12 One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God. 13 When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles: 14 Simon (whom he named Peter), his brother Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, 15 Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Simon who was called the Zealot, 16 Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.
A Terrorist among the Twelve
Luke 6:12-16Sermon
by Donald B. Strobe
by Donald B. Strobe
One of the retired ministers in our congregation bet me that I won’t be able to finish my series of sermons on the Twelve Apostles. The reason is because we know so very little about some of them, especially these last four. In the case of the one we are considering this morning, we only know one word. But that one word speaks volumes. The Gospel says that he was a “Zealot.” Luke refers to him as “Simon who was called the Zealot.” (Luke 6:15) The designation is important, because there are at least nine individuals named Simon in the New Testament. It can get confusing.
Luke calls him “zelotes,” which means “the Zealot.” Matthew and Mark complicate things by calling him “Simon the Cananaean.” (Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:18) At first, we might think that is a geographic designation, for we may remember the Land of Canaan from our Old Testament readings. But the word here is different. The best and most ancient manuscripts use the word Kananaois. This word is derived from the Hebrew word kana, which means to be jealous; and it was used for those who were “jealous for the Law;” and therefore means almost exactly the same thing as the Greek word “Zealot.”
I. THE ZEALOT MOVEMENT BEGAN WHEN JESUS WAS ABOUT TWELVE YEARS OLD. The Zealots were a fanatical religious-political group, a clandestine band of Jews who imagined themselves to be super-patriots, and their battle cry was: “No king but God; no tax but the Temple tax; no friend but the Zealot.” They hated the Roman occupying power.
For many years Herod (called the Great) held the nation together by the sheer force of his personality, his enormous building projects, and his skill in diplomacy, which enabled him to work with the hated Romans and get from them a modicum of special privileges for his people, the Jews. The people never really appreciated any of this, nor respected him at all, for to them he seemed a collaborator, a “quisling,” a man who had sold out his people in order to gain power. And there was some truth in their accusations. Herod reigned over Israel from 37 to the year 4 B.C.
When Herod died, he left his kingdom to his three sons. His son Herod Archelaus was to be ruler over Judea. His son Antipas, whom Jesus called “that fox” (Luke 13:32), was to be ruler over Galilee. His son Herod Philip was given the northern portion of the country above the Sea of Galilee. Archelaus was never really given much of a chance to rule Judea, for the people took his father’s death as an opportunity to gain their independence from Rome. They sent a delegation to the Roman emperor requesting that their province might be governed directly from Rome. The Roman emperor agreed and sent a man named Quirinius to take charge. Quirinius had proven himself to be an able administrator when he was governor of Syria.
The first thing Quirinius did was to raise the taxes. He didn’t even ask the people to read his lips. He simply raised the taxes. The problem was: nobody had ever taken a census to see how many people actually lived in Judea. You can’t assess taxes unless you first take a census. So he began a census and ordered a land survey so that he might also enact a land tax. This was the census mentioned in the Christmas story which required that every Jew return to his place of ancestral birth, the census which caused Joseph and Mary to journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem where Jesus was to be born.
Fanatical Jews immediately arose in protest. Remember their motto: “No king but God; no tax but the Temple tax; no friend but the Zealot.” They organized around a man named Judas of Galilee (see Acts 5:37), a fiery orator who was able to create anger and hysteria against Rome. But they did more than just talk about revolt: they started one. Their weapons were the torch to set on fire the buildings of their foes, the sword of the soldier for open conflict, and the deadly sharp dagger for secret violence and assassinations. In other words, they were terrorists. They were the equivalent of the most radical wing of our modern PLO.
The Zealot revolt of 6-7 A.D. was quelled by Rome, in a violent demonstration of overwhelming power. Its leaders were nailed on crosses along the roadside. As Jesus walked among the hills of Galilee, as a young boy, He saw those crosses, (2000 of them by one reckoning), and so knew perfectly well what He was talking about when He spoke to his followers about taking up a cross to follow Him. Although the revolt was crushed, the Zealots went underground, and their frustrated members became ever increasingly more violent. When the Temple fell in 70 A.D., one of the reasons for the weakness of its defense is that the Zealots were there, not only battling their sworn enemies, the Romans, but also killing any of their own people who so much as hinted that they might try to take a more moderate approach to the hated Romans.
Twenty years after the suppression of the first Zealot revolt, one of the members of this band of fanatical super-patriots met up with a man named Jesus, and that meeting forever changed his life. This man was named Simon, which was a most common name in the first century. We have already spoken of the other Simon in the band of Twelve to whom Jesus gave the new name: Peter, the “Rock.” Here is one who is called simply “Simon who was a Zealot.”
II. THERE CAN BE NO GREATER CONTRAST THAN THAT BETWEEN SIMON THE ZEALOT AND JESUS THE CHRIST. Simon had made a decision early on that the only way to freedom was through violence. “That’s the only language those blankety-blank Romans understand. You gotta fight fire with fire,” he said. Jesus knew better. He knew that when you fight fire with fire, then everybody gets burned.
The presence of Simon the Zealot among the disciples of Jesus raises the question of just who was the unnamed individual who drew a sword and struck at the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear. (Mark 14:47) The sword wielder is not identified in the first three Gospels as a disciple, but simply as “one of those who stood by.” Obviously, Simon the Zealot was the man most likely to have a dagger at hand, and have the impulse to use it in such a situation. The fourth Gospel says that it was Simon Peter who did the violent deed that night in the Garden, but whoever it was, it gave occasion for some of Jesus’ most familiar words. “Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.” (Matthew 26:52)
Whatever their grievances, terrorism comes about as close to the unpardonable sin as anything I can imagine. Killing in wartime is bad enough, but killing innocent people to make a political point seems to me to be unconscionable!
“All who take the sword will perish by the sword.” A lighter commentary on Jesus’ words is to be found in the story of Sir Robert Watson-Watt, the brilliant man who helped to invent radar. Much to his chagrin, while driving in Canada he was arrested for speeding after being timed by radar. He wrote a short verse to commemorate the occasion:
Pity Sir Robert Watson-Watt
Strange target of his radar plot.
And thus, with others I could mention,
A victim of his own invention.
If we are not careful that will be the epitaph of our earth.
George Bernard Shaw sat lightly toward all religion during his lifetime, but toward the end of his life he made this confession: “I am not a Christian any more than Pontius Pilate was...but I am ready to admit, after studying the world of human misery for 60 years, that I see no way out of the world’s trouble but the way Jesus would have found, had He undertaken the work of a modern statesman.”
We may not really believe that the meek will inherit the earth, but we have come to realize that unless we stop being belligerent and start being meek, there will be no earth left to inherit! Some folks in Iowa read in the weather forecast column of their local newspaper sometime back that “there is a 90% chance of tomorrow.” I certainly hope so. But there won’t be unless more of us wake up to the reality which Jesus proclaimed on a hillside twenty centuries ago, the reality that Simon the (former) Zealot came to see in Jesus Christ, when he left behind his daggers and bombs and hatreds and began to follow the Prince of Peace.
Simon was attracted to Jesus whose hatred of oppression was just as strong as that of Judas of Galilee. Only gradually did it dawn upon Simon that Jesus had a different way of dealing with His enemies, a radically different way, which was absolutely foreign to everything Simon had grown to believe. When the multitude wished to take Jesus by force and make Him king, He simply disappeared. When the people shouted “Hosanna” as He entered Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, he chose to enter not on a great stallion with shining armor, but riding on a humble donkey. Again and again people tried to make Him an earthly king, but He refused, saying, “My kingdom is not of this world...else would my disciples fight....” (John 18:36) And Simon came to realize that he either had to give up his sword or give up his Savior.
Something like this, I think, happens to all of us who start down the road with Jesus. We may begin with acceptance of Jesus as Savior and Lord, and give our hearts and allegiance to Him. At first we may not fully understand the radical nature of His call. We are happy with what Leonard Sweet calls a “Jacuzzi Jesus,” a religion which brings us warmth and comfort but makes few demands upon us. Then, as we sit at the feet of the Master, we begin to hear Him say startling things: “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you.” (Luke 6:27) Now we are faced with a dilemma. We must either make some radical changes in our lives, or get off the Jesus bandwagon. I imagine it must have taken some real soul-searching and gut-wrenching changes in the life of Simon the Zealot in order for him to become a full-fledged disciple of Jesus. But he did it. Luke calls him: “Simon who was a Zealot.” Past tense.
While Simon was no longer a zealot, I hope he kept some of his zeal. While nothing is known of Simon’s further activities beyond this brief mention, again, traditions have come in to fill the gap. One ancient tradition says that Simon preached the gospel of love and peace in many parts of the world, and even got as far as Britain where he was martyred. It is fascinating to speculate: if Simon got to Britain, and John Wesley came out of the Church of England, perhaps the churches that were started during the English Reformation are spiritual descendants of Simon! We sure could use some of his zeal these days. We live in a day when the committed are intolerant, and the tolerant are uncommitted.
Irish poet William Butler Yeats wrote that: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst/Are full of passionate intensity.” That sure seems to be true. I’d like people with about 10% of the passion of Simon the Zealot. Zeal is like fire; in a certain amount it warms and gives life; too much burns and consumes. When it comes to church members, I’d rather have a few over-zealous ones whose zeal must be tempered with love, than lukewarm folks who don’t get much excited about anything. It is easier to cool down a fanatic than it is to warm up a corpse!
III. FINALLY, I WANT YOU TO THINK FOR A MOMENT ABOUT THE VAST DIFFERENCES WHICH EXISTED WITHIN THAT APOSTOLIC BAND. Among the Twelve there was a former Zealot and a former tax-collector! There must have been many interesting discussions around the campfire. The Church is not a group of “like-minded” people. Just the reverse. It is a band of cut-throats who might well be enemies were it not for the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. Too many people have a saccharine-sweet view of the church. Once in awhile I hear someone say, “I’m against organized religion.” Well, brother, come join us—you’ve never seen such a disorganized bunch of clowns in your life, tripping over each other trying to do their Master’s will. As Frederick Buechner says, we are like friends of a bride or groom thrown together at a wedding, each eyeing the other suspiciously, and realizing that we would probably never have even met one another except for the love we have in common for the bride or groom. (Frederick Buechner, THE HUNGERING DARK, New York: Seabury Press, 1969, pp. 41-42) Well, Christ is the bridegroom and the church is His bride. And we are here together for one reason and one reason only: because we love Him and love His Church.
In the “Great Thanksgiving” prayer said before the celebration of the Lord’s Supper or Holy Communion, these words are found: “Christ our Lord invites to his table all who love him, who earnestly repent of their sin, and seek to live in peace with one another.” In other words: “Leave your old life behind; leave your old animosities behind, leave your angers, hurts, grudges, grievances, and jealousies behind, and make a new start here and now, a new start in love with God and with your neighbor.” For if we are not in communion with one another, how on earth can we be in communion with God?
Dynamic Preaching, Collected Words, by Donald B. Strobe
Luke observes that before Jesus chose twelve disciples and d…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
12 One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God. 13 When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles: 14 Simon (whom he named Peter), his brother Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, 15 Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Simon who was called the Zealot, 16 Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.
This section directly contrasts with the previous one. The religious leaders are rejecting Jesus, and he responds by choosing a faithful remnant (6:12–16) who will be responsible for communicating his message to others. The significance of the selection is indicated by verse 12: Jesus spends an entire night in prayer before choosing the Twelve. Simon Peter (6:14) heads up every list of the apostles in the New Testament. Bartholomew is sometimes equated with Nathanael (John 1:44–51). Matthew and Levi (Luke 5:27) are the same person (6:15). The Zealots (6:15) were members of a nationalistic religious party in Israel that led the revolt against Rome. Judas son of James (6:16) should be identified with Thaddaeus in Mark’s list (Mark 3:18; cf. John 14:22). The meaning of “Iscariot” is disputed. Probably it means “a man from Kerioth,” a city in southern Judea (Josh. 15:25). In any case, Judas’s name evokes the memory of his betrayal. The description of the geographical setting (6:17–19) of the Sermon on the Plain (6:17) does not necessarily contradict Matthew (Matt. 5:1), for Jesus could have delivered the sermon on a level place in the mountains. Luke prepares the reader for the sermon by noting that a vast array of people have gathered specifically to listen to Jesus (6:18). Jesus also heals many of those who have gathered to hear him.
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Big Idea: Jesus, the Son of Man, declares that he has the authority to determine how the Sabbath should be observed.
Understanding the Text
The two Sabbath incidents in 6:1–11 complete the series of confrontation stories that began in 5:17–26, and the concluding discussion of “what they might do to Jesus” sets an ominous note for the further development of the story.
But alongside the official opposition, we are now more fully introduced to the contrasting group of Jesus’s committed followers. We have read of the call of some of them in 5:1–11, 27–28, but now the inner circle of the Twelve is formalized. It is they who will form the primary audience for Jesus’s teaching on discipleship in 6:17–49, and who will be a constant presence during the story of Jesus’s itinerant ministry right up to the final week in Jerusalem.
Historical and Cultural Background
Observance of the Sabbath was (along with circumcision and the food laws) one of the main distinguishing marks of Jewish religion, culture, and national identity, and so it was a matter of primary importance in scribal teaching and discussion.
The Old Testament commanded God’s people to keep the Sabbath holy by doing no work on it. But what constituted “work”? A major concern for the scribes was so to define “work” that no one was left in any doubt as to what was and was not permitted on the Sabbath. Their Sabbath rules eventually filled two whole tractates of the Mishnah. Thirty-nine primary categories of “work” were established (see the sidebar “Rules for the Sabbath”) and then subdivided and elaborated so that every aspect of daily life was covered. Strict observance of the Sabbath was thus a major element in the Pharisees’ agenda of scrupulous obedience to the law, written and oral.
Healing is not listed among the forbidden categories, but scribes seem to have assumed that it qualified as work. So they discussed when medical help might exceptionally be given on the Sabbath, and they allowed this when there was imminent danger of death or when childbirth took place (m. Yoma 8:6; m. Shabb. 18:3). The principle seems to have been to allow only what could not be postponed until after the Sabbath (see on 4:40). A paralyzed arm clearly did not fall into this category.
Interpretive Insights
6:2 Why are you doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath? The act itself of plucking and eating grain in someone else’s field was not against the law (see Deut. 23:25), but to pluck grain and rub it could be classed as “reaping” and “threshing,” both of which were forbidden under Pharisaic Sabbath rules (see the sidebar “Rules for the Sabbath”).
6:3 Jesus answered them. As in 5:30, the accusation was addressed to the disciples, and only they are said to have plucked the grain. But a teacher was held to be responsible for his disciples’ behavior, and Jesus’s reply assumes that he has sanctioned what they are doing.
6:4 Have you never read what David did? An argument drawn from outside the books of Moses (1 Sam. 21:1–6) does not formally solve the legal question, but Jesus’s argument is not at that level. What David did is not a straightforward precedent because it concerned a different law. (It was on the Sabbath that the sacred bread was changed and so became available for eating [Lev. 24:8], so this incident may have occurred on a Sabbath day; but the text does not say so.) Jesus cites David’s action not simply as a case where Scripture recorded a law being set aside, without condemnation. It is rather a matter of why it was set aside, and especially of who did it. David used the holy bread, with the priest’s permission, because he and his men were hungry; so strict observance of the rules gave way to human need. But is that alone a sufficient reason for breaking the law? Jesus’s following words in 6:5 suggest that this is more about authority to override the law. David could do it because he was David, the Lord’s anointed. Jesus is the Son of David, indeed David’s Lord (20:41–44).
6:5 The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath. If David could set aside a legal ruling, how much more can the Son of Man (for this as Jesus’s self-designation, see the sidebar “The Son of Man” at 5:12–26). Here, as in 5:24, the reference is to his authority during his earthly ministry, but underlying it is Daniel’s vision of the universal sovereignty of the “one like a son of man” (Dan. 7:13–14). Jesus might have disputed the scribes’ definition of “work”; this was, after all, only a scribal ruling, not a matter of explicit Mosaic law. But he prefers to set the whole question of legal observance under the weightier heading of his own personal authority, leaving all the scribal debate, and the authority of the scribes, on one side.
6:6 whose right hand was shriveled. The Greek term for “hand” (cheir) may indicate the arm, not just the hand. “Shriveled” is literally “dry” (x?ra), and this may denote a deformed growth, but probably more likely paralysis. A nonfunctional right arm is a great inconvenience but not an immediate threat to life (see above under “Historical and Cultural Background”).
6:7 they watched him closely. This looks like a deliberately planted test case rather than a spontaneous healing, with the same objectors (Pharisees and scribes) now clearly intent on discrediting Jesus as a lawbreaker.
6:9 I ask you, which is lawful on the Sabbath? Jesus deliberately challenges the scribes. He is shifting the ground away from definitions of “work” to first principles. Of course no one would say that you should “do evil” or “destroy” on the Sabbath or on any other day. So Jesus, by his own authority, subjects Sabbath rules to human need. By framing the issue in these terms, Jesus undercuts the whole scribal enterprise. No wonder they “were furious”!
6:12 spent the night praying to God. The priority of prayer in Jesus’s ministry is a regular theme in Luke; see on 5:16. But we should probably also understand this note as underlining the significance of the choice to be made.
6:13 chose twelve of them. The number would inevitably recall the twelve tribes of Israel derived from the twelve patriarchs. Jesus will later speak of these twelve disciples as sitting on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel (22:30). Here Jesus is setting up the leadership structure for the true Israel of the kingdom of God.
whom he also designated apostles. The Twelve are drawn from a wider circle of “disciples,” committed followers of Jesus (see 6:17); seventy-two of them will be mentioned in 10:1. The Twelve are singled out to be Jesus’s regular traveling companions, and in 9:1–2 they will be given a special mission as “apostles” (those sent out, envoys), a term that Luke frequently uses for them both in the Gospel and especially in Acts, where they feature corporately as the central leadership group of the growing church in Jerusalem. It is thus the more remarkable that most of those listed remain merely names to us; only Simon (Peter), James and John, and, though of course for a different reason, Judas Iscariot are individually mentioned elsewhere in the Gospel or Acts.
Theological Insights
Jesus nowhere questions the Decalogue principle of Sabbath observance as such, but he had no time for the meticulous scribal definitions that had the effect of elevating the prohibitive element of the Sabbath (“You shall not do any work”) to a primary level of significance. For Jesus, it was overshadowed by the general principle of “doing good,” which for the scribes was infuriatingly vague and open-ended. Mark 2:27 sums up his approach: “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.”
Jesus’s claim to be “Lord of the Sabbath,” following after his claim to forgive sins (both under the title “the Son of Man”), adds to the sense that he claims to be on a level above merely human authorities. He will not openly claim to be divine, but the reader who remembers the angel’s message in 1:30–35 will have no difficulty in reading between the lines.
But alongside this exalted understanding of Jesus, it is salutary to note that those whom he chooses as his helpers and representatives come not from the top layer of society but rather from ordinary life: the ones whose professions we know are four fishermen and (if Levi = Matthew) a tax collector. Luke will later describe Peter and John as “unschooled, ordinary men” (Acts 4:13). Nor were the Twelve an altogether compatible group: Simon “the Zealot” was not necessarily a committed freedom fighter (the later meaning of “zealot”), but he was at least a keen nationalist and upholder of the law (the meaning of “zealot” in Acts 21:20; 22:3; Gal. 1:14), which would have made him an uncomfortable colleague for Levi/Matthew the tax collector.
Teaching the Text
This passage introduces two important themes that could be profitably developed in a lesson or sermon. The first is the nature and significance of Sabbath observance. While these Pharisees were interested in legalistically enforcing their Sabbath rules, Jesus emphasized the true purpose of the Sabbath, which was to benefit mankind. Listeners might be invited to consider their experiences of traditional restrictions on Sunday activity, and to think how far these were justified. What is the fundamental purpose of the Sabbath law, and how far is it literally applicable in modern Christian practice? What were the dangers inherent in the scribal approach to the Sabbath, and why did Jesus think it necessary to challenge them? Did Jesus fulfill the whole law, including Sabbath observance? What does this mean for the continuing authority of the Old Testament law?1In addition to God’s blessing of the seventh day of creation (Gen. 2:2) and the Old Testament Sabbath laws (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15), consider Paul’s words about our freedom in Christ in Romans 14:5–6 and Colossians 1:16.
Try also to get hearers to see the situation from the scribal point of view. Why did they regard Jesus’s attitude to legal rules as dangerous? What risks are inherent in his more positive and flexible approach to the issue? Do we need such rules and regulations now, and if so, what is their purpose?
The second key issue in this passage is the authority of Jesus as Messiah and Son of Man. The authority of the scribes to interpret the law and impose their decisions on others came from their recognized position in society, and more particularly from their formal training and the respected tradition to which they belonged. Jesus’s authority was personal, because of who he was. It was the authority of a charismatic teacher to whom people responded instinctively and also the unique authority of the Son of Man. Consider the extraordinary authority implicit in Jesus’s words. God alone established the Sabbath command. Yet Jesus identifies himself as “Lord of the Sabbath” (6:5). This same remarkable authority continues in the next passage, as Jesus chooses and appoints the Twelve (6:13–16). Remember that it was God himself who chose the twelve tribes of Israel to be his special people. Since the Twelve in some sense represent a reconstituted or restored Israel, Jesus is again claiming the authority of God to call out a new people for himself.
Illustrating the Text
Sometimes it is highly instructive when the authority of an established power group is challenged by a newcomer’s reaction.
Literature: “The War Prayer,” by Mark Twain. This bitterly ironic, short prose indictment of war is told in the form of a very short story. It was published in 1916, several years after Twain (1835–1910) died. Twain attacks more than people’s mere attitudes about war; he asks them to examine their prayers. In the piece, an older stranger, claiming to be a “messenger” from God, comes into a church service where the people have been sincerely, but probably smugly, asking God to preserve their boys in war, to grant them victory and bring them back safely. The old stranger asks the minister to step aside, which the “startled” minister does. Then, in a “deep voice” he begins to speak, picturing vividly what their prayers may invoke upon the enemy. “If you would beseech a blessing upon yourself, beware! Lest without intent you invoke a curse upon a neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain upon your crop . . . by that act you are possibly praying for a curse upon some neighbor’s crop which may not need rain and can be injured by it.” Continuing, he parodies, “Help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells. Help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead. . . . Help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire.” The story ends with the narrator commenting on the church’s reaction, “It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.”2
One person can become a significant force for change.
Documentary Film: The Singing Revolution, directed by James Tusty and Maureen Castle Tusty. This documentary (2006) about a populist, nonviolent revolution in Estonia between 1986 and 1991 chronicles the people’s successful attempt to push back on the Soviet occupation and oppression of their country. Hundreds of thousands of people gathered publicly to sing revolutionary songs.
Not widely known in the West, the account is inspiring and amazing.
Sometimes Christians create restrictions that inhibit the gospel’s outreach.
Quote: Extreme Righteousness: Seeing Ourselves in the Pharisees, by Tom Hovestol.
Sometimes our traditions compromise our theology; they even encourage us to look toward wrong solutions to the sin problem. We Christians at times produce lists of rules that protect us from defilement. Though it may not be packaged as such, defilement is viewed as “out there in the world.” Certain people are designated as defiling. . . . Certain places are inherently compromising: wherever alcohol is served or pot smoked, wherever rock music is played . . . —wherever secular activities occur. . . . While there is wisdom in many of these rules, they subtly communicate the antithesis of bedrock biblical theology, namely, that defilement is internal and not external.3
Teaching the Text by R.T. France, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
One of the twelve apostles and brother of Peter. Andrew came from Bethsaida in Galilee (John 1:44), though he lived and worked with Peter in Capernaum as a fisherman (Matt. 4:18). At first a disciple of John the Baptist, he, with an unnamed disciple (possibly John), transferred allegiance to Jesus (John 1:35 40). His first recorded act was to bring his brother to Jesus (John 1:41–42). Subsequently, he was called by Jesus to become a permanent follower (Matt. 4:19) and later was appointed as an apostle (Matt. 10:2).
A disciple of Jesus, and one of the twelve apostles. His name appears in the Synoptic lists of apostles (Matt. 10:2 4; Mark 3:16–19; Luke 6:13–16) and as a witness to Jesus’ ascension (Acts 1:13).
An epithet or appellation for the disciple named “Judas” who betrayed Jesus (Matt. 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). A word of uncertain derivation, it may signify “man of Kerioth,” a city in southern Judea (so the alternate textual readings at John 6:71; 12:4; 13:2, 26; 14:22: “from Kerioth”), the plural of “city,” or an Aramaic adaptation of the Latin sicarius, “assassin” or “terrorist.” The latter would place him with the Sicarii, a group of terrorists who murdered Roman sympathizers with curved swords (Acts 21:37 38; Josephus, J.W. 2.254; Ant. 20.186).
The name “James” is a form of the name “Jacob” (Heb. Ya’aqob; Gk. Iakōbos), which was very popular in the first century. In the NT there are five individuals named “James.”
(1) James the son of Zebedee and the older brother of John. He was martyred by Herod Agrippa I in AD 40 (Mark 1:19; 3:17; Acts 12:2).
(2) James the son of Alphaeus we know very little about other than that he is consistently listed among the disciples (Mark 3:18; Matt. 10:3; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13).
(3) James “the younger” (Mark 15:40), whose mother, named “Mary,” appears in Mark 16:1 just as the “mother of James.” In church tradition, he is sometimes identified with James the son of Alphaeus.
(4) James the father of Judas (Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13) is mentioned only to distinguish this Judas from Judas Iscariot.
(5) James the brother of Jesus was an early leader of the Jerusalem church (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3; Acts 12:17; 15:13 31; 21:18; 1 Cor. 15:7; Gal. 1:19; 2:9, 12; Jude 1). A number of Jesus’ family members became prominent leaders in the early Christian movement in Palestine, James being the most prominent.
A common name in first-century Judaism. The Greek name Iōannēs comes from the Hebrew name “Yohanan.” (1) The Baptist or Baptizer, he was the son of the priest Zechariah and Elizabeth. (See John the Baptist.) (2) The son of Zebedee, he was an apostle originally belonging to the inner circle of the twelve main disciples of Jesus. (See John the Apostle.) (3) John Mark, a cousin of Barnabas (Col. 4:10) and the son of Mary (Acts 12:12). (See Mark, John.) (4) The elder. Both 2 John and 3 John claim authorship by “the elder” (2 John 1; 3 John 1). Traditionally, all three Johannine Letters, the Gospel of John, and sometimes the Revelation of John have been attributed to John the apostle. However, modern scholarship often attributes 2 John and 3 John, and sometimes 1 John, to “the elder”—John the elder. (5) The seer, the author of the book of Revelation (see 1:1, 4, 9; 22:8). Some scholars ascribe the authorship of Revelation to John the apostle, in line with the view of the church father Irenaeus. Other scholars ascribe the writing of Revelation to a certain John the elder. The book of Revelation does not further identify the author. However, the author is among the prophets, a seer, and his name is “John”—hence, John the seer.
(1) One of the apostles identified as “Judas son of James” (Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13) and “Judas (not Judas Iscariot)” (John 14:22), probably the same person as Thaddaeus (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18). (2) A leading Jerusalem believer and prophet, “Judas called Barsabbas” (i.e., “son of the Sabbath” or “son of Sabbas”; possibly a relative of “Joseph called Barsabbas” in Acts 1:23). Along with Silas, he was sent with Paul and Bar-nabas to add verbal testimony to the letter to the Gentile Christians from the apostles and elders after the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:22, 27, 32). (3) One of the twelve disciples chosen by Jesus, he betrayed Jesus. See Judas Iscariot.
One of the twelve disciples chosen by Jesus (Matt. 10:4). He is identified beforehand as the one who would betray Jesus (Mark 3:19) and is noted as having a devil (John 6:66 71). John further attributes his betrayal of Jesus to Satan (John 13:2, 27), and Luke asserts that before the betrayal Satan entered into Judas (Luke 22:3).
Peter notes that Judas’s punishment, death, and abandonment of office were predicted by David in the psalms (Acts 1:15–20). Speaking euphemistically, Peter remarks that Judas went to his own place, no doubt a reference to hell (1:25).
Matthew’s Gospel appears first in almost every extant witness to the NT, and it was considered the preeminent Gospel by the early church. It is the Gospel most quoted by the early church fathers. Of the four Gospels, Matthew’s is most oriented toward a Jewish audience.
The miraculous beginnings of Jesus (1:1 4:11). Jesus’ genealogy and childhood show him to be the fulfillment of OT prophecy. His baptism demonstrates this fulfillment; his forty days of testing in the desert identify him with Israel.
Ethical teachings and miracles (4:12–10:42). This section begins with a geographical change, as Jesus returns to Galilee. Having instructed his disciples, he sends them out as an extension of his own mission.
Confrontation and reactions (11:1–16:20). This section also involves a change of geography. Jesus first is questioned by John’s disciples, then by the Pharisees, and finally by the people in his own town. The questions are resolved by Peter’s confession.
The messiah must suffer (16:21–20:28). This is the third section that begins “from that time on Jesus began to. . . .” Jesus explains to his disciples that he will die at the hands of the Jews but be raised on the third day. This section includes the transfiguration and many parables concerning judgment and reward. The climax is at the end, when Jesus declares that he has come “to give his life as a ransom for many.”
Jesus claims authority and receives praise (20:29–25:46). Another geographical shift occurs, as Jesus and his disciples leave Jericho. Jesus acknowledges the title “Lord, Son of David,” cleanses the temple, and argues with the Pharisees about the source of his authority. The parables concern sonship and responses to authority. The Pharisees try to entrap Jesus. Jesus teaches about authority, then rebukes the Pharisees. Chapter 24 describes the consequences of the ultimate rejection of authority. The climax is the parable of the sheep and the goats.
The death of Jesus (26:1–27:66). Matthew’s Gospel has built-in intensity up to the passion narrative. This section builds again within itself, from the anointing of Jesus in Bethany to the hush as the tomb is closed and sealed.
The resurrection of Jesus (28:1–28:20). The accounts of the resurrection and postresurrection appearances are brief but significant and contain several details not found in the other Synoptics.
Simon Peter is the best-known and the most colorful of Jesus’ twelve disciples. The name “Peter” means “rock” in Greek. In some biblical texts, he is also called “Cephas,” which is the Aramaic word for “rock” (see esp. John 1:42). Despite the ups and downs of Peter’s spiritual life, God was able to use him as the foundational apostle for the establishment of the NT church.
(1) The tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, regions northeast of Palestine, at the time when John the Baptist’s public ministry began (Luke 3:1). (2) One of Jesus’ twelve apostles (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:14; John 1:43). Philip, like Andrew and Peter, was from Bethsaida (John 1:44). It was Philip who introduced Nathanael to Jesus (John 1:45 48). John’s Gospel mentions Philip three times subsequent to chapter 1 (6:5–7; 12:20–22; 14:6–10), in the last instance recording Philip’s shortsighted request for Jesus to show the Father to the apostles. (3) One of seven men selected by the Jerusalem church to care for the distribution of food to its widows (Acts 6:1–6). This man, also known as Philip the evangelist (21:8), shared the message of Jesus Christ in a city of Samaria, performing great miracles (8:5–13). Philip later explained the good news of Jesus to an Ethiopian eunuch whom he encountered (8:26–38). After Philip baptized the eunuch, “the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away” (8:39). Philip then preached in several towns, finally arriving at Caesarea, where he settled (8:40). Years later, Paul stayed in Caesarea with Philip and his four prophesying daughters (21:8–9).
In the OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modern ways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayer does not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer to God, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray to humans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction between the sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in the OT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, such as that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. These should be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, but rather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” in recognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. In the NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.
A presupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and may indeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is not primarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of the one praying, but rather about God changing the circumstances of the one praying.
The depiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of the OT, but there are important developments.
Jesus tells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt. 6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Prayer to God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:19 20; John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26).
Prayer can also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him in the early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. Unlike anything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for their enemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke 23:34; Acts 7:60).
The Holy Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we are able to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is to be done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1 Cor. 14:15).
Jesus encourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke 18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).
Jesus becomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions (Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points (Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offers prayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers that are (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and not give up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overly literalized “pray without ceasing” in 1 Thess. 5:17 NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb. 5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and even now, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, our intercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb. 4:14–16).
(1) One of the original twelve apostles (Matt. 10:2), also called “Peter.” Simon Peter was the brother of Andrew and a fisherman by trade (Matt. 4:18). (See also Peter.) (2) The Zealot, one of the original twelve apostles (Matt. 10:4). (3) One of the brothers of Jesus, along with James, Joseph, and Judas (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3). (4) A leper who lived in Bethany. In his house the precious bottle of ointment was poured upon Jesus in preparation for his burial (Matt. 26:6). (5) A man from Cyrene who carried Jesus’ cross on the way to crucifixion (Matt. 27:32). (6) A Pharisee who invited Jesus for a meal (Luke 7:40). Jesus was anointed with ointment in his house. He perhaps is the same individual as in Matt. 26:6. (7) The father of Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Jesus (John 6:71). (8) A sorcerer who believed the gospel and was baptized. However, he became enamored with the miraculous power of Philip and with the ability of the apostles to impart the Holy Spirit, and he offered them money to give him that ability (Acts 8:9 25). (9) A tanner with whom Peter stayed in Joppa before traveling to the house of Cornelius (Acts 9:43).
One of Jesus’ original twelve apostles (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15), referred to as “Didymus,” meaning “twin” (John 11:16; 20:24; 21:2). The infamous title of “Doubting Thomas” comes from his refusal to believe in Jesus’ resurrection. Thomas said, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe” (John 20:25). A week later the risen Jesus again appeared to the apostles, including Thomas. Thomas’s response was “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). Despite his previous disbelief in Jesus’ resurrection, Thomas was present with the other apostles in the upper room (Acts 1:13).
Direct Matches
(1) The father of the disciple James, who is always identified as “the son of Alphaeus” in order to distinguish him from James the son of Zebedee (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). (2) The father of Levi the tax collector (Mark 2:14). Some have suggested that this individual is also the father of James the disciple, but this is unlikely. Additionally, some have identified Cle(o)pas (Luke 24:18; John 19:25) with one of the Alphaeus persons, but this is doubtful.
A title designating members of the group of twelve disciples (Matt. 10:2–4; Mark 3:16–19; Luke 6:13–16) who received Jesus’ teaching (Luke 17:5) and to whom he granted authority (Mark 6:7, 30; Luke 9:1, 10). Matthias later replaced Judas Iscariot (Acts 1:24). These apostles provided leadership to the early church in Jerusalem (Acts 15:6), performed miracles (Acts 2:43; 2 Cor. 12:12), and faced persecution (Acts 5:18) as they testified to Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 4:33; 5:32). Broader usage of the term includes witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection (1 Cor. 15:7), James the brother of Jesus (Gal. 1:19), Barnabas and Paul (Acts 14:14), and possibly Silas (1 Thess. 2:6) and Andronicus and Junias/Junia (Rom. 16:7). Paul regularly speaks of his calling in apostolic terms (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1; Titus 1:1), while Peter similarly self-identifies (1 Pet. 1:1; 2 Pet. 1:1). The word is once used of Jesus himself (Heb. 3:1).
A disciple of Jesus, and one of the twelve apostles. His name appears in the Synoptic lists of apostles (Matt. 10:2–4; Mark 3:16–19; Luke 6:13–16) and as a witness to Jesus’ ascension (Acts 1:13). Nothing else is known of him unless, as suggested by a ninth-century tradition, his other name was “Nathanael,” a disciple mentioned in John’s Gospel (1:45). The evidence is not conclusive, but Nathanael was closely associated with the apostles before and after the resurrection (John 1:35–51; 21:1–2); Jesus promised him divine revelation, which would accord well with apostolic status (1:50–51); and he is connected to Philip in John’s Gospel (1:45) just as Bartholomew is in the Synoptic lists of the apostles (Matt. 10:3).
The Greek term for “disciple,” mathētēs, means “student.” Like other rabbis and religious figures of the time, Jesus taught a group of such students (Matt. 9:14; 22:16; Mark 2:16; John 1:35; 4:1). The forms of address that Jesus’ disciples used for him reflect the nature of the relationship: “rabbi” (Mark 9:5), “teacher” (Mark 9:38), and “master” (Luke 5:5). In addition to receiving instruction from Jesus, his disciples took care of his physical needs (Matt. 21:1; John 4:8), ate with him (Matt. 9:10; 26:18), performed exorcisms and healings (Matt. 10:1; Luke 10:17), baptized (John 4:2), controlled access to Jesus (Matt. 19:13; John 12:21), and traveled with him (Luke 8:1; John 2:12). On one occasion Jesus visited the house of Peter and healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt. 8:14), which suggests that although the Gospels do not generally depict the private lives of Jesus or his disciples apart from their public ministry, the relationship among these men did not prevent the disciples from maintaining their own homes, families, and, probably, occupations.
In the Gospels Jesus is depicted with variously sized groups of disciples and followers. A prominent tradition in the Gospels indicates that there was an inner group of twelve (Matt. 10:1; 26:20; Mark 3:14; 4:10; 6:7; John 6:70), each of whom is known by name. This is the group most traditionally understood as “the disciples” of Jesus. As an authority, the group of twelve persisted beyond the ascension of Jesus (Acts 6:2). Following the death of Judas Iscariot, Matthias was chosen to take his place among the Twelve (Acts 1:26). Other passages specify a group of seventy or seventy-two (Luke 10:1, 16), and often the number of disciples is indeterminate. Several passages name disciples beyond the Twelve (Matt. 27:57; Luke 24:18; Acts 9:10; 9:36; 16:1; 21:16), and some later authors attempted to list the names of the seventy by drawing names from the book of Acts, the Epistles, and other early Christian traditions (e.g., the thirteenth-century Syriac compilation The Book of the Bee). The book of Acts often refers to any follower of Christ as “disciple,” including those in cities throughout the Roman Empire.
The Gospels tend to present Jesus as a charismatic teacher who could attract adherents with little overt persuasion. The calling of several disciples is narrated, including that of the brothers Simon Peter and Andrew, the brothers James and John the sons of Zebedee (Mark 1:16–20; John 1:40–41), Philip and Nathanael (John 1:44–45), and Matthew/Levi (Mark 2:13–17 pars.). The Gospel of John presents Andrew as a former disciple of John the Baptist.
The Twelve
Each of the Synoptic Gospels has a list of the Twelve (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16; cf. the list of eleven in Acts 1:13), and the Gospel of John mentions “the Twelve” several times without providing a list. With some slight harmonizations, it is possible to come up with a single list of twelve disciples based on the three Synoptic lists.
(1) All three Synoptic Gospels agree in placing Simon Peter first in the list. (2) His brother Andrew is second, though Mark has placed Andrew farther down the list and does not identify him as Peter’s brother. (3) James the son of Zebedee and (4) John the brother of James are next. Mark adds that the two were also named “Boanerges,” meaning “sons of thunder.” The placement of Peter, James, and John at the head of the list corresponds with the prominence of these three disciples in the story of Jesus’ arrest at Gethsemane, where these three were present (Matt. 26:37 // Mark 14:33). Perhaps the order of Mark’s list reflects the prestige of these three disciples, with Matthew and Luke bringing Andrew to the head of the list not because of any particular importance but so that he is listed with his brother Peter.
The lists continue with (5) Philip, (6) Bartholomew, and (7) Matthew, further identified in Matt. 10:3 as a “tax collector.” The calling of Matthew is narrated in Matt. 9:9–13 and also in Mark 2:13–17; Luke 5:27–32, where Matthew is called “Levi.” (8) Thomas is next (Matt. 10:3 lists Thomas before Matthew; in John 20:24 he is also called “Didymus”), followed by (9) James the son of Alphaeus (Mark 2:14 also calls Levi “son of Alphaeus”), so named to avoid confusion with James the son of Zebedee. (10) Simon the Cananaean (Matt. 10:4; Mark 3:18 NRSV) or Zealot (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13) is so designated to avoid confusion with Simon Peter. The precise meaning of the term “Cananaean” is uncertain (see Cananaean). (11) Thaddaeus (who precedes Simon the Cananaean in Matthew and Mark) probably should be identified with the eleventh disciple in Luke’s list, Judas the son of James. The names of Thaddaeus and Judas son of James represent the greatest single discrepancy among the three lists, but it may be mitigated somewhat by the fact that some manuscripts identify “Thaddaeus” as a surname (though they give this disciple’s other name as “Lebbaeus,” not “Judas”). All three lists agree in listing (12) Judas Iscariot as the last disciple in the list, and all note that he betrayed Jesus or became a traitor. The fact that Judas Iscariot bears a second name (“Iscariot”) may suggest that there was another Judas among the Twelve from whom it was necessary to distinguish him, as in the case of the two Simons and the two Jameses. This observation lends some weight to the notion that Thaddaeus was also named “Judas.”
The Disciples as Apostles
At various points in his ministry Jesus sent out his disciples to preach and perform miracles, hence they are also referred to as “apostles” (i.e., emissaries). The connection between these two terms is made clear in Luke 6:13: “When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles.” In the NT Epistles the title “apostle” is applied to several individuals who were not among Jesus’ twelve disciples, most notably Paul. In sum, both “disciple” and “apostle” have narrow and broad meanings in the NT, though there is substantial continuity between “the Twelve” disciples or apostles of Jesus and the narrow definition of “apostle” in the early chapters of Acts.
The Later Careers of the Disciples
After his resurrection, Jesus told his disciples (“the apostles he had chosen” [Acts 1:2]) that they would be his witnesses “in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8). Stories about the subsequent careers of the Twelve exist in both the NT and other early Christian sources. The first half of Acts largely focuses on the career of Simon Peter, before attention shifts to the career of Paul in the eastern Roman Empire. Extracanonical books and local legends trace the later careers of Jesus’ twelve disciples, placing them in Rome (Peter), Scythia (Andrew), Spain (James), Ephesus (John), Phrygia (Philip), Armenia (Bartholomew and Thaddaeus), India (Thomas), Ethiopia (Matthew), and North Africa (Simon the Cananaean). Pious local traditions attribute martyrdom to a number of the Twelve, though in the NT we know only of the deaths of Judas Iscariot (Matt. 27:3–10; Acts 1:16–20) and James the son of Zebedee (Acts 12:1–2).
An epithet or appellation for the disciple named “Judas” who betrayed Jesus (Matt. 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). A word of uncertain derivation, it may signify “man of Kerioth,” a city in southern Judea (so the alternate textual readings at John 6:71; 12:4; 13:2, 26; 14:22: “from Kerioth”), the plural of “city,” or an Aramaic adaptation of the Latin sicarius, “assassin” or “terrorist.” The latter would place him with the Sicarii, a group of terrorists who murdered Roman sympathizers with curved swords (Acts 21:37–38; Josephus, J.W. 2.254; Ant. 20.186).
The name “James” is a form of the name “Jacob” (Heb. Ya’aqob; Gk. Iakōbos), which was very popular in the first century. In the NT there are five individuals named “James.”
(1) James the son of Zebedee and the older brother of John. He was martyred by Herod Agrippa I in AD 40 (Mark 1:19; 3:17; Acts 12:2). Eusebius records a tradition from Clement of Alexandria that the individual who brought James before Herod was so moved by James’s testimony that he converted on the spot and was martyred along with James (Hist. eccl. 2.9).
(2) James the son of Alphaeus we know very little about other than that he is consistently listed among the disciples (Mark 3:18; Matt. 10:3; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13).
(3) James “the younger” (Mark 15:40), whose mother, named “Mary,” appears in Mark 16:1 just as the “mother of James.” In church tradition, he is sometimes identified with James the son of Alphaeus.
(4) James the father of Judas (Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13) is mentioned only to distinguish this Judas from Judas Iscariot.
(5) James the brother of Jesus was an early leader of the Jerusalem church (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3; Acts 12:17; 15:13–31; 21:18; 1 Cor. 15:7; Gal. 1:19; 2:9, 12; Jude 1). A number of Jesus’ family members became prominent leaders in the early Christian movement in Palestine, James being the most prominent.
Although he was not one of the twelve disciples and likely did not accept Jesus as the Messiah until after the resurrection (cf. John 7:5; Acts 1:14), James quickly emerged as a key leader in the Jerusalem church, where he served until his death in AD 62. Because the Jerusalem church was the parent of all churches and thus granted a central authority by early Christians, James played an important role by giving leadership and direction to the movement. According to Paul’s account, Jesus singled James out following the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:7), and in Luke’s narrative James is described as the leader of the church (Acts 12:17; 15:13; 21:18)—a depiction confirmed by Paul’s description of James as one of the three “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal. 2:9). During Paul’s first visit to Jerusalem, James’s standing was such that Paul felt it necessary to name him along with Peter as having seen him there (Gal. 1:19).
From the influential position of leadership in the Jerusalem church, James wrote two letters that shaped the contours of early Christian life. According to Luke, after the pivotal meeting and decision regarding circumcision in Acts 15, James, along with the “apostles and elders” (Acts 15:23), wrote to the Gentile believers to inform them that they would not have to follow the practice of circumcision in order to become followers of Jesus Christ. During the negotiations James provided a key exegetical argument from the OT (Amos 9:11–12 and Jer. 12:15, recorded in Acts 15:16–17) advocating the inclusion of Gentiles in the church. In the Letter of James, he wrote from this position of central authority in Jerusalem to Jewish Christians throughout the Diaspora. Here James again demonstrates his exceptional abilities as an interpreter of the OT regarding Jewish legal (Lev. 19) and wisdom (Prov. 3:34) traditions through the lens of Christ in order to call his readers to wholehearted living.
Memories of James were preserved well into the second century because he was viewed as the model of a pious person. Eusebius cites Hegesippus, a second-century Jewish believer from Jerusalem, who recounts how James was so often found kneeling in prayer for the people that his knees grew hard like a camel’s, and that “because of his unsurpassable righteousness” he was called “the Just” (Hist. eccl. 2.23.4–7). The same passage records that because of his confession of Christ before the Jews, James was thrown from the parapet of the temple, stoned, and finally killed by a blow from a fuller’s club (Hist. eccl. 2.23.16–18). In addition to these traditions there is a substantial body of apocryphal Christian writings composed in the name of James by individuals during the second and third centuries. These, mainly gnostic, texts promote an almost legendary man of piety and ascetic lifestyle (e.g., First Apocalypse of James, Second Apocalypse of James, Apocryphon of James).
The name “Judas” (Gk. Ioudas) is the Greek equivalent for the Hebrew name “Judah” (Yehudah). (1) One of Jesus’ brothers (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3), also known as Jude, author of the letter that bears his name (Jude 1). (2) One of the apostles identified as “Judas son of James” (Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13) and “Judas (not Judas Iscariot)” (John 14:22), probably the same person as Thaddaeus (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18). (3) A defunct revolutionary identified as “Judas the Galilean” (Acts 5:37), probably the same person as Judas the Galilean from Gamala in Gaulanitis, who led a revolt against Roman taxes in AD 6 (Josephus, Ant. 18.4; 20.102; J.W. 2.118, 433–34; 7.253). (4) A resident of Damascus, known simply as “Judas,” who had a house on Straight Street where the blinded Saul stayed (Acts 9:11). (5) A leading Jerusalem believer and prophet, “Judas called Barsabbas” (i.e., “son of the Sabbath” or “son of Sabbas”; possibly a relative of “Joseph called Barsabbas” in Acts 1:23). Along with Silas, he was sent with Paul and Barnabas to add verbal testimony to the letter to the Gentile Christians from the apostles and elders after the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:22, 27, 32). (6) One of the twelve disciples chosen by Jesus, he betrayed Jesus. See Judas Iscariot.
(1) The tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, regions northeast of Palestine, at the time when John the Baptist’s public ministry began (Luke 3:1). (2) One of Jesus’ twelve apostles (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:14; John 1:43). Philip, like Andrew and Peter, was from Bethsaida (John 1:44). It was Philip who introduced Nathanael to Jesus (John 1:45–48). John’s Gospel mentions Philip three times subsequent to chapter 1 (6:5–7; 12:20–22; 14:6–10), in the last instance recording Philip’s shortsighted request for Jesus to show the Father to the apostles. The gnostic Gospel of Philip was named for Philip the apostle, based on a short comment in the text attributed to Philip (Gos. Phil. 73:8). (3) One of seven men selected by the Jerusalem church to care for the distribution of food to its widows (Acts 6:1–6). This man, also known as Philip the evangelist (21:8), shared the message of Jesus Christ in a city of Samaria, performing great miracles (8:5–13). Philip later explained the good news of Jesus to an Ethiopian eunuch whom he encountered (8:26–38). After Philip baptized the eunuch, “the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away” (8:39). Philip then preached in several towns, finally arriving at Caesarea, where he settled (8:40). Years later, Paul stayed in Caesarea with Philip and his four prophesying daughters (21:8–9).
A distinction needs to be made between the various occurrences of the words “pray” and “prayer” in most translations of the Bible and the modern connotation of the same words. In the OT, the main Hebrew words translated as “to pray” and “prayer” (palal and tepillah) refer to the act of bringing a petition or request before God. They do not normally, if ever, refer to the other elements that we today think of as being included in the act of praying, such as praise or thanksgiving. The same is the case in the NT, where the main Greek words translated “to pray” and “prayer” (proseuchomai and proseuchē) also specifically denote making a petition or request to God. But other words and constructions in both Testaments are also translated “to pray” and “prayer,” and this article will deal with the larger concept, including praise, thanksgiving, petition, and confession, as opposed to the narrower meaning of the particular Hebrew and Greek terms (see also Praise; Thanksgiving; Worship).
Old Testament
In the OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modern ways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayer does not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer to God, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray to humans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction between the sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in the OT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, such as that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. These should be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, but rather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” in recognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. In the NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.
Many of the prayers in the OT are explicitly set in a covenantal context. God owes nothing to his creatures, but God has sworn to be faithful to those with whom he has entered into covenant. Thus, many OT prayers specifically appeal to the covenant as a motivation for both those praying and God’s answering (1 Kings 8:23–25; Neh. 1:5–11; 9:32; Pss. 25:10–11; 44:17–26; 74:20; 89:39–49). In postexilic books such as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Daniel, an important feature in the recorded prayers is the use of prior Scripture, praying God’s words (many times covenantal) back to him (in the NT, see Acts 4:24–30). Also, the closeness engendered by the covenant relationship between God and his people was unique in the ancient Near Eastern context. So Moses can marvel, “What other nation is so great as to have their gods near them the way the Lord our God is near us whenever we pray to him?” (Deut. 4:7).
Prayer must be made from a heart that is right toward God. There is no guarantee that God will hear every prayer (Ps. 66:18; Prov. 1:28; Isa. 1:15; 59:2). For the most part, the “rightness” that God requires in prayer is “a broken and contrite heart” (Ps. 51:17; cf. Isa. 66:2).
Although several passages talk about prayer in the context of sacrifice (e.g., Gen. 13:4), there is surprisingly little emphasis on prayer in the legal texts about sacrifice in the Pentateuch, no prescriptions for the kinds of prayer or the words that are to be said in connection with the sacrifices. Interestingly, however, in later, perhaps postexilic contexts, where there is no temple and therefore no sacrifice, we find texts such as Ps. 141:2, where the petitioner asks God to accept prayer as if it were an offering of incense and the evening sacrifice (cf. Prov. 15:8; in the NT, see Rev. 5:8).
A presupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and may indeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is not primarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of the one praying, but rather about God changing the circumstances of the one praying.
There is a striking honesty, some would even say brashness, evident in many OT prayers. Jeremiah laments that God has deceived both the people (Jer. 4:10) and Jeremiah himself (20:7) and complains about God’s justice (12:1–4). Job stands, as it were, in God’s face and demands that the Almighty answer his questions (Job 31:35–37). The psalmist accuses God of having broken his covenant promises (Ps. 89:39). While it is true that God does, to some extent, rebuke Jeremiah and Job (Jer. 12:5; Job 38–42), he does not ignore them or cast them aside. This would seem, ultimately, to encourage such honesty and boldness on the part of those who pray.
Literarily, accounts of prayers in narratives serve to provide characterizations of the ones praying. The recorded prayers of people such as Abraham, Moses, Hannah, Ezra, and Nehemiah demonstrate their true piety and humility before God. By contrast, the prayer of Jonah recorded in Jon. 2, in its narrative context, betrays a certain hypocrisy on the part of the reluctant prophet.
New Testament
The depiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of the OT, but there are important developments.
Jesus tells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt. 6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Although recent scholarship has demonstrated that “Abba” is not the equivalent of our “daddy,” it expresses a certain intimacy that goes beyond what was prevalent at the time, but retains an element of reverence as well. God is not just “Father,” but “our Father in heaven” (Matt. 6:9). Even Jesus addresses God as “Holy Father” (John 17:11), “Righteous Father” (John 17:25), and “Father, Lord of heaven and earth” (Matt. 11:25). And Paul, as mentioned earlier, uses a buffer zone, rarely in his epistles using the word “Father” by itself, but instead referring to “God our Father” (e.g., Rom. 1:7) and frequently using the phrase “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. 15:6; 2 Cor. 1:3; 11:31; Eph. 1:3; cf. Eph. 1:17; Col. 1:3). God is our Father, but still he is a Father before whom one reverently kneels (Eph. 3:14).
Prayer to God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:19–20; John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26). While there is some debate as to the exact nuance of this idea, it seems clear that, at the very least, prayers in Jesus’ name need to be ones that Jesus would affirm and are in accordance with his holy character and expressed will. It is, in essence, saying to God that the prayer being offered is one that Jesus would approve.
Prayer can also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him in the early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. The instances of this in the NT are rare, however, and generally either exclamatory or rhetorical (Acts 7:59; 1 Cor. 16:22; Rev. 22:20). The norm would still seem to be that prayer is to be made to the Father, through Jesus’ name.
Unlike anything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for their enemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke 23:34; Acts 7:60).
The Holy Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we are able to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is to be done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1 Cor. 14:15).
Jesus encourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke 18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).
Jesus becomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions (Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points (Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offers prayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers that are (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and not give up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overly literalized “pray without ceasing” in 1 Thess. 5:17 NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb. 5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and even now, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, our intercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb. 4:14–16).
A distinction needs to be made between the various occurrences of the words “pray” and “prayer” in most translations of the Bible and the modern connotation of the same words. In the OT, the main Hebrew words translated as “to pray” and “prayer” (palal and tepillah) refer to the act of bringing a petition or request before God. They do not normally, if ever, refer to the other elements that we today think of as being included in the act of praying, such as praise or thanksgiving. The same is the case in the NT, where the main Greek words translated “to pray” and “prayer” (proseuchomai and proseuchē) also specifically denote making a petition or request to God. But other words and constructions in both Testaments are also translated “to pray” and “prayer,” and this article will deal with the larger concept, including praise, thanksgiving, petition, and confession, as opposed to the narrower meaning of the particular Hebrew and Greek terms (see also Praise; Thanksgiving; Worship).
Old Testament
In the OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modern ways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayer does not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer to God, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray to humans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction between the sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in the OT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, such as that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. These should be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, but rather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” in recognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. In the NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.
Many of the prayers in the OT are explicitly set in a covenantal context. God owes nothing to his creatures, but God has sworn to be faithful to those with whom he has entered into covenant. Thus, many OT prayers specifically appeal to the covenant as a motivation for both those praying and God’s answering (1 Kings 8:23–25; Neh. 1:5–11; 9:32; Pss. 25:10–11; 44:17–26; 74:20; 89:39–49). In postexilic books such as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Daniel, an important feature in the recorded prayers is the use of prior Scripture, praying God’s words (many times covenantal) back to him (in the NT, see Acts 4:24–30). Also, the closeness engendered by the covenant relationship between God and his people was unique in the ancient Near Eastern context. So Moses can marvel, “What other nation is so great as to have their gods near them the way the Lord our God is near us whenever we pray to him?” (Deut. 4:7).
Prayer must be made from a heart that is right toward God. There is no guarantee that God will hear every prayer (Ps. 66:18; Prov. 1:28; Isa. 1:15; 59:2). For the most part, the “rightness” that God requires in prayer is “a broken and contrite heart” (Ps. 51:17; cf. Isa. 66:2).
Although several passages talk about prayer in the context of sacrifice (e.g., Gen. 13:4), there is surprisingly little emphasis on prayer in the legal texts about sacrifice in the Pentateuch, no prescriptions for the kinds of prayer or the words that are to be said in connection with the sacrifices. Interestingly, however, in later, perhaps postexilic contexts, where there is no temple and therefore no sacrifice, we find texts such as Ps. 141:2, where the petitioner asks God to accept prayer as if it were an offering of incense and the evening sacrifice (cf. Prov. 15:8; in the NT, see Rev. 5:8).
A presupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and may indeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is not primarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of the one praying, but rather about God changing the circumstances of the one praying.
There is a striking honesty, some would even say brashness, evident in many OT prayers. Jeremiah laments that God has deceived both the people (Jer. 4:10) and Jeremiah himself (20:7) and complains about God’s justice (12:1–4). Job stands, as it were, in God’s face and demands that the Almighty answer his questions (Job 31:35–37). The psalmist accuses God of having broken his covenant promises (Ps. 89:39). While it is true that God does, to some extent, rebuke Jeremiah and Job (Jer. 12:5; Job 38–42), he does not ignore them or cast them aside. This would seem, ultimately, to encourage such honesty and boldness on the part of those who pray.
Literarily, accounts of prayers in narratives serve to provide characterizations of the ones praying. The recorded prayers of people such as Abraham, Moses, Hannah, Ezra, and Nehemiah demonstrate their true piety and humility before God. By contrast, the prayer of Jonah recorded in Jon. 2, in its narrative context, betrays a certain hypocrisy on the part of the reluctant prophet.
New Testament
The depiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of the OT, but there are important developments.
Jesus tells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt. 6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Although recent scholarship has demonstrated that “Abba” is not the equivalent of our “daddy,” it expresses a certain intimacy that goes beyond what was prevalent at the time, but retains an element of reverence as well. God is not just “Father,” but “our Father in heaven” (Matt. 6:9). Even Jesus addresses God as “Holy Father” (John 17:11), “Righteous Father” (John 17:25), and “Father, Lord of heaven and earth” (Matt. 11:25). And Paul, as mentioned earlier, uses a buffer zone, rarely in his epistles using the word “Father” by itself, but instead referring to “God our Father” (e.g., Rom. 1:7) and frequently using the phrase “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. 15:6; 2 Cor. 1:3; 11:31; Eph. 1:3; cf. Eph. 1:17; Col. 1:3). God is our Father, but still he is a Father before whom one reverently kneels (Eph. 3:14).
Prayer to God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:19–20; John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26). While there is some debate as to the exact nuance of this idea, it seems clear that, at the very least, prayers in Jesus’ name need to be ones that Jesus would affirm and are in accordance with his holy character and expressed will. It is, in essence, saying to God that the prayer being offered is one that Jesus would approve.
Prayer can also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him in the early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. The instances of this in the NT are rare, however, and generally either exclamatory or rhetorical (Acts 7:59; 1 Cor. 16:22; Rev. 22:20). The norm would still seem to be that prayer is to be made to the Father, through Jesus’ name.
Unlike anything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for their enemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke 23:34; Acts 7:60).
The Holy Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we are able to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is to be done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1 Cor. 14:15).
Jesus encourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke 18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).
Jesus becomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions (Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points (Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offers prayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers that are (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and not give up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overly literalized “pray without ceasing” in 1 Thess. 5:17 NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb. 5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and even now, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, our intercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb. 4:14–16).
A title designating members of the group of twelve disciples (Matt. 10:2–4; Mark 3:16–19; Luke 6:13–16) who received Jesus’ teaching (Luke 17:5) and to whom he granted authority (Mark 6:7, 30; Luke 9:1, 10). Matthias later replaced Judas Iscariot (Acts 1:24). These apostles provided leadership to the early church in Jerusalem (Acts 15:6), performed miracles (Acts 2:43; 2 Cor. 12:12), and faced persecution (Acts 5:18) as they testified to Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 4:33; 5:32). Broader usage of the term includes witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection (1 Cor. 15:7), James the brother of Jesus (Gal. 1:19), Barnabas and Paul (Acts 14:14), and possibly Silas (1 Thess. 2:6) and Andronicus and Junias/Junia (Rom. 16:7). Paul regularly speaks of his calling in apostolic terms (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1; Titus 1:1), while Peter similarly self-identifies (1 Pet. 1:1; 2 Pet. 1:1). The word is once used of Jesus himself (Heb. 3:1).
One of Jesus’ original twelve apostles (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15), referred to as “Didymus,” meaning “twin” (John 11:16; 20:24; 21:2). The infamous title of “Doubting Thomas” comes from his refusal to believe in Jesus’ resurrection. Thomas said, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe” (John 20:25). A week later the risen Jesus again appeared to the apostles, including Thomas. Thomas’s response was “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). Despite his previous disbelief in Jesus’ resurrection, Thomas was present with the other apostles in the upper room (Acts 1:13).
A revolutionary religious group made up of junior priests from the Jerusalem temple and others who were anti-Roman. Their activities precipitated the war with Rome that led to the destruction of the temple in AD 70. Other revolutionary groups were brigands, Sicarii, and the Fourth Philosophy. Simon, one of Jesus’ disciples, is identified as a “zealot” (Matt. 10:4; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), but it is not known whether he had been a member of a revolutionary group or whether this was a general term for zeal for his God and nation (cf. Acts 21:20). See also Jewish Parties.
The KJV transliteration of the Greek word zēlōtēs, applied to Simon the Zealot in Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13. The Greek rendering of the Aramaic equivalent, Kananaios, is used in Matt. 10:4; Mark 3:18 (KJV: “Canaanite”; NRSV: “Cananaean”; NIV: “Zealot”). See also Zealots.
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because Luke 6:12-16 is mentioned in the definition.
A rendering of Kananaios, which is a Greek transliteration of the Aramaic word for zealot, used as an epithet for the disciple Simon to differentiate him from Simon Peter (Matt. 10:4; Mark 3:18; cf. Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13 [NIV: “the Zealot”]). It is not known whether Simon belonged to the Zealots, the Jewish sect that opposed Roman rule in Palestine, or was zealously devoted to Jewish law (see Acts 21:20).
The dislocation of a people group from its homeland. In the Bible, exile usually refers to two events in Israel’s history: the Assyrian exile of the northern kingdom in 722 BC and the Babylonian exile of the southern kingdom around 586 BC.
The Assyrian Exile
Although earlier Assyrian kings had deported the elite members of conquered populations, it was Tiglath-pileser III who formalized the procedure as a generalized policy in the late eighth century BC. Any people groups who were conquered or subdued after they had rebelled were subjected to exile by Tiglath-pileser, who resettled other conquered peoples in their place. This process of population exchange was designed to prevent the reorganization of and rebellion by groups that had been subjugated by Assyria.
The eventual Assyrian exile of the northern kingdom was set in motion when King Pekah of Israel joined with King Rezin of Damascus to revolt against their Assyrian overlords. Tiglath-pileser responded quickly and brutally, overrunning the northern kingdom in his campaign against Syria and Palestine (734–732 BC). Only a portion of Ephraim and western Manasseh remained, and with the assassination of Pekah, Hoshea was left to rule as the Assyrian vassal. However, before long Hoshea also rebelled. Shalmaneser V and his successor, Sargon II, conquered Samaria in 722 BC and exiled much of the Israelite population in Upper Mesopotamia. According to the biblical account of the fall of the north (2 Kings 15–17), peoples from Babylon, Cuthah, Avva, Hamath, and Sepharvaim were resettled in Samaria. The ten northern tribes eventually were assimilated into the local populations and were never reconstituted, though their eventual restoration would play an important role in prophetic eschatology (see Ezek. 37:15–28).
The Babylonian Exile
More frequently, the exile refers to the Babylonian exile of the southern kingdom in the sixth century BC. With the fall of the Assyrian capital of Nineveh in 612 BC, the Babylonians became the preeminent power in the Near East and quickly moved to consolidate previous Assyrian territories. In 601 BC Nebuchadnezzar’s forces clashed with Egyptian forces, and both sides suffered heavy losses. This setback prompted King Jehoiakim to rebel in order to establish Judah’s independence (2 Kings 24). The Babylonians marched on Judah, and in 597 BC Jerusalem surrendered. King Jehoiachin (who had become king after the assassination of his father, Jehoiakim), government officials, and leading citizens were taken to Babylon, and Zedekiah was installed as the vassal king of Judah. Further rebellions by Zedekiah eventually led to the destruction of Jerusalem, the burning of the temple, and the exile of even more of the population in 586 BC.
The Babylonians’ policy of exile differed from that of the Assyrians in two important respects. First, the Babylonians did not resettle other peoples in Judah. Second, they did not scatter the exiled peoples among other populations; rather, the Judahites were resettled in Babylon in their own community, called a golah. This resulted in the preservation of community identity along with theological traditions and texts. Important works of prophecy such as Ezekiel were written from the Babylonian golah, and there was much reflection on Israel’s history. One of the principal points of 1–2 Kings is that exile was God’s punishment for the sin of the nation, and repentance and a return to God were needed before they could be restored from exile.
After the Exile
The first sign that Jewish fortunes might be improving came in 561 BC, when the Babylonian king Awel-Marduk (Evil-Merodach) exalted King Jehoiachin and gave him a place of honor in his court (2 Kings 25:27–30). But hopes rose even more after the ascendancy of the Persian king Cyrus. When Cyrus conquered the Median Empire in 550 BC, he treated the new subjects quite well compared to Babylonian policies. Cyrus made a habit of restoring exiled peoples to their homelands and permitted the reconstruction of local shrines. In cases of major temples or those that served a strategic importance for the Persian government, funds were even supplied for the rebuilding projects. The shrewd statesman Cyrus understood well that grateful subjects were more likely to be obedient subjects. By the autumn of 539 BC, Cyrus had sufficient military strength to attack Babylon, and when he did, the city fell surprisingly quickly.
In the wake of this victory and in conformity with Cyrus’s policy, he authorized the return of the Jews living in the Babylonian golah and authorized the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem (Ezra 1:2–4; 5:13–17). Although some preliminary work was done, the rebuilding of the temple did not make significant progress until 520 BC, under the prophetic influence of Haggai and Zechariah and the leadership of Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest. With the return from Babylon and the rebuilding of the temple, the period of the exile technically came to an end.
However, even though the exilic period had come to an end in one respect, in another respect the Jews living in the late sixth century and later concluded that the exile had not fully ended. The hopes surrounding the Davidic heir Zerubbabel had waned by 515 BC, and the Jews still found themselves under the foreign rule of the Persians, albeit a more benevolent rule than that of the Babylonians. There was widespread social inequity, and the sins that had originally led Israel into exile still plagued the community. Thus, because the pictures of restoration in Isaiah and Ezekiel had not yet been realized, in a certain sense Israel was still in “exile” or slavery (cf. Ezra 9:7–8). Thus, throughout the Second Temple period many Jews considered the exile to have continued in a theological way, even though the Babylonian exile had come to an end.
This “theological exile” is the background to many statements of restoration in the Gospels. When Jesus calls twelve disciples who will institute the kingdom by driving out demons, curing illnesses, and ruling over the twelve tribes, he is implying that he has come to restore Israel from exile, for both the ten northern tribes and the two southern tribes (see Matt. 10:1; Luke 6:13; 22:28–30).
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.
Introduction
Name. Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title “Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). The name “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was a common male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ” is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually were named after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry of Jesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah (Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).
Sources. From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesus constitute the turning point in human history. From a historical perspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed, both Christian and non-Christian first-century and early second-century literary sources are extant, but they are few in number. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initial resistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Roman historian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,” since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailing worldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sources therefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christian sources.
The NT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry of Jesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels), and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four Source Hypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as a source by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (from German Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their own individual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additional sources.
The early church tried to put together singular accounts, so-called Gospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionites represents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Another harmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was produced around AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning the life of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, the Pauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John. Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4). The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was a passion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. The first extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’s letters (1 Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognized from the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1 Cor. 15:13–14).
Among non-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in a letter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governor of Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentions Christians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about the history of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius, wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Rome because of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Some scholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of “Christos,” a reference to Jesus.
The Jewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a story about the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus (Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in a different part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus is the Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). The majority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic but heavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source, the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but these references are very late and of little historical value.
Noncanonical Gospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of James, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, the Egerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these may contain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most part they are late and unreliable.
Jesus’ Life
Birth and childhood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesus was probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’s death (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of a virginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governor Quirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place in Bethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at the time of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars. Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to either confirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must be determined on the basis of one’s view regarding the general reliability of the Gospel tradition.
On the eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keeping with the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus” (Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home of his parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel of Luke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth in strength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke also contains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Jesus was born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered a temple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford to sacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’ earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, or metal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth was not a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground. Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently common first-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” (John 1:46).
Jesus was also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy were surely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnant before her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only the intervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal (Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem, far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinship hospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay with distant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcome because of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Mary had to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feeding trough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later in Nazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son” (Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming him as one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewise rejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucify him!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21; John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled (Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter, vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71; Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His own siblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamed of his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his mother into the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27) rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.
Baptism, temptation, and start of ministry. After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke 3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instant ministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that the temptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Luke identify three specific temptations by the devil, though their order for the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine intervention after jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’s kingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation, quoting Scripture in response.
Matthew and Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum in Galilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13; Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirty years of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity or perhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of the Levites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning of Jesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples and the sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Jesus’ public ministry: chronology. Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28, and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple had been forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as the temple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out the money changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding and expansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during the eighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry of John the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius (Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From these dates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of the reign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset of Jesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.
The Gospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast in John 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended over three or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a half years. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came on a Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death was therefore probably AD 30.
Jesus’ ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and his Judean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry in Galilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.
Galilean ministry. The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and around Galilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ first teaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30); the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for his calling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection and suffering.
All Gospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in his Galilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke 5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioning of the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers is recorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministry is the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke 6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, in particular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synoptics focus on healings and exorcisms.
During Jesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with his identity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority (Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family (3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner of Beelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesus told parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growing kingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humble beginnings (4:1–32).
The Synoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful. No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority or ability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized many demons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fed five thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark 6:48–49).
In the later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew and traveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are not written with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns to Galilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fear resolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee, where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ disciples with lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed the Pharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents (7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demanding a sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, who confessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus did provide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesus withdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician woman requested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans had long resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality that allotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere “crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,” Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-mute man in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’ travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The city was the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judean ministry. Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry as he resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually led to his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem into three phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27). The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of the journey. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, and the demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem (Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45; Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journey toward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvation and judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase of the journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are the main themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Social conflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposte interactions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel (Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomic feathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who had little value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16; Luke 18:15–17).
Passion Week, death, and resurrection. Each of the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with the crowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark 11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Luke describes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during which Jesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
In Jerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17). Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “began looking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segment of Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’ authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions (12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation (12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s own destruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, Judas Iscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’ arrest (14:10–11).
At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a new covenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29; Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned the disciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark 14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and later he prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agony and submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42; Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial, crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15; Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18). Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission by making disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8) and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return (Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
The Identity of Jesus Christ
Various aspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels, depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses to Jesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning and examining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark 3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70; 23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritual realm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). At Jesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus was transfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voice affirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark 9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’ identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and other guards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf. Mark 15:39).
Miracle worker. In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers were part of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs and miracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of God over various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature, and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’ signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus his identity.
No challenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miracles and signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed a storm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke 8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13; Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised the dead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16; 8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculous feedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44; 8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked on water (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).
The Pharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark 8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4). The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—his death and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice, taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).
Rabbi/teacher. Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbis or Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguished him was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28, 32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathered disciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to join him in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).
Jesus used a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables (Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35; 21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark 4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18; 12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15, 19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33), used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark 10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons (Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke 13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.
Major themes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the cost of discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, his identity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings, observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’s kingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come to fulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).
Jesus’ teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. These conflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions in which the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus used these interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gave replies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’s will, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. The Synoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations of violating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answers to such accusations often echoed the essence of 1 Sam. 15:22, “To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as “I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). An overall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’ public teaching.
The Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than” ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outward obedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equal to murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfully amounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revenging wrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesus valued compassion above traditions and customs, even those contained within the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter of the law.
Jesus’ teachings found their authority in the reality of God’s imminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9), necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence (Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—the family of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged, “Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness” (Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among prophetic teachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his own grounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt. 10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).
Examples of a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include the occasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesus used an aphorism in response to accusations about his associations with sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners” (Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark 2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking the law, he pointed to an OT exception (1 Sam. 21:1–6) to declare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also applied the “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, since women suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly became outcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).
Jesus’ kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, and eschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internal transformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring on love (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus to bless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesus taught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” ones in Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful, and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godly character.
Some scholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic” for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end of time. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of his teachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).
Messiah. The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore the glories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability was common in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babylonian captivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace and protection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer, one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice and righteousness (2 Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16; Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2; Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whose suffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle of expectation in terms of a deliverer.
Jesus’ authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianic images in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearers called him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt. 12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesus as the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). In line with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesus focused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regeneration through his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).
Eschatological prophet. Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewish apocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God to intervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom of God. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ prophecies concerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2, 15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). In addition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representative of the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30). Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images of coming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt. 24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).
Suffering Son of God. Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth was paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa. 61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so he revealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptly portrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ own teachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13, 31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly career ended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewish components (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65; 15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24; 18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.
Jesus’ suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt. 27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John 19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror, bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyone hanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13). Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with a crucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed as a lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referred to this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed of the gospel” (Rom. 1:16).
Exalted Lord. Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46). The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of Jesus Christ indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday (Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) and risen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke 24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus was witnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples (Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appeared to as many as five hundred others (1 Cor. 15:6). He appeared in bodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43; John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesus ascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).
As much as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory over death was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost, Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises (Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31). Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through his resurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his life and work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him as Lord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31; Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).
Jesus’ exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification (Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and his intercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascension signaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John 14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return in glory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt. 19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom (1 Cor. 15:24; 2 Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).
Jesus’ Purpose and Community
In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, who preaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent (4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter the kingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, one made in Jesus’ blood (26:28).
In the prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identity of Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidings of salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of the gospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.
Luke likewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose of Jesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is the kingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John the Baptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesus answered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, as presented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery of sight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’ healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God already present in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20; 8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).
In the Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signs throughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, his identity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundant life is lived out in community.
In the Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community of God (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but they continued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).
Jesus’ ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’s family—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained by adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).
The Quests for the Historical Jesus
The quest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from a historical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary by scholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’ death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding of the church.
The beginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecture notes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously. Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus that rejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. He concluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles, prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’s conclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry of rationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continued throughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “first quest” for the historical Jesus.
In 1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of the Historical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: Eine Geschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of the first quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-century researchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming the historical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching an inoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’s conclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest. Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was an eschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days in Jerusalem.
With the demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as Rudolf Bultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historical Jesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’s former students launched what has come to be known as the “new quest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). This quest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was still dominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels is largely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.
As the rebuilding years of the post–World War II era waned and scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeological finds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on to what has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeks especially to research and understand Jesus in his social and cultural setting.
During the time of Jesus and in the couple of centuries prior, Judaism was not a monolithic entity but was comprised of different groups with varying religious concerns and political interests. This multifaceted nature of Judaism has caused scholars to question whether it would be better to speak of Judaisms rather than Judaism. Was Judaism cut from a whole cloth, or was it a box of fabric scraps? Perhaps it is best to speak of Judaism as a single entity, but one comprised of various factions with diverse beliefs and interests. This conclusion is justified because the diverse sentiments and interests were responses to the same religious and political issues, such as Torah, the temple, and foreign occupiers.
Five of the important parties in ancient Judaism were the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes, the Zealots, and the Herodians. The first three seem to have first emerged in reaction to the rise of the Hasmonean priest-kings in the mid-second and first centuries BC, and the other two in response to the occupation of Palestine by the Romans and their establishment of the Herods as the rulers of Israel.
Pharisees
According to Josephus. The best source of information on the Pharisees, apart from the Gospels themselves, is the Jewish historian Josephus, who discusses the beliefs of various Jewish factions. In consideration of his Roman audience, he depicts these groups as Jewish philosophical schools. In his Antiquities, Josephus indicates a rough outline of the beliefs of the Pharisees and their political position in relation to the Sadducees and the general populace.
Josephus gives the following points in summation of the Pharisees’ beliefs. (1) The Pharisees believed some things are the result of fate, whereas other things are the result of human choice. (2) The Pharisees believed that the soul survives death in a place of either reward or punishment, and in the resurrection of the body. (3) Besides believing in the authority of Scripture, the Pharisees also had an authoritative body of oral tradition.
The Pharisees and the Sadducees had a difficult relationship, due not only to different religious beliefs but also to conflicting political aspirations. Josephus suggests that Jewish leaders gave patronage to one group or the other, or suppressed one group or the other, sometimes violently. In regard to the general populace, the Pharisees had a much better relationship with them than did the Sadducees, to the point that when Sadducees were magistrates, they had to rule according to the beliefs of the Pharisees or else the people would not listen to them.
In the New Testament. In the Synoptic Gospels, the Pharisees were one of the groups that opposed Jesus. It seems that the Pharisees most strongly opposed Jesus on issues related to their received tradition, which they considered to be as binding as the OT law. Two such legal issues were ceremonial washings before meals and working on the Sabbath. All three Synoptic Gospels narrate the Pharisees questioning Jesus concerning his and his disciples’ failure to follow the tradition of the elders by eating with “unclean,” that is, “unwashed,” hands (Matt. 15:1–2; Mark 7:1–5; Luke 11:39–41). Concerning breaking the Sabbath, the Pharisees confronted Jesus on various occasions, such as when Jesus healed on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:9–14; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–11) and when his disciples picked grain while walking through a field (Matt. 12:1–8; Mark 2:23–28; Luke 6:1–5).
In response to accusations concerning breaking the traditions of the elders, Jesus affirmed the priority of mercy in the face of human need that supersedes laws concerning the Sabbath by saying that the Sabbath was made for humans, not humans for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27), or that the Son of Man (Jesus) was Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8; Mark 2:28; Luke 6:5). He also said that God desires mercy, not sacrifice (Matt. 12:7).
Jesus’ critique of the Pharisees concentrated on their neglecting mercy toward fellow humans for the sake of their tradition. This is especially clear in Matthew, where Jesus’ critique of the Pharisees includes indictments against them for concentrating on the fine points of the law but neglecting justice and mercy (12:7; 23:23).
In the Gospel of John, the Pharisees are again usually depicted as adversaries of Jesus and also in league with other Jewish authorities in plotting to arrest and kill Jesus (7:32; 11:47–57). One passage suggests that they were divided concerning Jesus (9:16). One Pharisee, Nicodemus, came to Jesus by night (John 3), defended Jesus before his peers (7:50), and brought spices to prepare Jesus’ body for burial after his death (19:39).
The Pharisees were not always antagonistic toward Jesus. From time to time, they were on the same side of an issue, such as Jesus’ confrontation with the Sadducees over the resurrection (Luke 20:27–40). Nicodemus, mentioned above, was quite sympathetic toward Jesus. The apostle Paul identifies himself as a Pharisee in regard to keeping the law in Phil. 3:5; Acts 26:5, and in a confrontation with Jerusalem authorities in Acts 23:6. Also, some early Christians were said to be Pharisees (Acts 15:5).
Relationship with rabbinic Judaism. An issue concerning the Pharisees is their relationship with later rabbinic Judaism. There are basically two viewpoints on this matter, and both involve the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in AD 70. One position maintains that when the dust settled from the destruction of the temple, only the Pharisees remained standing, and rabbinic Judaism is their heir. Another view holds that after AD 70 sectarian Judaism disappeared, and rabbinic Judaism emerged from a coalescence of various Jewish groups. Although one cannot be certain, it seems that the former view may be closer to the truth, since in the Mishnah, Sadducean legal opinion is contrasted with Pharisaic, and the Pharisaic is invariably considered correct.
Sadducees
The Sadducees were an elite group of Jews connected with the priesthood. “Sadducee” probably means “Son of Zadok,” a descendant of the high priest Zadok from the time of David. Some members of the Qumran community used the term “Son of Zadok” as a self-designation as well, suggesting some common ancestry, if not direct identification, of the Sadducees and some members of the Qumran community.
Along with the Pharisees, the Sadducees were a religious-political group that sought the support of the ruling powers. It is in the context of the patron-retainer relationship that we first hear of the Sadducees. Josephus relates how the Hasmonean ruler John Hyrcanus switched from being the patron of the Pharisees to that of the Sadducees. When the Pharisee Eliezer suggested that Hyrcanus step down from the high priesthood due to his uncertain lineage, Hyrcanus became very angry and wanted Eliezer to be executed. The rest of the Pharisees suggested that he merely be bound and whipped, since they had a tradition of passing light sentences. A Sadducee suggested that they passed such a light sentence because they agreed with Eliezer that Hyrcanus was unsuitable to be high priest. Hyrcanus then cast his support behind the Sadducees and abolished the laws that the Pharisees had given to the populace.
Josephus gives the following general description of the Sadducees’ beliefs and relationship with the general populace. (1) The Sadducees rejected fate; things are the result of human action alone. Along with this, God stands aloof from humans concerning good and evil actions. Good and evil are the result of human action. (2) The Sadducees believed that the soul dies along with the body. (3) They accepted only the written law and had no oral tradition. Some take this last point to mean that they accepted only the Pentateuch as Scripture, but this goes beyond what Josephus says about them.
Josephus goes on to write that Sadducees were as contentious in their disputes with fellow Sadducees as with people outside the group, and they did not hold their elders in esteem. They had influence over the elite, but no say with the populace at large.
The Sadducees are mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels, but not in John, although the “chief priests” who plotted against Jesus with the Pharisees (e.g., John 11:46) probably were Sadducees. All three Synoptic Gospels relate the narrative in which the Sadducees posed the hypothetical question concerning whose wife a woman would be in the resurrection if she outlived seven husbands. Jesus answered that they understood neither the Scriptures nor the power of God, and that God was the God of the living and not the dead (Matt. 22:23–33; Mark 12:18–27; Luke 20:27–40).
The book of Acts confirms that the Sadducees were closely connected to the priesthood (Acts 4:1; 5:17), and that they disputed with the Pharisees over the resurrection (Acts 23:6–8).
Essenes
The Essenes are the third “philosophical school” mentioned by Josephus. Most scholars consider the Qumran sectarians who produced the DSS to be Essenes. This has created a number of circular arguments, since the DSS are then used to confirm the nature of Essene beliefs. That being said, there is good evidence that the Qumran sectarians were at least in part Essene. The Essenes are not mentioned in the NT or in rabbinic literature, but they do appear in the writings of Josephus, Philo of Alexandria, and Pliny the Elder.
Josephus delineates the beliefs of the Essenes as follows. (1) They ascribed every happening to God. (2) They believed in the immortality of the soul.
Josephus writes at great length concerning the Essenes’ way of life. They lived an ascetic lifestyle, avoided pleasure, and devoted themselves to prayer. They shared all things in common and lived in harmony with one another. Some Essenes avoided marriage, whereas others regarded marriage and procreation as too central to human life to avoid. Certain Essenes could predict the future and interpret dreams. Concerning sacrifices, Josephus mentions that although they sent offerings to the temple, they had their own, superior sacrifices.
Philo writes that the Essenes were much admired due to their holy lives, living peaceably with one another and holding to the truth. Contrary to Josephus, Philo says that the Essenes did not sacrifice, but through study they kept their minds pure and holy.
The Essenes, as Josephus and Philo describe them, seem similar to the Qumran sectarians. The Qumran sectarians believed that God determines the fate of people (1QS 3:13–4:26). Although the sectarians believed in the immortality of the soul as well as divine reward and punishment, this does not seem to be emphasized in their writings.
Zealots
Scholars tend to use “Zealots” as a general term to refer to three different groups mentioned by Josephus: brigands, Sicarii, and Zealots. The three groups have different political ideologies and emerged at different times in the first century. They can all be described as revolutionaries.
The brigands were motivated not by religious or political ideology but by survival. Displaced from the traditional economic structure of Palestine—the agricultural village—by the Romans, the brigands stole from Jew and Roman alike. They hated the Romans because the Romans had driven them into poverty through taxation and transformation of the economy from subsistence-based agriculture to cash crops that could be sold more readily. (Money could be shipped to Rome more easily than crops.)
The other two groups, the Sicarii and the Zealots, fought the Romans and Jewish collaborators for political and religious reasons. They emerged at different times during the first century, and they should not be lumped together, for their methodologies and goals were somewhat different.
Josephus writes about what he calls the “fourth philosophy,” which he considers an alien element introduced into the religion and politics of Israel, begun in AD 6 by Judas the Galilean and Zadok the Pharisee. Their slogan was “No king but God,” and they engaged in a short-lived rebellion. It seems unclear whether the fourth philosophy should be a category that includes the brigands, the Sicarii, and the Zealots, or whether it is a group unto itself. Whatever the case, Josephus makes clear that this fourth philosophy is an anomaly in the history of Israel.
The Sicarii were a group of assassins who emerged in the AD 40s–50s. They specialized in mixing into Jerusalem crowds and murdering Jews who were friendly with the Romans, mainly the wealthy. The high priest Jonathan was one of their victims. At the start of the first Roman war, they commanded Jewish troops but were driven out by fellow Jews. They spent the rest of the war at Masada, conducting inconsequential exploits. They killed themselves in AD 73–74 rather than be captured by the Romans. Josephus writes that the leader of the Sicarii at the beginning of the first Roman war was Menahem, the son or grandson of Judas of Galilee. It has been speculated that Judas Iscariot’s surname may be derived from Sicarii, but the etymology is uncertain.
The Zealots emerged at the start of the first Roman war (AD 66–70). Josephus mentions them mainly in connection with the Roman war and seldom in other sections of his writings. They consisted mainly of people displaced by Roman activity in Galilee. They targeted the aristocracy that collaborated with Rome, the Romans themselves, and other revolutionary groups. One of Jesus’ disciples was called “Simon the Zealot” (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), but this is likely a reference to his zealous faith.
The first Roman war erupted when the Roman procurator Florus looted the temple. When nothing was done concerning this, the lower priests, the captain of the temple guard, Eleazar, and other revolutionary leaders decided to terminate the temple sacrifice made on the emperor’s behalf. This essentially started the Roman war and gave rise to the Zealots.
Herodians
The Herodians are mentioned three times in the Gospels. They are reported to have plotted, along with the Pharisees, to kill Jesus after he healed a man with a withered hand (Mark 3:6). They are also described, along with the Pharisees, as trying to trap Jesus concerning the lawfulness of paying taxes to Caesar (Matt. 22:16; Mark 12:13).
The Herodians were aristocrats who supported the Herodian dynasty and the Romans, whose support made that dynasty possible. There seems to be some overlap between the Herodians and the Sadducees; Mark 8:15 has Jesus warning his disciples concerning the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod (some ancient witnesses read “Herodians”), whereas the parallel in Matt. 16:6, 11 has Jesus warning his disciples concerning the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Their religious beliefs may have been similar to those of the Sadducees. Too little information about them exists to permit drawing strong conclusions. One can safely say, however, that the Herodians were pro-Roman aristocrats who joined forces with the anti-Roman Pharisees in opposing Jesus.
One of the twelve apostles, according to the KJV of Matt. 10:3. Other English versions read “Thaddaeus.” The KJV, following a different Greek manuscript tradition, lists “Thaddaeus” as Lebbaeus’s surname. This apostle is elsewhere called “Judas son of James” (Luke 6:16).
The Letter of James has been hailed as possibly the earliest, most Jewish, and most practical of all NT letters. James 3:13 aptly communicates the book’s theme: “Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, by deeds done in humility that comes from wisdom.” The terms “wise” and “wisdom” occur five times in the book (1:5; 3:13 [2×], 15, 17). Hence, the author instructed his readers on leading a life of faith that was characterized by a wisdom expressed through speech and actions (2:12).
Literary Features
The author’s employment of picturesque, concrete language has close affinities to OT wisdom literature and reflects Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon on the Mount.
James 1:2 – Matthew 5:10-12
James 1:4 – Matthew 5:48
James 1:5; 5:15 – Matthew 7:7-12
James 1:9 – Matthew 5:3
James 1:20 – Matthew 5:22
James 1:22 – Matthew 7:21
James 2:5 – Matthew 5:3
James 2:13 – Matthew 5:7; 6:14-15
James 2:14-16 – Matthew 7:21-23
James 3:12 – Matthew 7:16
James 3:17-18 – Matthew 5:9
James 4:4 – Matthew 6:24
James 4:10 – Matthew 5:3-4
James 4:11 – Matthew 7:1-2
James 5:2 – Matthew 6:19
James 5:10 – Matthew 5:12
James 5:12 – Matthew 5:33-37
Like the OT wisdom literature, the teaching in James has a strongly practical orientation. Although the book contains some lengthier paragraphs, much of it consists of sequential admonishments and ethical maxims that in some cases are only loosely related to one another. The sentences generally are short and direct. There are fifty-four verbs in the imperative. Connection between sentences is sometimes created through repeated words. Yet the overall topic of practical faith and wisdom links these exhortations together.
Background and Occasion
After the death of Stephen, many disciples were scattered into the regions of Judea and Samaria (Acts 7:54–8:3). In Acts 11:19 the narrator notes, “Now those who had been scattered by the persecution that broke out when Stephen was killed traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, spreading the word only among Jews.” James may have written this letter to instruct and comfort those scattered believers, as he addressed his letter to “the twelve tribes dispersed abroad” (1:1 NET). These Jewish Christians no longer had direct contact with the apostles in Jerusalem and needed to be instructed and admonished in their tribulations. Apparently, the rich were taking advantage of them (2:6; 5:1–6), and their trials had led to worldliness, rash words, and strained relationships (2:1; 4:1, 11; 5:9). In view of persecution, some may have been tempted to hide their faith (5:10–11). James exhorted them to demonstrate a lifestyle that would reflect their faith.
James’s View on Works and Salvation
Some readers of this letter have observed a seeming contradiction between James’s call for good works and Paul’s insistence on salvation by grace through faith apart from works (cf. James 2:14–26 with Eph. 2:8–10). The discussion is complicated by James’s argument that a faith without works cannot “save” and by his observation that Abraham was justified by what he did, not by faith alone (James 2:14, 20–24). Paul, by contrast, maintains that Abraham was justified exclusively by faith (Rom. 4:1–3).
Referring rhetorically to people who claim to have faith but have no deeds, James asks, “Can such faith save them?” (2:14). That is, can the kind of faith that results in no works be genuine? The expected answer is no. The kind of faith that produces no works cannot be genuine faith; rather, it is “dead” (2:17, 26) and “useless” (2:20). This kind of faith is “by itself,” meaning that it produces no lasting fruit (2:17). James’s point is that genuine faith will produce good works in the believer’s life. By way of contrast, a mere profession is not necessarily an indication of genuine faith. Even demons believe in God, but they are not saved; the kind of belief that they exhibit is merely an acknowledgment of God’s existence (2:19).
According to James, Abraham was justified not in the sense of first being declared righteous, but rather in the sense that his faith was demonstrated as genuine when he offered up Isaac (2:21). Paul, on the other hand, argues that salvation is obtained not through works but rather by faith alone. He quotes Gen. 15:6 to show that Abraham trusted God and was declared righteous several years before he offered up Isaac (Rom. 4:3).
According to Paul, Abraham was justified (declared righteous) before God when he believed God’s promise (Gen. 15:6), but for James, he was justified in the sense of giving observable proof of salvation through his obedience to God. Whereas Paul refers to the point and means of positional salvation, James refers to a subsequent event that confirmed that Abraham was justified.
I. Faith
A. Paul (Romans 4:1-3):
1. Is personal trust in God
2. Justifies one before God
3. Is not proof of Salvation
B. James (2:14-26)
1. Is a mere claim if there is no resulting fruit
II. Works
A. Paul (Romans 4:1-3):
1. Precede salvation
2. Attempt to merit salvation
3. Cannot justify before God
B. James (2:14-26)
1. Follow conversion
2. Are evidence of salvation
3. Confirm one’s salvation
It is important to keep in mind that each author wrote with a different purpose. Paul wrote against Judaizers, who taught that a man had to be circumcised and keep the OT law to be saved. James was warning against a mere profession of faith that leads to self-deception (1:22). John Calvin correctly expressed the biblical teaching that faith alone saves, but that kind of faith does not remain alone; it produces good works (cf. Rom. 3:21–6:14; Eph. 2:8–10; Titus 2:11–14; 3:4–7).
Authorship
The author identifies himself as “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (1:1). The NT mentions five persons having the name “James”: (1) James the son of Zebedee and the brother of John (Matt. 4:21); (2) James the son of Alphaeus (Matt. 10:3); (3) James “the younger” (Mark 15:40); (4) James the father of the apostle Judas (not Judas Iscariot; Luke 6:16); and (5) James the brother of Jesus (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3; Gal. 1:19).
James the brother of John was executed by Herod Agrippa I, who died in AD 44 (Acts 12:2). Since the Letter of James probably was written after this date, the brother of John could not have written it. Neither James the son of Alphaeus, James the younger, nor James the father of Judas was as prominent in the early church as the writer of this letter, who simply identified himself and assumed that his readers would know him (1:1). James the son of Alphaeus is mentioned for the last time in Acts 1:13, and nothing is known of James the father of Judas apart from the listing of his name in Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13. (It is uncertain whether James the younger should be identified with one of the other four or is a separate figure.) Thus, it is unlikely that any of them wrote the book. James the brother of Jesus is most likely the author of this letter.
James the Brother of the Lord
At the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, James, as well as his brothers Joses (Joseph), Judas, and Simon, did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3; John 7:5). However, they came to believe in him after the resurrection (Acts 1:14; 1 Cor. 15:7). Paul called James, along with Peter and John, the “pillars” of the church (Gal. 2:9). James does not claim to be an apostle in this letter; however, he is identified as one in Gal. 1:19. But there the term “apostle” probably refers to a group of leading disciples outside the Twelve (cf. Acts 14:4, 14; 1 Cor. 15:7; Gal. 2:9). Since the author of this letter employed many imperatives, his readers clearly accepted his authority. James, the brother of Jesus, who also became a key leader of the church in Jerusalem, possessed such authority (Acts 12:17; 15:13, 19; 21:18; Gal. 1:18–19; 2:9).
Date
Some scholars hold that the Letter of James was written around AD 62, while others argue that James wrote this letter sometime in AD 45–50. Those who favor the earlier dates point out that the Jewish character of this letter fits with this period when the church was mainly Jewish, based on the following criteria: (1) There is no mention of Gentile Christians in the letter. (2) The author does not refer to the teachings of the Judaizers. If the letter had been written at a later date, we would expect the author to address the issue of circumcision among Christians. (3) The mention of “teachers” (3:1) and “elders” (5:14) as the leaders in the church reflects the structure of the primitive church. (4) The word “meeting” in 2:2 is the same Greek word as for “synagogue.” It describes the gathering place of the early church. This implies a time when the congregation was still primarily Jewish (Acts 1–7).
Outline
I. Introduction (1:1)
II. The Wise Christian Is Patient in Trials (1:2–18)
A. How the Christian should face trials (1:2–12)
B. The source of temptations (1:13–18)
III. The Wise Christian Is a Practical Doer of the Word (1:19–2:26)
A. Hearers and doers of the word (1:19–25)
B. True religion (1:26–27)
C. Prejudice in the church (2:1–13)
D. Faith that works (2:14–26)
IV. The Wise Christian Masters the Tongue (3:1–18)
A. The power of the tongue (3:1–12)
B. The wisdom from above (3:13–18)
V. The Wise Christian Seeks Peace in Relationships (4:1–17)
A. The cause of quarrels (4:1–3)
B. Warning against worldliness (4:4–10)
C. Warning against slander (4:11–12)
D. Warning against boasting and self-sufficiency (4:13–17)
VI. The Wise Christian Is Patient and Prays When Facing Difficulties (5:1–20)
A. Warning to the rich (5:1–6)
B. Exhortation to patience (5:7–12)
C. The power of prayer (5:13–18)
D. The benefit of correcting those in error (5:19–20)
One of Jesus’ disciples, mentioned by name only in John 1:45–49; 21:2. He was from Cana in Galilee (21:2), where Jesus changed water into wine. Nathanael was initially skeptical of Philip’s claims about Jesus because Jesus was from Nazareth (1:45–46), but his skepticism turned to belief when Jesus, who called Nathanael “truly . . . an Israelite in whom there is no deceit,” demonstrated miraculous knowledge of where Nathanael had been sitting before he met Jesus (1:47–49). Nathanael quickly declared his faith in Jesus. As a result of Nathanael’s ready faith, Jesus promised him that he would be witness to Jesus’ salvific work and the miraculous transformation of the broken relationship between God and humankind (John 1:50). Nathanael was one of the first disciples to see the risen Jesus (John 21:1–4).
Nathanael was most likely the same person as Bartholomew (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13), given that John never mentions Bartholomew and the Synoptic Gospels never mention Nathanael, and that the Synoptic Gospels list Bartholomew’s name directly after Philip’s, while John connects Nathanael and Philip in his narrative.
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.
Introduction
Name. Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title “Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). The name “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was a common male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ” is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually were named after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry of Jesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah (Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).
Sources. From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesus constitute the turning point in human history. From a historical perspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed, both Christian and non-Christian first-century and early second-century literary sources are extant, but they are few in number. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initial resistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Roman historian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,” since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailing worldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sources therefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christian sources.
The NT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry of Jesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels), and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four Source Hypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as a source by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (from German Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their own individual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additional sources.
The early church tried to put together singular accounts, so-called Gospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionites represents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Another harmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was produced around AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning the life of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, the Pauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John. Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4). The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was a passion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. The first extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’s letters (1 Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognized from the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1 Cor. 15:13–14).
Among non-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in a letter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governor of Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentions Christians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about the history of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius, wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Rome because of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Some scholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of “Christos,” a reference to Jesus.
The Jewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a story about the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus (Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in a different part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus is the Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). The majority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic but heavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source, the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but these references are very late and of little historical value.
Noncanonical Gospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of James, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, the Egerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these may contain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most part they are late and unreliable.
Jesus’ Life
Birth and childhood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesus was probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’s death (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of a virginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governor Quirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place in Bethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at the time of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars. Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to either confirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must be determined on the basis of one’s view regarding the general reliability of the Gospel tradition.
On the eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keeping with the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus” (Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home of his parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel of Luke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth in strength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke also contains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Jesus was born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered a temple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford to sacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’ earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, or metal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth was not a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground. Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently common first-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” (John 1:46).
Jesus was also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy were surely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnant before her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only the intervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal (Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem, far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinship hospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay with distant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcome because of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Mary had to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feeding trough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later in Nazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son” (Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming him as one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewise rejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucify him!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21; John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled (Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter, vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71; Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His own siblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamed of his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his mother into the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27) rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.
Baptism, temptation, and start of ministry. After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke 3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instant ministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that the temptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Luke identify three specific temptations by the devil, though their order for the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine intervention after jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’s kingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation, quoting Scripture in response.
Matthew and Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum in Galilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13; Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirty years of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity or perhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of the Levites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning of Jesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples and the sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Jesus’ public ministry: chronology. Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28, and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple had been forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as the temple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out the money changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding and expansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during the eighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry of John the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius (Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From these dates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of the reign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset of Jesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.
The Gospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast in John 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended over three or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a half years. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came on a Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death was therefore probably AD 30.
Jesus’ ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and his Judean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry in Galilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.
Galilean ministry. The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and around Galilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ first teaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30); the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for his calling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection and suffering.
All Gospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in his Galilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke 5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioning of the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers is recorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministry is the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke 6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, in particular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synoptics focus on healings and exorcisms.
During Jesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with his identity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority (Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family (3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner of Beelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesus told parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growing kingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humble beginnings (4:1–32).
The Synoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful. No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority or ability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized many demons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fed five thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark 6:48–49).
In the later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew and traveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are not written with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns to Galilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fear resolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee, where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ disciples with lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed the Pharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents (7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demanding a sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, who confessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus did provide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesus withdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician woman requested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans had long resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality that allotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere “crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,” Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-mute man in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’ travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The city was the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judean ministry. Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry as he resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually led to his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem into three phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27). The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of the journey. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, and the demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem (Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45; Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journey toward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvation and judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase of the journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are the main themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Social conflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposte interactions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel (Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomic feathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who had little value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16; Luke 18:15–17).
Passion Week, death, and resurrection. Each of the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with the crowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark 11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Luke describes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during which Jesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
In Jerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17). Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “began looking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segment of Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’ authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions (12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation (12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s own destruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, Judas Iscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’ arrest (14:10–11).
At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a new covenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29; Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned the disciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark 14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and later he prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agony and submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42; Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial, crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15; Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18). Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission by making disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8) and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return (Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
The Identity of Jesus Christ
Various aspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels, depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses to Jesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning and examining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark 3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70; 23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritual realm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). At Jesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus was transfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voice affirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark 9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’ identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and other guards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf. Mark 15:39).
Miracle worker. In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers were part of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs and miracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of God over various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature, and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’ signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus his identity.
No challenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miracles and signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed a storm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke 8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13; Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised the dead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16; 8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculous feedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44; 8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked on water (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).
The Pharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark 8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4). The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—his death and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice, taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).
Rabbi/teacher. Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbis or Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguished him was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28, 32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathered disciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to join him in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).
Jesus used a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables (Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35; 21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark 4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18; 12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15, 19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33), used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark 10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons (Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke 13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.
Major themes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the cost of discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, his identity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings, observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’s kingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come to fulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).
Jesus’ teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. These conflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions in which the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus used these interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gave replies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’s will, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. The Synoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations of violating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answers to such accusations often echoed the essence of 1 Sam. 15:22, “To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as “I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). An overall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’ public teaching.
The Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than” ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outward obedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equal to murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfully amounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revenging wrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesus valued compassion above traditions and customs, even those contained within the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter of the law.
Jesus’ teachings found their authority in the reality of God’s imminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9), necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence (Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—the family of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged, “Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness” (Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among prophetic teachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his own grounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt. 10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).
Examples of a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include the occasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesus used an aphorism in response to accusations about his associations with sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners” (Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark 2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking the law, he pointed to an OT exception (1 Sam. 21:1–6) to declare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also applied the “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, since women suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly became outcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).
Jesus’ kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, and eschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internal transformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring on love (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus to bless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesus taught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” ones in Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful, and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godly character.
Some scholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic” for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end of time. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of his teachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).
Messiah. The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore the glories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability was common in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babylonian captivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace and protection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer, one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice and righteousness (2 Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16; Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2; Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whose suffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle of expectation in terms of a deliverer.
Jesus’ authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianic images in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearers called him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt. 12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesus as the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). In line with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesus focused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regeneration through his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).
Eschatological prophet. Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewish apocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God to intervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom of God. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ prophecies concerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2, 15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). In addition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representative of the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30). Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images of coming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt. 24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).
Suffering Son of God. Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth was paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa. 61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so he revealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptly portrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ own teachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13, 31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly career ended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewish components (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65; 15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24; 18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.
Jesus’ suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt. 27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John 19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror, bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyone hanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13). Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with a crucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed as a lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referred to this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed of the gospel” (Rom. 1:16).
Exalted Lord. Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46). The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of Jesus Christ indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday (Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) and risen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke 24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus was witnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples (Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appeared to as many as five hundred others (1 Cor. 15:6). He appeared in bodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43; John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesus ascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).
As much as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory over death was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost, Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises (Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31). Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through his resurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his life and work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him as Lord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31; Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).
Jesus’ exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification (Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and his intercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascension signaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John 14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return in glory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt. 19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom (1 Cor. 15:24; 2 Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).
Jesus’ Purpose and Community
In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, who preaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent (4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter the kingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, one made in Jesus’ blood (26:28).
In the prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identity of Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidings of salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of the gospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.
Luke likewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose of Jesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is the kingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John the Baptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesus answered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, as presented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery of sight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’ healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God already present in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20; 8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).
In the Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signs throughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, his identity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundant life is lived out in community.
In the Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community of God (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but they continued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).
Jesus’ ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’s family—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained by adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).
The Quests for the Historical Jesus
The quest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from a historical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary by scholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’ death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding of the church.
The beginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecture notes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously. Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus that rejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. He concluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles, prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’s conclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry of rationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continued throughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “first quest” for the historical Jesus.
In 1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of the Historical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: Eine Geschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of the first quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-century researchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming the historical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching an inoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’s conclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest. Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was an eschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days in Jerusalem.
With the demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as Rudolf Bultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historical Jesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’s former students launched what has come to be known as the “new quest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). This quest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was still dominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels is largely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.
As the rebuilding years of the post–World War II era waned and scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeological finds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on to what has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeks especially to research and understand Jesus in his social and cultural setting.
These church offices are God-given positions of leadership within the early church designed to give it structure and direction. Some of these positions have ongoing application for today; others are important primarily for understanding the historical development of the church.
A definite structure for church leadership is God’s idea. Even though the equality of all believers is a biblical principle (the priesthood of all believers in 1 Pet. 2:5, 9), God has also chosen to give certain spiritual gifts of leadership (Rom. 12:8) or administration (1 Cor. 12:28) to a limited number within the church, not universally to everyone. Paul asks a series of rhetorical questions in 1 Cor. 12:29, “Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles?” where the expected answer in each case clearly is “No, not everyone has every gift.” Believers are also specifically instructed to “obey your leaders and submit to them” (Heb. 13:17 ESV, NRSV, NASB) and to respect those “who care for you in the Lord and who admonish you” (1 Thess. 5:12). God’s plan is clearly that there be specific leaders. At the same time, the NT does not always answer all our questions or spell out every detail in this area of church leadership. The more significant offices in the NT church include the following:
Apostle. Apostles formed the earliest and most important leadership structure. Jesus, early in his ministry, “called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles” (Luke 6:13). The word “disciple” (mathētēs) means “student” or “learner” and indicates the role of these original twelve during Jesus’ earthly ministry. Following Jesus’ death and resurrection, these same individuals (now minus Judas Iscariot) were typically called “apostles” (apostolos [lit., “sent-out one”), who were then entrusted with Christ’s power and authority as his official representatives. Paul describes the foundational role of this office in Eph. 2:20. Their power and authority were without parallel in the historical development of the church. Some other observations round out our understanding of this office. First, there are occasional (but limited) references to broader circles of apostles in the sense of other people being “sent out” by God for specific ministry. Thus, Barnabas is apparently described as an apostle alongside Paul (Acts 14:14), and James the brother of Jesus is described as an apostle (Gal. 1:19). However, Acts 1:21–22 spells out the usual qualifications for an apostle: “men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us.” Thus, the apostleship, especially understood in the strict sense, is limited to original eyewitnesses from among the first generation of believers, and this office has not continued.
Prophet. The office of prophet (prophētēs) is another foundational one at the time of the establishment of the church (Eph. 2:20). Agabus is described as a prophet (Acts 21:10), and Paul assumes that there were prophets in the church in Corinth (1 Cor. 12:29). Although this is a controversial topic, many believe that this office no longer continues today.
Elder/presbyter. The office of elder or presbyter (presbyteros) is one of the most common in the church. This office is based on the model of elders in the Jewish synagogue. Paul and Bar-na-bas appointed elders in every church as early as their first missionary journey (Acts 14:23). James instructs the sick to call on the elders of the church to pray over them (James 5:14). The best job description for elders is 1 Tim. 5:17, where there are two major emphases: first, directing the affairs of the church, and second, preaching and teaching. Elders apparently always functioned in a plurality in Scripture, never as solo leaders.
Overseer/bishop. The office of overseer or bishop (episkopos) is mentioned in Phil. 1:1 as well as in 1 Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:7 in the lists of qualifications. Although by the second or third century the office of overseer/bishop had evolved into a singular office of one overseer presiding over a number of elders, this was not true in the NT, where these two titles apparently were different names for the same office. Several passages indicate this relationship. In Acts 20:17 Paul calls specifically for the “elders” of the church, yet in Acts 20:28 he refers to them as “overseers.” In similar fashion, in Titus 1:5–9 Paul tells Titus to “appoint elders in every town” but then apparently goes on to speak of them as “overseers.” Peter does the same thing in 1 Pet. 5:1–2, where he describes them first as “elders” and then as “overseers.” The key to understanding this relationship is to see that the term “elder” comes from their Jewish heritage and reflects the qualifications for this office (someone who is older and more mature), whereas the term “overseer” comes from a Greek background and refers more to their job description (they are to oversee and take responsibility for leadership).
Deacon. Deacons provide practical, hands-on ministry in the local church. Interestingly, the classic passage on this office, Acts 6:1–6, never uses the actual noun “deacon” (diakonos). Instead, other forms of this word are used: “to wait on tables” (diakoneō [v. 2]) and “the ministry [lit., ‘service’] of the word” (diakonia [v. 4]). This word group is used frequently to refer to nonreligious service, such as Martha’s meal preparation (Luke 10:40) or in reference to a servant or attendant in one of Jesus’ parables (e.g., Matt. 22:13). Originally, the term “deacon” simply meant “servant.” In the development of the NT church, it gradually became a technical term used to refer to a specific office, such as in Paul’s greeting in Phil. 1:1 and in the list of qualifications in 1 Tim. 3:8–13. The standard understanding of the deacons in the NT church structure is that they assisted the elders/overseers in practical ways (probably on the model of the seven men in Acts 6).
Pastor. Pastors, surprisingly, show up only a single time in most English translations, in Eph. 4:11, where Paul describes how Christ “gave . . . pastors and teachers.” “Pastor” (poimēn) means “shepherd,” and although the noun appears in this sense of a church leader only here, the verb “to shepherd” (poimainō) occurs also in Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:2. This shepherding role is associated with the elders/overseers. We see this in Paul’s address to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20, where he calls them “elders” (v. 17) and “overseers” (v. 28) and tells them how they are to “be shepherds of the church of God” (v. 28). Peter does the same thing in 1 Pet. 5:1–2, where he calls them “elders” (v. 1) and then calls them “overseers” and tells them to “be shepherds of God’s flock” (v. 2).
Teacher. Teachers are mentioned among those with various spiritual gifts in 1 Cor. 12:28–29 and are connected with pastors in Eph. 4:11, apparently as a single combined office.
Evangelist. Evangelists are mentioned in the list of specially gifted individuals in Eph. 4:11, in relationship to Philip the evangelist in Acts 21:8, and as part of the job description for Timothy in 2 Tim. 4:5 (“do the work of an evangelist”).
The act of election and appointment to positions of leadership and service within religious communities.
Old Testament. In the OT, parties receiving such appointment include kings and other leaders of the people (1 Sam. 9), the Aaronide priests (Exod. 29), and the Levites (Num. 8).
Divine initiative stands behind the choice of a king. God expresses favor for a candidate through prophets (1 Sam. 9:16; 1 Kings 11:30–38), who have a role in ceremonies expressive of such appointment. An essential component of the procedure is the anointment of the appointee with oil (1 Sam. 10:1; 1 Kings 19:16). A consequence of such election and installation is the reception of a spirit from God, leading, in one case, to acts of prophecy (1 Sam. 10:10–13).
Divine initiative also stands behind the appointment of individuals (Moses [Exod. 3:7–22], Joshua [Num. 27:15–23], the various judges [Judg. 3:15; 6:11–24]) for the leadership of Israel apart from the office of kingship. In such cases within the OT, God’s communication may come directly (in the case of Moses) or through the agency of another human (Moses communicates divine intent to Joshua) or an angelic being (Judg. 6:11–24). In the case of Joshua, Moses lays his hands upon him as an expression of divine election (Num. 27:22); the action recognizes that a spirit from God has come upon Joshua (27:18).
Moses officiates at the ordination of the first priests (Aaron and his sons [Lev. 8:6–9:24]) of the Israelite sacrificial cult. Anointment with oil, the application of blood from a sanctified animal, and the donning of priestly vestments are part of the ritual of ordination.
The election of the Levites as assistants to the Aaronide priests, substitutes for the required offering of all firstborn males of Israel, comes from God (Num. 8:5–22). The laying on of hands by elders accompanies the consecration of the Levites (Num. 8:10), allowing them to handle the sanctified accoutrements of the sacrificial cult.
New Testament. In the NT, Jesus’ initiative stands behind the appointment of the disciples (Matt. 10:1–8; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). The disciples and/or elders preside over the appointment of other parties to positions of leadership and service in the community of faith. Such narrated acts of ordination cover appointments to a variety of tasks within the NT. These tasks include that of choosing an apostle to replace Judas Iscariot (Acts 1:15–26), the distribution of food (6:1–6), and carrying the gospel to specific destinations (13:1–3).
The means for direction in election include prayer (Acts 13:1–3), along with the casting of lots (1:24–26). Furthermore, the combination of prayer and fasting within the context of worship may become the occasion for direction from the Holy Spirit (13:1–3). A summary statement concerning the selection of elders in Acts 14:23 concurs with 13:1–3, listing prayer and fasting as the means to discernment. Also witnessed is the judgment of the community in finding servants filled with the Holy Spirit and wisdom (6:1–6). Thus, the ability of the community to recognize specific qualifications is enlisted in the process of election.
The laying on of hands may mark the commissioning of individuals to specific tasks (Acts 13:3). Elsewhere, the same action, along with an act of prophecy, bestows “gifts” upon individuals (1 Tim. 4:14). The mention of “gifts” (healing, guidance, tongues, etc.), along with the specification of certain functions within the community of faith (prophets, apostles, teachers, etc.), occurs in Rom. 12:6–8; 1 Cor. 12:27–30; Eph. 4:11. These passages offer an expansion of the list of functions and tasks described in the narratives previously mentioned. All three passages exhort the community to recognize the diversity of talent within the community and to employ those gifts appropriately. These gifts include those of healing, miracles, guidance, and speech in strange tongues. The functions and offices mentioned include those of prophet, apostle, and teacher. The collocation of such gifts and functions in these passages suggests, of course, that the appropriate gift would accompany the ability to perform such functions in the appointment of an individual.
Summary. Although differences exist between the OT and the NT in the roles prescribed by appointment and their attendant abilities, continuity across both bodies of literature finds expression through the initiative of God, the bestowal of a spirit of empowerment, and the practice of the laying on of hands in acts of ordination.
A distinction needs to be made between the various occurrences of the words “pray” and “prayer” in most translations of the Bible and the modern connotation of the same words. In the OT, the main Hebrew words translated as “to pray” and “prayer” (palal and tepillah) refer to the act of bringing a petition or request before God. They do not normally, if ever, refer to the other elements that we today think of as being included in the act of praying, such as praise or thanksgiving. The same is the case in the NT, where the main Greek words translated “to pray” and “prayer” (proseuchomai and proseuchē) also specifically denote making a petition or request to God. But other words and constructions in both Testaments are also translated “to pray” and “prayer,” and this article will deal with the larger concept, including praise, thanksgiving, petition, and confession, as opposed to the narrower meaning of the particular Hebrew and Greek terms (see also Praise; Thanksgiving; Worship).
Old Testament
In the OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modern ways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayer does not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer to God, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray to humans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction between the sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in the OT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, such as that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. These should be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, but rather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” in recognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. In the NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.
Many of the prayers in the OT are explicitly set in a covenantal context. God owes nothing to his creatures, but God has sworn to be faithful to those with whom he has entered into covenant. Thus, many OT prayers specifically appeal to the covenant as a motivation for both those praying and God’s answering (1 Kings 8:23–25; Neh. 1:5–11; 9:32; Pss. 25:10–11; 44:17–26; 74:20; 89:39–49). In postexilic books such as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Daniel, an important feature in the recorded prayers is the use of prior Scripture, praying God’s words (many times covenantal) back to him (in the NT, see Acts 4:24–30). Also, the closeness engendered by the covenant relationship between God and his people was unique in the ancient Near Eastern context. So Moses can marvel, “What other nation is so great as to have their gods near them the way the Lord our God is near us whenever we pray to him?” (Deut. 4:7).
Prayer must be made from a heart that is right toward God. There is no guarantee that God will hear every prayer (Ps. 66:18; Prov. 1:28; Isa. 1:15; 59:2). For the most part, the “rightness” that God requires in prayer is “a broken and contrite heart” (Ps. 51:17; cf. Isa. 66:2).
Although several passages talk about prayer in the context of sacrifice (e.g., Gen. 13:4), there is surprisingly little emphasis on prayer in the legal texts about sacrifice in the Pentateuch, no prescriptions for the kinds of prayer or the words that are to be said in connection with the sacrifices. Interestingly, however, in later, perhaps postexilic contexts, where there is no temple and therefore no sacrifice, we find texts such as Ps. 141:2, where the petitioner asks God to accept prayer as if it were an offering of incense and the evening sacrifice (cf. Prov. 15:8; in the NT, see Rev. 5:8).
A presupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and may indeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is not primarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of the one praying, but rather about God changing the circumstances of the one praying.
There is a striking honesty, some would even say brashness, evident in many OT prayers. Jeremiah laments that God has deceived both the people (Jer. 4:10) and Jeremiah himself (20:7) and complains about God’s justice (12:1–4). Job stands, as it were, in God’s face and demands that the Almighty answer his questions (Job 31:35–37). The psalmist accuses God of having broken his covenant promises (Ps. 89:39). While it is true that God does, to some extent, rebuke Jeremiah and Job (Jer. 12:5; Job 38–42), he does not ignore them or cast them aside. This would seem, ultimately, to encourage such honesty and boldness on the part of those who pray.
Literarily, accounts of prayers in narratives serve to provide characterizations of the ones praying. The recorded prayers of people such as Abraham, Moses, Hannah, Ezra, and Nehemiah demonstrate their true piety and humility before God. By contrast, the prayer of Jonah recorded in Jon. 2, in its narrative context, betrays a certain hypocrisy on the part of the reluctant prophet.
New Testament
The depiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of the OT, but there are important developments.
Jesus tells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt. 6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Although recent scholarship has demonstrated that “Abba” is not the equivalent of our “daddy,” it expresses a certain intimacy that goes beyond what was prevalent at the time, but retains an element of reverence as well. God is not just “Father,” but “our Father in heaven” (Matt. 6:9). Even Jesus addresses God as “Holy Father” (John 17:11), “Righteous Father” (John 17:25), and “Father, Lord of heaven and earth” (Matt. 11:25). And Paul, as mentioned earlier, uses a buffer zone, rarely in his epistles using the word “Father” by itself, but instead referring to “God our Father” (e.g., Rom. 1:7) and frequently using the phrase “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. 15:6; 2 Cor. 1:3; 11:31; Eph. 1:3; cf. Eph. 1:17; Col. 1:3). God is our Father, but still he is a Father before whom one reverently kneels (Eph. 3:14).
Prayer to God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:19–20; John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26). While there is some debate as to the exact nuance of this idea, it seems clear that, at the very least, prayers in Jesus’ name need to be ones that Jesus would affirm and are in accordance with his holy character and expressed will. It is, in essence, saying to God that the prayer being offered is one that Jesus would approve.
Prayer can also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him in the early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. The instances of this in the NT are rare, however, and generally either exclamatory or rhetorical (Acts 7:59; 1 Cor. 16:22; Rev. 22:20). The norm would still seem to be that prayer is to be made to the Father, through Jesus’ name.
Unlike anything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for their enemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke 23:34; Acts 7:60).
The Holy Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we are able to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is to be done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1 Cor. 14:15).
Jesus encourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke 18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).
Jesus becomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions (Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points (Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offers prayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers that are (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and not give up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overly literalized “pray without ceasing” in 1 Thess. 5:17 NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb. 5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and even now, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, our intercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb. 4:14–16).
The Sermon on the Mount is the inaugural sermon of Jesus in Matthew’s Gospel (5:1–7:29), which sets out Jesus’ kingdom program for the people of God. Whether this was a single sermon delivered on one occasion or Matthew’s compilation of Jesus’ teaching is uncertain. Luke’s Gospel has a similar sermon (6:17–49), which may or may not be the same event (sometimes called the “Sermon on the Plain” because of v. 17, although this may simply be a “level place” on the same hill that Matthew describes).
Luke’s account is similar to Matthew’s on several points: same beatitudes regarding the poor, the hungry, and the persecuted; same teaching of loving enemies, turning the other cheek, not judging, the Golden Rule; same illustrations of removing a speck from the eye, good trees producing good fruit, wise man building a house on the rock. Of course, there are many differences in Luke’s version: woes pronounced upon the rich, the satiated, and the honored; the importance of giving; warning the blind who lead the blind; how students become teachers. In Luke, Jesus delivers his sermon to the twelve disciples just chosen as well as directly to a larger crowd (Luke 6:12–20), “Blessed are you . . .” In Matthew, Jesus addresses the crowd (including the disciples) gathered around him because of the miracles he has performed (Matt. 4:24–5:1)—note the third person, “Blessed are the poor in spirit . . .” Finally, Matthew’s account has more unique material than Luke’s: beatitudes regarding the pure in heart, peacemakers, and mourners; questions about the righteousness of scribes and Pharisees; the importance of obeying the Law and the Prophets; teachings regarding murder, adultery, divorce, revenge, swearing oaths, giving alms, prayer, fasting, worry; illustrations of salt and light, dogs and pigs, fish and stones, narrow and wide gates, wolves in sheep’s clothing. That Matthew begins the story of Jesus’ earthly ministry with this sermon is significant: he wants his readers to see Jesus as the rabbi who knows more about the kingdom of heaven than any scribe or Pharisee.
The Beatitudes
With the first words of the sermon, commonly known as the Beatitudes, Jesus challenges the conventional wisdom that the poor, the hungry, and the meek are cursed. Instead, Jesus claims that his hearers are blessed (these poor, hungry, and meek Galileans) because the kingdom of heaven comes to those who need God. Not surprisingly, these subversive ideas are couched in paradoxes: the poor are kingdom rich; the hungry are satisfied with righteousness; the meek inherit the land of promise; the bereaved are comforted; the persecuted find joy in their tribulations. They are pure-hearted; they are peacemakers. These are the kind of people Jesus calls “the salt of the earth” (Matt. 5:13). They are “the light of the world” (v. 14) because they reveal the glorious work of God in their lives. They are what the kingdom of heaven looks like on earth.
All of this may sound like the opposite of what was taught in the Torah, where it was said that material blessings are a sign of divine favor for the obedient, and sickness and death come to those who disobey God (Deut. 30:1–20). But Jesus claims that he is not ignoring the Law and the Prophets. Instead, he intends to keep the Law and the Prophets better than anyone, especially the scribes and the Pharisees, whom Jesus accuses of abrogating the law because they have missed the heart of the commandments (Matt. 5:17–20; cf. 23:23–24).
Love God and Neighbor
The Sermon on the Mount appears to be an exposition of two great commandments emphasized by Jesus: love God (6:1–34; Deut. 6:5) and love your neighbor (5:21–48; Lev. 19:18). In particular, Jesus challenges the experts of the law—the scribes and the Pharisees—in regard to their righteousness.
Do the experts keep the law when it comes to loving your neighbor? They say, “You shall not murder” (quoting the Decalogue) and “Anyone who murders will be subject to judgment” (quoting their tradition). But according to Jesus, they break the commandment and their tradition when they call someone a “fool.” Their indignation is not righteous; in fact, it condemns them to hell and prevents them from worshiping God (5:21–26). They say, “You shall not commit adultery” (again quoting the Decalogue) and “Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of dismissal” (quoting Deut. 24). But Jesus believes that the commandment is broken when a man lusts for a woman; so he advises men to take drastic measures in dealing with eyes and hands, the instruments of lust (5:27–30). He even accuses husbands of practicing and promoting serial adultery when they abuse women by treating them as objects, trying to justify their selfish behavior by appealing to the provision of divorce in the law of Moses (5:31–32). The scribes and Pharisees also swear oaths to cover false vows (5:33–37). They hate their neighbors when they seek revenge against their enemies, desiring only to help their friends (5:38–47). Instead, Jesus teaches that when it comes to the kingdom of heaven, children of God must replicate the qualities of their heavenly Father (5:48): defying injustice (unrighteousness) through love, self-sacrifice, and mercy (turning the other cheek, giving away clothing, helping enemies, praying for persecutors). When it comes to loving your neighbor, this righteousness is picture perfect.
Certainly the scribes and the Pharisees cannot be accused of not loving God, for their standards of holiness are considered the highest of all. Yet according to Jesus, their acts of holiness are not for God’s benefit but for their own (6:1). When they give to the poor, it is an ostentatious display designed for social approval (6:2–4). When they pray, it is for human eyes, not God’s ears (6:5). When they fast, they want everyone to know about it (6:16). Jesus, on the other hand, believes that acts of holiness are for God’s eyes only. Give in secret; pray in private; fast in disguise (6:3–4, 6–13, 17–18). In this way, a person is storing up treasures in heaven. Those who seek human approval get their rewards on earth, where treasures are temporal (6:1–2, 5, 16, 19–21). Indeed, slaves of mammon worry about things that do not last (money, food, clothing). Those who seek the kingdom of heaven, on the other hand, are anxious for nothing. They serve the master who feeds sparrows and clothes fields of grass with flowers (6:24–34). God knows what kingdom seekers need before they ask, which is why they pray for the kingdom to come, for the will of God to be done on earth as it is in heaven (6:8–13). Rather than judging others, kingdom seekers forgive their debtors (7:1–5). They are delivered from the evil one because they make requests to a Father who gives only good gifts (7:7–11). Kingdom seekers treat others as they themselves want to be treated because they know that the Law and the Prophets are summed up in these two commandments: love God and love your neighbor (7:12).
The Narrow Gate
The sermon ends with an invitation. Two gates stand before Jesus’ listeners. One is wide, and many enter this way—a broad path that leads to destruction. It is the way of the Pharisees and the scribes. The other gate is narrow, and few enter this way, even though it leads to life—the way of righteousness, according to Jesus (7:13–14). There are two kinds of prophets, two kinds of trees, two kinds of builders (7:15–27). False prophets make bad trees; those who listen to them are fools. True prophets produce good fruit; those who listen to them are wise persons who build their lives on the rock of Jesus’ words—a Sermon on the Mount.
One of the twelve apostles (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18). Thaddaeus was also called “Judas son of James” (Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13) or “Judas (not Judas Iscariot),” whose only recorded words appear in John 14:22.
- Georgia abortion law not responsible for deaths of Amber Thurman and Candi Miller, pro-life doctors say
- Pastor Mark Driscoll refuses city order to take down 'Jesus Christ 24' sign: 'We will not comply'
- Lake Country Church pastor wrongfully fired for looking at inappropriate images, attorney says
- SBC Executive Committee creates department dedicated to fighting sexual abuse in churches
- 'Our eyes are on God': 16.2M Christians forced from their homes in sub-Saharan Africa
- Police refute reports that explosives were found near Trump rally
- UN demands Israel withdraw to pre-1967 borders within a year, limiting Israel’s ability to fight terrorism
- Megachurch leader weeps after worship pastor caught recording inside gender-neutral bathroom
- United Nations set to vote on stripping Israel of right to self defense; US senators slam resolution
- Muslim donor's blood denied for donation to sick Hindu woman at Indian hospital
- Seminary Professor Accused of Secret Second Marriage
- These Christians Have Not Given Up on North Korea
- Mobilizers See Millions of Future Missionaries in Overseas Filipino Workers
- Sports Betting Has Become Too Prevalent for Christians to Ignore
- You Can Turn Off the News and Still Be a Good Citizen
- God at the Bottom of the Glass
- Shielded from Truth at Our Own Expense
- School Screens Are Worst for the Least of These
- Parents Today Are Kinder and Gentler. They Can Still Take Sin Seriously.
- Half of Pastors Plan to Vote for Trump, Nearly a Quarter Wouldn’t Say
- 'No Kaitlan, you're not going to stop me there!: Irate Republican spars with CNN anchor
- Long Island Hindu temple vandalized ahead of Indian prime minister's visit
- GOP Senator Accused of 'Hate Speech' Against Arab American Witness at Hate Crimes Hearing
- Thailand: Culminated, Ganesh festival 2024 of Bangkok
- Pay attention to what Trump lies about most
- Make It Snappy: Time To Do Away With Bangladesh’s Existing National Anthem – OpEd
- Ramayana: The Legend of Prince Rama To Re-Release In India; Here's Everything You Need To Know
- Fans confused after 'most disturbing film they've ever watched' announces sequel
- 2 Years Later: A Disgraced Regime, Grieving People
- Corinth: The Sex Capital of Ancient Greece
- "Evangelicals for Harris" Mocks People of Faith to Shave Crucial Votes
- The 'Evangelicals for Harris' Hoping to Sway the Election
- Vatican Offers Cautious Green Light to Medjugorje Devotion
- Donald Trump and Polish President to Visit Shrine in Pennsylvania
- Evangelical Sociology and Clericalism
- The Workers and the Church
- 16.2M Christians Forced From Homes in Sub-Saharan Africa
- To See the Light
- SBC Will Sell its Nashville HQ to Defray Abuse-Related Legal Costs
- 80% of Indian Muslims Say They Suffer Discrimination From Hindus