Sermon and Worship Resources

Hebrews 4:1-13 · A Sabbath-Rest for the People of God

1 Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none of you be found to have fallen short of it. 2 For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith. 3 Now we who have believed enter that rest, just as God has said, "So I declared on oath in my anger, 'They shall never enter my rest.' " 4 And yet his work has been finished since the creation of the world. For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh day in these words: "And on the seventh day God rested from all his work." 5 And again in the passage above he says, "They shall never enter my rest."

6 It still remains that some will enter that rest, and those who formerly had the gospel preached to them did not go in, because of their disobedience. 7 Therefore God again set a certain day, calling it Today, when a long time later he spoke through David, as was said before: "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts." 8 For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. 9 There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; 10 for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from his own work, just as God did from his. 11 Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall by following their example of disobedience.

12 For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. 13 Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.

Like a Child

Hebrews 4:1—5:10

Sermon
by Lee Ann Dunlap

Angela was still a pre-schooler the Christmas Grandpa Harvey got her the red Radio Flyer wagon, and by summer it had become a popular item in the family's backyard. When her younger sister learned to toddle along sometime later they made a game of pulling each other, often with the help of Mom or Dad.

As is known to happen with siblings, one afternoon the cooperative play turned competitive, then became a heated argument. And so it was that Angela informed her little sister in a physical way that this was indeed her little red wagon, and hers alone. Before their parents could intervene the whole matter was succinctly solved. "Don't cry. It's okay," Angela declared to her sobbing sister with absolute confidence. "I'll just tell Grandpa, and he'll buy you a wagon, too."

Now little red wagons are not a dime a dozen, and Grandpa Harvey was not known to be a doting grandparent, nor was it his habit to lavish toys willy-nilly — even upon his grandchildren. In all her four years of living, Angela had never once asked him for anything more than to sit on his lap, but when the story made its rounds amidst the family grapevine her words of trust found their mark. And as if on cue, her prophecy was fulfilled and a second little red wagon found its way into the backyard, courtesy of Grandpa Harvey. For Grandpa, it was a matter of honor.

It would seem that a child's unqualified trust has the power of nearly supernatural proportion at times, melting the resolve of even the most rigid adults. That power is matched by some children's unlimited capacity to ask for anything from anyone, at anytime — strangers included. Ask any adult with a freezer full of Girl Scout cookies or twenty chocolate candy bars from the fourth grade class fundraiser.

Take for instance eight-year-old Travis and his cousin Lisa, who knocked on an elderly neighbor's door one afternoon with a handful of dried wildflowers and an intriguing business proposal:

"Um, you don't want to buy some weeds, do you?"

"Well, how much do you want for them?"

"Oh, a penny."

And he got it! He got a nickel in fact. Of course he got it — and more. What adult could resist?

Absolute dependence and absolute trust, combined with a penchant for shameless petitioning — that pretty much describes the spirit of early childhood. Then, somewhere along the way, things change. Sometimes we get rebuked and scolded; some of us get neglected or abused — and we stop trusting. Sometimes we are made to feel ashamed of our need, and we stop asking. We learn, "I can do that myself," and we are expected to do just that, and we stop depending.

Somewhere along the line we stop asking and we start demanding. We stop believing in others' generosity, and we start fending for ourselves. We stop trusting and we start manipulating; we stop begging and we start earning. It's called growing up and, for the most part, growing up is a good thing — but sad in a way, too.

Odd, isn't it, that our healthy physical and emotional growth toward maturity involves moving from infantile dependence to adult autonomy; but our spiritual maturation requires movement in the opposite direction? Those to whom we would point as saintly, or "perfected in faith," display as the hallmark of their lives a total trust in God's benign providence, a recognition of their own absolute dependence upon that providence, and the intimacy to "take it to the Lord in prayer." Growing up spiritually means that we live before God in the same condition that we entered the human realm — exposed, helpless, and crying out for what we need. Getting to that place is the journey of a lifetime.

But too many times, when it comes to our prayer lives, we just don't get it. Few of us hesitate to pray for the needs of others, particularly our friends and family. We are even able on occasion to petition for our own physical needs, but if we tell the truth about ourselves, most of us would admit that the journey to a place of childlike honesty and innocence, of intimacy and vulnerability before the face of God, is a journey we humans tend to avoid rather than embrace. Like the Hebrew children traveling to Canaan's promised land, we seek out the shortcuts and safe havens of false gods and false security, only to end up wandering the wastelands. Sadly enough, many of us, like them, perish in those wastelands. Dealing with a zealous God face-to-face is a frightening thing, and many choose alternate routes.

One of those all-too-perilous detours on this journey we might call "the head trip." It is a path chosen by clergy and laity alike, and can be recognized at denominational conferences, in local church Bible studies, as well as the local coffee shop. The first step on this path begins when we shift our focus toward conversing (and often arguing) with others regarding the finer theological propositions about God rather than engaging in intimate conversations with God.

The preacher who penned the Epistle to the Hebrews saw his own congregation wandering this treacherous path as they entered their popular culture's dialogue regarding the nature and activity of angels and other heavenly beings. Many converts from a pagan background practiced a kind of angel reverence as a way of hedging their bets against the chaotic forces that seemed so threatening. These heavenly creatures have their role, the preacher acknowledged, but that role is secondary to the glory of the crucified Christ. It is Christ and Christ alone who has the power to intercede on our behalf. No other intermediary is necessary or effective.

Make no mistake, theological reflection and dialogue are a necessary part of spiritual growth, but books and seminars and exegetical debates are no substitute for personal prayer and corporate worship. Separated from a healthy devotional life these "head trip" activities leave us as hungry and thirsty as those wandering Hebrews. Before we begin spouting our ideas and doctrines about God we must first engage in conversation with God. Only then will we have any proclamation worth hearing.

Another dangerous detour that tempts us on the spiritual journey could be called "the business trip" (or rather the "busy-ness trip"). We might recognize this path by its hectic pace and flurry of activity, often centering on church or community work under the banner of Christian service. Caught up in the busyness of doing for Christ we neglect being with Christ.

The congregation to which Hebrews was written was wrestling with their Jewish heritage and some persistent voices from within their group that demanded adherence to the Mosaic traditions and Law in addition to the Christian confession. Faith in Jesus is well and good, they declared, but those "good works" insured extra protection from the perils of the journey.

No one wishes to discourage Christian service. Most certainly, service projects, social justice campaigns, charitable fund-raisers, and church committee meetings all have their necessary place in Christian community. But when they become a diversion from the more rugged path of intimate prayer time our trek toward spiritual maturity takes a dangerous turn indeed. For the spiritually mature, service to others flows from our devotional life, and makes a poor substitute for it.

What is it about the steep path of prayer that scares us so? — so much so that we seek out the easier routes? Like those Hebrews gazing upon the fire and smoke of Mount Sinai we recognize that penetrating the presence of the living God is cause for awe and wonder, and more than a little fear. Placing one's self in the presence of such a God does indeed make one vulnerable and powerless. The word used in the text from Hebrews carries several nuances:

•"laid bare" and vulnerable — as in the jugular vein of an animal about to be slaughtered

•laid out like a patient on the operating table before the surgeon — that's Eugene Peterson's image

•"all are naked" before God — that's the NRSV translation

None of these images are particularly comfortable. Adults have hang-ups about nakedness and vulnerability — particularly in the presence of someone with power over us, but for little children this is not so. If you've ever chased a naked two-year-old around the room (or the front yard!) with a diaper in hand, you know it's the truth. Little children have no concern about who sees their private parts, and a few downright enjoy the exhibition!

But before long, we learn to cover up — not just our bodies, but also our emotions, and our hopes and dreams — and, more than that, our flaws and failures and misdeeds. Like Adam in the Garden of Eden, we weave garments to hide our shame. We hide our guilt beneath garments of rationalization and blame; we cover our fear and pain with the mantle of addiction. We conceal our true neediness with an attitude of indifference, and we avoid true intimacy with God and others under the disguise of self-righteousness.

But, as the scripture insists, it is a futile endeavor. The Word of God is sharper than any two-edged sword. Eugene Peterson's paraphrase reads "a surgeon's scalpel." It cuts through the surface of skin, muscle, and bone into the depths of our soul. Jesus, the Living Word, penetrates our defenses and cuts to our core. No body-armor can stop him. No head trip can deflect him, and no busyness of life can obscure his gaze.

What we tend to forget, however, is that the knife which penetrates our soul is the Word-Made-Flesh — sharing our humanity and interceding on our behalf. In the hand of the Great Physician, the scalpel becomes an instrument of healing. From the heart of God, the word of judgment we so often fear, becomes the word of forgiveness and restoration.

"For we do not have a great high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weakness, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are — yet was without sin." The beauty of a two-edged sword is that it cuts both ways. The one who is able to see into the depths of our soul is also our high priest who has penetrated the mysteries of heaven and gained access to the very heart of God.

In Old Testament tradition, the function of the high priest is to "draw near" (that's the meaning of the word in Hebrew). He functions as an intermediary, drawing the people into the presence of God, and bringing God into contact with the people. In Christian understanding, it is Jesus who embodies this work most completely. In his humanity, Jesus, the Son of God, made himself totally vulnerable and obedient and dependent — living his life in a state of complete reliance upon God. Because of that reliance, this great high priest goes before heaven's throne to petition the Almighty without shame or embarrassment of his need or desires. "Don't worry, it's okay," he assures us. "I'll just tell the Father, and he'll provide exactly what you need."

"Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need." Let's stop trying to manipulate God's favor and instead trust in God's generosity. Let's stop laboring to acquire for ourselves what God has promised to provide in due time. "Let us hold firmly to the faith we profess." Let us pray with the confidence of children.

CSS Publishing Company, Inc., Sermons on the Second Reading: Sermons for Sundays after Pentecost (Last Third), Travel Tips for Fellow Pilgrims: Lessons Learned along the Way, by Lee Ann Dunlap

Overview and Insights · Promised Rest for the Faithful (4:1–13)

While the people led by Moses failed to enter God’s rest because of their unbelief, there remains a rest for the new people of God. Those who have believed in Jesus have entered that rest, and the listeners need to make sure they are among the faithful (4:1–3). In 4:3–11, the preacher develops the concept of rest. God himself rested on the seventh day of creation (4:3–4; Gen. 2:2). David also suggests in Psalm 95 that while those who fol…

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Hebrews 4:1-13 · A Sabbath-Rest for the People of God

Commentary · A Sabbath-Rest for the People of God

That the alternatives Israel faced in the wilderness are the same ones believers face today is demonstrated by the use of the terms “promise” (4:1; cf. 6:12; 9:15; 10:36; 11:39–40) and “good news” (4:2; see also the verbal formin 4:6, euangelizō, “to evangelize”; cf. Rom. 10:16; Gal. 3:8) and by the striking inversion of order—not “they also,” but “we also” (Heb. 4:2). This serves as an impressive verification of the author’s consistent assumption that the gospel and its demands have remained unchanged from the beginning and that the spiritual world of the ancient people of God with its conditions, blessings, and powers is identical to that in which his readers now live. He commands them to take care (literally “fear”) and together to take care on each other’s behalf (Heb. 10:24–25). Eternal salvation must never be taken for granted but must be worked out in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12–13), all the more as it is possible to belong to the people of God in an outward way and yet, for want of a genuine and enduring faith, fail to obtain eternal life. The rest that faithless Israel failed to obtain but that believers will obtain is now identified as participation in God’s own rest that began after the creation of the world (4:3–5; cf. Gen. 2:2–3). The present tense in verse 3 expresses a principle or rule and so looks to the future (cf. Acts 14:22). Israel, therefore, failed to obtain the rest not because the rest itself was not yet available but solely because of her unbelief. Further, Israel’s forfeiture of the rest is at issue (4:6–8), not her failure to enter Canaan, as if the rest were one thing in the Old Testament and another today. Canaan was only a symbol of the eternal inheritance that faith obtains (Heb. 11:9–10, 13–16). Joshua brought Israel into the land, and generations of Israelites had lived in the promised land when God issued the warning of Psalm 95. It was quite possible to inhabit Canaan and yet forfeit the rest of God.

So the rest of God has always been available to women and men and remains so today. The sole question is whether we will exercise that persevering faith that alone obtains rest. For it is a rest that no one enters in this life but only in the world to come, when the believer has rested from work (10:36). The author speaks of a “Sabbath-rest” (4:9) to connect the rest that the believer will obtain with the rest of God (4:4; cf. Gen. 2:2–3). It does not refer directly to the weekly Sabbath but to eternal salvation as different from and following this life of work. The use of this unusual word, “Sabbath-rest,” a word the author himself may have coined, suggests that the weekly Sabbath, or Lord’s day, is an eschatological sign pointing to a fulfillment still to come. It should not be thought that this rest is inactivity, however, for God’s rest is not (John 5:17). Again, note the author’s characteristic emphasis on the futurity of salvation. The consideration of this future blessedness concludes with another summary exhortation to eschew the example of Israel, to fear the wrath of God that befell Israel, to set mind and heart on the life to come, and to strive to live by faith.

This appeal is enforced by a consideration of the character of the word of God, which confronted Israel and confronts us still today (4:12–13). It is the living voice of God, which is never disobeyed with impunity. Here the word is thought of as an instrument of God’s judgment, discerning the secrets and motives of the heart (cf. 1 Cor. 4:5). The author’s readers must not suppose that they will obtain the rest of God because they are accepted by human beings or are counted as members of the people of God. The faith required is to be exercised and will be measured in the day of Christ as much in the thoughts of the heart as in outward conformity to the will of God. The phrases “soul and spirit, joints and marrow” (4:12) denote the inner life of humankind in all its aspects. The terms no more prove that human persons are composed of three parts (spirit, soul, and body) than Matthew 22:37 proves that they are composed of four.

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

4:1 The rest offered to Israel was not entered into and God still offers the promise of entering his rest to his people (cf. vv. 3, 6, 11). It follows that that promise cannot have referred to entry and possession of the land, but must have been a more fundamental kind of rest. The key word rest is drawn from the original quotation (3:11; cf. 3:18) and is the subject of the exposition that follows (cf. vv. 3–5, 8, 10, 11). Let us be careful (cf. 1 Cor. 10:12) is perhaps a little weak for the strong warning of phobēthōmen, “let us fear” (cf. KJV; RSV; NEB). To be found to have fallen short of the promised rest is a warning applied directly to the readers: none of you.

4:2 As is evident through the teaching of the epistle, the gospel for the author and readers refers to the cross and its effects. For those in the wilderness it was the deliverance of the exodus (cf. 3:16) and the Sinai covenant. For both groups the gospel is God’s redemptive love demonstrated in his saving acts. The difference between that generation of Israelites and the Christian readers of the epistle, who are the recipients of definitive fulfillment, is not alluded to here as it is elsewhere (e.g., 2:1–4). The gospel that the Israelites heard, however, was of no value to them because it was not received with faith (cf. 3:19). The implication for the readers is clear. Hearing must be accompanied by believing.

4:3 By contrast, believers do enter that rest. These words again are drawn from the original quotation (3:11, 18). Here again we directly confront the ambiguity of our author’s eschatology, which has both present (or realized) and future aspects. While the rest in its fullest sense remains a future expectation, there is also a sense in which we are already entering into that rest now, and therefore it is already ours (see comment on v. 10). In the second half of the verse we encounter a section of the original quotation presented again as a formal quotation (cf. 3:15; 4:5, 7). The point of the quotation here is not readily apparent, despite the introductory words just as God (lit., “he”) has said. The explanation is given in the following verses and rests on two important premises our author is at pains to establish: (1) God’s rest is a reality (vv. 3b–4), and (2) the Israelites were prohibited from entering that rest (the quotations in vv. 3 and 5). It follows that the rest was not entered into and therefore remains for the people of the era of fulfillment (v. 6). What the Israelites failed to receive becomes available to those who believe in the good news of Jesus Christ (cf. vv. 2 and 3). Thus the negative argument of the quotation serves ultimately as a support for the argument concerning the continuing availability of rest. God declared on oath that the Israelites would never enter his rest even though that rest was already a reality. The implication is that he had others in mind who would indeed enter that rest. The reality of God’s rest from his creative work (lit., “works,” drawn from the quotation that follows) since the creation (lit., “foundation”) of the world is plainly evident.

4:4 Again our author shows little concern with the human author of Scripture (he has spoken) or even the location (somewhere) of the quotation. The quotation closely follows Genesis 2:2 according to the LXX and is used here to substantiate the argument of the preceding verse. Seventh day thus became in itself an expression for rest. This is more evident from the underlying Hebrew word for “seven,” from which we get the word “sabbath” (see comment on v. 9).

4:5 Again a line from Psalm 95:11 is quoted to reiterate the failure of the Israelites to enter God’s rest (cf. v. 3).

4:6 This verse summarizes the preceding argument and pulls together the various threads of the argument. The first half of the sentence speaks of the result of the former disobedience: it still remains that some will enter that rest. “Enter” again alludes to the original quotation. Phillips’s paraphrase catches the sense well: “it is clear that some were intended to experience this rest.” That is, God’s rest does not exist in vain; it was always meant to be shared by his people, and now that intention is fulfilled. For it is in this rest that God’s ultimate purpose for the creation finds its realization. The second half of the sentence repeats the argument of v. 2b (see comment there on the meaning of the gospel). Those who wandered in the wilderness did not go in (alluding to the original quotation), because of their disobedience. This disobedience allows others, namely, those who believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ, to enter.

4:7 From the opening word of the original quotation (in 3:7) from Psalm 95—the word today—the author deduces that God (lit., “he”) again set a certain day for his rest to be entered into. It is noteworthy that in the time of David, a long time later, the same invitation to hear and obey could be given with the preface today. This suggests not only that the rest remains to be entered, but that the invitation extends to, and finds its true meaning in, the present. For every day is a new “today,” and the word “today” applies preeminently to those who are “partners with Christ” (cf. 3:13, 14). The quotation is the fourth and last time that material from the original quotation (3:7–11) is represented in smaller, formal quotations (cf. 3:15; 4:3, 5).

4:8 Joshua did not give the people rest. For if that had occurred, the offer would not have been repeated later “through David” and there would have been no mention of another day. Since in Greek the names Joshua and Jesus are identical, the readers could not have avoided the implicit contrast between the “Jesus” who failed to give rest and the Jesus who brings the true, promised rest to his people. Although it is not mentioned, it must be assumed that David’s generation did not enter the promised rest—or at least that if they in some sense did, it was not in the definitive sense in which the OT rest is available to those who enjoy the fulfillment brought by Christ. Just as David contemporized the narrative of the wilderness rebellion by applying it to his readers, so the author in this passage has done for his readers. Yet the difference between David’s time and that of the writer is clear from the argument of the entire epistle.

4:9 The promised rest, therefore, remains … for the people of God to enjoy. Sabbath-rest comes from a single word that occurs only here in the whole of the Greek Bible. This word suggests God’s own sabbath-rest after creation (v. 4). God’s gift of rest may thus be regarded as the gift of his own rest. To enjoy the blessings of the eschaton is to participate in the sabbath-rest of God.

4:10 By a skillful combination of language drawn from two of the OT passages that have already been quoted (Ps. 95:11 in 3:11, 18; 4:3, 5; and Gen. 2:2 in 4:4), the author indicates that the promised rest and God’s rest are of the same kind. Thus anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from his own work (lit., “works”). In view here is the present experience of rest already available to the readers (the tense of the Greek verb is actually aorist, or past), a point the author intends to stress.

The way in which “works” is to be understood is not clear, and commentators have differed in their interpretations of the word. Since the rest or cessation from works is something meant to be begun here and now, it must not be thought of as a cessation of life or as that rest enjoyed only by the saints who through death have gone to be with Christ. If we look for something to be enjoyed in the present, it is unlikely that the works should be thought of as works-righteousness in the Pauline sense, so that the rest is one of justification by faith. This view is not articulated anywhere in the epistle and, more importantly, it is not appropriate to the context. Faith for our author, furthermore, is not put over against works but is practically interchangeable with obedience. Possibly by “works” the author may have in mind the activity of the sacrificial ritual and the minutiae of ceremonial purity so important in the Judaism to which the readers were attracted. The most plausible interpretation, however, is that the author has in mind the ideal qualities of the sabbath-rest, namely, peace, well-being, and security—that is, a frame of mind that by virtue of its confidence and trust in God possesses these qualities in contradiction to the surrounding circumstances. In short, the author may well have in mind that peace and sense of ultimate security “which transcends all understanding” (Phil. 4:7). This interpretation has the further advantage of making the argument very pertinent to the needs of the readers—a concern never far from our author’s mind.

4:11 That the above interpretation is on the right track is confirmed by the exhortation now given to make every effort to enter that rest (once again the allusion to the original quotation is plain). If this rest is entered into now, then none of the readers will fall as did the Israelites in the wilderness due to disobedience. Thus the rest, if entered into, will produce obedience—here in the sense of faithfulness. The readers will thereby not take the road of apostasy, by following the example of the Israelites, but will, armed with the existential peace of God’s sabbath rest, endure the hardships and persecution that they apparently face as Christians. It should be noted that in the argument of this chapter we encounter the tension between the indicative (we have entered the rest) and the imperative (we are to strive to enter the rest) that is often encountered in Paul’s argumentation (e.g., Rom. 6:7, 12). This is but a reflection of the tension between realized and future eschatology. The author’s pastoral concerns for his readers are evident in this application as well as in the following two verses.

4:12 The close connection between this paragraph (vv. 12–13) and the preceding verses is indicated by the strong conjunction for. These two verses thus supply the ground or logical basis for the preceding exhortation, and this fact is essential for correct interpretation. The word of God is neither a reference to Jesus nor even primarily to Scripture. It is instead what God speaks, and the idea was probably suggested to the author from the repeated reference to “hearing God’s voice” in the preceding verses (3:7, 15, 16; 4:2, 7). God’s voice, the word of God, by its very character demands authentic response. Before his penetrating word there can be no feigning of loyalty. Therefore the author’s exhortation is to be taken with the utmost seriousness. What God speaks is living and active. By his word he brought creation into existence, and his word can never be rendered ineffective (cf. Isa. 55:11). The effectiveness of God’s word is now expressed by the metaphor sharper than any double-edged sword (cf. Rev. 2:12). The sentences that follow are merely a development of this metaphor and are not meant to convey information extraneous to the point being made. The writer does not here reveal his view of the nature of humanity (dividing soul and spirit; the thoughts and attitudes of the heart). All of these details are concerned only to stress the utter effectiveness of God’s word.

4:13 Indeed, the point of the preceding is now made plain: nothing in all creation (lit., “no creature) is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before his eyes, and the connotation of this language is that all are inescapably vulnerable not only to God’s scrutiny but also to his judgment. This aspect is made explicit in the final sentence: it is God to whom we must give account (cf. Rom. 14:12). Thus verses 12 and 13 are applied to the readers to remind them of the seriousness of their choice. It is worth wondering whether the readers contemplated some form of compromise that was meant to veil what was actually apostasy.

Additional Notes

4:1 Héring offers an interesting interpretation of this verse that hinges on the meaning of the word “remaining” (kataleipomenēs), which he takes in the sense of “not being actualized.” The point then becomes that failure to enter the rest might be attributed by some to the failure of the eschatological era to be realized in any sense (cf. 2 Pet. 3:4). Such a rendering is possible, but if it is what the author intended, he has expressed himself very obliquely.

The word rest (katapausis), which was introduced in the original quotation (3:11) and repeated in 3:18, occurs six times in chap. 4 (twice in repetitions of the first quotation). The word occurs in only one other place in the NT, Acts 7:49 (quoting Isa. 66:1). The cognate verb occurs in 4:4, 8, 10 (twice by quotation of Gen. 2:2). The background for the author’s distinctive use of the concept katapausis probably is to be found in Jewish apocalyptic rather than Gnosticism. See G. von Rad, “There Remains Still a Rest for the People of God: An Investigation of a Biblical Conception,” The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays (Edinburgh & London: Oliver & Boyd, 1966), pp. 94–102; R. Hensel and C. Brown, NIDNTT, vol. 3, pp. 254–58. In understanding the present passage, it is important to realize that the author is speaking of three distinct, although related, kinds of rest: (1) literal rest in the land of Canaan (cf. Deut. 12:9), (2) God’s own rest (v. 4), and (3) the rest that is meant to be the portion of Christians (this indeed may be subdivided into the rest available at present and the future rest of the “end” in a final sense). It is clear that the author sees a typological relationship between rest in the land of Canaan and the rest that God intends for Christians. The blessings of the one foreshadow those of the other, just as the present rest Christians can enjoy anticipates the final, eschatological rest. See H. A. Lombard, “Katapausis in the Letter to the Hebrews,” Neotestamentica 5 (1971), pp. 60–71.

4:2 Had the gospel preached to us translates the verb euangelizō (in Hebrews only here and in v. 6), a word which, particularly because of its use in the second half of Isaiah, is full of eschatological associations. Its appropriateness for what the readers have heard is evident; it can be used anachronistically to refer to the time of the wilderness wandering because of the theological continuity of their experience of deliverance and covenant relationship with that of the readers. Considerable textual difficulty exists concerning the Greek that underlies those who heard did not combine it with faith, but no serious alteration of the meaning is involved. See Metzger, TCGNT, p. 665. NEB comes close to the literal meaning of the passage: “they brought no admixture of faith to the hearing of it.” The language of the verse is similar to Pauline idiom in Rom. 10:16 (where Isa. 53:1 is quoted). For the necessity of adding faith to hearing, see also Gal. 3:2, 6. On the meaning of the word faith, see note on 11:1.

4:3 Commentators are divided on whether the opening sentence in this verse should be taken to refer to a present entering into rest, as the present tense of the verb enter (eiserchomai) suggests (Westcott, Spicq, Montefiore), or a future eschatological rest (Delitzsch, Héring; by implication, Bruce, Hughes). The former interpretation, which need not exclude an ultimate realization of rest in the future, is supported implicitly in v. 1, explicitly in v. 10. This view alone makes sense of the exhortation in v. 11 and best supports the pastoral concern of the author. See also 12:22ff. On the tension in Hebrews between realized and future eschatology, see G. Hughes, Hebrews and Hermeneutics, pp. 67–73. “Foundation of the world” is common phraseology in the NT to refer to the creation (cf. Heb. 9:26; Matt. 25:34; Luke 11:50; John 17:24; Eph. 1:4; 1 Pet. 1:20; Rev. 13:8).

4:4 As in the preceding verse, NIV uses the singular work for the Greek plural (cf. v. 10). The word ergon (“work”) is common in Hebrews, referring several times to God’s creation, as here (1:10; 4:3). In 6:1, 10; 9:14; and 10:24 it refers to righteous or unrighteous deeds, but it is never used explicitly in a Pauline polemic against “works righteousness.” See G. Bertram, TDNT, vol. 2, pp. 635–55. Unlike the description of the previous six days, the Genesis account of the seventh day makes no mention of evening. Jewish commentators concluded that God’s sabbath-rest, which began after creation, lasted indefinitely. The writer draws on this tradition when he argues that his readers may enjoy God’s sabbath-rest in the present. Again, an eschatological sabbath, a thousand-year period following six thousand years of history, is also known in Jewish tradition. The author, we have argued, knows of both a present sabbath-rest and a future sabbath-rest. See A. T. Lincoln, “Sabbath, Rest and Eschatology in the New Testament,” in From Sabbath to Lord’s Day: A Biblical, Historical and Theological Investigation, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982).

4:5 Again in the passage above refers to the requotation of the last line of Ps. 95.

4:6 NIV omits epei oun, “since therefore,” the opening words of this verse, and thus does not do justice to the logic of the argument, especially in not reflecting its dependence on the OT quotation in v. 5 and the consequent force of the renewed invitation referred to in v. 7. Disobedience (apeitheia) is a key word here and in v. 11; the verb form occurs in 3:18 and 11:31. See O. Becker, NIDNTT, vol. 1, pp. 588–93.

4:7 Set (horizō, present tense) alludes to a sovereign decree of God (cf. Acts 10:42; Rom. 1:4). The point of the reference to David is not a concern with authorship, since elsewhere, as we have seen, the author is oblivious to the human authorship of Scripture, regarding it simply as the word of God. David is referred to here in order to stress the chronological distance between the time of the wilderness wandering and the repetition of the promise with the word “today.” If the author understands his own day as the today spoken of in the time of David, then he may have understood Ps. 95:7 as prophetic; and it becomes possible to interpret as was said before to mean “as was foretold.”

4:8 The Greek name for Joshua (Iēsous), “Jesus,” occurs in this form in the KJV of Acts 7:45, where the reference is to Joshua and not to some act of the preincarnate Jesus. In Josh. 22:4 (cf. 21:43–45), Joshua announced that God had given the people rest (the verb is the same as the one in this verse). But this rest, like that brought by David (2 Sam. 7:1, 11) and Solomon (1 Kings 8:56), was at best a meager experience of the rest God intended for his people. The latter indeed must be regarded as being on a different level altogether. All former experience of rest is typological foreshadowing of the eschatological rest God intends and that is now beginning to be experienced by his people.

4:9 The rare Greek word for Sabbath-rest in this verse (sabbatismos) is deliberately used by the author in place of the word for “rest” used previously in his argument (katapausis) in order to emphasize that the rest of which he has been speaking is of an eschatological order-indeed, of the order of God’s own sabbath-rest. God’s sabbath-rest thus becomes a symbol for our rest. For a similar perspective, wherein future heavenly blessings are conceived as realizable in the present, see 12:22–24. See A. T. Lincoln, “Sabbath, Rest and Eschatology in the New Testament,” in From Sabbath to Lord’s Day, ed. D. A. Carson. On sabbatismos, see E. Lohse, TDNT, vol. 7, pp. 34f.

4:10 Enters God’s (lit., “his”) rest is drawn from the language of the original OT quotation. KJV, ASV, and NASB accurately render the Greek aorist tense with the perfect tense “has rested.” Other versions (NIV, NEB, RSV) use the present tense, presumably regarding it as more consistent with the context (see v. 3) and understanding the aorist “has rested” as due to the influence of the same tense in the LXX quotation of Gen. 2:2 in v. 4. The presently realizable eschatological rest of course will find its fullest realization only in the future (cf. GNB, which actually employs the future tense here, but thereby weakens the present application intended by the author).

In exegeting the meaning of “works,” it is a mistake to put too much stress on the analogy of God’s having rested from his works. The analogy centers on the reality of the rest, not what one rests from. The rest, and therefore the cessation of works, is in principle eschatological, yet it is a rest to be entered into in the present. The interesting parallel in the language of Rev. 14:13 (“they will rest from their labor”) is therefore only partially pertinent here.

4:11 Make every effort translates spoudazō (“be diligent,” or “zealous”), a common word in the ethical exhortation of the NT. The last half of the verse, so that no one will fall by following their example of disobedience, alludes to the mention of disobedience as the cause of Israel’s failure as mentioned in 4:6. See H. W. Attridge, “ ‘Let us strive to enter that rest’: The Logic of Hebrews 4:1–11,” HTR 73 (1980), pp. 279–88.

4:12 Because in Philo the word of God (logos tou theou) is personified and said to divide different faculties within the human being, some have seen Alexandrian influence upon the author in the present passage. Although possible, such a conclusion is far from certain. The word of God is living because God is “the living God” (3:12). Its dynamic and effective quality is thereby assured (cf. Jer. 23:29; see also 1 Pet. 1:23). Effective words are likened to a sharp sword (Isa. 49:2) and the word of God (but here rhēma tou theou) to the sword of the Spirit (Eph. 6:17). For “two-edged sword,” see Rev. 2:12. “Wisdom” (sophia) has qualities that parallel those of the word of God in the present passage, especially with reference to powers of penetration (Wisd. of Sol. 7:23ff.; 1:6). For the argument that the word of God refers to Jesus, see J. Swetnam, “Jesus as logos in Hebrews 4:12–13,” Biblica 62 (1981), pp. 214–24. R. Williamson also finds a Logos Christology in Hebrews, appealing especially to the occurrence of logos in v. 13, which he would translate “with whom the Logos is present on our behalf” (where NIV has to whom we must give account [logos]. “The Incarnation of the Logos in Hebrews,” ExpT 95 [1983], pp. 4–8).

4:13 That at the time of judgment everything hidden will be revealed is stressed elsewhere in the NT (e.g., 1 Cor. 4:5). Uncovered and laid bare before his eyes indicates the precarious situation of every person at the time of judgment. For the connection between word and judgment, see John 12:48. See G. E. Trompf, “Conception of God in Hebrews 4:12–13,” StudTh 25 (1971), pp. 123–32.

Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by Donald A. Hagner, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Creation

The foundational story in all of the OT is the story of creation, found in Gen. 1 2. Throughout the history of interpretation there have been many approaches to understanding these chapters. In the modern world, discoveries from both science and archaeology have challenged some traditional convictions, and debates continue to rage. Still, what Gen. 1–2 communicates is generally clear: (1) it establishes Yahweh, the God of Israel, as the God by whose word all exists; (2) it presents for ancient readers a compelling argument for why they should worship Israel’s God and not other gods of the ancient world.

Creature

Whether animal or human, “creature” assumes creator. God’s unique creative activity is showcased in his majestic work: “creatures.” While the infinite God is not confined in the lives of his creatures, both are linked in a relationship of fidelity (Ps. 104).

A creature is a gift and has an obligation of service (Ps. 150). Scripture celebrates divine rule and creaturely dependence (Ps. 96). Creatures have roles, and the liturgy of doxology revels in a cosmic and eschatological drama (Ps. 148; Isa. 40:12 31; 65:17–25). Humans are caretaking creatures (Ps. 8).

David

The second king of Israel (r. 1010 970 BC), founder of a dynasty that continued with his son Solomon (r. 970–931 BC), who ruled all of Israel; subsequently the remaining “sons of David” ruled the southern kingdom, Judah, until 586 BC.

Human kingship is a late development in Israel, but a number of ancient texts anticipate the establishment of the institution (Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:14–20) and specifically the rise of a king from Judah (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:17). Thus, it is surprising that the first king of Israel is not from Judah, but from Benjamin. When the people ask Samuel for a king, he anoints Saul (1 Sam. 8–12), who proves to be a tremendous disappointment. He forfeits the establishment of his dynasty when he shows a lack of confidence in God by rashly offering prebattle sacrifices (13:13–14). God then rejects Saul as king because he does not execute God’s full judgment against the Amalekites as he knows he should (15:23).

Eventually Saul’s moment of judgment comes. Saul’s final battle is against the Philistines, the major foreign force still inside the borders of the promised land. Both Saul and Jonathan meet their end on Mount Gilboa, and David sings songs that express his sadness over their deaths (1 Sam. 31–2 Sam. 1).

Even with Saul out of the way, David’s rise to kingship is not easy. He is immediately crowned king of Judah (2 Sam. 2:1–7), but the northern tribes choose to follow Ish-Bosheth, the son of Saul. War erupts between the two kingdoms. Eventually, though, the powerful general Abner abandons his support of Saul’s son, sealing the end of that dynasty. Ish-Bosheth is killed by his own men, and soon David becomes king over all Israel (5:1–5).

David’s kingship leads to significant victories that, in essence, complete the conquest of Canaan by finally subduing all the internal enemies. His men take the city of Jerusalem from the Jebusites, and he makes it his capital (2 Sam. 5:6–16). He also defeats the Philistines, who have been a thorn in the side of Israel for years (2 Sam. 5:17–25; for other victories, see 8:1–14). In celebration, David brings the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6).

The David narrative reaches its apex when God enters into a covenant with him that establishes his dynasty (2 Sam. 7; 1 Chron. 17). After David dies, his son will succeed him, and indeed his dynasty lasts for many hundreds of years (see below).

David is a good king, but not a perfect king. A turning point in his reign comes in 2 Sam. 11. Up to this point, David has been content with what God has given him. He does not grasp for anything that does not belong to him. However, when he sees the beautiful Bathsheba bathing, he sends messengers to bring her to his house, where the two have sexual intercourse and she becomes pregnant. In an attempt to conceal this sin of adultery, he orders the death of her husband, Uriah the Hittite. Thus, he adds the crime of murder to that of adultery.

David thinks that the sin is secret, but nothing is hidden from God, who sends his prophet Nathan to confront David (2 Sam. 12; cf. Ps. 51). The difference between Saul and David is not that the latter is perfect but rather that David, as opposed to Saul, repents when he sins. Thus, God allows his reign to continue. Even so, David feels the consequences of his sin. First, the son that Bathsheba bears from her illicit union with David is struck with illness and dies. And ever afterward, David’s family life is troubled, with great impact on the political life of Israel. Son is pitted against son (Amnon and Absalom [2 Sam. 13]), as well as son against father (Absalom and David [2 Sam. 15–18]). Absalom temporarily deposes his father from the throne, but David eventually regains the kingship, though at the cost of the heartbreaking loss of his son.

Even at the very end, there is conflict within David’s house. When David has grown old, another son, Adonijah, attempts to take the throne, with support from powerful people such as Joab and Abiathar. At the instigation of Bathsheba and Nathan, however, David places the son of his choosing, Solomon, on the throne (1 Kings 1). David then dies after a reign of forty-one years, seven in Hebron and the rest over all Israel (1 Kings 2:10–12).

David’s greatest legacy is the dynasty that bears his name. Beginning with Solomon, however, his successors do not continue his spiritual legacy. Although a number of kings do some good, only Hezekiah (r. 727–698 BC) and Josiah (r. 639–609 BC) are given unqualified approval. Eventually, the Davidic rule comes to an end in Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians (586 BC). But God is not done with his redemptive purposes, and his promise to David is that he will have a ruler on the throne “forever” (2 Sam. 7:16). The NT recognizes that Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of this promise. He is the greater son of David, the one who is the Christ or Messiah, the anointed king. Jesus is the one who reigns forever in heaven. The life and the rule of David foreshadow the messianic rule of Jesus Christ.

Faith

Faith in the context of the OT rests on a foundation that the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence is reliable. Trust in Yahweh is expressed through loyalty and obedience. The theme of responsive obedience is emphasized in the Torah (Exod. 19:5). In the later history of Israel, faithfulness to the law became the predominant expression of faith (Dan. 1:8; 6:10). OT faith, then, is a moral response rather than abstract intellect or emotion.

Faith is a central theological concept in the NT. In relational terms, faith is foremost personalized as the locus of trust and belief in the person of Jesus Christ.

In the Gospels, Jesus is spoken of not as the subject of faith (as believing in God), but as the object of faith. In the Synoptic Gospels, faith is seen most often in connection with the ministry of Jesus. Miracles, in particular healings, are presented as taking place in response to the faith of the one in need of healing or the requester. In the Gospel of John, faith (belief) is presented as something that God requires of his people (6:28 29).

In the book of Acts, “faith/belief” is used to refer to Jews and Gentiles converting to following the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and becoming part of the Christian community. The book correlates faith in Christ closely with repentance (Acts 11:21; 19:18; 20:21; 26:18).

Paul relates faith to righteousness and justification (Rom. 3:22; 5:11; Gal. 3:6). In Ephesians faith is shown as instrumental in salvation: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” (2:8).

In Hebrews, faith is described as “being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (11:1). Faith thus is viewed as something that can be accomplished in the life of the believer—a calling of God not yet tangible or seen. To possess faith is to be loyal to God and to the gospel of Jesus Christ despite all obstacles. In the Letter of James, genuine works naturally accompany genuine faith. Works, however, are expressed in doing the will of God. The will of God means, for example, caring for the poor (James 2:15–16).

In 1 Peter, Christ is depicted as the broker of faith in God (1:21), whereas in 2 Peter and Jude faith is presented as received from God (2 Pet. 1:1). In the Letters of John “to believe” is used as a litmus test for those who possess eternal life: “You who believe in the name of the Son of God, . . . you have eternal life” (1 John 5:13).

Fall

“The fall” refers to the events of the first human couple’s sin in the garden of Eden (Gen. 2 3). Although the word “fall” does not occur in the account, Christians have used the term to describe it, taking their cues from Paul’s writings (esp. Rom. 5:12–21). The term is important because it reflects an interpretation that the events in the garden are the entrance of human sin and that the sin has universal effects on humankind.

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.

Heart

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

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

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

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

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

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

Joshua

(1) The son of Nun and the servant of Moses. As a military commander, Joshua fought against the Amalekites (Exod. 17:8 13). He became an assistant to Moses and accompanied him up and then down the mountain of God (24:13; 32:17). Joshua also kept watch over the tent of meeting (33:11).

Moses sent Joshua, Caleb, and ten others as spies to explore the land of Canaan (Num. 13). At this point, Moses also changed his name from “Hoshea” to “Joshua” (13:8, 16). Because Joshua and Caleb trusted that God would help Israel conquer Canaan, God vowed that only these two of that rebellious generation would enter the promised land (14:30). God also commanded Moses to commission Joshua as his successor. So in the presence of all Israel Moses laid his hands upon Joshua and set him apart for the task (27:15–23).

Joshua’s character as a leader is demonstrated throughout the book that bears his name. Among other things, Joshua served as a brilliant military leader (Josh. 1–12), an administrator (Josh. 13–21), and a religious leader (Josh. 24). He led the Israelites across the Jordan and presided at the allotment of land. In all of this, Joshua was “strong and courageous” (1:6), just as God and the people encouraged him to be (1:6–7, 9, 18). At the end of his life he was called, like Moses, “the servant of the Lord” (24:29). The people served God throughout the lifetime of Joshua (Judg. 2:7).

(2) A high priest and one of the leaders of Israel who survived the Babylonian captivity and was permitted by an edict of Cyrus to return to Jerusalem (Ezra 2:2; Neh. 7:7). He was a contemporary of Haggai and Zechariah.

Together with Zerubbabel, Joshua helped to restore worship for the returned exiles (Ezra 3:2) and with the sometimes hazardous work of rebuilding the temple (Ezra 3:8–9; 4:3; 5:2). The high priests descended from him are listed in Neh. 12:10, but other descendants are named as guilty of intermarriage with foreign wives (Ezra 10:18). In the book of Zechariah he is the subject of two visions where he serves as a representative of Israel (Zech. 3:1–10) and as a type of Christ (6:9–15).

Judges

Judges covers the period between the death of Joshua and the rise of the monarchy in Israel. It was a turbulent period, as the people did not seem to have any center in God. The bulk of the book narrates the stories of judges, mostly military leaders, whom God sent to Israel on those occasions when they turned to him for help (Othniel, Ehud, Shamgar, Deborah, Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson). The book also includes brief mentions of judges who are not associated with violent actions against the enemy (Tola, Jair, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon [10:1 5; 12:8–15]), as well as the story of an abortive attempt to establish kingship during this time (Abimelek [chap. 9]).

Indeed, the stories of the judges who were deliverers tend to follow a relatively set pattern. They begin with the sin of the people, which leads to their oppression by a foreign power. The suffering of the people shocks them into realizing that they need God, and they turn to him for help. In such instances, God responds by giving the people a judge, really a military leader, who then delivers them from the power of their oppressors. However, after a period of peace, the people sin again, and another oppressor takes control.

The two stories in the appendix of the book of Judges simply add emphasis to the dark picture painted in the body of the book. These are two accounts of family sins that expand into national tragedies. Individuals from the tribe of Levi, the priestly tribe dedicated to special service to God, play a particularly negative role in the appendix.

This phrase “in those days Israel had no king” (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25) is repeated throughout the appendix of the book and alerts the reader to one of the major themes of the book. Who will be the human leader of the people of God? The imperfect judges and the fragmentary condition of the tribes as well as their sad spiritual state cause the reader to yearn for something better: the rise of divinely appointed kingship in Israel. The books of Samuel and Kings, which follow, narrate the promise and ultimate failure of kingship, which itself will lead to the expectation of something even more, the Messiah.

Promise

A technical term for “promise” does not appear in the OT, but its concept is present throughout Scripture. God unfolds the history of redemption by employing the idea of promises. The writers of the NT repeatedly assert that Jesus Christ has fulfilled God’s promises in the OT (e.g., Luke 24:44 48; 1 Cor. 15:3–8).

Most remarkable is the promise that God made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Gen. 12:1–3; 13:14–17; 17:4–8; 22:17–18; 26:1–5; 28:13–15). God called Abraham in order to give him three specific blessings: the land, descendants, and the channel of blessing among the nations. As a sign of his promise, God made a covenant of circumcision with Abraham and his descendants (17:10–14). With Isaac (26:1–5) and Jacob (28:13–15), God repeatedly reconfirmed the promise made to Abraham. At the time of the exodus and later the settlement in Canaan, God’s promise to Abraham was partially fulfilled by multiplying his descendants into millions and by giving them the promised land.

The central message of the NT is that God’s promises in the OT are fulfilled with the coming of Jesus Christ. Matthew’s numerous citation formulas are evidence of this theme. In Luke 4:16–21 Jesus pronounces the fulfillment of Isaiah’s promise (about the Messiah’s ministry [Isa. 61:1–3]) in his own life. The book of Acts specifically states that Jesus’ suffering and resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit are the fulfillment of the OT promises (2:29–31; 13:32–34). Jesus’ identity both as the descendant of David (Acts 13:23) and as the prophet like Moses (Acts 3:21–26; cf. Deut. 18:15–18) is also regarded as the fulfillment of the OT.

Paul’s view of God’s promises is summarized in this statement: “For no matter how many promises God has made, they are ‘Yes’ in Christ” (2 Cor. 1:20). According to Rom. 1:2–3, Paul regards the gospel as the message that God “promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding his Son.” In Rom. 4 Abraham’s faith is described in terms of his trust in God’s promises, which leads to his righteousness. He is presented as our model of faith in God’s promises. The famous phrase “according to the Scriptures” in 1 Cor. 15:3–4 is, in a sense, understood by Paul as the fulfillment of God’s promises regarding Christ’s death and resurrection.

In the NT, God makes new promises based on the work of Christ, including the final resurrection and the second coming of Christ (John 5:29; 11:25–26; 1 Cor. 15:48–57; 2 Cor. 4:14; 1 Thess. 4:13–18). Furthermore, the message of the gospel is presented as multiple promises, including eternal life, the fullness of life in Christ, the forgiveness of sins, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the peace of God, the knowledge of God, and the joy of God (Matt. 28:18–20; John 3:16; 10:10; 14:16, 27; 16:20–24; 17:25–26; Phil. 4:4–9; 1 John 1:9).

Sabbath

God’s people were to observe the Sabbath on the seventh day of each week by resting from normal daily work. It is first explicitly introduced in Exod. 16:23 30, where God provides twice as much manna for the Israelites in the desert on the sixth day so that they might enjoy his provision for them on the seventh day without having to gather it on that day.

The Sabbath command is incorporated into the Ten Commandments (Exod. 20:8–11). The motivation given in Exodus for keeping the Sabbath is the fact that God made the world in six days and rested on the seventh (cf. Gen. 2:2–3)—hence sometimes it is considered a “creation ordinance.” God’s rest was his enjoyment of a world that met his expectations, and thus the weekly celebration might look to a time when the world would once again truly enjoy such “rest.” In Deut. 5:12–15 the motivation is given as the new creation event, the redemption of Israel from slavery in Egypt.

Although religious worship is not prominent in the Sabbath injunctions in the OT, there was to be a gathering of God’s people on that day with special offerings (Lev. 23:3; Ezek. 46:3–5), and it was a day when a visit to a prophet might be more likely (2 Kings 4:23). Psalm 92 is identified as a psalm for the Sabbath.

The terms “Sabbath” or “Sabbath rest” could also be applied to special days, such as the Day of Atonement, which did not fall on the seventh day (Lev. 16:31). In an extension of the sabbatical system, the land was to enjoy a Sabbath of rest every seven years (Lev. 25:4–7).

By NT times, regular gatherings were held at local synagogues on the Sabbath wherever a sufficient number of observant Jews resided. Jesus offended Pharisaic sensitivities with regard to Sabbath observance, using it to alleviate human suffering and presenting himself as the true representative of humanity, for whom the Sabbath was designed (Matt. 12:1–13; John 5:9–10). The healings on the Sabbath day draw attention to the realization of God’s creative and redemptive purposes for the world.

The writer to the Hebrews treats the Sabbath as a foretaste of the ultimate rest God provides for those who persevere in faith and obedience (Heb. 4:1–11).

Paul regards the victory of Christ as bringing a freedom “with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day” (Col. 2:16 [cf. Gal. 4:10]). Some Christians understand this as denying continuity of the Sabbath principle of a weekly day of rest. Others understand it in a way similar to Jesus’ remarks on Pharisaic restrictions imposed on the day and see a continuity of Sabbath observance, perhaps with a change of day, to make it a celebration of the Lord’s resurrection on the first day of the week (the Lord’s Day).

Soul

The way the word “soul” is used in English does not align well with any single Hebrew or Greek word in the Bible. It is widely accepted that the biblical view (both OT and NT) of humanity does not recognize sharp boundaries between body and soul (bipartite anthropology) or between body, soul, and spirit (tripartite). The human being is, according to biblical teaching, a psychosomatic unity.

Spirit

In the world of the Bible, a person was viewed as a unity of being with the pervading breath and thus imprint of the loving and holy God. The divine-human relationship consequently is portrayed in the Bible as predominantly spiritual in nature. God is spirit, and humankind may communicate with him in the spiritual realm. The ancients believed in an invisible world of spirits that held most, if not all, reasons for natural events and human actions in the visible world.

The OT writers used the common Hebrew word ruakh (“wind” or “breath”) to describe force and even life from the God of the universe. In its most revealing first instance, God’s ruakh hovered above the waters of the uncreated world (Gen. 1:2). In the next chapter of Genesis a companion word, neshamah (“breath”), is used as God breathed into Adam’s nostrils “the breath of life” (2:7). God thus breathed his own image into the first human being. Humankind’s moral obligations in the remainder of the Bible rest on this breathing act of God.

The OT authors often employ ruakh simply to denote air in motion or breath from a person’s mouth. However, special instances of the use of ruakh include references to the very life of a person (Gen. 7:22; Ps. 104:29), an attitude or emotion (Gen. 41:8; Num. 14:24; Ps. 77:3), the negative traits of pride or temper (Ps. 76:12), a generally good disposition (Prov. 11:13; 18:14), the seat of conversion (Ezek. 18:31; 36:26), and determination given by God (2 Chron. 36:22; Hag. 1:14).

The NT authors used the Greek term pneuma to convey the concept of spirit. In the world of the NT, the human spirit was understood as the divine part of human reality as distinct from the material realm. The spirit appears conscious and capable of rejoicing (Luke 1:47). Jesus was described by Luke as growing and becoming “strong in spirit” (1:80). In “spirit” Jesus “knew” what certain teachers of the law were thinking in their hearts (Mark 2:8). Likewise, Jesus “was deeply moved in spirit and troubled” at the sickness of a loved one (John 11:33). At the end of his life, Jesus gave up his spirit (John 19:30).

According to Jesus, the spirit is the place of God’s new covenant work of conversion and worship (John 3:5; 4:24). He declared the human spirit’s dependence on God and ascribed great virtue to those people who were “poor in spirit” (Matt. 5:3).

Human beings who were possessed by an evil spirit were devalued in Mediterranean society. In various places in the Synoptic Gospels and the book of Acts, either Jesus or the disciples were involved in exorcisms of such spirits (Matt. 8:28 33; Mark 1:21–28; 7:24–30; 9:14–29; 5:1–20; 9:17–29; Luke 8:26–33; 9:37–42; Acts 5:16).

The apostle Paul pointed to the spirit as the seat of conversion (Rom. 7:6; 1 Cor. 5:5). He described believers as facing a struggle between flesh and spirit in regard to living a sanctified life (Rom. 8:2–17; Gal. 5:16–17). A contradiction seems apparent in Pauline thinking as he appears to embrace Greek dualistic understanding of body (flesh) and spirit while likewise commanding that “spirit, soul and body be kept blameless” (1 Thess. 5:23). However, the Christian struggle between flesh and Spirit (the Holy Spirit) centers around the believer’s body being dead because of sin but the spirit being alive because of the crucified and resurrected Christ (Rom. 8:10). Believers therefore are encouraged to lead a holistic life, lived in the Spirit.

Wise

In the OT, wisdom is a characteristic of someone who attains a high degree of knowledge, technical skill, and experience in a particular domain. It refers to the ability that certain individuals have to use good judgment in running the affairs of state (Joseph in Gen. 41:33; David in 2 Sam. 14:20; Solomon in 1 Kings 3:9, 12, 28). It can also refer to the navigational skills that sailors use in maneuvering a ship through difficult waters (Ps. 107:27). Furthermore, wisdom includes the particular skills of an artisan (Exod. 31:6; 35:35; 1 Chron. 22:15 16). In all these cases, wisdom involves the expertise that a person acquires to accomplish a particular task. In these instances “wisdom” is an ethically neutral term, or at least that dimension is not emphasized. The wise are those who have mastered a certain skill set in their field of expertise.

The uniqueness of the OT wisdom literature (Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, etc.) is that it highlights the moral dimension of wisdom. Here “wisdom” refers to developing expertise in negotiating the complexities of life and managing those complexities in a morally responsible way that honors God and benefits both the community and the individual. Although it is difficult to pin down a concise definition, one can gain a better understanding of wisdom by investigating two important dimensions: wisdom as a worldview, and the traits of a person who is considered to be wise.

Who is wise? First, the wise are those involved in a lifelong process of character development. They manifest the virtues of righteousness, justice, and equity (Prov. 1:3; 2:9). The embodiment of these virtues culminates in the description of the woman of noble character at the conclusion of Proverbs (31:10–31). She exhibits self-control, patience, care, diligence, discipline, humility, generosity, honesty, and fear of the Lord (cf. James 3:13–18). She is the epitome of wisdom in its maturity and the model that all should emulate.

Second, the wise know the value of words and how to use them. They know when to speak, what to say, and how to say it (Job 29:21–22; Prov. 15:23; 25:11; Eccles. 3:7; 12:9–10). Wisdom and the wise place a premium on the power of words.

Third, the wise place great importance on relationships and on interaction with others. The wise person is the one who is open to the give-and-take of relationships (Prov. 27:5–6, 17, 19). Such a person develops the humility necessary to receive correction and criticism from others. Hearing criticism and changing wrong behavior are integral to wisdom (3:1–11). The wise appreciate insightful criticism because it helps them live life more productively (15:12). Wisdom is, ultimately, relational.

Fourth, the wise person develops the art of discernment (Prov. 1:2, 4–6). The sage is equipped with the ability to think critically. The very quality of wisdom itself invites the re-forming and rethinking of ideas. Sages are not interested in pat answers (26:4–5). Proverbs 16:1–9 throws a wrench in the conventional cogs of wisdom, claiming that although humans make their plans, God has the final say. Both Job and Ecclesiastes go head to head with conventional beliefs, probing more deeply into the complexities of life and the relationship between human and divine. No easy answers exist here. In contrast, fools do not use their mental faculties. They view wisdom as a commodity, a matter of learning some techniques, accepting certain beliefs, and memorizing a few proverbs (17:16). The wise, however, know that wisdom involves the art of critical thinking and interacting with others.

Fifth, and most fundamental, the wise person takes a God-centered focus toward life. Wisdom literature affirms, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Prov. 9:10; cf. Prov. 1:7; Job 28:28; Eccles. 12:13). That this is the beginning step in the process of gaining wisdom means that one who misses this step can proceed no further along the path to wisdom. The fear of the Lord is to wisdom as the letters of the alphabet are to forming words. The wise gain wisdom by being in relationship with the Lord (Prov. 3:5–8). The fear of the Lord is the beginning as well as the culmination of wisdom.

Wisdom is a highly prized quality, superior to might and power (Prov. 25:15; Eccles. 9:13–16), and one must diligently seek it (Prov. 2:1–5). Yet in the end, wisdom is a gift that only God can give (Prov. 2:6–8; 1 Kings 3:9).

Word

“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:16 17; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).

The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.

The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1 John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).

Works

The Bible has much to say about works, and an understanding of the topic is important because works play a role in most religions. In the most generic sense, “works” refers to the products or activities of human moral agents in the context of religious discussion. God’s works are frequently mentioned in Scripture, and they are always good. His works include creation (Gen. 2:2 3; Isa. 40:28; 42:5), sustenance of the earth (Ps. 104; Heb. 1:3), and redemption (Exod. 6:6; Ps. 111:9; Rom. 8:23). Human works, therefore, should be in alignment with God’s works, though obviously of a different sort. Works in the Bible usually reflect a moral polarity: good or evil, righteous or unrighteous, just or unjust. The context of the passage often determines the moral character of the works (e.g., Isa. 3:10–11; 2 Cor. 11:15).

Important questions follow from the existence of works and their moral quality. Do good works merit God’s favor or please him? Can good works save at the time of God’s judgment? When people asked Jesus, “What must we do to do the works God requires?” he answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent” (John 6:28–29). Without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). The people from the OT commended in Heb. 11 did their works in the precondition of faith. Explicitly in the NT and often implicitly in the OT, faith is the condition for truly good works. God elects out of his mercy, not out of human works (Rom. 9:12, 16; Titus 3:5; cf. Rom. 11:2). Works not done in faith, even if considered “good” by human standards, are not commendable to God, since all humankind is under sin (Rom. 3:9) and no person is righteous or does good (Rom. 3:10–18; cf. Isa. 64:6). Works cannot save; salvation is a gift to be received by faith (Eph. 2:8–9; 2 Tim. 1:9; cf. Rom. 4:2–6). Even works of the Mosaic law are not salvific (Rom. 3:20, 27–28; Gal. 2:16; 3:2; 5:4). Good works follow from faith (2 Cor. 9:8; Eph. 2:10; 1 Thess. 1:3; James 2:18, 22; cf. Acts 26:20). The works of those who have faith will be judged, but this judgment appears to be related to rewards, not salvation (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 2 Cor. 5:10; cf. Rom. 14:10; 1 Cor. 3:13–15).

Wrath

The words “wrath” and “anger” are used in Bible translations for a variety of Hebrew and Greek words that refer to the disposition of someone (including God) toward persons (including oneself [Gen. 45:5]) or situations considered to be seriously displeasing. There may be degrees of anger (Zech. 1:15), and it may be accompanied by other sentiments such as distress (Gen. 45:5), hatred (Job 16:9), jealousy (Rom. 10:19), grief (Mark 3:5), and vengeance (Mic. 5:15).

Anger may be a proper response to sin or a sin-distorted world, as seen in, for example, Moses’ reaction to the golden calf (Exod. 32:19). Paul envisages an anger that does not necessarily involve sin (Eph. 4:26). Jesus is said to display anger at the willful stubbornness of his contemporaries (Mark 3:5), and his response to the mourning for Lazarus (John 11:33) might be rendered as “outrage,” an anger directed not so much at the mourners as at the ugliness of death, the consequence of sin, and with thoughts, perhaps, of his own impending death necessitated by this fallen world.

On the other hand, a display of anger may be the result of distorted perceptions or values (Gen. 4:5 6). A tendency to anger in oneself needs to be kept in check (James 1:19) and in others needs to be handled prudently (Prov. 15:1). Unchecked, anger may lead to violence and murder (Gen. 49:6). In several NT lists anger is associated with such other sinful behavior as quarreling, jealousy, selfishness, slander, malice, gossip, conceit, strife, idolatry, sorcery, and bitterness (2 Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:20; Eph. 4:31; Col. 3:8).

In Ps. 76:10 NLT (cf. ESV, NASB, NRSV) God is said to cause human anger to bring him praise (but see NIV, NET, where it is God’s wrath against human beings that brings him praise). Perhaps an instance of this is seen in Rom. 13:4–5, where the wrath of the civil authority serves to maintain justice under God.

Direct Matches

Eye

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jesus

The name “Jesus” comes from the Greek form of the name “Joshua.” The same Greek word (Iēsous) is therefore used to refer to both Jesus and Joshua in the NT (see esp. Heb. 4). The name “Jesus” was common among Jews in the first century. Josephus mentions nineteen different men called “Jesus.” Likewise, Luke tells of a Jewish sorcerer named “Bar-Jesus” (Acts 13:6), and Paul refers to a Jewish companion named “Jesus” (Col. 4:11). The best-known figure of this name is the predominant figure of the NT, Jesus Christ. See also Jesus, Son of Sirach; Jesus Christ; Justus.

Rest

Leisure time offers a respite from work, those essential duties of life such as paid employment and maintaining a household, to pursue other activities. Such nonobligatory pursuits range from entertainment to fine art, from peaceful relaxation to physical activity.

From the beginning, humankind was intended to work (Gen. 1:28; 2:15), but God also set apart one day per week for his creatures to share in his divine rest (Gen. 2:2–3; Exod. 20:8–11). This weekly rest should bring to mind God’s creation and the final rest in the age to come (Heb. 4:9–11). Although leisure time and Sabbath observance are not identical, both are opportunities to give thanks, worship, and put hope in God. They also refresh and enrich earthly life.

Indeed, every good thing is a gift from the Father (James 1:17), including time off from daily duties. How one uses leisure time is thus a matter of stewardship, much like one’s use of money and working time (cf. Matt. 25:14–30). Thus, although the Bible does not discuss playing sports or writing poetry, it does proclaim Christ as Lord over all spheres of life. Therefore “whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God” (1 Cor. 10:31).

Sabbath

God’s people were to observe the Sabbath on the seventh day of each week by resting from normal daily work. It is first explicitly introduced in Exod. 16:23–30, where God provides twice as much manna for the Israelites in the desert on the sixth day so that they might enjoy his provision for them on the seventh day without having to gather it on that day.

The week, marked off by its Sabbath, is closely associated with the new moon as a quarter of that natural cycle (1 Chron. 23:31; Isa. 1:13). The people of Mesopotamia observed a lunar festival shabbatu, but we do not know of any people independently of Israel observing a weekly Sabbath. The Sabbath is a communal rather than an individual observance, including even “any foreigner residing in your towns” (Exod. 20:10; Neh. 13:15–22), a sign of Israel’s covenant relationship with God (Exod. 31:13–17; Isa. 56:6).

The terms “Sabbath” or “sabbath rest” could also be applied to special days, such as the Day of Atonement, which did not fall on the seventh day (Lev. 16:31). In an extension of the sabbatical system, the land was to enjoy a Sabbath of rest every seven years (Lev. 25:4–7).

The writer to the Hebrews treats the Sabbath as a foretaste of the ultimate rest God provides for those who persevere in faith and obedience (Heb. 4:1–11).

Sword

A close-quarters offensive weapon designed for slashing (cf. “the edge of the sword” [Josh. 8:24; 10:30 NRSV]), stabbing (e.g., Ps. 37:15), or both. The OT Hebrew word khereb encompasses many kinds of swords, including short swords or daggers (Judg. 3:16). In the NT, a distinction is made between the double-edged sword that was perfected in the Roman gladius, a weapon designed for deep penetration in stabbing (e.g., Luke 2:35), and the more common short sword or dagger. Appearing in accounts of wars and figures of speech, the sword is the most frequently mentioned weapon in the Bible. Swords were made of bronze or iron and could be ceremonial in use. Early swords were often sickle-shaped, as seen on Egyptian reliefs, and were also a badge of rank. The outer edge of the curve was sharpened. This style of sword is probably to be understood in Josh. 10:28–39. Later, particularly among the Sea Peoples, straight iron swords appear, such as have been found in burials in the Philistine territory. This style of sword is probably intended in Ps. 149:6. In early Israel a sword, especially one made of iron, was a rare and prized weapon representing the best technology of its kind (1 Sam. 13:19, 22; 17:45–50). Later, short swords were common enough that they could be obtained for defense (Luke 22:36–38).

The sword often functions as a terrifying symbol of warfare, death, and utter destruction—often expressions of God’s judgment (Gen. 3:24; Deut. 13:15; 20:13; Josh. 6:21; Jer. 6:25; Rev. 6:4, 8). Yet it could also represent power and consequent victory (Lev. 26:7–8; Ps. 149:6). Metaphorically, the sword is associated with imagery connected to the mouth: it eats and is satisfied (Deut. 32:42; Isa. 1:20; 34:6); tongues or teeth may be like swords (Pss. 57:4; 64:3; Prov. 12:18; 30:14); words are like swords (Eph. 6:17; Heb. 4:12; cf. Rev. 1:16; 19:21).

Word

“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:16–17; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).

The primary focus of this article is the written form of the word of God, the Bible. The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Psalm 119.

Theology of the Word

From the perspective of many systematic theologians, the word of God is defined with several essential labels. The word is the special revelation of God to humans—specifically, truth communicated from God to his human creatures by supernatural intervention, including a disclosure of his mind and will, his attributes, and his redemptive plans. This revealed word is inspired. Inspiration is an act of the Holy Spirit of God whereby he superintended the biblical authors so that they composed the canonical books of Scripture. Inspiration is verbal and plenary in that it extends to every part of the Bible and includes the choice of words used by the authors.

The word of God is inerrant, free from error in every matter addressed, and infallible, true in every matter addressed. The locus of inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility is the original manuscripts and not the translations. A translation is reliable when it accurately reflects the meaning of the inspired originals (Matt. 5:18; cf. John 10:35; 17:17; 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:21). And finally, the word is authoritative. Because the Bible is the divinely inspired word of God reliably composed in the originals without error, it is binding upon people in their relationship with their God as well as their relationships with their fellow human beings. Biblical authority derives from the eternal character of the divine author and the revelatory content of the Scriptures.

Psalm 119

A key OT text extolling the word is Psalm 119 (cf. Pss. 1; 19). The writer glorifies God, his word, and his divine directions to people by means of an acrostic format that covers the subject of Torah meditation. Eight synonyms are used for the “word” in the psalm. The eight are translated in the NIV as “words” (v. 57), “promise” (v. 58), “statutes” (v. 59), “commands” (v. 60), “law” (v. 61), “laws” (v. 62), “precepts” (v. 63), and “decrees” (v. 64).

The Ps. 119 word vocabulary informs us that God has pierced the darkness of our existence with the light of his word to make himself known to us. The word is his word spoken to us and preserved for us. The psalm also instructs us that the word is the will of God. When God pierced our darkness, he lit the path of freedom for us with his word. He described himself, defined righteousness, declared his love, announced his promises, and issued his warnings. Finally, the vocabulary establishes the authority of his word in our lives. Directions, commandments, laws, charges, and divine will ring with the sound of authority. The word of God is an authoritative proclamation from God to us that must be obeyed, that must be sought, that cannot be ignored.

Finally, Ps. 119 makes an intimate connection between the content of the word, things spoken, and the author of the things spoken. This connection better enables us to understand the “Word” as the person of Jesus Christ in John 1. The progressive development of verses 1–2 of Ps. 119 intimately connects the law of God, his statutes, and him, the one sought with all the heart. Verses 89–96 emphasize the durability and eternality of the word in keeping with the eternal character of God. In verse 114 the writer parallels God as refuge with putting hope in his word. Here the writer intimately connects God as a refuge with his word. In the Hebrew text “you” and “your word” stand side by side. In verses 137–44 the writer aligns the righteous God with a righteous word. According to verses 105, 130, 135, God and God’s word give light. The life-giving quality of the word and the Lord are proclaimed in verse 93. Just as God is to be feared, so is his word (vv. 63, 120).

The Word of God

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because Hebrews 4:1-13 is mentioned in the definition.

Armor

The Bible depicts war and warlike acts throughout. The arms are both offensive and defensive in nature. The most common types of offensive weapons are swords, axes, spears, bows and arrows, slings, and stones. Defensive weapons include the shield and the helmet. An army’s arsenal was usually kept in a storehouse called an armory (1 Kings 10:17; Isa. 22:8; Neh. 3:19).

Arms

Sword. In the OT, the word “sword” (khereb) appears for the first time in Gen. 3:24 after Adam and Eve have been evicted from the garden of Eden. A flaming sword was placed there “to guard the way to the tree of life.” Thus, the first use of the sword is defensive. Later in Genesis, Jacob’s sons use swords to avenge the rape of their sister Dinah (Gen. 34:25–26). In most cases the word describes the weapon of choice for most of antiquity. Swords were manufactured of iron (1 Sam. 13:19; Joel 3:10). Some were short and easy to maneuver (Judg. 3:16), while others were long and heavy (1 Sam. 21:9). They could be single- or double-edged, and they were worn in a sheath or scabbard (1 Sam. 17:51; 2 Sam. 20:8). The sword was also supported by a girdle made of leather studded with nails (1 Sam. 18:4; 2 Sam. 20:8). Sometimes, the sword was used figuratively to speak of God’s judgment (Lev. 26:6; Isa. 1:20; Jer. 47:6; 50:35–37; Ezek. 21:9, 28; Hos. 11:6). In the NT, the most common word describing a sword is the Greek machaira, which is used to describe the weapons wielded by the mob that came to arrest Jesus (Matt. 26:47, 55; Mark 14:48), as well as the weapon used by Peter to cut off Malchus’s ear (John 18:10). Another Greek word translated “sword” is rhomphaia, which describes a longer sword, generally worn over one’s shoulder (Rev. 1:16; 6:8; 19:21). The word “sword” is also used figuratively in the NT. The word of God is designated as “the sword of the Spirit” (Eph. 6:17) and as a “double-edged sword” (Heb. 4:12).

Spear. Four main words in the Bible are translated as “spear” or “javelin.” The Hebrew word romakh is translated “spear” or “javelin,” and it appears fifteen times in the OT. The spear was made of iron (Joel 3:10), and those who fell prey to it never survived its penetration (Num. 25:7; 1 Kings 18:28). The other Hebrew word used for the spear is khanit, which appears about fifty times in the OT. It is used to describe Goliath’s spear when he fought David (1 Sam. 17:7), Saul’s spear when he hurled it at David (1 Sam. 18:10–11), and the Assyrian-made “glittering” spear (Nah. 3:3). The third word is khidon, which appears about ten times in the OT. It describes a weapon in the arsenals of Joshua (Josh. 8:18, 26), Goliath (1 Sam. 17:6), and the Babylonians (Jer. 6:23). In the NT, the word “spear” (Gk. longchē) occurs only once, referring to the weapon used to pierce Jesus’ side at his crucifixion (John 19:34).

Bow and arrow. The bow and arrow was an important offensive weapon in Israel and the surrounding cultures. In the Bible, bow and arrow, either in combination or individually, appear in both a literal (2 Kings 9:24; Isa. 37:33) and a figurative sense (Pss. 11:2; 64:7; Isa. 49:2; Lam. 3:12; Zech. 9:13). There is extrabiblical evidence suggesting that the Egyptians and the Syrians also used the bow and arrow as part of their military arsenal.

Sling. Primitive but effective, the sling was used not only in Israel but also in Egypt and Babylon. Easy to manufacture, it used stones as ammunition; thus it was the weapon of choice for those lacking raw material to build weapons made of metal. Besides David’s use of the sling in his encounter with Goliath (1 Sam. 17:40), men from the tribe of Benjamin used the sling with remarkable accuracy (Judg. 20:16).

Ax. Besides its primary role for cutting down trees (Deut. 19:5; Judg. 9:48; Jer. 10:3), the ax probably was used in war as well. (See also Ax, Ax Head.)

Armor

Shield. The shield is one of the most ancient defense weapons. Two Hebrew words are used to depict a shield. The magen appears for the first time in Gen. 15:1, where it is used figuratively to speak of God’s protection of Abraham. It is used in the same manner one other time, in Deut. 33:29. It is frequently used as a figure of speech by the psalmists to denote the same idea of divine protection (Pss. 3:3; 7:10; 18:2, 30; 28:7; 33:20; 59:11; 84:9, 11; 115:9–11; 119:114; 144:2). When used literally, the term refers to a shield made of wood and sometimes overlaid with leather. Solomon used gold to manufacture shields (1 Kings 10:17), while Rehoboam manufactured them of bronze (1 Kings 14:27). This type of shield was used as a defensive weapon by the Israelites throughout their history (Judg. 5:8; 1 Chron. 5:18; 2 Chron. 9:16; 14:8; 17:17; 23:9; Neh. 4:16). It was also used by the Syrians (Isa. 22:6), Assyrians (Isa. 37:33), Egyptians (Jer. 46:3), and Persians (Ezek. 27:10). The other Hebrew term translated “shield” is tsinnah. This was larger than the magen and was meant to cover the fighter’s entire body. It was the type of shield carried by Goliath’s shield bearer (1 Sam. 17:7, 41), manufactured by King Solomon (1 Kings 10:16), used by the Gadites who joined David while fleeing from Saul (1 Chron. 12:8), and used by Israel’s army during the reigns of Rehoboam (2 Chron. 11:12) and Asa (2 Chron. 14:8). The Greek word thyreos is the LXX rendering of the Hebrew tsinnah, and it appears only once in the NT. Paul uses the word figuratively when speaking about the “shield of faith” (Eph. 6:16).

Helmet. The helmet had the obvious defensive purpose of protecting a combatant’s head. It was made of leather or light metal, such as bronze (1 Sam. 17:5, 38). In both Testaments, salvation is spoken of figuratively as a “helmet” (Isa. 59:17; Eph. 6:17; 1 Thess. 5:8).

Coat of mail. Body armor was used for the protection of the warrior not only in Israel but also in other ancient Near Eastern nations. The Hebrew term shiryon is variously translated as “coat of mail” (ESV, RSV, NRSV), “coat of scale armor” (NIV), or “habergeon” (KJV). Goliath wore this type of body armor (1 Sam. 17:5, 38), and his was manufactured of bronze. Despite wearing a shiryon, Israel’s king Ahab was fatally wounded in battle (1 Kings 22:34). In an attempt to strengthen Judah’s military power, King Uzziah also provided coats of mail for his army (2 Chron. 26:14). It was also used during postexilic times, Nehemiah’s workers having benefited from its protection (Neh. 4:16). Shiryon (Gk. thorax) is used figuratively to speak of a “breastplate” of righteousness and of love (Isa. 59:17; Eph. 6:14; 1 Thess. 5:8).

Arms

Arms

Ax. Besides its primary role for cutting down trees (Deut. 19:5; Judg. 9:48; Jer. 10:3), the ax probably was used in war as well. (See also Ax, Ax Head.)

Armor

Authority

The concept of authority in Scripture includes two distinct elements. First, a person has authority in various settings if he or she has the right to tell others what to do and decide how matters should be arranged. Second, a person has authority if he or she has not only the right to rule, as in the first case, but also the power to control, so that what this person decrees actually happens. When the angel of the Lord tells Hagar, “Go back to your mistress and submit to her,” he employs the first aspect of authority (Gen. 16:9). Hagar must do what Sarah tells her to do. The same sense of authority operates in Deut. 1:15, where Moses recalls, “So I took the leading men of your tribes, wise and respected men, and appointed them to have authority over you” (cf. Exod. 18:13–27). On the other hand, when Yahweh says of his word, “It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it,” the second sense of authority also plays a role (Isa. 55:11; cf. Heb. 4:12). Likewise regarding the one who “overcomes” in the book of Revelation: the Son gives the church authority, and its people rule the nations “with an iron scepter” (2:26–27). Both ideas—forensic right and power to effect—arise in that context.

The authority of Christ is a prominent theme of the Gospels, being evidence of his deity and messianic status. In Matthew’s Gospel, for instance, the Sermon on the Mount concludes with the crowd’s wonder that Jesus teaches “as one who had authority,” unlike the teachers of the law (7:28–29). Jesus then displays his authority over diseases (8:1–10), natural forces (8:26–27), and demonic entities (8:28–32), culminating in his authority to forgive sins (9:6) and resuscitate the dead (9:18–26). Mark and Luke also include parallel passages that emphasize the authority of Christ over similar domains. John’s Gospel highlights the authority of Jesus to judge (5:27), to lay down his life and take it up again (10:18), and to grant eternal life to those who abide in him (17:2). The authority of Christ over all events, even the worst of them, is the grand theme of the book of Revelation. Jesus has the right and power to rule for the sake of his church, overcoming all powers that usurp authority in opposition to him (Rev. 4–5; 13; 20). Finally, even the Great Commission proclaims the supreme authority of Christ (Matt. 28:18; cf. Eph. 1:21; Col. 2:10). With God, we expect authority as right and as power always to coincide in the end.

On this same trajectory, the church must submit to authority, first to God and then to human rulers, in the latter case when it can be done in good conscience. Paul’s references to Jesus as “Lord” throughout the Corinthian letters highlight his authority over those whom he has “bought at a price” (1 Cor. 6:9–20). For his own part, Paul can implicitly “pull rank” on the Corinthians, citing his own God-given authority over them (2 Cor. 10:8; 13:10; cf. 1 Tim. 4:2). No one should “lord it over” others (Luke 22:25–26), but even when they do, the servant must respect the master’s authority (1 Pet. 2:17–19). Wives must submit to the servant leadership of their husbands (Eph. 5:22), children must obey their parents (Eph. 6:1–3), slaves must yield to their masters (Eph. 6:5–8), and laypersons must obey the church’s elders (Heb. 13:17).

Respect for authority also extends to secular governments, whatever the character of their leaders. Even though Saul had intended to kill David (1 Sam. 20:33), David is outraged that anyone would kill Saul (2 Sam. 1:14). The apostle Paul has many reasons to distrust secular governments and defy their authority; yet when he is subjected to official abuse, he respects Rome’s laws (Acts 16:16–40; 21–28). In Rom. 13:1–6 Paul commands the church to be subject to governing authorities, assuming that God has established them, so that “whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted” (v. 2). In 1 Tim. 2:1–3 the church is called to prayer for secular rulers. These passages do not require obedience to human authority even when it conflicts with the will of God (Acts 5:29), but they do prevent the church from hindering the gospel with outbreaks of revolutionary enthusiasm.

Bible

Reading, understanding, interpreting, and properly applying the word of God to life and ministry is the work of Bible study. The essence of this work is the systematic and methodical analysis of the biblical text. The methods that one uses to understand the text of Scripture will vary in keeping with one’s presuppositions concerning the nature of the Bible and the preunderstandings of the interpreter. A methodical study of the Bible considers the nature and state of the biblical text, the issues related to the interpreter, and a procedure for discovering authorial intent.

The Nature of the Bible

Revelation. We begin with the assumption (or presupposition) that the Bible is the revealed word of God, the contents of which were progressively made known to authors guided by the Holy Spirit. God guided the authors of Scripture, using their personalities and writing styles, so that the canonical books of the Bible were composed exactly as God intended. These books in their original form are inspired and inerrant. The word of God is true and trustworthy and thus a reliable rule for faith and practice.

The ability of God to communicate with his creation, along with his desire to make himself known to his human creatures, is the essence of revelation. The preservation of God’s communication, the revelation of his will to people in the word of God, is what makes the Bible a unique literary document, distinguished from all other literary productions. God manifests himself in a general way to all people through creation and conscience (general revelation) and in a special way to select individuals at particular times (special revelation). These communications and manifestations are available now only by consulting certain sacred writings. The revelation given by God and recorded by people in the canon of Scripture is what God spoke in the past. However, the living and abiding nature of the word (Heb. 4:12) spoken in a past, historical context continues to be relevant. The voice of God can still be heard today. Just as revelation determines how theology is formulated, so revelation determines how a biblical text is to be read in the process of literary analysis.

Given the nature of the Bible’s origin, it is historically accurate in what it teaches. This accuracy is not limited to spiritual and doctrinal issues; it is inseparably connected with the historical and factual. Thus, when the Bible makes reference to political and historical figures, it speaks with authority and accuracy.

Accessibility and clarity. The word of God is a written text revealed and inspired by God (2 Tim. 3:16–17), who engaged about fifty authors over a period of approximately eleven hundred years. The OT text was originally recorded in Hebrew and Aramaic (Gen. 31:47; Ezra 4:8–6:18; 7:12–26; Jer. 10:11). The NT text was originally recorded in Koine Greek. Since the text was composed using the languages and literary conventions of the day, it was written to be intelligible and understandable. The biblical text has been distributed throughout the world and translated into just about every major language, so that the text continues to be accessible to many people today.

As Martin Luther observes in The Bondage of the Will, the clarity of the Bible is twofold. There is external clarity that can be discerned through the laws of grammar, and there is internal clarity attained through the work of the Holy Spirit illuminating the reader of Scripture. Related to these points is the perspicuity of Scripture, which refers to the clarity of Scripture in its main points. Unnuanced, these principles can create unfortunate misunderstandings. The clarity and perspicuity of Scripture relate to the result or the outcome of Bible study and only to major teachings. The intended message of Scripture is clear, understandable, and accessible.

Historical, literary, and theological aspects. While the Bible is written to be clear and accessible, the process of discerning the clarity is complex and involves a thorough examination of the historical, literary/linguistic, and theological aspects of each biblical text. Since the Bible is a document characterized by literary, historical, and theological impulses, it must be interpreted with these impulses in mind.

The historical character of the text affirms that the historical details (culture, setting, time, people or characters in the story, and readers of the composition) of a narrative are absolutely essential to the meaning and the message of the text. Historical details create the stage for what God is doing with his people in time and space. Historical details remind the reader that the written word has a context. The text is anchored to time and place.

The literary character of the text involves both the rhetorical strategies and the linguistic factors of a written text that are critical to the communication process. The act of literary communication involves the author/sender sending a message or text to the reader/recipient. The Bible must be interpreted in keeping with the act of literary communication: author, reader, and text. Literary types, structural development, and discourse function are formal features of the text that contribute to the communicating author’s intended meaning. The OT uses at least five basic literary types or genres: law, historical narrative, poetry, wisdom, and apocalyptic. The NT uses some of the same literary types, as well as parables and the epistolary, or letter, form. Gospel can also be considered a distinct literary form.

Finally, the text has a theological aspect, an ideology, a message, and an intention that God reveals on the historical stage by means of appropriate literary devices.

Unity and diversity. There is a definite unity to the diversity of the Bible that must be grasped in the interpretive process. Opinions vary depending on one’s understanding of the origin and nature of Scripture. Some readers stress the diversity of the biblical text, choosing to highlight apparent contradictions and irresolvable situations. Others go to the other extreme and may be in danger of oversimplifying, collapsing contexts, and ignoring the message of the text. Consider, for example, the importance of not reading too much into the discussion of faith and works as developed by Paul and James. The diversity of emphasis in these two authors is not contradictory in the overall message of the Bible.

Diversity obviously exists in the languages, writers, cultures, and message of various books of the Bible. However, given the reality of divine authorship, these diverse pieces are woven together coherently. There are longitudinal themes such as kingdom, covenant, and messiah that run from the OT into the NT. In addition, there is the developed use of terminology across both Testaments with terms such as “redemption” and “the word.”

The unity/diversity aspect of the biblical text ultimately contributes to an enriched understanding of both biblical and systematic theology. Biblical theology tends to consider the diversity of the writers and the different time periods and is willing to let diverse themes stand together. Systematic theology, which builds upon the findings of biblical theology, is more attentive to the unity of Scripture. These approaches complement each other and encourage what is called an “analogy of faith.” Once again, Luther gave shape to this phrase by opposing the ecclesiastical tradition of the church in favor of Scripture as the basis of dogma. The “analogy of faith” principle advocates that doctrine must cohere and not contradict the holistic teaching of Scripture. Doctrine cannot be a formulation of a few proof texts.

Summary. These summations concerning the nature of Scripture are by no means exhaustive, but they do provide a foundation for determining the nature and use of various interpretive methods. The process of interpretation will be given more attention below, but at this point it is worth emphasizing that methods of Bible study must contribute to the discovery of the author’s intended meaning. Since God is the ultimate author, our concern is to know his intended meaning. This goal is not without challenge. Many conclude that original authorial intent is unattainable because of the distance between our present cultural and historical situation and that of the biblical writers. An additional obstacle is the variety of interpretations that arise from community use of the biblical text. The challenges of time, culture, geography, and language can be faced successfully to arrive at the clear meaning of Scripture by means of a methodical analysis of all aspects of the biblical text.

The Role of the Interpreter

Before considering the relation of the interpreter to the process of Bible study methods, it is helpful to sort out who is the audience of a text. Written texts are composed with someone in mind, an original audience or recipients, who may or may not read the finished product. Beyond the original readers there is an extended audience of readers throughout time, including us, who read and interpret the word of God and seek to apply it to their lives.

Preunderstandings and presuppositions. The readers of the biblical text apply the methods of Bible study in order to understand the intended meaning of Scripture. In addition to the science of methodology there is an art to interpretation that involves recognizing personal preunderstandings brought to the text and presuppositions influencing an interpretation of the textual data.

So how do we differentiate a preunderstanding from a presupposition? “Preunderstanding” refers to the preconceived notions and understandings that one brings to the text, which have been formulated, both consciously and subconsciously, before one actually studies the text in detail. This includes specific experiences and encounters with the text that tend to make us assume that we already understand it. Sensitivity to preunderstanding reminds us that we are never approaching the text for the first time, completely neutral or totally objective. Our personal experiences, cultural influences (music, movies, literature), family background, church, race, and nationality are factors influencing our preunderstanding. These preunderstandings are ultimately corrected or nurtured by the constant influence of the biblical text.

Presuppositions, on the other hand, are the faith commitments held by Christians that do not change each time they study the Bible (in contrast to preunderstanding). This article, for example, began with a statement of presuppositions regarding God and the Bible. The analogy of faith deems such presuppositions to be unchangeable constants.

Approach to the text. How, then, should the interpreter approach the text? Although total objectivity is not a realistic goal, Christian readers do want to understand what God has revealed for them. So, the text is approached through faith and by means of the Holy Spirit, who gives understanding of the word that God authored. In order for this to happen, the reader must stand before the biblical text and allow it to speak rather than standing behind it to push it in a predetermined direction. The goal of Bible study is discovery of meaning, not creation of meaning.

A critical factor in Bible study is the realization that the process is an exercise with sacred dimensions. The primary object in this task is to know God, to understand his will, and to love and trust him, which is Paul’s desire for all Christians (Col. 1:9–14; Eph. 1:15–23; 3:14; Phil. 3:8–13). God is glorified when we find our joy and delight in him through an enriched understanding of his word. This can happen when one depends upon the Holy Spirit for understanding (1 Cor. 2:9–16). The study of the sacred text is a delicate balance of thinking, working, and analyzing while reverently and humbly depending upon the Spirit.

The Methods of Bible Study

Terminology. The activity of interpretation is best described as a spiral, a twist of assorted factors that take the reader from the intention of the original context to the present context of life within the community of the church. The process involves terms and procedures that can be confusing. The word “hermeneutics” is most commonly understood to describe the science and art of biblical interpretation. The goal of hermeneutics is to discern the original intent of the text (“what it meant”) and the contemporary significance of the text (“what it means”). Scholars regularly discuss which of these two is primary in hermeneutical process. The term, however, is broad enough to cover both aspects.

The English word “exegesis” is derived from a Greek term meaning “to lead out.” When applied to Bible study, it defines the nature of the work as taking meaning out of the text and not reading meaning into it. The exegetical process involves the study of words, syntax, grammar, and theology. Another critical term, “contextualization,” refers to an aspect of the interpretive process involving cross-cultural communication of the text’s significance for today.

Defining these key terms in hermeneutics brings to the surface an ongoing discussion associated with Bible study, the question of meaning, which is defined in several ways. Meaning is understood by some as the author’s intention. Some scholars explain meaning as referent (what the author is talking about), others describe it as sense (what is being said about the referent), and finally it can be understood as significance (a contemporary, cross-cultural significance).

Inductive Bible study. How one gets to meaning involves a process of study, the crux of which is the practice of inductive Bible study. Although this objective process can be defined in several ways, it is distinguished by four key elements.

(1) The first element is observation. This involves a careful, close reading of the text to determine exactly what it says. This step makes repeated use of the who, what, when, where, and why questions that enable the reader to become fully saturated with the particulars of the passage. Attention to textual detail will result in accurate interpretation. Observation requires a will to observe, exactness in making observations, and persistence and endurance in the process. Observation is focused on the words of the passage, the structure (the relations and interrelations between terms), the literary form, and the atmosphere or tone. (2) Interpretation follows. The goal of this element is to define meaning and to answer the question, What does this text mean? (3) Correlation, the third element, asks, How does this text relate to the rest of the Bible (cf. analogy of faith)? (4) The fourth element, application, asks, What does this text mean to me?

Each step in the inductive process is elaborate and includes its own particular interests and issues that are critical for determining meaning. Take, for example, the issues of meaning associated with the second step, interpretation. This process must be fully engaged for accuracy in interpretation. The business of interpretation involves a constant interaction of parts. Microaspects are observed in light of macrofeatures, and vice versa.

The interpretive process of the text is fairly standard. Given the nature of inductive analysis, the inductive process begins at the microlevel of examining and interpreting terms, words, and sentences. It then highlights the next structural levels of paragraphs, units of paragraphs, chapters, and then the book itself.

Context and literary type. Since context and literary type are critical elements in the exercise of analysis, attention will be given to each. It is often said that context determines meaning. This statement is a reminder that a term, a theme, or a structural element is ultimately governed by a larger set of factors. The term “trunk,” for example, in the context of a family vacation could refer to what is packed, whereas in the conversation of lumberjacks it could be a reference to a tree. Context takes into consideration all historical referents. In addition, context includes all the individual parts of a composition (phrases, sentences, paragraphs, chapters). Examination of a book’s particular historical context involves also looking at the geography, politics, economics, and cultural practices of a given audience featured. The danger of ignoring context in biblical study is that original authorial intent is replaced with all kinds of self-centered textual understandings.

Literary type is also a critical factor in the inductive process. Another word for literary form is genre, derived from a French term that can be translated “kind, sort, style.” It denotes a type or species of literature or literary form. Genre analysis profitably yields an understanding of the author’s intention in a given literary composition. For example, genre triggers the reader’s expectations and reading strategy. Genre guides the reader in understanding how to read and interpret a given text. For example, we read and interpret a story differently from the way we read and interpret a poem. Each of these genres has its own rules and strategies for communicating meaning. Genre analysis involves observing the form along with the mood, setting, function, and content of the text.

Each literary type has a set of distinctive characteristics that must be examined. To understand what the biblical authors are saying (and what God is saying through them), we must play by the rules of the literary genre that they selected. Genre is a generalization or an abstraction within which variation occurs. Thus, a genre may be defined broadly and include many texts that share fewer traits, while on the other hand it may be defined in a more narrow way and include fewer texts sharing many more traits.

The process of genre analysis is undertaken inductively. The analysis begins with the literary class, continues with the individual texts, and then interacts with both. Genre can be understood only by analyzing the parts of a given text. Although there are plenty of helpful textbooks devoted to virtually every literary type, one must keep in mind that genre descriptions arise out of the details of the text. Genre is not a predescribed form that is imposed on the text for the discovery of authorial intent.

Once the historical, literary, and theological aspects of the particular book are settled, the book is then analyzed in its specific canonical context (NT or OT) and then considered in the overall canon (the Bible). The results of this process are then pursued in relation to the interests of biblical and systematic theology.

Summary. The method of inductive Bible study is not only a specific procedure of analysis, but also a guide for a variety of methodical practices. The process of inductive Bible study encourages a spirit of attention to detail and reminds the reader of the overall goal in interpretation: to know what the text meant and means. In addition, the very nature of the inductive method promotes a curiosity and yields a definite joy of discovery. The inductive process is a guide to the interpreter in an analysis of either the Hebrew or the Greek text.

Other methods of Bible study. There are other methods of Bible study associated with distinct views of the Bible’s nature and origin. These critical methods of interpretation arise out of a discussion regarding how the Bible should be interpreted. The history of this discussion goes all the way back to the third century AD with the debates between the Alexandrians and Antiochians. The sixteenth-century Reformation, the eighteenth-century Enlightenment, and the twentieth century were significant turning points that yielded new ways of conceiving the world and the biblical text. Thus, it is important to understand that there are no neutral methods of biblical interpretation.

Historical-critical approaches. The more-popular critical methods of Bible study came to the forefront in the eighteenth, nineteenth, and twentieth centuries with the rise of deism and rationalism. The prevailing opinion of this time was the fundamental similarity of all historical texts and all historical events. The historical-critical method was founded on the principles of criticism, analogy, and correlation. The supernatural origin of the Bible is denied, and it is considered to be a book like all other historical documents. The biblical text is viewed as a tradition created. It is an artifact of the evolutionary process preserved and passed along to a subsequent generation and must be approached with an attitude of doubt.

In contrast to the approach taken in this article, the historical-critical understanding of the locus of revelation is not the biblical text revealed by God. The locus of revelation shifts outside the text. The reader no longer looks to the text to hear the word of God. The reader now looks behind or beyond the biblical text to another story, one that is independent of the biblical text. Instead of studying a process of progressive revelation, the historical-critical methodologies are committed to sorting out complex historical traditions. Sources are identified, sorted chronologically, and studied for their distinctive themes. The methods are sometimes organized according to the particular interests of schools of thought: history of religions, history of traditions, history of forms, history of redactions.

Literary approaches. Finally, there are methods of Bible study associated with the set of literary presuppositions. First, this approach to the biblical text takes an ahistorical view of the text. In other words, there is no concern for its historical cause and effect. It is concerned only with a synchronic analysis of the finished product. Second, the text is viewed as an autonomous entity. Once a text is completed, it has a life of its own. The interpretive process is then devoted to the text’s final form, looking at the whole instead of the parts. Meaning comes from the language and style of the text. Finally, meaning is understood as aesthetics; it is not related to authorial intention or a historical occasion. Theoretically, the literary approach views the text as if it is cut off from an author and from a historical context. In this construct, meaning shifts from the past to the present. Interpretation then is an interaction of text and reader. The methods of interpretation associated with these literary presuppositions include literary criticism, rhetorical criticism, structuralism, narrative criticism, and reader response criticism.

Bible Formation and Canon

Bible formation and canon development are best understood in light of historical events and theological principles. In the historical-theological process we learn what God did and how he engaged a variety of people to produce Scripture as the word of God. The Bible is the written revelation of the triune God, who made himself known to his creation. The divine actions of God to reveal himself resulted in a written text recognized to be authoritative and thus copied and preserved for future generations. The process of recognizing and collecting authoritative books of the Scriptures occurred over time and involved consensus.

Bible Formation

Revelation. The process of Bible formation begins with God revealing. The act of revelation involved God communicating truth to the human writers in a progressive and unified manner. Inspiration is the act of God the Holy Spirit, who superintended the biblical authors so that they composed the books of Scripture exactly as he intended. God used the biblical writers, their personalities and their writing styles, in a manner that kept them from error in composing the original written product, the Scriptures. The resulting books of the Bible constitute God’s permanent special revelation to humankind.

Both Testaments affirm the work of revelation along with the formation of a body of divine writings. The OT is dominated by the phrase “thus says the Lord” and similar expressions (cf. Gen. 9:8; Josh. 24:27; Isa. 1:2; Jer. 1:7 and contrast Ps. 135:15–19). Every part of the OT is viewed as the word of God (Rom. 3:2). This is confirmed by Jesus’ attitude toward the Scriptures (Matt. 19:4–5; 21:42; 22:29; cf. Luke 11:50–51; 24:44).

Four NT passages help us understand the work of inspiration. A factual statement regarding the extent and nature of inspiration is made in 2 Tim. 3:16. According to 2 Pet. 1:19–20, the Holy Spirit purposefully carried persons along to produce the prophetic word, and 1 Cor. 2:10–13 supports the choice of the words in the work of composing the inspired product. Finally, Peter comments that Paul was given wisdom to produce inspired literary documents in the canon of Scripture (2 Pet. 3:14–18).

Authority. Books formed and authored by God in this manner are authoritative. Because the Bible is the divinely inspired word of God reliably composed in the originals, it is binding upon people in their relationship with God and other people. Biblical authority derives from God’s eternal character and the content of his word preserved in Scripture. The inscripturated word of God is authoritative and requires obedience.

The authority of God’s word is affirmed and illustrated in the creation and fall narratives. In the fall, Adam and Eve rebelled against God’s command (Gen. 3:3–4) and were expelled from the garden. In subsequent periods of biblical history, God’s spoken and written word continued to be the basis for belief and conduct. God summarized his will in the Ten Commandments (Exod. 20:1-17; Deut. 5:6–21) and held his people accountable to it (Deut. 6:2; Josh. 1:8; 2 Kings 17:5–23). The authoritative word embraced by faith protects the believer from sin (Ps. 119:11). The fool is the person who rejects God’s authority (Pss. 14:1; 53:1). The apostle Paul acknowledged the authority of the gospel for his own life and ministry (Gal. 1:6–9). God the Holy Spirit impresses upon the believer the authority of the Bible as the reliable rule for faith and practice (John 6:63).

God made provision for a reliable and trustworthy preservation of his authoritative word in the multiplicity of extant manuscripts. God commanded that his revealed word be copied (Deut. 17:8–18; 24:8; 31:9, 25–26; 33:8–10) for administrative and personal purposes (Deut. 6:6; Josh. 1:8; 23:6; Prov. 3:3; 7:3). Through this process of multiplication the word of God was preserved (Ps. 119:152, 160; Isa. 40:8; cf. Matt. 5:17–18; John 10:35; 1 Pet. 1:22–25).

Canonization

Canonization is the next critical step in the development of the Bible. The word “canon” (Gk. kanōn) refers to a standard, norm, or rule (Gal. 6:16; cf. Ezek. 42:16), and when applied to the Bible, it designates the collection of books revealed by God, divinely inspired, and recognized by the people of God as the authoritative norm for faith and practice. The presupposition of canonicity is that God spoke to his human creatures and his word was accurately recorded. Since inspiration determines canonicity, the books composed by human beings under the direction of the Holy Spirit functioned authoritatively at the time of writing. The people of God then recognized and collected the books that they discerned to be inspired and authoritative (1 Thess. 2:10–16; 2 Pet. 3:15).

The canonical process. The challenge associated with canon and Bible formation is that the Scriptures do not reveal a detailed historical process for recognizing and collecting inspired works. An understanding of this process is derived from the testimony of Jesus, biblical principles, and historical precedents.

Canonical identification is associated with the witness of the Holy Spirit, who worked in connection with the believers to recognize the written documents given by inspiration (1 Thess. 2:13). The Holy Spirit enabled believers to discern a book’s authority and its compatibility with existing canonical revelation (Isa. 8:20; Acts 17:11). Although the question of authorship cannot be positively settled for every OT or NT book, believers recognized the prophets as the OT authors (Deut. 18:14–22) and the apostles as the NT authors. Canonical books were recognized to bear the power of God and to contain an effective message (2 Tim. 3:15–16; Heb. 4:12; 1 Pet. 1:23).

Over time, the authoritative books of Scripture were collected into a body of literature that today forms one book, the Bible. During this process, some believers struggled with the message, content, and ambiguous authorship of books such as Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, and Esther in the OT and Hebrews, James, and 2 Peter in the NT. The pattern of composition and canonical process for the OT provided the foundation for the composition and development of the NT canon. Therefore, the NT books that came to be recognized as canonical were those that were composed in connection with an apostle, doctrinally sound, and widely circulated and used by the churches.

In the collection task some texts were recognized (homologoumena), some were disputed (antilegomena), and others were rejected as unorthodox (pseudepigrapha). Historically, there is no evidence for widespread acceptance of the present-day canon of sixty-six books until the third century AD.

Structure and content. Over the centuries, several canonical lists began to emerge, often influenced by particular theological conclusions. For example, the Samaritan canon, which includes only the first five books of our OT, was compiled by the Samaritans, who were hostile to anything in Israel or Judea outside Samaria. Today, Christian traditions vary in their inclusion or omission of the Apocrypha from their Bibles and in their list of which books are contained in the Apocrypha.

The Babylonian canon, accepted as standard by Jews, contains all the books now recognized as the OT and is divided into three parts: the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. This canon is also known as the Tanak, an acronym derived from the Hebrew words for “law” (torah), “prophets” (nebi’im), “writings” (ketubim). This canonical list traditionally includes twenty-four books (the twelve Minor Prophets are considered to be one book, as are 1–2 Samuel, 1–2 Kings, 1–2 Chronicles, and Ezra-Nehemiah). The twenty-four books of this canonical list are the same as the thirty-nine OT books in current English Bible editions. The law or instruction section includes the first five books of Moses (Genesis through Deuteronomy). The Prophets section is divided into the Former and Latter Prophets. The Former Prophets are the historical books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings. The Latter Prophets include both the Major and the Minor Prophets. The Writings section contains both poetic and wisdom material, along with some historical material.

Historical references to this canonical format are found in extrabiblical sources as early as the second century BC. The grandson of Jesus Ben Sira referenced a threefold canon in the prologue of the apocryphal book Sirach (c. 190 BC); Josephus referenced it in Against Apion (AD 37–95). Jesus acknowledged the threefold division in Luke 24:44 (cf. Matt. 23:34). Among Christian sources, this division is preserved in the oldest extant list of OT books, associated with Bishop Melito of Sardis (AD 170). Tertullian, an early Latin church father (AD 160–250), Origen (AD 254), Hilary of Poitiers (AD 305–366), and Jerome (AD 340–420) affirmed an OT canon of twenty-two or twenty-four books. Most current English versions follow a fourfold structure of law, history, poetry, and prophets.

The twenty-seven books of the NT are attested in lists associated with churches in the eastern and western parts of the Mediterranean world. Two such witnesses are the Thirty-ninth Paschal Letter of Athanasius (AD 367) and the Council of Carthage (AD 397). The canonical list associated with Marcion and the Muratorian list represent fragmentary lists from the early part of the second century AD. In terms of usage, a majority of church fathers recognized and used the twenty-seven NT books in our canon. See also Apocrypha, New Testament; Apocrypha, Old Testament.

Canon

Bible Formation

Canonization

Conviction

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

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

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

Counselor

(1) One gifted with insight into human nature and the ability to discern the wise response in complex situations. Daniel became a counselor in the royal court of Babylon, and because of his knowledge of God, he became distinguished for his superior counsel (Dan. 1:20; 5:11–12). Isaiah prophesied that the Spirit of wisdom and understanding would rest on the Messiah (11:2). Possessing the Spirit and knowledge of Scripture (Heb. 4:12) makes believers competent counselors (Rom. 15:14; Col. 3:16). (2) A rendering of the Greek word paraklētos in John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7 (RSV). See also Advocate; Paraclete.

Earth

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

Heaven and Earth

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

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

The Theology of Land

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

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

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

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

Inheritance

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Exodus

The term “exodus” comes from a Greek word meaning “departure.” Specifically, the exodus refers to Israel’s departure from Egyptian slavery and its move toward the promised land (Canaan). The story of the exodus begins with a description of the harsh conditions under which the children of Abraham lived in Egypt, the raising up of a deliverer, the plagues, the actual departure, and the crossing of the Red Sea. Some treatments of the exodus include the wanderings in the wilderness (this topic is treated separately as a transitional period between the exodus and the conquest and settlement of the promised land; see Wilderness Wandering).

Many questions of interpretation of the exodus are matters of discussion, some of which will be treated below. These include, among other issues, the size of Israel, the date of the events, and the nature of the plagues. Two questions dominate all the others: Did the exodus happen? Does it matter to the message of the Bible whether the exodus happened?

The Nature of the Exodus

The exodus event is described in the first fifteen chapters of the book of Exodus, which opens with a description of Israel’s enslavement in the land of Egypt. The descendants of Israel had been in Egypt since the time of Joseph (see Gen. 37–50). An unspecified but significant number of years had passed since Joseph, and when the action begins in the book of Exodus, the Israelites were no longer honored in the land but reviled. Unmentioned in the Bible, but known from extrabiblical literature, a group called the “Hyksos” (“rulers of foreign countries”), ethnically related to the Hebrews, had taken advantage of an Egypt in political chaos and had dominated it for about a century (c. 1664–1555 BC). The events of Exod. 1 occurred after the Hyksos were expelled from Egypt, and many associate the new distrust of Israel with a general fear of a large Semitic presence in the land once a native Egyptian monarchy had been restored.

The biblical text, however, gives no motive but simply states that an unnamed (see below) pharaoh issued a decree to enslave the Israelites and to kill Israelite baby boys. In this context of enslavement and murder, God raised up a deliverer, Moses. His birth was extraordinary. After giving him birth, Moses’ mother placed him in a papyrus basket and put him on the Nile River. He was discovered by none other than the daughter of Pharaoh, who even hired Moses’ mother as a wet nurse. Thus, Israel’s deliverer was raised in the very household of the pharaoh who was trying to exterminate him.

Parallels to the Moses birth story exist. Especially close is the Sargon legend. Sargon was born to a high priestess who, for unstated reasons, could not keep him. Instead of abandoning him, she placed him in a basket and floated him down the Euphrates, where he was discovered by Aqqi, an irrigation worker. Aqqi raised Sargon, and from there he became the first king of the dynasty of Akkad. Rather than attributing the stories’ similarities to imitation, we should rather understand the action of Moses’ and Sargon’s mothers as the typical way that mothers helped preserve their babies in difficult situations. The moral of the biblical story is that God allows Israel’s future hero to survive so that he can use him to deliver his people.

Nothing is narrated about Moses’ childhood. The next major episode of the exodus involves Moses’ intervention in an altercation between a Hebrew and an Egyptian. Moses, who certainly knew his true parentage, killed an Egyptian who was beating an Israelite. This killing became known, and he had to flee Egypt.

Moses’ flight from Egypt brought him to Midian, an area around the Gulf of Aqabah. He married into the family of a Midianite tribal leader, Jethro. It was here, specifically at Mount Sinai, that God, speaking to Moses at a bush that was in flames but not consumed, called him to return to Egypt to confront Pharaoh. In response to Moses’ hesitation, God made his brother Aaron his companion and spokesperson.

When Moses returned to Egypt, he demanded that Pharaoh allow his people to go into the wilderness for three days in order to celebrate a festival. Ethical issues arise with this demand because it is unlikely that the Israelites would have returned to Egypt after the three days. This deception is not the only instance when lying seems to be divinely approved in the OT. We should likely understand that the pharaoh had forfeited his right to the truth because he intended to use it for evil purposes.

Pharaoh refused to allow the Israelites to leave. In response, God sent a series of disasters (plagues) against Egypt. According to Exod. 12:12, the plagues were judgments directed at the gods of Egypt (see also Num. 33:4). Turning the Nile into blood, God attacked the god of the Nile, Hapi. Darkening the sun, God showed his power over the most important Egyptian deity, the sun god Aten-Re. Climactically, the death of the Egyptians’ firstborn sons and livestock brought tragedy to the god who ruled Egypt, the pharaoh.

The plagues were a series of divinely initiated disasters of nature, miracles, or extraordinary providence, not naturally occurring events, that brought Egypt to its knees. Ultimately, Pharaoh agreed to let Israel leave Egypt. On the evening of the last plague, the Israelites celebrated the Passover (Exod. 12), which ever since has been an annual commemoration of their deliverance from Egypt.

Even after they set off toward the promised land, however, they were not safe. Pharaoh, angry and embarrassed, had a final change of mind and set off after the Israelites. He cornered them with their backs against an impassable body of water known traditionally as the Red Sea. The Hebrew phrase (yam sup) is literally translated “sea of reeds” and probably refers to one of the deepwater lakes that once existed to the north of the Gulf of Suez. In any case, Moses and the Israelites had no chance of escape—that is, no human chance. God opened up the sea so that they could pass through, and when the Egyptians tried to follow, he closed the sea so that it engulfed them. God’s act of rescue and judgment is then celebrated in song (Exod. 15:1–18). After they passed safely through the waters, the Israelites then continued their journey through the wilderness and toward the promised land.

Did It Happen?

The only direct witness of the exodus is the Bible itself. The account given in the book of Exodus is intended to be taken as an actual past event, and those who have confidence in the Bible as a historical source typically do not doubt the historicity of the exodus, although some questions persist, such as the size of the group that left Egypt or whether the exodus was the culmination or the beginning of a process of Israelites moving from Egypt to Israel.

Unfortunately, there is only indirect evidence of Israelite presence in Egypt in the second half of the second millennium BC (see “When Did It Happen?” below). The exodus and Israel are never mentioned in Egyptian records. Of course, it is unlikely that Egypt would have preserved permanent records of such an embarrassing and painful moment in its history. The exodus is not the type of event that Egypt would have memorialized by a pyramid or on tomb walls. What we do have on tomb walls, however, does show in a general sense that Semitic peoples were engaged in slave labor in the second millennium in Egypt. For instance, as early as the reign of Thutmose III, around 1460 BC, we have scenes of foreigners making bricks for the temple of Amun in Thebes. This is one example of indirect evidence that can be marshaled to make the account of the exodus sound reasonable. In this context, we should also note that the first extrabiblical evidence for the existence of Israel as a people in Egypt comes from the very end of the thirteenth century BC, in a victory monument of Pharaoh Merneptah (also known as the Israel Stela) that mentions Israel as a vanquished enemy.

When Did It Happen?

The biblical evidence is ambiguous as to when the exodus took place. Note that the names of the pharaohs are not given. The most straightforward text is 1 Kings 6:1, stating that Solomon began building the temple in his fourth year, which was 480 years after the exodus. Taking this number literally places the exodus in the middle of the fifteenth century BC. Through correlations with Assyrian chronology, which mentions dateable astronomical events, Solomon’s fourth year is reckoned to be approximately 966 BC. If the exodus took place in the fifteenth century BC, then a ruler such as Thutmose III would be a candidate for the pharaoh of the exodus.

Problems arise, however, when this date is compared to the traditional interpretation of archaeological evidence. A full discussion of the issue is impossible here, but as an example, we will note briefly the two “store cities” that Egypt forced Israel to build, Pithom and Ram-eses (Exod. 1:11). In the first place, the name of the second city reflects that of a pharaoh who ruled in the thirteenth century, Ramesses II. It is possible that the book of Exodus has updated the name of a city that had existed as early as the fifteenth century. Indeed, some archaeological remains from the fifteenth century at the archaeological site are widely recognized as the remains of Rameses (Tell Qantir [Daba’]). But it was during the reign of Ramesses II that the city really expanded.

Archaeology better (but not perfectly) supports a date for the exodus in the thirteenth century BC, with Ramesses as the pharaoh of the exodus. This conclusion holds not only for Pithom and Rameses but also for the cities said to be involved in the conquest that took place forty years later (Jericho, Ai, Hazor).

A late date (thirteenth century) for the exodus can be biblically justified by taking the number 480 as symbolic. The number 40 could stand for a generation (like the wilderness generation), and thus 480 years would stand for twelve generations. However, a generation is actually closer to twenty-five years, meaning that twelve generations would “literally” be about three hundred years. Accordingly, the exodus would be dated to the first part of the thirteenth century.

In conclusion, both the archaeological evidence and the chronological statements of the Bible are ambiguous. Archaeological results are often open to more than one interpretation. While insisting on the historicity of the exodus, we still cannot be dogmatic about when the exodus took place, whether in the fifteenth century or in the thirteenth.

Does It Matter Whether It Happened?

Many today understand the story of the exodus to be just that, a story. Often stories are meaningful in and of themselves, apart from whether the events they relate actually happened. However, in the case of the exodus, if the events associated with it did not happen, then the moral of the story has no relevance. The main teaching of the exodus is that Yahweh is a God who can rescue his people when they are beyond human aid. Indeed, that is how the exodus was understood even in later OT settings (see Ps. 77). At the exodus God was establishing a track record, showing that he was capable of and, under certain conditions, willing to rescue his people.

Biblical Theology

The exodus is the salvation event that defined Israel as a nation. Occurring at the beginning of Israel’s national history, it served as an important reminder of God’s concern and care for his people. After the exodus, the Israelites journeyed through the wilderness toward the promised land. Due to their rebellion and lack of trust, God punished them by making them stay in the wilderness for forty years, enough time for the first generation of adults to die out. With the exception of the faithful spies, Joshua and Caleb, those who stood on the eastern bank of the Jordan River forty years later did not experience the crossing of the Red Sea. To demonstrate that the God of power was still with them, God caused the waters of the Jordan River to stop, evoking memories of the exodus (Josh. 3).

The psalms also often recall the exodus in such a way that this past event may bring confidence for the present and hope for the future. Psalm 77 illustrates this, as does Ps. 114, which personifies the sea as the forces of chaos, afraid of God, who will control it.

Interestingly, the later prophets often speak of the exodus as if it were a future event. Isaiah (4:5; 11:15–16; 40:1–11; 43:18–19; 48:21; 49:11–12; 50:2; 51:9–10; 52:10; 63:11–14), Jeremiah (16:14–15; 23:7–8), Hosea (2:14–16), and many others announce God’s coming judgment on his sinful people. Looking beyond judgment, though, they also envision a future rescue of the faithful remnant, and often they do this in the language of the exodus.

When did this second exodus take place? Ezra 1–6 recounts the early returns under leaders such as Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel. Those who heard the prophetic message would have understood the exile as a reversion to bondage and a wandering in the wilderness. Thus, we should not be surprised that the faithful would think of the return to the land as a fulfillment of the promises of the second exodus. It is striking that just as the Egyptians gave gifts to the departing children of Israel (Exod. 3:21–22; 11:2; 12:35–36), so too did the people of Israel’s present foreign neighbors: “All their neighbors assisted them with articles of silver and gold, with goods and livestock, and with valuable gifts, in addition to all the freewill offerings” (Ezra 1:6). As the exodus generation offered gifts for the construction of the tabernacle (Exod. 35:21–29), so too the returnees contributed gifts for the construction of the temple (Ezra 2:68–69).

However, the return from exile was just the beginning. The NT understands that Jesus Christ is the ultimate fulfillment of the exodus; his work on earth follows the pattern of the exodus.

His ministry began with his baptism at the Jordan River, reflecting the Israelites’ crossing through the Red Sea (which was their baptism [1 Cor. 10:1–6]), after which he went into the wilderness for forty days and nights (Matt. 4:1–11). Here he experienced the same temptations as Israel did during its forty-year wandering. In contrast to the Israelites, Jesus showed that he was the obedient Son of God by not succumbing to the temptation, each time quoting the book of Deuteronomy, Moses’ last sermon to the Israelites in the wilderness.

After naming twelve disciples (reflecting the twelve tribes of Israel), Jesus preached a sermon from a mountain whose subject was the law (Matt. 5–7). Such a topic in such a setting would have reminded a Jewish Christian audience of God giving Moses the law on Mount Sinai.

These are just some examples of the connection between the exodus and Jesus’ life. The connection culminates, though, on the cross, since Jesus is executed on the eve of the Passover, the annual celebration of the deliverance from Egypt.

While the connections with Jesus’ life are arguably the most significant, the book of Hebrews also uses the exodus theme, though in a slightly different way. Hebrews likens contemporary Christians to the wilderness generation. They have been freed from their bondage (sin) and are on the way to the promised land (heaven), but for now they are in the wilderness. The author makes the connection to warn Christians not to rebel against God, as many in the wilderness generation did, and thus suffer punishment (Heb. 3:7–4:13).

Foreknow

In systematic theology, “foreknowledge” usually refers to the doctrine that God knows all things, events, and persons before they exist or occur and that this knowledge has been his from all eternity. No single Hebrew term in the OT corresponds to the English term; the concept is expressed rather on the phrase or sentence level. In the NT, the Greek verb proginōskō and noun prognōsis are translated “foreknow” and “foreknowledge,” respectively. Recently in evangelical circles there has been intense debate as to whether foreknowledge and omniscience are in fact taught in the biblical texts.

Old Testament

In the OT narratives, especially in the Pentateuch, there are numerous instances that indicate some limitations to God’s knowledge in general and his foreknowledge in particular. God appears to be somewhat surprised by how wicked humanity has become before he decides to send the flood (Gen. 6:5). God comes down and discovers that the inhabitants of Babel have started to build a tower and considers how to stop the activity (11:5–7). God comes down to ascertain whether the outcry that has come to his ears about the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah is actually as bad as the reports would indicate (18:20–21). God tests Abraham by commanding him to offer Isaac as a sacrifice, and when Abraham begins to do so, he declares that now he knows that Abraham really fears him (22:1–18).

Often, narratives such as these are regarded by theologians as cases of anthropomorphism, statements made about God that speak of him as if he had human characteristics—in this case, limited knowledge. And certainly there are many other narratives in the Pentateuch that appear to give the opposite picture. God asks Cain where his brother Abel is, though he apparently already knows the answer (Gen. 4:9–10). God relates to Abraham the course that Israelite history will take for the next several hundred years (15:13–16). God seems to be in a real-time chess match with Pharaoh, but in actuality God knows all the moves that both he and Pharaoh will make before the game ever begins (Exod. 3:19–22; 4:21–23; 7:1–5).

Given this data, perhaps the better explanation for what is happening in these texts is not that the biblical narrator is employing anthropomorphism but rather that God is accommodating himself both to the characters in the narrative and to the narrator of the stories. That is, at this stage of revelatory history God is not yet revealing himself as fully omniscient and prescient of the future in its entirety. In the conceptual world of the ancient Near East, deities were regularly portrayed as being interactive—deliberating, investigating, discovering, making decisions, and so forth. God therefore may well have accommodated himself to the larger milieu in revealing himself to the patriarchs and earliest biblical narrators.

Whatever the case may be, later biblical revelation certainly seems to present God as fully omniscient and prescient. “Death and Destruction lie open before the Lord—how much more do human hearts!” (Prov. 15:11). Before words reach our tongues, God knows them completely (Ps. 139:4). No one has ever had to keep God informed or provide him with counsel (Isa. 40:13–14). There are no limits to his understanding (Ps. 147:5). The God of Israel challenges all idols and all other gods to a foreknowledge contest: if they are able, let them tell what is going to happen, as Yahweh does (Isa. 42:9; 44:6–8; 48:3–8). God alone makes the end known from the beginning (Isa. 46:10), and he has been doing so from ancient times (Acts 15:17–18). God knew Jeremiah long before he was ever a fetus (Jer. 1:5). Our prayers do not make God finally aware of our situation; he already knows what our needs are (Matt. 6:8). Indeed, God answers our prayers before they are even prayed (Isa. 65:24). “Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare” before his eyes (Heb. 4:13).

New Testament

One especially important exegetical question for the NT involves the precise meaning of the aforementioned Greek words, proginōskō (“foreknow”) and prognōsis (“foreknowledge”). The question concerns whether these words, in their contexts, are merely cognitive terms, indicating simply that God knows things before they happen, or whether the terms are volitional terms and/or affective terms. That is, do they indicate foreordaining and/or foreloving? Are they terms that have basically the same meaning as “election” and “predestination”?

Giving credence to this position is the fact that in some of the passages where these words occur there are other words that definitely refer to God willing things to happen. In Acts 2:23, Peter declares that Jesus was handed over to his crucifiers by “God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge.” The verse can hardly mean that God decided to do this because he already knew it was going to happen. Rather, the terms “deliberate plan” and “foreknowledge” act together to convey the single idea of God’s complete control, planning, and sovereignty in the death of Jesus. Likewise, in 1 Pet. 1:20 the word does not mean that the Son was simply “foreknown” before the foundation of the world, but rather that he was “chosen” (NIV), “destined” (NRSV), “foreordained” (KJV).

In Rom. 11:2, Paul states that God has not rejected “his people, whom he foreknew.” Again, it is hard to read this as being only cognitive. Rather, the use of the term appears to imply some kind of “affective” foreknowing, a “setting his love upon” (cf. Deut. 7:7–8), a choosing. It is important to note that the text says God foreknew not things but people. On the one hand, God foreknew all people who would ever exist, but in this passage the foreknowing refers to a particular people. And the foreknowing most likely takes its sense from the use of the word “know” in the OT, which on numerous occasions refers to the relationship of acknowledgment and love between God and his people.

In the same way, in Rom. 8:29 “those God foreknew he also predestined,” “foreknew” again appears to be a volitional, affective term—that is, “those whom God set his love upon.” That it means that God knew how these people would respond to the gospel and then chose them seems to be excluded by passages such as Rom. 9:11–12, where God’s purposes in election are not determined by people’s actions. Finally, in 1 Pet. 1:1–2 the “elect” to whom Peter is writing are elect according to “foreknowledge of God”; not that God foreknew things about them, but that God foreknew them. This understanding of the terms in context seems preferable.

Foreknowledge

Old Testament

New Testament

Imagination

Often used in a negative sense, the words translated “imagine” and “imagination” relate to the ability to think with the mind, to devise or construct a plan, or one’s own thoughts in contrast to God’s thoughts (Ezek. 13:2, 17). In the OT, imagination is often related to plans with evil intent (Gen. 8:21; Deut. 31:21; Jer. 3:17; 7:24 KJV). Occasionally it refers to using one’s imagination to remain focused on God’s plans (1 Chron. 28:9; 29:18; Isa. 26:3). The NT word is concerned with the product of reasoning and is used negatively (Matt. 9:4; 12:25; Col. 1:21), positively (2 Pet. 3:1), and neutrally (Heb. 4:12). When it derives from the human ability to reason, the end product seems to more consistently lead to negative outcomes (Gen. 6:5).

Infinite

The quality of having no bounds or restraints. The theological and biblical concept of the infinite is of practical importance rather than being merely an abstract statement. “God is infinite” speaks of God’s omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence, not of a numerical conception of God’s size. Although the word “infinite” does not occur in the NIV, the concept of an infinite God is undisputed. Psalm 147:5 refers to God’s knowledge as having “no limit,” as does Heb. 4:13. Additionally, biblical writers sometimes exaggerate and describe large numbers or quantities as infinite for dramatic effect (e.g., “endless sins” [Job 22:5]).

Land

Heaven and Earth

The Theology of Land

Inheritance

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

Leisure Time

Methods of Study

The Nature of the Bible

Finally, the text has a theological aspect, an ideology, a message, and an intention that God reveals on the historical stage by means of appropriate literary devices.

The Role of the Interpreter

The Methods of Bible Study

Midrash

Rabbinic commentary on the Hebrew Bible, either the text or a biblical event. “Midrash” (pl. “midrashim”) is a noun derived from the verb darash, meaning “to seek” or “to inquire.” “Midrash” can refer to the commentary on a single passage, such as a midrash on Gen. 1, or to a whole collection of midrashim, such as Genesis Rabbah. It may also refer to the process by which ancient rabbis interpreted Scripture. Rabbinic midrash seeks theological and halakic answers to contemporary concerns; thus, it is concerned with the application of Scripture to various aspects of life.

Rabbinic Midrash

Midrash uses Scripture to interpret Scripture and uses the Bible as a whole, unified book. Although context is not ignored altogether, mid-rash juxtaposes verses from throughout the Hebrew Bible in order to illuminate a given text or illustrate a point. Verses are strung together to elucidate a theme that the text suggests either implicitly or explicitly. Within this system of Scripture interpreting Scripture, the Pentateuch holds pride of place as the center of the biblical witness. In rabbinic midrash, often the Prophets and the Writings do not have independent voices separate from the Pentateuch but serve a supporting role.

At times, the juxtaposition of verses that occur in midrash seems arbitrary, but this is not the case. A set of midrashic rules, middot, governs how the verses of Scripture are to be used and how argumentation is to be formed. Over time, the rules became more elaborate, but their earliest statement is attributed to the pre–AD 70 rabbi Hillel in the Babylonian Talmud. He lists seven rules:

1. Argument from the less significant to more significant, and vice versa.

2. Argument by analogy when Scripture uses identical expressions.

3. A statement in one verse applies to all topically related verses.

4. Same as the principle in three, but derived from two verses, not just one.

5. Argument from general to particular, and vice versa.

6. Argument from a similar expression found in another passage.

7. Argument from context.

The rabbinic rules of scriptural interpretation are similar to rules for Hellenistic rhetoric and Roman legal argument and thus reflect Hellenistic and Roman influence.

Rabbinic midrash can be characterized broadly as halakic (developing rules for Sabbath observance, ritual purity, sacrifice, etc.) and haggadic (theological, ethical, and whatever does not fall under halakic). Some bodies of rabbinic midrash explore a book of the Bible more or less verse by verse, and others are topical. Some midrashic works are homiletical in nature; they preserve sermon material from synagogue services.

Midrash in the Bible

Although the large compilations of mid-rash are rabbinic and are later than the Bible, midrashic material is also found much earlier. Midrash has its origins in the Bible. The clearest example is Chronicles, which in many respects is a midrash on Samuel and Kings. At Qumran, we find literature that can be classified as rewritten Scripture, such as the Temple Scroll, the book of Jubilees, and the Genesis Apocryphon, which have midrashic features. The Qumran Pesharim are also midrashic, although of a less sophisticated nature than the later rabbinic midrash, and seem to employ the middot.

The NT contains examples of midrashic material. Jesus’ teaching in the Gospels includes some midrashic material. In Luke 4:16–21, Jesus reads from the scroll of Isaiah and interprets the passage as applying to himself. Jesus is delivering a petikhah, a short exposition on a biblical text outside the main synagogue sermon. When debating with the Sadducees over the resurrection, Jesus gives midrashic comment to Exod. 3:6 (Luke 20:27–40). The apostle Paul engages in midrash even more explicitly: for example, he applies Deut. 25:4, concerning not muzzling an ox while it is threshing grain, to the idea that a minister is worthy of being paid for work (1 Cor. 9:9; 1 Tim. 5:18). Paul is arguing from the lesser to the greater in his application of Torah to his contemporary situation.

The most extended midrash in the NT is the book of Hebrews. For example, in Heb. 1–2 the writer applies numerous quotations from the Psalter to Jesus in order to show how he is greater than the angels. In Heb. 4 the writer, through an interpretation of Ps. 95:11, does a midrash on entering into God’s rest, by which he applies God’s resting from his work (Gen. 2:2) to Christians’ entering that rest because of the unbelief of Israel in the wilderness. It appears that the author is forming an argument by analogy in relating Gen. 2:2 and Ps. 95:11.

It can be demonstrated that Jews employed midrashic techniques in their interpretation of Scriptures centuries before the earliest rabbinic midrash compilations were created. We see these techniques in Qumran Pesharim, Philo’s writings, and in the NT. The rabbis made use of long-established interpretive techniques and made them more sophisticated. The difference between Qumranite, ancient Christian, and rabbinic interpretation of Scripture was one of emphasis. For the Qumranites, all Scripture had to speak of their community, which was the true, believing community in the end of days. For the Christians, all Scripture had to speak of Jesus and the salvation that he brought. For the rabbis, all Scripture upheld Torah and obedience to that Torah as the center of Jewish life.

Mystery

A mystery entails knowledge that is disclosed to some but withheld from others. Nothing is mysterious to God (Heb. 4:13), and he alone understands the full purpose of his will (Job 38:1–40:24; Isa. 46:10), but he also condescends to reveal portions of his will to those whom he chooses (John 16:15).

One way that God reveals such mysteries in the OT is through dreams and their interpretation. This is the dynamic at work in Dan. 2, where God reveals secrets to King Nebuchadnezzar through cryptic imagery. The meaning of this imagery remains hidden, however, until the “mystery was revealed to Daniel in a vision” (v. 19). Once revealed, the dreams detail God’s plans for the future of his kingdom.

Similarly, Jesus’ parables make known the character and future of God’s coming kingdom to his chosen servants, while also concealing it from those outside the circle (Matt. 13:18–23). Paul, by contrast, used “mystery” to refer to the disclosure of God’s plan for the redemption of humanity, namely the inclusion of Gentiles within “Israel” (Rom. 11:25). This plan, foreshadowed in the OT but nevertheless hidden in essentials, had only recently been fully revealed in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (Rom. 16:25; Eph. 1:9; 1 Tim. 3:16; cf. 1 Pet. 1:10–12). The gospel message is therefore the revelation of this mystery, the proclamation of the truth about Jesus Christ, now made public to the world (Eph. 3:3–9).

Omnipresence

The English word derives from the Latin omnis (“all”) and praesens (“present”). Though not found in Scripture, the term accurately describes a divine perfection. God is always in his totality everywhere present, yet separate from his creation (Gen. 1; 1 Kings 8:27; Ps. 139:7–12; Jer. 23:23–24; Heb. 4:13). This attribute is to be distinguished from pantheism, which teaches that God is everything, that is, that God and the material world are one and the same. God’s omnipresence is a great comfort for those who seek him but is disconcerting to those who may wish to avoid him (Job 34:21–22; Ps. 139:7; Amos 9:1–4; Jon. 1:3). Although at various times God chose to localize his presence for the purpose of revelation, he always remained transcendent (1 Kings 8:27). Although the lost are said to be removed from the presence of God (2 Thess. 1:9), even in the lake of fire they are in actuality separated from his mercy, grace, and forgiveness, not his essential presence (Job 26:6; Heb. 4:13; Rev. 14:10; 20:11–14).

Omniscience

The English word derives from the Latin omnis (“all”) and sciens (“knowing”). Though not found in Scripture, the term accurately describes an exclusively divine attribute. God has perfect infinite knowledge of himself and everything actual and possible (1 Sam. 23:8–13; Job 37:16; Pss. 33:13–15; 139:2–6, 11–12; 147:5; Prov. 15:3; Isa. 40:14; 46:10; Dan. 2:22; Matt. 11:21–23; John 21:17; Acts 15:18; 1 Cor. 2:10–11; Heb. 4:13; 1 John 3:20). God’s omniscience is eternal, encompassing all things past, present, and future. It includes complete knowledge of all human choices, the occurrence of all events, and the outworking of all contingencies.

Tempt

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

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

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

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

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

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

Temptation

Tempted

Tempting

Wandering in the Wilderness

In the biblical account of the exodus, Israel’s departure from Egypt begins in Exod. 12:37. The original intention was for the Israelites to go to Mount Sinai to receive the law and instructions for the tabernacle and then to proceed to Canaan. But Israel’s trip was not to be quite that simple. Because of the Israelites’ disobedience in the desert, they were condemned to a forty-year period of wilderness wandering, enough time for those twenty years of age or older during the rebellion to die in the wilderness (see Num. 14, which describes what is actually the final rebellion in a series of grumbling incidents that go back to Exod. 15:22–27).

Technically, the wilderness period began immediately after the crossing of the Red Sea. The Israelites passed through the Desert of Shur, the Desert of Sin, Rephidim, and then Sinai itself. These locations, however, were only stations on the way to Sinai, and so they do not pertain to the specific forty-year period of punishment, which begins in Num. 14. Their wandering period would not be officially over until they crossed the Jordan River and entered Canaan (Josh. 3:17).

Mapping the Route

The wilderness wandering, like the exodus and the passage through the Red Sea, are very difficult to outline precisely from a geographical and archaeological point of view. Many of the places named in the lists have not been located. Moreover, the two itinerary lists, one in Num. 33 and the other at various points in Num. 11–22, do not agree on every point. Although the two lists do not directly conflict, Num. 33 includes many more sites than Num. 11–22 and leaves out relatively few. One reason for this difference may be that only Num. 33 is actually intended to be an itinerary, whereas the sites mentioned elsewhere in Numbers are injected in the course of a narrative.

What contributes to difficulties in locating the wilderness route is that biblical names are not those used today, not to mention that many of these places no longer exist at all. Moreover, similarities between some names then and now have no necessary bearing on the issue. Also, it seems that at least some of the biblical names are symbolic. For example, “Meribah” means “quarreling,” and “Massah” means “testing.” These names seem to reflect the events recorded in Exod. 17 rather than being original names.

One of the most contested issues concerning the wilderness wandering is where it began: the location of Mount Sinai. It is commonly accepted that this mountain is located somewhere in the Sinai Peninsula, although numerous places have been suggested. Best known, perhaps, is Jebel Musa, the location of St. Catherine’s monastery, located in the southern portion of the peninsula. This is based not so much on historical evidence, however, as on church tradition. Another theory puts Mount Sinai in the eastern portion of the peninsula, near Midian. One factor in favor of this theory is that Moses first met God on Mount Sinai when he was living in Midian (with Zipporah, his wife, and Jethro, his father-in-law). According to Exod. 3:1, Moses left Jethro’s house to tend his sheep and it was on this journey that he came to Mount Sinai for the first time. Unless one presumes that he herded the sheep over one hundred miles in a southwesterly direction, into the desert, one might conclude that Mount Sinai is perhaps a more reasonable distance from Midian. But as with all theories regarding Sinai’s location, conclusive evidence is lacking.

Reminder of Rebellion and Its Consequences

Interest in the wilderness wanderings, however, extends beyond understanding ancient geography. There is also a powerful theological dimension, and this seems to be of greater importance for biblical writers. Wandering in the wilderness is Israel’s punishment for disobedience and rebellion. As such, it stands as a reminder for later Israelites to encourage them not to repeat that mistake. Indeed, the events of Numbers are not recounted merely to catalog arcane events but are preserved in writing to be a reminder for subsequent generations.

Israel’s wilderness experience is referenced in various portions of the OT. The rebellion is mentioned in Ps. 106:14, 26, and wilderness is associated with a place of death. Elsewhere the desert represents a place of God’s protection and provision for the new generation of Israelites living in the desert (Deut. 8:15–16; 29:5; 32:10; Ps. 136:16; Hos. 13:5).

Another example of a later appropriation of the wilderness tradition is found in Ps. 95, where the Israelites, perhaps in an exilic setting, are warned not to rebel as the exodus generation did (vv. 7–11). This same warning of Ps. 95 is picked up by the writer of Hebrews and applied to the church (Heb. 3:1–4:13). The author argues that since a greater mediator than Moses has come, the past warning holds all the more as the church goes through its period of wilderness wandering (which lasts until the church’s entrance into its heavenly promised land). The main difference Hebrews introduces is that the church’s period of wilderness wandering is not characterized by God’s wrath but rather is a time of God’s activity in redeeming the world.

Wilderness Wandering

Mapping the Route

Reminder of Rebellion and Its Consequences

Showing 1 to 50 of543 results

1. The Potent Word of God

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

The Epistle to the Hebrews is difficult to translate because so much of the content concerns the Jewish culture and religious rituals that are totally foreign to the Agra people who live in the northern Philippines. However, some parts of the epistle really make sense to them, like the verse in Hebrews 4:12, "The Word of God is living and potent."

Depending upon the context, the Agra word madagat can mean stinging, venomous, or potent. A poisonous snake is madagat, but so are some medicines that can heal. A translation assistant explained his understanding of how the Word of God is potent: "It depends upon how we approach it. If we disregard it, it's like the poisonous snake. But if we live by it, its potency is like medicine."

2. Ashamed To Beg

Illustration

John G. Lynn

In a large attractive office in a major city, a man worked for several months next to a small attractive woman. He had been there only a few days when he thought he'd ask her to lunch, which he did. The following day he asked her for dinner and they began a long dating relationship. They went to craft fairs together, since he liked to do that. They went to the ocean, which he also liked to do. They used to take long walks along the river.

He liked this relationship. He had lived for many years with his mother. In fact, it was only a few months after she died that he began dating his co-worker. Little by little, however, she began to dislike both the relationship and this man. She felt like she really wasn't herself when she was with him. She couldn't speak what she really felt. She rarely asserted where she wanted to go or what she wanted to do. She later said, "I just wasn't Sandra with him."

So she terminated her social, dating relationship with this man. Once she did, she began to feel like herself again. Her friends told her, "You're more like the old Sandra now."

Across the same town, in another office, a young man sat at his desk for eight years, struggling to manage his office work force. Outside he was a friendly, generous person. In the office he was the same way and his workers flattened him out, like steamrollers over an asphalt road. He worked long, long hours; he holed himself up behind his desk to keep all the records accurate; he just about wore himself out. Finally his friends told him, "Steve, you'd better get out of that job. You're not yourself anymore. Those people are eating you alive and you're not getting anywhere."

He protested, "But it's a good job. I make good money. And besides, it is what I do best. How can I even look for anything else?"

Then the company was sold. New management came in. All the supervisors were replaced and Steve found himself on the street. He was terrified. "To dig I am unable, to beg I am ashamed," he said. "What can I do?"

His friends told him they were glad he was fired. "At least you are your old self," they said. "And you'll find something. Just go for it." He did, and now he's doing better than he ever could have in the position he once felt he could never leave.

The steward in today's gospel lesson is like both Sandra and Steve. Sandra was not herself in that relationship. Steve was not himself in that job. Both were wasting away, losing that which was most precious to them both: their proper identities. Both felt they could not survive if they gave up something so close and precious as a relationship or a job.

In today's gospel lesson the steward's master calls him on the carpet. In Luke's mind, this Lord and Master is God. God always calls his stewards into question when they are wasteful of who and what they are. This steward is not just wasting his master's goods. The steward is wasting himself. Nothing is more precious in God's household than his steward's proper identity. This is God's gift to this steward, and he is wasting it. No wonder God calls him to account.

God does this to us all the time. He checks our relationships and he checks our jobs -- to help us make sure we are not wasting our identities where we are. This steward was. So God dismissed him. He had to get a new job and a new relationship. God does not tolerate our wasting who we are.

This dismissal turned the light on for the steward. "What shall I do? To dig I am unable, to beg I am ashamed." Finally he came to an assessment of who he was and what he could do. He came to value his own identity, one of his master's most precious goods.

He called in his master's creditors. "How much do you owe? One hundred barrels of oil? Take your bill and write 50." Did he cheat his master? Not at all. The commercial documents from that time indicate that 50 percent was the normal commission. He renounced what he thought he had to have to live on -- and he won friends for himself in so doing.

"How much do you owe? One hundred bushels of wheat? Take your bill and write 80." He did not cheat his master. He simply renounced his own commission. He gave up what he thought he needed to survive, and he survived much better without it. He zeroed in on his own identity, rather than on the commission he thought he had to have to survive.

Bruno Bettelheim, who has studied the survivors of the concentration camps in World War II, writes that those who survived were able to give up everything they thought they needed and, in so giving, they survived. Those who thought they would die if they had no clothing, no jewelry, no regular food, no books -- they did not make it.

Sometimes God will do to us what he did to this steward. He will strip us down to the very core of our existence to make us discover who we really are. He will bring us to a crossroad in life where we will be forced to say, "To dig I am not able, to beg I am ashamed." There God will reveal to us who we are. As we reach to him for help we will find ourselves renouncing our commissions -- whatever we think we need to survive but we really don't. God knows that.

Luther found himself in this position many times in his life. Once, as he began his study of law, he was struck down in a thunderstorm. Terrified, he cried out, "Dear Saint Ann, help me. I will become a monk." He quit his study of law and became a theologian instead -- the identity God wanted for him in the first place. He was wasting himself in law.

Later on, as a monk, he studied Paul's Epistle to the Romans. At that time in his life he felt he could not be Martin Luther unless he ended each day with a tray full of good works to present to God. In praying over Paul, he learned the difference between works righteousness and faith. He learned he was wasting God's gift of Martin Luther's identity in that daily tray full of good works.

He wrote: "Night and day I pondered until I saw the connection between the justice of God and the statement that the just shall live by faith. Then I grasped that the justice of God is that righteousness by which through mercy and sheer grace God justified us through faith. Thereupon I felt myself to be reborn and to have gone through open doors into paradise." Martin Luther the Do-Gooder was reborn Martin Luther the Believer.

Today's gospel lesson introduces that curious term, "mammon," an Aramaic word which means: "that in which I put my trust." We are like Sandra, Steve, and this steward. How easy to put all our trust in relationships or commissions or a job. God will not let us do that forever. He will force us to give up those people and those things we feel are absolutely critical. In God's eyes they are roadblocks to the truth. He will take them away. Then we will discover our real identities as God's stewards, and him alone shall we serve. "

3. PREACHER

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

Mark 1:14 - "Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the Gospel of God,"

Preaching, the proclamation of a divine message, and the regular instruction of the converted in the doctrines and duties of the faith, is as old as the human family. Noah is referred to as "a preacher of righteousness" (2 Peter 2:5). This is not a distinctly Judaistic or Christian concept; the Mohammedans practice it freely, and it is not unknown among the Buddhists. It has its roots in the activity of the Hebrew prophets and scribes, the former representing the broader appeal, the latter the edification of the faithful, and in the ministry of Jesus Christ and his apostles, where again we have both the evangelical invitation and the teaching of truth and duty. Whichever is emphasized in preaching, the preacher is one who believes himself to be the ambassador of God, charged with a message which it is his duty to deliver.

From the Acts of the Apostles we gather something of the methods adopted by St. Peter and St. Paul, and these we may believe were more or less general for the preachers of the Primitive Church. The Apostles who had known the Lord would naturally recall the facts of his life, and the story of his words and works would form a great deal of their preaching. It is not until we come to Origen (d. 254) that we find preaching as an explanation and application of definite texts, a usage that Christianity adopted from Greek rhetoricians.

The New Testament writers drew a definite distinction between preaching and teaching. Preaching is the proclamation of the gospel to men who have not yet heard it. Teaching is an instruction or exhortation on various aspects of Chrisitan life and thought addressed to a community already established in the faith.

Today, of course, the preacher or minister or pastor of a congregation is usually called upon to perform both functions. But the preaching mission of the church is still its prime function and should be considered so.

See HERALD

4. Gospel Grandmothers

Illustration

Richard A. Jensen

United Church has a tradition. They were known for supporting their pastors very well. Any pastor who has ever served at United will verify the truth of this tradition. Pastors, for example, consider it a privilege to serve in this congregation deep in the heart of Texas. Pastor Mike Snyder surely did. Pastor Mike, as everyone called him, had had a kind of love affair with this congregation throughout his nine years of service at United. The feeling was mutual. The people of United felt uniquely blessed by him as well.

It was not much of a surprise, therefore, when the church board at United decided to hold a special evening meeting to honor and celebrate the ministry of Pastor Mike Snyder. Someone on the board had found out that this year was the 25th anniversary of Pastor Snyder's ordination. Everyone agreed immediately that there should be a party, a Texas-style party to honor their pastor's 25 years of ordained ministry. And so it was.

The party for Pastor Snyder's anniversary was held on a hot Texas summer night. Just about the whole congregation turned out for it. Choirs sang their favorite numbers. The younger children recited verses of Bible stories they had learned. One of the members of the high school youth group spoke on their behalf. Many adults spoke as well. There was a representative of the women's organization, the men's club, the church board and just about every other group at United.

In their speeches people took care not to paint Pastor Snyder as some kind of perfect saint. It wasn't that Pastor Snyder's ministry with them was without fault. In fact, they knew his faults pretty well. There were some well-timed jokes concerning the fact that Pastor Snyder often neglected his own family in order to get all the ministry done at United. "You have to find more time for your own family," said the woman from the women's organization. Other jokes teased Pastor Snyder about the short fuse on his temper. They reminded him gently to put a lid on it!

And so the party went on. Words of thanksgiving and praise were spoken. So were words of caution and concern. And now it was time for Pastor Snyder's response. Jimmie Jones, chair of the church board, invited the pastor to the podium. "One of the things you've done best among us," said Jimmie, "is to help bring faith to life. We'd like to know who helped you. Who helped you to faith, Pastor Mike?"

"My grandmother," said Pastor Snyder without hesitation. "I believe that my grandmother had a tremendous shaping power over my life of faith even though I never knew her. She died eight years before I was born. But I heard the stories. I heard stories of how she headed up the Sunday school until she died. I heard stories of how she was the pioneer in seeing to it that the English language was introduced into her congregation of immigrants. I heard many stories of her faith."

"I can't explain it but I have always felt that my call to the ministry was a call to fulfill my grandmother's legacy. In some mysterious way I feel that her vision of Christian service has been passed along to me. She is, in a very special way, my 'gospel grandmother.' I'll bet many people here tonight can name a 'gospel grandmother' who has helped to lead you to faith. I thank God, we should all thank God, for our grandmothers in the faith!"

5. Grounded in Faith

Illustration

John E. Harnish

St. Paul's letters to the Corinthian church are written to a church torn by political and theological battles, a church unsure of its foundations and faith, a church struggling with issues of sexual morality and social pressure. So he reminds them:

Now I would remind you, brothers and sisters, in what terms I preached the Gospel, which you received and in which you stand. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: That Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures, that he was buried and that he was raised on the third day, in accordance to the scriptures. (I Corinthians 15:1)

It's the reminder of the central message of the Gospel, a reminder of the word we have to proclaim. And today, just as in the Corinthian church, there is a desperate need for disciples of Christ to be grounded in the faith, to grow together in our spiritual journey, to nurture one another in the life and spirit of Jesus Christ.

6. Blasphemy Against the Spirit

Illustration

Staff

This statement (Matt 12:32, par Mk. 3:29, Luke 12:10) has been the subject of much questioning. Obviously the reference here is not to the naming of the Holy Spirit in a blasphemous utterance, for in Matt. 12:32 even blasphemy against the Son of man can be forgiven. Among the many attempts at exegesis, the most convincing is the suggestion that the man who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit is he who has recognized that God is working through the Holy Spirit in the actions of Jesus, and who quite consciously "misrepresent faith in God as faith in the devil. This saying is an extremely serious warning against the demonic and scarcely conceivable potential in man: To declare war on God. This is not done in weakness and doubt, but by one who has been overcome by the Holy Spirit and who knows very well on whom he is declaring war" (E. Schweizer, The Good News according to Mark, 1971, 87; cf. H.W. Beyer, TDNT I:624; O.E. Evans, "The Unforgivable Sin", ExpT 68, 1956-57, 240-44). This is the blasphemer who does it deliberately, after encounter with the God of grace, as the context shows. For Jesus has just been accused of casting out demons by Beelzebul, the prince of demons. "Therefore he who blasphemes the Spirit is no longer speaking against a God who is distant, about whom he entertains mere foolish thoughts, but against the one who makes evident to him his gracious work, and confirms it with his manifest, divine seal. He is a man who ought to give thanks, not to blaspheme" (A. Schlatter, on Matt. 12:32).

W.L. Lane draws attention to Sifre on Deut. 32:38 (end): "The Holy One, blessed be he, pardons everything else, but on profanation of the Name [i.e. blasphemy] he takes vengeance immediately" (The Gospel of Mark, NLC, 1974, 145) Lane goes on to comment: "This is the danger to which the scribes exposed themselves when they attributed to the agency of Satan the redemption brought by Jesus. The expulsion of demons was a sign of the intrusion of the Kingdom of God. Yet the scribal accusations against Jesus amount to a denial of the power and greatness of the Spirit of God. By assigning the action of Jesus to a demonic origin the scribes betray a perversion of spirit which, in defiance of the truth, chooses to call light darkness. In this historical context, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit denotes the conscious and deliberate rejection of the saving power and grace of God released through Jesus' work and act" (ibid). Thus blasphemy here is much more serious than the taking of the divine name in vain which a believer may have done before coming to repentance and faith.

It may be said to those who have been tormented by fear that they have committed the unforgivable sin that their concern is itself a sign that they have not committed the sin envisaged in Jesus' teaching here. Lane's interpretation also helps to explain the distinction drawn between blasphemy against the Son of man and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The distinction suggests that "while an attack on Jesus' own person, as son of Man and therefore 'hidden', is pardonable, any speaking against the power by which he works (i.e. the divine endowment for his messianic ministry) will not be pardoned" (D. Hill, The Gospel of Matthew, New Century Bible, 1972, 318). For such an action would be deliberately to attribute to Satan the action of God himself. (NIDNTT, v. 3, pp. 343-344)

What is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? Though many suggestions have been offered, I think the answer lies in the context here (Luke 12:7-12) and in the context of redemptive history. Remember that the Holy Spirit had not yet been poured out, and it is the Spirit who causes men to recognize who Jesus is. Hebrews 6 and 10 contain discussions of unforgivable sins, but the distinction between blasphemy against Christ and the Spirit has disappeared. Jesus seemed to be saying this: Because the Holy spirit has not yet been poured out in fullness, the Jews will be forgiven for blaspheming the Son of Man. They will be given a second chance to repent, as we see in the book of Acts. If, however, they continue to blaspheme after the Spirit has come, they will not be forgiven. But what is the sin, specifically? Since it is blasphemy, we must see it essentially as a verbal sin. In context it is the sin of saying that Jesus Christ is of the devil. Jesus was willing to excuse this blasphemy before Pentecost; but, in the new covenant era it is not longer excusable. If a person curses Jesus, but does not really know who Jesus is, that sin is forgivable. But if the Holy Spirit has borne witness to a person that Jesus is indeed the Son of God, and that person curses Him, it cannot be forgiven.

7. The Law and the Gospel

Illustration

David Ernst

The primary purpose of the Law is, like a mirror, to teach man the true knowledge of his sin. We see this in the example of the publican. The publicans were tax-collectors for the Roman imperialists. They were Jews, but were not respected by their people. They were considered traitors and thieves, with some justification.

So the publican did not approach God with pride, demanding what was owed him. On the contrary, he approached the Lord with maximum humility and true repentance. Repentance is essential to receive the forgiveness of sins in Christ. That is why the Law should be preached to unrepentant sinners, but the Gospel to those who are troubled by their sins and terrified of damnation.

The Law demands, threatens and condemns; the Gospel promises, gives and confirms our forgiveness and salvation. God offers forgiveness of sins only in the Good News that we are saved because Christ fulfilled the Law, suffered, died and rose from the dead for us. So let us draw near to God in humility and repentance, of course, but also in the hope and faith that we are justified through faith, not by works, and that in Christ we are children of God.

8. Christianity's Initial Growth

Illustration

R. Robert Cueni

In less than 100 years the fire of the Gospel of Jesus Christ was carried as far as Spain to the west, India to the east, and Ethiopia to the south. It subsequently took several hundred years for the Gospel to arrive in the northern reaches of Europe, but it did. Down through the centuries the flames of the Fire burned brightly. The Christian faith gained and its ranks grew because people who were attracted to Christ had their lives changed. When people were filled with the power of the Holy Spirit, they came to know that peace that passes all understanding. The followers of Christ were known to demonstrate enormous courage under duress. Roman authorities tried to stamp out the Church by persecuting those who claimed Christ as Savior. The plan backfired. Those who were torn apart by wild animals in Roman arenas for the entertainment of the emperor and his entourage faced their deaths so courageously that others were attracted to the faith rather than repulsed by it.

9. Reasons for Rest

Illustration

Charles Hoffacker

Jesus has his reasons for inviting his disciples to rest. They have just returned from a mission on which he had dispatched them. He had sent them out in pairs and in haste. They were not to encumber themselves with gear or supplies, but simply trust local hospitality to meet their needs. They were not to linger where they were not wanted. Instead, they were to be on the move, calling people to repentance, casting out demons, anointing the sick. It was work they had never done before, and once they returned, they must have been exhausted.

Many of us do critically important work and find ourselves exhausted. Yet we don't rest. We may even believe that we cannot or should not rest. We push ourselves in a way that we would never push others. Our life may be productive, we may check off everything from our daily "to do" list, but deep down we recognize something is wrong, that we lack a sense of deep meaning, and so we feel cheated

The disciples have returned from their travels, but the pace has not slackened. As the Gospel reports, "Many were coming and going, and they had no leisure even to eat." Does that scene sound familiar to you? Is your workplace like that? Is your home like that? This is a common experience for people today. Many are coming and going, and they have no leisure even to eat.

Jesus listens to the disciples as they report on all they did and taught in the numerous places they visited. He does not, however, tell them to throw themselves into action again with even greater abandon. He doesn't ask them to do something difficult and dangerous, big and brave. Instead, what he asks for is disarming in its simplicity: "Come away to a deserted place all by yourselves and rest for a while."

10. Sabbath Rest

Illustration

Laurence Veinott

There is a story told of a wagon train on its way from St. Louis to Oregon. Its members were devout Christians, so the whole group observed the habit of stopping for the Sabbath day. Winter was approaching quickly, however, and some among the group began to panic in fear that they wouldn't reach their destination before the heavy snows. Consequently, several members proposed to the rest of the group that they should quit their practice of stopping for the Sabbath and continue driving onward seven days a week.

This proposal triggered a lot of contention in the community, so finally it was suggested that the wagon train should split into two groups - those who wanted to observe the Sabbath and those who preferred to travel on that day. The proposal was accepted, and both groups set out and traveled together until the next Sabbath day, when one group continued while the other remained at rest.

Guess which group got to Oregon first?

You're right. The ones who kept the Sabbath reached their destination first. Both the people and the horses were so rested by their Sabbath observance that they could travel much more vigorously and effectively the other six days of the week.

11. If You Want to Kill the Church

Illustration

Staff

Never go to your church or meetings held there,
If you do go, be late, it's no one's affair.
If the weather is bad, either too hot or snowing,
Just stay home and rest, for there'll be others going.

But should you attend, be sure and remember
To find fault with the work, each official and member.
Be sure to hold back on your offerings and tithes,
The bills will be paid by the rest of the guys.

And never take office if offered the post,
But eagerly criticize work of the host.
If not on a committee you're placed, be sore!
If you find that you are, don't attend any more.

When asked your opinion on this thing or that,
Have nothing to say, just turn 'em down flat.
Then after the meeting, shine out like the sun
By telling the folks how it should have been done.

Don't do any more than you possibly can,
Leave the work for some other woman or man.
And when you see faithful ones work themselves sick,
Then stand up and holler, "It's run by a clique!"

12. Twelve Promises to Claim

Illustration

Staff

A promise from God is a statement we can depend on with absolute confidence. Here are 12 promises for the Christian to claim.

God's presence "I will never leave thee" (Heb. 13:5)
God's protection "I am thy shield" (Gen. 15:1)
God's power "I will strengthen thee" (Isa. 41:10)
God's provision "I will help thee" (Isa. 41:10)
God's leading "And when He putteth forth His own sheep, He goeth before them" (John 10:4)
God's purposes "I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the Lord, thoughts of peace, and not of evil" (Jer. 20:11)
God's rest "Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest" (Matt. 11:28)
God's cleansing "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1 John 1:9)
God's goodness "No good thing will He withhold from them that work uprightly" (Psalm 84:11)
God's faithfulness "The Lord will not forsake His people for His great name's sake" (1 Sam. 12:22)
God's guidance "The meek will He guide" (Psalm 25:9)
God's wise plan "All things work together for good to them that love God" (Rom. 8:28)

13. Informing and Inviting

Illustration

J.I. Packer

Evangelism is communicating the gospel of Jesus Christ with the immediate intent of converting the hearer to faith in Christ, and with the ultimate intent of instructing the convert in the Word of God so that he can become a mature believer.

How then should evangelism be defined? The N.T. answer is very simple. According to the N.T., evangelism is just preaching the gospel, the evangel. Evangelizing, therefore is not simply a matter of teaching, and instructing, and imparting information to the mind. There is more to it than that. Evangelism includes the endeavor to elicit a response to the truth taught. It is communication with a view to conversion. It is a matter, not merely of informing, but also of inviting.

14. A Job Well Done

Illustration

H. A. Ironside

When I was a boy, I felt it was both a duty and a privilege to help my widowed mother make ends meet by finding employment in vacation time, on Saturdays and other times when I did not have to be in school. For quite a while I worked for a Scottish shoemaker, or "cobbler," as he preferred to be called, an Orkney man, named Dan Mackay. He was a forthright Christian and his little shop was a real testimony for Christ in the neighborhood. The walls were literally covered with Bible texts and pictures, generally taken from old-fashioned Scripture Sheet Almanacs, so that look where one would, he found the Word of God staring him in the face. There were John 3:16 and John 5:24, Romans 10:9, and many more.

On the little counter in front of the bench on which the owner of the shop sat, was a Bible, generally open, and a pile of gospel tracts. No package went out of that shop without a printed message wrapped inside. And whenever opportunity offered, the customers were spoken to kindly and tactfully about the importance of being born again and the blessedness of knowing that the soul is saved through faith in Christ. Many came back to ask for more literature or to inquire more particularly as to how they might find peace with God, with the blessed results that men and women were saved, frequently right in the shoe shop.

It was my chief responsibility to pound leather for shoe soles. A piece of cowhide would be cut to suite, then soaked in water. I had a flat piece of iron over my knees and, with a flat-headed hammer, I pounded these soles until they were hard and dry. It seemed an endless operation to me, and I wearied of it many times.

What made my task worse was the fact that, a block away, there was another shop that I passed going and coming to or from my home, and in it sat a jolly, godless cobbler who gathered the boys of the neighborhood about him and regaled them with lewd tales that made him dreaded by respectable parents as a menace to the community. Yet, somehow, he seemed to thrive and that perhaps to a greater extent than my employer, Mackay. As I looked in his window, I often noticed that he never pounded the soles at all, but took them from the water, nailed them on, damp as they were, and with the water splashing from them as he drove each nail in.

One day I ventured inside, something I had been warned never to do. Timidly, I said, "I notice you put the soles on while still wet. Are they just as good as if they were pounded?" He gave me a wicked leer as he answered, "They come back all the quicker this way, my boy!"

"Feeling I had learned something, I related the instance to my boss and suggested that I was perhaps wasting time in drying out the leather so carefully. Mr. Mackay stopped his work and opened his Bible to the passage that reads, "Whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of god."

"Harry," he said, "I do not cobble shoes just for the four bits and six bits (50c or 75c) that I get from my customers. I am doing this for the glory of God. I expect to see every shoe I have ever repaired in a big pile at the judgment seat of Christ, and I do not want the Lord to say to me in that day, 'Dan, this was a poor job. You did not do your best here.' I want Him to be able to say, 'Well done, good and faithful servant.'"

Then he went on to explain that just as some men are called to preach, so he was called to fix shoes, and that only as he did this well would his testimony count for God. It was a lesson I have never been able to forget. Often when I have been tempted to carelessness, and to slipshod effort, I have thought of dear, devoted Dan Mackay, and it has stirred me up to seek to do all as for Him who died to redeem me.

15. The Glory Beyond

Illustration

On their journey from Egypt to the Promised Land, the people of Israel come to a wilderness. It was barren and forbidding there. But the Scripture says, "They looked beyond the wilderness and beheld the glory of God."

It is always good to look beyond whatever wilderness we may be in, and to see the glory that is there. In many ways in our time we live in a wilderness kind of world; there are many problems, there is a lot of trouble, there is much complexity and confusion, and a great deal of the news is bad.

Occasionally we need to lift our gaze and look beyond all this. And this is what we do on Sunday morning when we worship God: we look beyond to see the glory.

The central element of the Christian Faith is the Christian gospel - and the word "gospel" means "good news." Beyond all the bad news that's in the daily press is the good news of Christ, our deliverance and our hope. There may be a lot of gloom in the world around us, but think of it: there isn't a single pessimistic idea in the whole New Testament! Today, may we all together see the glory of this, the wonder of what lies beyond.

16. An Exalted Christology

Illustration

Will Willimon

John's account of the miraculous feeding is curious, when compared to the synoptic gospels, for a number of reasons. John links the feeding to the story of Jesus' walking on water, and to Peter's confession of faith. Probably, John means thereby to make a strong point regarding the identity of Jesus as the exalted Christ.

Moreover, we should take note that this feeding is set by John in the context of Passover. In John's gospel, Jesus cleanses the temple at Passover and uses the occasion to speak of his impending death (John 2). Later, in John 13, Jesus will speak again of his death in the context of a Passover meal with his disciples.

Unlike Luke's account of the miraculous feeding, as well as Mark's, this meal is not presented by John as a sign of Jesus' compassion for the hungry multitudes. Rather, this feeding is used by Jesus as an opportunity to perform a sign that will be considerably greater than the crowds expected. This is a typical Johnannine moment. In John's gospel, they come to Jesus asking for "water," and he offers "living water." They come hankering for bread, and he gives them "bread from heaven." So again, in today's passage from John, we are alerted that "bread" means considerably more than what we mean when we say, "bread."

We come to Jesus with our bodily, carnal, immediate needs only to be surprised that Jesus seems to be about more than the meeting of our needs. Nothing so satisfies us as a good meal. After their miraculous meal, the crowd immediately thinks of monarchy. Moses earlier gave bread, manna, in the wilderness of the exodus (Deut. 18:18). They hail Jesus as the new king.

John offers us an exalted Christology. Jesus will not be controlled or utilized by the crowd for our purposes. He will not be jerked around in fulfillment of our wants.

17. Fully Awake

Illustration

J. Ellsworth Kalas

The glory of God comes to us when we are most "fully awake." A list of the half-dozen or more true geniuses of human history would surely include the name of Blaise Pascal the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician, and scientist. In his brief 39 years, he made scientific discoveries which are basic to a great amount of our most significant contemporary knowledge.

But with all his ability in logic and all his commitment to tough-minded scholarship, Pascal found his greatest personal assurance, not in science but in faith. On the evening of Monday, November 23, 1654, he felt the reality of Jesus Christ in such an intense way that it changed him. So that he would never forget that moment and forget his Lord he he wrote his feelings down on parchment and sewed it into the lining of his coat, which he wore for the rest of his life. Here is some of what he wrote:

God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob.
Not of the Philosophers and Scientists.
Certainty, Certainty, Feeling Joy, Peace.
God of Jesus Christ
May I not forget your words. Amen.

The words were found by his servant after his death nearly eight years later. For Pascal the greatest reality was not what he discovered in laboratory experiments, but what he found in his communion with God. It was at such a time that he was "fully awake."

Note: Here is the full writing as it appears on the parchment in his jacket:

Memorial

The year of grace 1654,

Monday, 23 November, feast of St. Clement, pope and martyr,
and others in the martyrology.
Vigil of St. Chrysogonus, martyr, and others.
From about half past ten at night until about half past midnight,

FIRE.

GOD of Abraham, GOD of Isaac, GOD of Jacob
not of the philosophers and of the learned.
Certitude. Certitude. Feeling. Joy. Peace.
GOD of Jesus Christ.
My God and your God.
Your GOD will be my God.
Forgetfulness of the world and of everything, except GOD.
He is only found by the ways taught in the Gospel.
Grandeur of the human soul.
Righteous Father, the world has not known you, but I have known you.
Joy, joy, joy, tears of joy.
I have departed from him:
They have forsaken me, the fount of living water.
My God, will you leave me?
Let me not be separated from him forever.
This is eternal life, that they know you, the one true God,
and the one that you sent, Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ.
I left him; I fled him, renounced, crucified.
Let me never be separated from him.
He is only kept securely by the ways taught in the Gospel:
Renunciation, total and sweet.
Complete submission to Jesus Christ and to my director.
Eternally in joy for a day’s exercise on the earth.
May I not forget your words. Amen.

18. And I Got in Myself

Illustration

Tom Rietveld

In the mid 1800s, Charles Berry, was a pastor in England. In his diary, he tells the story of how he became a Christian, after he was already a pastor. He said that at that time he preached a "very thin gospel" - really no gospel at all. He viewed Jesus as merely a good teacher - not the divine redeemer. But late one night during his first pastorate, he was sitting in his cozy study, and there came a knock. He opened the door and found a young girl with a shawl over her head and clogs on her feet.

"Are you a minister?" she asked. When he said, "Yes", she went on breathlessly. "You must come with me quickly. I want you to get my mother in."

Thinking the mother was a drunk who needed to get out of the cold, Berry said, "You must go and get a policeman."

"No," said the girl, "My mother is dying, and you must come and get her into heaven." So, Berry got dressed and followed her for a mile and a half through a maze of unlit streets. He went into an old apartment and knelt at the woman's side. He began telling her how good and kind Jesus was and how He'd come to show us how to live.

Then the desperate woman cut him off. "Mister," she cried, "that's no use for the likes of me. I'm a sinner. I've lived my life. Can't you tell me of someone who can have mercy upon me and save my poor soul?"

Then he wrote, "I stood there in the presence of a dying woman, and I realized I had nothing to tell her. In the midst of sin and death, I had no message. In order to bring something to that dying woman, I leaped back to my mother's knee, to my simple cradle faith, and I told her the story of the Cross and of a Christ who is able to save to the uttermost." The tears began to run down the woman's cheeks. "Now you're getting it," she said. "Now you're helping me."

Berry concluded the account by writing, "I got her in, and praise to God, I got in myself." Are you in? Can you help someone else get in?

19. Redemptive Joy! - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

In 2000 a homeless man by the name of William Wallace Brown, Jr. was buried in the graveyard of the prestigious St. John's Episcopal Church, across from the White House. This would not be unusual except that St. John's is called the "church of presidents." Since 1808, the time of the James Madison presidency, nearly every U.S. leader has worshiped there. So how is it, that this street bum was laid to rest in a prominent burial garden? It all began one Sunday morning when the homeless man spotted George H. W. Bush entering the church and asked the president to pray for him. Bush looked at him for a moment and said, "No, come inside with us and pray for yourself." And, so he did. He became a permanent part of the services and every week would place a crumpled dollar bill in the silver collection plate. He died not long after that. During the funeral for William Brown one of the speakers said that in the eyes of God "the homeless and the most important are one in the same"

I agree. And I would add that when any one of us are homeless and have lost our way, God leaves the most important of us behind and goes in search of the one. It is the way any parent would act. It is the way God acts. There is not one among us, down to the very least, who is not valued in the eyes of God. It is what I like to call Redemptive Joy! St. John's understood it the day William Brown walked down the isle shoulder to shoulder with the Commander and Chief. Jesus tried to explain it to his critics when he welcomed and ate with sinners. I want us to take look at it in our reading this morning.

There are three great themes that spring out from these two little parables. Three themes that describe precisely the meaning of the Gospel:

1. The Lost
2. The Found
3. And the Joy

20. The Joy Of God

Illustration

Richard A. Jensen

Dr. Yoshiro Ishida is an international church leader in the Lutheran Church. He began his service to the church as a pastor in his church in Japan. He was spotted as a very promising young man and the church arranged for him to attend graduate school in the United States. He returned to Japan as a professor in the theological seminary.

After these years of service in Japan, Dr. Ishida was called to serve at the headquarters of the Lutheran World Federation in Geneva, Switzerland. He gave dedicated service to the global church in Geneva in a variety of positions. He was next called to head up a new "Institute of Global Mission" in Chicago, Illinois. Dr. Ishida and his American-born wife, therefore, moved to Chicago. Just a year ago he was called again, now almost at retirement age, to come back to Japan and help start a new four-year women's college.

Dr. Ishida's service to the global Christian community is a wonderful testimony to his dedication. But where did he get that faith? Dr. Ishida was born into a Buddhist family. He was raised in a land that is only about one percent Christian. How did the Christian message find him and bring him to faith?

A couple of years ago Dr. Ishida answered this question as he addressed a mission gathering here in the United States. Dr. Ishida told the group that he was a teenager during the Second World War. He came from a Buddhist family and he was quite devout. He spent much time at the Buddhist Temple in his city. The temple was a quiet place for meditation and devotion. It was a safe place. He liked being around the temple, he said. There was a security there for him as he gave expression for his need to be right with God.

Then one day at the temple, just by chance, he got his hands on a copy of the Christian Bible. There were many Bibles available in Japan even if there were very few Christians. So young Mr. Ishida began to read the Bible. It was a whole new world for him. At first he couldn't understand much of it at all. It didn't make that much sense. He couldn't figure out the point.

One day that all changed. The "scales fell from his eyes" we might say as he was reading Luke 15. It was the joy of God that really spoke to him. "My heart was caught with the fact that the parables portrayed the joy of God," he said to the hushed assembly. He recited a portion of the parables: "Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over 99 righteous persons who need no repentance. Just so, I tell you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents." "Note this joy of God," he continued. "I couldn't believe it. I always thought we need to get right with God. That's what I was trying to do at the Buddhist Temple. But the Bible talked about a God who needs to save us. And when God saves us, when God finds us, God is filled with joy!"

'What a strange God this is!' I thought to myself. God is overjoyed with finding just one person. I found this new. I had never heard of such a thing. It meant that God was concerned with me. With me! Just one person! And God is filled with joy at finding me. To this very day, that is to me what the gospel of Jesus Christ is all about."

21. Spoken Without Love

Illustration

Sodium is an extremely active element found naturally only in combined form; it always links itself to another element. Chlorine, on the other hand, is the poisonous gas that gives bleach its offensive odor. When sodium and chlorine are combined, the result is sodium chloride. What is sodium Chloride? Salt. Common table salt. The substance we use to preserve meat and bring out its flavor. Love and truth can be like sodium and chlorine. Love without truth is flighty, sometimes blind, willing to combine with various doctrines. On the other hand, truth by itself can be offensive, sometimes even poisonous. Spoken without love, it can turn people away from the gospel. When truth and love are combined in an individual or a church, however, then we have what Jesus called "the salt of the earth," and we're able to preserve and bring out the beauty of our faith.

22. The Keys to the Car

Illustration

Don Walker

There are transitional moments in life that confirm something tremendous has taken place. One of those moments occurs in a teenager's life and in lives of the parents of that particular teenager, when a mom or a dad gives to him or her the keys to the car for the first time for a solo run. What a transitional moment this is! Many of us have already experienced this. Some of you still have to experience it in life, but, I guarantee you, it's going to happen. It's going to be a step of growth for you. It's a time when you release to your child into an adult world. It's a change in your son or daughter's life from which they are never going to turn back. It's a moment in which you are giving your child an adult responsibility.

It is a transitional moment for the child also because the teenager recognizes that he has been given a great responsibility. It's an adult responsibility. He also realizes that this is something that he needs to take care with because great trust has been put in him. Teenagers need to prove to their parents that the validity of their faith in them is correct.

In the Scripture for today, Jesus does something very similar for His followers. Jesus said, "As the Father has sent Me, so send I you." Jesus is tossing the keys to the kingdom to His disciples. He is demonstrating that He is accepting them as His followers but He is also demonstrating to them that He is entrusting to them the message of the gospel. He gives to them a great privilege. He is showing them that He believes in them.

23. What Does It Take To Make Up a "Call?"

Illustration

Thomas Long

William Muehl has a bone to pick with ministers. Muehl is on the faculty of YaleDivinitySchool, and he has spent many years teaching people who are about to become ministers and those who are already ministers. William Muehl is well acquainted with ministers, and he has a complaint.

What bothers Professor Muehl is what he sees as a widespread tendency among ministers to do some romantic editorial work on the nature of Christian calling. To hear most ministers talk, claims Muehl, God calls people only in moments of theatrical intensity. Someone, for example, is reading a theological book when, suddenly, a shaft of light falls upon a penetrating passage and scales fall from the reader's eyes. Or a hillside communion service at a summer church camp begins to glow with all the luminosity and power of the Upper Room. The ministerial version of Christian calling almost always involves a moment of high drama.

Muehl does not doubt that such moments do occur, but he does doubt that they occur as often and as predictably as some ministers say they do. Muehl thinks many ministers are guilty of dressing up these events in "Damascus Road" garb, which is unfortunate since most people come to faith, he says, in ways that are far more gritty and down-to-earth. They were forced into Sunday church school by their parents, or found the local church youth group to be a reliable way to spice up an otherwise dull weekend, or discovered that the sanctuary could be entered on the arm of an attractive member of the opposite sex. "These ways seem to have at least one thing in common," states Muehl. "They are not nearly as dramatic and intellectually impressive as people feel a genuine religious experience ought to be."'

One of the reasons which prompts Muehl to complain is his own experience of call. He was trained as an attorney and discovered, in the law school's moot court, that he was an exceptionally effective trial lawyer. He won his cases, for the most part, but the emotional stress of doing so caused him to develop a duodenal ulcer. After treating him for several gastric episodes, one of the health service physicians made a dire prediction. "Muehl," he said, "if you really undertake a career in the law, you will probably be rich by the age of forty. The only trouble is that you will be dead by the age of thirty."

Hearing this, Muehl left the field of law and joined the faculty of Yale Divinity School. Surrounded there by colleagues who had come to their work in response to a genuine sense of calling, Muehl soon began to doubt that he had experienced a real call, so he approached another faculty member, the ethicist H. Richard Neibuhr, with his concern. Neibuhr puffed on his pipe, laughed gently, and responded, "What does it take to make up a 'call' for you, Muehl? What you had planned to do with your life was quite literally eating you up inside, driving you . . . to consider alternatives. I can't imagine a better call outside the Bible."

What does it take to make up a "call" for you? That's an intriguing question, and one which lies at the heart of today's passage from the Gospel of John.

24. Trouble Makers

Illustration

Brett Blair

Thank God for those free thinkers throughout Christendom who have brought fire upon the earth, the early Church and the Catholic Church which has prevailed for almost 2000 years holding the banner of Christ.

Martin Luther, who called the church back to a Gospel which emphasized grace rather than works. John Wyclif and William Tyndale, who against the wishes of church leadership produced the Bible in the language of the people. William Wilberforce, against the will of many within the church, fought the evil ravages of the institution of slavery. Hudson Taylor, who dared to adopt the customs and culture of the people to whom he was a missionary. He converted people to Jesus, not to Western culture. He changed the focus of foreign missions. Men like John and Charles Wesley, Charles Finney, and Spurgeon, who called upon their churches to reform. They woke the world with their fiery preaching.

These men were trouble makers. Thinkers. Applecart shakers. Men who muddied the water just like Jesus. Heroes of the faith, we now call the, because they were not afraid of division. They knew Jesus did not come to bring peace but a sword. In other words: Truth. God's truth is like that. It is a double edged sword. What sounds like peace, the peace that Christ gives, really isn't peace as the world would have it. It is peace as God would have it. And what kind of peace is it that God wants? He wants the peace that exist between you and Him when the weight of your sins no longer are a snare and you can run with endurance the race set before you.

25. Understanding Joy in the Gospel

Illustration

Dean Lueking

There was an old Dutch preacher who served two congregations in Holland, one on either side of a dike. The only way he could get to both on winter Sunday mornings was to skate across the frozen body of water separating the two churches. When he asked permission of his ecclesiastical elders to skate the distance, they reluctantly agreed – but only on the stipulation that he would not enjoy doing so.

That story illustrates a much larger problem, the problem of knowing God only under the Law and never under the Gospel. Don't let that blight cripple your spirit and rob your faith of the delighting in God, the enjoyment of his grace and abundant goodness.

26. God's Instant Recipe

Illustration

Instant cake mix at first was a big flop. The instructions said all you had to do was add water and bake. The company couldn't understand why it didn't sell until their research discovered that the buying public felt uneasy about a mix that required only water. Apparently people thought it was too easy. So the company altered the formula and changed the directions to call for adding an egg to the mix in addition to the water. The idea worked and sales jumped dramatically.

That's how some people react to the plan of salvation. To them it sounds too easy and simple to be true, even though the Bible says, "By grace you have been saved through faith...; it is the gift of God, not of works" (Eph. 2:8-9). They feel that there is something more they must do, something they must add to God's "recipe" for salvation. They think they must perform good works to gain God's favor and earn eternal life. But the Bible is clear we are saved, "not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy" (Titus 3:5). Unlike the cake-mix manufacturer, God has not changed His "formula" to make salvation more marketable. The gospel we proclaim must be free of works, even though it may sound too easy.

27. 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 ...."

28. 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.

29. What Are You Looking For?

Illustration

Susan R. Andrews

Chaim Potok, the American author and Rabbi, was an intensely religious man; a Jew who explored the dimensions of faith in our lives. From an early age, Potok knew he wanted to be a writer. But his mother wasn't so sure. When he went away to college she said, "Son, now I know you want to be a writer. But I want you to think about brain surgery. You'll keep a lot of people from dying. And you'll make a lot of money." To which Potok responded, "No, Mama, I want to be a writer."

But, "No," is not what Mama wanted to hear. So, every vacation break for four years she would repeat her comments about his becoming a brain surgeon and keeping people from dying and making a lot of money, and always his response was the same. Finally the son had enough, and, when the same mantra began, he cut off his mother with exasperation, and with great passion he told his mother, "Mama, I don't want to keep people from dying, I want to show them how to live."

This morning's Gospel Lesson from John is a "call" story, but unlike so many call stories in scripture this one is not crisp, dramatic, or decisive. Today there is no flashing light, no booming voice, no clear instructions as to what the disciples are to do. Instead, what we hear is Jesus asking a question - a strange, penetrating question. The question is: "What are you looking for?"

30. Transactional Theology

Illustration

Barbara Brown Taylor

On the occasions when Jesus praises peoples’ faith, most Christians automatically assume that he means their faith in his divinity, which he then rewards by helping them out; but that is just another sorry example of transactional theology. According to this theology, if you believe the right things about Jesus, then he will help you. If you don’t, he won’t. I am not sure where this idea comes from, but in the first three gospels Jesus seems much more concerned with making people well than with making them believe in him.

Jesus does not proclaim himself; he proclaims the coming of God’s kingdom. The only thing people have to believe is that God can help them. In Luke’s gospel, when Jesus heals the ten lepers and the lone Samaritan among them comes back to say thanks, Jesus does not say, “Rise up and follow me.” He says, “Get up and go on your way; your faith has made you well.” The faith that helps Jesus do his saving work; the faith that makes people well; is their full-bodied trust that God can act in their lives, both to forgive and to heal.

31. Faith and Power

Illustration

Larry Powell

Mark 4:37-41 is one of the many passages in the Bible which has been set to music. "Master, the tempest is raging! The billows are tossing high! The sky is o’er shadowed with blackness ..." You recognize it. From childhood, we have sung the words to "Peace Be Still" and have loved to lift the refrain which concludes, "they all shall sweetly obey thy will ..." Two primary elements are underscored in both the scripture and the hymn: the power of Christ and faith in Christ.

The Gospel according to Mark characterizes the ministry of Jesus as being a succession of "mighty works," indicative of his Sonship. Actually, the stilling of the storm is only the beginning of a series of incidents portraying the power of Christ. After the storm experience on the Sea of Galilee, Jesus and the disciples came to the other side of the sea into the country of the Gerasenes. Here they encountered a man who lived among the tombs, crying out in travail both day and night, inflicting injury upon himself and striking fear into the hearts of all who chance to see him. Frequently, he had been subdued and bound with chains, but such was his deranged agony that he tore away the fetters and ran about the tombs as a wild man. In a great display of power, Jesus freed the man from his torment (5:13) and "all marveled. Then, crossing to the other side of the sea, Jesus encountered a certain Janus, a ruler of the synagogue, who prevailed upon him to accompany him to his home and heal his daughter" (5:23). On the way to the home of Janus Jesus was "touched" by a desperate woman who had hemorraged for twelve years and, according to Mark 5:29, so great was the power of Jesus that the woman was immediately healed simply by touching his clothing. Not to be minimized here is Jesus’ statement to the woman; "Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace and be healed from your disease" (5:34). Now the word comes that during the interval, Janus’ daughter has died. Reassuring Janus, Jesus said, "Do not fear, only believe." Approaching the house Jesus observed a gathering of people loudly mourning the death of the girl. Everyone was asked to wait outside the house save the little girl’s parents and the disciples who had been selected to accompany Jesus to the house, Peter, James, and John. "Taking her by the hand, he said to her, ‘Talitha cumi’ which means ‘Little girl, I say to you, arise.’ And immediately the girl got up and walked" (5:41-42).

Power! That is the theme of Mark’s section dealing with three successive miracles of Jesus. Read again the refrain of "Peace, Be Still" and see how it applied to each of the three incidents. See also the summons for faith. The disciples were scolded for their lack of faith, the woman with the issue of blood was rewarded because of her faith, and Janus was encouraged to intensify the faith he already had exhibited by falling at the feet of Jesus. Desperation characterizes all three encounters, and all three contain the enacted teaching that the power of Christ is but half of the whole; the other half, which taps this power, is faith. Ironically, it would appear that we, too, learn the lesson best in times of desperation.

32. Freedom Riders

Illustration

Steven E. Albertin

A story has been told about the experiences of the Freedom Riders in the American South during the '50s and '60s and their struggle for civil rights. The story was a vivid illustration of how life changes when Jesus has the last word, when Jesus is King.

When the Freedom Riders traveled through the South staging their sit-ins and marches and protests, they were often arrested and jailed. The guardians of racial segregation and the status quo were not going to let them have the last word. While in jail the Freedom Riders were often treated poorly and brutally in order to break their spirits. They were deprived of food or given lousy food. Noise was blasted and lights were flashed all day and night to keep them from resting. Sometimes even some of their mattresses were removed in order that all would not have a place to sleep.

For a while it seemed to work. Their spirits were drained and discouraged, but never broken. It happened more than once and in more than one jail. Eventually the jail would begin to rock and swing to sounds of gospel singing. What began as a few weak voices would grow into a thundering and defiant chorus. The Freedom Riders would sing of their faith and their freedom. Sometimes they would even press their remaining mattresses out of their cells between the bars as they shouted, "You can take our mattresses, but you can't take our souls!"

The Freedom Riders were behind bars in jail, but they were really free. They were supposed to be guilty, but they were really innocent. They were supposedly suffering, but they were actually having a great time. They were supposedly defeated but they were actually victorious.

Why? They may not have said it, but they could have: because Jesus has the last word, because Christ is King!

33. Living beyond Apprehension

Illustration

Staff

C.S. Lewis wrote with deep humor and insight about his faith in God in Christ. Lewis understood the gospel of Jesus to be Good News, not a fearful encounter with God as judge, but a meeting with a God full of agape love. Lewis remembered a moment of anxiety felt by his wife, Joy.

"Long ago before we were married, [Joy] was haunted all one morning as she went about her work with the obscure sense of God (so to speak) 'at her elbow,' demanding her attention. And of course, not being a perfected saint, she had the feeling that it would be a question, as it usually is, of some unrepented sin or tedious duty. At last she gave in - I know how one puts it off - and faced Him. But the message was, 'I want to GIVE you something' and instantly she entered into joy."

34. John's Gospel

Illustration

Michael P. Green

John’s Gospel has often been compared to a pool in which a child could wade safely and an elephant could swim. It is both simple and profound. It is for the beginner in the faith and for the mature Christian.

35. Zacchaeus - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

We owe Luke a great debt. For in his Gospel alone is told a dramatic story that capsulizes for us what the mission of Jesus was all about, and in turn what the mission of the church is all about. The event happened while Jesus was passing through Jericho, the city of palms. Writes Luke: "And there was a man named Zacchaeus. He was a chief tax collector, and he was rich." In one sentence we are told the story of a human life.

Here's the background. Nothing in first century Judea was quite so hated and despised as was the Roman tax. It not only reminded the Jews that they were a subjugated people, it also represented a theological affront. To the Jew there was only one King, and that was God, not Caesar. Paying tribute to an earthly non-Jewish monarch was something that the Hebrews had opposed throughout their long history.

But there was more. The dirty work of collecting the tax was done not by the Romans, but by collaborating Jews. Much of the money that they collected off the backs of their fellow countrymen stuck to their own fingers. We are told that Zacchaeus was a chief tax collector. That is the only time in the New Testament that that term is used. It meant that he was over an entire district. Zacchaeus may have been short in stature, but he had wealth and wealth means power, so, in a manner of speaking, people looked up to him. Zacchaeus was the little man with the big reputation. He was not just very well to do. According to Luke, he was a rich man.

Of course, one might take issue with Luke in that descriptive term rich. For in many ways Zacchaeus was as poor as any man in Jericho. For all of his money he was a lonely man, he was an empty man. In the world of the flesh he had everything; in the world of the spirit he had nothing. The people, of course, looked upon him with complete contempt. He was a dog. He was cut off from communion with the community of God. There is symbolism in his title chief tax collector. That is another way of saying that he was not only a sinner, but a chief among sinners. Therefore, he was prevented from seeing Jesus that day, not only by the press of the crowd, but also due to social and religious ostracism.

This is not only a story of Zacchaeus, but it is also the story of what it means to be a lost person. What do we means when we say that a person is lost? Well, we can perhaps oversimplify and say that their soul is lost, but it can be much more tragically real than that?

1. Jesus reaches out to the outcast and sinner

2. The most difficult aspect of our Christian faith

36. Embracing the Gracious Gift

Illustration

Joel D. Kline

Writing in a book entitled With Open Hands, Henri Nouwen asserts that "The challenge of the gospel lies precisely in the invitation to accept a gift for which we can give nothing in return. For the gift is the very life breath of God, the Spirit who is poured out on us through Jesus Christ. This life breath frees us from fear and gives us new room to live."

Nouwen's words remind us that the Christian faith is founded not upon your action or my action, but upon God's action: God loving us with a love that will not let us go; God choosing to dwell among us in Christ, taking human form; God seeking relationship and reconciliation with all the world; God adopting persons of faith as daughters and sons. Our task is but to receive the gift, to recognize and live in the assurance that all that we have in life—and indeed, all that we are—comes as a gift from God. Once we embrace this gracious gift which we cannot earn and which cannot be repaid, only then are we freed to become gracious givers.

37. At Least One Dollar

Illustration

John Bedingfield

Dr. H. King Oehmig tells a story of the time that a church congregation from Cartersville, Georgia wanted to begin a Habitat for Humanity group. It was in the early days of Habitat, so the group went to Americus, Georgia to meet with Millard Fuller, the founder of Habitat for Humanity. The group toured the Habitat facilities and saw a presentation on how groups operate. Then Mr. Fuller took time from his busy schedule to go and talk to this group. During the course of their conversation, one of the folks from Cartersville said, "Mr. Fuller, we think this is what God's calling us to do. But before we begin, how much money do you think we should have in the bank to get us off the ground?"

Fuller leaned toward the man and in a very low and serious voice told him, "It would be wholly irresponsible, completely negligent, totally feather-brained if you started an affiliate without at least one dollar. But you have to have one dollar. Don't dare make a move without it!"

King Oehmig says that that day, the Cartersville group learned, "as the disciples discovered with Jesus that evening, when He told them to feed the masses themselves – that faced with the Gospel imperative, we were searching for a reasonable alternative to faith." Just like modern America searches for a reasonable alternative to a miracle.

38. The Absurdity of the the Resurrection

Illustration

Thomas Long

In John Updike's A Month of Sundays there is a story that illustrates the absurdity of the the resurrection and maybe the story is more about beleif in it is a bit absurd: Clint Tidwell is the pastor of a church in a small Southern town, and one of his blessings and one of his curses is that the 80-year-old owner and still-active editor of the local newspaper is a member of his congregation. The blessing part is that this old journalist believes Tidwell to be one of the finest preachers around, and, wishing the whole town to benefit from this homiletical wisdom, he publishes a summary of Tidwell's Sunday sermon every Monday morning in the paper. The curse part is that this newspaperman, though well meaning, is a bit on the dotty and eccentric side, and Tidwell is often astonished to read the synopses of his sermons. The man owns the newspaper; nobody dares edit his columns, and the difference between what Tidwell thought he said and what the editor actually heard is often a source of profound amazement and embarrassment to Tidwell.

Tidwell's deepest amazement and embarrassment, however, came not when the newspaper editor misunderstood the Sunday sermon but, to the contrary, when he understood it all too sharply and clearly. It was early on the Monday morning after Easter, and Tidwell, in his bathrobe and slippers, was padding out the carport door to retrieve the Monday newspaper. The paper was lying at the end of the driveway, and, as Tidwell approached, he could see that the morning headline was in "second coming" sized type. What could it be? he wondered. Had war broken out somewhere? Had the local bank failed over the weekend? Had a cure for cancer been discovered? As he drew close enough to focus on the headline, he was startled to read the words, "Tidwell Claims Jesus Christ Rose From The Dead."

A red flush crept up Tidwell's neck. Yes, of course, he had claimed in yesterday's sermon that Christ rose from the dead, but golly, was that headline news? What would the neighbors think? I mean, you're supposed to say that on Easter, aren't you, that Christ rose from the dead, but that's not like saying that some person who died last week had risen from the grave, is it? Suddenly, as he looked at the screaming headline, what had been a routine Easter sermon had Tidwell feeling rather foolish.

Indeed, it is foolish the foolishness of the gospel. Those who gather on this Easter Day to sing and say that "Jesus Christ is Risen Today" do so not because we have proved anything philosophically, discerned some mystical key to the Scripture, or found some unassailable piece of historical evidence. We believe in the resurrection because the beloved disciple, the forerunner of all Easter faith, believed and passed the word along all the way into the present, prompting frail folks, like Tidwell and like us, to say what we believe: "I believe in Jesus Christ, born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, crucified, dead and buried. He descended into hell -- and dare we believe it? Dare we wager everything on it? -- rose again on the third day."

39. Who Is Jesus?

Illustration

John R. Brokhoff

Now, more than ever, we need to face the question, "Who is the real Jesus?" Is the Christ of faith the Jesus of history? What is the truth about Jesus? What can we believe? We turn to the Apostles' Creed which has given the church's answer for 2,000 years.

Different Positions

It is not strange that the most popular question of our time is, "Who is Jesus?" Was this question not answered in Matthew 16:16 when Peter said to Jesus at Caesarea Philippi: "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God"? In Jesus' day, too, there were different opinions about Jesus. When on a retreat with his disciples, he asked them what people were saying about him. The public was divided: Jesus was considered to be John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. What more of an answer do we need than the answer of Peter? Jesus accepted his answer as the truth, for he said, "Blessed are you, Simon, son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven" (Matthew 16:17). Yet, after twenty centuries, we do not believe what Peter said about the identity of Jesus. According to a Gallup poll, 42 percent of Americans agreed with the statement: "Jesus is the Son of God." A recent report from Germany indicated that only one out of every four believe in Jesus Christ. Throughout Christian history down to the present, there are different views of Jesus. Now let us look at some of them.

1. The All-Human Jesus

Human

According to this position, Jesus is 100 percent human. It was held as early as the first centuries of Christianity by the Ebionites. They denied that Jesus was divine. He was only a teacher, prophet, miracle-man, and one with an outstanding character. But he was not divine, the Son of God. Today this view is held by many, including atheists, agnostics, Unitarians, Jews, Moslems, and other non-Christian religions.

2. The All-Divine Jesus

Divine

Opposite the Ebionites, Docetists held that Jesus was entirely divine. He was not at all human. This view was originally taught by Eutychus, a monk in a monastery near Constantinople. In the fourth century, Appolonarius, bishop of Laodicea, popularized the teaching. It was known as Docetism, from the Latin word docere meaning "to seem." It just seemed that Jesus was human. It was based on the idea that the physical and material were inherently evil. The human body therefore was sinful. Jesus therefore was not human, for God could not be identified with sin. Docetists held that Jesus' human nature was swallowed up by the divine. This denied the Incarnation, the biblical teaching that "the Word became flesh."

3. The Half And Half Jesus

Human/Divine

Nestorians took the view that Jesus was half human and half divine. It was taught by Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, in the fifth century. To this day it is a very popular understanding of Jesus. When we see Jesus hungry, thirsty, and tired, we say it was because he was human. When he struggles in prayer and on the cross cries out, "My God, why ...?" we see the human Jesus. On the other hand, Jesus is God when he walks on water, feeds 5,000, raises the dead, heals lepers, and rises from the grave. The problem with this view is that we have a divided Jesus -- two persons in one body.

4. The Adopted Jesus

Divine

Human

This is known as adoptionism. According to this position, Jesus came into the world as a human. Because of his moral excellence, his perfect obedience to God, his wisdom, his compassion for people, and his willing sacrifice of himself on the cross, the Father adopted him as his son at his baptism. This adoption was confirmed by the resurrection and the ascension. Jesus then became a deified man.

5. The Both And Jesus

Human & Divine

The above different positions concerning Jesus caused great concern, for the gospel was at stake. If Jesus were only human, then he was just a martyr on the cross and not the Lamb that took away the sin of the world. If he were only human, the resurrection was a fairy tale. His promises of forgiveness and eternal life were meaningless. His claims to know God and to be one with God would then be the words of a religious fanatic who was deluded into thinking he was the Son of God.

On the other hand, if Jesus were only divine and not human, humanity would be the loser. Because he was human, he became one of us. As a human, he fulfilled the law for us. Through his humanity we could see the nature of God. Above all, he became sin for us so that sin, through him, could go out of the world. As a human Jesus knows our human condition. Like all of us he was tempted and he showed that by the power of God we can overcome temptation to sin.

Consequently, the church had to take a stand on the question of Jesus. Is he only human, only divine, or half and half? In 451 A.D. the church held a council at Chalcedon to decide the issue. The church decided that it was not a matter of Jesus being fully God or fully human, or half and half, but it was a matter of both, both fully human and fully divine. To this day the church holds to this truth stated at Chalcedon:

We confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, perfect in manhood, truly God and truly man, or a rational soul and a body, of one substance with the Father with respect to the Godhead, and of one substance with us in respect of the manhood, like us in everything but sin ...

This is to say that Jesus is fully God and fully man. These two natures are blended into one integrated personality. He is not a split personality, nor does he suffer from schizophrenia. It is like a blender in your kitchen. Suppose you put apples, peaches, and pears in it and pushed the "on" button for a minute. Now what do you have -- apples, peaches, and pears? Yes, you do, but can you tell which is which? They have become one fruit, one substance. Also, it is like homogenized milk. When the raw milk comes from the farm, a dairy runs it through a homogenizer. As the milk runs through the machine, pistons compact the milk so that the cream and skim milk are made one. As a result you cannot take cream off the milk. In the same way, the human and divine natures of Jesus are compacted into one integrated person.

This means that the Father and the Son are one. When Jesus prays, God also prays. When the human Jesus suffers and dies on a cross, God is in Jesus enduring the cross. "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself" (2 Corinthians 5:19). When the human Jesus speaks, it is also God who speaks. When Jesus weeps, God weeps. This truth makes us realize the seriousness of the cross. It was not only a human on the cross, but God was there in Jesus. Good Friday is the day God died in Jesus. Indeed, the murderers did not know what they were doing; they did not know they were killing God! As the spiritual says, "Sometimes it causes me to tremble, tremble, tremble."

40. 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.

41. The Coming of Christ Was to Simple Folk!

Illustration

James Cox

I have an embarrassing confession to make. I realized only a few days ago what Luke is trying to do in this text. For years I had read it and made the unwarranted assumption that old Simeon was a priest. Anna is described as a prophetess so I assumed Simeon a priest -- good balance and symmetry. But something about the text kept nagging me. And then I realized what it was. Simeon was not a priest at all. He was a simple old man -- a layman -- an ordinary person. And Anna was not an official prophetess. She was merely a devout old woman who came to the temple a lot. Luke was only underlining a point he had begun to make by telling about the shepherds who were called from their fields and flocks to worship Christ: The coming of Christ was to simple folk! Luke, did you notice, doesn't even tell the story of the wise men; that's Matthew. Luke's whole concern, in the stories surrounding the birth of Jesus, is to emphasize one thing: Christianity is based on the faith of simple folk.

Come to think of it, that's what Luke’s whole Gospel is about. It's what the book of Acts is about. Luke wrote the book of Acts. It wasn't the priest and Pharisees who received the Kingdom of God, it was the laypeople, the untutored, the untrained, the unsophisticated. It was simple fishermen like James and John and Peter. It was unimportant public officials like Matthew. It was women like Mary and Martha and Mary Magdalene.

Christianity my friends, has never been a religion of Priest and theologians, minister's and teachers; from the very beginning it has been a religion of devout men and women with no claim whatsoever to professional expertise about their faith. This is important to remember.

God never intended the church to be an organization of ministers. What he did intend it to be is an organization of laypersons, all "righteous and devout" like old Simeon, all devoted to fasting and prayer like old Anna, and all ready, in simple faith, to receive his Kingdom and rejoice in it. Ministers, in Christianity, are expendable; good, simple folk are not!

42. What Does It Mean to Be Born Again?

Illustration

Edward F. Markquart

So…what does it mean to be born again? What does it mean to be born anew? What is God's lesson for us in the Gospel story for today?

Well, far too often in life, we have drifted away from God. In our relationship with God, we are going through the motions without the inner motivation.

You can be a person who is fifteen or twenty-five or thirty-five or forty-five or fifty-five or sixty-five or seventy-five and eighty-five and you have drifted away from God. Things aren't quite right. The Nicodemus' in this room do not have to be older or more than sixty-five. Nicodemus' can be fifteen or twenty-five or thirty-five.

You start to have the habits of faith without the heart of faith. You have structures without the Spirit. You are going through the rituals but you don't have the real thing. You are going through the patterns of faith but you no longer have the power of faith.

And if you have ever come to that time in your life, when things aren't quite right, when your religion has become more of a ritual than a real thing, when it is more of a pattern than power, when it is more structure than Spirit, we then need to come to Jesus' home, rap on his door and say, "Jesus, I need some help. I've got a problem … here… in my heart. It is not quite right."

And Jesus will say to you and me, "Come right in. Sit down for a while. Let's talk. And Jesus has this uncanny ability to look deeply into your heart and mine and he says, "You need to be born again, to be born anew, to be born from above, to experience a rebirth of God's love in your heart. You need to be born of the water and the Spirit.

43. Called Together

Illustration

Martin Luther

In his Large Catechism Martin Luther describes the church: "There is on earth a little holy flock or community of pure saints under one head, Christ. It is called together by the Holy Spirit in one faith. I was brought to it by the Holy Spirit and incorporated into it through the fact that I have heard and still hear God’s Word. In this Christian church we have the forgiveness of sins, which is granted through the holy sacraments and…the Gospel"

44. Spiritual Teaching Gifts

Illustration

Dr. Earl Radmacher

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

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

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

45. The Poverty in the Christmas Story

Illustration

Edward F. Markquart

The gospel story for today could be entitled, "The Original Christmas Pageant." In both the first two chapters of Luke and in the rest of the gospel, we hear of God's special concern for the poor. Both in the whole gospel of Luke and in the first two chapters of prelude, there is a preoccupation with those who live in poverty. I would like to suggest to you that the forgotten element of Luke's original Christmas pageant is the theme of poverty and poor people themselves. The poverty of the Christmas story is often the forgotten element.

Dr. Walter Pilgrim's book about the gospel of Luke is entitled, GOOD NEWS FOR THE POOR. This professor, who is from Pacific Lutheran University and often teaches at our congregation, reminds us that ALL of the characters from Luke's original Christmas pageant were poor people. ALL of them! The story about the three wise men with their gold, frankincense and myrrh is not a story from the gospel of Luke but from the book of Matthew. For Luke, ALL the characters in his Christmas play are poor people.

46. Casting the Net on the Other Side of the Boat

Illustration

John R. Steward

Since many of the followers of Jesus were fishermen, it made sense for Jesus to use fishing as an example of the Christian life. In Matthew 4:19, as Jesus is walking by the Sea of Galilee, he sees Simon Peter and Andrew in the process of fishing. He says to them, "Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men."

In this text, Jesus gives them another picture of the work they would be doing. On their own, they are not able to catch many fish, but when Jesus commands them to cast the net on the other side of the boat, they catch more fish than they can handle. How are we doing at catching fish? Perhaps the problem is that we keep doing it the same way and the Lord would like us to try a new method.

The apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 9:22 says, "I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some." Maybe that's the same as casting your nets on the other side of the boat.

Several years ago when I was visiting Norway, the land of my great-grandparents, I learned something about evangelism. Since my wife was born in Norway, her family was giving us a tour of the country that on occasion was off the beaten track. On our way from Trondheim to the little island of Stord, we came across one of the famous Stave churches. These churches are around 1,000 years old. They are made of wood and are built with large posts or staves that go into the ground. At one time, there were around 1,000 Stave churches; now there are only thirty. One of the reasons is that the wood rots over time. However, the one that we saw had its posts in a rock foundation, and this explains why it is still in existence.

What was really fascinating to me were the symbols on the walls. I recognized most of them but there were some that I did not understand. I asked one of the guides what they meant. She told me that the symbols that I did not recognize were pagan symbols. It seems that when King Olaf became a Christian, he would go into the villages and demand that the people all become Christians. Since the Christian faith was forced on the people, they would display pagan symbols so as to meet the people where they were.

I am not suggesting that we use pagan symbols to reach our current society. However, we can do some things with music and in other areas that would better relate to our culture. If the Norwegians and the apostle Paul can learn that, certainly we can try to relate to our culture without destroying the gospel. Perhaps this is what Jesus meant by casting the net on the other side of the boat.

47. Looking for Signs

Illustration

Larry Powell

Several years ago I was a member of the Arkansas delegation which attended a jurisdictional seminar of some sort in Dallas, Texas. Our delegation included an exceptional Christian gentlemen, whose name you would probably recognize, just recently assigned as the Episcopal leader of the Arkansas Area. As a matter of fact, he had moved into the Episcopal residence only two weeks prior to the seminar. One evening as we filed slowly past a buffet table to fill our plates, I chanced to be behind two members of the conference from which the new bishop had come. One of the gentlemen nudged his companion, nodded toward the new bishop, and said under his breath, "Does he look like a bishop to you?" The companion continued to heap up his plate, smiled, and softly replied, "No way." Apparently, they saw no sign of authority in his gentle manner, no sign of dignity in his congeniality, no sign of spiritual aura about his unpretentious appearance. Brother, were they wrong!

Some people are always looking for signs. It is not a new thing under the sun. How many times do you suppose it was remarked behind Jesus’ back, "Does he look like a messiah to you?" Joseph’s son he was; a carpenter by trade, wearing a mother-made robe, keeping company with the blue-collar element, and stirring up everything that had been settled. Oh, there were signs all right ... signs that he was in league with the Prince of Darkness: a miracle here, an exorcism there, taking liberty with the Scriptures, condemning the establishment. How could any rational person believe him? But rational people did believe him. What is more, many believed him without a sign. That is actually the emphasis of what we are about here ... that he was believed without a sign.

1. The Gospel according to John tells us that many Samaritans believed in Jesus because of the testimony of the woman at the well (4:7-30). However, let us hasten to verse 42; "They said to the woman, ‘It is no longer because of your words that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Savior of the world.’ "

2. John further relates that when Jesus came to Capernaum, an official prevailed upon him to heal his son who was at the point of death. Jesus said, "Unless you see signs and wonders you will not believe" (v. 48). The official impressed Jesus by answering, "Sir, come down before my child dies" (v. 49). In other words, without benefit of signs, the man already believed. Jesus rewarded the official’s faith by saying, "Go; your son will live" (v. 50). Now, take notice of the response: "The man believed the word that Jesus spoke to him and went on his way" (50). He believed before the sign (4:51-53).

Is your belief contingent upon a sign? If so, what? A supernatural event, a special feeling, a bush of fire, or on the other hand, is your belief and faith in Christ operative beyond dependency upon signs?

48. Even in the Grocery Store

Illustration

The Washington Times carried a story many years ago about Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. According to this newspaper article, Dr. Rice once described to a Sunday school class at National Presbyterian Church in Washington, how she had drifted from her Christian faith and how God reached out and brought her back:

"I was a preacher's kid," says Dr. Rice, "so Sundays were church, no doubt about that. The church was the center of our lives. In segregated black Birmingham of the late 1950s and early 1960s, the church was not just a place of worship. It was the place where families gathered; it was the social center of the community, too.

"Although I never doubted the existence of God," Dr. Rice continues, "I think like all people I've had some ups and downs in my faith. When I first moved to California in 1981 to join the faculty at Stanford, there were a lot of years when I was not attending church regularly. I was traveling a lot. I was a specialist in international politics, so I was always traveling abroad. I was always in another time zone. One Sunday I was in the Lucky's Supermarket not very far from my house I will never forget among the spices and an African-American man walked up to me and said he was buying some things for his church picnic. And he said, 'Do you play the piano by any chance?'

"I said, 'Yes.' They said they were looking for someone to play the piano at church. It was a little African-American church right in the center of Palo Alto. A Baptist church. So I started playing for that church. That got me regularly back into churchgoing. I don't play gospel very well I play Brahms and you know how black ministers will start a song and the musicians will pick it up? I had no idea what I was doing and so I called my mother, who had played for Baptist churches.

"'Mother,' I said, 'they just start. How am I supposed to do this?' She said, 'Honey, play in C and they'll come back to you.' And that's true," says Dr. Rice, "If you play in C, people will come back. I tell that story," she goes on, "because I thought to myself, 'My goodness, God has a long reach.' I mean, in the Lucky's Supermarket on a Sunday morning."

You see, a black pastor had approached someone else in Jesus' name and Christ was there in Lucky's Supermarket.

We are not alone. This is where we find strength for the journey. Our Lord has given us an incredible promise: "Where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them." He's been here today. Now take him to everyone you meet.

49. O Little Town of Bethlehem: A Story of Faith

Illustration

Keith Wagner

One of my all time favorite Christmas hymns is "O Little Town of Bethlehem." It has been around since 1868. It is packed with emotion, a song about the Christ Child, born to Mary, a song filled with the creative power of God intervening in history with the gift of a savior. It's a story where the divine and the human come together in an amazing but humble way.

What might surprise you is how this great hymn came to be. It was written by Phillips Brooks, Episcopal priest. Brooks was serving the Holy Trinity Church in the City of Brotherly Love (Philadelphia, PA). He had just returned from a trip to The Holy Land which inspired him to write the words. "When he returned to America he still had Palestine singing in his soul." (from Stories of Christmas Carols by Ernest K. Emurian, Baker Book House Co., page 97)

Brooks was a bachelor. His church organist and Sunday School superintendent, Lewis Redner was also a bachelor and Brooks gave the words to him and asked him to create a tune for the upcoming Christmas celebration. Redner procrastinated and struggled with the creation of a tune to go with the 5 stanzas that Brooks had written. It wasn't until the night before the celebration that Redner got inspired in the middle of the night and created the song as we know it. The following day a group of 36 children and 6 Sunday school teachers introduced the song created by the 2 bachelors. That was on December 27th, 1868. It wasn't published as an official hymn of the Episcopal Church until 1892. The following January, Phillips Brooks died, never knowing the magnitude of the hymn that he created.

For some reason the 5th stanza has been dropped from the original score."Where children pure and happy Pray to the blessed Child, Where misery cries out to thee, Son of the mother mild; Where charity stands watching And faith holds wide the door, The dark night wakes, the glory breaks, And Christmas comes once more." The stanza includes the line, "And faith holds wide the door."

This hymn, like the story of the annunciation of Mary in the gospel of Luke, is a story about faith.

50. Winning the Debate

Illustration

The strongest argument for the Gospel of Christ is the personal testimony of someone whose life has been changed by it. Charles Bradlaugh, an avowed infidel, once challenged the Rev. H.P. Hughes to a debate. The preacher, who was head of a rescue mission in London, England, accepted the challenge with the condition that he could bring with him 100 men and women who would tell what had happened in their lives since trusting Christ as their Savior. They would be people who once lived in deep sin, some having come from poverty-stricken homes caused by the vices of their parents. Hughes said they would not only tell of their conversion, but would submit to cross-examination by any who doubted their stories. Furthermore, the minister invited his opponent to bring a group of non-believers who could tell how they were helped by their lack of faith. When the appointed day arrived, the preacher came, accompanied by 100 transformed persons. But Bradlaugh never showed up. The result? The meeting turned into a testimony time and many sinners who had gathered to hear the scheduled debate were converted.

Showing 1 to 50 of 543 results