Sermon and Worship Resources

John 20:24-31 · Jesus Appears to Thomas

24 Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "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 it."

26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."

28 Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

29 Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

30 Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Believing Thomas

John 20:24-31

Sermon
by Donald B. Strobe

I have always thought that Thomas got a bum rap. Down through the centuries we have called him “Doubting Thomas,” when, in reality, he was the greatest believer of them all. He ended up proclaiming the highest profession of faith we find in the Gospels. Beholding the risen Christ he said, “My Lord and my God!”

I. THE FIRST GLIMPSES WE HAVE OF THOMAS IN THE GOSPELS PORTRAY HIM AS A MAN OF CONSIDERABLE COURAGE. Actually, “Thomas” is not a name. It means simply, “The Twin.” Of course, over the years it has become a proper name. But in the beginning it was not. “The Twin”—to whom? Some apocryphal Gospels give him a real name, and it is Judas. One even suggests that he was Jesus’ twin...but that is so fanciful as to be absurd. It does indicate that Thomas had a special relationship with Jesus, however. One writer suggests that Thomas was a twin who lost his twin brother to death at an early age. This was a blow from which his faith never quite recovered. Then he transferred his affections to Jesus, and was content to tag along in the crowd, allowing Jesus to replace the twin brother he had lost. But then Jesus died, too! Thomas’s faith was shattered! That was the last straw! When the disciples gathered in the Upper Room that first Easter evening he could not bring himself to come. What hope was there? Where was God when the persons he had loved most in life died? There was reason for his bitterness and skepticism. There usually is. There are a lot of people who have doubts because of tragic experiences they have had, especially the loss of a loved one. Others doubt for less serious reasons, however. I know some who doubt because God didn’t get them a new bicycle on their fourth birthday. Or because they once came up against some obnoxious ministers, priests, or Sunday School teachers. Thomas’ doubts came from a deeper source.

Thomas first appears in the Lazarus story. (John 11:1-16) News had come to Jesus that his friend Lazarus was ill. But for two days Jesus made no move to do anything at all. Then he started off for Bethany. Bethany was sort of a “bedroom community” for those who worked and worshipped in Jerusalem, situated just over the Mount of Olives, a couple of miles away from the Holy City. The disciples knew that in going to Bethany, Jesus was putting Himself perilously close to His enemies who were plotting to kill him. To go there seemed suicidal and reckless. What made it worse is that word had come that Lazarus was not only ill, he was dead. So now the journey was not only reckless, but pointless. When Jesus said that He was going anyway, the disciples came close to deserting Him. Then there came the voice of one who was normally silent: Thomas, who said, “Let us also go, that we may die with him.” (John 11:16) Thomas was a born pessimist. He could see nothing ahead but disaster. But he was willing to go anyway. I suggest to you that that took a heap of courage and faith! To lose your faith and hope and still keep on going requires courage of the highest order! More than most of us could muster, I daresay!

Then, in the Upper Room, Thomas was the one who was most bewildered by Jesus’ strange talk about the Cross and Resurrection. Jesus told them that He was going away. Their hearts were broken with sorrow. He said to them, “Where I am going you know, and the way you know.” Then it was that Thomas spoke up once again and said, “Lord, we do not know where you are going, and how can we know the way?” (John 14:5) William Barclay says that “Thomas was a man who could not live with an unasked question.” (THE MASTER’S MEN, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1959, p. 49) It does seem that way. Thomas was the man who was always asking questions.

Finally, Thomas was the man who was absent when Jesus appeared on that first Easter Day. His absence fits his character, for he found Jesus’ teaching about resurrection too good to be true. And he simply could not believe the second-hand information he got from the others after the event. There is no doubt that the early Christians saw this resurrection appearance in the Upper Room as a description of what happened to them when they gathered together on the Lord’s Day, for “Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” (Matthew 18:20) But, when Jesus appeared on that first Easter evening, Thomas was absent. The others tried to tell them what they had seen and heard, but Thomas was skeptical about the whole deal. “Unless I see, I will not believe,” was his credo.

II. THOMAS SEEMS TAILOR-MADE FOR OUR SKEPTICAL AGE. I know a lot of folks who are hesitant to accept the Christian faith because they simply cannot accept what they cannot see. They have seen too many people who have been conned and they don’t want to be rubes at the County fair, walking around with eyes wide open to the wonders and with wallets hanging out of their pockets. They don’t want to be gullible, and so they are skeptical. “Unless I see, I will not believe,” is their credo. But it is a normal reaction. You or I might have felt as Thomas did.

Actually, doubt is not a bad thing. There can be no true faith without it. In late-19th century Denver there was a preacher named Myron Reed. I came across this excellent epigram from brother Reed: “A man who says he has never had a doubt in matters of faith wears a No. 6 hat.” (Quoted in Context by Martin E. Marty, Jan. 15, 1989) Tennyson once wrote: “There lives more faith in honest doubt, Believe me, than in half the creeds.” But note that he said “honest doubt.” I’ve seen a lot of doubt that is far from honest. Often it is merely taking the easy way out, refusing to think or to look beneath the surface of life. Many times it is only intellectual laziness. Someone once said, “Some people think; others think that they think; and the rest would rather die than think!” I have no worries about those who have examined the Christian Faith from every possible angle, but I worry a lot about people who believe it to be so far beneath their contempt they don’t even examine it. Closed-mindedness is not limited to religious folk; irreligious folk are guilty of it, too.

We all have doubts. Woody Allen is right: Faith would be easier if only God would show Himself by depositing a million dollars in a Swiss bank account in our name. Why doesn’t God do something spectacular like that? We can sympathize with British philosopher and mathematician Bertrand Russell who was once asked what he would say if after death he found himself confronted by God. Russell replied, “I shall say to Him, ‘Why did you make the evidence of your existence so insufficient?’” There is a part of us that says with Thomas, “Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe.” We all long for certainty. A giant comet streaking through a dark winter night with its tail sky-writing in our behalf, “I love you, signed, God,” or something like that. Why doesn’t God do that? It would be easy. Of course, if that happened, immediately a group of cynics would get together and explain to us that it was just a freak accident resulting from certain atmospheric conditions.

Why does God not reveal His existence more forcibly? Probably because He does not want to overwhelm us. If God’s aim is to produce mature spirits fit to spend eternity in His presence, it makes sense that He would not reveal Himself in His fullness to us. Such certainty would keep us perpetually immature. If a child knows that his father will always be there to solve every problem, to resolve every crisis, to get him out of every scrape, the child will never develop self-reliance. Our insecurity may be essential to spiritual growth. All of us, when we are honest, admit to having doubts. And doubt is not necessarily a bad thing. Especially today.

III. OUR AGE, IF ANYTHING, SUFFERS NOT FROM DOUBT, BUT FROM “OVER-BELIEF.” It seems to me that we could use a good, healthy dose of Thomas’s skepticism. It almost seems that today we are ready to believe anything that comes down the pike...and the weirder the better. I am continually amazed at the wild things people believe nowadays: from magic pyramids to crystals to channeling. William Willimon tells of talking with a member of what he called one of the “stuffiest” Presbyterian churches. She talked with him while peering out from under a gold cardboard pyramid. “Why are you wearing that on top of your head?” he asked. “Because I am a bit depressed today. It lifts me up,” she said. “What if you’re not depressed?” he asked. “Then I wear a silver one.” (Christian Century, December 22-29, 1982, p. 1301) The word “doubt” derives from the Latin dubito, which means “seeming to be two,” so that, etymologically, to doubt is to be of two minds—“to stand at the crossroad,” “to look in two directions.” Many believers don’t seem to have looked in any direction these days, but merely accept blindly whatever is handed to them, especially if they see it on television.

I find it significant that the highest confession of faith in Jesus we find in any Gospel comes from Thomas. Not Thomas the Doubter, but Thomas the Believer. Doubt can lead to faith. Only those who have had their faith shattered by the hammer blows of pain and adversity, by their own personal Calvary, can get to the other side of Calvary and experience resurrection faith. We can’t get to Easter without passing through Good Friday. Faith is always a venture, a risk, a reaching out into the void without any more assurance that Someone is there than the promise of His presence. It’s easy enough to have faith when things are going well, and problems do not loom on the horizon. Real faith is betting your life on God when that bet seems more foolish than betting on the state lottery. Thomas is not a villain. He is a model for most of us. In his story we discover that Christ comes to meet us in the midst of our shattered and broken world of doubt and despair. He knows our doubts, but He comes to us anyway.

One final note: THOMAS MISSED CHURCH...AND LOOK WHAT HE MISSED! The risen Christ was present, but Thomas was away somewhere, doing something he thought more important. But can there be anything more important than meeting the risen Christ on the Lord’s Day? They had a party with Jesus, but Thomas missed it because he wasn’t there! Where do you think he was? Was he off somewhere trying to drink himself into oblivion and forget the whole wild-goose chase he had entered upon with this crazy rabbi from Nazareth? Had he taken a coffee break? Had he gone to the park to feed the pigeons? Where was he? We do not know where he was—any more than we know where the other 60% of our church’s members who are not here this morning are. Maybe they are out doing good, I hope so. All we know is that Thomas was absent. And he missed something (or Someone) very important.

I find it fascinating that although Thomas did not believe in the Resurrection, the early Church didn’t throw him out! They seem to have been much more tolerant than any modern-day church would be. They probably said: “That’s old Thomas. He wasn’t there when the Lord came. He doesn’t believe in the resurrection. But give him time. He will.” I remember when the late Bishop Pike was dean of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York. Ever the radical, he held a worship service honoring Sigmund Freud in 1945, six years after Freud’s death. “But Freud was an atheist!” people protested. Came Pike’s reply: “He’s not now!”

Jesus seems to have had infinite patience with Thomas. Perhaps He had not forgotten that Thomas was the only one who wanted to go with him to the side of Lazarus, not because he believed that all would be well, but because, pessimist that he was, he believed that nothing would be well, and he might as well die with Jesus. Life wouldn’t be worth living without Him! And Jesus remembered that Thomas’ enquiry at the Last Supper opened the door for Him to teach them about the Way, the Truth, and the Life. So Jesus never lost patience with Thomas, for He seems to have valued honest doubt more than blind belief. Would that the Church had followed His example down through the ages! Jesus valued the skeptic, for He knew that only a converted skeptic would have the power to convert other skeptics.

Note this about the story: Although Christ invited Thomas to touch Him, there is no record that he actually did so. Merely meeting the Master was sufficient to convince him. From that day forward, Thomas’ faith was no longer second-hand. He had met the risen Christ. Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881) said of his parish church in Scotland as it was searching for a new pastor: “What this parish needs is what every parish needs, a man who knows God at more than second-hand.” That’s what this church needs in its ministers—and in its laity. People who know God at more than second-hand.

“Reach out and touch someone” is the slogan of one of our telephone companies. It might also be the slogan of the Fourth gospel as well. Or, even better, let that Someone reach out and touch you! The history of the Church records that millions have experienced that healing touch as they gather about the Lord’s Table to celebrate the Eucharist. The story of Thomas was put into the Gospel to remind us that Christ is in our midst. He invites you. He invites me. He invites all. Reach out and touch and be touched. Listen again to the words of our Lord, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.” That’s us. That is us.

Dynamic Preaching, Collected Words, by Donald B. Strobe

Overview and Insights · The Resurrected Son Appears to His Disciples (20:1–31)

All the Gospels record that the first witnesses to Jesus’s resurrection were women. In John 20:1–2, Mary Magdalene, likely accompanied by other women, discovers that the tomb is empty and runs to tell Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved. In John 20:3–9, we learn that Peter and John immediately run to the tomb. John arrives first but only looks in, while Peter barges right into the tomb upon arrival. They discover grave clothes but no body. At this point John “saw and believed,” although the disciples still did not fully understand that Jesus had to rise from the dead (20:8–9). In John 20:10–18, we read about Jesus’s appearance to Mary Magdalene. Mary mourns deeply (twice she is asked, “Woman, why are you crying?”), and when she encounters the two angels and the one she believes to be t…

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

John 20:24-31 · Jesus Appears to Thomas

28 Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

29 Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

Commentary · Jesus Appears to Thomas

When Jesus met with the disciples, Thomas (11:16; 14:5; 21:2) was absent. He receives the now familiar Easter greeting (20:25) but claims that unless he can acquire this certainty himself (i.e., “see the Lord”) he will not believe. On the following Sunday the group is gathered again, and Jesus appears, offering to Thomas that which he seeks. Thomas provides the Gospel’s final response to Jesus when he offers the ultimate title of divinity and lordship to him (20:28). Jesus’s final words speak to Thomas and to the church together. While “seeing” forms the basis of the apostolic witness (Acts 1:21–22; 1 Cor. 15:3–8; 1 John 1:1–4), it cannot belong to all. Those who believe without seeing—without demanding signs (cf. John 4:48)—are more blessed still.

20:30–31 · Conclusion:It is evident that this is a natural conclusion to the Gospel (see commentary on 21:1–25). The Fourth Evangelist stresses the purpose of his Gospel: that we might believe. (The verb has two readings, which the NIV calls attention to in a margin note: “to begin to believe” [aorist] and “to continue to believe” [present]; the former implies an evangelistic purpose, the latter a pastoral intent for those who already believe.) The Gospel is a record of signs—of evidences—that the reader must weigh. It stems from Jesus’s disciples, who are trustworthy witnesses (see 19:35), and in particular from the testimony of John (21:24). Its aim is to lead us to faith in Christ because in him alone can we find life.

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

The scene shifts from the tomb in the garden to a locked room somewhere in Jerusalem, and from “early on the first day of the week” (v. 1) to the evening of that first day of the week (v. 19). Despite the faith of the beloved disciple (v. 8) and despite the message brought by Mary Magdalene (v. 18), the disciples as a group are still afraid. Their reaction to her message is not recorded in John’s Gospel, but another tradition appended to Mark by later scribes states that after Mary had seen Jesus she “went and told those who had been with him” and found them “mourning and weeping. When they heard her say that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it” (Mark 16:10; cf. the apostles’ reaction to the report of the women who had seen the angels at the tomb according to Luke 24:11).

In John, the unbelief of the disciples as a group is not mentioned explicitly, only their fear of the Jewish authorities. The unbelief is attributed instead to one disciple, Thomas, in particular (vv. 24–25). The appearance to him in verses 26–29 is really an extension of the appearance to the gathered disciples in verses 19–23, even though it takes place a week later. Verses 24–25 link the two incidents together, so that in effect what is said to the disciples in verses 19–23 is said to Thomas as well, and what is said to him in verses 26–29 is said to them all. If this is so, it is incorrect to single out Thomas as the lone skeptic among the disciples. He is, rather, the disciples’ representative and spokesman both in his skepticism (v. 25b) and in his faith (v. 28). The rest of the disciples, except for their report to Thomas in verse 25a, We have seen the Lord! are silent throughout the story, but Thomas’ confession, My Lord and my God! (v. 28) is finally theirs as well.

The disciples’ fear and helplessness before seeing Jesus and receiving the Holy Spirit is shown by the fact that on Sunday evening they were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews (v. 19). They were essentially no better off than those who earlier had “believed in him,” but “because of the Pharisees they would not confess their faith for fear they would be put out of the synagogue” (12:42). Of those, the narrator had said, “They loved praise from men rather than praise from God” (12:43). The disciples had fled at Jesus’ arrest (16:32; 18:8) and returned to their quarters in Jerusalem (cf. 19:27; 20:10); now (despite what two of them had seen in vv. 3–9) they were living in fear as fugitives. Only the presence of Jesus and the Spirit could transform them again into a missionary community ready to carry on their Lord’s work (cf. 17:9–19). Yet a week later, after receiving the Spirit, they were still in hiding, gathered probably in the same place, with the doors locked (v. 26)! The only possible explanation is that their reunion with Jesus and their reception of the Spirit did not take effect—in some sense were not complete—until their skepticism (personified by Thomas) was overcome and their faith in Jesus found its voice in the decisive confession My Lord and my God (v. 28). This means that verses 19–29 present essentially one resurrection appearance of Jesus in two stages, a week apart. Together, they illustrate the same ambiguity about the disciples’ faith that has been present in the narrative all along (cf., e.g., 16:29–33) and dramatize the terse statement of Matthew’s Gospel that when Jesus appeared to the disciples on a mountain in Galilee, “they worshiped him; but some doubted” (Matt. 28:17). The command Stop doubting and believe (v. 27), though addressed to Thomas in particular, is an appropriate command for every disciple and every reader (cf. the cry of the father of a demon-possessed boy in Mark 9:24: “I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!”).

Jesus’ self-disclosure to his disciples on Easter Sunday evening and a week later is most appropriately understood as the fulfillment of virtually all he had promised them in his farewell discourses:

The Promise

The Fulfillment

I will come to you (14:18, 28). My Father and I will come to him (14:23).

Jesus came and stood among them (20:19, 26).

Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you (14:27). I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace (16:33).

Peace be with you (20:19, 21, 26).

In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me (16:16). I will see you again and you will rejoice, and no one will take away your joy (16:22).

The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord (20:20).

I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor … the Spirit of truth (14:16–17). The Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things (14:26; cf. also 15:26; 16:7–15).

With that he breathed on them and said: “Receive the Holy Spirit” (20:22)

If the empty tomb signified to the beloved disciple Jesus’ departure to the Father, his appearance to the disciples gathered behind locked doors signifies his return. He has come back, not to pay them a brief visit and go away again, but to stay. His return is not a momentary incident but the beginning of a new relationship. “Before long,” he had said, “the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you” (14:19–20). The new relationship is made possible by the Spirit, who, Jesus had said, “lives with you and will be in you” (14:17). The disciples’ joy at this reunion is a joy that “no one will take away” (16:22).

Three times the risen Jesus reveals himself to the disciples with the salutation Peace be with you (vv. 19, 21, 26). The first time he verified his presence and identity by showing them his pierced hands and wounded side (v. 20). The second time he commissions them (As the Father has sent me, I am sending you, cf. 17:18) and breathes on them as a sign of the impartation of the Holy Spirit (vv. 22–23). The act of breathing proves that Jesus is once more alive (contrast 19:30) and, what is more, able to give life. The verb breathed (Gr.: enephysēsen) corresponds to the Greek translation of Genesis 2:7, when God “breathed … the breath of life” into Adam at the creation (cf. 6:63: “the Spirit gives life”). The Spirit, depicted in the farewell discourses as a person (“the Counselor,” 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7) is here seen as the divine power by which the disciples will be enabled to complete their mission, that is, to continue the work of Jesus himself (cf. Paul’s allusion to Gen. 2:7: “So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living being,’ ” to which he adds, “the last Adam, [i.e., Jesus] a life-giving spirit,” 1 Cor. 15:45). Specifically, the work of Jesus that the Spirit continues is the work of forgiving (or not forgiving) people’s sins, the two-sided work of giving life on the one hand, and bringing judgment or condemnation on the other (cf. 5:19–29). The same Jesus who told the royal official, “Your son will live” (4:50, 53), and called Lazarus out of his tomb (11:43) also told the Pharisees, “Your guilt remains” (9:41; cf. 15:22–24). He came “so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind” (9:39). In this respect, his disciples’ mission in the power of the Spirit would be no different from his own.

The third greeting of Peace, like the first, is accompanied by the verification of Jesus’ identity by the wounds in his hands and side (v. 27). In this case, the manner of verification corresponds exactly to the sign that Thomas, in the meantime, had demanded of his fellow disciples (v. 25). The resulting confession, My Lord and my God (v. 28) was Thomas’ acknowledgment, first, that the man standing before him was Jesus, his beloved teacher (cf. “my Lord” on the lips of Mary Magdalene in v. 13), and second, that he now understood his beloved teacher to be none other than God himself (cf. Jesus’ prophetic words in 8:28, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am the one I claim to be”).

Jesus’ response to this last great confession of John’s Gospel is much like his response to all the other confessions. He accepts it, but with no special words of commendation (cf., e.g., 1:50; 6:70; 16:31–32). Instead of pronouncing a beatitude on Thomas as he does in Matthew’s Gospel on Simon Peter (“Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah,” Matt. 16:17), Jesus reserves his beatitude for others who are not even present: Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed (v. 29). The purpose of the distinction is not so much to rebuke Thomas and the assembled disciples for their skepticism as to emphasize that Jesus’ memorable words and tangible signs were not just for the immediate participants in the drama of his resurrection but for other believers and later generations as well. The pronouncement lays the basis for a significant comment by the Gospel writer to some who had not seen the nail marks in Jesus’ hands and the gaping wound in his side—specifically the Gospel’s readers (vv. 30–31).

At some stage in the growth of this Gospel’s traditions, the last two verses of the chapter probably functioned as a summary statement of purpose for the Gospel as a whole. Jesus’ ministry in its entirety is characterized as a series of miraculous signs written down in order to foster belief in him as the Christ, the Son of God (in contrast to those who saw his miracles but refused to believe, cf. 12:37). Such an understanding has much to commend it if the end of this chapter is also the end of the book, but in John’s Gospel as it stands, this is not the case. Another chapter follows, with its own appropriate postscript to the book as a whole (21:25). To what miraculous signs, then, do verses 30–31 refer? Some have argued that the summary once stood at the end of a collection of miracle stories (the seven “signs” of Jesus’ public ministry, perhaps: the Cana wedding, the healing of the nobleman’s son, the sick man at Bethesda, the feeding of the five thousand, the walking on the water, the blind man at Siloam, the raising of Lazarus), but such a theory, even if valid, offers no help in explaining how the statement functions in its present position in the Gospel as we have it today. It is more likely that the term miraculous signs is here used to denote resurrection signs, like the “many convincing proofs” of Acts 1:3. They are words or actions of the risen Lord that either made him known to his disciples or reinforced the instructions and commands he gave them (e.g., vv. 16, 17, 22, 27; cf. Luke 24:30, 39–42). The narrator implies that he knows—and could have included—many more of these, and that what he has provided is only a small sampling. The purpose of the sampling is in order that you [i.e., the readers of the Gospel] may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (v. 31). The narrator’s intent is that through his writing (especially his account of the resurrection appearances), his readers should enter into the once-and-for-all experience of Jesus’ original disciples (cf. the invitation of the original disciples to do exactly that in 1 John 1:1–3). He wants them to claim for themselves Jesus’ last beatitude, Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed (v. 29). Their confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God echoes Thomas’ exclamation, My Lord and my God! (v. 28), while the accompanying promise of life in his name recalls the life that Jesus breathed into his disciples when he conferred on them the Holy Spirit (v. 22).

Much has been written on the question of whether verses 30–31 could have been addressed to those who were already “believers” or whether the phrase that you may believe implies that the recipients were unbelievers. The answer probably hinges less on whether the verb is believe (NIV text) or “continue to believe” (NIV margin) than on the analogy between the Gospel’s readers and the disciples who literally saw the risen Jesus. The disciples were “believers” in Jesus almost from the start (cf. 2:11), yet in this resurrection encounter the group (represented by Thomas) “believed” once more (vv. 28–29), just as they had done on certain other occasions after their first expression of faith (cf. 6:69; 16:30). The narrator intends that this should happen to his readers as well. To him, faith is no static thing that comes once to a person, only to lie dormant, but a response to God that comes to expression again and again as one is confronted afresh with the story of Jesus (cf. 4:50, 53). It is therefore likely that the resurrection narrative—like the rest of John’s Gospel—is directed at those who already believe, so as to engage them anew with the events on which their faith is built, events that may have seemed to be receding all too quickly into a less defined and less insistent past.

Additional Notes

20:19 On the evening of that first day of the week (cf. v. 1). It is possible that the phrase “of that … day” has eschatological significance because the events to be recorded are fulfillments of Jesus’ words of promise in his farewell discourses (cf. 14:20: “On that day, you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you”). More likely, however, the phrase looks back from the narrator’s standpoint on “that [memorable] day,” the Sunday when Jesus rose from the dead (cf. “that year” in 11:49 and 18:13). If so, the language reflects an early stage in a process that culminated in the formal observance of Easter.

20:22 Receive the Holy Spirit: The most natural way of understanding these words is that the disciples were intended to receive (and did receive) the Holy Spirit at that very moment. Because the book of Acts records the coming of the Spirit fifty days later, at Pentecost (Acts 2:1–4), some have regarded the statement here as proleptic (i.e., as a promise that the disciples would later receive the Spirit). Appeal could be made to 2:19, where Jesus uses an aorist imperative (“Destroy this temple”) to refer to something that did not happen until he was crucified. But the cases are not alike, for the imperative in 2:19 is conditional (i.e., “If you tear down this temple, I will raise it up”), whereas the imperative here is an actual command. This is the only recorded fulfillment of Jesus’ promises of the Spirit in his farewell discourses (cf. also 7:39), and it is clear that the Gospel writer intends it as the fulfillment. In that sense it is the Johannine equivalent of Pentecost, not a mere foretaste of Pentecost.

Historically, there are hints in Luke and Acts that even before Pentecost the Spirit indeed played a role in the ministry of the risen Jesus to his disciples. The preface to the book of Acts states: “Until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen” (Acts 1:2). In Luke 24, when Jesus revealed himself to his gathered disciples, he is said to have “opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures” (i.e., by the power of the Spirit? 24:45); in this connection he said, “I am going to send you what my Father has promised” (24:49a). The latter statement is more literally translated in the present tense: “And I myself am [now] sending upon you what my Father promised.” Such an interpretation makes better sense of what immediately follows; “But stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high” (24:49b). Clearly, something is given and something is still expected. Luke’s emphasis is largely on what is still expected, whereas John’s emphasis is exclusively on what is already given.

20:23 If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven. The metaphorical equivalent of this pronouncement is the promise of Jesus to Peter in Matt. 16:19 and to all the disciples in Matt. 18:18 (as translated in NIV with the verbs “bind” and “loose”). To “bind” is understood as “not forgive”; to “loose” is understood as “forgive.” The setting in John is not church discipline (as in Matthew) but mission, the proclamation of Jesus’ message to the world. The first part of Jesus’ statement has a parallel in a similar resurrection context in Luke’s Gospel: “And repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24:47).

20:24 Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve: See note on 11:16. Thomas was actually introduced more abruptly in his first appearance in the Gospel than he is here. The designation of him as one of the Twelve is supplied here to emphasize the point that he normally would have been present for the incident recorded in vv. 19–23 but was not. The Twelve (though now only eleven because of Judas’ departure) are still being viewed as a fixed group representing the whole church (cf. 6:70). Even though Judas has departed, Thomas must be present in order for the revelation to be complete.

20:26 A week later: lit., “after eight days.” A common ancient custom was to count both the first and the last days in a series, so that eight days would be the equivalent of a week. The meaning is that the appearance took place on the next Sunday after Easter (cf. v. 19).

20:29 Because you have seen me, you have believed. There is no question either about Thomas’ belief or about the basis of it. Jesus does not say that Thomas touched him, and there is no evidence in the text that his skepticism went so far as actually to accept the challenge laid down in v. 27. He believed because he saw, just as the rest of the disciples did (vv. 20, 25; cf. v. 8).

Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by J. Ramsey Michaels, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Christ

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.

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).

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).

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 the 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 (5:1–13), raised the dead (5:35–42), fed five thousand (6:30–44), and walked on water (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).

Didymus

Surname of the apostle Thomas, meaning “twin.” The term occurs only in the Gospel of John (11:16; 20:24; 21:2). “Didymus” is the Greek equivalent of the Aramaic “Thomas,” which also means “twin.”

Mark

Mark’s Gospel is a fast-paced, action-packed narrative that portrays Jesus as the mighty Messiah and Son of God, who suffers and dies as the servant of the Lord—a ransom price for sins. Mark’s purpose is to provide an authoritative account of the “good news” about Jesus Christ and to encourage believers to follow Jesus’ example by remaining faithful to their calling through persecution and even martyrdom. A theme verse is Mark 10:45: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Mark’s narrative may be divided into two main parts. The first half of the story demonstrates that Jesus is the mighty Messiah and Son of God (1:1 8:26); the second half reveals that the Messiah’s role is to suffer and die as a sacrifice for sins (8:27–16:8).

Unlike Matthew and Luke, Mark does not begin with stories of Jesus’ birth but instead moves directly to his public ministry. As in the other Gospels, John the Baptist is the “messenger” who prepares the way for the Messiah (cf. Isa. 40:3; Mal. 3:1). John preaches a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins and announces the “more powerful” one, the Messiah, who will come after him (1:7). When Jesus is baptized by John, the Spirit descends on him, empowering him for ministry. After his temptation (or testing) by Satan in the desert, Jesus returns to Galilee and launches his ministry, proclaiming the “good news” (gospel) that “the time has come. . . . The kingdom of God has come near” (1:15).

During his Galilean ministry, Jesus demonstrates extraordinary authority in teaching, healing, and exorcism. He calls fishermen from their occupation, and they drop everything and follow him (1:16–20). He claims authority to forgive sins (2:10) and authority over the Sabbath command (2:28). He reveals power over natural forces, calming the sea (4:35–41), walking on water (6:45–52), and feeding huge crowds with a few loaves and fishes (6:30–44; 8:1–13). The people stand “amazed” and “astonished” (a major theme in Mark) at Jesus’ teaching and miracles, and his popularity soars.

Jesus’ authority and acclaim provoke opposition from the religious leaders of Israel, who are jealous of his influence. The scribes and Pharisees accuse him of claiming the prerogative of God (2:7), associating with undesirable sinners (2:16), breaking the Sabbath (2:24), and casting out demons by Satan’s powers (3:22). They conspire to kill him (3:6).

A sense of mystery and awe surrounds Jesus’ identity. When he calms the sea, the disciples wonder, “Who is this?” (4:41), and King Herod wonders if this might be John the Baptist risen from the dead (6:16). Adding to this sense of mystery is what has come to be called the “messianic secret.” Jesus silences demons who identify him as the Messiah and orders those he heals not to tell anyone what has happened. This secrecy is not, as some have claimed, a literary device invented by Mark to explain Jesus’ unmessianic life; rather, it is Jesus’ attempt to calm inappropriate messianic expectations and to define his messianic mission on his own terms.

The critical turning point in the narrative comes in 8:27–33, when Peter, as representative of the disciples, declares that Jesus is the Messiah. The authority that Jesus has demonstrated up to this point confirms that he is God’s agent of salvation. Yet Jesus startles the disciples by announcing that his messianic task is to go to Jerusalem to suffer and die. Peter rebukes him, but Jesus responds, “Get behind me, Satan! . . . You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns” (8:33). Jesus will accomplish salvation not by crushing the Roman occupiers, but by offering his life as a sacrifice for sins.

In the second half of the Gospel, Jesus journeys to Jerusalem, three times predicting that he will be arrested and killed (8:31–32; 9:31; 10:33–34). The disciples repeatedly demonstrate pride, ignorance, and spiritual dullness (8:33; 9:32–34; 10:35–41), and Jesus teaches them that whoever wants to be first must become last (9:35); that to lead, one must serve (10:45); and that to be Jesus’ disciple requires taking up one’s cross and following him (8:34).

When he comes to Jerusalem, Jesus symbolically judges the nation by clearing the temple of merchants (11:15–17) and by cursing a fig tree (representing Israel), which subsequently withers (11:12–14, 20–21). He engages in controversies with the religious leaders (chaps. 11–12) and teaches the disciples that Jerusalem and the temple will be destroyed (chap. 13). Judas Iscariot, one of Jesus’ own disciples, betrays him. Jesus is arrested and brought to trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin, which finds him guilty of blasphemy. That council turns Jesus over to the Roman governor Pilate, who accedes to his crucifixion (chaps. 14–15).

The crucifixion scene in Mark is a dark and lonely one. Jesus is deserted by his followers, unjustly condemned, beaten by the soldiers, and mocked by all. Apparently deserted even by God, Jesus cries out from the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (15:34). Yet the reader knows by this point in the story that Jesus’ death is not the tragedy that it seems. This is God’s means of accomplishing salvation. Upon Jesus’ death, the curtain of the temple is torn, opening a new way into God’s presence. The Roman centurion at the cross cries out, “Surely this man was the Son of God!” (15:39). The death of the Messiah is not a defeat; it is an atoning sacrifice for sins. Three days later Jesus rises from the dead, just as he has predicted. When Jesus’ women followers come to the tomb, the angel announces, “He has risen! He is not here” (16:6). Jesus the Messiah has turned tragedy into victory and has defeated sin, Satan, and death.

Messiah

The English word “messiah” derives from the Hebrew verb mashakh, which means “to anoint.” The Greek counterpart of the Hebrew word for “messiah” (mashiakh) is christos, which in English is “Christ.”

In English translations of the Bible, the word “messiah” (“anointed one”) occurs rarely in the OT. In the OT, kings, prophets, and priests were “anointed” with oil as a means of consecrating or setting them apart for their respective offices. Prophets and priests anointed Israel’s kings (1 Sam. 16:1 13; 2 Sam. 2:4, 7).

The expectation for a “messiah,” or “anointed one,” arose from the promise given to David in the Davidic covenant (2 Sam. 7). David was promised that from his seed God would raise up a king who would reign forever on his throne. Hopes for such an ideal king began with Solomon and developed further during the decline (cf. Isa. 9:1–7) and especially after the collapse of the Davidic kingdom.

The harsh reality of exile prompted Israel to hope that God would rule in such a manner. A number of psalms reflect the desire that an ideal son of David would come and rule, delivering Israel from its current plight of oppression. Hence, in Ps. 2 God declares that his son (v. 7), who is the Lord’s anointed one (v. 2), will receive “the nations [as] your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession” (v. 8). God promises that “you will rule them with an iron scepter; you will dash them to pieces like pottery” (v. 9; see NIV footnote). Jesus demonstrates great reticence in using the title “Messiah.” In the Synoptic Gospels he almost never explicitly claims it. The two key Synoptic passages where Jesus accepts the title are themselves enigmatic. In Mark’s version of Peter’s confession (8:29), Jesus does not explicitly affirm Peter’s claim, “You are the Messiah,” but instead goes on to speak of the suffering of the Son of Man. Later, Jesus is asked by the high priest Caiaphas at his trial, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?” (Mark 14:60). In Mark 14:62, Jesus answers explicitly with “I am,” while in Matt. 26:64, he uses the more enigmatic “You have said so.” Jesus then goes on to describe himself as the exalted Son of Man who will sit at Yahweh’s right hand.

Jesus no doubt avoided the title because it risked communicating an inadequate understanding of the kingdom and his messianic role. Although the Messiah was never a purely political figure in Judaism, he was widely expected to destroy Israel’s enemies and secure its physical borders. Psalms of Solomon portrays the coming “son of David” as one who will “destroy the unrighteous rulers” and “purge Jerusalem from Gentiles who trample her to destruction” (Pss. Sol. 17.21–23). To distance himself from such thinking, Jesus never refers to himself as “son of David” and “king of Israel/the Jews” as other characters do in the Gospels (Matt. 12:23; 21:9, 15; Mark 10:47; 15:2; John 1:49; 12:13; 18:33). When Jesus was confronted by a group of Jews who wanted to make him into such a king, he resisted them (John 6:15).

In Mark 12:35–37, Jesus also redefines traditional understandings of the son of David in his short discussion on Ps. 110:1: he is something more than a mere human son of David. Combining Jesus’ implicit affirmation that he is the Messiah in Mark 8:30 with his teaching about the Son of Man in 8:31, we see that Jesus is a Messiah who will “suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the teachers of the law” (8:31) and through whom redemption will come (10:45). Jesus came not to defeat the Roman legions, but to bring victory over Satan, sin, and death.

Son of God

In the OT, heavenly beings or angels are sometimes referred to as “sons of God” (Gen. 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Pss. 82:6; 89:6). The more important background for the NT, however, is the use of the term with reference to the nation Israel and the messianic king from David’s line. Israel was God’s son by virtue of God’s unique calling, deliverance, and protection. Hosea 11:1 reads, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” Similar references to God as the father of his people appear throughout the OT (Exod. 4:22; Num. 11:12; Deut. 14:1; 32:5, 19; Isa. 43:6; 45:11; Jer. 3:4, 19; 31:9, 20; Hos. 2:1). The king from the line of David is referred to as the son of God by virtue of his special relationship to God and his representative role among the people. In the Davidic covenant, God promises David concerning his descendant, “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2 Sam. 7:14; cf. Pss. 2:7; 89:26). Later Judaism appears to have taken up these passages and identified the coming Messiah as the “son of God.”

Thomas

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

Disciple

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).

God

For Christians, God is the creator of the cosmos and the redeemer of humanity. He has revealed himself in historical acts—namely, in creation, in the history of Israel, and especially in the person and work of Jesus Christ. There is only one God (Deut. 6:4); “there is no other” (Isa. 45:5). Because “God is spirit” (John 4:24), he must reveal himself through various images and metaphors.

Imagery of God

God’s character and attributes are revealed primarily through the use of imagery, the best and most understandable way to describe the mysterious nature of God. Scripture employs many images to describe God’s being and character. Some examples follow here.

God is compared to the father who shows compassion and love to his children (Ps. 103:13; Rom. 8:15). The father image is also used by the prophets to reveal God’s creatorship (Isa. 64:8). Jesus predominantly uses the language of “Father” in reference to God (Mark 8:38; 13:32; 14:36), revealing his close relationship with the Father. God is also identified as the king of Israel even before the Israelites have a human king (1 Sam. 10:19).

The Psalter exalts Yahweh as the king, acknowledging God’s sovereignty and preeminence (Pss. 5:2; 44:4; 47:6–7; 68:24; 74:12; 84:3; 95:3; 145:1). God is metaphorically identified as the shepherd who takes care of his sheep, his people, to depict his nature of provision and protection (Ps. 23:1–4). The image of the potter is also employed to describe the nature of God, who creates his creatures according to his will (Jer. 18:6; Rom. 9:20–23). In Hos. 2:4–3:5 God is identified as the long-suffering husband of the adulterous wife Israel. In the setting of war, God is depicted as the divine warrior who fights against his enemy (Exod. 15:3).

God is also referred to as advocate (Isa. 1:18), judge (Gen. 18:25), and lawgiver (Deut. 5:1–22). The image of the farmer is also frequently adopted to describe God’s nature of compassionate care, creation, providence, justice, redemption, sanctification, and more (e.g., Isa. 5:1–7; John 15:1–12). God is often referred to as the teacher (Exod. 4:15) who teaches what to do, as does the Holy Spirit in the NT (John 14:26). The Holy Spirit is identified as the counselor, the helper, the witness, and the guide (John 14:16, 26; 15:26). God is often metaphorically compared to various things in nature, such as rock (Ps. 18:2, 31, 46), light (Ps. 27:1), fire (Deut. 4:24; 9:3), lion (Hos. 11:10), and eagle (Deut. 32:11–12). In particular, the Davidic psalms employ many images in nature—rock, fortress, shield, horn, and stronghold (e.g., Ps. 18:2)—to describe God’s perfect protection.

Last, anthropomorphism often is employed to describe God’s activities. Numerous parts of the human body are used to speak of God: face (Num. 6:25–26), eyes (2 Chron. 16:9), mouth (Deut. 8:3), ears (Neh. 1:6), nostrils (Exod. 15:8), hands (Ezra 7:9), arms (Deut. 33:27), fingers (Ps. 8:3), voice (Exod. 15:26), shoulders (Deut. 33:12), feet (Ps. 18:9), and back (Exod. 33:21–22).

Names and Attributes of God

The OT refers to God by many names. One of the general terms used for God, ’el (which probably means “ultimate supremacy”), often appears in a compound form with a qualifying word, as in ’el ’elyon (“God Most High”), ’el shadday (“God Almighty”), and ’el ro’i (“the God who sees me” or “God of my seeing”). These descriptive names reveal important attributes of God and usually were derived from the personal experiences of the people of God in real-life settings; thus, they do not describe an abstract concept of God.

The most prominent personal name of God is yahweh (YHWH), which is translated as “the Lord” in most English Bibles. At the burning bush in the wilderness of Horeb, God first revealed to Moses his personal name in sentence form: “I am who I am” (Exod. 3:13–15). Though debated, the divine name “YHWH” seems to originate from an abbreviated form of this sentence. Yahweh, who was with Moses and his people at the time of exodus, is the God who was with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Jesus’ testimony, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” is identified as the God “of the living” (Matt. 22:32). Hence, the name “Yahweh” is closely tied to God’s self-revelation as the God of presence and life. (See also Names of God.)

Many of God’s attributes are summarized in Exod. 34:6–7: “The Lord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.” Below are further explanations of some of the representative attributes of God.

Holiness. The moral excellence of God is the attribute that underlies all other attributes. Thus, all God’s attributes can be modified by the adjective holy: holy love, holy justice, holy mercy, holy righteousness, holy compassion, holy wisdom, and so forth. God is the only supremely holy one (1 Sam. 2:2; Rev. 15:4). God’s name is also holy; those who profane God’s name are condemned as guilty (Exod. 20:7; Lev. 22:32). God is depicted as the one who has concern for his holy name, which the Israelites profaned among the nations; God actively seeks to restore the holiness of his defiled name (Ezek. 36:21–23). God’s holiness is revealed by his righteous action (Isa. 5:16). Not only is God holy, but also he expects his people to be holy (Lev. 11:45; 19:2). All the sacrificial codes of Leviticus represent the moral requirements of holiness for the worshipers. Because of God’s character of holiness, he cannot tolerate sin in the lives of people, and he brings judgment to those who do not repent (Hab. 1:13).

Love and justice. Because “God is love,” no one reaches the true knowledge of God without having love (1 John 4:8). Images of the father and the faithful husband are frequently employed to portray God’s love (Deut. 1:31; Jer. 31:32; Hos. 2:14–20; 11:1–4). God’s love was supremely demonstrated by the giving of his only Son Jesus Christ for his people (John 3:16; Rom. 5:7–8; 1 John 4:9–10). God expects his people to follow the model of Christ’s sacrificial love (1 John 3:16).

God’s justice is the foundation of his moral law and his ways (Deut. 32:4; Job 34:12; Ps. 9:16; Rev. 15:3). It is also seen in his will (Ps. 99:4). God loves justice and acts with justice (Ps. 33:5). God’s justice is demonstrated in judging people according to their deeds—punishing wickedness and rewarding righteousness (Ezek. 18:20; Ps. 58:11; Rev. 20:12–13). God establishes justice by upholding the cause of the oppressed (Ps. 103:6) and by vindicating those afflicted (1 Sam. 25:39). God is completely impartial in implementing justice (Job 34:18–19). As with holiness, God requires his people to reflect his justice (Prov. 21:3).

God keeps a perfect balance between the attributes of love and justice. God’s love never infringes upon his justice, and vice versa. The cross of Jesus Christ perfectly shows these two attributes in one act. Because of his love, God gave his only Son for his people; because of his justice, God punished his Son for the sake of their sins. The good news is that God’s justice was satisfied by the work of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:25–26).

Righteousness and mercy. God’s righteousness shows his unique moral perfection. God’s nature, actions, and laws display his character of righteousness (Pss. 19:8–9; 119:137; Dan. 9:14). “Righteousness and justice” are the foundation of God’s throne (Ps. 89:14). God’s righteousness was especially demonstrated in the work of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:21–22). God’s righteousness will ultimately be revealed in his final judgment (Rev. 19:2; 20–22; cf. Ps. 7:11).

The English word “mercy” renders various words in the original languages: in Hebrew, khesed, khanan, rakham; in Greek, charis, eleos, oiktirmos, splanchnon. English Bibles translate these variously as “mercy,” “compassion,” “grace,” “kindness,” or “love.” The word “mercy” is chosen here as a representative concept (cf. Ps. 86:15). God’s mercy is most clearly seen in his act of forgiving sinners. In the Psalter, “Have mercy on me” is the most common form of expression when the psalmist entreats God’s forgiveness (Pss. 41:4, 10; 51:1). God’s mercy is shown abundantly to his chosen people (Eph. 2:4–8). Because of his mercy, their sins are forgiven (Mic. 7:18), their punishments are withheld (Ezra 9:13), and even sinners’ prayers are heard (Ps. 51:1; Luke 18:13–14). God is “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor. 1:3 NRSV).

God keeps a perfect balance between righteousness and mercy. His righteousness and mercy never infringe upon each other, nor does one operate at the expense of the other. God’s abundant mercy is shown to sinners through Jesus Christ, but if they do not repent of their sins, his righteous judgment will be brought upon them.

Faithfulness. God’s faithfulness is revealed in keeping the covenant that he made with his people. God “is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). God is faithful to his character, his name, and his word (Neh. 9:8; Ps. 106:8; 2 Tim. 2:13; Heb. 6:13–18). God’s faithfulness is clearly seen in fulfilling his promise (Josh. 23:14). God showed his faithfulness by fulfilling all the promises that he made to Abraham (Gen. 12:2–3; Rom. 9:9; Gal. 4:28; Heb. 6:13–15), by having Solomon build the temple that he promised to David (2 Sam. 7:12–13; 1 Kings 8:17–21), and by sending his people into exile in Babylon and returning them to their homeland (Jer. 25:8–11; Dan. 9:2–3). God’s faithfulness was ultimately demonstrated by sending Jesus Christ, as was promised in the OT (Luke 24:44; Acts 13:32–33; 1 Cor. 15:3–8).

Goodness. Jesus said, “No one is good—except God alone” (Mark 10:18). God demonstrates his goodness in his actions (Ps. 119:68), in his work of creation (1 Tim. 4:4), in his love (Ps. 86:5), and in his promises (Josh. 23:14–15).

Patience. God is “slow to anger” (Exod. 34:6; Num. 14:18), which is a favorite expression for his patience (Neh. 9:17; Pss. 86:15; 103:8; Joel 2:13). God is patient with sinful people for a long time (Acts 13:18). Because of his patient character, he delays punishment (Isa. 42:14). For instance, God was patient with his disobedient prophet Jonah and also with the sinful people of Nineveh (Jon. 3:1–10). The purpose of God’s patience is to lead people toward repentance (Rom. 2:4).

God of the Trinity

The Christian God of the Bible is the triune God. God is one but exists in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19). The Son is one with the Father (John 10:30); the Holy Spirit is one with God (2 Sam. 23:2–3). All three share the same divine nature; they are all-knowing, holy, glorious, and called “Lord” and “God” (Matt. 11:25; John 1:1; 20:28; Acts 3:22; 5:3–4; 10:36; 1 Cor. 8:6; 2 Cor. 3:17–18; 2 Pet. 1:1). All three share in the same work of creation (Gen. 1:1–3), salvation (1 Pet. 1:2), indwelling (John 14:23), and directing the church’s mission (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 16:6–10; 14:27; 13:2–4).

Jesus Christ

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.

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.

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.

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).

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).

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).

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.

Miracles

Because Scripture sees all things as providentially arranged and sustained by God’s sovereign power at all times (Heb. 1:3), miracles are not aberrations in an otherwise closed and mechanical universe. Nor are miracles raw demonstrations of divinity designed to overcome prejudice or unbelief and to convince people of the existence of God (Mark 8:11–12). Still less are they clever conjuring tricks involving some kind of deception that can be otherwise explained on a purely scientific basis. Rather, God in his infinite wisdom sometimes does unusual and extraordinary things to call attention to himself and his activity. Miracles are divinely ordained acts of God that dramatically alert us to the presence of his glory and power and advance his saving purposes in redemptive history.

Terminology

The biblical writers describe miracles with various terms, such as “signs,” “wonders,” and “miracles” (or “powers”), which can carry various connotations. As the word “sign” suggests, divine miracles are significant and should cause us to think more deeply about God in a way that goes beyond mere amazement or curiosity (Exod. 4:30–31; John 2:11). Not all of God’s signs are miraculous. Some are given as part of his ordering of the natural world (Gen. 1:14) or as an encouragement to faith that God will do as he has said (e.g., the rainbow in Gen. 9:8–17; the blood of the Passover lamb in Exod. 12:13). (See also Sign.)

Often coupled with signs are “wonders” (Jer. 32:21; John 4:48; 2 Cor. 12:12). If the depiction of miracles as “signs” indicates an appeal to the intellect, that of “wonders” points to the emotions. Miracles evoke astonishment and awe at the one who did them.

The NT word “miracle” carries the meaning of power and therefore points to the supernatural source of these events (Luke 10:13; Acts 8:13).

Miracles in the Bible

Old Testament. In the OT, miracles are not evenly distributed but rather are found in greater number during times of great redemptive significance, such as the exodus and the conquest of Canaan. Miracles were performed also during periods of apostasy, such as in the days of the ninth-century prophets Elijah and Elisha. Common to both of these eras is the powerful demonstration of the superiority of God over pagan deities (Exod. 7–12; 1 Kings 18:20–40).

New Testament. In the NT, miracles often are acts of compassion, but more significantly they attest the exalted status of Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 2:22) and the saving power of his word (Heb. 2:3–4). In the Synoptic Gospels, they reveal the coming of God’s kingdom and the conquest of Satan’s dominion (Matt. 8:16–17; 12:22–30; Mark 3:27). They point to the person of Jesus as the promised Messiah of OT Scripture (Matt. 4:23; 11:4–6). John shows a preference for the word “signs,” and his Gospel is structured around them (John 20:30–31). According to John, the signs that Jesus performed were such that only the one who stood in a unique relationship to the Father as the Son of God could do them.

Miracles and faith. Just as entrenched skepticism is injurious to faith, so too is naive credulity, for although signs and wonders witness to God, false prophets also perform them “to deceive, if possible, even the elect” (Matt. 24:24). Christians are to exercise discernment and not be led astray by such impostors (Matt. 7:15–20).

The relationship between miracles and faith is not as straightforward as sometimes supposed. Miracles do not necessarily produce faith, nor does faith necessarily produce miracles. Miracles were intended to bring about the faith that leads to eternal life (John 20:31), but not all who witnessed them believed (John 10:32). Additionally, Jesus regarded a faith that rested only on the miracle itself as precarious (Mark 8:11–13; John 2:23–25; 4:48), though better than no faith at all (John 10:38). Faith that saves must ultimately find its grounding in the person of Jesus as the Son of God.

It is also clear that although Jesus always encouraged faith in those who came to him for help (Mark 9:23), and that he deliberately limited his miraculous powers in the presence of unbelief (Mark 6:5), many of his miracles were performed on those who did not or could not exercise faith (Matt. 12:22; Mark 1:23–28; 5:1–20; Luke 14:1–4).

The fact that Jesus performed miracles was never an issue; rather, his opponents disputed the source of his power (Mark 3:22). Arguments about his identity were to be settled by appeal not to miracles but to the word of God (Matt. 22:41–46).

The function of miracles. Miracle accounts function in a symbolic and prophetic manner. Hence, the cursing of the fig tree was prophetic of the coming judgment (Mark 11:12–21). The unusual two-stage healing of the blind man of Bethsaida symbolized Peter’s incomplete understanding of Jesus’ messiahship (Mark 8:22–33).

The miraculous element of Jesus’ ministry carries an eschatological significance, pointing to the order of things in the age to come. For example, the nature miracles (Mark 4:35–41) look forward to the redemption of creation itself, which is presently subject to frustration and decay (Rom. 8:20–21); the healing miracles point to a day when disease and deformity will be abolished (Rev. 21:4); and miracles in which the dead are raised to life anticipate a time when death itself will be no more (Rev. 20:14; 21:4). From this perspective, the miracles are a gracious foretaste of a far more glorious future.

Nail

Several different Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek biblical words are translated into English as “nail.” First, there are the common fasteners that attach one item to another (Jer. 10:4), often made of iron to join pieces of wood (1 Chron. 22:3; Isa. 41:7), or even made of gold to overlay sheets of gold (2 Chron. 3:9). The writer of Ecclesiastes speaks metaphorically of wise sayings as “firmly embedded nails” (Eccles. 12:11). Roman soldiers fastened Jesus to the cross with nails (John 20:25). Second, there are pegs either driven into walls from which people hung items (Isa. 22:25; Ezek. 15:3) or used to anchor tents (Isa. 33:20). The tent pegs for the tabernacle were made of bronze (Exod. 27:19), and Jael used a tent peg to kill Sisera (Judg. 4:21–22). Isaiah speaks metaphorically of Eliakim as one whom God will drive “like a peg into a firm place” (Isa. 22:23). Finally, there are the nails of fingers (Dan. 4:33). Deuteronomy prescribes the trimming of nails as part of the purification process for Israelite men to marry captive women (Deut. 21:12).

Sign

The word “sign” usually is a translation of the Hebrew word ’ot or the Greek word sēmeion. Signs are visible, typically being an object, a mark, an event, or a custom. In addition, signs are symbolic, pointing to things not seen. Signs often reveal or share some quality with the unseen reality to which they point, and so they are a token of that reality. In the Bible, signs typically are caused or instituted by God, and in many cases they are miraculous. However, in a few cases signs are set forth as the work of other gods (as in Deut. 13:1–2) or as being instituted by merely human design (as in Num. 2:2). In summary, a sign may be defined as something seen that points to something unseen, and that is instituted or created to do so by someone’s intention.

Several examples support this definition. Keeping the Sabbath is a sign of God’s rest after creating the world (Exod. 31:15); the Sabbath rest itself imitates God’s rest. Circumcision is a sign of God’s promise to both Abraham and his descendants; circumcision is also a physical mark that is related to human fertility (Gen. 17:11). The rainbow is a sign of God’s promise not to destroy the world by water and rain; rainbows appear only with rain (Gen. 9:13). (In the original Hebrew text, both the custom of circumcision and the rainbow that appears after the great flood are called “signs.”) The early Passover plagues both bring and warn of judgment, while the healing miracles of Jesus both bring and promise blessing. While signs point to unseen realities, these realities do not diminish the value or importance of the visible world. Instead, the unseen realities themselves are ultimately expressed in the visible world.

Divine Intervention

The word “sign” usually refers to an event that cannot be plausibly explained by natural or human causes but is consistent with intervention by God or by some other divine power. An important example of this occurs in the book of Exodus. In Exodus, Moses predicts each kind of plague that will occur and the time of its occurrence. Many of those plagues, such as the plague of locusts (Exod. 10:14–15), are events that could occur naturally. However, the merely natural occurrence of so many plagues in such a short time is quite improbable. It is likewise improbable that Moses could simply guess beforehand the type and timing of all these plagues.

Ultimately, a merely natural explanation for these plagues does not prove credible to the Egyptians. However, the plagues are consistent with acts of divine intervention, provided one does not rule out that possibility beforehand. They are consistent because Moses gives a plausible explanation of why God would intervene at this time, even though God had not intervened within living memory. All these evidences together are considered sufficient to infer that some god has caused the signs. The signs are portrayed as objectively known events. When Pharaoh refuses to admit that Moses can bring plagues, Pharaoh’s own officials say that he should know better (Exod. 10:7). The officials believe in the reality of the signs even though they do not follow the faith or God of Moses.

Throughout the Bible, signs give evidence of God’s direct action and identity, but they are not given as evidence for God’s existence. God’s existence is to be known by other means; for example, Paul writes that the existence of the Creator is “clearly seen” from the created world (Rom. 1:20).

Miracles and Faith

Miraculous signs often are given to validate a prophet and his message. Signs are especially frequent when that prophetic message is a covenant from God that has life-or-death consequences. Both the Mosaic covenant (Deut. 30:15–20) and the new covenant of Jesus (Luke 22:15–20; John 5:24–29) warn of life and death. In the OT, signs occur most prolifically at the hands of Moses. The signs manifested on behalf of Moses are explicitly given so that people will believe in Moses and follow God’s covenant (Exod. 4:1–9; 19:9).

Signs occur even more frequently and prominently in the NT. Jesus makes the lame walk, heals the blind, and even raises the dead (John 5:1–9; 9:1–7; 11:1–44). Throughout the Gospels, Jesus is characterized as performing many signs, and the signs are cited as one reason to believe in Jesus (John 20:30–31). The signs are characteristic of Jesus’ ministry and later of his apostles’ ministries. The tradition that Jesus performed signs is interwoven throughout the four Gospels as we have them, even in portions often thought to reflect earlier sources. The most important sign in the NT is the resurrection of Jesus, since this is the ultimate validation of Jesus by God, and the Christian faith hangs upon the truth of Jesus’ resurrection (1 Cor. 15:1–20).

Although signs are given to elicit faith, human nature and desires are such that reasonable belief does not always take root. As with Pharaoh, many others throughout the OT do not believe despite seeing signs (e.g., Num. 14:11; Ps. 78:11). In the Gospels, many will not believe any reports about miraculous signs. They instead demand to see signs personally (Mark 8:11–12; John 4:48; 6:30; 9:27–41; 20:29) or attribute them to Satan. The Passover signs were to be remembered and credited by later generations (Exod. 12:26–27). Similarly, the signs performed by Jesus were intended by the evangelists to be credited by readers who had not seen them (John 20:29–31). Belief is not expected without inquiry (John 4:39–42; Acts 17:11); however, unbelief in the face of evidence is seen as a human failing (John 11:37–40).

Son of God

In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus’ divine sonship is closely linked to his messiahship. The angel Gabriel connects Jesus’ status as “Son of the Most High” with his reception of the throne of David (Luke 1:32). At Jesus’ baptism (which Luke identifies as Jesus’ messianic anointing [Luke 3:21; 4:1, 14, 18]), the Father declares Jesus to be “my Son, whom I love” (3:22), an allusion to Ps. 2:7. Satan tempts Jesus as the Son of God to abandon obedience to the Father and claim independent authority (Matt. 4:1–11; Luke 4:1–13). Peter confesses that Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16), and the high priest questions whether Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One” (Mark 14:61; Matt. 26:63). In these and other texts “Son of God” is almost synonymous with “Messiah” (cf. Mark 1:1; Luke 4:41; 22:70; John 11:27; 20:31; Acts 9:20, 22). In other contexts, Jesus’ divine sonship appears to exceed messianic categories. Jesus prays to God as his Father (“Abba” [Mark 14:36]) and refers to himself as the Son, who uniquely knows and reveals the Father. The Father has committed all things to him. No one knows the Father but the Son and those to whom the Son reveals him (Matt. 11:25–27; Luke 10:21–22). It is by virtue of Jesus’ unique sonship that he invites his disciples to pray to God as their Father (Matt. 6:9).

In the Fourth Gospel, the status of Jesus as the Son of God is especially important, indicating both Jesus’ unique relationship with the Father and his essential deity. John introduces the notion of preexistent sonship in which the “Word” from creation is the Son (John 1:1–18; 17:5, 24). God sends into the world his Son (3:16), who reflects the glory of the Father (1:14; 14:6–11) and who will soon return (14:28). Jesus affirms that “I and the Father are one” (10:30), that “the Father is in me, and I in the Father” (10:38). John’s purpose in writing is to provoke faith “that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God” (20:31).

Some scholars reject the royal Jewish background of “the Son of God” when investigating the phrase in the Gospels. Instead, they appeal to Hellenistic sources to argue that Jesus as the Son of God is a “divine man” (theios anēr), which accounts for his ability to work miracles. This line of thinking, however, is fraught with many difficulties, not least of which is that the epithet is never used to describe the “divine man” in Greek literature.

In Paul’s thinking, the corporate, Israelite background of “Son of God” is renewed with reference to the NT people of God. Paul states that “theirs [the people of Israel] is the adoption to sonship” (Rom. 9:4). Although ethnic Israelites are rightfully called “sons of God,” this status is contingent upon being people of faith: “So in Jesus Christ you are all children of God through faith” (Gal. 3:26); Jesus’ death as the Son effects salvation (Rom. 8:2, 32; Gal. 2:20). The Spirit also plays a role in testifying with the spirits of believers that they are indeed children of God (Rom. 8:15–16), by which they cry, “Abba, Father” (Gal. 4:3–6). The believers’ status as God’s children will be completely revealed when they share in Christ’s glory (Rom. 8:17).

Thomas

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because John 20:24-31 is mentioned in the definition.

Beloved Disciple

Traditionally identified with John the son of Zebedee, the Gospel of John depicts him as the ideal eyewitness to Jesus and as the ideal author. He first explicitly appears in John 13–21. In representing the Beloved Disciple as the author of the Gospel of John (John 21:24–25), the author thus claims a privileged place for its revelation about Jesus, perhaps in relation to the Gospel of Mark, which many in the early church considered to have Peter as its primary source of testimony.

Biblical Hermeneutics

Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.

Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.

The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.

The Development of Hermeneutics

The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.

From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.

Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circumstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.

From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.

More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.

Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic

An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circumstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.

Linguistics

An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.

A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.

Literature and Literary Theory

The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.

Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.

History

As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circumstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.

Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).

Humility and the Attitude of the Reader

Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.

Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).

Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation

Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.

The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).

Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.

Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.

Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).

Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.

Eternal Life

Eternal life usually is mentioned in reference to human life, where it means unending life in the body, free from death. The expression, though most common in the NT, is drawn from the OT. The book of Daniel says that many who “sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt” (12:2). This yearning for eternal life is also expressed in Genesis, where those who eat of the “tree of life” will “live forever” (3:22). In Deuteronomy, God likewise declares, “I live forever” (32:40). Among the DSS, 4Q418 (frag. 69) and 1QS (4:7), both of which predate the NT, also refer to everlasting life.

The NT expression “eternal life” may seem to have a different meaning than the OT expression “everlasting life.” Any such appearance arises only in translation to English, for the underlying Greek words in the NT have the same meaning as the underlying Hebrew words in the OT. The words are already treated synonymously by the LXX, an ancient translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek (predating the NT).

The English word “eternal” may refer to eternity past and future, but in biblical usage that word does not generally refer to eternity past. This is evident where the NT mentions “eternal fire” (Matt. 18:8) and “eternal punishment” (Matt. 25:46). It is also indicated where eternal life is seen as a future reward for the righteous (Dan. 12:2; Luke 18:30; Rom. 2:7; Gal. 6:8; Titus 1:2; 1 John 2:25).

That life in the body is included in the NT concept of eternal life is evident from several considerations. Jesus says of everyone who believes in him, “I will raise them up at the last day” (John 6:40). The bodily nature of everlasting life is indicated by Jesus’ own resurrection, for his tomb was left empty. Jesus says after his own resurrection that a spirit “does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have” (Luke 24:39). The apostle Paul even writes that without the resurrection the Christian faith is invalidated (1 Cor. 15:12–19). When Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,” he does not mean that resurrection is of the human spirit, but rather that perishable flesh and blood must first be made immortal (1 Cor. 15:50–54; 2 Cor. 5:4).

The prospect of eternal life is often contrasted with death and punishment, just as the Bible more generally contrasts the prospect of life with death and lawless behavior. In Gen. 3, the sin of Adam and Eve shows that people turn from God out of self-interest, so everlasting life is not given to them. Much later, the people of Israel are warned that they will suffer death if they break faith with the true God to follow other gods (Lev. 26; Deut. 28; 30:15–20). Later still, the book of Daniel warns plainly that resurrection is to everlasting life or to everlasting contempt (12:1–3). The NT likewise, drawing at times from the Hebrew prophets (e.g., Isa. 66:22–24), contrasts the prospect of eternal life with the prospect of punishment for doing evil (Matt. 25:31–46; John 5:28–29; Rom. 6:23; Gal. 6:8; Rev. 20:10–15; 22:1–6).

Just as eternal life is contrasted with death, eternal life is sometimes referred to more fundamentally and simply as “life” (e.g., Matt. 19:17; Acts 11:18; 1 John 3:14). All life comes from God, through his divine word (Gen. 1; Deut. 30:20; John 1:1–4). The NT says that God gave his Son the power to give eternal life, since the Son does only what God the Father commands (John 5:19–30; 6:57–58).

The NT promises eternal life to all who believe (trust) in God’s Son (John 3:16; 3:36; 6:40; 11:25–26; 20:31; 1 John 5:13). To believe in God’s Son is to believe that God sent Jesus (John 17:8), to listen to Jesus’ message from God and so believe in God (5:24; 12:44), and to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah (20:31).

The belief in God and Jesus that secures eternal life is not mere mental assent, but rather is expressed in a life that turns from evil. Those who will receive eternal life are characterized by love rather than by hatred and murder (John 5:29; 1 John 3:14–15). Only the righteous will enter into eternal life, and they are marked by their care for Jesus’ brothers and sisters: feeding the hungry and clothing the poor (Matt. 25:31–46). They do not live for themselves, nor do they give free rein to all human desires, but instead they are led by, and walk in accordance with, the Spirit of God (John 12:25; Gal. 5:16–21; 6:8).

Exegesis

The Development of Hermeneutics

Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic

Linguistics

Literature and Literary Theory

History

Humility and the Attitude of the Reader

Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation

First Letter of John

First John is a letter written to reassure Christians of the security of their salvation in Christ. The letter contrasts the truth of the original gospel taught by the author with the heretical doctrines of traveling teachers who sought to instill doubt and fear in the churches. The incarnation takes center stage as the climactic confession of Christianity (1 John 4:2–3). Christian love flows out of God’s ultimate example of love in the atoning death of Christ.

Genre

First John is commonly referred to as a letter, but it bears none of the traditional marks of a Greco-Roman letter. The author does not introduce himself, the recipients are not named, there is no opening greeting or wish for health, and there are no closing salutations. Some have suggested that 1 John is a universal tract, but the content is too specific and polemical. First John is probably a circular letter intended for general distribution among the churches associated with the author.

Main Themes

First John repeats many of the same themes as the Gospel of John. The historical reality of the incarnation of Christ is a central theme in 1 John (1:1–3). The incarnation is rooted in history and cannot be divorced from that foundational fact. Christ’s “atoning sacrifice” is another foundational fact of Christian belief; however, it is not simply that Christ died a sacrificial death, but that he did so “for our sins” (2:2; 4:10). The author explains the meaning of the atonement to help build the salvation confidence of the struggling Christians. In a number of places the author places special stress on the forgiveness of sins that comes through Jesus’ blood. His death “purifies us from all sin” (1:7). He came to take away sin and to destroy the work of the devil (3:5, 8).

Love is another resounding theme. Christians are to love one another in concrete ways, reflecting the sacrificial love of Christ (2:16–18). Love is rooted in God and ultimately demonstrated at the cross (4:9). We will never find what love means if we start from the human end. We must start from the cross, where we see the love of God (4:10). The author reminds his readers that they have the Holy Spirit and have no need for further instruction by the false teachers (2:20–21, 26–27). The Spirit of God is the Spirit of truth, who bears witness that Jesus is Christ in the flesh (4:2, 6). Competing spirits should be tested and rejected as “antichrist” if they fail to confess Christ (4:3).

First John is full of family imagery. The author repeatedly addresses his readers as “children,” “brothers,” and “beloved.” Being “born of God” is the hallmark of those who are “children of God” (2:23; 3:1–3, 9–10). Children of God love one another and do what is right (3:10–11). Eternal life is a present possession that believers can be assured of (5:13). Although the false teachers sow seeds of doubt, the author seeks to uproot them. Salvation is not for those who are spiritually enlightened but for all whose faith is in the blood of Christ.

Literary Features

One of the author’s favorite literary features is the repetition of key words. The word “love” appears over fifty times in 1 John. Love is the bedrock of the Christian faith. The verb “to know” appears approximately forty times in 1 John. The author reassures his readers of their salvation by repeating what they already “know.” They “know” God and should not fear the false teachers’ so-called knowledge. The verb “to remain” appears twenty-four times. God, God’s word, Christ, truth, life, love, and the Holy Spirit all remain in believers. They, in turn, should remain in God, Christ, and the light. In contrast, unbelievers remain in death (3:14). First John also has strong dualistic contrasts: light/dark, love/hate, truth/falsehood (1–2; 4:6). The dualism of 1 John is similar to that found in the DSS, but its Christian character gives it a unique christocentric emphasis.

Authorship

First John and the Gospel of John share common vocabulary, writing style, and many interlocking themes that point to a common author. The opening verses of 1 John show a close affinity with the beginning of the Gospel (John 1:1; 1 John 1:1). Also, the purpose statements of both the Gospel and 1 John concern faith in Christ and receiving eternal life (John 20:31; 1 John 5:13). Some scholars believe the apostle John is the author, but this is impossible to prove from the text itself, since the author never mentions his name. Church fathers such as Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian attributed 1 John to the apostle. An alternative theory is that the three letters were written by another John, known as John “the elder” (2 John 1; 3 John 1). The church historian Eusebius thought that this elder John rather than the apostle John was the author of the Johannine Letters. John the elder is thought to have lived in Ephesus at about the same time as John the apostle. Yet there is no indisputable proof that this person existed or that he wrote anything to churches in the area. Nevertheless, there is nothing in 1 John that hinges on the exact identity of the author. He seems to be well advanced in years and regards the church members as his “children” (2:1, 18, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4; 5:21) and “friends” (3:2, 21; 4:1, 7, 11). He has a close relationship with them and shows a genuine pastoral concern for their well-being. He claims to be an eyewitness of Jesus, the Word of life (1:1–3).

Audience, Life Setting, and Date

Audience and date. The audience is a group of churches in fellowship with the author’s church. This group of churches is often referred to as the Johannine Community, a community represented by the Johannine literature of the NT (Gospel of John, 1–3 John, Revelation). Whether this community functioned formally as such is unclear, but there seems to be a close-knit network of churches associated with the author. Tradition places these churches in and around Ephesus at the end of the first century. Since John’s Gospel was written sometime in the years AD 85–95, 1 John was written probably not long afterward to churches in and around Ephesus.

Life setting. The exact life setting behind 1 John is uncertain, but the churches apparently were endangered by itinerant false teachers intent on distorting the gospel preached by the author. Their teachings may have stemmed from a misinterpretation of John’s Gospel, but this is difficult to prove. They were in fellowship with the author at one time but broke away and charted their own deceptive direction (1 John 2:18–19, 26). The audience had already heard the message of the gospel, including its command to love, and this had already impacted their lives (2:8). They already knew the truth of the gospel (2:21), but the false teachers began to sow seeds of doubt. This explains the purpose statement of 1 John: “I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life” (5:13). The author’s purpose was not to correct the heretics, for the letter was not written to them, but to show his readers that the false teachers’ claims were indeed false.

The identity of the false teachers is unknown, but their teachings reflected seeds of gnosticism and docetism and may have included some Jewish influences. The more-advanced forms of gnosticism and docetism that threatened the church in the second century were not yet fully developed by the time of John, but similar ideas were already beginning to infiltrate the church. Gnostics taught a radical division between flesh and spirit. Flesh and matter were bad, but spirit was good. Because of this false premise, they may have misinterpreted Jesus’ words in John’s Gospel: “Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit” (John 3:6). A gnostic or a docetic who was “born from above” (see John 3:3 NIV mg.) was resurrected and became “otherworldly” and truly “spiritual.” Flesh was discarded as worthless and evil. Although this was only one aspect of the false teaching, it was enough to threaten the very core of the gospel of Christ in the flesh as well as a bodily resurrection. For the false teachers, Jesus only seemed to have a genuine body of flesh and to suffer and die (docetism), since flesh was evil by nature (gnosticism). This notion threatened the very heart of the Christian gospel.

Among the debated issues were the identity of Christ, the significance of his atoning death, the nature of salvation, and the shape of Christian discipleship. The heretics claimed to be without sin (1 John 1:8–2:2), continued to sin (3:6, 8, 10), disobeyed God’s commands (1:6–7; 2:4–6; 5:2–3), did not love their brothers and sisters in Christ yet claimed to love God (2:7–11; 3:10–18, 23; 4:7–11, 20–21), and loved the world (2:15–17; 4:4–6; 5:19). They erred regarding the nature and work of Christ. They denied that Jesus was the Christ and, by doing so, denied God as well (2:22; 5:1). By denying Jesus, they did not remain in God (4:15; 5:5, 10, 13). They rejected the historical fact that Christ came in the flesh (4:3). They also rejected the atonement of Christ (2:2; 3:5; 4:10; 5:6). Those who threatened the church may have valued the heavenly and spiritual realm and despised physical matter in such a way that it led them to place all their emphasis on the heavenly Christ rather than the human Jesus, and on their own “spiritual” status as the children of God rather than their day-to-day actions. They were committed to a fundamentally different understanding of the Christian faith.

The heretics were not content to keep their ideas to themselves, so they circulated among the churches in order to spread their beliefs. They sought to win people over to their understanding of things (2:26; 4:1–3). This led to confusion among the believers who remained faithful to the gospel as it was proclaimed at the beginning, the gospel that had come from eyewitnesses such as the author. As a result, these Christians doubted their salvation, doubted that they really knew God and Christ, and doubted that they were experiencing eternal life. Clearly, the author viewed the teachings and practices of the false teachers as a threat to the proper understanding of truth and to the well-being of his readers.

Outline

I. Prologue: The Incarnate Word of Life (1:1–4)

II. Walking in the Light (1:5–2:2)

III. Keeping His Commands (2:3–11)

IV. Do Not Love the World (2:12–17)

V. A Warning against Antichrists (2:18–27)

VI. The Hope of God’s Children (2:28–3:3)

VII. Born of God (3:4–10)

VIII. Love One Another (3:11–18)

IX. Assurance and Obedience (3:19–24)

X. The Spirits of Truth and Falsehood (4:1–6)

XI. The Priority of God’s Love (4:7–12)

XII. Christian Love (4:13–5:4)

XIII. The True Faith Confirmed (5:5–12)

XIV. Concluding Remarks (5:13–21)

Good News

The English word “gospel” translates the Greek word euangelion, which is very important in the NT, being used seventy-six times. The word euangelion (eu = “good,” angelion = “announcement”), in its contemporary use in the Hellenistic world, was not the title of a book but rather a declaration of good news. Euangelion was used in the Roman Empire with reference to significant events in the life of the emperor, who was thought of as a savior with divine status. These events included declarations at the time of his birth, his coming of age, and his accession to the throne. The NT usage of the term can also be traced to the OT (e.g., Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1), which looked forward to the coming of the Messiah, who would bring a time of salvation. This good news, which is declared in the NT, is that Jesus has fulfilled God’s promises to Israel, and now the way of salvation is open to all.

The Gospel Message

The apostle Paul recognizes that the gospel is centered on the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:1–5). He states that this gospel is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes (Rom. 1:16), a sacred trust (1 Tim. 1:11), the word of truth (Eph. 1:13), and an authoritative pronouncement that requires a response (Rom. 10:16; 2 Cor. 11:4; 2 Thess. 1:8). The declaration of this good news is found on the lips of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 11:5; Luke 4:18), who calls people to respond in repentance and belief (Mark 1:15). The good news is also in the early apostolic preaching, where it is associated with the proclamation of Christ (Acts 5:42; 8:35; 11:20).

The records of apostolic preaching in Acts are records of the earliest public declaration of this gospel. The apostle Peter gives three such speeches (Acts 2:14–41; 3:11–4:4; 10:34–43), whose content can be summarized as follows. The age of fulfillment has dawned through the birth, life, ministry, and resurrection of Jesus Christ (2:22–31), which has ushered in the “latter days” foretold by the prophets (3:18–26). Jesus, by his resurrection, has been exalted to the right hand of God as the head of the new Israel (2:32–36), and the Holy Spirit has been given to the church as the sign of Christ’s present power and exaltation (10:44–48). This age will reach its consummation at the return of Christ (3:20–21), and in response to this gospel an appeal is made for repentance, with the offer of forgiveness, the Holy Spirit, and salvation (2:37–41).

This declaration of the gospel is concerned primarily with what was preached rather than what was written. Itinerant preachers of this gospel were known as “evangelists,” which in Greek is closely related to the term euangelion (Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; 2 Tim. 4:5). Some scholars believe that during the stage of oral transmission, the gospel accounts developed a certain form through repetition, which helps explain some similarities between later written accounts of the gospel.

From Oral to Written Gospel

Later, this “oral” gospel was written down, for several reasons. With the rapid spread of Christianity, as recorded in the book of Acts, a need arose for a more efficient dissemination of the message of Jesus than was available by oral means. Furthermore, there was a need to keep the message alive because some of the apostles had died (e.g., James in Acts 12:2) and many churches were facing opposition and persecution. The written Gospels would facilitate catechetical and liturgical needs and encourage persecuted Christians to continue following Jesus by telling the story of his faithfulness through great suffering. These written Gospels would also contain examples of those who persevered in following Jesus and of those who denied him and betrayed him. These accounts about Jesus and those who followed him became foundational documents for the early church.

It should be noted that the gospel was not written down in order to give it greater authority. The first-century context was largely an oral culture, in which storytelling and the rehearsal of facts was integral. Papias, a leader of the church in Hierapolis in Asia Minor who died around AD 130, states his preference for oral tradition rather than written information about Jesus: “For I did not think that information from books would help me as much as the word of a living and surviving voice” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.39.4). There is, however, a traceable trajectory from the gospel preached by the apostles to the written accounts that bear the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It is generally held that the authors/editors of the four canonical Gospels were using oral and/or written sources (Luke 1:1–4), and that their respective Gospels were written in the second half of the first century.

The majority of biblical scholars hold that Mark was the first Gospel to be written (c. AD 66). According to tradition, its editor/author was John Mark, a close friend of the apostle Peter (1 Pet. 5:13) and a part-time companion of the apostle Paul (Acts 12:12; Col. 4:10; 2 Tim. 4:11). This tradition is not without basis. Papias says, “Mark, who had indeed been Peter’s interpreter, accurately wrote as much as he remembered, yet not in order, about that which was either said or done by the Lord” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.39.15). This tradition is also outlined by Clement of Alexandria, who, around AD 200, wrote, “When Peter had publicly preached the word at Rome, and by the Spirit had proclaimed the gospel, then those present, who were many, exhorted Mark, as one who had followed him for a long time and remembered what had been spoken, to make a record of what he said; and that he did this, and distributed the Gospel among those that asked him” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 6.14.5–7; cf. 2.15.1–2).

It is widely held that Matthew and Luke used Mark as one of their sources: of the material in Mark, over 97 percent is repeated in Matthew and over 88 percent in Luke. Matthew and Luke also contain material that appears to come from a common written source that is not found in Mark. Scholars have named this source as “Q” (from the German Quelle = “source”), although this may be a collection of sources rather than a single document.

Furthermore, the association of the Fourth Gospel with the apostle John goes back to Irenaeus (c. AD 180), who states, “John, the disciple of the Lord, who leaned on his breast, also published the gospel while living at Ephesus in Asia” (Haer. 3.1.1, as cited in Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.8.4). By the second century, the term “gospel” is used for the written accounts of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus (e.g., Did. 11.3; 15.4). Justin Martyr (c. AD 140) refers to the “memoirs of the apostles” (1 Apol. 67) and Irenaeus (c. AD 180) mentions the four canonical Gospels by name (Haer. 3.11.7).

The Purpose and Genre of the Gospels

Purpose. The Gospels were written to convey theology and to create and confirm faith. They do not give an objectively neutral account of the life of Jesus; they enthusiastically endorse their protagonist and condemn those who oppose him. They differ from traditional biographies in that they give little information about the chronology of Jesus’ life. Only two of the Gospels, Matthew and Luke, tell of the events surrounding Jesus’ birth. Luke alone tells of an event in Jesus’ childhood (Luke 2:41–52). It is virtually incidental that Jesus worked as a carpenter and had brothers and sisters (Mark 6:3). A large percentage of each of the four canonical Gospels is devoted to the last week of Jesus’ life; of the sixteen chapters of Mark’s Gospel, six are devoted to the one week from Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem until his resurrection.

The primary intentions of the authors/editors of the written Gospels were not to give biographical details but rather to lead the reader to an acknowledgment of the identity of Jesus and a belief in the purpose of his mission (Luke 1:4; John 20:31). Their theological purposes, however, do not necessarily compromise their commitment to historical accuracy. Jesus is presented as a real, historical figure who lived within a specific historical time frame. Luke appears to be more concerned than the other evangelists with historical details, giving a rough date for Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1–2) and a more specific time for Jesus’ baptism (3:1–2).

Genre. The discerning reader of the Gospels is forced to ask questions concerning the literary genre(s) of these texts. Such a discussion is imperative, as the interpretation of a section of any piece of literature will largely be determined by the function of the text within a certain literary genre. Prior to the 1970s, most NT scholars believed that the Gospels formed a unique literary genre and were therefore distinct from other first-century literary forms. This conclusion was based on the belief that the written Gospels were collections of smaller sections sewn together by the evangelists, and that the documents as a whole lacked coherence. Since then, this presupposition has been challenged, largely because scholars have seen that the Gospel writers were real editors and authors who were not just collecting primitive source material but were using that material to write a larger story about Jesus. The written Gospels therefore have overall coherence and purpose; they were written in such a way as to bring about a desired response in the reader. Such an overall intention may have stronger similarities with different genres in the Greco-Roman world of the NT.

The Gospels have been associated with several genres. They bear some resemblance to aretalogies, which were narratives about divine persons in antiquity from which flowed moral instructions. These stories often involved miraculous events at the subject’s birth or death or during life, and they included the presence of both disciples and opponents. Within these aretalogies, the narrative was secondary to the morality. An association with aretalogies, therefore, would encourage the reader to give greater attention to moral teaching than to events in which this teaching is embedded. Similarly, others have seen the Gospels as essentially a collection of wisdom sayings set in a historicized narrative; this view again gives priority to sayings and is doubtful of the historicity of the narrative. Such views that downplay the narrative, and particularly the miracles in Jesus’ life, have led others to argue the opposite extreme, which sees the Gospels, and Luke-Acts in particular, as examples of ancient novels, with their focus on miracle stories. Many scholars have rejected the emphasis on either sayings or narrative, arguing that the literary genre that the Gospels most closely resemble is ancient biographies (bioi). These contained praise for the protagonist, rhetoric, moral philosophy, and a concern for character.

Although the Gospels use different literary motifs that are reflective of different genres of the Greco-Roman world, they do not exactly replicate a known genre. They contain material not found in other Hellenistic literature of the time—for example, the fulfillment of OT expectations and their desire to address particular issues faced by the early church, such as opposition; the Gentile mission; the need to redefine Israel in the light of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection; and the nature of Christian discipleship. Unlike other literature of the time, they do not name their authors, and with the exception of Luke, they lack traditional literary devices such as prefaces. They are therefore to be seen as unique, or at least as a distinct subgenre of ancient biographies.

Canonical and Noncanonical Gospels

The progression from the events of Jesus’ life to the oral preaching of this gospel to the first-century writing of the story led to the acceptance of the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John into the NT canon. There is also a significant body of literature that is normally referred to as the noncanonical gospels. These later documents were neither widely accepted nor viewed as authoritative, but they provide useful insights into the nature of early Christianity. A significant noncanonical gospel is the Gospel of Thomas, which is part of a large collection of works discovered at Nag Hammadi (Egypt) in 1945. The Gospel of Thomas does not contain a resurrection account and is primarily a collection of sayings.

The canonical Gospels are not more authoritative than other sections of Scripture, but because they focus on Jesus’ ministry, with particular attention to his death and resurrection, they draw the attention of the reader to the fulfillment of God’s purpose in the life and work of Jesus, the Messiah. They are therefore of great importance within Scripture.

Gospel

The Gospel Message

From Oral to Written Gospel

The Purpose and Genre of the Gospels

Canonical and Noncanonical Gospels

Interpret

The Development of Hermeneutics

Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic

Linguistics

Literature and Literary Theory

History

Humility and the Attitude of the Reader

Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation

Interpretation

The Development of Hermeneutics

Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic

Linguistics

Literature and Literary Theory

History

Humility and the Attitude of the Reader

Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation

Nativity of Christ

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

Jesus’ Life

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).

The Identity of Jesus Christ

Jesus’ Purpose and Community

The Quests for the Historical Jesus

Trinity

The biblical writers proclaim that only one God exists, yet they also refer to three persons as “God.” The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all God. Furthermore, these three persons relate to one another as self-conscious individuals. Jesus prays to the Father (John 17). The Father speaks from heaven concerning the Son (Matt. 3:17; Luke 3:22). Jesus vows to send the Spirit as “Advocate” after his ascension, and he will do what Jesus himself did while he was among us (John 16:7–8). The challenge of Christian theology, therefore, is to formulate a doctrine of God that captures all these elements, each of which surfaces in both Testaments.

Old Testament

In the OT, evidence for the Trinity appears mostly at the implicit level. Yahweh is called “Father” in Isaiah (63:16; 64:8), Jeremiah (3:4, 19; 31:9), and Malachi (2:10). Isaiah declares, “But you are our Father, though Abraham does not know us or Israel acknowledge us; you, Lord, are our Father, our Redeemer from of old is your name” (Isa. 63:16). Yahweh identifies himself as “Father” implicitly when he claims Israel as his “son” (Hos. 11:1), and the same principle applies to Ps. 2:7, where God declares to his anointed, “You are my son; today I have become your father.” These cases do not compare in numbers with the NT evidence, but a person thought of as “God the Father” certainly appears in the OT.

Messianic texts of the OT introduce us to God the Son. In Isa. 9:6 a “child is born” who will be called “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” The day of “Immanuel,” or “God with us,” is foreshadowed in Isa. 7:14 (cf. Matt. 1:22), while Isa. 40:3–5 anticipates the appearance of the Lord “in the wilderness” (cf. Matt. 3:3). Daniel sees “one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven” being given “authority, glory and sovereign power” (Dan. 7:13–14). In Ps. 110:1 Yahweh says to David’s “Lord,” “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”

Similarly, the OT seems to distinguish the Spirit of God from Yahweh while implying the Spirit’s own personality. Genesis 1:2 makes that case, as does Exod. 31:3, where Yahweh fills Bezalel with the “Spirit of God” (cf. Exod. 35:31; Num. 11:29). In 1 Sam. 16:14 a contrast is made between the “Spirit of the Lord” that leaves Saul and an “evil spirit from the Lord” that torments him; also we find a repentant David pleading that God would not take away his “Holy Spirit” (Ps. 51:11). The Spirit can be put on persons by God, with the result that they prophesy (Isa. 61:1; Joel 2:28–29) and do what pleases him (Ezek. 36:26–27). In the OT, therefore, we see two persons (the Son and the Holy Spirit) who are both God and also distinguishable from one to whom they answer and by whom they are sent.

New Testament

The NT contains abundant evidence for “God the Father,” often because of Jesus’ teaching. The “Father” appears several times in the Sermon on the Mount (e.g., Matt. 5:16; 6:6–9, 14, 18, 26, 32; 7:11). Matthew 7:21 stands out because of Jesus’ reference to “my Father who is in heaven,” by which he identifies himself as the Son (see also Matt. 15:13; 16:17; 18:10; and Luke 24:49). Paul’s greetings normally come from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, as seen in Rom. 1:7: “Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ” (also 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:1–3; 1 Tim. 1:2; 2 Tim. 1:2). Paul introduces the Father and the Son in 1 Cor. 8:6: “For us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live” (see also 1 Cor. 15:24; 2 Cor. 11:31; Eph. 1:3; Phil. 2:22). Other significant texts include Heb. 1:5; 1 Pet. 1:2–3; in the latter, the scattered believers are those “who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood. . . . Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!” The NT evidence for “God the Father” is clear.

Biblical texts that point to the deity of Christ supply evidence for the second claim: the Son is God. Some of the texts listed above say as much, but one can take this case further. In context, John’s prologue refers to Jesus as the “Word” and proclaims that he was “with God” and “was God” (John 1:1). Jesus also relates to the Father in ways that imply his own deity, as he declares in John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.” After significant doubting, Thomas confesses the deity of Christ in John 20:28: “My Lord and my God!” NT passages that identify Jesus as the “Son of God” point to his deity, as Peter does in Matt. 16:16: “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Even demons identify Jesus as the Son. They call out, “What do you want with us, Son of God? . . . Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?” (Matt. 8:29; cf. Mark 5:7). The so-called Christ Hymn of Phil. 2:6–11 puts Jesus on the level with God, saying that he did not consider “equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.” The author of Hebrews declares that Jesus is “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” (1:3). Colossians 1:15–16 says that Jesus is the “image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation” and the one by whom “all things were created,” and Col. 1:19 states that “God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him.” According to Titus 2:13, Jesus is “our great God and Savior.” The entire sequence of Rev. 4–5 highlights the deity of Christ, culminating in the praise “To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever!” as both the Enthroned One and the Lamb are worshiped as God (5:13–14).

The NT writers underscore both the deity and the distinctive personality of the Holy Spirit. Jesus is conceived in Mary’s womb by the Spirit’s power (Matt. 1:18–20), and when Jesus is baptized, the Spirit descends upon him as a dove (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10). Jesus drives out demons by the Spirit, and one dare not speak against the Spirit when he does so (Matt. 12:28–32). Luke’s Gospel puts added emphasis on the ministry of the Spirit, as we also see in Acts. He empowers various people to praise and prophesy (Luke 1:41, 67) and to be witnesses for Christ (Acts 1:8; 2:4, 17–18, 38). Sinners can lie to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3, 9), and the Holy Spirit bears witness along with the apostles to the risen Christ (5:32). In John’s Gospel, the Spirit becomes the counselor and teacher of the disciples, reminding them of their Lord’s instructions (John 14:26; 16:13). The Spirit brings assurance of sonship (Rom. 8:16) and helps disciples when they pray (8:26). This person even knows the very thoughts of God (1 Cor. 2:11). Accordingly, the Great Commission requires baptism in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19). All three members of the Trinity have a part in the advancement of the kingdom, the Spirit no less than the Father and the Son.

Relationships between Father, Son, and Spirit

The evidence considered thus far demonstrates that three persons are called “God” in Scripture: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. But the Scriptures also point to a chain of command in their relationship to one another. The Son obeys the Father, and the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son to apply the work of the cross to the church. This “functional subordination” of the Son to the Father, some might argue, would follow simply from the analogy chosen by God to reveal himself to us. The “Son” would obey his “Father,” not vice versa, though they share a common dignity as God, just as a human father and son share a common humanity. But the NT writers expressly tell us that they relate to each other in this way. In Matt. 11:27 (cf. Luke 10:22) Jesus announces, “All things have been committed to me by my Father” (cf. John 3:35; 5:22). The latter transfers authority to the former as his subordinate. The Father even (for a season) knows more than the Son regarding the last days: “About that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father” (Matt. 24:36), though he also dignifies the Son: “For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does” (John 5:20). The Son’s commitment to please his heavenly Father is a prominent theme of the NT, as Jesus declares in John 5:19: “The Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.” No text brings out this dependence of the Son upon the Father more clearly than Heb. 5:7–8, where the Son is said to have “offered up prayers and petitions with fervent cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. Son though he was, he learned obedience from what he suffered.” It is debated by theologians whether this functional subordination relates only to the period of the Son’s earthly ministry, or whether it is an eternal subordination.

The Spirit, though equal in personality and dignity with the Father and the Son, proceeds from them to apply the work of the cross and empower the church for ministry. In John 14:26 Jesus says, “The Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.” In John 15:26 Jesus announces that he also sends the Spirit out: “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father—he will testify about me.” The Spirit only conveys what he has received: “He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come” (John 16:13). The same “chain of command” appears in John 16:15, where Jesus says, “All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what he will make known to you.”

Trinitarian Heresies

The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are God, while being distinguishable persons. The Son obeys the Father; and these two persons of the Trinity send out the Holy Spirit to implement our deliverance from sin. A defensible explanation of the Trinity will respect all these dynamics, taking special care not to illustrate them with misleading images or simply lapse into various forms of polytheism. One of the earliest heresies of the church came from Marcion, a second-century theologian who distinguished the Father of Jesus from the supposedly vindictive God of the OT, which leaves us with more than one God. Later came the heresies of modalism and subordinationism (or Arianism). Modalists claimed that the persons of the Trinity are no more than guises worn by the one person of God. One minute God is the Father, the next he is the Son or the Holy Spirit. Subordinationists such as Arius (died AD 336) went beyond the functionality of the NT’s chain of command, arguing that the Son and the Holy Spirit are not themselves God but are essentially subordinate to him. Jehovah’s Witnesses have fallen into this latter error, suggesting that Jesus is “a god” but not the Creator God.

These early heresies pressed the church to refine its understanding of the Trinity. In his response to Marcion’s error, Tertullian coined precise language to describe the persons of the Godhead, so that God’s “threeness” and “oneness” are preserved. He used the Latin term trinitas to describe the Christian God and argued that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit share the same “substance.” The Son (also, then, the Holy Spirit) is not simply of “like substance” (Gk. homoiousios) with God the Father, but rather is “consubstantial” (Gk. homoousios) with him: the Son is God, and so is the Holy Spirit. The Nicene Creed of AD 325 incorporated this explanation and, in so doing, also set aside the idea that either the Son or the Holy Spirit was created by God, as the Arian heresy requires. Nicaea also rejected adoptionism, which regards Jesus as a man whom God promoted by endowing him with supernatural powers.

Each of these heresies—plus, say, the strict monotheism of Islam—attempts to relieve the tension seen among the claims that constitute the Trinity; however, orthodox Christians will remember that tensions and paradoxes are not automatic contradictions. No philosopher or theologian has ever expressly demonstrated that the Trinity entails logical nonsense, and Christianity’s detractors carry the burden of proof in this case. It is one thing to allege that an idea is contradictory, and quite another thing to show with an argument that it is so. On the positive side, the Trinity must remain a central doctrine of the church because it affects all the others, especially the entire work of redemption. If God is not triune, then Jesus is not God; and if he is not God, then he cannot save us, nor can we worship him as our Lord. The sacrifice that he offers for our sin would not, in that case, be supremely valuable. Consider also the application to us of what Christ has done. If the Holy Spirit is not God, then he cannot speak for God as one who knows perfectly his thoughts and gives us the word of God, our Bible. Scripture indicates that God is triune, and sinners need him to be so.

Wonders

Terminology

The NT word “miracle” carries the meaning of power and therefore points to the supernatural source of these events (Luke 10:13; Acts 8:13).

Miracles in the Bible

Showing 1 to 50 of730 results

1. The Scarred Hands

Illustration

Robert Allen

I read a story by Leslie Flynn who told of a small boy being raised in a frontier city by his grandmother. One night the house catches on fire. The grandmother, trying to rescue the boy who was asleep in the bedroom upstairs, is overcome by the smoke and dies in the fire. This frontier city doesn't have much of a fire department. A crowd gathers around the house and they hear a small boy crying out for help. The lower floor is a wall of flames and no one seems to know what to do. Suddenly, a man pushes through the crowd and begins climbing an iron drainage pipe which runs to the roof. The pipe is hot from the fire, but he makes it to a second floor window. The man crawls through the window and locates the boy. With the crowd cheering encouragement, the man climbs back down the hot iron pipe with the boy on his back and his arms around his neck.

A few weeks later, a public meeting was held to determine in whose custody the boy would be placed. Each person wanting the child would be allowed to make a brief statement. The first man said, "I have a farm and would give the boy a good home. He would grow up on the farm and learn a trade."

The second person to speak was the local school teacher. She said, "I am a school teacher and I would see to it that he received a good education." Finally, the banker said, "Mrs. Morton and I would be able to give the boy a fine home and a fine education. We would like him to come and live with us." The presiding officer looked around and asked, "Is there anyone else who would like to say anything?" From the back row, a man rose and said, "These other people may be able to offer some things I can't. All I can offer is my love." Then, he slowly removed his hands from his coat pockets. A gasp went up from the crowd because his hands were scarred terribly from climbing up and down the hot pipe. The boy recognized the man as the one who had saved his life and ran into his waiting arms.

The farmer, teacher and the banker simply sat down. Everyone knew what the decision would be. The scarred hands proved that this man had given more than all the others.

2. An Invasion of Privacy

Illustration

William G. Carter

Every Sunday morning, the people of a church in the Pacific Northwest say, "Peace be with you." They begin the worship service with a hymn of praise. The people confess their sins together, and hear of God's forgiveness. Then they are invited to turn to others around them and pass the peace. It has become an exuberant moment in an otherwise sober occasion. Friends leave their pews to embrace one another. Newcomers are warmly welcomed with a kind word or a hug.

Nobody thought much about the weekly ritual until the pastor received a letter from a man who had recently joined the congregation. The new member was a promising young lawyer from a prestigious downtown law firm. He drafted a brief but pointed letter on his firm's letterhead. "I am writing to complain about the congregational ritual known as 'passing the peace,'" he wrote. "I disagree with it, both personally and professionally, and I am prepared to take legal action to cause this practice to cease." When the pastor phoned to talk with the lawyer about the letter, he asked why the man was so disturbed. The lawyer said, "The passing of the peace is an invasion of my privacy."

I have no doubt that there are people who would take their church to court if too many people shook their hands, or if neighbors were too friendly, or if fellow pewsitters interrupted their private little religious moments. To that end, I think the pastor's response to the lawyer was right on target.

He said, "Like it or not, when you joined the church you gave up some of your privacy, for we believe in a risen Lord who will never leave us alone." Then he added, "You never know when Jesus Christ will intrude on us with a word of peace."

3. Rosie Lives!

Illustration

Bill Bouknight

There was a man named George who was accustomed to driving his wife, Rosie, to church. They had a long and happy marriage; their love for each other was monumental. They did everything together; everything, that is, except one thing. When George drove Rosie to church each Sunday, she went in but he did not. He remained in the car, reading the newspaper.

After 45 years of marriage, Rosie died. George was distraught with grief. On Sunday mornings George no longer made that drive to church, transporting Rosie. But several months after her death Easter Sunday rolled around. George drove to the church and he went in. The pastor delivered a stirring resurrection sermon and then closed with prayer.

Then there were a few moments of silence as the pastor prepared to announce the final hymn. Suddenly George stood up and with deep emotion declared loudly, "Rosie lives!" Then he began to sing with a deep, rich baritone voice that song that he had always associated with Rosie --"My Wild Irish Rose, the Sweetest Flower That Grows..." The congregation was stunned at first. But several people in the congregation knew George and how he was grieving for Rosie. They stood up and joined in the song. Then more and more people joined into the song. Finally, the whole congregation was joyfully and tearfully singing a glorious, secular Easter hymn.

4. A Backstage View

Illustration

Craig Barnes

Garrison Keillor said, "We always have a backstage view of ourselves." We let the audience see only the neatly arranged stage. But behind the curtain all kinds of things are lying around: old failures, hurts, guilt and shame. We hear that we are living in a shameless society, and that people are no longer bothered by shame. I don’t believe it. Shame plagues our souls. Psychologists tell us that shame sweeps over us when we overstep our abilities, or when our fantasy about who we would like to be encounters the backstage reality of who we really are.

Nothing is more crippling to our souls than working at hiding shame. We lock up more and more doors, sealing off more and more rooms of the heart to prevent our true selves from being discovered. We think we are keeping the world out, but in fact we are keeping ourselves locked in.

5. The Reputation of a Lifetime

Illustration

John Ewing Roberts

Thomas found a Lord who dealt with him where he was, in his present circumstances but led him beyond the passing into the permanent. I think it is criminal to call him, "Doubting Thomas," for one brief moment of his life. We should remember him for the permanent affirmation Jesus evoked from him.

I recall a story my grandmother told of a man in west Kentucky around 1900. He never touched a drop of "Demon Rum" except for one memorable occasion. He got roaring drunk, stole a horse and buggy, and raced down the main street of Arlington, Kentucky, all the while singing at the top of his lungs the song, "There'll be a hot time in the old town tonight!" For the rest of his life he was known as "Hot Time." One night and a reputation for a lifetime! It wasn't fair to call him "Hot Time" all his life, nor is it fair to keep on saying, "Doubting Thomas" for one request on one night.

6. No Evidence Necessary

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

When Thomas was first told about the meeting with Jesus that he had missed, he was understandably guarded. The notion that a dead man was back alive again was not exactly something you grabbed hold of and easily believed in a minute or two, not today and not 2,000 years ago, either. Modern scholars sometimes pet the disciples as such naïve bumpkins that they’d believe anything. Not so. They knew the dead stayed dead and this was not a fact you revised on a whim. So Thomas plays it safe but also then speculates aloud as to what it might take for him to believe this after all. As he talks, his rhetoric gets more and more exaggerated. "My friends, I'd have to see with my own eyes the nail holes in his hands. No, tell you what, I'd need to touch those holes with my own finger. Better yet, I'd want to stick my whole hand right into his side where the sword pierced him!" Thomas kept mounting up an ever-larger heap of evidence that he thought he'd need to believe. His words seemed calculated to induce some eye-rolling.

Of course, once he does meet Jesus, all that evaporates. To paraphrase a traditional aphorism, if you don't have faith, then there will never be evidence enough to convince you, and if you do have faith, no evidence is needed.

Without faith, no evidence is sufficient; with faith, no evidence is necessary.

7. I’m in the Bible!

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

When I was a kid, my father read the end of John 20 at the dinner table one night for our family devotions. After he read the part about Jesus’ telling Thomas that there would be lots of people who would not see him but who would still believe in him anyway, my mother commented, “Jesus means us. He’s talking about us. We’ve never seen him the way the disciples did, but he is our Savior and we believe in him. Jesus is talking about us.”

All these years later, I can still remember marveling a bit over a thought that tantalized my young heart: I am in the Bible! Little Scott Hoezee of Ada, Michigan, is in the Bible!

How cool is that?

A few years later when I ran across that same passage in high school, I realized that my mom might have been guilty of a little rhetorical excess. No, I am not in the Bible. Not specifically, not personally, not really. That’s the kind of thing a naïve kid thinks. And when I was a child, I thought like a child and reasoned like a child but now . . .

Then a few more years passed. I entered Seminary and began to understand a few things about the divine inspiration of Scripture, about how the Word of God is alive, living, vibrant, sharper than a two-edged sword and cutting clean to the bone of those who read that Word. I began to understand that the living God really can and does encounter his people through his Word and that he’d been doing just that to countless millions of people across the millennia. And so when the evangelist John turns to the reader to say, “These are written that you may believe,” by the Holy Spirit, that is a direct and living address to me as the reader. Maybe all of us are, maybe each of us is, really in the Bible after all. I am in the Bible. This is my story.

And all God’s people said, “How cool is that?”

8. Seeing Beyond Our Ability

Illustration

Keith Wagner

It is difficult to see things that are beyond our reality. We live lives that are narrowly focused, conditioned by our environment, traditions and habits. The name Hans Lippershey is not a famous one, but he made a tremendous contribution to the world of vision. In l600, he created the first telescope. He was a Dutch spectacle maker. One day two children came into his shop and were playing with some of the lenses scattered around. They put two together which greatly magnified a weathervane across the street. Lippershey capitalized on the discovery and made a profit selling his new lenses to the military.

This all happened in Middleburg, Netherlands. Several others claimed to invent the telescope about the same time. Galileo is the most famous but even he credits Lippershey for its creation. Most everyone doubted the creation at first. It was hard for them in that time to envision things could be magnified. It was beyond their reality. Even when our vision is enhanced by technology it is sometimes impaired by our lack of faith. Ironically, it took two small children at play to make it all happen. An unexplainable event shaped the beliefs of society and enabled them to see.

9. The Greatest Scar Story

Illustration

Christi O. Brown

I can think of no better modern-day illustration of the sacrifice Jesus made for us than a recent story I heard about a woman who is a fit 30-something-year-old. Yet she has a brace on each knee and scars on both, but the scars are not from surgery.

Here's what happened. Several years ago she scooped up her toddler son from the swimming pool and began to walk towards a lounge chair. As she stepped onto the tiled patio, her foot slipped on the wet slick surface. She was also seven months pregnant, and it was one of those moments where you feel like you’re moving in slow motion but there’s nothing you can do to stop the fall.

Within a split second, she knew her momentum was toppling her forward, and she could either face-plant and land on top of both her son and her unborn child, or she could fall on her knees.

Of course, as any loving parent would do, she chose to fall on her knees directly onto the unforgiving concrete. Her knees immediately burst open and blood went everywhere. She ended up needing stitches, which resulted in scars, but her son and unborn child were both unscathed. It is hard for me to tell this story without tearing up, because to me, it serves as a miniscule example of the immense sacrifice and love of Jesus Christ for us. You see, we are the beloved children of God for whom Jesus took the fall. Christ suffered on the cross and endured unimaginable pain for us. His is the greatest scar story ever told.

10. We Want Proof

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

There is a reason why many Christians around the world have latched so quickly and tenaciously onto the discovery of what may be the ossuary or burial box for James, the brother of Jesus. There's a reason why every time archaeologists discover some inscription referring to King David, Pontius Pilate, or some other biblical figure that this news immediately makes a splash in the pages of Christianity Today. Here, we are told, is further "proof" that the stuff in the Bible really did happen! There's a reason why there is now a huge enterprise that is literally scouring the universe for evidence that the formation of the cosmos required the hand of a Creator God. It's not just that we want to meet evolutionary and atheist scientists on their own turf--most folks also quietly hanker for something tangible that can bolster the confidence they have in their faith. Over and again we find ourselves wanting more.

Jesus himself knows that faith is both a blessing and a miracle. That's why he says in verse 29 that while it was one thing for Thomas to believe with Jesus standing right in front of him, it would one day be quite another thing to believe without such undeniable physical proof standing in the same room.

11. The Secret of the Power

Illustration

Brett Blair

Thomas Jefferson ranks as one of our nations greatest intellects but not many people know that he rejected the notion of miracles. When he approached the scriptures he could not tolerate those passages which dealt with the supernatural. So what did he do? He wrote his own bible. In the Thomas Jefferson Bible you will find only the moral teachings and historical events of Jesus' life. No virgin birth. No healing of Jairus' daughter. No walking on water. And, no resurrection. Here is how the his bible ends: "There laid they Jesus and rolled a great stone at the mouth of the sepulcher and departed."

It is very easy to rewrite history. To say, "that did not happen." But the story remains that the disciples were witnesses to these events. Thomas Jefferson is in essence calling the disciples liars and that they continued throughout the first century, for 70 years, to propagate those lies. Furthermore, Jefferson's Bible has been robbed of its power. I am convinced that the church does not accomplish 2000 years of life inside the walls of a closed dark sepulcher. There is no power in that dark place; rather, the Church is alive because He is alive forevermore.

12. What Anger Leaves Behind

Illustration

Brett Blair

There was a little boy who had a bad temper. His father gave him a bag of nails and told him that every time he lost his temper, he must hammer a nail into the back of the fence.

The first day the boy had driven 37 nails into the fence. Over the next few weeks, as he learned to control his anger, the number of nails hammered daily gradually dwindled down. He discovered it was easier to hold his temper than to drive those nails into the fence.

Finally the day came when the boy didn't lose his temper at all. He told his father about it and the father suggested that the boy now pull out one nail for each day that he was able to hold his temper. The days passed and the young boy was finally able to tell his father that all the nails were gone.

The father took his son by the hand and led him to the fence. He said, "You have done well, my son, but look at the holes in the fence. The fence will never be the same. When you say things in anger, they leave a scar just like this one. You can put a knife in a man and draw it out. It won't matter how many times you say I'm sorry, the wound is still there."

The little boy then understood how powerful his words were. He looked up at his father and said "I hope you can forgive me father for the holes I put in you."

"Of course I can," said the father.

It's not always anger, it is your actions in general. There are no "fresh starts" in life. There is no new beginning. Forgiveness comes easy for many people but the scars of the past, they never go away. Watch what you do today, because sometimes the price isn't worth the reward (or more explicitly stated: what you gain through your anger isn't worth the damage left behind).

13. Thomas - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

If I were to mention the names of certain disciples to you and ask you to write down the first word that comes into your mind, it is unlikely you would come up with the same words. If I were to mention the name of Judas many of you would write down the word "betray" but not all of you. If I were to mention Simon Peter, some of you would write down the word "faith," but not all of you. If I were to mention the names of James and John, some of you would write down the phrase "Sons of Thunder," but not all of you. But when I mention the word Thomas, there is little question about the word most everyone would write down. It would be the word doubt. Indeed, so closely have we associated Thomas with this word, that we have coined a phrase to describe him: "Doubting Thomas."

You may be interested to know that in the first three gospels we are told absolutely nothing at all about Thomas. It is in John's Gospel that he emerges as a distinct personality, but even then there are only 155 words about him. There is not a lot about this disciple in the Bible but there is more than one description.

When Jesus turned his face toward Jerusalem the disciples thought that it would be certain death for all of them. Surprisingly, it was Thomas who said: Then let us go so that we may die with him. It was a courageous statement, yet we don't remember him for that. We also fail to point out that in this story of Thomas' doubt we have the one place in the all the Gospels where the Divinity of Christ is bluntly and unequivocally stated. It is interesting, is it not, that the story that gives Thomas his infamous nickname, is the same story that has Thomas making an earth shattering confession of faith? Look at his confession, "My Lord, and my God." Not teacher. Not Lord. Not Messiah. But God! It is the only place where Jesus is called God without qualification of any kind. It is uttered with conviction as if Thomas was simply recognizing a fact, just as 2 + 2 = 4, and the sun is in the sky. You are my Lord and my God! These are certainly not the words of a doubter.

Unfortunately history has remembered him for this scene where the resurrected Christ made an appearance to the disciples in a home in Jerusalem. Thomas was not present and when he heard about the event he refused to believe it. Maybe he was the forerunner of modern day cynicism. Maybe the news simply sounded too good to be true. Thomas said: Unless I feel the nail prints in his hands I will not believe.

Now I cannot help but notice that Thomas has separated himself from the disciples and therefore, in his solitude, missed the resurrection appearance. I think that john is suggesting to us that Christ appears most often within the community of believers that we call the church, and when we separate ourselves from the church we take a chance on missing his unique presence.

But the story doesn't end here. The second time Jesus made his appearance Thomas was present with the disciples and this time he too witnessed the event. This time he believed. What can we learn from the life of Thomas?

1. Jesus did not blame him.
2. The most endearing things in life can never be proven.
3. We must move beyond doubt to faith.

14. Doubting Thomas

Illustration

Richard A. Jensen

Tommy Russo tried and tried to go to church with his wife. Sophia Russo was the one who had been brought up in the church. Her parents had been very devout Christian people. With Tommy's parents it was completely different. They didn't attend church and they didn't make their kids attend either. At this point in their marriage, therefore, Tommy and Sophia Russo faced a real dilemma. Tommy had promised he'd give church a try. And he did. But the whole thing left him sort of cold. He just couldn't buy it all. There was just too much there that was unbelievable!

Tommy tried talking to Sophia about it one Sunday after they had been to church. "Can't we find some kind of compromise on this religion thing?" Tommy asked. But Sophia would have none of it. Her Christian faith meant the world to her. She was not about to compromise. She was not about to give up her faith practices. "You promised," she said to Tommy. "You said you would give it a try."

"But I have tried," Tommy replied. "How long do I have to go on with this anyway? I've been to church with you just about every Sunday for this whole first year of our marriage. Isn't that trying? What more do you want from me? Enough is enough. There's just too much about church and all that I just can't believe."

"What can you believe about it all?" Sophia asked.

"Jesus," Tommy blurted out after a few moments of silence. "I like Jesus. He makes a lot of sense to me at times. There's some very good advice about life in his teachings. But to buy into Jesus I've got to buy into too much other stuff that is not helpful at all. In fact, it just confuses the issue. Take this Virgin Mary business, for example. I mean, come on! Get serious. Stuff like that just doesn't happen. And what's the use of it anyway? Does it make Jesus any better than he already is? I don't think so. And then there's the miracles and the final miracle: 'he was raised from the dead.' I feel the same way about that as I do about his birth. So what? Jesus was a great man, a great teacher. I don't need all this miracle business. I honestly doubt that it really happened that way. Maybe the disciples just made it up for all we know."

At the end of their discussion, however, Tommy agreed to keep his promise and go with her on Sundays for a few more months. One Sunday the gospel reading caught him up short. It was about Thomas. That was his name. Thomas had doubts. So did he. He liked what Thomas had to say about Jesus being raised from the dead. "Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands, and put my finger in the mark of the nails and my hand in his side, I will not believe." Tommy Russo couldn't have put it better himself. "If only I could see his body," he thought to himself. "If only I could touch his body. That's the way we Thomas people are."

Tommy's mind got fixed on the Bible's doubting Thomas. That's all he could think about for the rest of the service. That's what he thought about when he and Sophia went up for communion. "If only I could see his body. If I only could touch his body." And then Tommy's reverie was interrupted by the pastor's words. The words jolted his consciousness. It was just a simple word. "This is my body given for you."

15. Are We Brave enough to Bet It All?

Illustration

Thomas Long

In John Updike's A Month of Sundays, there is a parable about how the Christian faith is, indeed, an improbable wager on the impossible possibility. In one episode, a group of men are playing a variation of poker. In this game, each person is dealt several cards, some of them on the table face up and the others concealed in the hand.

In one round, the main character, a man named Thomas, has been dealt a very strong hand, and he decides to bet heavily. As Thomas keeps sweetening the pot and raising the stakes, all of the other players drop out one by one, intimidated by Thomas' hand, that is, all except one player, a stutterer named Fred.

Curiously, Fred appears to have a poor hand; his cards showing on the table are "nondescript garbage." Astonishingly, though, he keeps up the betting pace, calling and raising Thomas at every opportunity. Thomas is puzzled since his own hand is a poker player's dream. It isn't absolutely perfect he is holding one poor card but other than this single little flaw his hand is virtually unbeatable. Why does Fred keep on betting against such odds? Why doesn't he fold?

When the time comes to lay down the cards, though, Thomas is shocked to discover that Fred has the winning hand. When he compares Fred's hand with his, Thomas realizes that there was only one card in the whole deck that could have made Thomas the loser, and that was the one bad card that Thomas had hidden in his hand. If Thomas had held any other card, he would have won, and won big. In other words, Fred was betting everything everything on the tiny chance that Thomas held this one losing card. Dumbfounded, Thomas thinks to himself: Fred had stayed, then, against me when only one card in the deck ... could have made my hand a loser to his. Two truths dawned upon me:

He was crazy. He had won. He had raised not on a reasonable faith but on a virtual impossibility; and he had been right. "Y-y-y-you didn't feel to me like you had it," he told me, raking it in.

16. A Palace in Heaven

Illustration

Richard J. Fairchild

There is a legend from the first century about the disciple Thomas who was sent by Christ to India.

Thomas was employed by the local king Gundaphorus to build a new palace, and he was given money to buy materials and hire workmen. Thomas gave the money to the poor, but always assured the king that his palace was rising steadily. The king became suspicious when Thomas kept putting off his requests to see the work in progress and finally sent for Thomas. "Have you built my Palace?", he asked.

"Yes", Thomas replied.

"Then we shall go and see it now," said the King.

Thomas answered: "You can not see it now, but when you depart this life you shall see it. I have built you a palace in heaven by giving your money to the poor and needy of your kingdom."

The King was furious and had Thomas thrown in prison. All that night he considered how he should put Thomas to death. It seems good to me, the king said, to flay him and burn him with fire. But that night the king's brother dies and sees the kings palace in heaven which has been built by Thomas' charitable work. He makes a request to return to earth. His dead body is suddenly revived; he tells his brother of the magnificent palace awaiting him in heaven. Thomas is freed from prison and the king and his brother become Christians.

17. No One is Exempt From Doubt

Illustration

Brett Blair

Some of you may remember Dave Dravecky, former pitcher for the San Francisco Giants. At the peak of his career in 1991 he lost his pitching arm to cancer. Those who watched his 1989 comeback will never forget the Montreal game. Dave's left arm snapped with a deafening crack that could be heard in the stands. The comeback quickly ended. It was a devastating experience. It is bad enough to have cancer, let alone face the amputation of an arm, but then on top of that, to lose a promising career as a major league baseball player. Naturally Dave was filled with many questions.

During his struggles, letters of encouragement poured in from all over the country. Most were letters of encouragement. Some were looking for answers to life's questions. They had seen him keep his faith, and they wanted to know how he had done it. But one day he received this letter:

Dear Mr. Dravecky, If there is a God who cares so much about you, why did he allow you to have the surgery in the first place? I have lived 41 years in this old world and have yet to see any piece of genuine evidence that there is anything real about any of those religious beliefs you talk about. God certainly does not love me and has never done a single thing to express that love for me. I have had to fight for everything I ever got in life. Nobody cares about what happens to me and I don't care about anybody else either. Can't you see the truth that religion is nothing more than a crutch used by a lot of weaklings who can't face reality and that the church is nothing but a bunch of hypocrites who care nothing for each other and whose faith extends not to their actions or daily lives but is only just a bunch of empty phrases spouted off to impress others?

A cruel letter, isn't it? How would you have responded to it? He sent a letter to the man and said that he had faced his own doubts and that faith was not always easy. He wrote, "I am convinced that there is a God. That no matter what happens to me, there is a purpose for it and behind that purpose stands a loving, caring God." Dravecky had come to know the same Lord who came back for Thomas. The same Resurrected Jesus who stood before all the disciples and said, "Peace be with you, Thomas. Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."

We all have doubts: Thomas, Dravecky, the letter writer. No one is exempt. What Jesus says to you is: You will be blessed if in the midst of those doubts you believe.

18. Regardless of the Cost?

Illustration

Bryn MacPhail

There's a vast difference between intellectual faith and genuine faith. In the late 1890's, a famous tightrope walker strung a wire across Niagara Falls. As 10,000 people watched, he inched his way along the wire from one side of the falls to the other.

When he got to the other side, the crowd cheered wildly. Finally, the tightrope walker was able to quiet the crowd and shouted to them, 'Do you believe in me?'. The crowd shouted back, 'We believe! We believe!'.

Again he quieted the crowd and shouted to them, 'I'm going back across the tightrope but this time I'm going to carry someone on my back. Do you believe I can do that?'. The crowd yelled back, 'We believe! We believe!'. He quieted the crowd one more time and then asked them, 'Who will be that person?'.

The crowd suddenly became silent. Not a single person was willing to apply the very truth that they professed to believe in that the tightrope walker could cross the falls with a person on his back.

We may believe that Jesus is the Son of God, but does our faith surpass the faith of demons? Are we willing trust our lives with Jesus? Are we willing to follow Him regardless of the cost?

19. An Angel Came to Joseph

Illustration

Samuel G. Candler

We too often forget about poor Joseph. Every year, we tend to focus on the story of Mary. But this year, it's Joseph.

Now, if the angel can appear to Mary, and then also appear to Joseph, there's a lesson in that. That means that the angel can appear to you and me, too. In the Bible, the annunciation does not occur only once, but twice-not just to a woman, but also to a man.

The Bible, then, carries an implicit message that God does appear over and over again, to various sorts of folks. Matthew and Luke both have it right, but they are different stories. God continues to come into the world, but we have to trust other sources!

What are you giving for Christmas this year? I do not mean what are you getting. We all want something wonderful, I am sure. But what are you giving for Christmas?

The greatest gift you can give this year is to believe in someone's dreams. The greatest gift you can give is to have faith in someone else; believe in their dreams. Believe in the dreams of the person you love. Believe in the dream of your husband. Believe in the dream of your wife. Believe in the dreams of your children. Believe in the dream of your hero, your leader, your friend. Believe in their dreams!

20. Faith: Do You Believe?

Illustration

There was a tightrope walker, who did incredible aerial feats. All over Paris, he would do tightrope acts at tremendously scary heights. Then he had succeeding acts; he would do it blindfolded, then he would go across the tightrope, blindfolded, pushing a wheelbarrow. An American promoter read about this in the papers and wrote a letter to the tightrope walker, saying, "Tightrope, I don't believe you can do it, but I'm willing to make you an offer. For a very substantial sum of money, besides all your transportation fees, I would like to challenge you to do your act over Niagara Falls." Now, Tightrope wrote back, "Sir, although I've never been to America and seen the Falls, I'd love to come." Well, after a lot of promotion and setting the whole thing up, many people came to see the event. Tightrope was to start on the Canadian side and come to the American side. Drums roll, and he comes across the rope which is suspended over the treacherous part of the falls blindfolded!! And he makes it across easily. The crowds go wild, and he comes to the promoter and says, "Well, Mr. Promoter, now do you believe I can do it?" "Well of course I do. I mean, I just saw you do it." "No," said Tightrope, "do you really believe I can do it?" "Well of course I do, you just did it." "No, no, no," said Tightrope, "do you believe I can do it?" "Yes," said Mr. Promoter, "I believe you can do it." "Good," said Tightrope, "then you get in the wheel barrow."

The word believe, in Greek means "to live by". This is a nice story...makes you ask, how often do we say that we believe Christ can do it, but refuse to get in the wheelbarrow?

21. Compared Faiths

Illustration

Scott Chambers

Several years ago a scholar by the name of Dr. Harry Rimmer had a friendly discussion with a Muslim teacher in which they compared their faiths.

Dr. Rimmer said “We believe that God has spoken to us in a book, the Bible.”

The Muslim teacher replied, “We believe God has spoken to us in a book, the Koran.”

Rimmer then said, “We believe that God visited this planet in the person of Jesus Christ.”

The Muslim teacher replied, “We believe that God has revealed himself in the prophet Muhammad.”

Rimmer then said “We believe that Jesus Christ died for His people.”

The Muslim replied, “We believe that Muhammad died for his people.”

Rimmer then added, “We believe that Jesus proved His claim, by coming back from the grave.”

The Muslim teacher replied, “We have no record of our prophet after his death.”

22. Historic: The Declaration of Independence

Illustration

Staff

The unanimous Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies in Congress, July 4, 1776

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained, and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies, without the consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighboring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms. Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren.

We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.
We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here.
We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence.

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare.

That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

The signers of the Declaration represented the new states as follows:

New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Background

On July 4, 1776, the Second Continental Congress, meeting in Philadelphia in the Pennsylvania State House (now Independence Hall), approved the Declaration of Independence. Its purpose was to set forth the principles upon which the Congress had acted two days earlier when it voted in favor of Richard Henry Lee's motion to declare the freedom and independence of the 13 American colonies from England. The Declaration was designed to influence public opinion and gain support both among the new states and abroad especially in France, from which the new "United States" sought military assistance.

Although Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Roger Sherman and Robert R. Livingston comprised the committee charged with drafting the Declaration, the task fell to Jefferson, regarded as the strongest and most eloquent writer. The document is mainly his work, although the committee and Congress as a whole made a total of 86 changes to Jefferson's draft.

As a scholar well-versed in the ideas and ideals of the French and English Enlightenments, Jefferson found his greatest inspiration in the language and arguments of English philosopher John Locke, who had justified England's "Glorious Revolution" of 1688 on the basis of man's "natural rights." Locke's theory held that government was a contract between the governed and those governing, who derived their power solely from the consent of the governed and whose purpose it was to protect every man's inherent right to property, life and liberty. Jefferson's theory of "natural law" differed in that it substituted the inalienable right of "the pursuit of happiness" for "property," emphasizing that happiness is the product of civic virtue and public duty. The concept of the "pursuit of happiness" originated in the Common Sense School of Scottish philosophy, of which Lord Kames was the best-known proponent.

Jefferson emphasized the contractual justification for independence, arguing that when the tyrannical government of King George III of England repeatedly violated "natural law, " the colonists had not only the right but the duty to revolt.

The assembled Continental Congress deleted a few passages of the draft, and amended others, but outright rejected only two sections: 1) a derogatory reference to the English people; 2) a passionate denunciation of the slave trade. The latter section was left out, as Jefferson reported, to accede to the wishes of South Carolina and Georgia, who wanted to continue the importation of slaves. The rest of the draft was accepted on July 4, and 56 members of Congress began their formal signing of the document on August 2, 1776.

23. Wisdom from Helen Keller

Illustration

Helen Keller

I believe that we can live on earth according to the teachings of Jesus, and that the greatest happiness will come to the world when man obeys His commandment "Love one another."

I believe that we can live on earth according to the fulfillment of God's will, and that when the will of God is done on earth as it is done in heaven, every man will love his fellowmen, and act toward them as he desires they should act toward him. I believe that the welfare of each is bound up in the welfare of all.

I believe that life is given us so we may grow in love, and I believe that God is in me as the sun is in the color and fragrance of a flower—the Light in my darkness, the Voice in my silence.

I believe that only in broken gleams has the Sun of Truth yet shone upon men. I believe that love will finally establish the kingdom of God on earth, and that the cornerstones of that kingdom will be liberty, truth, brotherhood, and service.

24. Doubt: The Prelude to Faith

Illustration

William L. Self

Several years ago I spoke on a university campus, and when I finished speaking, a young man accosted me in the hall. He said, "I don't like what you had to say in there." I asked him to tell me which part he didn't like.

"He replied, "Actually, I didn't hear you. I just don't like preachers." I agreed that I have some trouble with preachers too.

I said, "Well, what are you?"
And he said, "I'm a seeker."

I said, "That's interesting. Where do you meet?"
He said, "We don't meet."

I said, "What are you seeking?"
He said, "We're seeking truth."

I said, "Well, what have you read?"
He said, "I haven't read anything in particular."

We went on with the conversation for a short while. Finally, I looked at him and said, "I don't think you are a seeker. I think you are a runner. I think you are hiding. For you see, not to decide is to decide. You have decided that you want to hide in unbelief."

The disbelief and the doubting for Thomas was not something that was rooted in fact. It was something that was inside of Thomas.

Doubt is like a front porch. All of us go through it before we get into the house of faith.

25. Is There Anyone Else Up There?

Illustration

Joel D. Kline

You may know the old story of a hiker who comes too close to the edge of the Grand Canyon, losing his footing and plunging over the side. Yet, amazingly, the hiker is able to grab hold of a small bush. Filled with fear, the hiker calls out, "Is anyone up there? Can anyone help me?"

A reassuring voice promptly answers, "I'm here; I'm the Lord your God."

Overjoyed, the hiker responds, "I'm so glad you came along, God. I can't hold on much longer."

"Before I help you," God responds, "I want to know if you believe in me."

"Yes," says the hiker. "I go to church every Sunday, I read my Bible, I pray daily, I even contribute some money to the offering."

"But do you really believe in me?" questions God.

Growing more and more desperate, the hiker shouts, "Lord, you can't believe how much I believe in you! I really believe!"

"Good," says God. "Let go of the branch."

"But, God. . ." protests the hiker. Once again God responds, "If you really believe in me, let go of the branch."

The hiker is silent for a few moments, then shouts, "Is anybody else up there?"

26. I Believe in Miracles

Illustration

Erwin Drake

I believe for every drop of rain that falls, a flower grows;
I believe that somewhere in the darkest night, a candle glows;
I believe for everyone who goes astray, someone will come to show the way;
I believe above the storm the smallest prayer will still be heard;
I believe that Someone in the great somewhere hears every word;
Every time I hear a newborn baby cry, or touch a leaf, or see the sky,
Then I know why, I believe.

27. Decisions Based on Integrity

Illustration

Keith Wagner

Adrian Thomas held a bonfire out behind his drugstore in Meyersdale, PA, which his family owned and operated for three generations. During the winter in 1992, he came to a fateful decision. He had seen too many deaths of his friends caused by lung cancer and heart disease. For ninety-six years, his family business sold tobacco products. On that day, Thomas, his family members, and his employees boxed up all the cigars, snuff, and pipe-tobacco products and piled them in the middle of the parking lot. Thomas then struck a match and used his state tobacco license to start the fire. A crowed gathered and Thomas told the local media he could no longer put profits ahead of the health of his patrons. Perhaps that single event didn't change the smoking habits in society and other stores probably absorbed profits, but, this was not a decision based on economics, Thomas was responding from his own sense of integrity. (from God's Little Lessons on Life for Dad, Honor Books)

It took Thomas years to change his family business. Thankfully, he made a commitment and like the first son in our story, acted out of a sense of integrity.

28. Believing Is Beyond Seeing

Illustration

H. Lindsell

D.L. Moody often told this experience: "Mr. Moody, what do you do with that?" "I do not do anything with it." "How do you understand it?" "I do not understand it." "How do you explain it." "I do not explain it." "What do you do with it?" "I do not do anything with it." "You do not believe it, do you?" "Oh, yes, I believe it." "Well, you don't accept anything you can't understand, do you?" "Yes, I certainly do. There are lots of things I do not understand, but I believe them. I do not know anything about higher mathematics, but I believe in them. I do not understand astronomy, but I believe in astronomy...A man told me a while ago he would not believe a thing he had never seen, and I asked him if he had ever seen his own brain? Did you ever notice that the things at which men cavil most are the very things on which Christ has set His seal?"

When a liberal preacher declared that the story of Jonah and the whale was a myth, reporters asked Mr. Moody his opinion of the question. His reply, contained in four words, was telegraphed far and wide: "I stand by Jonah."

29. Make a Decision

Illustration

Robert AuBuchon

Ed Young, pastor of the Second Baptist Church of Houston, Texas, tells of one event in his call to the ministry.

While I attended the University of Alabama, I got away from Bible study and away from the church. I had a friend name Walter Carroll, who was an atheist. He was a good guy, though. One Sunday afternoon he looked at me and said, "Eddie, do you believe there's a God??" I said, "Sure, Walter, I believe there is a God." He said, "You don't live like it." I said, "What do you mean?" He said, "You live just like I do. I'm an atheist. I don't believe there's a God, and I live like there's no God. We're buddies. You do everything I do. You say there is a God, and yet you don't live like there's a God. Don't you know that, if there is a God, if you can get to know Him and live the way He wants you to live, that's the most important thing in life?"

Ed Young goes on to say, "That was the greatest sermon I have ever heard. God used the mouth of an atheist. I'll never forget it. I couldn't answer. I went to my room, dropped on my knees and said, Lord, I know you're there. I believe Jesus is Your Son. I've gotten away from that? Just lead me. I'm yours."

Do you believe there's a God? The most natural response is "of course!" Our lives, the way we live - do they support our belief of God? Many of us have wavered between belief and unbelief in both thought and action. It's time to make a decision.

30. Death and Resurrection

Illustration

We, as human beings, whoever we are and whatever station in life we are in, all stand on common ground when we realize that we all at sometime in life fear death, we all live in the presence of death, that all men, in some way or another, have been hurt by death. And it does not only touch the life of the elderly. In his preface of "Bread For the World", Author Simon reminds us that before we complete reading this brief preface that four people in the world will have died of starvation, most of them children. So no matter who you are, whether you are in the sunset years and expect to live fewer years than you have lived to date, or whether you are just beginning life's journey—death is real. All of the wars in the world have not increased the death toll by one. It robs people of valuable years of their life but it in no way increases the death toll, for all of us, one day, shall have to go through the experience of death.

I have always wondered about the cynics and non-believers. What do they do at Easter? Have you ever wondered about that. On that day when the Christian church joyfully celebrates the resurrection of Jesus Christ, what do they do. Humanism is all right for the classroom, but it leaves you nothing at an icy graveside. It is precisely at that point that Christianity responds: Yes, we shall see our loved ones again and all be reunited.

Some demand that they need proof and documentation. I wonder what kind proof that they desire. There is more documented evidence that Jesus Christ rose from the dead than there is that Julius Caesar ever lived. There is more evidence of the resurrection than there is that Alexander the Great died at age 33. I have always found it interesting that some will accept thousands of facts for which there are only shreds of evidence, but in the face of overwhelming evidence of the resurrection they cast a skeptical doubt, because it is so unique. We say that we want the facts. Well the facts are that in the history of the ancient world the resurrection has been attested to as much as most of the events that we routinely accept and read in the history books.

In the early nineties the ABC news show 20/20 had an interesting segment on the shroud of Turin. If you were completely out of touch at that time and have not heard of the shroud of Turin, let me tell you that it is supposed to be the cloth that Jesus was buried in. And on this cloth is an imprint of the person of Jesus. It is now housed in a cathedral in Turin, Italy. Several years ago an international team of scientists, consisting of Christians, Jews, Moslems, and non-believers, set about to prove or disprove the story behind this ancient cloth. The results of their findings were published in an issue of National Geographic magazine.

The interesting thing to me about the 20/20 story was an interview that they had with one of the scientists, an Air Force colonel who was a specialist in laser technology. He openly admitted that he began the project not only as a non-Christian, but as a person who was openly anti-religious. I relished this opportunity, he said, to debunk what I considered a childish myth. Haraldo Rivera asked him: Now that you have spent four years on this project what is your response. His response not only shocking, but it was shocking that 20/20 allowed it to go on the air. He said: After four years on this project, I now fall upon my knees and worship a resurrected Christ.

It would be nice if we could hold some physical evidence in our hands to prove it all, but I would mislead you this Easter Day if I left the impression that the resurrection was a matter of fact. For in the end, the resurrection is a religious belief. In the end you cannot prove it or disprove it. And that is why some brilliant people believe and why some brilliant people do not believe. Because you cannot prove it one way or the other. There just are not any photographs. In the end we must fall back upon the words of the resurrected Christ to the disciple Thomas: Thomas, you have believed because you have seen. Blessed are those who have not seen, and yet believe.

31. Peace Be With You...It Already Is!

Illustration

Thomas Long

Theologian Karl Barth once remarked that to say the old line from the creed, "I believe in the Holy Catholic Church" does not mean that we believe in the church. It means rather to believe that God is present and at work in the church, that "in this assembly, the work of the Holy Spirit takes place. ... We do not believe in the Church: but we do believe that in this congregation the work of the Holy Spirit becomes an event."

32. A Lifelong Allegiance to God

Illustration

King Duncan

The late Danny Thomas lost his life savings of $600.00 at a time when he was out of work. He and his wife, Rosie, had a baby on the way, and they needed money. Danny worked at part-time jobs so Rosie could buy groceries. He also borrowed money from friends. It was a tough time in his life. A week before the baby was born, Danny had the grand total of seven dollars and eighty-five cents to his name. What would he do? "My despair led me to my first exposure to the powers of faith," Danny would later recall.

On Sunday morning Danny went to church. When the offering plate was passed he put in his "usual one dollar." But something unexpected happened that day. A special missions offering was taken. The priest explained where the mission offering would go, and Danny felt he had to give something. "I got carried away," Danny said, "and ended up giving my seven dollars." He had given away all his money that Sunday. What in the world had he done? He walked up to the altar rail, got on his knees and prayed aloud. "Look, I've given my last seven bucks," he prayed. "I need it back tenfold because I've got a kid on the way, and I have to pay the hospital bill." He went home with a mere eighty-five cents in his pocket all the money he had in the world. "You won't believe this," Danny Thomas later wrote, "but the next morning the phone rang in the rooming house hall." It was a job offer. He was offered a part in a commercial. The job wasn't much but the pay was good seventy-five dollars. "I literally dropped the telephone receiver," Danny remembered. "First I whooped with joy; then an eerie feeling came over me." He remembered what he had prayed at church the day before. "The seventy-five-dollar fee," he said, "unheard of for me at that time, was almost exactly ten times the amount of money I had donated to the church."

The important truth about this story is not that Danny Thomas received a tenfold return on his money. He might have done just as well at the racetrack. The important thing was Danny Thomas' lifelong allegiance to God. Those of you who know his story know that St. Jude's Hospital for Children in Memphis Tennessee stands today as silent testimony to that allegiance. Often when God asks us, "What will you give?" we take the bit that we can spare, the part we can easily give and offer it to God. The question is one of total allegiance. How committed are you to God?

33. It Is God's Will to Heal

Illustration

Glenn Pease

Modern doctors have confirmed that one of the keys to healing is the will. Those who believe God is willing to heal them have a better chance of experiencing a miracle. Those who do not believe that God is willing to heal can die, even when it is not medically necessary. Dr. Bernie Siegal in his book, Love, Medicine & Miracles, has many examples. He specializes in cancer surgery, and has many examples of people who are fatalists about cancer. When they hear that they have it, they lock in on the idea that death is inevitable, and God is not willing to deviate from the statistics.

Irving was a financial advisor, and when he was told he had six months to live with his liver cancer, he refused to think otherwise. He said, "I've spent my whole life making predictions based on statistics. Statistics tell me I am suppose to die. If I don't die, my whole life doesn't make sense." He went home and died on time.

15 to 20% of his cancer patients do this, for they say there is no willingness in the universe that it be otherwise. But Dr. Siegal started a therapy group called, Exceptional Cancer Patients. He discovered there are another 15 to 20% of his patients with the same cancers who refused to believe there is no willingness in God to heal them. In fact, they believe just the opposite. They believe it is His will to heal no matter how bad they are, and how grim the statistics. These people break all the rules, and like the leper in our text, they walk away clean from hopeless situations.

Miracles take place when people are convinced someone is willing to heal them. These exceptional cancer patients refuse to be victims. They are the doctors worst patients. They will not follow the herd and do as they are told. They question everything, and demand answers and explanations for everything, and if it doesn't make sense to them, they won't do it. They are independent, but they are the ones who are most likely to get well. Those who never question, and just go along with the routine, are ideal patients, but they are the ones most likely to die.

34. Sowing the Seed

Illustration

David E. Leininger

One of William Barclay's friends tells this story. In the church where he worshiped there was a lonely old man, old Thomas. He had outlived all his friends and hardly anyone knew him. When Thomas died, this friend had the feeling that there would be no one to go to the funeral so he decided to go, so that there might be someone to follow the old man to his last resting-place.

There was no one else, and it was a miserable wet day. The funeral reached the cemetery, and at the gate there was a soldier waiting. An officer, but on his raincoat there were no rank badges. He came to the grave side for the ceremony, then when it was over, he stepped forward and before the open grave swept his hand to a salute that might have been given to a king. The friend walked away with this soldier, and as they walked, the wind blew the soldier's raincoat open to reveal the shoulder badges of a brigadier general.

The general said, "You will perhaps be wondering what I am doing here. Years ago Thomas was my Sunday School teacher; I was a wild lad and a sore trial to him. He never knew what he did for me, but I owe everything I am or will be to old Thomas, and today I had to come to salute him at the end." Thomas did not know what he was doing.

No preacher or teacher ever does. Keep sowing the seed. We can leave the rest to God, including keeping the fire going. And that is GOOD news for all us tenant farmers.

35. !!!

Illustration

John H. Krahn

With the coming of the Holy Spirit an exclamation point was added to the Christian witness. Excitement had arrived. Power was present. Unbelief vanished. Fear fled. God, full throttle, was busy putting punch into preaching - cracking walls of unbelief, and giving the apostles a spiritual trip that they had never imagined possible.

At Pentecost the church is born. It had ceased to be an expectant enclave and now becomes a witnessing community. What emerged that day was a congregation filled with the power, excited over the message of salvation through Jesus Christ, alive at worship, consumed with love for one another, and devoted to the Lord. Their ministry was so positive that Luke tells us that the whole city was favorable to them.

We all get excited over the early success of the Christian Church, for everyone likes to hear a success story. In recent history, there have been fewer success stories in the church. In contemporary America, a congregation merely holding its own is seen as doing exceptionally well. The church has developed a failure mentality. At times even its leadership and its pastors speak in terms of its lessening influence and its ineffective witness. Disgraceful! All hell rejoices over such negatives.

When I recite the Creed every Sunday at our services, I believe what I say. "I believe in the Holy Ghost, the holy Christian Church." I really do. And I know you do also. I not only believe the church will remain, but I also believe it will flourish. The promises of God and the powerful Spirit are still with us!

There is no dream inspired by God and having the blessing of his Spirit that is unattainable for us. As a salesman member of our parish put it to me, "We have the greatest product there is, Jesus Christ." To which I might add, "We have a great area to market it. We all live in communities stocked with thousands of potential customers. In most cases only forty percent of them are worshiping regularly." I have only the highest hopes for the church’s future.

"I believe in the Holy Spirit." Pentecost continues to happen! The Spirit’s power is ours! We must seize the moment and become a dynamic church in every way to the glory of God until the Lord comes again!

36. We Believe You

Illustration

King Duncan

I ran across a beautiful story recently about a woman named Rosemary who works in the Alzheimer’s Unit of a nursing home. Rosemary and a colleague named Arlene brought the residents of the home together one Good Friday afternoon to view Franco Zeffirelli’s acclaimed production Jesus of Nazareth. They wondered whether these elderly Alzheimer’s patients would even know what was going on, but they thought it might be worth the effort.

When they finally succeeded in getting everyone into position, they started the video. Rosemary was pleasantly surprised at the quiet attention being paid to the screen. At last came the scene where Mary Magdalene comes upon the empty tomb and sees Jesus’ body not there. An unknown man, in reality the risen Christ, asks Mary why she is looking for the living among the dead. Mary runs as fast as she can back to the disciples and tells Peter and the rest with breathless excitement, "He’s alive! I saw Him, I tell you! He’s alive." The doubt in their eyes causes Mary to pull back. "You don’t believe me . . . You don’t believe me!"

From somewhere in the crowd of Alzheimer’s patients came the clear, resolute voice of Esther, one of the patients. "WE BELIEVE YOU," she said, "WE BELIEVE YOU!"

Well, Esther, I believe it too. The evidence is overwhelming, and life makes no sense without it. Jesus Christ rose from the dead.

37. Do an About-Face

Illustration

Staff

Professor Drummond once described a man going into one of our after meetings and saying he wanted to become a Christian.

"Well, my friend, what is the trouble?"

He doesn't like to tell. He is greatly agitated. Finally he says, "The fact is, I have overdrawn my account" a polite way of saying he has been stealing.

"Did you take your employer's money?"

"Yes."

"How much?"

"I don't know. I have never kept account of it."

"Well, you have an idea you stole $1,500 last year?"

"I am afraid it is that much."

"Now, look here, sir, I don't believe in sudden work; don't steal more than a thousand dollars this next year, and the next year not more than five hundred, and in the course of the next few years you will get so that you won't steal any. If your employer catches you, tell him you are being converted; and you will get so that you won't steal any by and by."

My friends, the thing is a perfect farce! "Let him that stole, steal no more," that is what the Bible says. It is right about face.

Take another illustration. Here comes a man, and he admits that he gets drunk every week. That man comes to a meeting, and wants to be converted. Shall I say, "Don't you be in a hurry. I believe in doing the work gradually. Don't you get drunk and knock your wife down more than once a month?" Wouldn't it be refreshing to his wife to go a whole month without being knocked down? Once a month, only twelve times in a year! Wouldn't she be glad to have him converted in this new way! Only get drunk after a few years on the anniversary of your wedding, and at Christmas, and then it will be effective because it is gradual!

Oh! I detest all that kind of teaching. Let us go to the Bible and see what that old Book teaches. Let us believe it, and go and act as if we believed it, too. Salvation is instantaneous. I admit that a man may be converted so that he cannot tell when he crossed the line between death and life, but I also believe a man may be a thief one moment and a saint the next. I believe a man may be as vile as hell itself one moment, and be saved the next.

Christian growth is gradual, just as physical growth is; but a man passes from death unto everlasting life quick as an act of the will "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life."

38. A Seeking Doubt

Illustration

Mickey Anders

Someone described Thomas' doubt as a "seeking doubt, a doubt that wants not to continue to doubt but to come to believe."

Thomas makes it clear to us that there is more than one kind of doubt. There is the kind of doubt that does not want to believe, that reaches for arguments in order to deny the affirmations of the faith. But there is also that "seeking doubt." This is a person who earnestly wants to believe but honestly admits that he struggles to understand. This kind of doubt actually energizes and expands faith.

39. We Believe You

Illustration

King Duncan

I ran across a beautiful story about a woman named Rosemary who works in the Alzheimer’s Unit of a nursing home. Rosemary and a colleague named Arlene brought the residents of the home together one Good Friday afternoon to view Franco Zeffirelli’s acclaimed production Jesus of Nazareth. They wondered whether these elderly Alzheimer’s patients would even know what was going on, but they thought it might be worth the effort.

From somewhere in the crowd of Alzheimer’s patients came the clear, resolute voice of Esther, one of the patients. "WE BELIEVE YOU," she said, "WE BELIEVE YOU!"

Well, Esther, I believe it too. The evidence is overwhelming, and life makes no sense without it. Jesus Christ rose from the dead.

Note: We don't know the source of this story. Treat it as a modern parable.

40. Santa in a UFO

Illustration

Owen Edwards

On December 16, 1965, NASA astronauts Wally Schirra Jr. and Thomas P. Stafford contacted Mission Control in Houston, Texas, to report a UFO sighting. Mission Control engineers listened tensely as the astronauts aboard Gemini 6 described the unusual aircraft they spotted as they orbited the earth.

“I see a command module and eight smaller modules in front,” Stafford said. “The pilot of the command module is wearing a red suit.” The Houston lab was silent, waiting for more details on this UFO, when Wally Schirra began playing “Jingle Bells” on his harmonica, while Thomas Stafford stood in the background and shook a set of tiny sleigh bells.

It was a little Christmas prank they had planned for weeks before the Gemini’s launch. Today, Wally Schirra’s harmonica sits in a special display case in the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum. It is, according to historians, the first musical instrument ever played in space.

41. We Don’t Have to Sneak In

Illustration

Adrian Dieleman

The night before a camping trip one boy was staying at the home of another when suddenly he realized he forgot his fishing gear. "Let's run to my house and get it," he said. "Isn't it too late?" asked his friend. "Everybody will be sleeping."

"We'll sneak in," said the first boy. "Come on."

When they got to his house all the doors were locked. He decided to pry the screen off his bedroom window and enter that way. He tried to be quiet, but the noise woke his parents. His dad grabbed a baseball bat and went to investigate. The boy had one leg in the window when his dad yelled, "Stop, or I'll hit you!"

The boy froze. "Don't! It's me, Dad!" he said.

His father flicked on a light. "Why didn't you ring the doorbell?" he said. "You didn't have to try and sneak in."

The front door was available to him but he chose another way. So often that's the tempted to try it our way instead of the through the gate available, but the consequences of the short cut are far greater than the responsibilities at the front door.

42. Luke's Stories

Illustration

Richard A. Jensen

Luke is fond of telling stories of faith. In his stories Luke narrates scenes in which trust in the spoken word from God is the very essence of faith.

It all begins with an old priest named Zechariah. This is the first story that Luke tells us in his Gospel. One day, Luke writes, the lot fell to Zechariah to enter the temple of the Lord and burn incense. As he was about to perform this sacred task, however, an angel of the Lord appeared to him standing just to the right of the altar. Zechariah was troubled. Fear fell upon him. The angel spoke words of comfort to Zechariah. "Do not be afraid, Zechariah," the angel said, "for your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you will name him John" (Luke 1:13). The angel Gabriel went on to announce to Zechariah that his son John would be filled with the Holy Spirit and would make the way ready for the Messiah to come. Zechariah had heard a word spoken to him from God. Zechariah had heard a word from Gabriel announcing new realities that were to come to pass.

Of such stuff is faith composed as Luke tells the story. Faith, or unfaith! Zechariah heard the word from God. He did not believe it! "How will I know that this is so?" Zechariah demanded of the angel (Luke 1:18). "I'm an old man and my wife is old too. How can this word be?" "I am Gabriel," the angel shot back. "How will I know?" said Zechariah. "I am Gabriel," came the reply. And the angel continued. "... because you did not believe my words, which will be fulfilled in their time, you will become mute, unable to speak, until the day these things occur" (Luke 1:20). "You did not believe my words." That is the heart of Zechariah's unbelief. Mary is next in line. Six months into Elizabeth's pregnancy Gabriel spoke words from God to Mary. "Hail, O favored one, the Lord is with you" (Luke 1:28).

That was Gabriel's greeting to Mary. Like Zechariah before her, Mary was troubled and afraid at the sound of the angel's voice. Gabriel spoke to her as he had spoken to Zechariah: "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And now, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you will name him Jesus" (Luke 1:31). Mary, like Zechariah, heard a word spoken to her from God. Mary, too, is unsure. "How can this be," she protests, "since I am a virgin?" (Luke 1:34). Gabriel told Mary that it will be because the Holy Spirit will make it happen. Mary was satisfied. She spoke great words of faith. "Here I am," she said, "the servant of the Lord; let it be with me according to your word" (Luke 1:38). "You did not believe my words," said Gabriel to Zechariah. That is the heart of Zechariah's unfaith. "...let it be with me according to your word," were Mary's words to Gabriel. This is the heart of Mary's faith.

Faith is called into being by a word spoken from God. A centurion in Capernaum grasped this reality very well. "Only say the word ...," the centurion said. Luke presents this rather unlikely fellow, this centurion, this stranger to Israel, this foreigner as a model of faith. "Only say the word ...."

43. Affirming What We Believe

Illustration

William G. Carter

In his autobiography, actor Alec Guinness tells a story that might keep every pastor and church school teacher awake at night. He was a teenager and it was the morning of his confirmation. The classes were finished. The students' heads had been filled full of Bible stories and theological doctrines. Guinness says HolyTrinityChurch in Eastbourne was crammed with confirmation candidates, their parents, friends, schoolteachers, and sponsors. At the appropriate moment, he notes, "The girls, mostly in grey uniforms, filed up to kneel at the Bishop's left hand and the boys, in blue serge, to his right. I remember white episcopal hands and shaggy black eyebrows. A pale, greenish light filtered through the window-panes, giving a subaqueous hue to the perspiring congregation." Then he adds, "At the age of sixteen, one early summer day, I arose from under the hands of the Bishop of Lewes a confirmed atheist ... With a flash I realized I had never really believed what I had been taught."

I don't know about you, but I am troubled by that story. I believe in Christian education. God's people are called to teach the Christian faith to children, teenagers, and adults. Sunday church school and confirmation classes are important educational activities. The church needs to do these things. And yet, here is the story of a bright, intelligent person who emerged from those experiences, and he did not believe a word of what he learned. As a professional church leader, as a Christian educator, that story bothers me. At a personal level, however, that story haunts me for another reason, namely, that it sounds surprisingly familiar. On a bright Sunday morning, it is easy to affirm what we believe. As the familiar verse we've heard today puts it, "God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but have eternal life." With sunbeams shining through stained glass, I can believe it. But late at night, after the lights are dimmed, sometimes I have my doubts, my questions, my lapses of belief. Perhaps I'm not the only one.

44. The Apostles' Creed

Illustration

Staff

The earliest known mention of the expression "Apostles' Creed" occurs in a letter of AD 390 from a synod in Milan. The most traditional version of the creed is as follows:

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.

I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
      who was conceived by the Holy Spirit
      and born of the virgin Mary.
      He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
      was crucified, died, and was buried;
      he descended to hell.
      The third day he rose again from the dead.
      He ascended to heaven
      and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.
      From there he will come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,
      the holy catholic* church,
      the communion of saints,
      the forgiveness of sins,
      the resurrection of the body,
      and the life everlasting. Amen.

*that is, the true Christian church of all times and all places

The Old Roman Symbol (Latin: vetus symbolum romanum), or Old Roman Creed, is an earlier and shorter version of the Apostles’ Creed. It was based on the 2nd-century Rule of Faith and the interrogatory declaration of faith for those receiving Baptism. It is said that this earlier and first adopted version was based on the Trinitarian formula found in The Great Commission in Matthew 28:19. It was widely accepted in the 4th century, that, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, each of the Twelve Apostles contributed an article to the twelve articles of this creed:

I believe in God the Father almighty;
and in Christ Jesus His only Son, our Lord,
Who was born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary,
Who under Pontius Pilate was crucified and buried,
on the third day rose again from the dead,
ascended to heaven,
sits at the right hand of the Father,
whence He will come to judge the living and the dead;
and in the Holy Spirit,
the holy Church,
the remission of sins,
the resurrection of the flesh
(the life everlasting)

The Apostles' Creed (100 A.D.) is the oldest and shortest creed with only 109 words in the traditional version. Only the New Testament creed, "Jesus is Lord," is older. It is also the most often used -- practically every Sunday, except for festivals and seasons when the Nicene Creed is confessed. Undoubtedly, it is the most universal statement of the Christian faith.

By 100 A.D. the Apostles' Creed became the basic statement of faith for the church. In the first century, it was the rule of faith for baptismal candidates. In 390 it became known as the Apostles' Creed, even though it was not written by the apostles but contained the beliefs of the apostles. An ancient legend has it that after Pentecost the apostles agreed on a summary of what they were going to preach. The summary was the Apostles' Creed. Yet, the creed did not reach its final form until the sixth or seventh century. Martin Luther held this creed in such high regard that he used it in his Small Catechism to teach families what a Christian believes. To this day the Small Catechism is used as the basis for youth and adult preparation for church membership in Lutheran churches.

45. A Church with Nothing to Offer

Illustration

Thomas Long

Check out the church ads on the religion page of the Saturday edition of most big city newspapers and you find some impressive sounding places of worship. There, with sleek graphics and Madison Avenue phrases, a few select churches boast of their assets -- their choirs, their friendliness, their powerful preaching, their singles ministries, their ample parking, their family life centers, their sensitive child care, and their compassionate spirit. Some churches, it seems, have it all.

Other churches, however, appear by contrast to have nothing, absolutely nothing. Take, for example, the church depicted in our text for today. Here, we get our first glimpse of the disciples gathered together after the resurrection, the first glimpse, in other words, of the church in its earliest days, and, all in all, it is not a very pretty picture. Near the end of his life, Jesus had carefully prepared his disciples to be a devoted and confident fellowship of faith. They were to be a community of profound love with the gates wide open and the welcome mat always out, but here we find them barricaded in a house with the doors bolted shut. They were to be the kind of people who stride boldly into the world to bear fruit in Jesus' name, a people full of the Holy Spirit performing even greater works than Jesus himself (John 14:12), but here we find them cowering in fear, hoping nobody will find out where they are before they get their alibis straight. In short, we see here the church at its worst -- scared, disheartened and defensive. If this little sealed-off group of Christians were to place one of those cheery church ads in the Saturday newspaper, what could it possibly say? "The friendly church where all are welcome"? Hardly, unless one counts locked doors as a sign of hospitality. "The church with a warm heart and a bold mission"? Actually more like the church with sweaty palms and a timid spirit.

Indeed, John's gospel gives us a snapshot of a church with nothing – no plan, no promise, no program, no perky youth ministry, no powerful preaching, no parking lot, nothing. In fact, when all is said and done, this terrified little band huddled in the corner of a room with a chair braced against the door has only one thing going for it: the risen Christ. And that seems to be the main point of this story. In the final analysis, this is a story about how the risen Christ pushed open the bolted door of a church with nothing, how the risen Christ enters the fearful chambers of every church and fills the place with his own life.

46. And Their Eyes Were Opened

Illustration

Larry Powell

Some years ago, a movie titled Zapata depicted the engaging story of the famous Mexican hero, Zapata. He was to the Mexicans what "El Cid" was to the Spanish: a redeemer of his people. Those who loved Zapata were radically devoted to him and his cause. At the end, when Zapata was ambushed by government troops, the white horse upon which he had led countless charges, escaped into the hills. The peasants violently refused to believe that their leader would have allowed himself to be ambushed and killed, and whenever they caught a glimpse of the white horse in the hills, they claimed that it carried Zapata, signaling to them that he would return. They fully expected the return, but in time, the expectation died.

Although Jesus attempted on several occasions to interpret specific events to his disciples, as well as to prepare them for his certain return, not one of them was prepared. As Carlyle Marney once said, none of them lay hidden in the shrubbery near the tomb ... waiting ... waiting. Judas had gone off somewhere and hanged himself. The others were scattered, afraid, stroking their wounds, trying to recover from the total collaspe of everything. They had not been prepared for the crucifixion, much less the Resurrection. The post-Resurrection appearances mentioned in our scripture caught them totally by surprise. Two observations about the particular appearance described in our text:

1. The two men were on their way to Emmaus, discussing events pertaining to the crucifixion. Jesus caught up to them in the midst of their own journey, becoming a part of it himself, and in the end, baptizing it with his blessing. Those of us in the church believe that this is still the way Christ often comes into our lives. Off on our own journeys, pursuing some goal or objective, totally submerged in our own concerns ... determined, ambitious, outrunning the spiritual life while in full stride toward that which we hope to achieve. And then, it happens. In half-step we are arrested by the sudden awareness of another presence; we had not expected it, nor do we always recognize it immediately. It just abides, and just as with the Emmaus travelers, it comes into clearer focus in due time. As the Holy Spirit accompanies us in our own journeys, it is hoped that somewhere along the way it may be with us as it was with them; "And their eyes were opened and they recognized him" (v. 31).

2. It is significant that Jesus was made known to them in the "breaking of bread." In the upper room Jesus had taken the elements of the Passover meal and transformed them into something completely different. The familiar ritual was changed from remarks about the Passover to references to the "body and blood" of the host. In a very real sense, Jesus’ messianic identity was uniquely made known to them in the breaking of bread in the upper room. Then, at Emmaus, he was again "made known" in the breaking of bread. There are other references to post-Resurrection appearances of Jesus at which his presence was made known around a meal (see Mark 16:14; John 21:9-14). Little wonder that early Christians quickly associated a mystical significance with the meal, more specifically, the Eucharist. Consequently, the church observed communion several times daily with the prayer, "Maranatha" (Come Lord!).

The expected return of Zapata was never fulfilled, and eventually the expectation faded. The unexpected return of Jesus of Nazareth took even his followers by surprise. Ironically, it seems that he must still catch us from behind.

47. Nothing Fills the Vacuum

Illustration

Billy D. Strayhorn

In 1992, the Washington Redskins won the Super Bowl with an explosive victory over the Buffalo Bills. Seventy five thousand people gathered on the mall between the Capitol and the Washington Monument to cheer their team and Coach. Four days later, Chuck Colson called the Redskins' office to see if any football players could attend a rally at a prison the next day. Many of the players had given their life to Christ. Joe Gibbs the head coach answered the phone and told Colson that all the players had left the city for a well-deserved rest. With his characteristic humility, Joe Gibbs asked Colson, "Will I do?"

Colson immediately accepted the offer by the coach of the championship Washington Redskins. Five days after winning the Super Bowl, Joe Gibbs could have opened any door in Washington DC but he was willing to walk behind the locked steel doors of the penitentiary for the District of Columbia to speak to men about his faith in Christ.

Joe Gibbs stood up to speak to the cheers, whistles and applause of 500 prisoners five days after he had won the most prestigious event in pro sports. He told those men:

"A lot of people in the world would probably look at me and say: Man, if I could just coach in the Super Bowl, I'd be happy and fulfilled... But I'm here to tell you, it takes something else in your life besides money, position, football, power, and fame. The vacuum in each of our lives can only be filled through a personal relationship with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Otherwise, I'm telling you, we'll spend the rest of our lives in a meaningless existence. I've seen it in football players' eyes, and I've seen it in men who are on their deathbed. There's nothing else that will fill the vacuum."

48. A Dead Balloon

Illustration

Brian Stofregen

A "dead balloon" -- has no life. It continues to lie wherever you put it. It doesn't move. It has no power.

Take a "dead balloon" and do what Jesus did -- blow in it. What happens? It's full of air; but it is still dead, going nowhere until that power is released. [As an illustration, the "powered balloon" can be released.]

Under the "spirit's/breath's/wind's" power, the balloon can move. It goes out. However, when the wind power within the balloon is released, you don't know where the balloon is going to go; but you know it's going somewhere. (We don't know where the wind comes from or is going.)

Jesus did not give the disciples the Spirit's power so that they could stay behind locked doors in fear. It is given as a power to move people out into the world -- even if we don't always know exactly where we will end up.

What happens to the balloon after it has "spent" its power? It seems dead again. All out of power. It's flat. There's no more "spirit/breath" within it. On one hand we are not like that balloon. Jesus promises that the Spirit will be with us forever. We will never run out of the Spirit's power. The Spirit given to you in baptism remains forever. On the other hand, over and over again in Acts, we read that certain disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit. Their filling didn't just happen once, but over and over again. So we also need to be refilled. Weekly we return to church as a refilling station. To receive Jesus again in the hearing of the word and in the sharing of sacrament and through the fellowship of the saints.

49. Absolute Truth

Illustration

Mickey Anders

In religious circles today, there is a broad discussion about the nature of truth. I have been involved in some of those discussions and listened in on others on Internet discussion groups. Most of them turn into a highly philosophical debate over questions such as these: "Is the Truth objective or subjective?" or "Is the Truth absolute or relative?"

Whether we think philosophically or not, the issue confronts everyone sooner or later. In fact, this issue came up in our church some years ago when a young family visited our church for several months. I have been told that they loved the people, loved the building, loved the programs, but finally decided to find another church. When someone asked them why they left our church, they replied, "Your church doesn't seem to believe in Absolute Truth."

How did they decide that this church did not believe in Absolute Truth? Did someone tell them that? And what did this young family mean by that phrase, "Absolute Truth?" If we don't believe in Absolute Truth, what kind of truth do we believe in? What is so dangerous about this Subjective Truth others condemn? Why is Objective Truth so much better than Subjective Truth? More importantly, where does the Bible discuss the difference between them?

50. I Believe On Authority

Illustration

C.S. Lewis

Believing things "on authority" only means believing them because you have been told them by someone you think trustworthy. Ninety-nine percent of the things you believe are believed on authority. I believe there is such a place as New York. I could not prove by abstract reasoning that there is such a place. I believe it because reliable people have told me so. The ordinary person believes in the solar system, atoms, and the circulation of the blood on authority because the scientists say so. Every historical statement is believed on authority. None of us has seen the Norman Conquest or the defeat of the Spanish Armada. But we believe them simply because people who did see them have left writings that tell us about them; in fact, on authority. A person who balked at authority in other things, as some people do in religion, would have to be content to know nothing all his life.

Showing 1 to 50 of 730 results