were in the open air; others were set apart in a holy place. They could symbolize either God’s presence and protection or false worship that would lead to God’s judgment.

Earth

Israel’s promised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen. 13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing, fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orienting points for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise, “flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27). Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity and judgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationship with God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; this could ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits” people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).

For Israel, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen. 15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithful obedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1 Kings 2:1–4). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen. 18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was the supreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance” to give (1 Sam. 26:19; 2 Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). The Levites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did the other tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20; Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter and to occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3). Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when they accused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing with milk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however, no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance” (Josh. 13:1).

Glory

The tangible presence of God, experienced as overwhelming power and splendor. The main Hebrew word referring to glory, kabod, has the root meaning “heavy” (1 Sam. 4:18), which in other contexts can mean “intense” (Exod. 9:3; NIV: “terrible”), “wealthy” (i.e., “heavy in possessions” [Gen. 13:2]), and “high reputation” (Gen. 34:19; NIV: “most honored”). When used of God, it refers to his person and his works. God reveals his glory to Israel and to Egypt at the crossing of the sea (Exod. 14:4, 17 19). He carefully reveals his glory to Moses after Israel’s sin with the golden calf in order to assure him that he will not abandon them (33:12–23).

In the NT the glory of God is made real in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14; Heb. 1:3). He is, after all, the very presence of God. When he returns on the clouds, he will fully reveal God’s glory (Matt. 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27).

Guilt

Although the concepts of sin and guilt often overlap, a basic distinction between the two can be established. In the biblical sense, sin is basically violation of divine stipulations (what a person does or does not do), whereas guilt is the resulting state, or one’s “legal” status (what that person has become as a result). In essence, one commits sin and becomes guilty (Hab. 1:11).

The state of being guilty is further distinguished from the punishment that it draws, because one can be pronounced guilty and still be exempted from punishment. Nor should guilt be mistaken for the emotional response of the culprits toward themselves and their victims. No matter how sincere it may be, remorse does not eliminate the guilt.

In the biblical sense, guilt is something objective and separate from the will or intention of the culprit. One can pay back debt and render the obligation fulfilled. One cannot, however, cancel one’s own guilt. In the sacrificial system of the OT, the offender must perform restitution to the victim and also give a guilt offering to God. This reflects the notion that in committing sinful acts in violation of God’s laws, the culprit has offended not only the victim but also God. This is what David means in Ps. 51:3 4 (with his sin in full display before God, David realizes that he has sinned against God and God alone).

This is why those who scoff at the guilt offering are fools (Prov. 14:9). By doing this, they insult God’s being and character. Such a biblical view of guilt implies that forgiveness and restoration should come from without, from source(s) other than the culprit and victim. The Bible affirms that the only one capable of offsetting the cost of human sin is the sinless Christ, “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). His life was laid on the cross and offered as the acceptable sacrifice for the totality of guilt, and as a result it freed those who believe in him from the obligation of the guilt.

Heart

Physiologically, the heart is an organ in the body, and in the Bible it is also used in a number of metaphors.

Metaphorically, the heart refers to the mind, the will, the seat of emotions, or even the whole person. It also refers to the center of something or its inner part. These metaphors come from the heart’s importance and location.

Mind. The heart refers to the mind, but not the brain, and in these cases does not involve human physiology. It is a metaphor, and while the neurophysiology of the heart may be interesting in its own right, it has no bearing on this use of language. Deuteronomy 6:5 issues the command to love God with all one’s heart, soul, and strength. When the command is repeated in the Gospels, it occurs in three variations (Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). Common to all three is the addition of the word “mind.” The Gospel writers want to be sure that the audience hears Jesus adding “mind,” but this addition is based on the fact that the meaning of the Hebrew word for “heart” includes the mind.

The mental activities of the metaphorical heart are abundant. The heart is where a person thinks (Gen. 6:5; Deut. 7:17; 1 Chron. 29:18; Rev. 18:7), where a person comprehends and has understanding (1 Kings 3:9; Job 17:4; Ps. 49:3; Prov. 14:13; Matt. 13:15). The heart makes plans and has intentions (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Prov. 20:5; 1 Chron. 29:18; Jer. 23:20). One believes with the heart (Luke 24:25; Acts 8:37; Rom. 10:9). The heart is the site of wisdom, discernment, and skill (Exod. 35:34; 36:2; 1 Kings 3:9; 10:24). The heart is the place of memory (Deut. 4:9; Ps. 119:11). The heart plays the role of conscience (2 Sam. 24:10; 1 John 3:20 21).

It is often worth the effort to substitute “mind” for “heart” when reading the Bible in order to grasp the mental dimension. For example, after telling the Israelites to love God with all their heart, Moses says, “These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts” (Deut. 6:6). Reading it instead as “be on your mind” changes our perspective, and in this case the idiom “on your mind” is clearer and more accurate. The following verses instruct parents to talk to their children throughout the day about God’s words. In order for parents to do this, God’s requirements and deeds need to be constantly on their minds, out of their love for him. Similarly, love for God and loyalty are expressed by meditation on and determination to obey his law (Ps. 119:11, 112). The law is not merely a list of rules; it is also a repository of a worldview in which the Lord is the only God. To live consistently with this truth requires careful, reflective thought.

Emotions and attitude. The heart, as the seat of emotion, is associated with a number of feelings and sentiments, such as gladness (Exod. 4:14; Acts 2:26), hatred (Lev. 19:17), pride (Deut. 8:14), resentment (Deut. 15:10), dread (Deut. 28:67), sympathy (Judg. 5:9), love (Judg. 16:15), sadness (1 Sam. 1:8; John 16:6), and jealousy and ambition (James 3:14). The heart is also the frame of reference for attitudes such as willingness, courage, and desire.

Holy

Holiness is an attribute of God and of all that is fit for association with him. God alone is intrinsically holy (Rev. 15:4). God the Father is holy (John 17:11), as is the Son (Acts 3:14), while “Holy” is the characteristic designation of God’s Spirit (Ps. 51:11; Matt. 1:18). God’s name is holy (Luke 1:49), as are his arm (Ps. 98:1), ways (Ps. 77:13), and words (Ps. 105:42).

With reference to God himself, holiness may indicate something like his uniqueness, and it is associated with attributes such as his glory (Isa. 6:3), righteousness (Isa. 5:16), and jealousy—that is, his proper concern for his reputation (Josh. 24:19).

God’s dwelling place is in heaven (Ps. 20:6), and “holy” functions in some contexts as a virtual equivalent for heavenly (11:4). God’s throne is holy (47:8), and the angels who surround it are “holy ones” (89:5; cf. Mark 8:38).

A corollary of God’s holiness is that he must be treated as holy (Lev. 22:32)—that is, honored (Lev. 10:3), worshiped (Ps. 96:9), and feared (Isa. 8:13).

While “holy” is sometimes said to mean “set apart,” this does not appear to be its core meaning, though it is an associated notion (Lev. 20:26; Heb. 7:26). Holiness, as applied to people and things, is a relational concept. They are (explicitly or implicitly) holy “to the Lord” (Exod. 28:36), never “from” something.

The symbolic representation of God’s heavenly palace, the tabernacle (Exod. 40:9), and later the temple (1 Chron. 29:3), and everything associated with them, are holy and the means whereby God’s people in the OT may symbolically be brought near to God. For God to share his presence with anything or anyone else, these too must be holy (Lev. 11:44 45; Heb. 12:14).

The OT system of worship involved the distinction between unclean and clean, and between common and holy, and the means of effecting a transition to a state of cleanness or holiness (Lev. 10:10). People, places, and items may be made holy by a process of consecration or sanctification, whether simply by God’s purifying presence (Exod. 3:5) or by ritual acts (Exod. 19:10; 29:36).

God’s faithful people are described as holy (Exod. 19:6; 1 Pet. 2:9). In the OT, this is true of the whole people of God at one level, and of particular individuals at another. Thus, kings (Ps. 16:10), prophets (2 Kings 4:9), and in particular priests (Lev. 21:7) are declared to be holy. While the OT witnesses to some tension between the collective holiness of Israel and the particular holiness of its designated leaders (Num. 16:3), the latter were intended to act as models and facilitators of Israel’s holiness.

Iniquity

Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’s commandment to the contrary (2:16 17), Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. When Adam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete. They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaves were inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with their attempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent, Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).

In the midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways that sin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised to put hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of the woman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blow upon the offspring of the woman, the offspring of the woman would defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequate covering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implication is that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adam and Eve, covering their sin.

In one sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holy God satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationship with human beings without compromising his justice? The short answer is: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), who eventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemed them from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought them to Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated on obedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant was the sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided as a means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrifices made for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year to atone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement the high priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies and sprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took a second goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people of Israel, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them on the head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness. . . . The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barren region; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev. 16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinful people, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.

During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longing for God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last, when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it was revealed that he would “save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, John the Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereas both Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to be the obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation (Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13; Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also the Suffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45; cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrath of God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. With his justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify all who are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). What neither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, Jesus Christ did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).

After his resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers began proclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus did and calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins” (Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness, they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned against them (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believers continue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal. 5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23). The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the new heaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse (Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).

As even this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesis to Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’s plot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative; it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved in order for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.

King

A kingdom signifies the reality and extent of a king’s dominion or rule (Gen. 10:10; 20:9; Num. 32:33; 2 Kings 20:13; Esther 1:22). Some kingdoms were relatively small; others were concerted attempts to gain the whole world.

A kingdom presupposes monarchy, rule by an individual, human authority. Although kings only have as much authority as their armies and the general populace allow, they nevertheless exercise an almost absolute power, which invites either profound humility or hubris. Royal arrogance, unfortunately, is the primary motif characterizing kings in the Bible (e.g., Dan. 3).

God originally intended Israel to be governed as a theocracy, ruled by the one, true, living God (but see Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:14 20). Israel was to be a “kingdom of priests” (Exod. 19:6), but the people demanded a king (1 Sam. 8:1–22). However, even when God granted their request, God remained King over the king and even retained ownership of the land (Lev. 25:23, 42, 55). The Israelite king was nothing more than God’s viceroy, with delegated authority. With few exceptions, most of the kings of Israel and Judah were corrupted by authority and wealth and forgot God (1 Sam. 13:13–14; 15:28; Matt. 14:6–11). But God made a covenant with David, so that one of his descendants would become a coregent in a restored theocracy, the kingdom of God (2 Sam. 7:1–29; Pss. 89:3; 132:11). In contrast to David’s more immediate descendants, this coming king would return to Jerusalem humble and mounted on a donkey (Zech. 9:9; cf. Isa. 62:11). The Gospels present Jesus Christ as this king (Matt. 21:1–9 pars.). Those who are likewise humble will inherit the land with him (Matt. 5:5).

Seraphim

Seraphim appear in Isa. 6:2, 6. The prophet sees God on his throne, and over him fly the seraphim. They have six wings: with two they cover their faces, with two they cover their feet, and with two they fly. The Hebrew word sarap means “to burn”; thus, the serapim are “burning ones” (cf. sarap in Num. 21:6, 8; Deut. 8:15; Isa. 14:29; 30:6 in reference to venomous serpents). They are living bolts of lightning, and their cries of “Holy, holy, holy,” are peals of thunder, which shake the heavenly temple and fill it with smoke.

Uzziah

Also known as Azariah, he was the king of Judah from approximately 783 to 742 BC. The account of his rule is in 2 Kings 14:21 22; 15:1–7; 2 Chron. 26:1–23. He likely ruled as coregent with his father, Amaziah, starting in 792 BC, before he was sole ruler. He became king at the age of sixteen, when his father was assassinated. Much of his reign overlapped with that of Jeroboam II of Israel, and both kingdoms prospered economically during this time.

Uzziah was a relatively faithful king. He was also successful, maintaining a robust building program and achieving victory over the Philistines. His reign and life turned in a negative direction, however, when he pridefully presumed to offer incense in a holy area of the temple. Such actions were permitted only for the priests. The priests tried to stop him, but he continued, and so God caused him to become leprous for the rest of his life and thus excluded from the temple. Thereafter, his son Jotham discharged the kingly duties. When Uzziah died, he was buried with his fathers, but at some distance because of his condition (2 Chron. 26:23).

Although their messages were directed to the northern kingdom, the superscriptions to the books of Amos and Hosea indicate that these two prophets ministered during Uzziah’s reign (Hos. 1:1; Amos 1:1). Isaiah was called to be a prophet in the year Uzziah died (Isa. 1:1; 6:1), and Zech. 14:5 records an earthquake that took place during his rule.

Direct Matches

Coal

Used both literally and figuratively for the burning embers of a fire. People used coal/embers for baking (Isa. 44:19), heat (Isa. 47:14), and burning incense in worship (Lev. 16:12). Figuratively, hot coals portray God’s anger (2 Sam. 22:9, 13; Ps. 18:8) or purification of sin (Isa. 6:6) and also the discomfort of receiving good after doing evil (Prov. 25:21–22; cf. Rom. 12:20). Dying embers picture the end of a family line (2 Sam. 14:7).

Earth

The Hebrew word ’erets occurs 2,505 times in the OT and is most frequently translated “country” or “land.” “Earth” renders the Greek word gē in the NT. Not surprisingly, ’erets appears 311 times in Genesis alone, the book that initiates Israel’s landed covenant (Gen. 15:18). The primary uses of ’erets are cosmological (e.g., the earth) and geographical (e.g., the land of Israel). Other uses of ’erets include physical (e.g., the ground on which one stands) and political (e.g., governed countries) designations. Less frequently, “earth” translates the Hebrew word ’adamah (“country, ground, land, soil”).

Heaven and Earth

Israel shared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. This worldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon the primeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having four rims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rims were sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters. God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth and shaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12–13). Similarly, the Akkadian text Hymn to the Sun-God states, “You [Shamash] are holding the ends of the earth suspended from the midst of heaven” (I:22). The earth’s boundaries were set against chaos (Ps. 104:7–9; Isa. 40:12). In this way, the Creator and the Savior cannot be separated because, taken together, God works against chaos in the mission of redemption (Ps. 74:12–17; Isa. 51:9–11). The phrase “heavens and earth” is a merism (two extremes representing the whole) for the entire universe (Gen. 1:1; Ps. 102:25). Over the earth arched a firm “vault” (Gen. 1:6). Heaven’s vault rested on the earth’s “pillars,” the mountains (Deut. 32:22; 1 Sam. 2:8). Below the heavens is the sea, part of the earth’s flat surface.

There was no term for “world” in the OT. The perception of world was basically bipartite (heaven and earth), though some tripartite expressions also occur (e.g., heaven, earth, sea [Exod. 20:11; Rev. 5:3, 13]). Though rare, some uses of ’erets may refer to the “underworld” or Sheol (Exod. 15:12; Jer. 17:13; Jon. 2:6). The earth can be regarded as the realm of the dead (Matt. 12:40; Eph. 4:9). However, the OT is less concerned with the organic structure of the earth than with what fills the earth: inhabitants (Ps. 33:14; Isa. 24:1), people groups (Gen. 18:18; Deut. 28:10), and kingdoms (Deut. 28:25; 2 Kings 19:15). The term ’erets can be used symbolically to indicate its inhabitants (Gen. 6:11). However, unlike its neighbors, Israel acknowledged no divine “Mother Earth,” given the cultural associations with female consorts.

The Theology of Land

In biblical faith, the concept of land combines geography with theology. The modern person values land more as a place to build than for its productive capacities. But from the outset, human beings and the “earth” (’erets) functioned in a symbiotic relationship with the Creator (Gen. 1:28). God even gave the land agency to “bring forth living creatures” (Gen. 1:24). The “ground” (’adamah) also provided the raw substance to make the human being (’adam [Gen. 2:7]). In turn, the human being was charged with developing and protecting the land (Gen. 2:5, 15). Showing divine care, the Noahic covenant was “between [God] and the earth” (Gen. 9:13). Thus, land was no mere onlooker; human rebellion had cosmic effects (Gen. 6:7, 17). The land could be cursed and suffer (Gen. 3:17; cf. 4:11).

For Israel, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen. 15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithful obedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1 Kings 2:1–4). Conditionality and unconditionality coexisted in Israel’s relationship of “sonship” with Yahweh (Exod. 4:22; Hos. 11:1). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen. 18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was the supreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance” to give (1 Sam. 26:19; 2 Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). The Levites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did the other tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20; Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter and to occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3). Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when they accused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing with milk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however, no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance” (Josh. 13:1).

Land possession had serious ethical and religious ramifications (Deut. 26:1–11). Israel was not chosen to receive a special land; rather, land was the medium of Israel’s relationship with God. Land functioned as a spiritual barometer (Ps. 78:56–64; Lam. 1:3–5). The heavens and earth stood as covenant witnesses (Deut. 4:26). Blood, in particular, could physically pollute the land (Num. 35:30–34). National sin could culminate in expulsion (Lev. 26:32–39), and eventually the land was lost (Jer. 25:1–11). For this reason, Israel’s exiles prompted a profound theological crisis.

Inheritance

The notion of inheritance connected Israel’s religious worship with practical stewardship. Land was not owned; it was passed down through patrimonial succession. God entrusted each family with an inheritance that was to be safeguarded (Lev. 25:23–28; Mic. 2:1–2). This highlights the serious crime when Naboth’s vineyard was forcibly stolen (1 Kings 21). It was Israel’s filial sonship with Yahweh and Israel’s land tenure that formed Yahweh’s solidarity with the nation. The law helped limit Israel’s attachment to mere real estate: Yahweh was to be Israel’s preoccupation (see Jer. 3:6–25). When the nation was finally exiled, the message of the new covenant transcended geographical boundaries (Jer. 32:36–44; Ezek. 36–37; cf. Lev. 26:40–45; Deut. 30:1–10). In postexilic Israel, sanctuary was prioritized (Hag. 1:9–14).

It was Israel’s redefinition of land through the exile that prepared the way for the incorporation of the Gentiles (Ezek. 47:22–23), an integration already anticipated (Isa. 56:3–7). The prophets saw a time when the nations would share in the inheritance of God previously guarded by Israel (Isa. 60; Zech. 2:11; cf. Gen. 12:3). Viewed as a political territory, land receives no substantial theological treatment in the NT; rather, inheritance surpasses covenant metaphor. Using the language of sonship and inheritance, Paul develops this new Gentile mission in Galatians (cf. Col. 1:13–14). The OT land motif fully flowers in the NT teaching of adoption (cf. 1 Pet. 1:3–5). Both curse and covenant are resolved eschatologically (Rom. 8:19–22). Inheritance is now found in Christ (Eph. 2:11–22; 1 Pet. 1:4). In the economy of the new covenant, land tenure has matured in fellowship (koinōnia). Koinōnia recalibrates the ethical significance of OT land themes, reapplying them practically through inclusion, lifestyle, economic responsibility, and social equity.

Beyond cosmological realms, heaven and earth are also theological horizons still under God’s ownership. What began as the creation mandate to fill and subdue the earth (Gen. 1:28) culminates in the new creation with Christ (Rom. 8:4–25). Under the power of Satan, the earth “lags behind” heaven. Christ’s mission brings what is qualitatively of heaven onto the earthly stage, often using signs of the budding rule of God (Matt. 6:10; Mark 2:10–11; John 3:31–36; Eph. 4:9–13; Heb. 12:25). As Israel was to stand out in a hostile world (Deut. 4:5–8), now those of Abrahamic faith stand out through Christian love (John 13:34–35; Rom. 4:9–16). According to Heb. 4:1–11, Israel’s initial rest in the land (see Exod. 33:14; Deut. 12:9) culminates in the believers’ rest in Christ (Heb. 4:3, 5). The former inheritance of space gives way to the inheritance of Christ’s presence. The OT theme of land is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus’ exhortation to “abide in me” (John 15).

Earthquake–In Palestine there have been about seventeen recorded major earthquakes in the past two millennia. One of the major sources of these earthquakes is believed to originate from the Jordan Rift Valley. In antiquity earthquakes were viewed as fearful events because the mountains, which represented everlasting durability, were disturbed. The confession of faith is pronounced in association with such phenomena (“We will not fear, though the earth give way” [Ps. 46:2]). An earthquake must have made a great impact in Amos’s day (“two years before the earthquake” [Amos 1:1; cf. Zech. 14:5]).

An earthquake has many symbolic meanings. First, the power of God and his divine presence are manifested through it (Job 9:6; Ps. 68:8; Hag. 2:6). It accompanied theophanic revelation (Exod. 19:18; Isa. 6:4; 1 Kings 19:11–12) when the glory of the Lord appeared (Ezek. 3:12). His divine presence was especially felt when earthquakes occurred during the time of the crucifixion and the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Matt. 27:54; 28:2). It led the centurion to confess of Christ, “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54). God’s salvation power is represented when an earthquake comes at the appropriate moment, such as when it freed Paul and Silas from prison (Acts 16:26).

Second, it is used in the context of God’s judgment (Isa. 13:13; Amos 9:1; Nah. 1:5). It becomes the symbol of God’s anger and wrath (Ps. 18:7). God brought earthquakes upon the people to destroy evil in the world and to punish those who had sinned against him (Num. 16:31–33; Isa. 29:6; Ezek. 38:19). Earthquake activity possibly explains the background to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 19:24).

Third, earthquakes are said to precede the end of time (Matt. 24:7; Mark 13:8; Luke 21:11). In the apocalyptic book of Revelation, earthquakes are regular occurrences (Rev. 6:12; 11:13, 19; 16:18).

Eye

The organ of visual perception. The eye is the lamp of the body, so that someone who has a sound or healthy eye can experience light, but someone with a deficient eye experiences only darkness (Matt. 6:22–23). Bright eyes signify alertness and good health (1 Sam. 14:27–29; Ps. 38:10), whereas dim eyes signify poor vision, often from old age (Gen. 27:1; 48:10; 1 Sam. 3:2). Blindness may be cured by opening the eyes (Isa. 35:5; John 9:14), although Paul was blind even with his eyes open (Acts 9:8). To lift or raise the eyes is to take a look around or look toward something (Gen. 13:10; 18:2; John 11:41). To turn the eyes from something is to no longer look at it (Ps. 119:37; Song 6:5; Isa. 22:4). Something hidden from the eyes is unknown (Num. 5:13; Job 28:21; Luke 19:42), but hiding the eyes from something is to ignore it (Isa. 1:15; Ezek. 22:26; cf. Lev. 20:4). The expression “before the eyes” signifies that an event has taken place in the presence of others, and they have witnessed it.

The eye is an important part of the body (1 Cor. 12:16–21). A defective eye disqualified a priest from certain duties (Lev. 21:17–20). A conquering army often gouged out the eyes of the defeated enemy (Judg. 16:21; 2 Kings 25:7), rendering them ineffective in battle (1 Sam. 11:2). Destroying Israel’s eyes is the first among many punishments listed for breaking God’s covenant (Lev. 26:16). Paul testifies that the Galatians cared enough for him even to pluck out their eyes in order to give them to him (Gal. 4:15). The importance of the eye highlights the importance of Jesus’ demand to pluck it out if it causes one to stumble (Matt. 5:29; 18:9).

Perception and enlightenment. Opening eyes is a theme that runs through both Testaments. At times, opening the eyes simply refers to making one aware of previously unknown information. It may be in this sense that the eyes of Adam and Eve are opened, since they become aware of their nakedness (Gen. 3:7). This same kind of opening occurs when God reveals a well to Hagar (Gen. 21:19), when Balaam sees the angel of the Lord standing in his way (Num. 22:31), and when the disciples on the road to Emmaus recognize Jesus (Luke 24:31). This sense is extended into the spiritual realm, so that the eye is used figuratively as the principal organ of spiritual perception. To open or enlighten the eyes in this sense involves one of the following: (1) allowing one to understand spiritual truth in the law of God (Ps. 119:18), prophetic utterance (Num. 24:3), or by the Spirit of God (Eph. 1:18); or (2) leading someone to repentance and conversion (Acts 26:18). These spiritual eyes may also be blinded or closed, hindering the person from repenting (Isa. 6:10; Matt. 13:13; cf. 2 Cor. 4:4).

The eye not only allows one to perceive the world but also helps others perceive the person. David has beautiful eyes, highlighting his handsome appearance (1 Sam. 16:12). Leah has weak eyes, a characteristic that is contrasted to the beautiful appearance of her sister, Rachel (Gen. 29:17). A bountiful eye reveals a generous spirit (Prov. 22:9). Haughty eyes reveal arrogance (Ps. 18:27; Prov. 6:17), as do eyes that are exalted (Ps. 131:1; Prov. 30:13). Eyes may reveal one’s pity for another (Ezek. 16:5), but in the administration of justice, the eye is not allowed to pity or spare, meaning that the law will be executed to its fullest extent (Deut. 7:16; Ezek. 5:11). The eye that mocks a father or a mother reveals a person who holds them in contempt (Prov. 30:17).

Direction and evaluation. The eye also serves as a symbol for direction, care, and vast knowledge. Since the eye allows one to see, it helps set the proper course forward, physically (Num. 10:31) or spiritually (1 John 2:11). The fact that God’s eyes are always upon the land of Israel demonstrates his care for it (Deut. 11:12). Likewise, his eyes are always upon the righteous, ready to help them (Ps. 34:15). Especially in apocalyptic literature, the many eyes of the living creatures are symbols of God’s omniscience (Ezek. 1:18; Rev. 4:6), while the eyes of God in general are symbols of his awareness (1 Kings 9:3; Jer. 32:19; Amos 9:8; Heb. 4:13).

Finally, the eyes are associated with evaluation. The eyes of God often represent his favor or disfavor (Gen. 6:8; Deut. 21:9; 2 Kings 10:30). Those who evaluate themselves in their own eyes are often led astray because the eyes can lead to sinful lust (Num. 15:39; Deut. 12:8; Judg. 17:6; Prov. 3:7; 1 John 2:16).

Glory

The tangible presence of God, experienced as overwhelming power and splendor. The main Hebrew word referring to glory, kabod, has the root meaning “heavy” (1 Sam. 4:18), which in other contexts can mean “intense” (Exod. 9:3; NIV: “terrible”), “wealthy” (i.e., “heavy in possessions” [Gen. 13:2]), and “high reputation” (Gen. 34:19; NIV: “most honored”). When used of God, it refers to his person and his works. God reveals his glory to Israel and to Egypt at the crossing of the sea (Exod. 14:4, 17–19). He carefully reveals his glory to Moses after Israel’s sin with the golden calf in order to assure him that he will not abandon them (33:12–23).

God’s glory is often associated with a cloud. Perhaps better stated, God’s glory often is intentionally obscured by a cloud so that people are not overwhelmed by the radiance of his presence. Such is the case on top of Mount Sinai as Moses ascends it (Exod. 24:15–18). God’s glory as associated with the cloud is also closely connected to the tabernacle and the temple. When the tabernacle is completed, God makes his presence known there by filling it with the cloud that represents his glory (Exod. 40:34–38). Later, the temple too is filled with God’s glory made manifest in the cloud (1 Kings 8:10–11). The ark of the covenant, the most potent symbol of God’s presence, is also seen as a manifestation of his glory (1 Sam. 4:21–22).

God’s glory is overwhelming, and human beings cannot experience its fullness and survive. Thus, glory is often connected with God’s acts of judgment. For instance, when Korah the Levite and Abiram the Reubenite rebel in the wilderness, God appears ready for judgment against the people in the form of the glory-cloud (Num. 16:19–21), though Moses’ intercession spares the bulk of the people from the judgment that comes on the leaders of the rebellion (see also 16:41).

The Psalms celebrate God’s glory. Psalm 24 is an example. The original setting of the psalm is likely the return of the ark of the covenant from the battlefield. The priest at the head of the army, led by the ark, asks a priest or gatekeeper, “Lift up your heads, you gates; be lifted up, you ancient doors, that the King of glory may come in.” The priestly gatekeeper asks, “Who is this King of glory?” eliciting the response, “The Lord strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle.” Many other psalms share this theme or call on Israel to glorify the Lord (see Pss. 29:9; 34:3; 63:3; 104:31 as examples).

The prophets have the privilege of intimate fellowship with God and profound experiences of God’s glory. Isaiah accepts his commission as a prophet in a vision of the throne room of God. He sees angelic figures calling out: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord Almighty; the whole earth is full of his glory” (Isa. 6:3). Ezekiel reports an amazing encounter with God in his glory that causes him to fall facedown on the ground (Ezek. 1:28).

Holy

A corollary of God’s holiness is that he must be treated as holy (Lev. 22:32)—that is, honored (Lev. 10:3), worshiped (Ps. 96:9), and feared (Isa. 8:13).

Holiness may be an attribute of places marked by God’s presence (Exod. 3:5; Ps. 43:3). Likewise, particular times, especially the Sabbath day (Exod. 20:8), are declared holy.

The prophet Zechariah envisions a time when the distinctions between holy and common will be meaningless (Zech. 14:20–21). While vestiges of the symbolic language of holiness remain in the NT (e.g., the “holy city” in Matt. 27:53), after the death and resurrection of Christ the NT no longer operates with the symbolic holiness of the OT. Rather, this language is appropriated to explain what true holiness entails in the lives of God’s people (Rom. 12:1; Eph. 2:21). All Christians are holy (“saints” [Gk. hagioi] means “holy ones” [e.g., Rom. 1:7]), including in some sense the members of a believer’s family (1 Cor. 7:14). The holiness of God’s people is both definitive, by virtue of the saving work of Christ (Heb. 13:12), and progressive, by eliciting, and empowering through his Holy Spirit, holy and righteous living (Rom. 6:19; 1 Thess. 4:7–8). Both divine initiative and human activity with regard to holiness may be seen in texts such as Lev. 20:8; Heb. 10:14. The objective of Christian discipline is that we might share God’s holiness (Heb. 12:10).

Host of Heaven

A KJV phrase used to describe the heavenly bodies or heavenly beings. The NIV prefers “starry host(s),” “multitudes of heaven,” or “stars in the heavens/sky,” but “host of the heavens” does occur in Dan. 8:10. The Hebrew phrase, tseba’ hashamayim, means literally “army of the heavens.” The connection between the celestial elements and an army comes in conjunction with God’s role as the commander of the Israelite forces (Josh. 5:13–15; Judg. 5:23). There are times when the Bible portrays the celestial elements as part of God’s military retinue, fighting on his behalf. The stars fight from heaven against Sisera (Judg. 5:20), and in the Israelites’ battle against the Amorites, the sun and the moon are commanded to stand still (Josh. 10:12–13; cf. Hab. 3:11). Based on these passages, the phrase may have had some military background, but it is also understood in other ways.

Perhaps one of the more enigmatic uses of the phrase occurs in 1 Kings 22:19 (cf. 2 Chron. 18:18; NIV: “multitudes of heaven”), where it describes God’s council. There are other biblical phrases used with more frequency to describe the heavenly council surrounding God. Other names for these beings include the “seraphim” of Isa. 6:2 and the “sons of God” in Job 1:6; 2:1; Pss. 29:1; 89:6. The connection between God’s council and the celestial elements likely comes, as noted above, through the heavenly bodies’ association with God in battle. Further solidifying this connection is Job 38:7, where the “sons of God” parallel the “morning stars.” Exactly what these heavenly beings are is debated, and many interpreters suggest the answer lies in the polytheistic context of Israel’s neighbors. Another possible explanation is to view these beings as the messengers or angels of God. The Bible portrays them as inferior beings (Deut. 3:24; 10:17; Jer. 10:6), and they function to serve and worship Yahweh (Pss. 29:1; 103:21; 148:2–3; Isa. 6:2). The angels who appear to the shepherds at Jesus’ birth are described as the “heavenly host” (Luke 2:13).

The last and most frequent use of the phrase “host of heaven” is to describe a condemned object of Israelite worship. It is likely that from their association with God’s council, these celestial elements gained an independent status and were worshiped apart from God. At times the “host of heaven” appears to refer to the stars alone; the NIV therefore translates it as “stars in the sky” (Deut. 17:3; Jer. 33:22; cf. Jer. 8:2) or “starry hosts” (2 Kings 23:5). At other times the phrase refers to the totality of the heavenly bodies (Deut. 4:19 [NIV: “heavenly array”]; cf. 2 Kings 21:3, 5). Based on the distribution of the phrase, and its occurrence primarily in documents narrating the Assyrian period (2 Kings 17:16; 21:3, 5; 23:4–5; Jer. 19:13; Zeph. 1:5), there is likely a direct correlation between the worship of the host of heaven and Israel’s Assyrian vassalage in the seventh century BC. The extent of Assyrian impact on Israelite religion is debated, but it is likely that astral worship—that is, worship of the starry hosts—flourished in this period due to the influence of the Assyrians, a culture entrenched in worship of the astral powers.

Iniquity

There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin; hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, or portrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of the driving forces of the entire Bible.

Sin in the Bible

Old Testament. Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’s commandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. When Adam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete. They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaves were inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with their attempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent, Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).

In Gen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on full display. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able to eradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humans gathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make a name for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them to scatter across the earth (11:1–9).

Despite these provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke its covenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under the reign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people, including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder (2 Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wives and concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods (1 Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israel and Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry became rampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judah in 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised to raise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as a guilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).

After God’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that the great prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, were at hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remained under foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell of Solomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Before long, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning away from him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administration of the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failed to properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).

New Testament. During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longing for God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last, when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it was revealed that he would “save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, John the Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereas both Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to be the obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation (Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13; Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also the Suffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45; cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrath of God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. With his justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify all who are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). What neither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, Jesus Christ did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).

Definition and Terminology

Definition of sin. Although no definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of the concept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conform to God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action, orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered that God’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character, so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather is a personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited to actions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen. 4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature as human beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.

Terminology. The Bible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying them is not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and use of the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one of the following four categories.

1. Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator and ruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’s self-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankind foolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom. 1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows to humans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31). Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodliness or impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa. 9:17; 1 Pet. 4:18).

2. Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from the lawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass” picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or the crossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42; Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’s law, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45; Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violating his statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result is guilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’s law is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectively feels guilt.

3. Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what is good. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what is good (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contrasts the upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could also include here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speak of perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequent mention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievous departure from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27; 1 Cor. 5:1–11).

4. Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individual had to be in a state of purity before him. While a person could become impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating woman was impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity” clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek. 24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Although it is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, in other places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7; Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).

Metaphors

In addition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible uses several metaphors or images to describe it. The following four are among the more prominent.

Missing the mark. In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin” have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sin is reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that a person simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it is that he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9; Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional or not, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num. 15:30).

Departing from the way. Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in the wisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of the righteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19). Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways, but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18). Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed by their own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).

Adultery. Since God’s relationship with his people is described as a marriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32), it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness as adultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous woman vividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3). When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them of spiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52). When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate in idolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1 Cor. 6:12–20; 10:1–22).

Slavery. Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clear that Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture of its far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7; 49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to those who do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything that pleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic power that is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare (Rom. 7:7–25).

Scope and Consequences

Sin does not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage along with it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.

Scope. The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As a result of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist human efforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen. 3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under the weight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2 Chron. 36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation as well (Rom. 8:19–22).

Sin affects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions, motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom. 3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “total depravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful as they could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is tainted by sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as a sinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societal structures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economic markets, to name but a few.

Consequences. Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’s neighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sin has consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level. Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen. 2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty in God’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, and subjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20; 5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict between individuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breeds mistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closest relationships.

Conclusion

No subject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding of sin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As the Puritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ will not be sweet.”

Land

Heaven and Earth

The Theology of Land

Inheritance

Third, earthquakes are said to precede the end of time (Matt. 24:7; Mark 13:8; Luke 21:11). In the apocalyptic book of Revelation, earthquakes are regular occurrences (Rev. 6:12; 11:13, 19; 16:18).

Lips

The soft outer flesh that surrounds the mouth. The Hebrew word translated “lip” usually refers to the upper lip, which was often covered by the hand or garment as a sign of sorrow (2 Sam. 19:4). In the OT, the lips are used to describe the demeanor of the person to whom they belong. Lips are often synonymous with speech or language (Job 12:20). For example, lips can be faltering (Exod. 6:30), flattering (Ps. 12:2), deceitful (Ps. 17:1), lying (Prov. 12:22), evil (Prov. 17:4), unclean (Isa. 6:5), honest (Prov. 16:13), truthful (Prov. 12:19), righteous (Prov. 10:21), and joyful (Ps. 71:23).

Lord of Hosts

The names of God given in the Bible are an important means of revelation about his character and works. The names come from three sources: God himself, those who encounter him in the biblical record, and the biblical writers. This article is concerned mainly with the names that occur in the OT, though the NT will be referenced when helpful.

In the Bible the meaning of names is often significant and points to the character of the person so named. As might be expected, this is especially true for God. The names that he gives to himself always are a form of revelation; the names that humans give to God often are a form of testimony.

Yahweh: The Lord

Pronunciation. Unquestionably, for OT revelation the most important name is “(the) Lord.” In English Bibles this represents the name declared by God to Moses at the burning bush (“I am who I am” [Exod. 3:13–15]) and the related term used elsewhere in the OT; in Hebrew this term consists of the four consonants YHWH and is therefore known as the Tetragrammaton (“four letters”). Hebrew does not count vowels as part of its alphabet; in biblical times one simply wrote the consonants of a word and the reader supplied the correct vowels by knowing the vocabulary, grammar, and context. However, to avoid violating the commandment in the Decalogue that prohibits the misuse of God’s name (Exod. 20:7; Deut. 5:11), the Jews stopped pronouncing it. Consequently, no one today knows its correct original pronunciation, but the best evidence available suggests “Yahweh,” which has become the conventional pronunciation (consider the Hebrew word “hallelujah,” which actually is “hallelu-Yah,” hence “praise the Lord”). In ancient Jewish tradition, “Adonai” (“my Lord”) was substituted for “Yahweh.” In fact, when Hebrew eventually developed a vowel notation system, instead of the vowels for “Yahweh,” the vowels for “Adonai” were indicated whenever YHWH appeared in the biblical text, as a reminder. Combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of “Adonai” yields something like “Yehowah,” which is the origin of the familiar (but mistaken and nonexistent) “Jehovah.” English Bibles typically use “Lord” (small capital letters) for “Yahweh,” and “Lord” (regular letters) for “Adonai,” which distinguishes the two.

Meaning. More vital than the matter of the pronunciation of YHWH is the question of its meaning. There seem to be two main opinions. One sees YHWH as denoting eternal self-existence, partly because it is suggested by the grammar of Exod. 3:14 (the words “I am” use a form of the Hebrew verb that suggests being without beginning or end) and partly because that is the meaning Jesus apparently ascribes to it in John 8:58. The other opinion, suggested by usage, is that YHWH indicates dynamic, active, divine presence: God’s being present in a special way to act on someone’s behalf (e.g., Gen. 26:28; 39:2–3; Josh. 6:27; 1 Sam. 18:12–14). This idea also appears in the episode of the burning bush (Exod. 3:12): when Moses protests his inadequacy to confront Pharaoh, God assures him of his presence, a reality noted with other prophets (1 Sam. 3:19; Jer. 1:8).

Perhaps the best points of reference for understanding the meaning of YHWH are God’s own proclamations. In addition to Exod. 3:13–15, at least two other passages in Exodus give God’s commentary (as it were) about the meaning of his name. An important one is Exod. 34:5–7. A key passage in the theology proper of ancient Israel, its themes echo in later OT Scripture (Num. 14:18–19; Ps. 103:7–12; Jon. 4:2). What is noteworthy about the texts cited is that all of them say something remarkable about the grace of God. This fits, for the revelation of Exod. 34:5–7 is given in the context of covenant renewal after the incident of the golden calf. Moses invokes God’s name in the Numbers text to avoid catastrophic judgment when the Israelites refuse to enter the promised land. The psalm text picks up this theme and connects it with God’s revelation of his ways to the chosen people. Jonah, remarkably, affirms that the same grace extends even toward a wicked Gentile city such as Nineveh.

Another such passage is Exod. 6:2–8. Here God reaffirms his redemptive purpose for captive Israel, despite the fact that Moses’ first encounter with Pharaoh has not gone well. God assures the prophet that he has remembered his covenant with the patriarchs, whom he says did not know him as “Yahweh,” which probably means that the patriarchs did not experience him in the way or character that their descendants would in the exodus event (though it is possible to translate the Hebrew here as a rhetorical question with an affirmative idea: “And indeed, by my name Yahweh did I not make myself known to them?”). God then proceeds to outline the redemptive experience in its fullness: deliverance from bondage, reception into a covenant relationship, and possession of the land promised to their ancestors (vv. 6–8). The statement is bracketed with this declaration: “I am the Lord” (vv. 2, 8). One stated purpose of this redemptive work is that Israel might come to understand this (v. 7). This is important to note because a central theme of Exodus as a book is the identity of the God of Israel. This concern prompts Moses to ask for God’s name at the burning bush (3:13), and this contempt for the God of the enslaved Hebrews causes Pharaoh to be dismissive at his first meeting with Moses and Aaron (5:2). Moses asks with the concern of a seeker and receives one of the most profound declarations of God’s identity in the Bible. Pharaoh asks with the contempt of a scorner and receives one of the most powerful displays of God’s identity in the Bible (the plagues). The contrast is both striking and instructive. The meaning of God’s name, then, is revealed in works as well as words, and his purpose is that not just his people but all peoples may come to understand who he is. Yet another majestic statement in the book of Exodus (9:13–16) makes this abundantly clear.

Based on this pattern of usage, the name “Yahweh” seems to signify especially the active presence of God to bless, deliver, or otherwise aid his people. Where this presence is absent, there is no success, victory, protection, or peace (Num. 14:39–45; Josh. 7:10–12; Judg. 16:20; 1 Sam. 16:13–14). The message that God not only is but also is present to save and deliver may well be the most important truth communicated in the OT, and it is only natural to see its ultimate embodiment in the person and work of Christ (Isa. 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:21–23).

Name used in combination. The name “Yahweh” also is used in combination with other terms. After God grants a military victory to Israel over the Amalekites, Moses names a commemorative altar “Yahweh Nissi,” meaning “the Lord is my Banner” (Exod. 17:15). In Ezekiel’s temple vision Jerusalem is called “Yahweh Shammah,” meaning “the Lord is there” (Ezek. 48:35). A familiar expression is “the Lord of hosts,” which is generally comparable to the expression “commander in chief” used in American culture (cf. 1 Kings 22:19–23).

Elohim

This is the first term for God encountered in the Bible, right in the opening verse. It is a more generic term, denoting deity in contrast to humans or angels. “Elohim” is a plural form; the singular terms “El” and “Eloah” are used occasionally, particularly in poetic texts. “El” is a common term in the biblical world; in fact, it is the name for the father of Baal in the Canaanite religion. This may explain why the Bible commonly uses the plural form, to distinguish the one true God, the God of Israel, from his pagan rivals. Others explain the plural form as a “plural of majesty” or “plural of intensity,” though it is uncertain just what this would mean. Some see the foundation for NT revelation of the Trinity (Gen. 1:26–27; 11:6–7; cf. John 17:20–22), but this is unlikely. The plural form also can serve simply as a common noun, referring to pagan deities (Exod. 12:12), angels (Ps. 97:7, arguably), or even human authorities (Exod. 22:28, possibly).

“El” also occurs in combination with other descriptive terms. The best known is “El Shaddai,” meaning “God Almighty” (Gen. 17:1). The precise meaning of “Shaddai” is uncertain, but it seems to have the notion of “great/powerful one.” The distressed Hagar, caught, comforted, and counseled by the mysterious personage at a well, calls God “El Roi,” which means “the God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). One of the most exalted expressions to describe God is “El Elyon,” meaning “God Most High.” This title seems to have particular reference to God as the owner and master of creation (Gen. 14:18–20).

Adonai

As noted above, this common word meaning simply “(my) lord/master” is used regularly in place of the personal name of God revealed to Moses in Exod. 3:14. And in the OT of most English Bibles this is indicated by printing “Lord” as opposed to “Lord” (using small capital letters). However, “Adonai” is used of God in some noteworthy instances, such as Isaiah’s lofty vision of God exalted in Isa. 6 and the prophecy of Immanuel in Isa. 7:14. In time, this became the preferred term for referring to God, and the LXX reflected this by using the Greek word kyrios (“lord”) for Yahweh. This makes the ease with which NT writers transfer the use of the term to Jesus (e.g., 1 Cor. 12:3) a strong indication of their Christology.

Seraphim

Seraphim appear in Isa. 6:2, 6. The prophet sees God on his throne, and over him fly the seraphim. They have six wings: with two they cover their faces, with two they cover their feet, and with two they fly. The Hebrew word sarap means “to burn”; thus, the serapim are “burning ones” (cf. sarap in Num. 21:6, 8; Deut. 8:15; Isa. 14:29; 30:6 in reference to venomous serpents). They are living bolts of lightning, and their cries of “Holy, Holy, Holy,” are peals of thunder, which shake the heavenly temple and fill it with smoke.

Sin

Sin in the Bible

Definition and Terminology

Metaphors

In addition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible uses several metaphors or images to describe it. The following four are among the more prominent.

Scope and Consequences

Sin does not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage along with it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.

Conclusion

Teil Tree

The KJV translation of the Hebrew word ’elah in Isa. 6:13. More-recent versions translate the term as “oak” or “terebinth.” See also Plants; Terebinth.

Tongs

Pure gold instruments among the articles of tabernacle and temple equipment (1 Kings 7:49; 2 Chron. 4:21). They are associated with the lampstand. In Isa. 6:6, a seraph uses tongs to take a burning coal from the altar.

Train

(1) The trailing skirt of a robe or outer garment (Isa. 6:1). It usually denoted favor, wealth, and/or power (Exod. 28:33; Ps. 68:18). (2) To prepare through instruction and practice for war (Isa. 2:4) and/or life (Prov. 22:6; 1 Tim. 4:7).

Uzziah

(1) A Levite, the son of Uriel, a descendant of Levi through Kohath (1 Chron. 6:24).

(2) The father of Jonathan, who was an administrator during David’s reign (1 Chron. 27:25).

(3) Also known as Azariah, he was the king of Judah from approximately 783 to 742 BC. The account of his rule is in 2 Kings 14:21–22; 15:1–7; 2 Chron. 26:1–23. He likely ruled as coregent with his father, Amaziah, starting in 792 BC, before he was sole ruler. He became king at the age of sixteen, when his father was assassinated. Much of his reign overlapped with that of Jeroboam II of Israel, and both kingdoms prospered economically during this time.

(4) A priest who was guilty of marrying a foreign woman during the time of Ezra (Ezra 10:21).

(5) The father of Athaiah, a member of the tribe of Judah who was a provincial leader who settled in Jerusalem during the time of Nehemiah (Neh. 11:4).

Vision

A divine communication in the form of visual imagery, usually accompanied by words, and often using symbols that require explanation and spur reflection about God’s otherwise imperceptible presence and activity. Presumably, the recipient “sees” the vision as an event of inward perception, often within a dream during sleep or in a divinely induced state of ecstasy (Gen. 15; Dan. 7:1; 10:1–9; 2 Cor. 12:1–4). Characteristically, visions entail conversation with God or an angelic representative, often following a question-and-answer format (Dan. 7:15–28; Zech. 1:8–15, 18–21). The visionary is actually in the scene as direct observer and active participant (Dan. 8:1–2).

Prophetic visions are meant to be retold. For example, imagery is accompanied by the authentication of divine commissioning (Isa. 6; Ezek. 1:1–3:15; Rev. 10), leading to announcement of judgment (Jer. 1:4–19). This close conjunction of image and word (1 Sam. 3:21) is reinforced by statements about a prophet “seeing” God’s word (e.g., Mic. 1:1 ESV, NRSV, NASB) and about prophetic books as collections of visions (2 Chron. 32:32; Nah. 1:1). Vision reports join oracles and other forms of prophetic speech as essential features of these works. Visions contribute to the community’s spiritual well-being (Prov. 29:18; Ezek. 7:26), but not always (Lam. 2:14; Ezek. 13; Zech. 13:4; Col. 2:18).

Visions drive the narrative surrounding Jesus’ birth (Matt. 1:18–2:23; Luke 1:1–2:20). The baptism of Jesus includes a visionary element, the Holy Spirit’s anointing of Jesus for his ministry, accompanied by the Father’s word (Matt. 3:16–17; Mark 1:10–11; Luke 3:22; John 1:32–33). Jesus’ transfiguration is comparable (Matt. 17:1–9; Mark 9:2–10; Luke 9:28–36). Visions mark key transition points in the narrative of Acts (e.g., chaps. 9–11). The book of Revelation opens with a vision of the Son of Man (1:9–20) and is structured around three vision cycles of judgment interspersed with visions of heaven meant to bolster the readers’ faithfulness.

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because Isaiah 6:1-13 is mentioned in the definition.

Angel

The English word “angel” refers to nonhuman spirits, usually good. The biblical words usually translated “angel” (Heb. malak; Gk. angelos) mean “messenger” and can refer to one sent by God or by human beings. A messenger must be utterly loyal, reliable, and able to act confidentially (Prov. 13:17). The messenger speaks and acts in the name of the sender (Gen. 24).

Messengers sent by God are not always angels. Yahweh’s prophets were his messengers (Hag. 1:13), as were priests (Mal. 2:7).

Old Testament

There are few references to angels (plural) in the OT. In heaven they praise God and worship him (Pss. 103:20; 148:2). God sends his angels to accompany his people (Gen. 28:12; 32:1) and to protect them (Ps. 91:11) and once sent them to destroy Egypt (Ps. 78:49).

An angel in human form was referred to as a “man of God” (Judg. 13:6), the same term used for a prophet (cf. 1 Kings 13:14).

Angels evoked fear and wonder. They are described as shining (Matt. 28:3; Acts 12:7). When humans bowed to worship angels, they were rebuked because God alone is to be worshiped (Rev. 22:8–9).

God himself, not being a part of the created order, cannot be seen. In order to communicate with people, he sometimes speaks through a form called “the angel of the Lord.” The angel of the Lord appeared to Abraham in human form (Gen. 18; cf. Josh. 5:13–15), but to Moses as fire (Exod. 3:2). When he spoke, it was God speaking (Exod. 3:4, 14). He guided and guarded Israel out of Egypt and through the desert (23:20–23). He appeared within the pillar of fire or cloud (13:21–22; 14:19), being seen through the pillar on occasion as “the glory of the Lord” (16:7–10; 24:16–17; 33:9–11; 40:17, 34–38), and later as he filled Solomon’s temple (1 Kings 8:11).

In a series of visions of the glory of the Lord (Ps. 18:7–15; Ezek. 1; Rev. 4:7) we encounter four “living creatures” called “cherubim” (Ezek. 10:20–22) that are not explicitly identified as angels and whose visible appearance is part human and part animal. Their form was placed on the cover of the Ark of the Covenant (Exod. 25:18) and embroidered on the curtains of the tabernacle (26:1). Cherubim guarded the eastern entry into the garden of Eden (Gen. 3:24), implying that Eden, the place where God appeared on earth, was now excluded from the area allocated to humankind.

In Isaiah’s vision of God’s glory, he describes, literally, “flaming ones” (Heb. seraphim) located above God and crying, “Holy, holy, holy” (Isa. 6:1–7). All we know of them is that they had six wings, whereas the cherubim had four (Ezek. 1:11). It may be that seraphim are not a separate class of angels but simply a description appropriate to all angels, since elsewhere we are told (Ps. 104:4; Heb. 1:7) that God’s angels are “flames of fire.”

Angels are also called “holy ones” (Deut. 33:2) and “spirits” or “winds” (Zech. 6:5; cf. Ps. 104:4). Since God’s people are also called “holy ones” (Dan. 7:27; NIV: “holy people”), it may be difficult to know if a given reference is to angels or people (e.g., Deut. 33:3).

Angels are first named in the book of Daniel: Gabriel, whose name means “hero of God” (8:16; 9:21; [cf. Luke 1:19, 26]); Michael, whose name means “who is like God?” (10:13, 21; 12:1 [cf. Jude 9; Rev. 12:7]) and who is also called “one of the chief princes,” “your prince,” and “the great prince.” The Hebrew word for “prince” (sar) also means “commander” (e.g., 1 Sam. 17:55) and thus might refer to Michael’s standing as a commander of God’s angelic armies (cf. Jude 9, where he is called “archangel”). During the intertestamental period, texts outside the Scriptures tend to give more attention to angels in elaborate stories, introducing such names as Raphael and Uriel (see Tobit, 1 Enoch, etc.).

Intertestamental Period and New Testament

During the intertestamental period some Jews came to think that angels ranked higher than humans, since the Greeks asserted that anything physical was evil and only purely spiritual beings could be holy. Increasingly detailed stories about angels served to distance God from the evils of physical reality. The myth of the fall of the angels arose during this time through a series of writings claiming to come from the pen of Enoch (1 Enoch), stimulating a large number of other writings. Some people even went so far as to worship angels (Col. 2:18).

Some references to angels are difficult to understand. In Matt. 18:10 Jesus warns people to treat children well because their angels have constant access to God. The simplest meaning is that angelic messengers will tell God what has happened with these children. Rhoda’s reference to Peter’s “angel” as if it were his ghost probably reflects a local superstition (Acts 12:15) or a sectarian Jewish belief that the righteous become angels when they die. Paul’s comment that a woman should have “authority over her own head” (i.e., her head covered) “because of the angels” (1 Cor. 11:10) remains something of a puzzle, and his unique reference to the language of angels appears to be hyperbole (1 Cor. 13:1).

Paul warns us that Satan can appear as “an angel of light,” meaning that he would work through one who claimed to bring a message in accord with the gospel (2 Cor. 11:14). The devil has his “angels/messengers” (Matt. 25:41), although we know little about them.

Angels do not marry, reproduce, or die (Matt. 22:30; Mark 12:25; Luke 20:35–36). The NT affirms that angels rank below God’s people and serve them (1 Cor. 6:3; Heb.1:4–14; 2:5, 16), as they did Jesus (Matt. 4:11; Mark 1:13; cf. 1 Kings 19:5–7; Luke 22:43). Angels have limited understanding or knowledge of God’s plans and purposes (1 Pet. 1:12), although they reveal God’s word (Rev. 1:1). They bring the spirits of God’s people to heaven when they die (Luke 16:22) and implement God’s judgment on the last day (Matt. 13:39, 49; 16:27; 24:31; 25:31; Mark 8:38; 13:27; Luke 9:26; 2 Thess. 1:7; Rev. 14:15–19). They rejoice when a sinner repents (Luke 15:10). Christians already stand in the greater assembly that includes the angels (Heb.12:22). Eventually, Jesus will welcome his people into the heavenly courtroom in the presence of the angels (Luke 12:8–9; Rev. 3:5). See also Archangel.

Anthropology

The study of human beings, their nature and origins. The Christian understanding of anthropology stems from a biblical view of humankind’s relationship to God.

The Origin of Humankind

According to Genesis, the creation of humankind took place on the sixth day of the creation week. The amount of narrative space allotted to this day (Gen. 1:24–31) testifies to the special importance of what happened. Human beings were made on the same day as the animals. Human beings were not given a day of their own, showing that they have a certain kinship with the animals, although they are far more than highly successful and adaptive mammals. This has implications for the care of animals and of the environment generally. The value of human beings and their special place in the created order is clear in passages such as Pss. 8:5–6; 104:14–15.

Created in the image of God. When it came to the making of human beings, God deliberated over this crucial step (Gen. 1:26). The plural of exhortation in “Let us make man in our image” signals that the decision to make humankind was the most important one that God had made so far. Genesis 1 says that human beings are like God in some way.

Various opinions have been canvassed as to what the “image” is. We cannot totally exclude the physical form of humans, given God’s humanoid form in OT appearances (theophanies; e.g., Isa. 6:1; Ezek. 1:26; Amos 9:1). The image has sometimes been interpreted as a task, the exercising of dominion (Gen. 1:28), with humanity appointed as creation’s king, ruling under God. But the image is better understood as the precondition for rule rather than rule itself. The image shows human worth (Gen. 9:6) and differentiates humans from all other creatures. It is proper for the Bible to use anthropomorphic language for God, for humans are remarkably like God. Both male and female are in the image of God (“in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them” [1:27]), so that the divine image is not maleness, nor is sexual differentiation the image. Commonly, the image of God is thought to be some peculiar quality of human beings—for example, rationality, speech, moral sense, personality, humans as relational beings.

Every century has its own view of what is the essence of humanity. However, nothing in the passage allows a choice among such alternatives. The point of the passage is simply the fact of the likeness, with no exact definition being provided. The fact of the image is the basis of the divine prohibition of murder and of the strict penalty applied to the transgressor (9:4–6). The fall into sin affected every aspect of the human constitution, and the Bible does not minimize the fact of human sinfulness (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Rom. 3:10–18); nevertheless, humans are still in the image of God (Gen. 5:1–3; 9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7). God’s plan of salvation is aimed at ridding creation (and especially humanity) of the baneful effects of sin, and this will be achieved through the work of Christ, who is the image of God (2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15–20; Heb. 1:1–3; 2:5–18). The outcome will be the conformity of believers in Christ to his glorious image (Rom. 8:29–30; 2 Cor. 3.18).

Place in the created order. God’s purpose in giving human beings the divine image is “so they may rule” (NET [Gen. 1:26b translated as a purpose clause]). The syntax suggests that the image is a presupposition of dominion. It is plain that such a delegated authority makes humans stewards. The vegetarian diet of Gen.1:29 (there was no eating of meat at first) represents a limitation to the human right of dominion. Adam’s naming of the animals was (in part) expressive of his sovereignty over them (2:19). Later, Noah was charged to bring pairs of animals into the ark to preserve them alive (6:19–20), showing care for other creatures. The patriarchs tended flocks (13:2–9; 26:12–14), and Joseph’s relief measures saved the lives of people and animals (47:15–18). The wanton destruction of the Promised Land was expressly forbidden (Deut. 20:19–20). Humanity is accountable to God for the stewardship of the earth. The divine command “be fruitful and multiply” (Gen. 1:28 NRSV) shows that God’s purpose is that the human race populate the whole earth.

At Gen. 2:7 the biblical narrative becomes thoroughly anthropocentric, picturing the little world that God establishes around the first man, so this account is quite different from the cosmic presentation of Gen. 1. In Gen. 1 humankind is the apex of a pyramid, the last and highest of a series of creatures; in Gen. 2 the man is the center of a circle, everything else made to fit around him, and his connection to the physical earth is emphasized. In either view, a very special place is given to human beings in the created order. The two pictures are complementary, not contradictory.

The “man” (’adam) is formed from the “ground” (’adamah), with the related Hebrew words making a pun. Man’s name reminds him of his earthy origins. He is made from the “dust,” which hints at his coming death. He will return to the dust (Gen. 3:19; cf. Job 10:8–9; Ps. 103:14; Isa. 29:16). The reference to “the breath of life” (Gen. 2:7) is due to the fact that this leaves a person at death (Job 34:14–15; Ps. 104:29–30), so man’s (potential) mortality is implied. Ironically, the making of man is described using the language of death. What is described in Gen. 2 is the making of the first man, from whom the rest of the human race has descended, not the making of humankind, though the word ’adam can mean that in other contexts.

The Nature of Humankind

Body, soul, and spirit. Arguments over whether human nature is bipartite (body and soul) or tripartite (body, soul, spirit) are not to be decided by arbitrary appeal to isolated verses. Verses can be found in apparent support for both the first view (e.g., Matt. 10:28) and the second (e.g., 1 Thess. 5:23), but certainly the first scheme is much more prevalent in the Bible. “Soul” and “spirit” can be used interchangeably (Eccles. 3:21; 12:7; Ezek. 18:31). Death is marked by the parting of soul/spirit and body, but it would be a mistake to think that human beings are made up of separate component parts, or that the physical body is only a dispensable shell and not essential to true humanity. The physicality of human existence in the “body” is owned and celebrated in Scripture, part of that being the positive attitude to sexuality when properly expressed (Song of Songs; 1 Cor. 7) and the nonascetic nature of biblical ethics (1 Cor. 10:31; Col. 2:23). The doctrine of the resurrection of the body is the fullest expression of this (1 Cor. 15), in contrast to ancient Greek thought that viewed the body as inherently evil and understood salvation as the immortality of the liberated, disembodied soul.

The different words used in relation to persons are only intended to refer to and at times focus on different aspects of unified human nature. References to the “soul” may stress individual responsibility (e.g., Ezek. 18:4 NASB: “The soul who sins will die”). In Ps. 103:1–2, “O my soul” expresses emphatic self-encouragement to praise God and is in parallel with “all my inmost being”—that is, “my whole being” (an example of synecdoche: a part standing for the whole [cf. Ps. 35:10]). These are ways of referring to oneself as a person who expresses will and intention (cf. Ps. 42:5–6, 11). The “flesh” is used to stress the weakness of mortal humanity (e.g., Isa. 40:6 RSV: “All flesh is grass”). The “heart” is the volitional center of a human being (Prov. 4:23; cf. Mark 7:17–23). The emotional and empathetic reactions of humans are described by reference to the organs: “liver,” “kidneys,” “bowels.”

Morals and responsibility. In Gen. 2 the complexities of the man’s moral relation to God and his relations with the soil, with the animals, and with the woman are explored. God deposited the man in the garden “to work it and take care of it” (2:15). The words chosen to designate the man’s work prior to the fall have an aura of worship about them, for they are later used in the OT for the cultic actions of serving and guarding within the sanctuary. The priests served by offering sacrifices, and the Levites guarded the gates of the sacred precinct. A theology of work as a religious vocation is presented. The man was a kind of king-priest in the garden of God.

The moral responsibility of humanity is signaled from the beginning. God’s command gives permission for the man to eat from “any tree” except one (Gen. 2:16–17) and as such indicates man’s freedom, so that this command is no great restriction. The wording “you are free to eat” reinforces the point about God’s generous provision. The prohibition is embedded in the description of God’s fatherly care for the man and gracious act in placing him in the garden. The divine restriction is slight and not at all overbearing, though the serpent will seek to make it appear mean-spirited (3:1). The command and prohibition are the very first words of God to the man, marking them out as of fundamental importance for the relationship between them. The prohibition (“you must not eat . . .”) is an absolute one in the style of the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). What is placed before the man is a test that gives him the opportunity to express his loyalty to God. A relationship of obedience and trust requires the possibility of choice and the opportunity to disobey (if that is what he wants to do). The moral nature and responsibility of individuals is not a late discovery by the prophet Ezekiel (Ezek. 18); rather, it is the presupposition behind the Mosaic law, for the commands of the Decalogue (“you shall not . . .”) are phrased as commands to individuals (as the Hebrew makes clear). On the other hand, the concept of corporate responsibility is also present (e.g., Achan’s punishment in Josh. 7).

Relationships. Human beings are relational by nature, as the creation of the woman as a helper and partner for the first man makes plain (Gen. 2:18–25). Later in Scripture this is put in more general terms, so that friendship and mutual cooperation are shown to be essential to life (Eccles. 4:7–12). The body life of the church reflects the same fact and need (1 Cor. 12). In Psalms, human needs and vulnerability find their answer and fulfillment in God, with the psalmist acknowledging his frailty and his creaturely dependence on God (e.g., Ps. 90). This also shows the folly of sinful human pride, against which the prophets so often inveighed (e.g., Isa. 2:9, 11–17, 22).

Archangel

A chief or first angel. The word “archangel” refers to a particular class of angels; it also refers to a rank in the angelic hierarchy. In the OT, no particular angel is identified as the highest in the angelic hierarchy. Michael and Gabriel are the two named angels in the OT. In the book of Daniel, Michael is identified as “one of the chief princes,” which is taken to mean archangels (10:13). The distinction between Michael and Gabriel in the book of Daniel is that of function, not hierarchy. Michael functions as a warrior (10:13, 21; 12:1), whereas Gabriel functions as a revealer of mysteries (8:16; 9:21). In the NT, Michael is specifically called “the archangel” and is the divine warrior who contends with the devil over the body of Moses (Jude 9); and Michael and his angels engage in a heavenly battle against Satan and his angels (Rev. 12:7). In 1 Thess. 4:16 the imagery used is of God as a divine warrior par excellence who comes down from heaven with a shout, with the voice of his archangel, and with a trumpet declaring his victory as he comes to gather his people.

Angelology is more developed in Second Temple period (intertestamental) literature, wherein the identities and functions of angels are clarified. The archangels comprise one class of angels within the angelic hierarchy. Scripture refers to other classes of angels, such as cherubim (e.g., Gen. 3:24; Exod. 25:18–22; Pss. 18:10; 80:10; 99:1), seraphim (Isa. 6:2, 6), watchers (Dan. 4:13, 17, 23), Satan and fallen angels (Matt. 9:34; 25:41; Eph. 2:2; 2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6; Rev. 10:12). For example, 1 En. 6 gives the names of the twenty fallen watchers (cf. Gen. 6:1–4), and 1 En. 20 has the earliest reference to the seven archangels: Uriel, Raphael, Raguel, Michael, Zerachiel, Gabriel, and Remiel. There are, however, other lists that give alternate names to the seven archangels. In 3 En. 17:1–3 the archangels are Michael, Gabriel, Shatqiel, Baradiel, Shachaqiel, Baraqiel, and Sidriel. In the Testament of Solomon four of the seven archangels are mentioned: Michael, Ouriel, Raphael, and Gabriel (1:6; 2:4; 5:9; 18:6). In the book of Tobit, the angel Raphael disguises himself in human form and finally reveals his identity thus: “I am Raphael, one of the seven angels, who stand ready and enter before the glory of the Lord” (12:15; cf. Rev. 8:2).

The archangels also perform various other functions. In Tobit, Raphael functions as a protective guide and healer. In 3 En. 17:1–3 the seven archangels are in charge of the seven heavens, and each is accompanied by 496,000 ministering angels. In Rev. 12:7–9 Michael commands the angel army that battles the dragon and its army. In T. Levi 3:3–6 the archangels are regarded as temple personnel; they serve and offer proprietary sacrifices on behalf of all the sins of ignorance of the righteous ones in uppermost heaven, the holy of holies (cf. Jub. 2:2; 1 En. 14:23). In a similar fashion, in Rev. 8:1–10:11 the seven angels appear before God and also serve at the altar to offer incense and to take the prayers of the saints before the throne. See also Angel.

Awe

Awe mingles dread with wonder, especially toward God (Ps. 33:8 KJV). Translations use “awe” almost exclusively for God and his deeds. Modern translations use “awe,” “awesome,” and “awe-inspiring” to render numerous Hebrew and Greek terms.

The Bible never records a person encountering God without being visibly shaken by God’s awesomeness. Awe is a personal disposition more than an emotional state. In God’s presence Moses hides his face (Exod. 3:6), and Isaiah declares, “Woe to me!” (Isa. 6:5).

Awesome

Book of Isaiah

The first of the Major Prophets in the canon, the book of Isaiah is one of the longest books in the Bible. This, coupled with the NT’s frequent use of Isaiah, has contributed to the book’s great importance in Christian tradition. Isaiah contains some of the most memorable passages in Scripture, with its majestic poetry and evocative sermons making it a literary masterpiece. Nevertheless, it has also been characterized as a difficult book to comprehend and make sense of as a whole because the connections between different paragraphs and sections appear to be haphazard at times and are difficult to understand. However, some knowledge of the way the book was formed can aid in interpretation.

Authorship

The authorship of Isaiah has been one of the most debated issues in biblical interpretation. Ancient tradition credited the eighth-century BC prophet Isaiah with the entire sixty-six chapters. However, an early Jewish tradition in the Talmud claims that “the men of Hezekiah” compiled Isaiah, showing their awareness that the book did not come entirely from Isaiah.

Literary evidence. Isaiah son of Amoz is referred to as author in three sections of the book (1:1; 2:1; 13:1) and is featured in both third-person (chaps. 7; 20; 36–39) and first-person (chaps. 6; 8) narratives. However, chapters 40–66 have no such headings and do not even mention Isaiah. While references to Isaiah as author in specific sections may suggest that he actually did write the whole book, they may also indicate that he did not write sections that are not ascribed to him. Similarly, historical narratives referring to the prophet in the third person may suggest that someone else wrote them, although the intimate information in them (e.g., 7:3) could point to Isaianic authorship.

Another possible indication of multiple authorship is the marked difference in literary style and vocabulary found in different sections of Isaiah. While such judgments are quite subjective, both sides of the authorship debate acknowledge these stylistic differences.

Historical settings. The debate regarding the authorship of Isaiah really centers on the diverse historical settings within different sections of the book. Chapters 1–39 clearly are set during the late eighth century BC, the period when Assyria is threatening Judah. Assyria is frequently mentioned (e.g., 7:17; 8:4; 10:12; 11:11; 19:23; 20:1; 27:13; 36:1), as are Judean kings (e.g., 1:1; 6:1; 7:1; 14:28; 36:1) and the prophet Isaiah himself (e.g., 1:1; 2:1; 13:1; 20:2; 37:5).

In contrast, the historical setting of chapters 40–55 is not eighth-century BC Judah. Israel is described as in captivity and Jerusalem is referred to as ruined and deserted (44:26, 28; 52:9); there is frequent allusion to the sufferings of the exile (42:22, 25; 43:28; 47:6; 51:17; 52:5); and the coming return from exile is described as close at hand (40:2; 46:13; 48:20). Furthermore, in chapters 40–55 Babylon is Israel’s enemy, even though in Isaiah’s day they were allies. Also, Cyrus the Great, the Persian king who conquered Babylon in 539 BC (ending the exile), is mentioned with no introduction or explanation (44:28; 45:1), even though he lived 150 years after Isaiah. In sum, chapters 40–55 appear to be addressed to Judeans in Babylonian exile.

Conversely, chapters 56–66 appear to come from yet another historical period. Unlike in chapters 40–55, where the temple was destroyed and out of operation, in chapters 56–66 the temple (66:6), along with sacrifices (56:7; 66:3), offerings (57:6; 65:3; 66:3), and Sabbaths (56:2; 58:13; 66:23), is referred to. Also, Jerusalem and its walls are standing (62:6), unlike in chapters 40–55, where it is predicted that Jerusalem will be rebuilt (44:26). This seems to indicate that it addresses those who have returned to Jerusalem after the exile.

This evidence suggests that the book of Isaiah was written by several authors from different time periods. Alternatively, these diverse historical settings could be explained by supposing that Isaiah spoke to audiences in the distant future through divine inspiration. While skeptical scholars holding antisupernatural worldviews have denied this possibility, those who believe in an almighty God believe that he can reveal the distant future to his prophets. However, the question is whether that is in fact the case with Isaiah. It is significant that in chapters 40–55 Babylonian oppression is not predicted as something to come in the future but rather is presupposed as the present conditions under which the writer is living—only the release from exile is predicted. Logically, it would seem that the author lived in the situation that he presupposes and before the situation that he predicts.

Arguments for the unity of Isaiah. Some scholars still hold to the unity of Isaiah on the following grounds: (1) no ancient manuscripts show that the book ever existed in another form; (2) differences in style and vocabulary can be explained by different subject matter (besides which, the title “Holy One of Israel” unites all sections of Isaiah, as it is used thirteen times in chapters 1–39, sixteen times in chapters 40–66, and only seven times in the rest of the Bible); (3) it seems unlikely that an author as great as the one who wrote chapters 40–55 should remain anonymous; and (4) although it is logical to assume that a prophet is contemporary with what he presupposes, once a prophet makes a prediction, that prediction can become a presupposition for another prediction. Therefore, Isaiah’s prediction of exile in 39:6–7 could become the basis or presupposition on which he continued to prophesy the end to the exile.

However, these arguments are not compelling. Although no manuscripts attest to earlier versions of the book, we possess so few manuscripts from before the time of Christ (and none dating to the time during which the three sections of Isaiah are thought to have been combined) that this is insignificant. Also, the differences in subject matter do not seem great enough to explain the very different style and language in the various sections. Regarding the unlikelihood that the writer of chapters 40–55 could remain anonymous, the fact is that many biblical books are indeed anonymous (e.g., Judges, 1–2 Kings, 1–2 Chronicles). However, most significant are the different historical settings of the major sections of Isaiah. If Isaiah was addressing an audience in the distant future, not only would it be a situation unparalleled in the biblical prophets, but also the message would have been largely unintelligible to Isaiah’s contemporaries (especially references to Cyrus). Moreover, the text does not claim to predict these situations but only presupposes them. However, the reality of prophetic inspiration is underscored, as a later author predicts not only the end of the exile but also a suffering messiah.

First, Second, and Third Isaiah. For convenience (and not to imply that each author was named “Isaiah”), the three major sections are often referred to as First Isaiah (chaps. 1–39), Second Isaiah (chaps. 40–55), and Third Isaiah (chaps. 56–66). In light of the purposeful connections between the different sections, it is probable that the book was the product of a “school” of Isaiah’s disciples (cf. 8:16) who collected and organized Isaiah’s words and added to them over a long period of time.

In the end, the involvement of multiple authors in the composition of Isaiah does not undermine its authority as Scripture. Its authority derives not from the namesake prophet but rather from God, who inspired its writing (2 Tim. 3:16).

Plan of the Book

Isaiah has a literary structure similar to that of Ezekiel, Zephaniah, Joel, and the Greek translation of Jeremiah. The first section is concerned with judgment on Israel (chaps. 1–12), the second with judgment on foreign nations (chaps. 13–23), and the third records prophecies of hope and salvation (chaps. 24–27). This structure purposefully places hopeful oracles of comfort after the judgment oracles. Some view the entire book of Isaiah as following this pattern (chaps. 1–12, judgment on Israel; chaps. 13–35, judgment on other nations; chaps. 40–66, oracles of comfort). However, both of these schemes are somewhat forced, since each section is slightly mixed (there are oracles of salvation in chaps. 1–12, prophecies against Judah in chaps. 13–23, and judgment oracles in chaps. 56–66). However, in broad outline it is helpful to recognize this structure.

Outline

I. Judgment on Judah (1–12)

II. Judgment on the Nations (13–27)

III. Warnings to Trust in the Lord (28–35)

IV. The Assyrian Crisis (36–39)

V. The Second Exodus (40–48)

VI. The Restoration of Jerusalem (49–55)

VII. The Earthly and New Jerusalem (56–66)

First Isaiah (Isa. 1–39)

Key historical events. This section of Isaiah comes from the period when the nation of Assyria was aggressively expanding its territory and terrorizing weaker nations, such as Israel and Judah. Two key historical events form the background for many oracles in chapters 1–39 and are the prominent focus there: the Syro-Ephraimite war of 734 BC and the 701 BC Assyrian invasion of Judah.

The Syro-Ephraimite war. The nations of Aram (Syria) and Israel (Ephraim) allied together against Assyria and tried to coerce Judah into joining them. They planned to replace King Ahaz with a king of their choice (7:6), which would end the Davidic dynasty. In the end, Ahaz rejected Isaiah’s advice to simply trust God (7:9) and instead appealed to the king of Assyria for aid. The Assyrians conquered Aram (732 BC) and Israel (722 BC) and assimilated them into the Assyrian empire. Judah survived but had to pay tribute to Assyria from that point onward.

The Assyrian invasion of Judah. The Assyrian king Sennacherib invaded Judah when Hezekiah, Ahaz’s son, reigned in Jerusalem. The invasion devastated Judah; however, when Jerusalem was threatened, Hezekiah, in contrast to his father, trusted God to save them, and the Assyrian army suffered massive losses and failed to take Jerusalem (37:36).

Structure and themes. The structure of chapters 1–39 is quite complex. However, the prophecies and historical narratives concerned with Isaiah’s day are roughly in chronological order (e.g., prophecies and events occurring during the reign of King Ahaz [6:1–8:22] precede those during Hezekiah’s reign [36:1–39:8]). The structure of these chapters alternates between threat and promise (e.g., chap. 1 = threat; 2:1–4 = promise of hope; 2:5–4:1 = threat; 4:2–6 = promise of hope). Analogously, the main themes of these chapters alternate between threat and promise.

Holiness. A major theme of Isaiah is God’s holiness, as evidenced in its favorite title for the Lord, “Holy One of Israel.” While the original idea underlying holiness was physical separation and did not have an ethical dimension (e.g., temple prostitutes in the ancient Near East were called “holy women”), a different concept of holiness emerges in chapter 6, the account of Isaiah’s call. Since 6:1–9:7 is the only part in the book with autobiographical narration, these chapters probably come from an original memoir of Isaiah himself. The memoir is surrounded by judgment oracles with a repeated element, “Yet for all this, his anger is not turned away, his hand is still upraised” (5:25; 9:12, 17, 21; 10:4), suggesting that the memoir as a whole was inserted between these oracles to explain God’s anger recorded in 1–12. God’s mandate to Israel was to “be holy, because I am holy” (Lev. 11:44–45), but Israel failed to follow this command. In the presence of the holy God, Isaiah realized his own sinfulness and the sinfulness of his people (6:5), connecting the concepts of holiness and righteousness.

The remnant. Already in the first chapter we see the emergence of two groups within Israel: the wicked, who will be punished, and a remnant, who will be redeemed (1:27–31). This focus on the remnant was one way in which Isaiah saw hope for Israel despite the coming judgment that he predicted. The remnant theme highlights the apparent tension between God as holy and God as redeemer: God’s holiness is upheld through the judgment on Israel, but God’s character as savior is witnessed through the remnant that is redeemed.

A coming messianic king. The section 6:1–9:7 dates from the time of the Syro-Ephraimite war, and it appears that Isaiah wrote it down (8:16) when Ahaz refused his counsel. The memoir emphasizes the rejection of the Davidic king Ahaz and predicts the birth of a royal son who would replace Ahaz and bring freedom from oppression (9:1–7). This dissatisfaction with the reigning Davidic king was the seedbed for messianic expectations and is the background for the messianic trilogy of 7:14–16; 9:2–7; 11:1–9. While some of these passages may have originally referred to Hezekiah, he falls short of these messianic expectations, leaving the community of faith awaiting another anointed one (messiah). Ominously, chapter 39 describes Hezekiah’s entertaining guests from Babylon, perhaps implying an alliance between the two nations. Hezekiah’s actions prompt Isaiah to predict the Babylonian exile (39:6–7), providing a fitting segue to chapters 40–66.

Second Isaiah (Isa. 40–55)

A message to the exiles. Second Isaiah was written near the end of the exilic period for those who were deported by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon. Although the exiles in Babylon were settled in communities (Ezek. 3:15) and allowed to build houses and farm the land (Jer. 29:5–7), they had no temple for worship, and many of the exiles probably saw the destruction of Jerusalem and their temple as the end of God’s action on their behalf. The gods of Babylon appeared to have won the victory. The exiles’ faith was flagging, and even those who did not abandon worship of Israel’s God simply clung to the past and expected nothing new from him.

Contrary to these expectations, Second Isaiah proclaims that God is doing something new for his people and bringing an end to the exile (40:1; 55:12). The role of Cyrus in this deliverance is highlighted, with explicit and implicit reference made to the Persian king (41:2–3, 25; 44:28; 45:1–4, 13–14). However, amid the oracles of comfort there is also a challenge to Israel, which is somehow resistant to the message. To break down this resistance, the prophecy has a sustained rhetoric against idol worship, with some quite hilarious sections ridiculing idol makers (44:9–20). Israel needed to realize that only Yahweh is God and to trust that he will redeem Israel for his purposes. Chapters 1–39 allude to the redemption of Israel (1:27; 35:9), and chapters 40–66 reveal more of how this redemption will take place: the work of “the servant.”

The servant. Several poems featuring an anonymous “servant” (42:1–9; 49:1–12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12) are often referred to as the Servant Songs. As far back as the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:34), interpreters have struggled with how to identify “the servant.” At times, Israel is explicitly identified as the servant (Isa. 41:8–9; 42:19 [2×]; 43:10), yet the servant clearly also has individual features, suggesting that a person was to fill the role. Some have suggested Cyrus because 42:1 says that the servant “will bring justice to the nations,” and Cyrus is described as conquering nations (41:2, 25; 45:1). However, despite all the talk of Cyrus, the text never explicitly applies the term “servant” to him, which can hardly be by chance. Alternatively, the servant could be the prophet who speaks in these chapters (as the Ethiopian eunuch speculated), since he was destined for his mission before his birth (49:1) and equipped for a mission involving prophetic speech (49:2) and had received divinely revealed knowledge (50:4).

Yet the Servant Songs are also messianic and look forward to a future anointed one who will fulfill the role of the servant fully. In the NT, Jesus is presented as the new Israel (cf. Matt. 2:15 with Hos. 11:1) who truly fulfills the role of the servant (John 12:38, quoting Isa. 53:1; Matt. 8:17, quoting Isa. 53:4). However, Paul appears to hold to a collective interpretation of the songs, as he sees himself as the servant in some instances (Acts 13:47; Rom. 15:21; Gal. 1:15). Both the individual and the collective interpretations are legitimated in the NT, as both Jesus (individual) and the church (collective), which is Christ’s body, fulfill the role of the servant.

Third Isaiah (Isa. 56–66)

In 539 BC Cyrus allowed the exiles to return home to rebuild Jerusalem and its temple (Ezra 1:1–4). Despite many obstacles, the temple was finished in 515 BC. Even with this success, living in the land was challenging (see Malachi), with factions among the people, economic troubles, hypocritical worship (Isa. 58:1–14), and problems with corrupt leaders (56:9–57:13). It was for this postexilic community that Third Isaiah was written (probably before the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah in 445 BC brought lasting change to the desperate situation).

Unlike in chapters 40–55, where Israel needs to be roused from its despair by the imminent actions of God, in chapters 56–66 the people are pleading with God to help them (59:11; 62:7). In chapter 59 the prophet declares that God’s delay in helping his people is due not to his inability but rather to the sins of the people, which are described, confessed, and lamented.

In many ways, Third Isaiah unites the themes of First Isaiah and Second Isaiah. Second Isaiah emphasizes the inbreaking of a new age that contrasts with the old. The former things are remembered, but the new thing that God was doing—the return from exile—is stressed. However, in Third Isaiah the deliverance from Babylon is seen as merely a foretaste of God’s promise, which is now identified as a new heaven and earth (chaps. 65–66). Third Isaiah looks forward to the new things that are still ahead.

First Isaiah predicts a Davidic messiah who would rule in righteousness (9:1–7; 11:1–9) and a faithful remnant that would respond in trust (10:20; 28:16). Second Isaiah does not continue with these themes, instead turning attention to the “servant” whose suffering and death would atone for Israel (53:4–5). However, Third Isaiah links First Isaiah’s faithful remnant with obedient “servants” who take on the mission of the Suffering Servant in Second Isaiah. This interpretation sets the direction for the NT’s identification of the royal messiah of chapters 1–39 as the servant of chapters 40–55 (Luke 24:26; Acts 8:32). Third Isaiah thus unites and reinterprets the book as a whole.

It is fitting that Jesus read the opening verses of Isa. 61 in the synagogue at the beginning of his ministry. Like Third Isaiah, he united prophecies of both the messianic Davidic ruler of First Isaiah and the Suffering Servant of Second Isaiah, taking on both roles himself. Third Isaiah ends with a glorious future pictured for the Jewish community as they function as priests in the world (61:6). Similarly, Christ’s body, the church, now functions in these same roles in the world (cf. Acts 13:47; Rev. 5:10).

Conviction

In its more prominent use, “conviction” refers to the experience of becoming aware of one’s guilt before God. Isaiah’s vision of the throne of God provides a dramatic illustration of conviction. He describes the feeling of dread and self-revulsion that he experienced in the presence of God, who is holy: “ ‘Woe to me!’ I cried. ‘I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, . . . and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty’ ” (Isa. 6:5). After a miraculous catch of fish, when Peter recognized that Jesus was the Christ, his initial response was similar: “Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!” (Luke 5:8).

Jesus said that after his departure he would send the Spirit, who would convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment (John 16:8). Sin has the effect of dulling one’s conscience to its pervasiveness. God is light, and his presence exposes our darkness. To be convicted is to become aware of one’s need for forgiveness and cleansing from sin. Confession, or inward agreement, is the only appropriate response. The initial fulfillment of this promise occurred at Pentecost, when in response to the miracle that drew crowds, Peter preached the resurrection of Christ to the multitudes, who only recently had handed Christ over to be crucified. Upon hearing Peter’s sermon, they were “cut to the heart” and asked, “What shall we do?” Peter then commanded them to repent so that they might receive forgiveness for their sins (Acts 2:37–38). This illustrates that the Spirit works through the proclaimed word of God, which is able to expose the thoughts and intents of the heart (Heb. 4:12). It is, however, possible to resist conviction, which eventually leads to the hardening of one’s heart (Acts 7:51).

The book of Hebrews uses “conviction,” in its secondary meaning, to refer to the internal persuasion that characterizes faith (11:1 ESV, NRSV, NASB).

Deaf

The condition of being wholly, or partly, without hearing. The Greek word kōphos can refer to one’s inability to speak (Matt. 9:32–33; 12:22; 15:30–31; Luke 1:22; 11:14) or hear (Matt. 11:5; Mark 7:37; 9:25; Luke 7:22). Such a condition was often believed to be a judgment from God (Mic. 7:16). God has control over deafness (Exod. 4:11; Ps. 94:9; Prov. 20:12; Luke 1:20). God’s people were to mirror his compassion toward the deaf (Lev. 19:14). In NT times, hearing deficiencies were sometimes caused by Satan (Mark 9:25) but were always met by Jesus’ miraculous power (Matt. 11:5; Mark 7:32–37; 9:25). Figuratively, deafness describes people’s spiritual rebellion, their unwillingness to hear, know, and obey God (Ps. 58:4; Prov. 28:9; Isa. 6:10; 29:18; 35:5; Jer. 6:10; Ezek. 12:2; Matt. 13:14–16; Mark 4:10–12; Luke 8:10; Acts 28:26–27). God is described as being deaf to a rebellious people (Deut. 1:45; Pss. 28:1; 39:12), whereas idols are deaf because they have no real life (Deut. 4:28; Pss. 115:6; 135:17; Dan. 5:23; Rev. 9:20).

Deafness

Elohim

Yahweh: The Lord

Elohim

Adonai

Ethics

The Bible contains two kinds of statements related to proper conduct. Some of them describe the nature of God, the sort of world he created, and what he has done for particular groups of people. It also contains statements telling us what we ought to do, both as creatures of this God and, in some instances, as the unique beneficiaries of his redemptive activity. Consequently, the Bible sets forth a moral viewpoint or ethical system, supported by reasons that justify its content and urgency. The writers of Scripture were not moral philosophers, outlining their position in technical detail; nevertheless, they intended to reveal what pleases our God and Savior, so that the saints are “thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16–17). The Bible, therefore, is the foundational resource for moral discernment, the definitive statement of what Christians must do and who they must become.

The Sources of Moral Knowledge

Scripture identifies two sources of moral knowledge. First, all human beings have the law of God “written on their hearts” (Rom. 2:15). We have a conscience, a God-given awareness of right and wrong that acquits or convicts us, depending on how we respond to it. The fall of humankind has damaged this source of knowledge, and our consciences can become “seared” through chronic disobedience and doctrinal treason (1 Tim. 4:2). We do not, therefore, see infallibly what our duties are. Nevertheless, the apostle Paul argues that every human being knows enough of God’s law—and indeed, enough about his nature as God—to eliminate every defense on judgment day (Rom. 1:18–20). No one will be able to say to God in that hour, “I had no idea who you were and no hint of what you expected of me.”

Second, as noted above, we have the Bible as a source of knowledge, this one being fully adequate and sufficiently clear to guide our choices. Knowing Scripture is necessary for Christian ethics because it offers a high-definition view of what conscience can (even in its best moments) scarcely grasp. The Bible proclaims not only what the church must do, often in straightforward, concrete terms, but also (at least, in many cases) why God’s will has its particular content and why obedience is an emergency, not a safely deferred, improvement project. The Bible does not, and really could not, answer every ethical question put to it in unambiguous detail. New technologies and cultural shifts have created dilemmas unimagined in the first century or any previous age. But the church can be assured that a faithful reading of and response to Scripture will, by the grace of God, please him even today, whatever our particular circumstances.

The Logic of Biblical Morality

The moral teaching of Scripture has an identifiable structure consisting of duties and final objectives. When we obey God’s commandments, which is our duty, his ultimate goals or objectives in creating us are realized. In this sense, biblical morality is complete and informative compared to systems derived from other worldviews. It explains what life is all about, but also what we must do from day to day. This entire picture emerges from Scripture because its theological statements are always practically applied and never presented with merely theoretical interest.

The objectives of biblical morality. The objectives of an ethical system are its final ends or purposes: the results that obedience is supposed to yield. In the Bible, two objectives have this ultimate significance, one being the anticipated side effect of the other.

To glorify God. The biblical writers proclaim the spectacular goodness of God. He is maximally excellent in all ways as the Creator, including wisdom, power, justice, and love. He is the holy God who, almost in spite of that fact, loves us and gave his Son, Jesus, to suffer for our sins so that we might live eternally in his presence. In these respects, God stands alone, not simply in experience but necessarily so. No one ever has, and no one ever could, be like him. Thus, the final objective of all human striving must be to glorify this God—to know him, to praise him, and to value what he values. Our actions must testify to his excellence, honoring him and encouraging others to do likewise. Obedience treasures what God treasures, shuns what he abhors, and allows his power to work in our lives, causing us to live in unity with our fellow believers. These patterns of behavior define what it means to glorify God.

To be happy in God’s presence. The second goal or objective of biblical morality is to be happy in ways that are proper for God’s creatures. In this sense, the Christian system of ethics differs from moral theories that either reject happiness altogether, viewing it as an unworthy goal, or else reduce it to a merely practical necessity—that is, we sinners need our incentives. On the contrary, the God of Scripture plainly desires our happiness and often presents himself as the final source of it when calling his people to obedience. This tendency follows from the perfect goodness of God and his freedom in creating all things. He did not have to make anything else, but he did so; and because he has no needs, his purposes must have been selfless rather than selfish. He created in order to give rather than to get, and the very best he desires for any of us is the happiness that results from our glorifying him together, as one body in Christ. Likewise, then, biblical morality differs from ethical systems that make human happiness an intrinsic good, so that any means to it is acceptable. God wants us to be happy, but our happiness must come from bringing him glory. All other forms of happiness are deceptive and transitory. The heavenly scenes of the book of Revelation show the church what happiness God has in store for them if they overcome the trials of this life (so, e.g., Rev. 4–5; 7; 21–22; cf. 1 Cor. 2:9; Heb. 12:2).

The means of biblical morality. Not surprisingly, the Bible also shows us how to glorify God—how to reflect his majesty in our daily lives, how to praise him, and how to value what he values. Within the whole of this teaching, several major themes can be discerned, five leading examples of which appear below, allowing some overlap between them.

Trusting in God’s promises. Biblical faith is the confidence that God will do for us what he has promised. We believe that he can and will meet our needs and not allow us to endure pointless suffering. When we trust him, we proclaim his greatness and acknowledge our own dependence upon him. Both Rom. 4 and Heb. 11 make this point in ways that reflect upon OT history with an application to the present Christian life. The gospel is a promise concerning the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ; and faith assures us that God will reckon these events to our account. Conversely, we often violate God’s commandments because we doubt that he will give us what we need when we need it (so, e.g., Abraham’s capitulation to Sarah in Gen. 16, with its corresponding negative results).

Keeping holiness and impurity separated. God is the all-powerful, all-knowing, morally perfect Creator of the universe. All things depend on him for their existence, and he is extreme both in his commitment to justice and his desire to love. Consequently, God’s creatures encounter him as “holy,” as the ominously transcendent or dangerously perfect deity. He stands alone, apart from everything else, and life in his presence cannot entail business as usual. The shorthand way of expressing this duty is to say that we ourselves must be holy, as he is holy, by shunning all forms of impurity. In this way, for example, the ancient Israelites prepared themselves to enter Yahweh’s presence and gave him public honor (Lev. 11:44; 19:2; Ps. 24:3–4; Isa. 6:1–5; cf. 1 Pet. 1:15–16).

In Scripture, the distinction between the pure and the impure, or the holy and the unholy, is sometimes intrinsic and sometimes pedagogical. Breaking any of the Ten Commandments makes one intrinsically impure. It is always evil, everywhere, for anyone to have other gods, make idols, and disrespect parents. It is evil to lie, steal, and murder. Even breaking the Sabbath is wrong if it expresses unbelief in God’s ability and willingness to provide. But some lines between purity and impurity—or, in other cases, just between the sacred and the common—seem to be drawn by God for instructional purposes only. They do not separate good from evil as such, but they compel the Israelites to “practice Yahweh’s presence” by honoring boundaries imposed on domestic life. It is not evil to eat pork, but doing that is forbidden in the OT and permitted in the NT (Lev. 11:7; Mark 7:19). It is not evil to wear blended cloth, but doing that is forbidden in the OT and passed over in the NT (Lev. 19:19). Therefore, as suggested, Levitical rules of this kind must have had some instrumental purpose, serving an objective beyond themselves. They impose the holiness of Yahweh on everyday choices, as the Holy Spirit now presses the claims of God upon his church. This separation of impurity and holiness is, in any case, a constant theme in the OT, and it carries over into the NT as well, where it informs the question “What must I do to be saved?” (cf. Acts 16:30).

Imitating God/Christ. The biblical writers also construe the moral life as an imitation of God and/or Christ, especially when the virtues of mercy, humility, and endurance are at stake. In the OT, Yahweh’s behavior toward people becomes the standard for Israel’s own conduct. So, for example, he says, “But let the one who boasts boast about this: that they have the understanding to know me, that I am the Lord, who exercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight” (Jer. 9:24). In the NT, similar inferences appear, as when Jesus says, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God” (Matt. 5:9), the son being one who follows in his father’s footsteps. We must love our enemies, so that we may be “children of (our) Father in heaven” (Matt. 5:44–45). We must “be perfect,” as he is perfect (Matt. 5:48). Jesus commands his disciples to wash one another’s feet, after his own example (John 13:14–15). They must love each other as he has loved them (John 15:12). The new commandment to love one another, following the Lord’s example, puts on display his character and their own relationship to him (13:34–35). Jesus prays that his disciples will be “one,” just as the Father and the Son are one (17:22). Paul’s hymn in Phil. 2:5–11 serves this purpose: we must imitate the humility that surrendered all, even to the point of crucifixion. Hebrews 12:1–2 holds up Christ as one who “for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame,” resulting in his glory.

Living out our unique identity. Scripture defines the moral ideal for all persons, whoever they are, because its perspective is not relativistic. Murder, idolatry, and lying are not wrong for some and right for others. Nevertheless, most of the Bible’s moral teaching has a target audience, so that it often contains inferences to this effect: “You shall do X (or doing X is urgent for you), either (a) because you belong to God in a special way or (b) because he has done this special thing for you.” In the OT, the target audience is Israel; in the NT, the corresponding group is the church. In both Testaments, however, the same ethical particularism operates, thereby giving the moral exhortations of Paul and Peter, to cite two clear examples, a recognizably “Jewish” structure or theme.

The linkage between gift and task, or supernatural identity and behavior, is the basic structure of the Sinai covenant itself. The text moves from prologue, “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt,” to moral exhortation, beginning with, “You shall have no other gods before me” (Exod. 20:1–3; Deut. 5:6–7). Echoes of this prologue also occur frequently in the OT as motive clauses. God will say, in effect, “You shall do X, for I am the Lord your God,” or “You shall not do Y, for I am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt.” In some cases, the motive clause identifies the people themselves, as in, “For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession” (Deut. 7:6). Or again, “You are the children of the Lord your God. Do not cut yourselves or shave the front of your heads for the dead, for you are a people holy to the Lord your God. Out of all the peoples on the face of the earth, the Lord has chosen you to be his treasured possession” (Deut. 14:1–2). In some cases, God refers to the people’s unique condition to shame them, as in, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. But the more they were called, the more they went away from me” (Hos. 11:1–2). Loyalty was especially urgent, given Israel’s experience of God’s particular love.

In the NT, the mandate to live out one’s special identity appears often, especially (though not exclusively) in the writings of Paul and Peter. In Rom. 6 those who have been emancipated from sin must resist its waning influence. In Rom. 8 those who are under the Holy Spirit’s new management must walk in accordance with him and shun the mind-set of the flesh. The Corinthians have become an unleavened batch of dough; therefore, they must “Get rid of the old yeast,” which tolerates extraordinary sin (1 Cor. 5). The members of Christ’s one body are to function as one new humanity (1 Cor. 12:12–31). If the Galatians live by the Spirit, they must also walk by the Spirit (Gal. 5:25). Peter tells his readers to love one another because they have been “born again” of “imperishable seed” (1 Pet. 1:22–23). They are a “chosen race,” a “royal priesthood,” and a “holy nation”; therefore, they must proclaim his excellence and abstain from carnal passions (1 Pet. 2:9–11). Jesus himself says that because he is the vine and we are the branches, we must abide in him (John 15:1–11). In all these cases, the target audience has a special relationship to God that imposes on them corresponding duties or priorities, so that they reflect his holiness, value what he values, and attain the goals that he has set before them.

Living in unity with one another. The first sin separated God from humankind and damaged all other relationships (Gen. 3). From that point onward, Adam and Eve would live in tension (Gen. 3:16), and their son Cain kills his brother Abel (Gen. 4:8). Disunity results from sin; and in some cases, God scatters sinners as judgment on their wickedness (e.g., Gen. 11:1–9; 1 Kings 11). It is “good and pleasant” when “God’s people live together in unity” (Ps. 133:1), and obedience to OT teaching would make them do so. Nevertheless, sin stands between Yahweh and his people, and it stands between one Israelite and another. Disunity, in all these dimensions, is the unfinished business of the OT story.

The NT presents unity as both an effect and a duty (or a gift and a task) of the new life in Christ. We are one in Christ, and we must live in unity of fellowship with one another. Jews and Gentiles—indeed, people from all walks of life—become one body, a new kind of people, defined by relationships that are “thicker than blood,” so to speak, as blood is thicker than water. Paul, as the apostle to the Gentiles, enforces this theme throughout his letters, so that his exhortations concentrate on the church, in the first instance, rather than the individual. Christians must display the social virtues of love and humility, resisting selfish ambition and pride, both of which separate believer from believer and each from the head of the church, who is Christ. Romans and Ephesians make a positive case for Christian unity among Jews and Gentiles, while Philippians (perhaps, in a broader sense, also Galatians and Colossians) confronts a divisive tendency. The essential vice denounced in 1–2 Corinthians is arrogant grandstanding, which rejects Paul’s “message of the cross” (1 Cor. 1:18) and subdivides the church into cults of personality. Worldly forces are centrifugal, leading us away from one another and into competition for influence, wealth, and public honor. In contrast, the Holy Spirit’s force is centripetal, creating unity where no one would expect it and leading each person to self-sacrifice so that others in the body of Christ might be built up in him.

Fiery Serpent

When the Israelites grumbled in the wilderness, God sent “venomous [lit., “burning”; Heb. serapim] snakes” that bit the people (Num. 21:4–9; cf. KJV: “fiery serpents”). In response to Moses’ prayer on their behalf, God commanded Moses to make a sarap and put it on a pole; the people who looked at it would live. Moses made a bronze serpent. Because the people worshiped the bronze serpent, Hezekiah destroyed it (2 Kings 18:4). Jesus likened the bronze serpent lifted up in the wilderness to the Son of Man being lifted up (John 3:14). From a human perspective, both a serpent and a crucified messiah were unlikely objects of faith.

“Burning snake” appears in Deut. 8:15 (NIV: “venomous snakes”); the burning aspect may refer to the effects of the venom. Isaiah employed the image of a “flying” venomous snake in referring to Ahaz’s successor (Isa. 14:29 KJV; NIV: “darting”). Serapim appeared in Isaiah’s vision of the supernatural winged creatures flying above the throne of God; one brought a burning coal to touch Isaiah’s lips (Isa. 6:2–6). See also Seraphim.

Fire

Human Uses and Metaphors

Fire is a basic necessity for various human activities such as cooking (Exod. 12:8; Isa. 44:15–16, 19; John 21:9), warming (Isa. 44:16; Jer. 36:22; John 18:18), lighting (Isa. 50:11), manufacturing (Exod. 32:24), and refining metals (Num. 31:22–23). Fire is also an important means of maintaining the purity of God’s people, used to punish sinners (the sexually immoral [Lev. 20:14; 21:9; cf. Gen. 38:24] and the disobedient [Josh. 7:25; cf. 2 Kings 23:16]) and to destroy idols (Exod. 32:20; Deut. 7:5, 25; 2 Kings 10:26), chariots (Josh. 11:6, 9), and the cities of Canaan (Josh. 6:24; 8:19; 11:11; Judg. 18:27). As an essential means of worship, fire is used to burn sacrificial animals (Gen. 8:20; Exod. 29:18; Lev. 1:9; 3:3; 9:10, 13–14, 20) and grain offerings (Lev. 2:2, 9; 9:17).

The Mosaic law has several regulations concerning fire. Regarded as work, starting a fire is forbidden on the Sabbath (Exod. 35:3). It is the responsibility of the priests to keep the fire burning on the altar (Lev. 6:9, 12–13). The use of an “unauthorized fire” for sacrifice is forbidden (note Nadab and Abihu’s death [Lev. 10:1–2; cf. Num. 3:4; 26:61; 1 Chron. 24:2]). Also, contrary to the Canaanite religious custom, burning children is forbidden (Deut. 18:10), though the Israelites failed to keep this command and elicited God’s judgment (2 Kings 16:3; 17:17; 21:6; Jer. 7:31; 32:35; note Josiah’s ban in 2 Kings 23:10).

As a metaphor, fire also signifies human anger (Ps. 39:3), wickedness (Isa. 9:18), self-reliance (Isa. 50:11), evil planning (Hos. 7:6–7), lust (Prov. 6:27–28), evil speech or tongue (Prov. 16:27; James 3:5–6), and, paradoxically, kindness to an enemy (Prov. 25:22; Rom. 12:20).

Divine Uses and Metaphors

In the Bible, God is described as the ruler of fire (Ps. 104:4; cf. 1 Kings 18). Positively, God sends fire to signify his acceptance of worship (Lev. 9:24; Judg. 13:19–20; 1 Kings 18:38; 2 Chron. 7:1–3; cf. Luke 9:54). God also purifies his people by fire in order to provide them with abundance (Ps. 66:12), to cleanse them of their sins (Isa. 6:6–7), to refine them into the true remnant (Zech. 13:9), to restore true worship (Mal. 3:2–3), to bring forth genuine faith (1 Cor. 3:13, 15; 1 Pet. 1:7), and to give Christians a true joy of participating in Christ’s suffering (1 Pet. 4:12). God also promises to make his people like a firepot and a flaming torch that will burn the surrounding enemies (Zech. 12:6). Negatively, God uses fire to punish the wicked and disobedient (Gen. 19:24; Exod. 9:23; Num. 11:1; 16:35; 2 Kings 1:10, 12; Isa. 29:6; 34:9–10; 66:24; Ezek. 38:22; 39:6; Rev. 20:9). God is a farmer burning unfruitful trees (John 15:2, 6; cf. Matt. 3:10; 7:19; 13:40) and “thorns and briers” (Isa. 10:17). The eternal fire of hell is the place where God’s final judgment will be executed (Matt. 5:22; 25:41; Mark 9:45–49; Jude 1:7; note the “lake of fire” in Rev. 20:14–15; cf. 14:10; 21:8).

Fire is also a symbol used to image the indescribable God. It symbolizes God’s presence: a smoking firepot with a flaming torch (Gen. 15:17), the burning bush (Exod. 3:2; cf. Elijah’s expectation [1 Kings 19:12]), the pillars of fire and smoke (Exod. 13:21–22; Num. 14:14), the smoke on Mount Sinai and in the tabernacle and the temple (Exod. 19:19; Num. 9:15–16; Deut. 4:11–12; Isa. 6:4). Fire marks God’s protection: the “horses and chariots of fire” (2 Kings 6:17; cf. 2:11), the “wall of fire” (Zech. 2:5). Fire also represents God’s glory: God’s throne (Dan. 7:9; cf. Ezek. 1:4, 13; 10:2, 6–7), God’s form (Ezek. 1:27), the seven spirits of God before the throne (Rev. 4:5). God in his holy wrath is also likened to a burning fire (Pss. 79:5; 89:46; Isa. 5:24; 33:14; Jer. 15:14; Ezek. 21:31; 22:21; Hos. 8:5; note the expression “consuming fire” [Deut. 4:24; Isa. 33:14; Heb. 12:29]) and even to a fiery monster (Ps. 18:8; Isa. 30:33; 65:5; cf. Job 41:19–21). Fire is an important element in the description of the day of the Lord (Joel 2:3; cf. 2 Pet. 3:12). God’s words in the prophet’s mouth are likened to a fire (Jer. 5:14; 20:9; 23:29).

Fire is also used to speak of Jesus. John the Baptist refers to Jesus’ baptism as one with the Holy Spirit and fire (Matt. 3:11). Jesus identifies the purpose of his coming as casting fire on earth (Luke 12:49). The returning Jesus is portrayed as coming in “blazing fire” (2 Thess. 1:7), and the eyes of the glorified Christ are likened to “blazing fire” (Rev. 1:14; 2:18; cf. “flaming torches” in Dan. 10:6). In Acts 2:3 the Holy Spirit is portrayed as the “tongues of fire.”

Gestures

In the Bible, gestures are made with either parts of the body or items, such as clothing and rings, directly connected to the body. For this reason, it makes sense to classify biblical gestures in relation to the different body parts that are identified with the gestures. It is, however, challenging to know where to draw a line on classifying a gesture. For example, a devious person is described in Prov. 6:13 as one “who winks maliciously with his eye, signals with his feet and motions with his fingers.” It is unclear whether this is a single gesture or multiple ones, and whether all signify different things or the same thing.

Head

Gestures that relate to the head range from simple head motions to semiviolent acts such as hair pulling. Simple head motions include lifting of one’s head in honor (Gen. 40:13), bowing one’s head in mourning (Ps. 35:14), tossing one’s head in mockery and derision (2 Kings 19:21), and shaking one’s head as insult (Ps. 22:7; Mark 15:29).

A common action is the shaving of the head, which can be for purification (Lev. 14:8–9; Num. 6:9; 8:7 [includes all body hair]), mourning (Deut. 21:11–13; Job 1:20; Isa. 15:2; Jer. 16:6; 47:5; 48:37; Ezek. 27:31; Amos 8:10; Mic. 1:16), remorse (Jer. 41:5), or shaming (Jer. 2:16). However, priests are forbidden from shaving their heads even in mourning (Lev. 21:5; Ezek. 44:20), while the high priest is to wear a turban on his head during sacrificial duties (Exod. 29:6).

Anointing of the head is done when a priest or king is installed (Exod. 29:7; Ps. 23:5) or simply as a sign of God’s goodness and blessing on a person (Eccles. 9:8). Blessing may also involve placing a hand on the head of the person being blessed (Gen. 48:14–18; Exod. 29:19), while the same gesture on the head of sacrificial animals is a symbolic means of transferring sin (Lev. 3:2, 8, 13; 4:4, 15, 24, 29, 33; 8:18, 22).

In the OT, a woman’s head can be shaved in mourning (Deut. 21:12–13; cf. Jer. 47:5), but in the NT, a shaved head can be a cause for disgrace (1 Cor. 11:5–6).

Face. Facial gestures range from expressions to actions such as touching or covering the face. A face can be downcast in anger (Gen. 4:5–6) or bowed to the ground in honor (Gen. 48:12), in dejection (Josh. 7:6), in humility (Ruth 2:10), in worship (2 Chron. 20:18; Ps. 138:2), in subjection, supplication, reverence (1 Sam. 20:41; 25:41; 28:14; 2 Sam. 14:4, 22; 18:28; 24:20; 1 Kings 1:23; 1 Chron. 21:20), or in dread (e.g., Moses before Yahweh [Exod. 3:6]).

The face can be covered or veiled as an indication of uncleanness (Lev. 13:45), in grief/mourning (2 Sam. 19:4; Ezek. 24:17), in resignation (1 Kings 19:13), with intent to deceive in adultery (Job 24:15), or in horror of judgment (Esther 7:8; Ezek. 12:6, 12). It can also be buried in the dust in remorse (Lam. 3:29).

God can be described as hiding or turning away his face against wickedness and evil (Deut. 31:18; 32:20; Ps. 34:16; Isa. 8:17; Jer. 33:5; Ezek. 7:22; 15:7; 20:46; 21:2) or in an act of withholding blessings (Job 13:15; Pss. 10:1; 13:1; 27:9; 30:7; 34:16; Isa. 54:8; 59:2; 64:7). God can also turn his face toward a place in judgment (Ezek. 4:3, 7; 6:2). In 1 Sam. 5:3–4 the idol of the Philistine god Dagon falls facedown before the ark of the covenant, apparently overpowered by Yahweh.

Acts of humiliation or dishonor can involve spitting in the face (Num. 12:14; Deut. 25:9; Job 17:6; 30:10; Isa. 50:6), slapping the face (1 Kings 22:24; 2 Chron. 18:23; Job 16:10; Lam. 3:30; Mic. 5:1), pulling a skirt up over someone’s face in shaming judgment (Jer. 13:26; Nah. 3:5), and hooking and dragging someone by the nose (2 Kings 19:28). Although being struck on the cheek is humiliating, Jesus instructs his disciples to “turn the other cheek” as a sign of resistance to violence (Matt. 5:39; Luke 6:29).

One can lift one’s face in worship (2 Kings 20:2; Job 22:26; Isa. 38:2) or in confidence (Job 11:15) and can fail to lift it in shame and disgrace (Ezra 9:6). Although the shaving of beards in mourning is common practice (Ezra 9:3; Isa. 15:2; Jer. 41:5; 48:37), the forced shaving of beards is an act of shaming and insulting (2 Sam. 10:4; 1 Chron. 19:4–5; Isa. 7:20; 50:6).

Eyes. Winking the eye is perceived as an evil, deceptive, or malicious act (Ps. 35:19; Prov. 6:13; 16:30). Eyes can be lifted up in worship and expectation (Pss. 121:1; 123:1).

Mouth. Pursed lips can characterize an evil person (Prov. 16:30), while a hand can be clapped over the mouth in awe and submission (Job 21:5; 40:4). Psalm 72:9 looks to the righteous king before whom the desert tribes will bow and whose “enemies lick the dust” in defeat.

Ears. An Israelite slave for life is to have a hole punched through his or her earlobe, held against a doorpost, with an awl (Exod. 21:6; Deut. 15:17). Blood is sprinkled on the lobe of the right ear for purification (Exod. 29:20; Lev. 8:23–24; 14:17), while supplication can be described as asking for the turning of an ear (2 Kings 19:16; Ps. 31:2). Turning one’s ear signifies paying attention or taking something to heart (Ps. 49:4; Prov. 4:20; 5:13).

Neck. The neck can be adorned (Song 1:10) as a sign of pride and honor (Gen. 41:42; Judg. 5:30; Prov. 1:9; Ezek. 16:11) or outstretched in arrogance (Ps. 75:5 TNIV: “Do not lift your horns against heaven; do not speak with outstretched neck”). Jeremiah put a yoke on his neck as a prophetic sign of the approaching Babylonian conquest (Jer. 27–28). While putting someone’s neck in a yoke is an act of triumphal conquest (Ps. 105:18), stepping on the neck of a subdued enemy is an act of subjugation and humiliation (Josh. 10:24).

Body

Nakedness in public is considered shameful (Gen. 9:22–23; Nah. 3:5; Rev. 3:18), so that it is sometimes pictured as part of divine judgment (Deut. 28:48; Isa. 47:2–3; Lam. 1:8; Mic. 1:11) or as a sign of promiscuity (Isa. 57:8; Ezek. 16:36). An unkempt body can be a sign of mourning, as it is for Mephibosheth (2 Sam. 19:24). A certain kind of body covering is a sign of marriage proposal or protection (Ezek. 16:8; 23:18; Hos. 2:9). Body dismembering, even in war, is an act of humiliation (2 Sam. 4:12).

Chest. In self-mortification, one can pound one’s chest in mourning (Ezek. 21:12) or in remorse (Jer. 31:19; Luke 18:13). The breasts of sacrificial animals are waved before God as a “wave offering” before being eaten (Exod. 29:26; Lev. 7:30; Num. 6:20).

Hand, arm. Hand gestures include motions such as lifting hands in worship, clapping hands in joy, and clapping a hand over one’s mouth in awe. The expression “outstretched arm” (Exod. 6:6; Deut. 4:34; 5:15; 7:19; 9:29; 11:2; 26:8; 1 Kings 8:42; 2 Kings 17:36; 2 Chron. 6:32; Ps. 136:12; Jer. 21:5; 27:5; 32:17, 21; Ezek. 20:33–34) indicates power, might, strength. It is often used of God to indicate his ability to defeat powerful armies and enemies. God is implored by the psalmist to lift his hand and act for the sake of the righteous (Ps. 10:12).

Since the right hand is the hand of power, the act of sitting at the right hand indicates being favored (1 Kings 2:19; Ps. 110:1; Matt. 22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:43; Acts 2:35; Heb. 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; 1 Pet. 3:22). When taking an oath, one places a hand under the thigh/crotch (Gen. 24:2; 47:29), most likely the right hand (see Gen. 48:14, 17–18; Lev. 8:23; 14:14).

Clapping the hands can be a sign of awe (Ezek. 6:11), malice, or remorse (25:6), while a bared arm can be a sign of judgment (4:7). Job claps his hand over his mouth in awe of God and in submission and repentance (Job 40:4–5).

Hands can be lifted in worship (1 Kings 8:22; 1 Tim. 2:8), to beseech (Ps. 28:2), to protect and bless (Ps. 10:12), in an oath (Deut. 32:40), or to harm (Exod. 24:11; 1 Sam. 24:6, 10; 2 Sam.1:14; 18:12).

Pilate washes his hands to proclaim his innocence over the death of Jesus (Matt. 27:24), while 1 Pet. 5:6 urges believers to humble themselves “under God’s mighty hand,” so that in due time they will be lifted up.

Buttocks. Exposure of the buttocks can serve as a humiliating insult and provocation, as happens to David’s men (2 Sam. 10:4; 1 Chron. 19:4) and Egyptian and Cushite captives (Isa. 20:4).

Leg. The leg or thigh is often a euphemism for the male reproductive organs, so that putting one’s hand under a thigh in oath (Gen. 24:2; 47:29) may involve actually grabbing the genitalia. Animal thighs are waved to God in offering before being consumed (Lev. 9:21; 10:14; Num. 6:20), while oaths administered to uncover adultery cause a guilty woman’s thighs to waste (Num. 5:2–27).

The most common gesture involving the knee is bowing, in worship or reverence (Deut. 33:3; Isa. 45:23; Rom. 11:4; 14:11; Phil. 2:10), in defeat (2 Sam. 22:40; Ps. 18:38; Isa. 60:14), in distress (Ps. 57:6), or in respect (1 Kings 1:31). In what seems to be a somewhat awkward position, Elijah puts his face between his knees in prayer (1 Kings 18:42).

Feet. Gestures involving the feet are probably the most common gestures in the Bible. Feet can be washed in hospitality (Gen. 18:4; 19:2; 24:32; 43:24; 1 Sam. 25:41), in ablution (Exod. 30:19, 21; 40:31), or in supplication (1 Sam. 25:41). Feet can be bathed in oil as a blessing (Deut. 33:24), uncovered in marriage proposals (Ezek. 16:8; cf. Ruth 3:4, 7), and stamped in remorse (Ezek. 25:6), and sandals can be removed from them in honor (Exod. 3:1–10) or disgrace (Deut. 25:9). The heavenly seraphs cover their feet in supplication before the throne of God (Isa. 6:2), while the feet of humans can signal deception (Prov. 6:13).

Enemies can be placed under one’s feet in subjugation (1 Kings 5:3; Pss. 8:6; 18:39; 45:5; 47:3; 110:1; Mal. 4:3; Rom. 16:20), have their feet shackled or ensnared (Job 13:27; 33:11; Pss. 25:15; 105:18), and be forced to lick the feet of victors in humiliation and defeat (Isa. 49:23). The righteous will bathe their feet in the blood of their enemies in revenge (Pss. 58:10; 68:23).

Those overwhelmed can grovel at the feet of the powerful (2 Kings 4:27, 37; Esther 8:3; Matt. 28:9; Mark 5:33; 7:25; Acts 10:25), while those emboldened can rise to their feet in confidence (Ezek. 2:1–2; 3:24; Dan. 8:18).

In the NT, dust can be shaken off one’s feet as an indication of divine judgment (Matt. 10:14; Mark 6:11; Luke 9:5), even as lying at a person’s feet is a recognition of authority/submission (Matt. 15:30; Mark 5:33; Luke 8:28, 35, 41, 47; 10:39; 17:16; Acts 4:37; 5:2). A woman publicly washes Jesus’ feet with her tears, wipes them with her hair, and kisses and perfumes them in what seems an act of love and repentance; but Jesus indicates that she has prepared his body for burial (Luke 7:38–46; John 11:2; 12:3). Jesus washes his disciples’ feet as instruction on servanthood and discipleship (John 13:5–14).

Fingers, Toes. Different fingers seem to have different roles assigned them. A finger sprinkles blood in cleansing (Lev. 4:6, 17, 25, 30, 34; 8:15; 9:9; 14:16; 16:14, 19; Num. 19:4), while blood on the tip of the right thumb and on the right big toe is for cleansing (Exod. 29:20; Lev. 8:23–24; 14:17, 25, 28).

One wears a signet ring as a sign of power (Esther 3:10) or a gesture of restoration and forgiveness (Luke 15:22). But fingers can also motion in deception (Prov. 6:13) or point in blame (Isa. 58:9). Jesus writes with his finger on the ground, apparently as a gesture of indifference to those pointing accusing fingers (John 8:6).

Clothes and Shoes

Garments. Garments attain significance as they are related to specific emotions. Wearing sackcloth and ashes in mourning is common (Gen. 37:34; Ezek. 7:18; 2 Sam. 3:31), while ripping garments in mourning is also frequently attested (Gen. 37:34; 44:13; Lev. 10:6; 21:10; Josh. 7:6; 2 Sam. 1:11; 3:31; 13:31; 1 Kings 21:27; 2 Kings 2:12; 19:1; Esther 4:1; Isa. 32:11; 37:1; Jer. 41:5).

Ripping someone’s clothing to expose nakedness (Ezek. 16:39; 2 Sam. 10:4) or pulling a person’s skirts up over the face (Jer. 13:26) is an act of shaming or insulting. But tearing one’s clothes off can be a sign of fury (Matt. 26:65). Persons with defiling diseases are expected to warn off others by wearing torn clothes and shouting, “Unclean! Unclean!” (Lev. 13:45).

By laying their clothes at Saul’s feet, the crowd may be acknowledging his authority in the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58).

Sandals. A woman can remove a man’s sandal in contempt (Deut. 25:5–10), while a sandal can be removed by a kinsman-redeemer to indicate giving up a right or as a transfer of property (Ruth 4:7–8). A sandal can also be removed in mourning (Ezek. 24:17) or be cast over a piece of land to claim ownership (Pss. 60:8; 108:9).

Prophetic Gestures

Prophetic gestures in the OT are mostly concerned with the call to repentance and approaching judgments upon failure to heed the warning. Jeremiah puts a yoke on his neck (Jer. 27–28; cf. Deut. 28:48), Ezekiel cooks with dung (Ezek. 4:12) and sleeps on his left side for 390 days and then on his right side for 40 days (4:5–6), Isaiah strips off his clothing (Isa. 20:2–3; 32:11), and Hosea marries an unfaithful wife (Hos. 1:1–3).

In the NT, Jesus cleanses the temple as an act of symbolic judgment (Matt. 21:12; Mark 11:15; John 2:15). He also breaks bread and drinks wine (Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19; 24:30, 35; Acts 2:46; 20:11; 27:35; 1 Cor. 11:24–25) and washes his disciples’ feet (John 13:1–13), thereby establishing symbolic Christian practices.

Incense

A compound of aromatic spices closely related to the daily life of Israel. It became synonymous with “frankincense” at a later time. Aromatic spices were used in Israel for cosmetics (Prov. 7:17; Song 5:5) and for medical (Jer. 8:22; 46:11; 51:8) purposes but occupied a special place in Israelite worship when used as incense. Incense was professionally compounded (Exod. 30:34–35) and was offered on the golden altar by the high priest twice a day (Exod. 30:7–8; cf. Luke 1:8–11) and on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:12–13; cf. 10:1–2). As the incense burned, its sweet fragrance filled the sanctuary, forming an atmospheric curtain to protect the sanctuary and to characterize it as God’s private domain (Isa. 6:4). Prayers offered with the smoke of the incense guaranteed acceptance by God (Deut. 33:10; cf. Gen. 8:21; Exod. 29:18; Ezek. 20:41). In Ps. 141:2, prayers are said to ascend to God like incense, providing a background to the book of Revelation, where incense represents the prayers of the saints (Rev. 5:8; 8:3–4).

Isaiah

An eighth-century BC prophet who prophesied during the period just before and after the fall of the northern kingdom of Israel to the Assyrians in 722 BC. Isaiah lived in Judah, specifically in Jerusalem.

Isaiah began his prophetic work in the year that King Uzziah died, approximately 733 BC (Isa. 6:1). His ministry continued through the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. The latter began his rule in 727 BC and ended in 698 BC, but since Isaiah was with him during the Assyrian incursion of 701 BC (see below), the prophet was active until late in his reign. He may have lived into the reign of Hezekiah’s wicked son Manasseh. Tradition states that he died as a martyr, being sawn in half.

Isaiah was married to a prophetess and had at least two sons (Isa. 7:3; 8:3). His sons had names with symbolic import. The first was “Shear-Jashub,” meaning “a remnant will return”; the second was “Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz,” meaning “quick to the plunder, swift to the spoil.”

Apart from such glimpses, readers do not learn as much about Isaiah the person as they do about Jeremiah or even Ezekiel. But his prophecies are clearly connected to the big events of his day. Many of his prophecies have the Syro-Ephraimite war as their background. The king of Syria, Rezin, and the king of Israel, Pekah, tried to enlist the help of the king of Judah, Ahaz, against the encroachment of the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser III in the middle of the eighth century BC. Ahaz refused, and Isaiah supported that decision. However, Ahaz did not really trust God in this matter, for against the wishes of Isaiah he wrote to Tiglath-pileser asking for help against Rezin and Pekah, since they had decided to try to replace him with a more amenable person. As a result of his appeal, Tiglath-pileser took Syria, and his successors eventually took the northern kingdom in 722 BC. Ahaz and the kings of Judah who followed him were forced to become vassals.

In 701 BC the current Assyrian king, Sennacherib, moved militarily against Judah to incorporate it into his empire. Isaiah again was at the side of the Judean king, now Hezekiah, encouraging him to depend on God and not submit. In contrast to Ahaz, Hezekiah did not submit, and God delivered him from the Assyrians.

These events are the background and the situations into which Isaiah spoke, but his prophetic vision extended far beyond his lifetime. He saw not only the future defeat of Judah and Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians but also their restoration (see esp. Isa. 40–66). The NT cites Isaiah more frequently than any other OT book, finding the ultimate fulfillment of many of his oracles in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Judgment Day

Judgment Day in the Bible

The book of Revelation concludes with a harrowing vision of final judgment. On that day, when the God of all creation sits on his great white throne and holds court, the dead will rise and answer for their deeds, whether good or bad (20:11–13). The record of each person’s conduct appears in books, one of which is the Book of Life (20:12–13). Anyone whose name does not appear in the Book of Life is thrown into the lake of fire (20:15).

The apostle Paul refers to this same event in Acts 17:30–31. All human beings will face their scheduled day in court, as God certified by raising Christ from the dead. It will be a day of wrath, among other things, when God’s righteous anger against sin is fully displayed (Rom. 2:5). In the presence of this God, Isaiah proclaimed himself to be ruined because of his sinfulness before the one who is called “Holy, holy, holy” (Isa. 6:1–5). We therefore confess with the author of Hebrews, who says, “It is [and will be] a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb. 10:31).

Many other texts of Scripture forecast the same event: judgment day is coming, and nothing can stop it. They also describe this day in equally frightening terms, anticipating fire, darkness, and weeping for some, but everlasting joy and peace for others. Even Christians will be judged on this day, notwithstanding the promise of everlasting life for everyone who believes (e.g., John 3:16; 5:24; Rom. 3:21–24; 8:1–2; 2 Cor. 5:21). In Rom. 14:10–12 Paul says, “For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat,” at which time, “each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.” Similarly, in 2 Cor. 5:10 Paul warns, “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.”

Justification and Judgment

In these texts, an apparent tension exists between the promise of justification, upon which all Christian hope stands, and the certainty of final judgment, including the judgment of believers. It will not do simply to downplay the one or the other, as if the biblical writers had not really intended one or both of them. These texts say what they say, the good news no less plainly than the bad. Yet, closer inspection shows that the tension is merely apparent.

We must first recognize that Scripture treats piety as the evidence of regeneration and saving faith. Jesus says that a “good tree,” which is a genuine disciple, bears good fruit (Matt. 7:17). That is, the observable righteousness of such a disciple will surpass the hypocritical casuistry of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 5:20). On judgment day, therefore, no actual conflict will or ever could arise between the general tendency of the believer’s conduct and his or her position in Christ. Over a lifetime, the believer’s habitual behavior will have differed fundamentally, though never satisfactorily, from that of a lost person. As for unrepentant sinners, they will be sentenced to eternal damnation because of their lawlessness (Rom. 3:9–19). Their conduct demonstrates that they have rejected the gospel and are deserving of wrath (Heb. 2:3). This linkage between justification and right conduct accounts for James’s polemical statement: “You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone” (James 2:24). Abraham’s positional righteousness, secured by faith in what God would do on his behalf, became publicly evident through his obedience (James 2:21–22).

We should also note the different purpose that God has in judging his church. One aspect of it certainly is to grasp the enormity of our sins, so that we might properly acknowledge the depth of his mercy on that day. But also this judgment will occur in order to mete out the differing rewards that Scripture anticipates for the people of God. The definitive text in this regard is 1 Cor. 3:1–17, which connects the believer’s rewards and losses to the quality of his or her behavior within the body of Christ. Some are building on Christ, the sure foundation, using the available materials, and they receive their proper reward. Others build selfishly on themselves, with the result that they are saved, “though only as one escaping through the flames” (1 Cor. 3:15). In both cases, however, the question seems to be one of greater and lesser reward, as opposed to salvation or damnation. Even in hell itself, various degrees of suffering come into play. According to Jesus, one can receive a heavy or light “beating” for disobedience, based on one’s prior knowledge of the master’s will (Luke 12:47–48). Judgment day, therefore, should not frighten Christians. Jesus really did suffer the full measure of God’s wrath against our sin. But this day reminds us that we are accountable for what we do as his disciples, and it motivates the evangelism that we are commanded to practice.

Kingdom of God

The kingdom of God is a major theme in the Bible. While the theme is most fully developed in the NT, its origin is the OT, where the emphasis falls on God’s king-ship. God is king of Israel (Exod. 15:18; Num. 23:21; Deut. 33:5; Isa. 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kings 19:15; Pss. 29:10; 99:1–4; Isa. 6:5; Jer. 46:18). Juxtaposed to the concept of God’s present reign as king are references to a day when God will become king over his people (Isa. 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Zeph. 3:15; Zech. 14:9). This emphasis on God’s kingship continues throughout Judaism and takes on special significance in Jewish apocalypticism and its anticipation of the kingdom of God in the age to come, which abandoned any hope for present history. Only at the end of the age will the kingdom of God come. This idea of God’s kingdom is further developed throughout the NT.

The Synoptic Gospels

In the Synoptic Gospels the phrase “the kingdom of God” occurs over one hundred times in Mark, Luke, and Matthew (where “kingdom of heaven” is a synonym for “kingdom of God”). Three views have been defended regarding whether and to what extent the kingdom of God was present in Jesus’ ministry. In other words, how are we to interpret the phrase “kingdom of God” in the Synoptics? The three views are consistent eschatology, realized eschatology, and inaugurated eschatology.

Consistent eschatology. Albert Schweitzer, a biblical scholar from the late nineteenth century, first popularized consistent eschatology. Here, “consistent” means consistent with the apocalyptic Judaism of Jesus’ day, which interpreted the kingdom of God as something coming in the future. Judaism at the time of Christ divided history into two periods: this age of sin, when sin rules, and the age to come, when the Messiah is expected to bring the kingdom of God to earth. Schweitzer concluded that an apocalyptic understanding of the kingdom was foundational not only for Christ’s teaching, but also to understanding his life. Thus, Schweitzer maintained that Jesus believed that it was his vocation to become the coming Son of Man. Initially, Jesus revealed this messianic secret only to Peter, James, and John. Later, Peter told it to the rest of the Twelve. Judas told the secret to the high priest, who used it as the grounds for Jesus’ execution (Mark 14:61–64; cf. Dan. 7:13).

According to Schweitzer, when Jesus sent out the Twelve on a mission to proclaim the coming kingdom of God, he did not expect them to return. The Twelve were the “men of violence” (cf. Matt. 11:12) who would provoke the messianic tribulation that would herald the kingdom. Whereas some earlier scholars believed that one could only wait passively for the kingdom, Schweitzer believed that the mission of Jesus was designed to provoke its coming. When this did not happen, Jesus determined to give his own life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45) and so cause the kingdom to come.

According to Schweitzer, Jesus took matters into his own hands by precipitating his death, hoping that this would be the catalyst for God to make the wheel of history turn to its climax—the arrival of the kingdom of God. But, said Schweitzer, Jesus was wrong again, and he died in despair. So for Schweitzer, Jesus never witnessed the dawning of the age to come; it lay in the distant future, separated from this present age.

On the positive side, Schweitzer called attention to the fact that the message of Jesus is rooted in first-century apocalyptic Judaism and its concept of the kingdom of God. This connection is still foundational to a proper understanding of biblical prophecy and the Gospels today. On the negative side, Schweitzer’s selective use of evidence and rejection of the historicity of much of the Gospel tradition resulted in a skewed perspective on the present dimensions of Jesus’ eschatology.

Realized eschatology. In contrast to futurist eschatology, where the kingdom of God awaits a final consummation at the end of history, realized eschatology views the kingdom of God as already realized in the person and mission of Jesus. The futurist aspects of Jesus’ teaching are reduced to a minimum, and his apocalyptic language is viewed as symbolic of theological truths.

The person most responsible for advocating this position is British scholar C. H. Dodd. In his 1935 book Parables of the Kingdom, he focused on Jesus’ teachings that announced the arrival of the kingdom with his coming. For instance, in Luke 11:20 Jesus says, “But if I drive out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you” (cf. Luke 17:21; Matt. 13). Eschatology becomes a matter of the present experience rather than any kind of future event. The kingdom has fully come in the messianic ministry of Jesus.

Most interpreters have criticized Dodd’s realized eschatology for ignoring Jesus’ teachings that point to a future consummation of the kingdom (e.g., Matt. 24–25; Mark 13). When all of Jesus’ teachings are considered, futurist eschatology balances realized eschatology. To be sure, the kingdom arrived with Jesus, but Jesus himself taught that history still awaits a final completion. The kingdom of God is both “already” and “not yet,” which leads us to the third view of the relationship of the kingdom of God to the ministry of Jesus Christ.

Inaugurated eschatology. The third view, inaugurated eschatology, is commonly connected with the twentieth-century Swiss theologian Oscar Cullmann. Like others before him, Cullmann understood that the Jewish notion of the two ages formed an important background for understanding the message of Jesus. According to Judaism, history is divided into two periods: this age of sin and the age to come (i.e., the kingdom of God). For Jews the advent of the Messiah would effect the shift from the former to the latter. In other words, Judaism viewed the two ages as consecutive. According to Cullmann, Jesus Christ announced that the end of time, the kingdom of God, had arrived within history (see Mark 1:15 pars.; esp. Luke 4:43; 6:20; 7:28; 8:1, 10; 9:2, 11, 27, 60, 62; 10:9, 11; 11:20; 13:18, 20; 16:16; 17:20–21; 18:16–17, 24–25, 29; Acts 28:31). Yet other passages suggest that although the age to come had already dawned, it was not yet complete. It awaited the second coming for its full realization (Luke 13:28–29; 14:15; 19:11; 21:31; 22:16, 18; 23:51; Acts 1:6). Hence the adjective “inaugurated” characterizes this eschatology. Such a view is pervasive in the NT (see, e.g., Acts 2:17–21; 3:18, 24; 1 Cor. 15:24; 1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 3:1; Heb. 1:2; 1 John 2:18). So for inaugurated eschatology, the two ages are simultaneous: the age to come exists in the midst of this present age. Christians therefore live in between the two ages until the parousia (second coming of Christ).

We may break down the data in the Synoptic Gospels regarding the “already/not yet” aspects concerning the kingdom of God in this manner: Mark, probably the first Gospel written, records Jesus’ programmatic statement in 1:15: “The time has come. . . . The kingdom of God has come near.” Mark, along with Luke and Matthew, then goes on to demonstrate that Jesus’ miracles, teachings, death, and resurrection inaugurated the kingdom of God. Yet it is also clear from Matthew, Mark, and Luke that the final manifestation of the kingdom has not yet happened. We may draw on Luke as representative of all three Synoptics. Luke’s Gospel indicates that the kingdom was present for Jesus (Luke 7:28; 8:10; 10:9–11; 11:20; 16:16; 17:20–21), but it also awaited the second coming for its completion (6:20–26; 11:2; 12:49–50, 51–53; 13:24–30; 21:25–29; 22:15–18, 30). The same dual aspect of the kingdom pertains to Luke’s second volume, Acts. The kingdom was present in Jesus’ ministry and now through his disciples (Acts 1:3; 8:12; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23–31), but it will not be completed until Christ comes again (1:6; 14:22).

The Gospel of John

John’s Gospel has only three references to the kingdom of God. Nicodemus was told by Jesus that he needed to be born again to enter the kingdom of God (3:3–5). Yet Jesus’ kingdom is not worldly in nature, but spiritual (18:36). Although the Gospel of John contains both the present (“already”) aspect and the future (“not yet”) aspect, the focus is clearly on the present. This is why many scholars label the Fourth Gospel the “Gospel of Realized Eschatology.” This emphasis on the “already” can be seen in John in the following ways: (1) Eternal life, or entrance into the kingdom of God, can be a present possession (3:5–6, 36; 6:47, 51, 58; 8:51; 10:28; 11:24–26). (2) The eschatological promise of sonship is granted to the believer in Jesus now (1:12–13; 3:3–8; 4:14). (3) The general resurrection has already begun (5:25). (4) The Spirit, the gift of the end time, currently indwells believers (7:37–39; 14:15–31; 15:26–27; 16:5–16; 20:22–23). (5) Final judgment is determined by one’s present response to Jesus (3:19; 5:22–24, 27, 30–38; 9:38; 12:31–33). (6) The spirit of antichrist has already entered the world scene to oppose Christ (6:70; 13:2, 27). (7) Jesus’ death on the cross seems to absorb some elements of the messianic woes or aspects of tribulation. In other words, Jesus’ passion was where the end-time holy war was waged, and his death and resurrection began the end of the forces of evil (15:18–16:11).

On the other hand, the Gospel of John also includes some typical future (“not yet”) aspects of eschatology. For example, the future resurrection is still expected (5:26–30). Likewise, the future second coming of Christ is alluded to (14:1–4; 21:22). Admittedly, however, the “already” aspect of the kingdom of God seems to overshadow the “not yet” perspective in the Fourth Gospel.

Pauline Literature

The phrase “kingdom of God” and/or “kingdom of Christ” occurs twelve times in Paul’s writings.

Rom. 14:17 – kingdom of God (present tense)

1 Cor. 4:20 – kingdom of God (present tense)

1 Cor. 6:9-10 – kingdom of God (2x) (future tense)

1 Cor. 15:24 – kingdom of Christ/God (present/future tense)

1 Cor. 15:50 – kingdom of God (future tense)

Gal. 5:21 – kingdom of God (future tense)

Eph. 5:5 – kingdom of Christ/God (future tense)

Col. 1:13 – kingdom of the Son (present tense)

Col. 4:11 – kingdom of God (present tense)

1 Thess. 2:12 – his [God’s] kingdom (future tense)

2 Thess. 1:5 – kingdom of God (future tense)

Three observations emerge from the chart: (1) The kingdom of Christ/God is both present and future, already here and not yet complete. This is consistent with the Gospels and Acts. (2) Christ and God are, in at least two instances, interchanged, suggesting equality of status between them (cf. Eph. 5:5; Rev. 11:15; 12:10). (3) In 1 Cor. 15:24 we find the most precise description of the exact relationship between the kingdoms of Christ and God: the interim messianic kingdom begun at the resurrection of Christ will one day give way to the eternal kingdom of God. Such a temporary kingdom is attested to in apocalyptic Judaism and may underlie Rev. 20:1–6.

Christians therefore live in between the two ages, in the messianic kingdom.

Hebrews and the General Epistles

Hebrews and the General Epistles continue the theme of the “already/not yet” aspects of the kingdom.

Hebrews. The following ideas associated in Second Temple Judaism with the arrival of God’s kingdom are seen by the author of Hebrews to have been fulfilled at the first coming of Christ: (1) the appearance of the Messiah of the last days indicates the dawning of the kingdom of God (1:2; 9:9–10); (2) the great tribulation/messianic woes that were expected to occur in connection with the advent of the Messiah are now here (2:5–18; cf. 5:8–9; 7:27–28; 10:12; 12:2); (3) the outpouring of the Holy Spirit has happened (6:4–5); (4) the manifestation of the eschatological high priest at the end of history has taken place in Jesus (7:26–28), who has also established the new covenant of the last days (8:6–13). Compare the preceding statements in Hebrews with that author’s explicit mention of the presence of the kingdom of God in 12:18–28. And yet the kingdom of God is not yet fully here. The church continues to suffer the messianic woes, as is evidenced in the intermingling of Jesus’ suffering of the great tribulation with the present afflictions of the Christian (2:5–18; 3:7–4:6; 5:7–6:12; 10:19–39; 12:1–2; 13:11–16). Furthermore, the exhortations to persevere in the faith that punctuate the book of Hebrews (2:1–4; 3:7–4:13; 5:11–6:12; 10:19–39; 12:14–29) are a familiar theme in Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature.

The General Epistles. The main message of James is that the last days are here (1:2; 5:3) and with it the messianic woes (1:2–12; 5:1–12). Therefore, believers will need to faithfully endure the great tribulation until the second coming of Christ. But there are two indications that James also teaches that the kingdom of God has dawned in the midst of the great tribulation. First, Christians experience even now the eschatological quality of joy (James 1:2–3; cf. Joel 2:21–27). Second, Christians also share in the end-time gift of wisdom (James 1:5–8).

First Peter is similar to James with regard to its inaugurated eschatology. Thus, the church suffers the messianic woes/great tribulation (1 Pet. 1:6, 11; 3:13–17; 4:12–19; 5:1–9). Nevertheless, the age to come/kingdom of God has broken into the midst of this age, as evidenced by the eschatological joy and God’s protective power that it brings (1:5–6).

Second Peter does seem to stress the “not yet” aspect of the kingdom of God. Thus, the kingdom of God still waits to be entered (1:11), is hindered by end-time apostasy (2 Pet. 2), and has been postponed (3:1–10). Yet the “already” aspect of the kingdom is not entirely absent. This is evidenced by the fact that the transfiguration of Christ on the mountain was a display of the coming power and glory of the age to come, a glory revealed to the disciples on the mountain and now communicated to all believers (1:16–19).

Jude is devoted to alerting Christians to the reality that they are in the midst of the end-time holy war (vv. 3, 20–23), as can be seen by their struggle with the false teaching of end-time apostasy (vv. 5–19). Nevertheless, because believers possess the eschatological gift of the Holy Spirit, they will prevail to fully enter the kingdom of God (v. 20).

The Letters of John attest to the overlapping of the two ages—that is, inaugurated eschatology. Thus, on the one hand, the spirit of antichrist is here (1 John 2:18; 2 John 7), along with the false teaching that it breeds (1 John 2:20–29; cf. 2–3 John); but on the other hand, the Johannine community has the end-time anointing of the Holy Spirit, which preserves believers from evil and deception (1 John 2:20–21; 3:1–10). Moreover, Christians presently have eternal life through Christ, one of the blessings of the kingdom of God (1 John 5:11–13).

Revelation

The “already/not yet” aspects of the kingdom of God are manifested in Revelation in the following way: the kingdom of God has already dawned in heaven, but it has not yet appeared on earth. Regarding the former, it is clear from 1:9; 5:1–14; 12:1–6 that Jesus’ death and resurrection inaugurated the advent of the kingdom of God in heaven. Thus, Jesus obediently underwent the messianic woes on the cross and was then raised to heavenly glory, triumphant over the great tribulation. There in heaven, Christ reigns as the invisible Lord over all (including Caesar). But that the kingdom of God has not yet descended to earth is clear in Revelation from two present realities. First, even though Jesus has endured the great tribulation/messianic woes, his followers continue to face many trials (chaps. 6–18). There is no deliverance for them from such affliction until the return of Christ in glory (chap. 19). The only possible exception to this is the divine protection of the 144,000 (chaps. 7; 14). Second, the kingdom of God has not appeared on earth; that event awaits the parousia (chap. 20 [assuming that the premillennial interpretation of that chapter is the most viable reading]). In all of this, it seems that the messianic woes/great tribulation are the divine means for purging the earth in preparation for the future arrival of the temporal, messianic kingdom (chap. 20). After Christ’s one-thousand-year reign on earth, this temporal messianic kingdom will give way to the eternal kingdom of God and its new earth and new heaven (chaps. 21–22). It must be acknowledged, however, that interpretations of chapters 20–22 greatly vary, depending on whether one takes a premillennial, amillennial, or postmillennial perspective.

Conclusion

The preceding data thus seem to confirm that the most apt description of the relationship between the two ages and the kingdom of God that informs the NT is inaugurated eschatology: with the first coming of Christ, the kingdom of God/the age to come dawned, but it will not be until the second coming of Christ that the age to come/kingdom of God will be complete. The church therefore lives in between the times. That is to say, the age to come has broken into this present age, and it is only through the eye of faith that one can now perceive the presence of the kingdom of God.

Last Judgment

Judgment Day in the Bible

Justification and Judgment

Micaiah

(1) The son of Imlah, he was a faithful prophet who contradicted the false prophets and predicted King Ahab’s death, for which he was imprisoned (1 Kings 22; 2 Chron. 18). His commissioning and vision of God’s throne room are similar to Isa. 6. (2) The father of Akbor (Abdon), who was one of those sent to Huldah by King Josiah to inquire about the Book of the Law (2 Kings 22:12). He is also called “Micah” (2 Chron. 34:20). (3) The mother of King Abijah of Judah (2 Chron. 13:2 NIV mg.), she is also called “Maakah” (1 Kings 15:2; 2 Chron. 11:20). (4) One of five officials sent by King Jehoshaphat to teach in the towns of Judah (2 Chron. 17:7). (5) An ancestor of the Asaphite musician Zechariah, who participated in the dedication of the Jerusalem wall (Neh. 12:35). (6) One of the priests who blew trumpets at the dedication of the Jerusalem wall (Neh. 12:41). (7) The son of Gemariah and grandson of Shaphan, he was an official of King Jehoiakim who reported Baruch’s reading of Jeremiah’s oracles to other officials of the king (Jer. 36:11–13).

Michaiah

Names for God

Yahweh: The Lord

Elohim

Adonai

Names of God

Yahweh: The Lord

Elohim

Adonai

Personality

The study of human beings, their nature and origins. The Christian understanding of anthropology stems from a biblical view of humankind’s relationship to God.

The Origin of Humankind

The Nature of Humankind

Propecy

The Phenomenon of Prophecy

A prophet is a messenger of God, a person to whom God entrusts his message to an individual or to a nation. Indeed, the last book in the OT is named “Malachi,” which means “my messenger.” Isaiah heard God ask, “Whom shall I send?” and he cried out, “Send me!” (Isa. 6:8). A good template for understanding the phenomenon is Moses and Aaron. Moses was to tell Aaron what to say, and Aaron would say it. “Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet’ ” (Exod. 7:1).

Prophets such as Isaiah were privy to what transpires in heaven, where decisions were being made that control the course of human history. Micaiah describes how he has seen God in the company of the heavenly host deliberating on how to entice Ahab to his death (1 Kings 22:13–23). All the other “prophets” in Ahab’s court were false, since they did not have knowledge of the events beyond human ken, as only true prophets can. Only one who has encountered God in this way can speak as an agent of the heavenly court.

For every true prophet in Israel, there were many false prophets. Moses set guidelines for distinguishing them. True prophets prophesy in accordance with revealed religion. If a prophet contradicts the law, for example, and calls Israel to worship another god, this is not a true prophet (Deut. 18:20). Also, if a prophet predicts something that does not come to pass, that is also a false prophet (Deut. 18:21–22). These criteria are not mechanical and automatic, however. Sometimes a prophet may appear to contradict prior revelation (Jer. 26:11), and sometimes the predicted judgment is staved off by national repentance (Jon. 4). Also, sometimes God may test the people with a false prophet who makes a true prediction (Deut. 13:1–3).

True prophets occasionally exhibited bizarre behavior. Saul, while pursuing David, was suddenly possessed by the Spirit of God and lay naked day and night, prophesying. This caused the people to ask if Saul was now one of the prophets (1 Sam. 19:24). Even in the ancient world, prophets were considered a bit crazy (2 Kings 9:11; Jer. 23:9; 29:26; Hos. 9:7). The phenomenon he experienced is referred to as “ecstasy.” The practice of tongues in the NT church also seems to have been ecstatic behavior. Paul notes that observers would call practitioners “out of your mind” (1 Cor. 14:23). At Pentecost, some observers thought that the apostles were drunk. Peter replied that they were not drunk but rather had the Spirit upon them (Acts 2:15–21).

The word “prophet” refers to one who foretells the future. Of course, many people cannot accept the notion of real prophecy and thus regard all prophecy as an illusion. Either the text was written after the fact, or it was couched in such general terms that it is no miracle that it came true, or else it was a lucky guess. The text itself, however, wants to be read as real prophecy, and Christians before the modern age read it as such. After all, to reject the supernatural elements in the Bible ultimately leads to rejecting the resurrection of Christ.

However, the modern Christian should not focus on the predictive part of the prophets’ message to such an extent that the “forthtelling” element is neglected. Forthtelling is the prophets’ chief ministry—calling the people to mercy and justice, to obedience to the law and fidelity to God. Christians who believe the Bible should take seriously the predictions about the future, but even more so the challenges about the present.

The Books of Prophecy in the Old Testament

The OT of Catholic and Protestant Bibles is roughly organized around the Greek translation of the OT, the Septuagint. Thus, Daniel is considered a prophetic book, and the prophets are separated from the historical books by the poetical books. However, the Hebrew Bible has a different organization. It has only eight “books” of prophecy, divided into the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets. The Former Prophets are Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings. Traditionally, Samuel wrote Judges. The books of 1 Samuel and 2 Samuel form one scroll, as do 1 Kings and 2 Kings. The book of Samuel bears the name of the prophet, and Kings is substantially about Elijah and Elisha. The four Former Prophets witness to the outworking of the covenant sanctions, from the Israelites’ entry into the promised land to their expulsion from it.

Usually, when Christians speak of the prophets, they are referring to the Latter Prophets, plus Daniel. In Catholic and Protestant Bibles there are four Major Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; and twelve Minor Prophets: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. Many other prophets ministered in Israel but have no scroll that bears their name. Thus, the ones listed above can be called the “writing prophets.”

Isaiah. The book of Isaiah preserves the sermons from the prophet who ministered during the time when Hezekiah was king of Judah, the southern kingdom. Isaiah saw Jerusalem surrounded by the Assyrian army and assured the king that God would deliver his people. That message of salvation is the overall theme of the book, a salvation universal in scope and focused on the figure of the Suffering Servant. Isaiah claims that this servant of God would be wounded and “cut off from the land of the living” (Isa. 53:8) and through this would bring healing and salvation to his people. He would see this and make many righteous (Isa. 53).

The NT refers to Isaiah more often than any other prophet, always to demonstrate that the truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ were revealed in advance by the prophet. For example, Paul cites Isa. 1:9 in his argument as to why the Jews had rejected the gospel (Rom. 9:29). When Jesus withdrew to the area of Zebulun and Naphtali, Matthew says that this act fulfilled Isa. 9:1–2 (Matt. 4:15–16). Jesus himself cites Isa. 53:12, “[he] was numbered with the transgressors,” and claims that it was written about him (Luke 22:37). He does the same with Isa. 61:1–2 (Luke 4:18–21).

Jeremiah. The book of Jeremiah puts in writing the words of the prophet Jeremiah, who ministered at the very end of the kingdom of Judah and lived through the destruction of Jerusalem, with its temple and the people of God being taken away to forced exile and captivity. He sees the weakness and powerlessness of the covenant that God had made with his people to stir up love and fidelity in their hearts to him. According to Jeremiah, what the people chiefly need is a new covenant altogether, one that is not external and written on tablets of stone, but internal, written on their hearts. They need a change of personality to become a different sort of people altogether. This is what Jeremiah predicts will happen in the coming age after their time of captivity is over (Jer. 31:31–40). The NT identifies this new covenant with the gospel of Jesus (Heb. 8:8–12), secured by his blood (Heb. 10:16–17). This is the new covenant that Jesus announces to his disciples when he eats the Last Supper with them (Luke 22:20).

Ezekiel. The book of Ezekiel picks up where Jeremiah leaves off and continues from the destruction of Jerusalem into the early years of the Babylonian captivity. Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel sees the failure of the old covenant. He likens Israel to a married woman who violates her marriage covenant at every turn (Ezek. 16). The prophet also foresees a future character transformation of God’s people. “I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws” (Ezek. 36:26–27). This is graphically illustrated in Ezek. 37, where the prophet is told to prophesy to a valley of dry bones, and through the preaching of the word of God the company of the dead come to life and become a vast army—not of skeletons, but of vitally alive warriors. This is a vision of what will happen when God makes an everlasting covenant with them and will dwell with them forever (Ezek. 37:26–27). Paul cites this in 2 Cor. 6:16 and argues, “We are the temple of the living God.” The last part of Ezekiel describes a great, larger-than-life temple that Paul interprets to be the church. Thus, Ezekiel anticipates the preaching of the gospel, bringing spiritual life to a vast company of believers, among whom God himself will dwell.

Daniel. The book of Daniel is not a prophetic book by genre, but much of it is devoted to predicting the future, so in Catholic and Protestant Bibles it is placed between Ezekiel and the Minor Prophets. Prophecy calls the people to repentance and threatens judgment on them due to their sin. Daniel does the opposite: it calls them to persevere as saints, while the evil nations oppress them, until the end of time, when they will be vindicated. Daniel comforts the faithful who are suffering due to the sins of the nations.

The Twelve. The twelve Minor Prophets follow a roughly chronological sequence (with some notable exceptions). Hosea, Amos, and Micah date from the rise of Assyria as the great power that threatened Israel and Judah. Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah date from near the end of Assyrian dominance and the rise of Babylon. The Babylonian exile is skipped, and the last three—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—were written after the Jews’ restoration to the land of Judah. Joel, Obadiah, and Jonah are difficult to date with certainty.

Read as one book, the Minor Prophets tell a story of God’s constancy and fidelity even though everything else in the world changes. They begin with all twelve tribes intact and enjoying prosperity in the land. In Judah, there is a king on the throne of David. But by the end, most of the tribes are lost, the monarchy is no more, Jerusalem and the temple have been destroyed, and the Jews are under the heel of foreign powers. After all of that, God says to them, almost as the moral of the whole history of the OT, “I the Lord do not change. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed. Ever since the time of your ancestors you have turned away from my decrees and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you” (Mal. 3:6–7). Deeply explored in the Minor Prophets is the day of the Lord, the climax and denouement of history, in which all the words of the prophets will finally be fulfilled (see Joel and Zephaniah). The reader is given, as a picture of this day, a view of the repentance of one generation of Ninevites at the preaching of Jonah and of the final judgment to fall on that city as described by Nahum.

The NT cites the Minor Prophets much more often than any book of prophecy except Isaiah. Peter draws upon Joel 2:28–32 to explain the pouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17–21). James cites Amos 9:11–12 to demonstrate that salvation was always intended for the Gentiles as well as the Jews (Acts 15:16–17). Paul quotes Hab. 2:4 to argue that righteousness before God comes through faith (Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11). Jesus says that like Jonah, he will return to the land of the living after three days (Matt. 12:38–41).

Prophecy in the New Testament

In the NT period there were a number of prophets. John the Baptist could point to Jesus and proclaim him to be the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29). Agabus the prophet predicted a famine and, later, Paul’s arrest (Acts 11:28; 21:10–11).

Paul lists “gifts of the Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:4–11), including prophecy and various phenomena reminiscent of the OT prophets’ ecstatic state. Paul warns the Corinthians not to overdo this sort of thing and so to be mature (1 Cor. 14:19–20). Near the end of his life, in one of his last letters, he speaks of prophecy as normative in the church, particularly in establishing an authoritative body of elders to rule and especially to preach the gospel (1 Tim. 1:18; 4:14). Peter draws a connection between the ministry of the OT prophets and the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Evangelism seems to be the normative mode for prophecy today: forthtelling by calling people to turn from their sins to Jesus, and foretelling by speaking of his return and the final judgment.

Thus, all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they never participate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. The greatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus. John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure, but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection can proclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministry of any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).

Prophecy

The Phenomenon of Prophecy

The Books of Prophecy in the Old Testament

Prophecy in the New Testament

Prophetic

The Phenomenon of Prophecy

The Books of Prophecy in the Old Testament

Prophecy in the New Testament

Prophets

The Phenomenon of Prophecy

The Books of Prophecy in the Old Testament

Prophecy in the New Testament

Sanctification

Sanctification and Holiness

In the biblical sense, the word “sanctification” relates directly to the Hebrew and Greek words for “holy” (qadosh and hagios respectively). One may even argue that “holy-fication” would be preferable to “sanctification” to underscore the intertwined nature of these terms. In Scripture, English terms such as “holy”/“holiness,” “consecrate”/“consecration,” and “sanctify”/“sanc-ti-fi-cation”/“saints” express cognates of qadosh/hagios.

Despite continued emphasis by many writers that “holy” speaks to separation and that “to be holy” means “to be set apart,” the biblical terms are relational and speak primarily of belonging. “To be holy” (sanctified) means “to belong to God”; separation follows only as the exclusivity of this relationship demands it.

Qadosh is God’s adjective. God’s character defines the meaning of “holy,” not the other way around. Holy, then, cannot be reduced to religious notions of purity (and/or exclusivity) but rather must be understood in light of the full expression of God’s character and will. While other adjectives such as “great,” “majestic,” and “powerful” can also describe humans, God exclusively determines the meaning of the adjective qadosh (hagios). “Holy” has no meaning apart from God. Humans (and things) become holy only as they belong to God. For example, an ordinary table dedicated to God becomes a holy table. The people belonging to God are a holy people. Different from other spirits, the Holy Spirit belongs to God and expresses his presence exclusively (cf. Isa. 6:3; 52:1).

It follows that holiness and divine presence are tightly interwoven. God opens the door into his presence, enabling sanctification (John 17:18; 1 Cor. 1:2; Heb. 10:10), and he calls for his people not to violate his relational presence (2 Cor. 7:1; 2 Tim. 2:21; Heb. 12:14). Sanctification, then, is not as much an intrinsic “either/or” quality (granted or not granted) as it is a relational “more or less” quality based on God’s dynamic presence. Put differently, the biblical perspective on holiness resists reduction to a mere “holy versus profane” dichotomy and cannot be reduced to a simple declaration (granted!) or to a specific list of godly requirements (dos and don’ts).

Old Testament

The gradation of the OT priesthood into levels of holiness that enabled entrance and service in weaker or stronger intensities of God’s presence underscores further this dynamic quality of holiness. Although all the people of Israel were holy (belonging to God), the priests enjoyed a higher degree of holiness than the ordinary Israelite. Within the ranks of the priests, the high priest went through stricter rituals of consecration (Exod. 29:1–8, 20–21; Lev. 8:7–24; 21:13–15), since he alone could minister in the most intensive presence of God (Lev. 16:1–17). Less holy were those of the Aaronic lineage born with physical defects. Although sufficiently holy to eat from the most holy offerings, they could not serve at the altar (Lev. 21:16–23).

Average Israelites possessed a lower level of holiness than Levites and priests but could, as individuals, acquire greater levels of holiness through obedience (Lev. 11:44–45; Num. 15:40–41). Moreover, special vows, like that of the Nazirite, enhanced the average Israelite’s quality as holy. The Nazirite vow (Num. 6:1–21) did not transfer priestly status to any person, but it did elevate one’s holiness to a comparable level during the period of dedication.

This dynamic connection between divine presence and sanctification becomes even more evident in the prophets. They were “holy men” because they were endowed with the divine spirit, and as the level of this endowment varied from prophet to prophet, so did their effectiveness as God’s messengers. False prophets still carried the name, but their lack of devotion to Israel’s God caused inaccuracy in their message (e.g., Jer. 6:13–14).

New Testament

This dynamic relationship between divine presence and holiness translates directly to the NT use of hagiasmos (and cognates). Although the Gospels rarely use “sanctification” vocabulary, Jesus’ ongoing polemic against the Pharisees, who had turned their piety (holiness) into a question of mere conspicuous behavior, makes the same point. John’s correlation of Jesus’ sanctification as God’s Son with the disciples’ experience of the Spirit’s empowerment (John 10:34–38; 17:17–19) indicates the same. Sanctification could not be separated from purpose and sending (20:21–23) and could not be reduced to a process of learning specified “Christian” behaviors. This, again, follows the pattern outlined in Acts; it was the outpouring of the Spirit that enabled the disciples to live the Christian life, which required the dynamic, creative power of God’s presence (Acts 1:8; 2:1–21).

Paul’s conversion exemplifies this tight connection between divine presence and sanctification (holiness). Not attaining the experience of God that he expected from keeping the law, Paul found the law-promised access to God in Christ. This turned him into a theologian of the Spirit who focused on the relational quality of God’s presence. In Paul’s vernacular “divine presence,” as expressed through the language of holiness or sanctification, stems from the relational work of the Holy Spirit. Accordingly, sanctification centers on deepening the relationship between God and the Spirit-filled Christian. Sanctification as a process of “learning” ethics surfaces only as a derivative; ethics is a by-product of divine presence, not vice versa. The antidote to the vices of the flesh (Gal. 5:18–21) is not a contrasting list of virtues of the Spirit but rather a fruit, the product or result, of living in God’s presence (Gal. 5:22–23).

For Paul, Spirit possession was synonymous with being a Christian (Rom. 8:9). His concern involved the intensity of the Spirit’s presence. The Spirit could be grieved and his presence quenched—a devastating situation to the Christian’s power and sanctity (Eph. 4:30; 1 Thess. 5:19).

Snuffers

Golden instruments used in the service of the tabernacle and temple (Exod. 25:38; 37:23; Num. 4:9; 2 Chron. 4:22 NRSV [NIV: “wick trimmers”]). Associated specifically with the lampstand (1 Kings 7:50), these were a kind of scissors used to trim the wicks of lamps or to remove or dispose of the burnt portions of the wicks. Sometimes they were made of bronze (2 Kings 25:14; Jer. 52:18); they differed from the “tongs” (Isa. 6:6) used to take coals from the altar.

Starry Host

Submission

The act of yielding or consenting to the authority of another, voluntarily or involuntarily; personal deference, compliance, or humility toward another; to become subject to. Submission incorporates obedience, and in certain usages the terms are synonymous. However, “obedience” indicates compliance with directions or guidance, while “submission” describes one’s subservient posture toward another. Submission within a formalized hierarchy is subordination—for example, Jesus’ relationship to the Father.

Scripture presents submission in two ways: as the translation of a number of specific Hebrew and Greek terms that convey an aspect of the concept, and as a general portrait of relationships—for example, patriarchs and prophets before the Lord, or demons toward Jesus. Sometimes, the presentation is negative, as in a refusal to submit.

In the OT, the use of the word “submission” (or its derivatives) in the major English versions is primarily a function of translator preference. In fact, Gen. 16:9, the angel’s instructions to Hagar, is the sole instance where “submit” is broadly agreed to be the best translation of the underlying Hebrew. Elsewhere, the NIV and at least one other version use forms of “submission” to interpretively translate Hebrew expressions meaning the following: “become a slave to” (Gen. 49:15); “serve” (2 Chron. 30:8); “have a relationship with” (Job 22:21); “quickly stretch out hands” (Ps. 68:31); “give over to” (Ps. 81:11); and “give the hand to” (Lam. 5:6).

In the NT, “submission” (along with its derivatives and, often, “to be subject to”) appears only in Luke and the epistles, and it translates forms of four different Greek roots.

1. Dogmatizō appears once: “Why . . . do you submit to rules?” (Col. 2:20). It includes the aspect of obligation to something that has been decreed.

2. Hypeikō appears once: “Obey your leaders and submit to them” (Heb. 13:17 NASB, NRSV). Here, obedience is specifically distinguished from submission.

3. Hypotagē appears four times as “submission.” In Gal. 2:5; 1 Tim. 2:11; 3:4 it indicates the main understanding: subordinate posturing toward superiors; in 2 Cor. 9:13, however, it refers to obedience to a decree, in this case confession of the gospel.

4. Hypotassō is by far the most significant root. It appears almost forty times in the NT; about half of these occurrences can be translated using a form of “submission” (or “to be subject to”). It is used to convey the subordination of children to parents (Luke 2:51); demons to the seventy-two missionaries (Luke 10:17, 20); sinners to God’s law or righteousness (Rom. 8:7; 10:3); people to governing authorities (Rom. 13:1, 5; Titus 3:1; 1 Pet. 2:13); believers to one another (1 Cor. 16:16; Eph. 5:21); wives to husbands (1 Cor. 14:34; Eph. 5:22, 24; Col. 3:18; Titus 2:5; 1 Pet. 3:1, 5); slaves to masters (Titus 2:9; 1 Pet. 2:18); angels, authorities, and powers to Jesus (1 Pet. 3:22); believers to God (Heb. 12:9; James 4:7); younger men to elders (1 Pet. 5:5).

A few additional uses of “submission” in some translations have other primary meanings: “turn in for inspection” (Gal. 2:2 NASB); “reverence” (Heb. 5:7 NIV, NRSV); and “open-mindedness” (James 3:17 NIV).

Vivid portraits of submission conveying the concept without invoking the specific vocabulary include Abraham’s submission to God (Gen. 12:1–4; 17:1–27; 21:4; 22:1–19); Moses at the burning bush (Exod. 3:1–4:17); Joshua toward God (Josh. 24:29); prophets toward God (1 Sam. 3:10; Isa. 6:8; Hos. 1:1–3); Jesus’ submission to the Father (Matt. 26:39, 42, 44; Mark 14:35–36, 39; Luke 2:49; 22:42); Paul’s submission to Jesus (Rom. 1:1; Titus 1:1); believers doing the will of the Father (Matt. 12:50; 21:28–32); the prodigal son toward his father (Luke 15:18, 21); believers toward Jesus (John 12:26; 14:21, 23–24; 15:10); husbands and wives toward each other (1 Cor. 7:3–5; 11:11); believers humble before one another (Rom. 12:10; Phil. 2:3–4); and the bowing of every knee to Jesus (Phil. 2:10–13).

Subordination

In the NT, “submission” (along with its derivatives and, often, “to be subject to”) appears only in Luke and the epistles, and it translates forms of four different Greek roots.

1. Dogmatizō appears once: “Why . . . do you submit to rules?” (Col. 2:20). It includes the aspect of obligation to something that has been decreed.

2. Hypeikō appears once: “Obey your leaders and submit to them” (Heb. 13:17 NASB, NRSV). Here, obedience is specifically distinguished from submission.

Tempt

In English, a distinction between the words “temptation,” “test,” and “trial” (or “tribulation”) seems apparent. However, the biblical Greek noun peirasmos and verb peirazō translate these nouns and their related verbs, leaving context alone to determine meaning. In the understanding of the Scripture, temptation relates directly to test and trial.

Negatively, English Bibles choose “temptation” and “tempt” as the fitting translation for peirasmos and peirazō respectively. The devil, or Satan, is the origin; the purpose is to encourage sin and devastate human relationship with God (Matt. 4:1 pars.; 1 Cor. 7:5; Gal. 6:1; 1 Tim. 6:9; James 1:13). Satan personifies this purpose as the tempter (Matt. 4:3; 1 Thess. 3:5).

Positively, the English word “test” seems fitting. God tests his people to reveal the quality of their faith commitment (Gen. 22:1; Exod. 15:25; Judg. 2:22; Gal. 4:14). When God tests his enemies, it results in a hardening of their hearts (Exod. 14:4). When God tests his own people, it may look like judgment (Isa. 6:9–10; cf. Mark 6:52; Heb. 3:8; 4:7). The NT sees a direct link between the words peirazō and dokimazō (“to test, prove, approve”) and uses one to explain the other (2 Cor. 13:5–7; James 1:2–3, 12).

Neutrally, “trial” (or “tribulation”) translates the meaning. People may face trials in their Christian walk (Acts 20:19; 2 Cor. 8:2; James 1:2, 12; 1 Pet. 1:6) that may or may not lead to sin (Matt. 26:41; cf. Dan. 12:10). The sixth petition of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt. 6:13 // Luke 11:4) presupposes the understanding that God is sovereign over all human circumstances and therefore has the power to protect from trials that may lead to temptation and fall. Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane follows the same supposition (Mark 14:38).

This interconnectedness in the biblical understanding between temptation, test, and trial helps to explain some inherently difficult texts. There can be no sharp distinction made between temptation and test; God may use someone’s tribulation as a test to affirm faith, while Satan uses the same as an avenue for temptation to commit sin. A prime OT example of such interconnectedness is the parallel texts in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles that describe David as both tested by God (2 Sam. 24:1) and tempted by Satan (1 Chron. 21:1) in regard to taking a census of Israel.

When humans tempt/test God, they provoke him to prove his power (Exod. 17:1–7) by acting as if he does not exist (Ps. 14:1). God’s firm prohibition against this (Deut. 6:13–16) exposes it as a violation of his relationship with humans (Matt. 4:7; Acts 5:9; 15:10).

Temptation

Tempted

Tempting

Theophany

An appearance by God. The word “theophany” is not found in the Bible; however, by the early fourth century AD, the term had come to be used in reference to God. Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea at that time, uses the term (Gk. theophaneia) in reference to God’s appearances to people as these are recounted in Gen. 18:1–5, 25; 32:28–30; Exod. 3:4–6; Josh. 5:13–15 (Hist. eccl. 1.2.10). This meaning of “theophany,” referring to the biblical phenomenon of God’s appearing, is the sense of the word considered here.

“Theophany” is a compound word, related to the Greek words theos (usually translated as “god” or “God”) and phainō (often translated as “to appear”). The Bible says in many places that God “appeared” (e.g., Gen. 12:7; 17:1; 18:1; 26:2, 24; 35:9; 48:3; Exod. 3:16; 4:5; Deut. 31:15). For example, Gen. 18:1 says that “the Lord appeared” to Abraham. Several other passages say that people saw God (Gen. 32:30; Exod. 24:10; Isa. 6:1). For example, Isa. 6:1 says that Isaiah “saw the Lord.” “Appeared” and “see” usually reflect different forms of the same Hebrew verb.

Closely related to these appearances are statements describing God’s presence and glory within a cloud and at God’s tent or temple. During the exodus of Israel from Egypt, “by day the Lord went ahead of them in a pillar of cloud,” leading them (Exod. 13:21). When Moses later constructs the tabernacle or tent of meeting, a cloud covers it, and the glory of God fills the tabernacle (40:34). God typically speaks to Moses from the tabernacle (Exod. 33:7–9; Num. 1:1; 7:89).

Later, when the temple is dedicated, “the cloud filled the temple of the Lord” (1 Kings 8:10). This cloud is associated with God’s glory, and where God says he would dwell (8:11–12). In the book of Ezekiel, God forsakes the temple because of the sins of Israel, so the cloud and God’s glory depart (Ezek. 10:4). Throughout the Bible, the local presence of God is regularly indicated by the tabernacle and later by the temple, for this is the place where all offerings are given to God, and where people come before God.

In the Bible, an appearance by God does not limit God to one place. Solomon says during the dedication of the temple that even heaven cannot contain God, much less the temple that Solomon has built (1 Kings 8:27). God’s omnipresence is likewise expressed by the psalmist (Ps. 139:7–8).

God does not always appear in the same form in theophanies. The angel of the Lord appears in the fire of a burning bush, saying that he is the God of Abraham (Exod. 3:2–6). Elsewhere, the angel of the Lord is described as a man, but then ascends to heaven in the flame of an altar (Judg. 13:3–13, 20). John describes God sitting on a throne (Rev. 4:2; 5:1). In other passages God is locally present and speaks, yet without explicitly appearing, which might be classified as a theophany (Num. 22:9, 20; 23:16; Mark 1:11; 9:7; John 12:28).

Despite these examples of theophanies, some biblical passages state that people cannot see God. However, these passages may refer to practical human limitations rather than any inherent characteristic of God himself. In Exodus, for example, God tells Moses that no one seeing God’s face can live (33:20). However, God then says that Moses, without seeing God’s face, “will see my back” (33:23). The entire passage indicates that God can be seen more fully, but only with fatal results. Several NT passages similarly indicate that God cannot be fully seen (John 1:18; 4:24; 1 Tim. 1:17; 6:15–16; Heb. 11:27).

Just as God dwelled within the tabernacle, at times showing his glory, the NT says that the Word of God was made to dwell in flesh (incarnate) as Jesus Christ and so revealed God’s glory (John 1:14). This Word of God is the same word that created all things in Gen. 1 and so is genuinely God (John 1:1–3).

Venomous Serpent

Showing 1 to 50 of149 results

1. Confirming Our Relationship

Illustration

Staff

Each day, day after day for a number of weeks, a minister observed a small boy enter the church auditorium, sit quietly before the altar for awhile, and then quietly leave. Always it was about the same time of day, shortly following the dismissal of school, and obviously the lad, carrying his books, was on his way home when he made his daily stop.

One day the minister approached the boy, told him he had observed what he was doing and that he was pleased to see him doing this. Then the minister asked, "What do you do when you come? Do you pray, or what?" After a moment of thought, the boy replied, "Sir, I just say, 'Jesus, this is Jimmie.' "

Just reporting in! Just pausing to identify himself and to be identified. Just confirming a relationship.

Worship has many aspects. But none of these are more essential, more central to its meaning, than this. Whatever else you may do in the experience of this hour, be sure you say, "Lord, it is I." It is not necessary to introduce yourself; he knows you already. Just identify yourself, just let him know it's you. In worship, confirm your relationship with your Lord.

2. God's Evangelism Plans

Illustration

Richard A. Jensen

The fall of Haile Selassie in 1974 did not bring the kind of peace that the Ethiopians had hoped might follow their somewhat "benevolent" dictator. They had hoped for democracy. They had hoped for freedom. What they got, instead, was a Marxist state that ruled with an iron hand. Repression was everywhere. Persecution was everywhere. The Christian church became a target of this repression and persecution. The almost 20 years of Marxist rule was a very difficult time for the Christians of Ethiopia. During the waning years of this Marxist rule an Ethiopian pastor named Yadessa addressed an American audience concerning this persecution. He told of churches being closed and of many Christians and Christian leaders being put in prison. He said that there were hardly any churches left open in the western region of Ethiopia where evangelical Christianity had been very strong.

But closed church buildings did not close down the church. "Houses became churches," Pastor Yadessa told his audience. Christianity not only survived but thrived and grew under state repression. Pastor Yadessa reminded his audience that the most significant person to be imprisoned in those years was the president of the church himself, Pastor Gudina. Pastor Gudina was jailed and released several times but he eventually died in prison, Pastor Yadessa reported. He further reported that Pastor Gudina's wife was also imprisoned. "She has adjusted to prison life very well," Pastor Yadessa said. "She sews sweaters for people and distributes Bibles that are sent to her. She and many of the other imprisoned Christians have become great evangelists in the prisons. God has God's own evangelism plans," Pastor Yadessa proclaimed with a smile.

He told another story of God's evangelism planning. At the time of his address to his American audience Pastor Yadessa was the director of evangelism for the Ethiopian Evangelical Church -- Mekane Yesus. (Mekane Yesus means "the place of Jesus.") He planned that evangelism leaders from the Addis Ababa area and evangelism leaders from the land to the West that had been so heavily persecuted should meet in a city on the border of the two areas. "Just the logistics of planning the meeting," Pastor Yadessa said, "were extremely difficult. Communication between parties was almost impossible. But," he continued, "when the day for the meeting arrived, somehow, under God's providence, all of us arrived safely." The meeting, of course, was a bit subversive in light of the state's persecution of the church. The evangelism leaders gathered, therefore, in a simple home in the city. "We were just about to start our meeting," said Pastor Yadessa, "when seven uniformed policemen barged through the door of the house. 'This is an illegal meeting,' the head of the policemen shouted at us. 'You are all under arrest. Come with us at once.' It wasn't long until all of us were locked together in prison." As Pastor Yadessa told the story he indicated that the first hour or two that the leaders were in the jail were moments of great despair. "But then," he said brightening, "we realized that God had given us a great opportunity. Here we were all together in one place with nothing to do but pray together and talk together and think about evangelism together. We found ourselves on a wonderfully unplanned evangelism retreat. God, indeed, has God's own evangelism plans that surprise and surpass our own!""

3. Clean and Unclean

Illustration

Larry Powell

Simon Peter is called into account by the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem to explain why he had made so bold as to eat unclean food in the presence of Gentiles. He explains that while he was in Joppa, a guest in the home of Simon the tanner, he had fallen into a trance and experienced a vision. Before going further, let us make a distinction at two points: 1. Simon the tanner. As the name suggests, Simon tanned hides, an occupation considered by Jews to be unclean, insofar as it involved handling dead things (Leviticus 11:39-40). 2. The vision. While on the rooftop of Simon’s house (11:5) Peter saw a great sheet being let down from heaven containing animals, beasts of prey, and wild birds. A voice instructed him to "rise, kill and eat," but refusing, he said, "No Lord, for nothing common or unclean has ever entered my mouth." But the voice answered, "What God has cleansed you must not call common" (11:9). Notice that Peter did not refer to the food as "unclean," but common, meaning "beneath him." Notice also that Peter is mildy chastized for placing himself above anyone or anything. The supreme point of the vision is found in 10:34: "Truly I perceive that God shows no partiality." It follows then, that if God’s love is inclusive, "to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance unto life" (11:18). Yes, even the Gentiles, those who were outside the concern of the circumcision party in Jesusalem.

Closer to home, what about those who are outside the circle of our concern? Oh, we know about them well enough, but they are not a part of our daily experience, nor are they included in the regular routine of our decision-making. Occasionally, they may receive a polite tip of the hat, but they are included in the host of concerns outside our own family or church circle of concern which we are inclined to consider "unclean" or "common," reluctant to believe that even unto them also "God has granted repentance unto life." One at a time, think about the following: Shall God grant repentance to 1. those in our prisons, 2. Russians, 3. criminals, 4. non-Christians, or even non-Christian religions, 5. persons who exploit us in some manner, 6. ignorant people who could do better but won’t, 7. con-artists? Measure your response well, remembering that it was necessary for Peter to broaden the orbit of his concern.

A retiring old usher, instructing a youthful new replacement in the details of ushering said, "And remember, my boy, we have nothing but good, kind Christians in this church ... until you try to put someone else in their pew." Perhaps the arena for extending the circle of our concern is nearer than we may suppose.

4. Who Is a Missionary?

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

For a helpful look at what or who a missionary is or should be, I recommend A Hitchhiker's Guide to Missions by Ada Lum (InterVarsity Press, 1984). Lum gives some helpful definitions and analysis of just what the missionary enterprise is all about. "A missionary is a prepared disciple whom God sends into the world with His resources to make disciples for His kingdom." She suggests six biblical images:

1.         A Witness—Acts 1:8; Isaiah 43:10-12
2.         An Evangelist—Luke 2:10-11; Acts 11:19-21
3.         A Pioneer—Hebrews 12:2; Acts 20:22-24
4.         A Herald—1 Timothy 2:7; 2 Timothy 1:11, 4:2
5.         An Ambassador—2 Corinthians 5:20; Ephesians 6: 19-20
6.         A Servant—1 Corinthians 4:1; 2 Timothy 2:24

Lum points out similarities between Jesus and Paul in Preparation and in Ministry.

Similar Preparation: They had a deep sense of commission, they were well trained by life, they were full of the Spirit and they each had the heart of a servant.

Similar Ministry: Their message was reconciliation to God, they had a worldwide vision, they had a strategy, they focused on basic ministries, they trained disciple makers to carry on the work, they were men of perseverance, they were part of a team, they were men of compassion, and they were men of passion.

5. God's Banquet Feast

Illustration

Alex Gondola

Martin Copenhaver, Pastor of the Wellesley Congregational Church, offers a vision of what God's Banquet Feast might be like: When God is throwing a party, you never know who will be there or whom you will sit next to. The financier will be seated next to the panhandler he always passed on his way to work. The store owner will be next to the person he just fired, and the doctor will be put next to the woman who just sued him for malpractice. Rush Limbaugh may be beside Barack Obama. A prostitute will sit next to the Pope.

All the "right" people will be there; that is everyone who responds to God's invitation ... and seated next to the host (Jesus) in the places of honor are not the dignitaries, the celebrities, the distinguished people of position and prominence, but rather the poor, the hurting, the outcast people who have distinguished themselves only by their need." (Library of Distinctive Sermons, vol. 2, Multnomah Press, p. 48)

I might add to Copenhaver's vision that at that Banquet Feast, everyone will get along famously. And that at that Banquet Feast, you and I may well find ourselves seated next to, and engaging in conversation with, people we presently can't stand (or who can't stand us). But the old anger, hurt, and grudges will be gone, and reconciliation will come. At God's Table, the barriers that keep people apart rich/poor, upperclass/lowerclass, black/white, Republican/Democrat, gay/straight, friend/foe, the dividing walls of hostility will come smashing down. The crash will be greater than the fall of the Berlin Wall. God's Banquet Feast will be the most remarkable party ever thrown!

6. How My Light Is Spent

Illustration

Robert Pack and Jay Parini, Editors, adapted from Miller Williams

When I read in the scriptures of Bartimaeus regaining his sight, I celebrate the power of faith. One of the greatest poems in the English language was written by John Milton in 1652 as he dealt with the onset of his own blindness. John Milton’s contention with himself as he thought on his blindness was not simply a complaint or a chastening. Clearly he was in anguish not only at his loss of sight but at his inability to serve God as he thought he should. But, Milton found through his loss not only the resignation to abide it but turned his mind with a startling clarity of thought and vision to writing his most memorable work: Paradise Lost.

Listen to Milton's words in another poem about his experience of turning darkness into light. Here is Milton's "How My Light is Spent":

When I consider how my light is spent
Ere half my days in this dark world and wide,
And that one talent which is death to hide
Lodg'd with me useless, though my soul more bent
To serve therewith my Maker, and present
My true account, lest he returning chide,
"Doth God exact day-labour, light denied?"

I fondly ask. But Patience, to prevent
That murmur, soon replies: "God doth not need
Either man's work or his own gifts: who best
Bear his mild yoke, they serve him best. His state
Is kingly; thousands at his bidding speed
And post o'er land and ocean without rest:
They also serve who only stand and wait."

True faith has vision that goes beyond mere sight. Or as Jesus would say to blind Bartemaeus, as to all of us, "Do you want to see?"

7. Ministry to People in Need

Illustration

E. Carver McGriff

There's a wonderful legend about Saint Francis, the kindly thirteenth century monk, who one day informed his brethren that he planned to go into the nearby village on a preaching mission. He invited a novice to go along. On their way, they passed an injured man and Francis promptly stopped, saw to the poor fellow's needs and arranged medical care for him. They went on and soon passed a homeless man who was near starvation. Again, Francis stopped his journey and ministered to the hungry, homeless man. So it went, through the day: people in need, Francis lovingly caring for them as best he could until the sun was low in the sky. He told his novice friend it was time for them to return, now, to the monastery for evening prayers. But the young man said, "Father, you said we were coming to town to preach to the people." Francis smiled. Then he said, "My friend, that's what we've been doing all day."

That's evangelism at its most faithful. Ministry to people in their need. Not worrying about numerical growth, or adding to one's own conversion record, or winning acclaim within the denomination. Evangelism is sharing the love of God in concrete form among God's people.

8. A Community of Love

Illustration

Carl Jech

In a sermon titled "A New Vision," Dr. E. Howard Satterwhite of Trinity United Methodist Church in Alexandria, Virginia, compared the ideal of a Christian community of love, with a marriage in which the romance has faded, the honeymoon is over, and the relationship has become a labor of love requiring simple tenacity, "hanging in there." Describing his vision of Christian love at close quarters he said, "We should lose the illusions of perfection ... if we are looking for perfection here, we had better go somewhere else. But no one else has it either. We need to deal with the fact that we are imperfect and yet are in love as community. The community cannot save us from anything and we cannot save anyone else, not on our own skills and not on our charms. But trusting in God we become more trustworthy to each other, and more available for the authentic community that is grounded in God's power and not our own."

9. In the Know

Illustration

Michael Horton

One of the earliest and most potent threats to early Christianity came from the heretical group known as the Gnostics. Blending elements of Christianity, Greek philosophy, and oriental mysticism, the Gnostics denied the orthodox view of God, man, and the world, and Christ. The apostle John included them in the camp of the Antichrist.

The Gnostics were so called because of their view of revelation. The word gnosis is the Greek word for "knowledge." In many cases the Gnostic heretics did not make a frontal assault against the apostles or against the apostolic teaching of Scripture. In fact, many of them insisted that they were genuine, Bible-believing Christians. It wasn't that they rejected the Bible; they just claimed an additional source of knowledge or insight that was superior to or at least beyond the knowledge of Scripture. The "Gnostikoi" were "those in the know." Their knowledge was not derived from intellectual comprehension of the Scripture or by empirical research, but was mystical, direct, and immediate. God "revealed" private, intuitive insights to them that carried nothing less than divine authority.

Here is a typical Gnostic statement: "We cannot communicate with God mentally, for He is a Spirit. But we can reach Him with our Spirit, and it is through our Spirit that we come to know God….This is one reason God put teachers (those who are really called to teach) in the church to renew our minds. Many times those who teach do so with only a natural knowledge that they have gained from the Bible and other sources. But I am referring here to one of the ministry gifts. Those who are called and anointed by the Spirit to teach. God has given us His Word, and we can feed upon that Word. This will renew our minds. But He also puts teachers in the church to renew our minds and to bring us the revelation of the knowledge of God's Word." (Kenneth E. Hagin, Man on Three Dimensions (Tulsa, Okla.: Faith Library, 1985), 1:8,13.)

Notice that this quotation does not include a direct assault on the Bible. The Bible is recognized as God's word. But in order to understand the Bible we need something beyond our natural mental ability. We need the Spirit-anointed teachers to "bring us the revelation of the knowledge of God's Word." This is a typically Gnostic statement, but the quote is not from Valentinus or any of the other early Gnostics. It is from the pen of a modern missionary of Gnosticism, Kenneth E. Hagin. It is from Hagin's Man on Three Dimensions. Hagin's theology echoes the tripartite epistemology of early Gnosticism (man as having three separate entities: body, soul, and spirit).

Robert Tilton also claims a direct pipeline to divine revelation: "God showed me a vision that almost took my breath away. I was sucked into the Spirit . . ., caught away . . . and I found myself standing in the very presence of Almighty God. It just echoed into my being. And he said these words to me. . . exactly these words . . ."Many of my ministers pray for my people, but I want you to pray the Prayer of Agreement with them" . . . I have never seen the presence of God so powerful. This same anointing flooded my Spirit-man . . . It's inside of me now, and I have supernatural faith to agree with you. From that day forth, as I have been faithful to that heavenly vision, I've seen every kind of miracle imaginable happen when I pray the Prayer of Agreement with God's people." (Robert Tilton, newsletter from Robert Tilton Ministries, Word of Faith World Outreach Center, Box 819000, Dallas, TX75381.

It seems that in Robert Tilton the church is blessed with a twentieth-century apostle whose visions of revelation exceed that of the apostle John and whose miracle powers surpass that of the apostle Paul. If we are to believe Tilton's astonishing claims, there is no reason we should not include his writings in the next edition of the New Testament.

Paul Crouch of the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), has revelatory dreams and has warmly embraced the neo-Gnostic dogma. His network has become a prime distribution center for the growing movement. Kenneth Copeland also receives phrases from God in "his spirit."

10. Our Real Work for Christ

Illustration

J. Hampton Keathley III

All around us are forces at work to distract, delude, and deter us from experiencing God's plan and vision for us as individual believers and as the body of Christ as a whole. We see people shattered on the rocks of delusion and despair. We see a skyrocketing divorce rate, abuse in the home, disease, crime, abortion, gangs, suicide, incest, child abuse, rape, drive-by shootings, drugs, and the inability of government to handle our problems because we are a people who seek man-made solutions and ignore the biblical mandates of Scripture. So, the list of problems grow.

Unfortunately, in the midst of this, we also see churches turned inward rather than outward as lights in the midst of this horrible darkness. Why? Because to a very large degree, the church—though very religious—has ignored the truth of this passage and lost sight of the vision it gives us of what life should be.

Let us not forget as we examine this passage that Christ's conflict was with the religious people. They were experts in the Old Testament Scriptures but they had missed the central truth of the Word of God. And the same can apply to us.

11. Spiritual Teaching Gifts

Illustration

Dr. Earl Radmacher

The following is an attempt by Dr. Earl Radmacher and Gordon McMinn to identify and define spiritual gifts centered around teaching.

Prophecy: setting before people the Word and wisdom of God persuasively.
Encouragement: drawing alongside to comfort, encourage, rebuke, and lead someone into insight toward action.
Teaching: laying down in a systematic order the complete truth of a doctrine and applying it incisively to life.
The message of wisdom: Locating formerly unknown principles as well as combining known principles of God's Word and communicating them to fresh situations.
The message of knowledge: Arranging the facts of Scripture, categorizing these into principles, and communicating them to repeated or familiar situations.
Service Gifts. Contributing: Giving most liberally and beyond all human expectation. Mercy: Being sensitive or empathetic to people who are in affliction or misery and lifting internal burdens with cheerfulness.
Helps: Seeing tasks and doing them for or with someone in order to lift external burdens.
Distinguishing spirits: Detecting a genuine or spurious motive by distinguishing the spirit-source behind any person's speech or act.
Evangelism: Communicating the gospel with power and persuasiveness as well as equipping the saints for evangelism.
Leadership Gifts. Leadership (executive ability): Standing before people and inspiring followers by leading them aggressively but with care.
Administration (legislative ability): Standing behind people to collect data, set policy, and develop plans which will guide a course of action with wisdom.
Faith: Seeing through any problem to the Ultimate Resource.

What about the so-called sign gifts, such as healing and speaking in tongues, referred to in today's text? To us, Hebrews 2:4 suggests that they were intended to be confirming signs for the Apostles, and ceased with them. Others feel they are still for today, but if so, one thing is clear: they are given sovereignly by the Spirit for specific purposes and are the exception, not the rule.

12. What the World Expects of the Church

Illustration

Brett Blair

On a cold, dreary December evening, several hundred people gathered at a large downtown church in Winston-Salem to celebrate the Christmas season. Bishop Ernest Fitzgerald, present that evening, had gone down a long hallway to help a small boy who was pushing against massive oak doors trying to get outside. The boy was about 2 years old and as he pushed he was crying as if his heart would break.

The Bishop picked him up, thinking he belonged to someone at one of the Christmas parties but as he opened the doors and looked outside he spotted an old-model car speeding away in the darkness. Gradually, it dawned on him that the child he held in his arms had been abandoned.

Phone calls were made, and soon the church was filled with people wanting to help in any way they could. Within moments, the local TV stations interrupted their usual programs to ask if anyone knew the identity of the little boy. The next morning, one of the city's newspapers put the child's picture on the front page. Under the picture there was an article describing the events of the evening before. The article began with this striking line: "Someone trusted the church last night, and the church came through!"

Bishop Fizgerald later reflected on this event and wrote these words: It will be a long, long time before I can forget that newspaper headline. So much of the world's future depends on the faithfulness of the "People of God" to the "Great Commission." There is a deep hunger across our land as countless people grope for answers to the deepest questions of the human spirit. The message of Christ speaks to these questions, bringing hope and light to people who now stumble in the dark and live in despair. Our world will be changed as the hearts of people are changed. Evangelism is no longer an option for the church. It is essential to the survival of our world.

The line in that Winston-Salem newspaper is a haunting reminder of what the world expects of the church. "Someone trusted the church last night, and the church came through!" May that always be true!

13. WE HAVE GREAT POTENTIAL

Illustration

John H. Krahn

Until Jesus Christ permeates every fiber of our being, we can never begin to appreciate the power and potentiality available in us. We continue to doubt whether we can do this or that or be what we want to be. Yet, God wants us to reach the heights of our created potential. God wants us to develop a faith that can handle both problems and opportunities. He desires that we capture his vision of our worth and our latent abilities.

Some time ago I saw the play Man of La Mancha. I believe it illustrates what I am saying. The man of La Mancha comes to a wayside inn. Here the camel drivers stop. He sees Aldonza, the waitress, there. She is also the local prostitute. Aldonza is dirty and smells from perspiration. "Ho, my lady. You will be my lady ... every knight needs a lady, and you will be my lady. And I will give you a new name, it will no longer be Aldonza but Dulcinea." She looks at him in amazement. "Me, your lady, ha!" she kicks up her heels, grabs a sack of money out of his hand, runs off the stage. Every time the man of La Mancha sees her, he says, "You are a lady, you have a new name. I have given it to you. It is Dulcinea."

The curtain opens on another scene ... the stage is empty. It’s night. Suddenly Aldonza comes on stage. Her hair is disheveled; she has blood and dirt and mud on her; her skirt is torn. She’s been raped. Hysterical, she runs confused and crying to the middle of the stage. Off to the side enters the man of La Mancha. When he sees her, he says, "Ho, my lady." To which she replies, "Don’t call me a lady. Look at me; I was born in a ditch; my mother left me naked and cold and too hungry to cry. I never blamed her; I’m sure she left hoping I would have the good sense to die. Ah ... look at me, I’m no lady, I’m only a kitchen slut, reeking with sweat, a strumpet men use and forget. Oh God, I am no lady; I am only Aldonza. I am nothing at all." Then she runs away and is gone.

And now it is the last scene. The man of La Mancha, like Jesus of Nazareth, has been despised, rejected by men, a man of sorrow, acquainted with grief. He is dying, like our Lord, from a broken heart. While on his deathbed, a courtly woman comes to his side. She has a beautiful mantilla which covers her modestly. She kneels beside him and says, "My lord, my lord."

Through a haze he looks at her and asks, "Who are you?"

"My lord, look, don’t you remember? Try to remember, my lord. You sang the song, remember ... to dream the impossible dream, to fight the unbeatablc foe. My lord you gave me a new name. You called me your lady."

And through eyes clouded with death he recognizes her and says, "Dulcinea," and he dies.

God has given all of us great potential. He believes in us and wants to help us lead full and useful lives. We need to join God in his faith in us. An ever-deepening faith in Jesus Christ is the best way to accomplish this. Come, Lord Jesus, be our guest and bless us with a doubt-cleansing faith, a possibility - expanding faith, a faith that opens up our great potential.

14. All Shall Be Well

Illustration

Daniel B. Clendenin

The English mystic and Benedictine nun Juliana of Norwich (1342–1414) had reasons enough to worry. She lived during the Black Death that killed 75 million people in medieval Europe. Many people interpreted the bubonic plague as divine punishment, but not Juliana. In her unapologetically optimistic view of life, she believed that God loved every person and that he would redeem every tear. In her book of visions called Sixteen Revelations of Divine Love — by some accounts the first book published in English that was written by a woman — Juliana wrote one of the most well-known sentences in all of Christian history that's also the perfect antidote to worry.

In her thirteenth vision or "shewing," Juliana concluded that she was wrong to worry about the sins and sorrows of life. Jesus told her that these trials and tribulations were, in fact, "behovely" (from which we get our word "behoove"). Even our sins and anxieties are somehow incumbent uponus. They're part of our human story. Despite "all the pains that ever were, or ever shall be," Juliana believed that God longs to "comforteth readily and sweetly." He does so by reassuring us that, because of the certainty of his boundless love,

"All shall be well, and all shall be well,
and all manner of thing shall be well."

15. What Kind of Egg Are You?

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

He’s a bag egg! How often have you heard that expression? It has something to say to us.

Will you use your imagination with me for a moment? Imagine a bird’s nest in a tree with some beautiful blue eggs in it. Now imagine talking to those eggs and trying to communicate a new vision to them. Now don’t think I’m silly. Use your imagination. You say to those eggs, “Someday you’re going to fly. You’re going to have wings and soar to the heavens.”

With the warmth of the parent birds, there is a change in that egg -- day after day -- until a little bird is hatched. It can’t fly yet, but you can now see the beginnings of wings. As C. S. Lewis says, “We’re all like eggs at present. And you cannot go on indefinitely being just an ordinary decent egg. You must be hatched or go bad.”

If we don’t become what God intends us to be, if we resist God’s intention and purpose, we become bad eggs and go rotten inside.

16. The Doctor's Brave Volunteer

Illustration

Max Lucado

February 15, 1921. New York City. The operating room of the Kane Summit Hospital. A doctor is performing an appendectomy. In many ways the events leading to the surgery are uneventful. The patient has complained of severe abdominal pain. The diagnosis is clear: an inflamed appendix. Dr. Evan O'Neill Kane is performing the surgery. In his distinguished thirty-seven-year medical career, he has performed nearly four thousand appendectomies, so this surgery will be uneventful in all ways except two.

The first novelty of this operation? The use of local anesthesia in major surgery. Dr. Kane is a crusader against the hazards of general anesthesia. He contends that a local application is far safer. Many of his colleagues agree with him in principle, but in order for them to agree in practice, they will have to see the theory applied.

Dr. Kane searches for a volunteer, a patient who is willing to undergo surgery wile under local anesthesia. A volunteer is not easily found. Many are squeamish at the thought of being awake during their own surgery. Others are fearful that the anesthesia might wear off too soon. Eventually, however, Dr. Kane finds a candidate. On Tuesday morning, February 15, the historic operation occurs.

The patient is prepped and wheeled into the operating room. A local anesthetic is applied. As he has done thousands of times, Dr. Kane dissects the superficial tissues and locates the appendix. He skillfully excises it and concludes the surgery. During the procedure, the patient complains of only minor discomfort. The volunteer is taken into post-op, then placed in a hospital ward. He recovers quickly and is dismissed two days later. Dr. Kane had proven his theory. Thanks to the willingness of a brave volunteer, Kane demonstrated that local anesthesia was a viable, and even preferable, alternative.

But I said there were two facts that made the surgery unique. I've told you the first: the use of local anesthesia. The second is the patient. The courageous candidate for surgery by Dr. Kane was Dr. Kane.

To prove his point, Dr. Kane operated on himself! A wise move. The doctor became a patient in order to convince the patients to trust the doctor.

HERE IS A SHORTER VERSION OF THIS STORY:

Dr. Evan O'Neill Kane, chief surgeon of the Kane Summit Hospital in New York, had been a surgeon for almost four decades. He was fascinated by the possibility of the use of local anesthetics in areas that had always used a general anesthetic. He was concerned about the dangers of what he considered the overuse of general anesthesia. He wanted to find an appendectomy candidate who would be willing to do it with a local only. As Dr. Kane had performed nearly four thousand such operations, he was confident this would be a good type of operation to do with such an approach. But it was tough to find someone who was willing to stay awake through such surgery. Finally, he found a willing candidate, and on February 15 he wheeled in the patient, prepped him, and prepared for the operation. The surgeon deftly cut into the patient, found the troublesome appendix, and took it out without a hitch. The operation was a rousing success, and the patient recovered nicely.

The date was 1921 and the patient was none other than Dr. Kane himself. He had succeeded in taking out his own appendix under local anesthetic. Dr. Kane gave new meaning to the expression "Physician, heal thyself!"

17. A Decision Over the Atlantic

Illustration

Warren Wiersbe

It was in 1873, in Dublin that D.L. Moody heard British evangelist Henry Varley utter those life changing words:

"The world has yet to see what God can do with and for and through and in a man who is fully and wholly consecrated to Him." It was after an all-night prayer meeting in Dublin, at the home of Henry Bewley. Varley did not even remember making the statement when Moody reminded him of it a year later. "As I crossed the wide Atlantic," Moody said, "the boards of the deck...were engraved with them, and when I reached Chicago, the very paving stones seemed marked with them."

The result: Moody decided he was involved in too many ministries to be effective and therefore began to concentrate on evangelism.

18. Daylight Lasts Longer

Illustration

Thomas Long

A couple in Arkansas had given their six-year-old son strict instructions to come home from playing every afternoon no later than 5 p.m. He was allowed to play with his friends, but his parents were quite serious about his curfew. If not home by 5 p.m., they'd begin to worry and call around the neighborhood to find out where he was. The boy knew this, though, and was careful to arrive every day on time.

One March Monday, however, the day after Daylight Saving Time went into effect, the boy was late coming home. When he finally arrived, a few minutes before 6 p.m., his mother scolded him for being late. "You know you are to be home by five," she said, "and here it is nearly six."

Puzzled, the little boy pointed out the window. "But the light," he protested, "the light; it's the light that tells me when to come home."

Realizing what had happened, his mother smiled and gently explained that the day before the time had been changed, that everyone had reset their clocks and, now, the daylight lasted longer. The boy's eyes narrowed. "Does God know about this?" he asked suspiciously.

In a childlike way, this little boy shared John's theological vision. Martha, Jesus wants you to know that with God daylight lasts longer than death.

19. The Leverage of Prayer

Illustration

C. H. Spurgeon

We would be abler teachers of others, and less liable to be carried about by every wind of doctrine, if we sought to have a more intelligent understanding of the Word of God. As the Holy Spirit, the Author of the Scriptures, alone can enlighten us rightly to understand them, we should constantly ask His teaching and His guidance unto all truth.

When the prophet Daniel sought to interpret Nebuchadnezzar's dream, what did he do? He set himself to earnest prayer that God would open up the vision. Therefore, if, your own and others' profiting, you desire to be "filled with the knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding," remember that prayer is your best means of study. Like Daniel, you shall understand the dream, and its interpretation, when you have sought God. You may force your way through many barriers to understanding with the leverage of prayer. Thoughts and reasonings are like the steel wedges which give a hold on truth, but prayer is the lever which forces open the treasure hidden within.

20. Basic Vision

Illustration

John Powell

If I think of you as a friend and collaborator, my emotions on meeting you will be warm and positive. If I see you as an enemy and competitor, my emotions will be just the opposite. You will remember the little verse:

Two men looked out from prison bars.
One saw mud, one saw stars.

In the pursuit of the fullness of human life, everything depends on this frame of reference, this habitual outlook, this basic vision that I have of myself, others, life, the world, and God: What we see is what we get.

Consequently, if you or I are to change, to grow into persons who are more fully human and more fully alive, we shall certainly have to become aware of our vision and patiently work at redressing its imbalances and eliminating its distortions. All real and permanent growth must begin here. A shy person can be coaxed into assuming an air of confidence, but it will only be a mask-one mask replacing another. There can be no real change, no real growth in any of us until and unless our basic perception of reality, or vision, is changed.

21. Anyone Can Have a Fruitful Ministry

Illustration

Our Daily Bread

John Warr, an 18th-century apprentice shoemaker, was determined to be a faithful witness for Christ. Another apprentice by the name of William was hired, and John repeatedly talked to him about spiritual things, but the new worker didn't want to be bothered. Then one day he was caught exchanging a counterfeit shilling for a good one. In his guilt and humiliation he asked John for help and prayer. Through the faithful witness of John Warr, that man put his faith in Christ and developed into a committed disciple.

The young apprentice was William Carey, who later became a remarkably fruitful missionary to India. Carey's life and ministry had a tremendous influence on the cause of worldwide gospel outreach in modern times.

Jesus said in John 15:8, "By this My Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit." This could be discouraging to Christians who can't preach, sing, teach, or go to the mission field. They might see themselves as stuck in a situation that makes fruitful service impossible.

If that's how you feel, then take courage from the example of John Warr. His impact on a co-worker brought glory to God and untold blessing to multitudes of people around the world.

22. Focus on Your Path

Illustration

Warren Wiersbe

It 1873, D.L. Moody first heard British evangelist Henry Varley utter these life changing words: "The world has yet to see what God can do with and for and through and in a man who is fully and wholly consecrated to Him." It was after an all-night prayer meeting in Dublin, at the home of Henry Bewley. Varley did not even remember making the statement when Moody reminded him of it a year later. "As I crossed the wide Atlantic," Moody said, "the boards of the deck...were engraved with them, and when I reached Chicago, the very paving stones seemed marked with them." The result: Moody decided he was involved in too many ministries to be effective and therefore began to concentrate on evangelism.

23. We Can't Contain God In Our Cups!

Illustration

Zan W. Holmes

One morning a little girl sat at a kitchen table to eat breakfast with her mother and father. As she listened to the prayer her father prayed before the meal, she was especially intrigued that he thanked God for God's presence everywhere.

After the father finished his prayer the little girl asked him, "Father, is it really true that God is everywhere?"

"Yes," said her father.

"Is God in this house?" she asked.

"Yes," her father said.

"Is God in this kitchen?"

"Yes," her father said.

"Is God on this table?" she asked.

"Yes," her father said.

The little girl hesitated and then asked, "Is God in this cup?"

Her father said, "Yes."

Upon hearing this the little girl quickly covered the cup with her hand and exclaimed, "I've got Him!"

In Job's attempt to make some sense out of his suffering, he tried desperately to figure God out by confining God to his own narrow conception of God. In other words, Job was trying to get God to respond within the limited confines of Job's own theological cup. In fact, Job was so certain of his theology that he believed he would prevail if his case were presented before God. To be sure, this is why he wanted to find God. He said, "Would he contend with me in the greatness of his power? No; but he would give heed to me. There an upright person could reason with him, and I should be acquitted forever by my judge" (Job 23:6-7).

Finally in chapter 38 God appears before Job as a voice out of the whirlwind: Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up your loins like a man, I will question you, and you shall declare to me. Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements -- surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone when the morning stars sang together and all the heavenly beings shouted for joy? -- Job 38:2-7

As soon as God speaks, Job realizes that he can never have the luxury of saying: "I've got God!" Indeed Job now knows that God has exceeded Job's expectations and refuses to be contained and fit neatly into any theological box that Job has constructed. So God answers Job, but not according to Job's definition of the problem of suffering. Instead God transposes the issue to another level which emphasizes God's power and divine knowledge in contrast to the human weakness and ignorance of Job.[1] In response, Job now realizes how foolish he has been to propose that he understood everything that happens. In fact, Job answers God and says, "See, I am of small account; what shall I answer you? I lay my hand on my mouth. I have spoken once, and I will not answer; twice, but will proceed no further" (Job 40:4-5).

No longer does Job seek to arrange a debate where he can instruct God. He finally realizes that it is he and not God who is unaware of life's complete picture. When we too are tempted to believe that God is bound by our theologies, rituals, denominations, and traditions, like Job, we are called to remember that God is boundless and cannot be contained in any of our cups. We cannot put God in the cup of any ritual and say, "I've got God covered." We cannot put God in the cup of any theology and say, "I've got God covered." We cannot put God in the cup of any church tradition and say, "I've got God covered." We cannot put God in any ethnic or gender cup and say, "I've got God covered."

Job learned that God stands above all human systems and wisdom. The purpose behind it all is not to answer directly the problem of suffering, but to give Job a vision of God's glory and presence with Job in the midst of Job's suffering. Thus Job discovers that he can trust God's purposes even though he cannot clearly understand them. Indeed, he comes to see that his new relationship with God will sustain him in the midst of his suffering.

Our African American forefathers and foremothers in the midst of the suffering of slavery could identify with Job's predicament. Even in the face of sorrow and suffering in the absurdity of slavery they were able to sing praises to God through the spirituals. Even though their relationship with God did not bring an immediate end to their oppressive condition, they were sustained by the faith that the cup of slavery could not contain the God of their hope and liberation. By the grace of God, it was a faith that enabled them to sing: Nobody knows the trouble I see, Nobody knows but Jesus. Nobody knows the trouble I see, Glory, Hallelujah.

1. Beverly B. Gaventa, editor, Texts for Preaching, (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993), p. 551. "

24. How to Be a Pilgrim

Illustration

Alex Gondola

The Pilgrims had the courage to act on their commitments, no matter what. Do we?

Sociologist Robert Bellah, author of Habits of the Heart, is impressed by the power of religion. He once said, "We should not underestimate the significance of the small group of people who have a new vision of a just and gentle world. The quality of a culture may be changed when two percent of its people have a new vision (and act on it)."

Christians make up far more than two percent of most town, far more than two percent of Americans. So, why don't we have a greater effect: on issues of the environment, on justice for the needy, on the quality of life in our own city? Could it be we need more courage to act on our commitments? To be a Pilgrim means to stand up for what you believe, no matter what.

To be a Pilgrim also means sharing what you have, and turning thanks into giving. The Pilgrim colonists willingly shared all they had. During their first three years, all property was held in common. At one point, they were down to five kernels of corn per day for food. Still, they divided the corn kernels up equally. And, the original group of fifty that survived the first winter shared their limited food with the sixty newcomers who arrived in the spring.

One of their finest moments came in 1623, at the first real Thanksgiving. The small colony hosted over ninety Native American braves for three days. There was eating and drinking, wrestling, footraces, and gun and arrow-shooting competitions. It was the Pilgrims' way of saying "Thank you" to God, and to the Native Americans who had helped them survive. To be a Pilgrim means sharing and turning thanks into giving. How thankful and giving are we?

25. Gladdening the Valleys Below

Illustration

Edward F. Markquart

God never meant us to live on the mountaintop. We don't often read the Transfiguration and include the story immediately after it, but we should. Because the next story is the key to the transfiguration story. The disciples and Jesus came off the mountain, and they came right down to the bottom of the valley. They came off the mountain and they came down into the valley and they found a boy who was having epileptic seizures. The mother and father were enormously upset and worried about the desperately sick boy, and the little boy fell into a fire and burned himself. In other words, the disciples came down off that mountaintop right into the problems of real life. Home from a mountaintop vacation and into the real world at home. And the disciples discovered that God is also down in the valley and does not live only or even primarily on the mountaintop.

I like the quotation by Henry Drummond, the Scottish theologian when he said, "God does not make the mountains in order to be inhabited. God does not make the mountaintops for us to live on the mountaintops. It is not God's desire that we live on the mountaintops. We only ascend to the heights to catch a broader vision of the earthly surroundings below. But we don't live there. We don't tarry there. The streams begin in the uplands, but these streams descend quickly to gladden the valleys below." The streams start in the mountaintops, but they come down to gladden the valleys below.

You and I experience the valleys of life. You and I both know what happens the next day coming down from the mountain. It is the real world and the real life. After Sundays of life, there are always Mondays. You know, the tough ones of life. God is with us there.

26. A Courageous Mr. Nobody

Illustration

Jon Johnston

Who was United States Senator Edmund G. Ross of Kansas? I suppose you could call him a "Mr. Nobody." No law bears his name. Not a single list of Senate "greats" mentions his service. Yet when Ross entered the Senate in 1866, he was considered the man to watch. He seemed destined to surpass his colleagues, but he tossed it all away by one courageous act of conscience.

Let's set the stage.

Conflict was dividing our government in the wake of the Civil War. President Andrew Johnson was determined to follow Lincoln's policy of reconciliation toward the defeated South. Congress, however, wanted to rule the downtrodden Confederate states with an iron hand.

Congress decided to strike first. Shortly after Senator Ross was seated, the Senate introduced impeachment proceedings against the hated President. The radicals calculated that they needed thirty-six votes, and smiled as they concluded that the thirty-sixth was none other than Ross'. The new senator listened to the vigilante talk. But to the surprise of many, he declared that the president "deserved as fair a trial as any accused man has ever had on earth." The word immediately went out that his vote was "shaky." Ross received an avalanche of anti-Johnson telegrams from every section of the country. Radical senators badgered him to "come to his senses."

The fateful day of the vote arrived. The courtroom galleries were packed. Tickets for admission were at an enormous premium.

As a deathlike stillness fell over the Senate chamber, the vote began. By the time they reached Ross, twenty-four "guilties" had been announced. Eleven more were certain. Only Ross' vote was needed to impeach the President. Unable to conceal his emotion, the Chief Justice asked in a trembling voice, "Mr. Senator Ross, how vote you? Is the respondent Andrew Johnson guilty as charged?" Ross later explained, at that moment, "I looked into my open grave. Friendships, position, fortune, and everything that makes life desirable to an ambitions man were about to be swept away by the breath of my mouth, perhaps forever." Then, the answer came unhesitating, unmistakable: "Not guilty!" With that, the trial was over. And the response was as predicted.

A high public official from Kansas wired Ross to say: "Kansas repudiates you as she does all perjurers and skunks." The "open grave" vision had become a reality. Ross' political career was in ruins. Extreme ostracism, and even physical attack awaited his family upon their return home.

One gloomy day Ross turned to his faithful wife and said, "Millions cursing me today will bless me tomorrow...though not but God can know the struggle it has cost me." It was a prophetic declaration. Twenty years later Congress and the Supreme Court verified the wisdom of his position, by changing the laws related to impeachment.

Ross was appointed Territorial Governor of New Mexico. Then, just prior to his death, he was awarded a special pension by Congress. The press and country took this opportunity to honor his courage which, they finally concluded, had saved our country from crisis and division.

27. Ounce of Prevention

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

There's a fascinating biography of Irene Webster Smith by Russell Hitt titled Sensei, which means "teacher" in Japanese. Irene Smith was a Quaker and a missionary to Japan for some fifty years. Sensei became her name to the Japanese. She first went to Japan about 1915 under the Japan Evangelistic Band from her native Ireland. Her first assignment was to serve in the Tokyo Rescue Home, which sought to save prostitutes from their entrapment in the government-licensed brothels. In this early experience, Sensei learned how these young girls, who were unwanted by their parents, were sold into a life of prostitution and trained from their earliest years to know no other experience. These days in the Tokyo Rescue Home were very discouraging to Sensei, because these girls, no matter how they seemed to repent of their past, would so often revert to their life of immorality as soon as they regained their health.

In the midst of this frustrating job a thought came to Sensei. It would be better to put a fence at the top of the precipice than an ambulance at the foot. And with that thought a vision was born—a vision of a home for unwanted girls—a home warmed by love and bright with God's grace, a home where little girls, once destined for brothels and disease, could be brought up in happiness to lead full and useful Christian lives. And so, for many years Sensei turned to the work of endeavoring to keep young girls from falling over this particular precipice.

Which is most important? Picking up the pieces in people's lives after calamity has struck (running an ambulance service), or catching a few, as it were, midair in a net, or building fences to keep people from trouble in the first place?

28. In the Hands of God

Illustration

Joel D. Kline

Raymond Fung, who some years ago served as secretary of evangelism for the World Council of Churches, asserts that "waiting is an attitude, an inclination to act. Our waiting communicates that life is not all it should be. We wait because there is something worth having. We wait because the resources we need to survive and to grow are not in our own hands, but in the hands of God."

29. What's Your Style of Evangelism?

Illustration

Brett Blair

A true heart of compassion will let people know of God's love and that God has provided a way to experience true life, an abundant life. But How? Do we all have to share the same way? No, the unbelieving world is made up of a variety of people: young, old, rich, poor, educated, uneducated, urban, rural, with different race, personalities, values, politics, and religious backgrounds. It's going to take more than one style of evangelism to reach such a diverse population!

So what is your style?

Confrontational? Repent and be baptized, save yourselves from this corrupt generation. (Acts 2)

Intellectual? Paul debated with the philosophers on Mars Hill to convince them. (Acts 17)

Testimonial? One thing I do know. I was blind but now I see! (John 9)

Relational? Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you. (Mark 5)

Invitational? The Samaritan woman at the well begged the people of the city to come and hear Jesus for themselves. (John 4)

Serving? Dorcas impacted her city by doing deeds of kindness. (Acts 9)

Don't ever think you're a second class Christian because you don't proclaim Christ like Peter or Paul. Discover your own method. Then get out of your chair and use it, for the Glory of God. Live by faith, not fear!!!

30. WHEN WINNING MEANS LOSING

Illustration

John H. Krahn

For the Christian, life is idyllic. As you embrace Christ, your problems become opportunities, heartaches turn into joys, and bad times fade into the past. Your career succeeds as it never has. Your relationship with those around you is enhanced. Unkind words once directed toward you no longer make their way to your ears. Temptation runs against you, then retreats in dismay. Money is no longer a problem, for you’ll have more than enough. Lovely flowers moving in the fresh breeze send their fragrance your way as the warming rays of the sun fill your body with the feeling of health and beautiful harmony with God and nature. You are God’s special person. He spares you from pain, problems, and poverty.

Hogwash, unmitigated hogwash - more like heresy. If Christianity is as I have just described it, then all of us must be wondering whether we really are Christians. Although our walk with Jesus brings us many blessings that will enhance our lives, the Evil One does not roll over and play dead when we follow Christ but continues to dog us as we make our way through life. Following Jesus Christ also brings with it a degree of suffering as our selfishness is lost to service and discipleship. And as we struggle to be what we are, children of God through Baptism, it is often hard and painful. Christ suffered, his followers suffered, we too will have the privilege of suffering.

Those of us who try to live a moral life in society that is so permissive know the suffering that sometimes accompanies our uniqueness. Often, others look at us in disbelief when we stand for something because it’s right rather than because it’s expedient. To them we appear as losers. But for us to do less is to march to a different drum beat than the one Jesus sounds. Jesus puts it this way, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me." To lead a winning Christian life, we lose our selfishness and replace it with selflessness.

Our march through life does not end at the grave but moves beyond. Our vision is both present and future, in this world and the next. Courageously we meet the world, proclaiming the glory of the Lord in word and deed and find strength through him to overcome whatever conflicts our faith might encounter. Leaning on him we seek his Spirit’s power to help us deny ourselves, to bear his cross, and to even suffer for the Gospel’s sake. With Christ we desire that everyone might become his children through faith and join him and us at the Father’s house in eternity.

When we arrive, God will look us over - not for medals, or awards, or degrees, but for scars. Finding them, he will declare, "Ah, a wise person who understood that winning meant losing."

31. Imitate Generosity

Illustration

Douglas R. A. Hare

The climax of the parable occurs in verse 15: "Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?" The vineyard owner claims the right to pay his workers not on the basis of their merits but on the basis of his own compassion. Why should such generosity be condemned as injustice? Underlying the parable is the Old Testament conception of God as the creator who is GOOD, that is, generous to all (see, e.g., Ps.145:9). Jesus reveled in the incredible magnanimity of God (see 5:45). Of course Jesus believed in the God of justice, but in his vision of God the divine compassion greatly outshone the divine justice. Those who worship such a God must imitate his generosity, not begrudge it.

32. Mary’s Faith

Illustration

Timothy W. Brock

In light of the highly unusual circumstances surrounding his conception, the birthing and rearing of Jesus of Nazareth was indeed a profound act of faith. A young woman and various members of her family were asked to demonstrate a remarkable level of faith in themselves, in the future of all humanity, and ultimately, in God when she became pregnant prior to her marriage. In faith, as this mother gazed at her child in the manger, her personal hopes and dreams for her son were tempered by her knowledge that this child would indeed redeem the past and communicate God's vision for the future. This child's character would develop in a faithful home. From his parents and other members of his family, this child would learn about his rich family and religious heritage. Eventually, this child would grow and mature to the point that he would ask deep questions, questions that cause religious leaders, and even his mother, to reflect on life and faith in fresh ways.

33. Can We Bear the Light?

Illustration

B. Wiley Stephens

The story is told of a young monk asking an older monk, "Father, if God is infinitely merciful, how can he deprive anyone of his heavenly kingdom?" The older monk answered, "Why do you keep turning your head from side to side?" The younger monk replied, "Because the sun keeps hitting me right in the eye and just won't leave me in peace." "Then you've answered your own question," the older monk laughed. "God doesn't deprive anyone of his heavenly kingdom. Some simply cannot bear the light, any more than you can bear the sun."

This vision of the last judgment is telling us that there is a greater standard than what we think or what we are comfortable with. Leander Keck has noted that true authority is not self-generated but stands over against us because it has its own integrity. It is a standard by which we can be judged. This speaks of an ultimate justice where that which is wrong will be made right. We will be held accountable.

34. The Power to See

Illustration

Staff

If you are like most people, the first time you looked into a microscope all you saw was a fuzzy gray blur. But when you got everything in right adjustment, and got your seeing eye in precisely the right position, there it was! A living thing pulsating with life, a tiny paramecium or amoeba, or whatever it was you were trying to see.

Here we are today in Christian worship. Here we look at life: we look into heights and depths - deep within ourselves and into the far reaches and ranges of what we are. And we look to God.

May God help us to adjust the powers of our vision that we may see as we have not seen before, that things may come into focus for us and be clear, that by the aid of faith we may discover what we otherwise could never know. May this time of worship be a discovery time, a time of better seeing, a time of deeper understanding. And so may we go from here equipped with a finer insight for the ventures of living which are out there ahead of us.

35. What Does Faith Mean for You?

Illustration

Mark Trotter

Arie Brouer was a Reformed pastor, part of the Reformed Church in America. At one time he was the General Secretary of the National Council of Churches. As a Reformed pastor, he was part of the Calvinist tradition, and the tradition that has the strongest emphasis on God's sovereign rule over the whole creation. It was the Calvinists after all who invented predestination to affirm that God is in control of everything. Every single move that we make is controlled by God.

Then Arie Brouer got cancer. A terrible theological problem for any sensitive Christian, but I would think especially so for a Calvinist. His son asked him about it in the most innocent way. "What does faith mean for you now that you are facing this?"

Arie Brouer responded by saying that he had believed in God all of his life, and because he has cancer is no reason for him to stop believing in God. His son said, "But you and mom have spent a lot of your life trying to make this a better place for all people. This is a very strange way to be paid back."

Brouer said to his son, "Steve, I don't believe that God wants me to have cancer. But what I have come to believe during these days is that God can't do anything about it. That raises some very fundamental questions for me about what I have been taught and what I have believed over the years about the almightiness of God. Because if God can't stop this, then I have to come to some new understanding of God's almightiness, or perhaps reject it altogether. I haven't had time to think about this because I am too busy dealing with all sorts of survival questions. But I am going to work on it."

And he did. He counted the number of times God's "almightiness" is mentioned in the New Testament. He discovered it is only ten times. Nine of the ten times are in the Book of Revelation, the last book of the Bible, the vision of the end of history. He said, "I looked at those texts that talk about God's almightiness, and I discovered that every one of them has to do with God's ultimate triumph in history. They say that at the end of history, God's love, and justice, and peace, will prevail. At the end of history, God will prevail in the struggle, and that now God is with us in the struggle. And I said to myself, 'Arie, why in the world haven't you understood this before.'"

36. Angels on Assignment

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

This happened in 1956 during the Mau Mau uprisings in East Africa. The story is told by veteran missionary Morris Plotts.

A band of roving Mau Maus came to the village of Lauri, surrounded it, and killed every inhabitant, including women and children—three hundred people in all. Not more than three miles away was the Rift Valley Academy, a private boarding school where children were being educated while their missionary parents worked elsewhere. Immediately upon leaving the carnage at Lauri the Mau Maus came with spears, clubs, torches, and bows and arrows to the school, bent on destruction.

You can imagine the fear of those children at the school. Word had already reached them about the destruction of Lauri. There was no place to flee. The only resource was prayer.

Out in the night, lighted torches were seen coming toward the school. Soon there was a complete ring of these terrorists about the school, cutting off all avenues of escape. Shouting and curses could be heard coming from the Mau Maus. Then they began to advance on the school, tightening the circle, shouting louder, coming closer. Suddenly, when they were close enough to throw a spear, they stopped. They began to retreat, and soon they were running into the jungle. A call had gone out to the authorities, and an army had been sent in the direction of the school to rescue the inhabitants. But by the time the army arrived, the would-be assassins had dispersed. The army spread out in search of them and captured the entire band of raiding Mau Maus.

Later, before the judge at their trial, the Mau Mau leader was called to the witness stand. The judge asked him, "On this night did you kill the inhabitants of Lauri?"

The leader replied, "Yes."

"Was it your intent to do the same at the Rift Valley Academy?"

"Yes".

"Well then," asked the judge, "why did you not complete the mission? Why didn't you attack the school?"

The leader, who had never read the Bible and never heard the gospel, replied, "We were on our way to attack and destroy all the people at the school. But as we came closer, all of a sudden, between us and the school, there were many huge men, dressed in white with flaming swords. We became afraid and we ran to hide!"

37. One Nation Under God?

Illustration

Brett Blair

You would have thought that the population of the US was headed toward a godless future reading this stat from 1992. But compare this first paragraph to a the second which is a Pew poll. Not much has changed. The good news here is that America remains a wonderful field for evangelism and change.

1992

In "One Nation Under God," a statistical map of American religion, summarized in the November 29 issue of Newsweek, Barry Kosmin and Seymour Lachman of the City University of New York have assembled data from 113,000 respondents, by far the most comprehensive random sample of detailed religious preference ever collected. The survey determined that nearly 1/3 of the adult U.S. population (18 and over) is now "totally secular" in its spiritual outlook! It also found that only 19 percent of adult Americans about 36 million people regularly practice their faith. The rest are described as "moderately religious" (22 percent), "barely" or nominally religious (29 percent) and agnostics and atheists (7.5 percent). The survey has an important message for the religiously and politically conservative who are interested in reversing the downward cultural spiral. It is unlikely that the 19 percent whose faith affects their lives and world view can change the moral and social conditions of our country through political means alone.

2019

The religious landscape of the United States continues to change at a rapid clip. In Pew Research Center telephone surveys conducted in 2018 and 2019, 65% of American adults describe themselves as Christians when asked about their religion, down 12 percentage points over the past decade. Meanwhile, the religiously unaffiliated share of the population, consisting of people who describe their religious identity as atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular,” now stands at 26%, up from 17% in 2009.

https://www.pewforum.org/2019/10/17/in-u-s-decline-of-christianity-continues-at-rapid-pace/

38. A Vision For The Future

Illustration

Richard A. Jensen

A few years back a west coast bishop returned home from a meeting of his denomination's bishops in Kansas City. He reported on the meeting to his staff. He worked up the most energy in talking about the three major speakers. "One of the speakers," he told his staff, "teaches Bible at one of our seminaries. She did an excellent job of tracing all the currents of biblical research that have brought us to the present. She gave an excellent review of the recent and not so recent past in biblical studies." "A second speaker," the bishop continued, "was a theologian. He did much the same thing as the biblical teacher. He reminded us of our heritage. He talked about the giants of theology in the early 20th century. He outlined the major streams of theology that have brought us to our present state." The bishop started warming to his subject now. "The third speaker," he reported with a gleam in his eye, "was an incredibly gifted lay woman who works in the field of applied science. She is a member of our denomination and a product of one of our church colleges. The things she told us about the nature of science today were mindboggling. It's a field that is changing with incredible speed. The average length of time of a job in her field is three years. The average length of time of a company in the field is seven years. On the one hand, she said, that is scary. On the other hand, however, this is probably the most exciting time to be alive that humankind has ever known.

Things are changing. There are grand new opportunities. We can change our future!" After he had finished reviewing the speakers the bishop grew more serious. "I found it interesting," he went on, "that our church's teachers talked to us mostly about the past while she talked to us mostly of the future. And that's not all. She not only talked about the future but she made it clear that science has moved far beyond the point of thinking that God is to be factored out of any intelligent equation. As we move to a new future, she said that the spiritual issues were of absolutely vital concern. And you have the answers here, she said to us. We look to you. We need you. Help us provide the spiritual sustenance the world needs as we move toward a new tomorrow."

The bishop was clearly fond of this woman scientist. He had a chance to visit with her at the end of the five days they were together. He reported to his staff on that conversation as well. "She told me," the bishop began, "that she had been very carefully observing our group over our five days together. And she was impressed. 'These are wonderful leaders,' she told me. 'As a group you are incredibly bright and talented. I've never heard any group that is so knowledgeable of the kind of issues you discuss with each other. I've been listening in on your conversations and I am thankful that my church has such dedicated leaders. But,' she said, 'everything you talk about is in the past. It's the past that you are so expert in discussing. It's the church's past that you are so knowledgeable of. But I don't think I've heard anyone discuss the future. Where is your church going in this exciting time? What kind of new future are you going to create? Surely in the church you have language to talk about the future. Surely you have language in the Bible which can hold out a vision of hope for a new world.' "

39. Rest on God's Word

Illustration

An elderly man said to H.A. Ironside, "I will not go on unless I know I'm saved, or else know it's hopeless to seek to be sure of it. I want a definite witness, something I can't be mistaken about!"

Ironside replied, "Suppose you had a vision of an angel who told you your sins were forgiven. Would that be enough to rest on?"

"Yes, I think it would. An angel should be right."

Ironside continued, "But suppose on your deathbed Satan came and said, 'I was that angel, transformed to deceive you.' What would you say?" The man was speechless.

Ironside then told him that God has given us something more dependable than the voice of an angel. He has given His Son, who died for our sins, and He has testified in His own Word that if we trust Him all our sins are gone. Ironside read I John 5:13, "You may know that you have eternal life." Then he said, "Is that not enough to rest on? It is a letter from heaven expressly to you."

God's Spirit used that to bring assurance to the man's heart.

40. Father at the Game

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

Some years ago, Columbia University had a great football coach by the name of Lou Little. One day Lou had a boy try out for the varsity team who wasn't really very good. But Lou noticed that there was something unique about him—while he wasn't nearly good enough to make the team, he had such irrepressible spirit and contagious enthusiasm that Lou thought, this boy would be a great inspiration on the bench. He'll never be able to play, but I'll leave him on the team to encourage the others.

As the season went on, Lou began to develop a tremendous admiration and love for this boy. One of the things that especially impressed him was the manner with which the boy obviously cared for his father. Whenever the father would come for a visit to the campus the boy and his father would always be seen walking together, arm in arm, an obvious indication of an exceptional bond of love between them. They could always be seen on Sunday going to and from the university chapel. It was obvious that theirs was a deep and mutually shared Christian faith. Then, one day, a telephone call came to Coach Little. He was informed that the boy's father had just died—would he be the one to tell the boy? With a heavy heart Lou informed the boy of his father's death, and he immediately left to go home for the funeral.

A few days later the boy returned to the campus, only two days before the biggest game of the season. Lou went to him and said, "Is there anything I can do for you? Anything at all?" And to the coach's astonishment the boy said, "Let me start the game on Saturday!" Lou was taken aback. He thought, I can't let him start, he's not good enough. But he remembered his promise to help and said, “All right, you can start the game,” but he thought to himself, I'll leave him in for a few plays and then take him out. The day of the big game arrived. To everyone's surprise the coach started this boy who had never played in a game all season. But imagine even the coach's surprise when, on the very first play from scrimmage, that boy was the one who single-handedly made a tackle that threw the opposing team for a loss. The boy went on to play inspired football play after play. In fact, he played so exceptionally that Lou left him in for the entire game; the boy led his team to victory and he was voted the outstanding player of the game.

When the game was finally over Lou approached the boy and said, "Son, what got into you today?" And the boy replied, "You remember when my father would visit me here at school and we would spend a lot of time together walking arm in arm around the campus? My father and I shared a secret that nobody around here knew anything about. You see, my father was blind—and today was the first time he ever saw me play!"

It is because of resurrection vision that we are able to "play above our heads" in the game of life and "see" the purposes and power and love of God.

41. A Story of Meeting Christ

Illustration

Michael Card

Let me tell you of someone who knows about the Spirit of God invading a life. This story is told by Michael Card in his book, Immanuel. It is about Joseph, a tall, slender Massai warrior in Kenya. Some time ago he met a man along a dusty African road who told him the story of Christ. Joseph became a believer and rejoiced in the "Jesus story." Joseph became a fiery witness, to the point that he later made the long journey from Africa to Amsterdam for an Evangelism conference with Billy Graham. His greatest hope was to meet Graham in person. A staff member named Robert was so struck by Joseph's story that he made it possible for Joseph to tell his conversion experience to Dr. Graham. You need to hear Joseph's story in his own words:

"After I met Jesus, I was so excited that I just knew everyone in my village would be happy to meet him also. So I went door-to-door telling everyone I met about the cross of Jesus and the salvation it offered. To my amazement my people not only didn't care, they became hostile. The men held me to the ground while the women began beating me with barbed wire. I was dragged from the village and left to die in the bush." Joseph somehow managed to crawl to a water hole, and there, after two days of passing in and out of consciousness, found he had the strength to get up. He was puzzled about the hostile reception from family and friends whom he had known all his life. "I decided that I must have left something important out of the story I told them about Jesus. So I practiced it over and over, then limped back to tell them the good news. I went again, from hut-to-hut telling about Jesus who died for us so we might find forgiveness and know the living God. Again they held me down and I was beaten, opening anew the former wounds. They dragged me unconscious outside the camp and I was left for dead. I woke up two days later, scarred and bruised, but still alive. For the third time I went back into my home village and started to witness. But they were waiting for me. I was set upon, thrown to the ground and as the beatings began I passed out. When I awakened this time I was in my own bed. The folks who had been whipping on me had now become my nurses. Everyone in my village had become a believer in Christ." After telling Billy Graham his story, Joseph lifted his colorful African shirt and showed his scars. Afterward, Billy said to his staff, "I'm not worthy to untie his shoes, and he wanted to meet me?"

Because most of us have been brought up in the church, we may not realize that there is more to faith than simply going through our normal religious routines, as important as they are. Christ has promised us a comforter, an encourager, someone who will fill us with new excitement about our lives so that we may more easily translate our good intentions into positive actions. Paul tells us to use our head. He tells us to open our hearts to God's Spirit so that we will have power for the living of our lives.

42. TO BE WHAT WE ARE

Illustration

John H. Krahn

Gentle Jesus, meek and mild ... sweet, passive, wish-washy Jesus was not the man who whipped animals and beat up money changers at the annual Passover festival in Jerusalem. Tables overturned, money crashing to the floor, rolling everywhere, pigeons frantically flying for cover, men screaming in pain, adding salty language to the cacophony of sound and confusion all taking place in the Holy Temple. "What has the Master gotten himself into now?" his disciples probably worried. "Take these things away," Jesus screamed, "You shall not make my Father’s house a house of trade."

Slowly order was restored, perhaps coming at the point of Jesus’ exhaustion. Gingerly, Jews quizzed him on the appropriateness of his behavior. "What sign have you to show us for doing this?" they asked. A reasonable question from the uninitiated. One might rather have expected a few cries of "Throw the bum out of here" or demands for retribution. Jesus probably commanded so much authority that hasty action against him was not considered wise.

Our Lord's answer to their question confused his hearers. "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up," Jesus offered.

"It has taken forty-six years to build this temple and will you raise it up in three days?" they questioned in unbelief. At the time not even Jesus’ disciples understood what he was suggesting. Only after his resurrection did they realize that the temple referred to his body that would be destroyed and then resurrected in three days.

In Jesus’ ministry there is evidence that he regarded his death as the means by which the old sacrificial system would be condemned and the new Israel would come into being after his resurrection. Here he refers to his body as the temple. Later Saint Paul refers to the church as the "body of Christ" - a body alive, growing, reaching out, ever-changing with many parts working together for the good of the whole. Its hands are not made for patting itself on the back but for reaching out to the lost. Its eyes are not fixed on a rearview mirror looking at where it has been but are busy seeking a glimpse of the Father’s vision of where it should go. Its legs do not run in busy circles but walk the road of obedience. It does not lose heart when confronted by risk but follows the Spirit’s leading even into the unknown. Its mouth does not seek to speak of Jesus as the eschatological manifestation of the ground of our being, but as God’s gift of love and forgiveness for those who are hurting. The church endeavors to unite its mind with God’s mind, its will with his will, its purposes with his purposes, and its plans with his plans.

Seized by the Spirit of God the church lives as if all depends on God, for its very life is dependent upon God. It shares with God in the salvation of his children. As it does this, it gently comforts the afflicted and boldly afflicts the comfortable. Jesus, the church’s head, is its leader. Jesus, meek and mild, sometimes; Jesus, bold and belligerent, often.

"To be or not to be," is rarely the question for the church. Jesus dwells in the midst of our community. We are the church - the body of Christ. Come Holy Spirit, we pray, help us to be more completely what we are.

43. Sadness in the Heart of God

Illustration

John Claypool

There is a Jewish parable that both parallels and illumines Jesus' story, and it has helped to clarify my understanding greatly. This one is about a "farmer who lived in Poland. For generations before him, his family had been very poor. One night he was awakened by an angel of the Lord, who said: "You have found favor in the eyes of your Maker. He wants to do for you what he did for your ancestor Abraham. He wants to bless you. Therefore, make any three requests that you will of God, and he will be pleased to give them to you. There is only one condition: your neighbor will get a double portion of everything that is bequeathed to you."

The farmer was startled by this revelation and woke up his wife to tell her all about it. She suggested that they put the whole thing to a test. So they prayed. "Oh, blessed God, if we could just have a herd of a thousand cattle, that would enable us to break out of the poverty in which we have lived for generations. That would be wonderful." No sooner had they said these words than they heard the sound of animal noises outside. Lo and behold, all around the house were a thousand magnificent animals!

During the next two days, the farmer's feet hardly touched the ground. He divided his time between praising God for such great generosity and beginning to make practical provisions for his newly acquired affluence. On the third afternoon, he was up on a hill behind his house trying to decide where to build a new barn when he looked across at his neighbor's field, and there standing on the green hillside were two thousand magnificent cattle. For the first time since the angel of the Lord had appeared, the joy within him evaporated and a scowl of envy took its place. He went home that evening in a foul mood, refused to eat supper, and went to bed in an absolute rage. He could not fall asleep because every time he closed his eyes, all he could see were his neighbor's two thousand cattle.

Deep in the night, however, he remembered that the angel had said he could make three wishes. With that, he shifted his focus away from his neighbor and back to his own situation, and the old joy quickly returned. Digging deep into his own heart to find out what else he really wanted, he began to realize that in addition to some kind of material security, he always wanted descendants to carry his name into the future. So he prayed a second time: "Gracious God, if it please thee, give me a child that I may have descendants." With that, he and his wife made love, and because of his experience with the cattle, he was not too surprised shortly thereafter to learn that she was expecting.

The next months were passed in unbroken joy. The farmer was busy assimilating his newly acquired affluence and looking forward to the great grace of becoming a parent. On the night his first child was born, he was absolutely overjoyed. The next day was the Sabbath. He went to the synagogue, and at the time of the prayers of the people, he stood up and shared with the gathered community his great good fortune: now at last a child had been born into their home. He had hardly sat down, however, when his neighbor got up and said, "God has indeed been gracious to our little community. I had twin sons born last night. Thanks be to God." On hearing that, the farmer went home in an utterly different mood than the one in which he came. Instead of being joyful once again he was filled with the canker of jealousy.

This time, however, his envy did not abate. Late that evening, he made his third request of God: "Please, gouge out my right eye."

No sooner had he said these words than the angel who had initiated the whole process appeared again and asked, "Why, son of Abraham, have you turned to such vengeful desirings?" With pent-up rage, the farmer replied, "I cannot stand to see my neighbor prosper. I'll gladly sacrifice half of my vision for the satisfaction of knowing that he will never be able to look on what he has."

Those words were followed by a long silence, and as the farmer looked, he saw tears forming in the eyes of the angel. "Why, O son of Abraham, have you turned an occasion for blessing into a time of hurting? Your third request will not be granted, not because the Lord lacks integrity, but because God is full of mercy. However, know this, O foolish one, you have brought sadness not only to yourself, but to the very heart of God."

44. God's Getting Better at It

Illustration

Lane Boyd

Since the beginning God has attempted to get people's attention and to call them into a commitment to live with principles, values, and sense of sacredness that God wants from all humanity. Sometimes the people heard and responded to God, and sometimes they ignored God.

God kept trying. God kept working at getting their attention. I heard about a little girl who sort of understands that about God. She was sitting on her grandfather's lap as he read her a bedtime story. From time to time, she would take her eyes off the book and reach up to touch his wrinkled cheek. She was alternately stroking her own cheek, then his again. Finally she spoke up, "Grandpa, did God make you?"

"Yes, Sweetheart," he answered, "God made me a long time ago."

"Oh," she paused, "Grandpa, did God make me too?"

"Yes, indeed, honey," he said, "God made you just a little while ago."

Feeling their respective faces again, she observed, "God's getting better at it, isn't he?"

God got better at it. After untold efforts to win our allegiance and our hearts, God took on human form, walking among us and living with us so that we would understand.

It is in the living, breathing person of Jesus that we really see all things we call holy, such as forgiveness, sharing, joy, vision, courage, perseverance, and especially love. We might think we understand love, for example, but when we receive totally unconditional love from another person, love takes on a completely new meaning for us. Jesus shows us the ultimate example of love, namely, God's love. Seeing this example in the flesh makes all the difference in the world for us.

45. Transfigured: Who Changed?

Illustration

Laurel A. Dykstra

Laurel A. Dykstra, a scripture and justice educator living in Vancouver, British Columbia, wrote the following in an article for Sojourners Magazine: "My first night at Guadalupe House, a Catholic Worker "transition house" where I spent nearly 10 years, I sat at the wobbly-legged table amid a circle of men's faces, black and brown and white, and looked at the peeling linoleum, tattered sheer yellow curtains, broken couches, and roach-filled corners. I had never seen a place so ugly. After a week of hospitality, laughter, community, and connection, I sat in the same seat and caught myself thinking, 'What a kind and homey room this is.' Transfigured.

"So I wonder: In Matthew's story of the mountain, was it Jesus who changed or was it that John, James, and Peter could now see the face of God shining in the man they knew? Did the thin air and the elevated perspective contribute to their clarity of vision? When they came down from the mountaintop, did they take their new capacity to see into the low places and crowded city streets? Can we? And when we see the face of God shining through those who are familiar to us, do we truly, deeply listen to them?"

46. God's Timetable Not Ours

Illustration

Larry R. Kalajainen

I heard a story which illustrates how we often confuse God's timing with ours. A country newspaper had been running a series of articles on the value of church attendance. One day, a letter to the editor was received in the newspaper office. It read, "Print this if you dare. I have been trying an experiment. I have a field of corn which I plowed on Sunday. I planted it on Sunday. I did all the cultivating on Sunday. I gathered the harvest on Sunday and hauled it to my barn on Sunday. I find that my harvest this October is just as great as any of my neighbors' who went to church on Sunday. So where was God all this time?" The editor printed the letter, but added his reply at the bottom. "Your mistake was in thinking that God always settles his accounts in October." That's often our mistake as well, isn't it -- thinking that God should act when and how we want him to act, according to our timetable rather than his. The fact that our vision is limited, finite, unable to see the end from the beginning, somehow escapes our mind. So we complain; we get frustrated; we accuse God of being indifferent to us; we do not live by faith.

47. Designed to Be Lived Up

Illustration

Richard Patt

Ted Engstrom of World Vision fame tells how one day he was cleaning out an old desk drawer. He found a flashlight he hadn't used in a year. He turned it on but there was no light. He shook it, and then he unscrewed one end to release what were probably dead batteries. The batteries wouldn't come out, but finally, after some effort, he shook them loose. What a mess he found! Corroded batteries with liquid acid seeping all over the mechanism - all because he hadn't used the flashlight regularly!

Batteries are designed to be turned on, to be used, not neglected or ignored. What you and I refuse to use we will surely lose. We're meant to he turned on, too. Our gifts are to be used! Our lives are not meant to be "waited out" but to be lived up! Are you and I living up to the gifts and talents God has given us? What kind of commitment do we have to ourselves and to the graces within us?

48. Dimes In Your Eyes

Illustration

Cedric Gowler

In I Talk Back to the Devil, A.W. Tozer reminds us:

"Money often comes between men and God. Someone has said that you can take two small ten-cent pieces, just two dimes, and shut out the view of a panoramic landscape. Go to the mountains and just hold two coins closely in front of your eyes the mountains are still there, but you cannot see them at all because there is a dime shutting off the vision in each eye."

It doesn't take large quantities of money to come between us and God; just a little, placed in the wrong position, will effectively obscure our view.

49. God's Hands and Feet

Illustration

Ronald Reagan

A farmer took a piece of bad earth and made things flourish. Proud of his accomplishments, he asked his minister to come by and see what he had done. The minister was impressed. "That's the tallest corn I've ever seen. I've never seen anything as big as those melons. Praise the Lord!" He went on that way about every crop, praising the Lord for it all. Finally the farmer couldn't take it anymore. "Reverend," he said, "I wish you could have seen this place when the Lord was doing it by himself."

God bestows upon us grace and salvation, but without any input from us, God's mission on earth could not be fulfilled. We are God's hands and feet in the world, disciples and apostles commissioned for evangelism and mission.

50. When the Saints Go Marching In

Illustration

Robert S. Crilley

Most readers of the Bible seem to have a love-hate relationship with its concluding book. In fact, the Revelation to John almost appears to possess the uncanny ability of being frustrating and fascinating at the same time -- much like a toddler playing with a piece of Scotch tape! They are, no doubt, the most famous last words ever written. However, "well-known" does not always imply "well-thought-of" or even "well-understood." Granted, few portions of Scripture have aroused the curiosity of as many -- I dare say, "a great multitude that no one could count." But then again, simply arousing curiosity, in and of itself, is hardly a ringing endorsement for the book. After all, those who slow down on the highway to gawk at a roadside accident may be interested in what's going on, but they don't necessarily wish to become involved with it. And so it has been throughout the centuries for Revelation: garnering reverence from some, outright ridicule from others.

Martin Luther, for instance, felt that the letter "to the seven churches that are in Asia" should have been returned to sender. He found Christ neither taught nor acknowledged in its gaudy imagery and surreal symbolism. Zwingli's assessment was just as blunt, and for that matter, equally harsh. He saw no need to be concerned with the Apocalypse, because, in his words, "it is not a biblical book." John Calvin didn't even deem it worthy of comment. He wrote extensively on every portion of the New Testament – with the conspicuous exception of this one. Even today, John's rather extravagant vision from the prison island of Patmos is regarded by many as little more than a playground for religious eccentrics and placard-carrying prophets of doom.

Needless to say, some of the difficulty in comprehending Revelation lies in the fact that it is a work fraught with mystery, and like all mysteries I suppose, it is at times compelling and at other times confusing. Filled with truth, but nevertheless teasingly enigmatic. Of course, thinking of this book only as a mystery leaves the impression that it doesn't need so much to be studied as it does to be solved. However, to be honest, such an endeavor is like trying to analyze a sunset or dissect a rainbow. At best, it's a wearisome task to scour John's words in the hope of deciphering secret clues. At worst, it seems to treat his journey of faith as if it were a scavenger hunt.

Simply put, Revelation is neither an ancient chronicle of the past, nor a cryptic almanac of the future. John is not interested in explaining God's purposes, or even in describing them, but rather in creating an awareness through which they might be encountered again. If you will, he is more of a poet than a mystery writer -- fashioning a new reality from the fertile language of imagination. And as Eugene Peterson once observed, "We do not have more information after we read a poem, we have more experience."

Showing 1 to 50 of 149 results