Sermon and Worship Resources

Mark 2:23-3:6 · Lord of the Sabbath

23 One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain. 24 The Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?"

25 He answered, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? 26 In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions."

27 Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."

1 Another time he went into the synagogue, and a man with a shriveled hand was there. 2 Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath. 3 Jesus said to the man with the shriveled hand, "Stand up in front of everyone."

4 Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent.

5 He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored. 6 Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.

Never on Sunday

Mark 2:23-3:6

Sermon
by Dean Feldmeyer

There are not ten commandments; there are only nine.

That other one, the one about resting and not working on the Sabbath, that’s really just a suggestion. No one, not even the most observant Christians — with the possible exception of Hobby Lobby and Chick-fil-a — take it all that seriously, and even they simply close their businesses. Whether or not they actually rest and remember, as the commandment requires, is anyone’s guess.

Business Insider lists In-and-Out Burger, Marriott, and Forever 21 as three of the top seventeen most religious companies in the country but they all pretty much ignore the fourth commandment, as does Walmart who claims to run their company based on the principles of Christian servant leadership.¹

And all this is so if you interpret “Sabbath” as Sunday. If you interpret it as sundown Friday through sundown on Saturday, as did the ancient Hebrews, first-century Jews, and the early, primitive Christian church, then just about everyone except the Jews and the Seventh Day Adventists have tossed out that “Never on Sunday” commandment.

It wasn’t always that way, though.

There was a time, about 2,000 years ago when people, religious people, Jewish people took that commandment very seriously, indeed. In fact, they took it so seriously that they spent a great deal of time and effort trying to determine what constituted “work” so they could be sure that they didn’t do it on the Sabbath.

Let’s take a minute and talk about that, shall we?

Remembering and Resting²

Shabbat, the Hebrew word for what we call Sabbath, is the only religious rite that is established and proscribed in the Ten Commandments. It is therefore the most important of all Jewish religious observances.

We pretty much take for granted the five-day work week, but that is a relatively new thing. In the times of the Bible there was no such thing as a weekend. The rich took time off whenever they liked, the poor, never. There was nothing to protect them from an employer who would make them work from dusk to dawn, seven days a week.

This commandment created one 24-hour period out of the week, from dusk on Friday to dusk on Saturday, as a time set aside for two things:

It was a time for 1) resting, and 2) remembering.

Resting meant not working, but it didn’t mean not working at all. Some types of work were permitted, such as those actions required for religious rituals or preparing to eat a meal that had been cooked beforehand. Work that contributed to the remembrance part of the day was also allowed – playing music, reading aloud, recitation, those kinds of things.

Work that wasn’t allowed was called, in Hebrew, melachah, which generally refers to the kind of “work that is creative, or that exercises control or dominion over your environment.” Also prohibited would be any work that achieved the same purpose. Specifically, the early rabbis listed 39 tasks that were prohibited along with any other task which was undertaken for the same purpose. (see Appendix on p. 139)

These tasks are, basically, the kinds of work that was undertaken to build the temple and, since the building of the temple was always halted for Shabbat, it seemed appropriate that that kind of work should always be halted for this sacred and holy day of the week.

Also, the time of resting wasn’t supposed to be spent taking naps but “remembering the significance of Shabbat, both as a commemoration of creation and as a commemoration of our freedom from slavery in Egypt.” Singing songs and recounting these important stories in poetry and literature were a big part of the Sabbath observance.

A thousand years later, in the first century CE, things had gotten a little twisted.

The law as it comes to us in the Torah was given to human beings by God to draw us closer to God and to each other. Its purpose was not arbitrary or accidental. It was meant to help us create a community of faith and justice where people live together in peace.

But human nature being what it is, this same law that was given as a gift to make for a just, peaceful, fair, equitable, and faithful society had been seized and reshaped by the religious/political leaders of that very same community and turned into something that does the opposite of what it was intended to do.

It was dividing and separating the people into subgroupings based on ethnicity, economics, place of birth, education, and religious practices. And it was separating people from YHWH.

This was all being done in two ways represented by the two stories that the gospel writer, Mark, placed before us this morning.

An Illegal Nosh

In the first story, the law had been perverted into a club for beating people into submission and a trap for ensnaring heterodoxy (unorthodox ideas).

Jesus and his disciples were walking through a field of grain on the Sabbath and as they walked some of the disciples absentmindedly stripped some grains off of the stalks, rolled them in their hands to remove the chaff, and popped them into their mouths to eat. It was a common way to snack in the fields. What, in Yiddish, is called a “nosh” (snack).

Some Pharisees who apparently were walking with them for reasons not explained, pounced on this violation of the Shabbat rules. Harvesting was not allowed on the Sabbath and this picking and eating of grain constituted harvesting. Gotcha!

They asked Jesus why his followers were willfully breaking the laws about Sabbath observation, a violation which, if they really wanted to push it, was punishable by death (Exodus 31:14).

Jesus answered a question with a question: Haven’t you read in the sacred texts how David was starving and broke into the temple and tricked the priest into giving him some sacred bread that only the priests could lawfully eat?

Before we go on, let’s be honest. Mark had just massacred the story that was recounted in 1 Samuel 21. The parallels between David and Jesus were, pretty much, nonexistent. In the David story there was no mention of hunger, he didn’t have any companions with him, he did not enter the house of God, and the high priest is Ahimelech, not Abiathar, and neither David nor his companions actually ate the sacred bread.

Mark had rewritten the story to make a Christian point about the Sabbath and, by inference, the law in general. The law was made to serve human beings. Human beings were not made to serve the law. If David could violate a silly law with impunity in order to serve a greater good, then certainly Jesus should be able to do so as well.

The law was given to draw us closer to each other in community and closer to God. When it ceases to do that it has failed in its purpose and a new law needs to be written.

A Withered Hand

The second story is more serious and more important than the first because it showed the law being perverted in such a way as to dismiss and even condone callousness and cruelty.

Jesus and the disciples entered the local synagogue, which is primarily a place of learning and a sort of local substitute for the temple as a place to worship. Inside the synagogue, he met a man with a withered hand; probably, the language tells us, a malady from birth.

Mark built tension by shifting the camera’s eye from Jesus to his audience, the religious leaders who were watching to see if he healed the man which, they believe, would be a violation of the Sabbath prohibition against working.

Note that neither of these two stories was about whether or not the Sabbath should be kept sacred. That was a given with which Jesus heartily agreed. These stories are about the definition of work, of melachah, and what work was allowed and what was not.

So Jesus invited the man with the withered hand to come forward and he asked the Pharisees, “Is it lawful to do good or to do harm on the Sabbath, to save life or to kill?” This was not a rhetorical question and the answer would have been obvious to even the most casually observant Jew of that or this time.

Any Sabbath law can be broken to save a life. This applied not just to human life but to animal life as well. The most common example being, if you were walking along the road on the Sabbath and you saw an ox stuck in the mud would it be lawful to do the work necessary to free the ox? The answer is always “yes” because you would be working to save a life. Even if you’re not sure whether or not you’re actually saving the life, if you have reason to believe that you were, that is enough.

And, of course, it is not lawful to do harm, to ever murder another human being (cf. commandment number six), on the Sabbath or any other time. It is unlawful to slaughter or butcher an animal for food on the Sabbath. Jesus was pushing those laws and commandments even further. They had, up to now, been applied to action, and he applied them to inaction as well. What he seemed to be saying was that it was just as wrong to not do good, when you can do good, as it was to do evil.

All this was just too complicated and difficult for the Pharisees who believe that the guy’s hand would still be withered on Monday so why not just wait until then so you don’t have to break Shabbat? But rather than making that argument, they said nothing and Jesus, for the first and only time, shows that he is angry toward them. These religious leaders who had perverted the law in such a horrible way that it made it illegal to heal a suffering soul disgusted him.

With that, he healed the man’s hand and the Pharisees left and began to conspire with the Herodians, a political group for whom they, heretofore, have had no use. Their conspiracy was to kill Jesus, not because he was wrong but because he embarrassed them and showed them to be the hardhearted prigs that they truly were.

Sacred Cows Make the Best Burgers

The point of these two stories has very little to do with the Sabbath. They are not really about the definition of work and what is allowed on the Sabbath and what is not. To let them drag us into that discussion would be very like committing the same mistake that the Pharisees make.

The point of the stories, the issue at hand is, in fact, “sacred cows” and idolatry.

The legal prohibition against working on the Sabbath is, simply, an easy springboard into this broader concern: When have we allowed the sacred cows of our religion to become twisted and perverted so that they become clubs for beating people into submission or traps for ensnaring those who dare to question popular orthodoxy?

Likewise, and more importantly, when have we allowed our sacred cows, our rituals, our traditions, our doctrines, and our dogmas, to become idols that we worship, that rob us of our compassion, our kindness, our sense of charity, and our love of our fellow human beings?

When, in other words, do we allow our sacred cows to become more important to us than our relationships with each other and the Lord, and what do we do about them when they do?

Up to this point I have dealt with this subject in a nice, safe, general way that is sure to offend no one. After all, this passage couldn’t possibly be about my sacred cows, right? My sacred cows are never idolatrous. It’s other people’s sacred cows he was talking about.

Up to now it’s just been a broad, general kind of thing, safe and inoffensive.

But…

I’m going to conclude this sermon with a few specific sacred cows that I believe are currently running loose in our own Christian churches, sacred cows that need to be rethought and possibly re-contextualized. Perhaps some need sent to the slaughterhouse before they become idols that we place at the center of our worship instead of the God who comes to us in Jesus Christ:

The Bible

The first is the Bible.

After a lifetime of study and more than thirty years of professional ministry, I have come to believe that the biggest sacred cow, one that has already been placed on the altar and worshiped as an idol in many churches, is the Bible.

We have forgotten that the Bible is not God. It is a sign that points us toward God but it is not God. It is a story that tells us about the relationships of ancient cultures with God, but it is not God. It is an account of the good news of God’s love and mercy and acceptance… but it is not God.

We must free ourselves from that idolatry that is biblical literalism. We must, if we are going to grow in our faith, stop worshiping the Bible, and start wrestling with it, struggling with it, contending with it, discussing it, and, at the very least, studying it. Just reading it and expecting it to work some kind of magic in our lives is not enough.

It’s neither a talisman nor a grimoire.³ It carries with it no magical power or magical knowledge. It is, above all else, a story that needs to be studied, compared, and applied for it to have any meaning or power at all.

Religious Language

The second sacred cow is religious language.

We do love our religious language, do we not? The words and phrases we learned as children and youth gave us comfort and understanding throughout our lives and we loathe to let go of them. But, there are cases where we must let them go if we are going to effectively carry out the great commandment that Jesus gave to us: “Go and make disciples.”

It’s time to purge phrases like “Holy Ghost” and “blood of the Lamb” from our religious vocabularies. They are symbols that no longer speak to anyone outside of the closed circle that is fundamentalist Christianity. They smack of superstition and are most often met with repulsion from those both in and outside of the church.

How can we invite a new Christians into our church and then sing a hymn like “There is a Fountain Filled with Blood” and “Are You Washed in the Blood?” and not expect them to be at least a little confused if not totally grossed out?

The phrase “born again” is utterly without meaning to those who aren’t and to many who are but don’t realize it.

Words like “holiness” may have had meaning 200 years ago when John and Charles Wesley called their first prayer groups “holy clubs” but today that phrase smacks of religious zealotry and fanaticism.

If our missionaries of the past 200 years have taught us nothing else, it is that, when we go into the mission field we must be able to speak the language of those to whom we are taking the gospel. If we go speaking only our own language we will usually accomplish little more than offending and alienating the very people with whom we are trying to establish a bond.

Religious Capitalism

I’m a big fan of economic capitalism. I believe that when it is done right, honest competition in the marketplace can create some pretty great things like America. For all its shortcomings, this is a pretty great place to live. Sometimes I wonder at all the marvelous and amazing things that are available to us in this country and how lucky I am to have been born here. I mean, it’s really pretty awesome, and much of it has come my way because of capitalism.

But I also believe that capitalism must be left at the door of the church.

The church of Jesus Christ is not a capitalistic institution.

It is not a store where we go to purchase spiritual food to get us through the rest of the week. It is not a store where the customer is always right, and to which our only responsibility is to show up, get what we want or need, pay the check, and leave until we need something else.

Even a cursory examination of the New Testament shows this to be the case. We are a community of faith, a family, a body where every organ and limb has an important task to do and without which the body is incomplete. We do not function to make a profit, but to serve a God. The pastor is not the CEO, but the pastor, a word that comes from the Latin root meaning shepherd. The members are neither the customers nor the employees but members of the church, even as the hand and the foot and the eyes are members of the body.

Those are just three institutional sacred cows. There are local ones as well (chicken barbecues, vacation Bible schools, Sunday school classes, meetings, reports, and so on) and even personal ones (the pew I sit in, my favorite hymn, the time the worship service begins, what kind of clothes people in church should wear, and so on).

You can always identify them by asking one simple question: “Is this bringing people closer to God and each other, or is it dividing, separating, estranging people and, in general, creating problems for our life together, but we keep on doing it, anyway, because we always have?”

Robert Kriegel, in his book Sacred Cows Make the Best Burgers, says, “Individuals and organizations that are good react quickly to change. Individuals and organizations that are great create change.”

Rethinking and, sometimes, letting go of sacred cows requires change, change with which all of us are sometimes uncomfortable. Jesus didn’t call his followers to be comfortable. He didn’t just react to change. He created it, not for its own sake, but for the sake of the world, the world which he loved and for which he died.

In the light of that great sacrifice, it seems little enough to ask for us to occasionally loosen our grip on just a few of our sacred cows, whether they are doctrinal, ecclesiastical, traditional, institutional or personal.

After all, sacred cows really do make the best burgers.

Amen.

1. http://www.businessinsider.com/17-big-companies-that-are-intensely-religious-2012-1 and http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/24/7-religious-companies-besides-chick-fil-a/

2. A mythical book of magic spells.

CSS Publishing Company, Inc., Like a Phoenix: Cycle B sermons for Pentecost through Proper 14, by Dean Feldmeyer

Overview and Insights · Lord of the Sabbath (2:23–3:6)

Overview · Jesus and his disciples are walking through a grain field. It happens to be on a Sabbath. They happen to pick and eat some of the grain. Evidently a group of Pharisees was following them around. They accuse Jesus’s disciples of breaking the Sabbath law. Jesus always seems to be in trouble with these religious leaders for breaking food laws or Sabbath laws. He responds with a story from 1 Samuel 21 about David eating the sacred bread to validate his decision to place basic human needs above food and Sabbath rules. The Pharisees need to change their priorities. Also, by speaking as “Lord of the Sabbath” (v. 28), Jesus again links himself with God (cf. 2:7–10, 19).

As Jesus goes into a synagogue, he sees a man with a deformed hand. But the religious leaders in the audience don’t so …

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Mark 2:23-3:6 · Lord of the Sabbath

27 Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."

4 Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent.

Commentary · Lord of the Sabbath

Of the two observances most characteristic of Judaism, circumcision and Sabbath, the latter is the more important and the subject of the fourth conflict narrative, in Mark 2:23–28. The Sabbath commandment forbids Jews (as well as their slaves and animals) from beginning any work that would extend over the Sabbath—from sunset Friday to sunset Saturday—or from doing any work on the Sabbath that was not absolutely necessary (“necessary” work referred to work that preserved life). Thus, a person could be rescued from the mouth of a wild animal or retrieved from under a fallen tree on the Sabbath, but a dislocated foot or hand could not be set on the Sabbath. The preeminence of the Sabbath is signaled by two factors: it is the longest of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20; Deuteronomy 5), and it is rooted in the order of creation—as God created six days and rested on the seventh (Gen. 1:1–2:4), Jews were divinely mandated to rest on the Sabbath.

When Jesus and the disciples walk through a field and eat grain, the Pharisees accuse them of “doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath” (2:24). The putative infractions are either traveling (walking more than 1,999 paces was considered a journey) or harvesting, or both. In defense, Jesus appeals to the precedent of when David and his companions ate from the twelve loaves of altar bread intended for the priests (1 Sam. 21:1–6; cf. Exod. 40:23; Lev. 24:5–9). The appeal to David hints at Jesus’s messianic status, for David was both Israel’s greatest king and precursor of the Messiah (2 Sam. 7:11–14; Ps. 110:1). In 2:27 Jesus clarifies the relationship of human life to Sabbath. In contrast to the Pharisees, who make human life subservient to the Sabbath, Jesus declares that people are not made for Sabbath rules, but rather the Sabbath is intended to bless and enhance human life. Second and more important, Jesus grounds this teaching in his own authority as Son of Man. In declaring that “the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath” (2:28), Jesus once again puts himself unambiguously in the place of God.

Each of the five conflict stories in 2:1–3:6 portrays Jesus’s sovereign authority as superseding all other authorities—whether of society, of scribes and Pharisees, or even of the law—in order to introduce God’s kingdom to needy, alienated, and sinful people. In this fifth and final conflict story (3:1–6), all eyes are trained on Jesus to see if he will heal on the Sabbath. A shriveled hand is not life threatening and does not qualify as an exception to Jewish Sabbath rules. Mark places this story immediately after 2:27–28 in order to demonstrate Jesus’s revolutionary teaching of doing—not refraining from—God’s work on the Sabbath. Before healing the man, Jesus asks two questions. The first question, about doing good or evil, refers to healing the man; but the second, about saving life or killing, cannot refer to the man, since a shriveled hand is not fatal. The second question refers, rather, to the intentions of the Jewish religious leaders with regard to Jesus. Grieved and indignant about their hardness of heart, Jesus commands the man to stretch forth his hand. Only in exposing his malady to Jesus is he healed. But Jesus is thereby jeopardized (see also 1:45), for “the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus” (3:6). Thus, early in his ministry, the shadow of the cross falls on Jesus.

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

Big Idea: In Jesus the new age has come, and this new reality cannot be immersed into the old ways. Jesus the Son of Man has authority over the Torah and is Lord over the Sabbath.

Understanding the Text

The opposition to Jesus intensifies with each of the episodes in this section. The central story among the five in 2:1–3:6 tells why the conflict is occurring (2:18–22): in Jesus a new era has arrived, one in which he must challenge the old traditions. Those who cling to the old (symbolized by the issue of fasting) have been superseded, and this new kingdom reality cannot be subsumed under the old ways. This then leads to the final two episodes, which are controversies over Sabbath observance (the first two, 2:1–12, 13–17, center on forgiveness of sins and acceptance into the new community).

Interpretive Insights

2:18 John’s disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees were fasting. These two groups of disciples represent the old order, still observing traditional practices. The only required fast was on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:29–34 [most agree that Jesus and his disciples probably observed this but not the weekly fasting]), but there were other times of fasting connected to traumatic experiences in the life of Israel (Zech. 7:5; 8:19, both linked to the exile). The Pharisees fasted twice a week (Luke 18:12), on Monday and Thursday, and John’s disciples likely followed this practice. Fasting generally signified repentance for sin or grief over death or illness.

2:19 How can the guests of the bridegroom fast while he is with them? These persons (literally, “sons of the wedding hall”) could be the groomsmen or the guests, but Jesus likely means it more widely of all the guests attending (his followers). The question is formulated to expect a negative answer: “The guests cannot fast, can they?” Jesus’s analogy is very apt. Fasting expresses mourning and sorrow, while weddings center on intense joy. Weddings lasted seven days, with an abundance of good food and wine.1As Yahweh is the bridegroom of Israel, Jesus is the groom of the new kingdom community, the church.2

2:20 on that day they will fast. The two metaphors centering on the time when the groom is “with them” and when he “will be taken from them” clearly refer to Jesus’s time on earth and to his crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension. Jesus’s followers experience the joy of the kingdom that he has brought with him, so it is time for celebration. There may be double meaning in “taken”: taken from this world through death and taken up into glory by God. But the former is central, and Jesus certainly is referring to his coming violent death (“on that day” = his crucifixion). The later church took this literally and fasted on Wednesdays and Fridays.

2:21 a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. The two parables of 2:21–22 state the same thing through separate pictures: placing something new in something old. The message is the incompatibility of the new covenant with the old covenant. The old garment has already shrunk and is inflexible. The new patch sewed on will shrink when washed, and the thread will tear both the old cloak and the new cloth. Both will be destroyed. The same is true with Jesus’s new kingdom message.

2:22 new wine into new wineskins. Joel Marcus says it well: “The necessity of preserving, undiluted by compromise with the structures of the old age, the eschatological power that has broken into the world in Jesus’s advent, is summed up by the battle cry that ends the passage: ‘New wine into new wineskins!’”3Leather wineskins were soft and flexible when new, but over time they became dry and brittle. New wine is unfermented, and as the wine expands while fermenting, it produces cracks in the dry skin, so that the wine leaks out and the wineskin is of no more use. Both are lost. The new wine of Jesus’s kingdom teaching must be encased in the new covenant reality, the new community and ways that Jesus is establishing.

2:24 what is unlawful on the Sabbath. The fourth of the Ten Commandments (Exod. 20:8–11; cf. Lev. 23:3) said that the Sabbath (sunset Friday to sunset Saturday) was to be a day of rest, with no work whatsoever done. However, the question of what constitutes work vexed the Pharisees, so they developed the oral Torah to give specific examples of what was prohibited; these included harvesting grain on the Sabbath.4Here the disciples are walking through a field plucking some wheat for a snack (this was allowed as long as one did not use a sickle). But for the Pharisees, Jesus’s disciples broke their law, since it was harvesting on the Sabbath.

2:25–26 David . . . ate the consecrated bread. This occurred in 1 Samuel 21:1–6, as David, future king and messianic forerunner, was fleeing from Saul.5He and his men ate the sacred loaves reserved for the priests (Exod. 25:30; Lev. 24:5–9). The priest freely gave him the bread, and God never judged David, so Jesus uses this as an example of the law being set aside due to the need of David, who as future king and forebear of the Messiah had the authority to demand the holy bread. If this is true, even more may an oral tradition be set aside for the Messiah himself, the Son of God.

2:27 The Sabbath was made for man. God’s rest, the Sabbath, was meant to benefit and strengthen God’s people. The ordaining of the Sabbath was never intended for the purpose of people keeping Sabbath regulations and precepts. It was a gift from God and so was to serve humankind, not to become the master over humankind. For us, it is meant to be a day of rest and worship, not a source of rules.

2:28 the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath. This concludes all the miracle stories thus far. The result (“So [h?ste] the Son of Man . . .”) of Jesus’s actions is absolute proof that as the glorified “Son of Man” (see the sidebar in the unit on 2:1–12; the major theme of Dan. 7:13–14 is universal dominion), he is cosmic Lord of all, specifically here “over the Sabbath” and its regulations. He is the final interpreter of Torah (one of the emphases of the Sermon on the Mount [Matt. 5–7]) and offers a Sabbath-like rest for the soul (Matt. 11:28–30). What Christ has brought is “greater than the temple” (Matt. 12:6 [in the same story as here in Mark]), and if Christ supersedes the temple, he also has authority over the Sabbath observance. This is an apex of Mark’s Christology and shows that, for Mark, there is a divine authority that rests on Jesus.

3:2 looking for a reason to accuse Jesus. They are back in the Capernaum synagogue (indicated by “another time”), and another compelling act of Jesus’s authority is about to take place. There are three sections to this story: setting (vv. 1–2), confrontation (vv. 3–4), and miracle (vv. 5–6). Each begins with an act of Jesus and ends with a negative reaction on the part of the leaders. They obviously rejected Jesus as “Lord over the Sabbath” and so were hoping that he would discredit himself by breaking the regulations about healing (= work) on the Sabbath.

3:4 Which is lawful . . . to save life or to kill? Similar to 2:9 (cf. Deut. 30:15–19), this is a question of halakah, the rabbinic rules for daily life. Their rigid legal demands would leave the man’s “shriveled hand” unhealed rather than restoring his health. Thus it would be an act of “evil” rather than “good.” Jesus thus poses the dilemma of a system that, ironically, stands in the way of God’s good and obviates his true purposes.

But they remained silent. The Pharisees had a ready answer (“This is not life-threatening [their law allowed healing if a life was at stake], so heal the man tomorrow rather than today”), so their silence seems strange. Perhaps they just did not want to be drawn into another debate, and perhaps they realized that however they answered they would be in trouble. But Mark uses silence five times (four total in the other Gospels); here and in 1:25 and 4:39 it is a reference to Jesus’s authority and power. They had no response in light of Jesus’s God-given authority.

3:5 in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts. Jesus’s deep emotions come to the surface, reflecting the justice and love of God that here are displayed by Jesus—God’s anger at sin yet grief at the dilemma of fallen humankind. This is, literally, “the hardness of their hearts” and will be descriptive of the disciples as well in 6:52; 8:17. Their callous and stubborn refusal to submit to God’s truths typified the leaders.

3:6 how they might kill Jesus. Clearly the religious (Pharisees) and political (Herodians—Herod’s partisans who are always opposed to Jesus in the Gospels) leaders are convinced that Jesus has become such a threat that only his death will suffice. So they enter a plot to kill him. The anti-Jesus campaign of 2:1–3:6 has reached its apex already.

Theological Insights

Two insights dominate. (1) In Jesus God’s kingdom—God’s reign over this world—has arrived in a new way, and God’s people must embrace this newness and respond properly. A new age with new principles has entered among God’s people, and they are called to emulate this new kingdom reality in their lives and worship. This is illustrated by the new Sabbath principle: rules of ritual have been replaced by its purpose from the beginning—rest and worship. (2) Jesus is Lord of all, and those who reject his authority will answer to God. All characterized by “stubborn hearts” must submit to God in Jesus or face the consequences.

Teaching the Text

1. Fasting is a spiritual discipline for the present age. It is critical to help people understand the meaning and purpose of fasting. Many in Jesus’s time connected it with mourning for sin, sorrow in time of tragedy, but also with gaining favor with God to manipulate him into doing things. In the new era inaugurated by Jesus, fasting is practiced (Acts 13:2–3; 14:23), but it is always part of worship and deep prayer. It must never constitute manipulation of God. When believers fast, they should never do so in an attempt to get God to say yes to their requests. Rather, fasting is the surrender of major needs (food usually, but also sexual relations within marriage in 1 Cor. 7:5) in order to realize that God is our primary need. In other words, its goal is to make God our absolute priority, not to get things from God. Still, fasting is a major aspect of worship and of the spiritual disciplines.

2. A new community and ritual characterize the new wine of Christ. The “new wineskin” that must encase Jesus’s new kingdom reality almost certainly refers to the newness of ritual and community that defined the church in the New Testament. Jesus at his death and resurrection entered “the greater and more perfect tabernacle” (Heb. 9:11) and opened up the heavenly temple for us, giving us a new access to God and a “new covenant” (Jer. 31:31–34 = Heb. 8:8–12). The church is the new temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16; 1 Pet. 2:4–5), and each of us, indwelt by the Spirit, is a temple, a walking holy of holies! In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks often of the new prayer power that we possess (14:13–14, 26; 15:16; 16:23, 24, 26). In Christ the church is bathed in newness.

3. The true purpose of the Sabbath laws is worship and rest. The scribes and Pharisees developed a complex set of rules for keeping the Sabbath,6and this tendency to define the seventh day by strict adherence to regulations has dogged the church ever since. The problem with a legalistic approach to God and worship is the tendency to feel that rule keeping is sufficient in our relationship to God. We too easily forget compassion and good works. We forget the basic principle of Hosea 6:6: “I desire mercy, not sacrifice.” There are only two requirements for the Sabbath: worship and rest. It is a day set apart for God and family. It is not to be just another secular day, but we are not to look down on each other regarding Sabbath observance. As Paul says in Romans 14:1–15:13, we should respect each other’s religious convictions regarding such things as holy days and food laws.

4. Jesus is the Lord of all. All of 1:21–3:6 centers on the authority of Jesus over all creation. This will become even more evident in the miracle stories in 4:54–5:43, where Jesus is presented as Lord over nature, the demonic realm, sickness, and death. Mark’s Gospel has often been characterized as having a “low Christology,” but that is because the disciples never confess Jesus as more than the Messiah. In reality, Mark implicitly affirms John’s emphasis on Jesus as God. He is the Son of God, and as the Son of Man he fulfills the universal dominion set out in Daniel 7:13–14. Worship demands the realization that Jesus is more than our friend and guide; he is our Savior and Lord.

Illustrating the Text

The new community and ritual

Object Lesson: Apply a large, unwashed, wool patch to an old pair of pants (wool will shrink significantly when washed). Wash the pants in hot water and run them through the dryer. The patch may not tear, but it certainly will distort the look of the pants and render the pants, and the patch, unusable.

The problem of legalism

Business: In order to warn consumers of potential dangers, many products may include warning labels. But efforts to avoid potential liability can sometimes result in ridiculous-sounding warnings. Here are a few examples found on actual products or in the related manual:

• Ammoniated window cleaner: Do not spray in eyes.

• Electric woodworking drill: This product not intended for use as a dental drill.

• Hair coloring: Do not use as an ice cream topping.

• Sleeping pills: May cause drowsiness.

• Air conditioner: Avoid dropping air conditioners out of windows.

Though many are humorous, product warning labels reflect the impulse of caution in the face of potential danger. In an effort to ensure that behavior pleased God and avoid potential sanction for wrongdoing, the religious leaders developed an oral tradition of sometimes overly detailed religious laws to ensure that people obeyed God’s commands.

Observing the Sabbath

Human Experience: The point of the Sabbath is to give us time to rest and to focus our hearts on God. Research shows that we desperately need rest. Consider the following data reported by Key Organization Systems:7

• Nearly one-third of American working adults get less than six hours of sleep per night.

• Sleep deprivation is now costing U.S. companies $63.2 billion a year in lost productivity.

• One-third of employees maintain chronic stress.

The command for keeping the Sabbath is not meant to be a burden but rather is to be viewed as a great gift. When we understand the purpose of the Sabbath, we make it a priority for physical, emotional, and spiritual rest, a rest desperately needed by many in our culture.

The place of fasting in the Christian life

Testimony: Fasting is a biblical and historical Christian discipline that is largely ignored by Christians today. Ask someone in your church who has had a positive experience with fasting (not as an attempt to manipulate God but as an opportunity to surrender more fully to him) to share about their experience. Challenge your listeners to make a commitment to fast regularly; this could include fasting from pleasures suchas television, computers, and cell phones.

Teaching the Text by Grant R. Osborne, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Abiathar

Anger

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.

Bread

Generally made of grain, this staple of foods has been known to be in existence since prehistoric days, being mentioned in the oldest literatures of humanity. Though usually made of wheat, it can be made of any grain and also some kinds of beans or lentils.

To make bread, grain must be ground into flour, mixed with salt and water, kneaded into a dough, and baked. Most breads included a leaven to add substance. As a food staple, it became a symbol of hospitality (Neh. 13:1 2; Matt. 14:15–21) and community as people ate together (Acts 2:42). Bread was considered a gift from God, so it was treated with special deference. Unleavened bread was required during Passover feasts and in most occasions related to the worship of God. The “bread of the Presence” (KJV: “shewbread”), representing the twelve tribes of Israel in the temple, was made of unleavened bread (Exod. 25:30) with special flour and was carefully eaten by the priests.

Jesus used bread in the Lord’s Prayer to represent asking God to meet our basic needs (Matt. 5:11), and he called himself the “bread of life” to show that he is the one who “gives life to the world,” our ultimate sustenance (John 6:33–35). During this exchange with the Jews about the bread of life, Jesus foreshadows what takes place at the Last Supper with his disciples, suggesting that believers must “eat [his] flesh” (represented by bread) and “drink [his] blood” (represented by wine) (John 6:53–59; cf. Luke 22:19). Additionally, bread was used symbolically to represent those things that were present in daily life (Pss. 127:2; 80:5; Prov. 4:17; 20:17).

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.

Hardness of Heart

Hardness of heart describes a spiritual condition of active resistance against God and his ways. In a certain sense this kind of resistance is found in every human being ever since the fall in Gen. 3. Every human being inherits a sin nature from Adam (Rom. 5:12 14) that naturally and inevitably imparts a predisposition to sin.

One of the puzzles and mysteries of Scripture is that God himself is often described as being the one who hardens the hearts of various individuals. Pharaoh in the exodus story is a classic illustration. In Exod. 4:21 God says to Moses, “I will harden his [Pharaoh’s] heart so that he will not let the people go.” Other times, more ambiguous language is used, such as in 7:13, where “Pharaoh’s heart became hard.” Still other times, Pharaoh himself is described as being actively involved in this process, such as “when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen to Moses and Aaron” (8:15). The best way to understand this situation is to see hardness of heart as a combination of the active will of fallen human beings and the mysterious workings of a sovereign God. (Salvation and spiritual growth are similar spiritual realities in that both of these also involve a mysterious combination of God’s direct involvement in people’s lives and the necessity of their own human response.) Since the Bible so frequently warns against the danger of a hardened heart, there are clearly genuine opportunities for people to cry out to God for mercy and deliverance from this awful situation.

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.

Herodians

Five of the important parties in ancient Judaism were the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes, the Zealots, and the Herodians. The first three seem to have first emerged in reaction to the rise of the Hasmonean priest-kings in the mid-second and first centuries BC, and the other two in response to the occupation of Palestine by the Romans and their establishment of the Herods as the rulers of Israel.

Pharisees. In the Synoptic Gospels, the Pharisees were one of the groups that opposed Jesus. It seems that the Pharisees most strongly opposed Jesus on issues related to their received tradition, which they considered to be as binding as the OT law. Two such legal issues were ceremonial washings before meals and working on the Sabbath. All three Synoptic Gospels narrate the Pharisees questioning Jesus concerning his and his disciples’ failure to follow the tradition of the elders by eating with “unclean”—that is, “unwashed”—hands (Matt. 15:1 2; Mark 7:1–5; Luke 11:39–41). Concerning breaking the Sabbath, the Pharisees confronted Jesus on various occasions, such as when Jesus healed on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:9–14; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–11) and when his disciples picked grain while walking through a field (Matt. 12:1–8; Mark 2:23–28; Luke 6:1–5).

In response to accusations concerning breaking the traditions of the elders, Jesus affirmed the priority of mercy in the face of human need that supersedes laws concerning the Sabbath by saying that the Sabbath was made for humans, not humans for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27), or that the Son of Man (Jesus) was Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8; Mark 2:28; Luke 6:5). He also said that God desires mercy, not sacrifice (Matt. 12:7).

Jesus’ critique of the Pharisees concentrated on their neglecting mercy toward fellow humans for the sake of their tradition. This is especially clear in Matthew, where Jesus’ critique of the Pharisees includes indictments against them for concentrating on the fine points of the law but neglecting justice and mercy (12:7; 23:23).

In the Gospel of John, the Pharisees are again usually depicted as adversaries of Jesus and also in league with other Jewish authorities in plotting to arrest and kill Jesus (7:32; 11:47–57). One passage suggests that they were divided concerning Jesus (9:16). One Pharisee, Nicodemus, came to Jesus by night (John 3), defended Jesus before his peers (7:50), and brought spices to prepare Jesus’ body for burial after his death (19:39).

The Pharisees were not always antagonistic toward Jesus. From time to time, they were on the same side of an issue, such as Jesus’ confrontation with the Sadducees over the resurrection (Luke 20:27–40). Nicodemus, mentioned above, was quite sympathetic toward Jesus. The apostle Paul identifies himself as a Pharisee in regard to keeping the law in Phil. 3:5; Acts 26:5, and in a confrontation with Jerusalem authorities in Acts 23:6. Also, some early Christians were said to be Pharisees (Acts 15:5).

Sadducees. The Sadducees were an elite group of Jews connected with the priesthood. “Sadducee” probably means “Son of Zadok,” a descendant of the high priest Zadok from the time of David. Some members of the Qumran community used the term “Son of Zadok” as a self-designation as well, suggesting some common ancestry, if not direct identification, of the Sadducees and some members of the Qumran community.

The Sadducees are mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels, but not in John, although the “chief priests” who plotted against Jesus with the Pharisees (e.g., John 11:46) probably were Sadducees. All three Synoptic Gospels relate the narrative in which the Sadducees posed the hypothetical question concerning whose wife a woman would be in the resurrection if she outlived seven husbands. Jesus answered that they understood neither the Scriptures nor the power of God, and that God was the God of the living and not the dead (Matt. 22:23–33; Mark 12:18–27; Luke 20:27–40).

The book of Acts confirms that the Sadducees were closely connected to the priesthood 4:1; 5:17), and that they disputed with the Pharisees over the resurrection (23:6–8).

Essenes. Josephus delineates the beliefs of the Essenes as follows: (1) They ascribed every happening to God. (2) They believed in the immortality of the soul.

Zealots. Scholars tend to use “Zealots” as a general term to refer to three different groups mentioned by Josephus: brigands, Sicarii (Assassins), and Zealots. The three groups have different political ideologies and emerged at different times in the first century. They can all be described as revolutionaries.

Herodians. The Herodians are mentioned three times in the Gospels. They are reported to have plotted, along with the Pharisees, to kill Jesus after he healed a man with a withered hand (Mark 3:6). They are also described, along with the Pharisees, as trying to trap Jesus concerning the lawfulness of paying taxes to Caesar (Matt. 22:16; Mark 12:13).

The Herodians were aristocrats who supported the Herodian dynasty and the Romans, whose support made that dynasty possible. There seems to be some overlap between the Herodians and the Sadducees; Mark 8:15 has Jesus warning his disciples concerning the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod (some ancient witnesses read “Herodians”), whereas the parallel in Matt. 16:6, 11 has Jesus warning his disciples concerning the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Their religious beliefs may have been similar to those of the Sadducees. Too little information about them exists to permit drawing strong conclusions. One can safely say, however, that the Herodians were pro-Roman aristocrats who joined forces with the anti-Roman Pharisees in opposing Jesus.

High Priest

A priest is a minister of sacred things who represents God to the people and the people to God. The OT identifies priests of Yahweh and priests of other gods and idols. The only pagan priest that the NT mentions is the priest of Zeus from Lystra who wanted to offer sacrifices to Paul and Barnabas, whom the crowd mistook for deities (Acts 14:13). All other NT references build upon OT teaching about priests of Yahweh.

Early biblical history records clan heads offering sacrifices for their families (Gen. 12:7 8; 13:18; 22; 31:54; 46:1). Although the patriarchs performed these duties, they are never called “priests”; the only priests mentioned from this time are foreigners such as Melchizedek, the Egyptian priest of On, and Moses’ father-in-law Jethro (Gen. 14:18; 41:45, 50; 46:20; Exod. 3:1; 18:1). Whereas all Israelites could be called “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:6), a distinctive priesthood came to light when God instructed Moses to prepare special priestly clothes for Aaron and his sons (Exod. 28). The high priest was distinguished from the others by more magnificent clothes. By failing to wear their special clothes while serving at the tabernacle, the priests would incur guilt and die (Exod. 28:43).

In NT times many priests exerted religious and civil power as leaders of the Sadducees and the Essenes. Some priests, such as Zechariah, were portrayed as righteous men (Luke 1:5–6). Others were said to have come to faith in Jesus (Acts 6:7). Supporting the role assigned by Moses, Jesus regularly required those whom he healed to show themselves to the priest. Even so, most Gospel references to priests underscore their opposition to Jesus’ ministry and the role they played in his trial and crucifixion. This opposition continued after the resurrection, as priests challenged the witness of the apostles. When Peter and John proclaimed that a crippled beggar had been healed by Jesus’ power, the priests and others jailed, interrogated, and forbade them from speaking in Jesus’ name (Acts 4:1–20). The Sanhedrin questioned Stephen about charges of blasphemy and speaking against the temple and the Mosaic law (6:11–7:1). Saul (Paul) received a letter of authority from the high priest to arrest Christians (9:1–2). Later, as a follower of Jesus, he stood trial before Ananias, who charged him before Felix (24:1), and a wider group of chief priests who charged him before Festus (25:1–3).

Hebrews uniquely highlights how the priesthood of Jesus surpassed the OT priesthood. The OT priests presented sin offerings, but their sacrifices needed to be repeated regularly, whereas Jesus, the faithful and merciful high priest, offered a sacrifice that never needed repeating and was available to everyone at all times. Jesus also surpassed the Aaronic priests because they first needed to offer sacrifices for their own sins, but he never sinned. Furthermore, since he offered the perfect sacrifice of himself, all people, not just priests, could draw near to God.

The NT develops the idea of a priesthood of all believers by taking the concept that Israel would be a kingdom of priests and transferring it to the church (1 Pet. 2:4–9; cf. Exod. 19:6). Reflecting the general biblical view of priesthood, believers offer spiritual sacrifices to God, represent God to the world by revealing his works of salvation, and represent the world to God through prayer. In the NT, the priesthood of believers is corporate; a priestly office in the church is never expressly mentioned.

Save

“Salvation” is the broadest term used to refer to God’s actions to solve the plight brought about by humankind’s sinful rebellion and its consequences. It is one of the central themes of the entire Bible, running from Genesis through Revelation.

In many places in the OT, salvation refers to being rescued from physical rather than spiritual trouble. Fearing the possibility of retribution from his brother Esau, Jacob prays, “Save me, I pray, from the hand of my brother Esau” (Gen. 32:11). The actions of Joseph in Egypt saved many from famine (45:5 7; 47:25; 50:20). Frequently in the psalms, individuals pray for salvation from enemies that threaten one’s safety or life (Pss. 17:14; 18:3; 70:1–3; 71:1–4; 91:1–3).

Related to this usage are places where the nation of Israel and/or its king were saved from enemies. The defining example of this is the exodus, whereby God delivered his people from their enslavement to the Egyptians, culminating in the destruction of Pharaoh and his army (Exod. 14:1–23). From that point forward in the history of Israel, God repeatedly saved Israel from its enemies, whether through a judge (e.g., Judg. 2:16; 3:9), a king (2 Kings 14:27), or even a shepherd boy (1 Sam. 17:1–58).

But these examples of national deliverance had a profound spiritual component as well. God did not save his people from physical danger as an end in itself; it was the necessary means for his plan to save them from their sins. The OT recognizes the need for salvation from sin (Pss. 39:8; 51:14; 120:2) but, as the NT makes evident, does not provide a final solution (Heb. 9:1–10:18). One of the clearest places that physical and spiritual salvation come together is Isa. 40–55, where Judah’s exile from the land and prophesied return are seen as the physical manifestation of the much more fundamental spiritual exile that resulted from sin. To address that far greater reality, God announces the day when the Suffering Servant would once and for all take away the sins of his people (Isa. 52:13–53:12).

As in the OT, the NT has places where salvation refers to being rescued from physical difficulty. Paul, for example, speaks of being saved from various physical dangers, including execution (2 Cor. 1:8–10; Phil. 1:19; 2 Tim. 4:17). In the midst of a fierce storm, Jesus’ disciples cry out, “Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!” (Matt. 8:25). But far more prominent are the places in the Gospels and Acts where physical healings are described with the verb sōzō, used to speak of salvation from sin. The healing of the woman with the hemorrhage (Mark 5:25–34), the blind man along the road (Luke 18:35–43), and even the man possessed by a demon (Luke 8:26–39), just to name a few, are described with the verb sōzō. The same verb, however, is also used to refer to Jesus forgiving someone’s sins (Luke 7:36–50) and to his mission to save the lost from their sins (Luke 19:10). Such overlap is a foretaste of the holistic salvation (physical and spiritual) that will be completed in the new heaven and earth (Rev. 21–22). The NT Epistles give extensive descriptions of how the work of Jesus Christ saves his people from their sins.

Son of Man

In the OT, the phrase “son of man” usually refers to humanity in general or to a specific individual. In Ezekiel, for instance, God addresses the prophet himself as “son of man,” possibly indicating his human status compared with God or, alternatively, highlighting his unique status as God’s prophet in contrast with the rest of humanity.

One of the most crucial OT “son of man” texts is Dan. 7 because of its influence on the “Son of Man” in the Gospel tradition. The first half of the chapter records Daniel’s vision (7:1 14), while the second half contains its interpretation (7:15–27). In the vision Daniel sees “one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven” (7:13). This exalted figure contrasts with the first three beasts, which are “like a lion” (7:4), “like a bear” (7:5), and “like a leopard” (7:6). The fourth beast is so gruesome that it defies comparison with any species of the animal kingdom (7:7). Many agree that the beasts likely refer to ancient world empires; however, the referent of “one like a son of man” has given rise to much debate. The figure may refer to earthly Israel, since at this figure’s vindication he is endowed with authority and glory. This is precisely what “the holy people of the Most High” receive in verse 27. In this way, the “one like a son of man” is a symbol for the persecuted, earthly saints. Alternatively, the exalted figure could be a heavenly being such as the archangel Gabriel (9:21) or Michael (10:13; 12:1). Here “one like a son of man” is the heavenly counterpart and leader of suffering Israel and fights a cosmic battle on its behalf.

In the NT the term “Son of Man” occurs mostly in the Gospels and, with the exception of John 12:34 (where the crowd quotes Jesus), is uttered exclusively by Jesus himself. Unlike in Daniel, the epithet occurs in the Gospels with the definite article, likely indicating that the Son of Man was a known figure. In first-century Judaism many Jews believed that the Son of Man would return at the end as savior and judge. The OT provides the most helpful background for understanding the Son of Man in the Gospels.

The Son of Man sayings in the Gospels fall within three categories: earthly, suffering-resurrection, and future-vindication sayings. Starting with the earthly sayings, in Mark 2:10, for example, the Son of Man has “authority on earth to forgive sins,” and in 2:28 he exercises dominion over the Sabbath. Although in Daniel the Son of Man does not receive such authority until his appearance in Yahweh’s presence at his vindication, the Son of Man in the Gospels exercises such authority during his earthly ministry. Jesus also predicts that the Son of Man will suffer, die, and be raised again. In Mark, these suffering-resurrection predictions occur three times (8:31; 9:31; 10:33–34). Echoing Dan. 7, this plight of Jesus recalls the suffering of the holy ones caused by the little horn (v. 21). If the “one like a son of man” represents the holy ones in their vindication, then it is reasonable that he does so in their suffering as well; however, the text of Daniel is silent on this point. Finally, the clearest reference to Dan. 7 occurs in the future-vindication sayings. In Mark 13:26; 14:62 the Son of Man comes with/on the clouds, which points to his vindication over the Sanhedrin, the dominant adversaries of Jesus in Mark. Matthew appears to develop even more than Mark the judicial responsibilities of the Son of Man (Matt. 13:41–43; 25:31–33). Meanwhile, in Luke the church must stay alert and be prepared for the return of the Son of Man (12:39–40; 17:22–37; 21:34–36).

Finally, the Son of Man in Revelation is in the heavenly temple functioning as both judge and caretaker of the seven churches (Rev. 1:12–20) and reaps the saints while “seated on the cloud” (14:14–16).

Synagogue

In English, the word “synagogue” refers either to a Jewish congregation or to the place where that congregation meets. Synagogues of the biblical era functioned as both religious and civic centers for the Jewish community.

Since synagogues were institutions with a documented history no earlier than the third century BC, they are not mentioned in the OT. The Greek word from which the English one is derived does appear frequently in the LXX, but always with a general reference to a gathering, assembly, or meeting.

Synagogues frequently were locations of the teaching and healing ministry of Jesus. He began preaching the kingdom of God, teaching, and performing healing miracles in Galilean synagogues (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; 12:9; 13:54; Mark 1:21 29, 39; 3:1; 6:2; Luke 4:15–38, 44; 6:6–11; 13:10–17; John 6:59; 18:20). Later, the apostle Paul customarily initiated his mission work in the local synagogue at each of his destinations (Acts 9:19–20; 13:5, 14–15; 14:1; 17:1, 10, 17; 18:1–8; 19:8).

The last (and, from a twenty-first-century perspective, most controversial) use of the word “synagogue” in Scripture is the difficult phrase “synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9; 3:9), which must be read in its context. This was written in response to the significant persecution in Asia Minor of the churches at Smyrna and Philadelphia by Jews who were in collusion with the Roman authorities. They were falsely accusing Jewish and Gentile Christian believers, creating unspeakable suffering for them. This phrase, intended to encourage Christian perseverance, implies that the churches in view represented true Israel, while their accusers were false Jews.

Direct Matches

Abiathar

A high priest, son of Ahimelek, first mentioned in 1 Sam. 22:20, when he escaped Saul’s slaughter of the priests of Nob. He took refuge with David in the cave of Adullam and, having escaped with the ephod (1 Sam. 23:6–12), became the high priest after David’s reign was established. He was from the line of Eli, son of Aaron, and served with Zadok (line of Eleazar, son of Aaron) during David’s reign (2 Sam. 8:17), although note the reference there to “Ahimelek son of Abiathar.” This is usually considered a copyist’s error, since Ahimelek was Abiathar’s father, and Abiathar is often mentioned as a contemporary of Zadok (e.g., 2 Sam. 15:29, 35; 1 Kings 1:7–8). When Absalom rebelled against David, Abiathar remained supportive (2 Sam. 15). Later, however, he supported Adonijah as David’s successor rather than Solomon, which led to his banishment to his hometown, Anathoth, by Solomon, thus fulfilling Eli’s prophecy (1 Sam. 2:30–35; 1 Kings 2:26–27). He is mentioned once in the NT, Mark 2:26, where Jesus recounts when David took the showbread to feed his men “in the days of Abiathar the high priest.” According to 1 Sam. 21:1–9, however, it was Ahimelek, Abiathar’s father, who was high priest at the time. This is often considered to be a copyist’s error, and some Greek manuscripts omit or alter the reference to Abiathar.

Anger

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).

Corn

The KJV uses the word “corn” to translate a variety of words that refer to cereal crops such as wheat and barley. In these instances, the NIV typically uses the translation “grain” (e.g., Gen. 27:28; Deut. 16:9; Mark 2:23; etc.). See also Grain.

Heart

Physiologically, the heart is an organ in the body, and in the Bible it is also used in a number of metaphors. The NT uses the Greek term kardia similarly to the OT Hebrew terms leb and lebab and in some cases depends on OT usage.

Mind and Emotions

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. We also should not confuse some modern English idioms or distinctions as being related to the biblical viewpoint. The Bible does not make a distinction between “head knowledge” and “heart knowledge,” nor does it employ language making the “heart” good or superior and the “head/mind” bad, inferior, or merely intellectual. It does not prize the emotional over the thoughtful; it has a more integrated viewpoint.

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.

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.

Idioms

The word “heart” also appears in several idioms.

Hardness of heart. A hard heart is obstinate or averse (Mark 3:5), while a tender heart is humble (2 Kings 22:19). In the book of Exodus the translations typically say that God or Pharaoh hardened Pharaoh’s/his heart. These passages in Exodus use not the Hebrew words for hardness but rather those for being heavy or for strengthening. The neutral sense of strengthening the heart takes on nuances in context for being bold or obstinate. Pharaoh was strengthened in his opposition to God, and this obstinacy fits the idiom of having a hard heart.

Uncircumcised/circumcised heart. An uncircumcised heart is a metaphor for an obstinate and rebellious heart, while a circumcised heart is linked to being humble and faithful (Lev. 26:41; Deut. 30:6; Jer. 4:4; Acts 7:51). Perhaps the metaphor is based on the role of circumcision in the covenant.

“A man after his [God’s] own heart” (1 Sam. 13:14). This description of David may mean either “according to his [God’s] choice” (cf. 2 Sam. 7:21), stressing God’s choice over the people’s choice, or it may mean “in accordance with his [God’s] desire” (1 Sam. 14:7; 1 Kings 15:3), referring to how David showed conformity with God’s agenda.

All the heart. The phrase “with all [one’s] heart” in some cases means “wholeheartedly” or “single-mindedly,” which emphasizes unity of purpose and focus. In other cases it seems to mean, more broadly, “with all of one’s thinking or perspective” and implies the work of adjusting our worldview away from common cultural assumptions and toward God’s teaching.

Say in one’s heart. This expression denotes talking to oneself (i.e., thinking) rather than out loud or indicates reflection or deliberation. There are several warnings not to lie to oneself—that is, not to deliberate, believe, and act on the stated false premise.

Take [a matter] to heart. To take something to heart is to take it very seriously or to give it high priority.

Herodians

Since the term “Herodians” appears only three times in the NT (Matt. 22:16; Mark 3:6; 12:13), it is unclear whether it refers to a political party or more generally to supporters of the Herodian dynasty. Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, ruled as tetrarch of Galilee during the period of Jesus’ ministry, and this is likely where the Herodians were based. In all three NT appearances they are conspiring with the Pharisees against Jesus. This is unusual in one sense because the Herodians were favorably disposed toward the Roman authorities (who kept Herod in power), while the Pharisees generally opposed Roman rule. Nonetheless, both groups had reason to fear Jesus and his influence among the people, the Pharisees for religious reasons and the Herodians for political ones. Herod and his supporters would have been leery of any popular messianic movement that might provoke a peasant revolt among Herod’s disgruntled subjects. See also Jewish Parties.

Lord

Old Testament

The Hebrew word for “Lord,” yhwh (usually pronounced “Yahweh”), occurs more than 6,800 times in the OT and is in every book except Ecclesiastes and Esther. “Yahweh” is God’s personal name and is revealed as such in Exod. 3:13–14. God tells Moses to declare to the Israelites in Egypt, “I am has sent me to you” (3:14). The Hebrew behind “I am” connotes active being; the Lord is the one who is there for his people and, in the book of Exodus, does so through miraculous events (14:13–14). This demonstrates the close association between one’s name and one’s character in the ancient world. Yahweh is one who is with his people (Exod. 3:12; 6:2, 4; Isa. 26:4). Although the divine name is used before the exodus (Gen. 12:1; 15:1), it is not until the time of Moses that God reveals its redemptive significance. Nonetheless, the divine name is used in Genesis in contexts where the immanence of God is evident. In Gen. 3:8 “the Lord God . . . was walking in the garden in the cool of the day.” Further, the Lord makes a covenant with Abraham (Gen. 12; 15; 17), and the Lord will remain faithful to his covenants for a thousand generations (Deut. 7:9). Later in Israel’s history, Micah, in the face of those who worship other gods, reassures the people of Israel that Yahweh is distinct from all others, and that they will walk in his name because he will one day act to effect justice for all (Mic. 4:3–5).

The divine name also occurs as a form of address in various prayers throughout the OT (Gen. 15:2, 8; Exod. 5:22; 2 Sam. 7:18; 2 Kings 6:17), most notably in the psalms, where it occurs over two hundred times. In the psalms an abbreviated form of the name is often seen in an exclamation of praise, hallelu yah, “praise Yah[weh]” (e.g., Pss. 149:1; 150:1).

It is interesting to note the origin of the pronunciation of yhwh as “Jehovah.” To avoid breaking the third commandment, against misusing the name of God, pious Jews did not pronounce the divine name yhwh, substituting the word ’adonay (“my master”) in its place. In medieval times Jewish scholars added vowels to the consonantal text of the Hebrew Bible to aid in correct pronunciation. For yhwh, they used the vowels of ’adonay, which, when pronounced, creates a name unknown to the biblical authors, “Jehovah.”

In the postexilic period the appellation “Yahweh” occurs far less frequently, being replaced by adonay (Hebrew) or kyrios (Greek). The latter is used for Yahweh over six thousand times in the LXX. In Hellenistic literature kyrios is used to describe various gods and goddesses. The Roman emperors were also called kyrios, often with implications of deity. Some argue that the early Christians employed the title polemically to refer to Christ, the true kyrios. A clear example is found in Phil. 2:11, where it is said that every tongue will confess that “Jesus Christ is Lord” (cf. 1 Cor. 8:5–8). Kyrios was also used nonreligiously to refer to a “master” of a slave and as a term of respect to address someone of superior status (“sir”). Peter addresses Jesus as “lord” when he washes Peter’s feet (John 13:6).

New Testament

In the NT, the majority of occurrences of “Lord” (kyrios) appear in Luke-Acts and the writings of Paul, perhaps due to the predominantly Hellenistic audiences of these texts, who would know well its Greco-Roman connotations. As for Paul, the use of “Lord” by Luke may point to the deity of Jesus. In the Lukan birth narrative, Elizabeth wonders why “the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Luke 1:43; cf. 7:19; 10:1). In Acts 1:21 the name “Jesus” is preceded by the definite form of “Lord,” reflecting an oft-repeated confessional title in Acts and Paul (Acts 15:11; 20:35; 2 Cor. 1:2). According to some, if Matthew intends a divine connotation by his use of the term “Lord,” it is more oblique. For instance, in Matt. 4:7 Jesus quotes Deut. 6:16, where “the Lord” is Yahweh and not Jesus (cf. Matt. 9:38). There are occasions in Mark where “lord,” although appearing to function in a nonreligious sense, does seem to point to Yahweh. In Mark 2:28 Jesus claims that “the Son of Man is lord even of the sabbath” (NRSV). Since the Sabbath belongs to Yahweh and falls under his sovereign authority (Exod. 20:8–11), it is quite probable that Mark’s readers would now ascribe that dominion to the Son of Man. This is not unlike his authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:10), which, as the scribes rightfully point out, is something that only Yahweh can do. In light of these usages, one cannot help but think that the use of the term in Mark 11:3, at the triumphal entry, also carries divine significance. In John, there are examples of both the nonreligious use of “lord,” as a reverent form of address (5:7; 9:36), and the religious, divine sense, particularly after the resurrection (20:28; 21:7).

It is quite likely that Jewish Christians, even before Paul, regarded Jesus as one who shares in Yahweh’s divinity. In his letter to the Corinthians, a Greek-speaking congregation, Paul uses the expression marana tha (1 Cor. 16:22), a Greek transliteration of an Aramaic phrase that means “Our Lord, come!” This term likely was a part of an early Jewish Christian liturgy. Further, there are places where Paul refers to Jesus simply as “the Lord,” suggesting a common understanding of the appellation among the early Christians (Rom. 14:6; 1 Cor. 3:5). In addition to Phil. 2:11, Paul expresses the divinity of Jesus by alluding to Deut. 6:4, the Shema, in 1 Cor. 8:6: “Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.” In the book of Revelation divine status is ascribed to Jesus. While in the vision of God in Rev. 4 the title is used of God (4:8, 11), at the conclusion of the book appears the invocation “Come, Lord Jesus” (22:20; cf. 22:21).

For Paul, a particularly important component of the lordship of Jesus is his resurrection, through which he becomes “the Lord of both the dead and the living” (Rom. 14:9; cf. 1:4), and his return marks the “day of the Lord,” which in the OT was the day of Yahweh (1 Thess. 5:2; cf. 5:23). Exactly how Jewish Christians could attribute such a status to Jesus and yet maintain a strict monotheism remains a matter of considerable debate. Is Christ included in the identity of the Godhead, or is he an intermediary figure (of which Second Temple Judaism had many), possessing a quasi-divine status? If Jesus is an intermediary figure, then his authority to do that which only Yahweh can (such as forgiving sins and fulfilling roles originally referring to God) suggests a very close identification between Yahweh and Jesus himself. See also Names of God; YHWH.

Synagogue

A transliteration of the Greek word synagōgē, meaning “gathering, assembly, meeting.” In English, the word “synagogue” refers either to a Jewish congregation or to the place where that congregation meets. Synagogues of the biblical era functioned as both religious and civic centers for the Jewish community.

Origins

The origin of synagogues is uncertain. The earliest archaeological evidence is from Egypt in the third century BC, consisting of inscriptions and a papyrus letter. The oldest architectural find is from the island of Delos in the Aegean Sea, although whether this was constructed as a synagogue or redesigned into one is unknown, as is whether it was Jewish or Samaritan. The oldest structures yet found in Israel consist of two rooms at Qumran and the synagogue at Gamla, which date from the late first century BC. In Capernaum, the basalt synagogue was built by a Gentile centurion for the community in the first century AD (Luke 7:1–5).

By that time, synagogues were well attested in Israel, elsewhere in the Roman Empire, and in Egypt (Matt. 4:23; Luke 4:44; Acts 9:2; 17:10, 16–17; 18:8, 19). Synagogues were found wherever there were communities of Jews, in cities and rural areas alike. Especially in Diaspora settings or remote locations, they were the heart of Jewish life. Several hypotheses have been suggested to account for their apparently sudden appearance.

Some believe that synagogues were developed during the Babylonian captivity as the response of the exile community to the destruction of their temple and sacrificial system. Despite these enormous losses, the Jews still had the Torah, and from that point forward worship and prayer based on the reading and studying of the Scriptures, which could be done locally, began to gain ascendancy. Critics of this idea, however, point out that while it makes sense, there is no direct evidence to support it.

Others think that the spread of Hellenism in the second century BC precipitated a crisis of identity among Jews. For example, 1 Maccabees reports with distress that some Jews had abandoned the covenant and teamed with the Hellenists, even going so far as to build a Greek-style gymnasium in Jerusalem (1:11–15). Thus, the thought is that synagogues were a form of resistance to the overwhelming and perversely appealing cultural changes of the day.

More recently, it has been suggested that synagogues were the gradual successors to functions that had previously taken place at city gates. First-century synagogues served a wide range of functions for the community. Throughout Israel’s prior history, however, these same activities—assembly, legal, social, educational, and religious—had taken place at the city gate (Deut. 12:15; 2 Sam. 15:2; 2 Kings 23:8; Neh. 8:1–8). The Gamla synagogue sits against the east city wall next to a probable gate, and its location could be evidence of the slow development of the synagogue as city gates changed from multipurpose facilities to portals of ingress and egress.

First-Century Synagogues

First-century synagogues served as integrated centers supporting Jewish life. Regular communal reading and exposition of Scripture, including teaching and discussion of the law and transmission of its complex associated traditions (Luke 4:16; Acts 13:14–15), occurred there. Although formal liturgical rites evolved after the destruction of the temple in AD 70, synagogues were places of prayer in the first century (Matt. 6:5). Synagogues also served as courtrooms and places where crimes were punished (Acts 22:19), as well as locations for common meals and festivals (see Acts 6:2).

Synagogues were administered by local community leaders, including a president and a board (Acts 13:15). Synagogue leaders named in the NT include Jairus (Mark 5:22; Luke 8:41), Crispus (Acts 18:8), and Sosthenes (Acts 18:17). The role of the leader was to preside over services, to rule as the judge in court cases, to represent the community, and often to act as a patron. The board served in an advisory role and assisted with teaching. A scribe maintained community records and taught.

Congregations included Pharisees, who advocated strict adherence to the law, although they were chided by Jesus for their false piety (Luke 11:42–44). Women participated in the synagogue along with the men, and in some cases they were financial donors (cf. Luke 8:3). God-fearing Gentiles were welcomed (Acts 17:17). In Jerusalem, synagogues included both Hebrews and Jews from the Diaspora (Acts 6:1, 9).

A synagogue could be a designated room in a house or a discrete building. Most of the better archaeological evidence is later than the first century and reveals more clearly religious intentionality in design than may have been characteristic earlier. This evidence includes the door facing Jerusalem, artistic temple motifs, a niche for the Torah scrolls, and perimeter bench seating around an open central hall.

The Synagogue in the Bible

Rabbinic history (but not Scripture) makes reference to the “Great Synagogue,” meaning a group of men who transmitted traditions from the prophets to the earliest named rabbinic teachers. It is loosely based on Neh. 8–10, which describes the prayers and actions of the Jewish leaders who had returned from exile.

Synagogues frequently were locations of the teaching and healing ministry of Jesus. He began preaching the kingdom of God, teaching, and performing healing miracles in Galilean synagogues (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; 12:9; 13:54; Mark 1:21–29, 39; 3:1; 6:2; Luke 4:15–38, 44; 6:6–11; 13:10–17; John 6:59; 18:20). Later, the apostle Paul customarily initiated his mission work in the local synagogue at each of his destinations (Acts 9:19–20; 13:5, 14–15; 14:1; 17:1, 10, 17; 18:1–8; 19:8).

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because Mark 2:23-3:6 is mentioned in the definition.

Ahimelech

A priest who allowed David and his men to eat the consecrated bread of the tabernacle (1 Sam. 21:1–6; cf. Mark 2:25–26). See also Abiathar.

Ahimelek

A priest who allowed David and his men to eat the consecrated bread of the tabernacle (1 Sam. 21:1–6; cf. Mark 2:25–26). See also Abiathar.

Disabilities and Deformities

(Disabilities; Disability; Deformity; Deformities; Sickness] The Bible often speaks of health, healing, disease, and illness. Good health was a sign of God’s favor, and healing was also the work of God and his divinely empowered agents. These agents included the prophets (1 Kings 17:8–23; 2 Kings 5:1–15), the apostles (Acts 3:1–10), and the messiah (Mal. 4:2). The divine prerogative of Jesus was to heal (Mark 1:32; 6:56; Matt. 4:23; 8:16; 15:30; 21:14; Luke 6:10, 17–19), and miraculous healings were a sign of his messianic office (Luke 7:20–23). Disease, on the other hand, was regarded as a sign of God’s disfavor. Within a covenantal context, God could send disease to punish the sinner (Exod. 4:11; 32:35).

The Bible assigns a wide variety of names to various diseases and their symptoms. These terms are nontechnical and generally descriptive. Some are uncertain in meaning. In most cases they describe the symptoms of the disease, not the disease itself. Diagnosis often was based on incomplete observation and nonclinical examination. The Bible also presupposes supernatural intervention in the life of a person. Healing occurred when God’s agents touched individuals, cast out demons, and resurrected the dead.

Ancient Near Eastern Influences

In the ancient Near East the knowledge of disease and medicine was precritical. Bacteria and viruses were virtually unknown. Mesopotamian literature contains many references to medicine, physicians, and medical practice. Minerals, salts, herbs, and other botanicals were used to make up treatments. Babylonian physicians also administered prescriptions accompanied by incantations. Disease was considered to be the result of a violation of a taboo or possession by a demon. The Code of Hammurabi (1750 BC) includes laws regulating the practice of medicine and surgery by physicians. In Egypt medicine and healing were connected to the gods. Tomb paintings and several papyrus documents describe the developing state of Egyptian medicine, pharmacy, and surgery.

Greek physicians admired and sought to learn the skills of the Egyptians. However, the early Greek doctor Hippocrates (460–370 BC), called the “Father of Medicine,” is credited with being the first physician to reject the belief that supernatural or divine forces cause illness. He argued that disease is the result of environmental factors, diet, and living habits, not a punishment imposed by the gods.

It is clear that the biblical world shared with the ancient Near East the same types of maladies common to tropical or subtropical climates. These include malaria, tropical fevers, dysentery, and sunstroke. The tendency of the hot climate to produce frequent droughts and famine certainly contributed to similar types of diseases throughout the Fertile Crescent. Additionally, it must be remembered that Palestine was a land bridge between the Mesopotamian and Egyptian worlds. Migrations carry not only goods and products, but also parasites, communicable disease, and epidemics.

Biblical Concept of Disease

The religious tradition of the Hebrews repudiated the magical or demonic origin of disease. Hence, moral, ethical, and spiritual factors regulated disease and illness. This was true for the individual as well as the community. The Hebrews, like the Egyptians, also recognized that much sickness arose from the individual’s relationship to the physical environment. Great stress was placed on hygiene and preventive medicine.

Pentateuchal legislation offered seven covenantal principles designed to prevent the possibility of disease and sickness: (1) Sabbath observance for humans, animals, and the land, which enforced regular periods of rest (Gen. 2:3); (2) dietary regulations, which divided food into efficient categories of clean and unclean (Lev. 11); (3) circumcision, which carried physical benefits as well as religious and moral implications (Gen. 17:9; circumcision is the only example of Hebrew surgery); (4) laws governing sexual relationships and health, including a list of forbidden degrees of marital relationships (Lev. 18–20); (5) provisions for individual sexual hygiene (Lev. 15); (6) stipulations for cleanliness and bodily purification (Lev. 14:2; 15:2); (7) sanitary and hygienic regulations for camp life (Num. 31:19; Deut. 23:12).

In NT times magical charms and incantations were used along with folk remedies in an effort to cure disease. Jesus repudiated these means. He also suggested that sickness and disease were not direct punishments for sin (John 9:2). In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7), Jesus confirmed that the ethical and religious standards of the new covenant promoted the total health of the community and the individual.

Circulatory Diseases

Nabal most likely suffered a cerebrovascular accident or stroke (1 Sam. 25:36–38). After a heavy bout of drinking, his heart “died” (KJV; NIV: “failed”), and he became paralyzed, lapsed into a coma, and died ten days later. Psalm 137:5–6 may contain a clinical example of the symptoms of stroke. The psalmist wrote, “If I forget you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its skill. May my tongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you.” This description points to a paralysis of the right side of the body (right hemiplegia) and the loss of speech (motor aphasia) that result from a stroke on the left side of the brain. Basically, the exiled psalmist is wishing upon himself the effects of a stroke if he held anything other than Jerusalem as his highest priority. Some have considered the collapse of Uzzah when he reached out to stabilize the ark of the covenant (2 Sam. 6:6–7) to be the consequence of an apoplectic seizure. But since no actual paralysis was described and death occurred immediately, this seems unlikely. It is more probable that God struck him down with an aortic aneurism or a coronary thrombosis.

Paralysis

A possible case of paralysis may be described in the shriveled (atrophic) hand of Jeroboam I (1 Kings 13:4–6). In an angry outburst Jeroboam ordered the arrest of a prophet who condemned the altar at Bethel. When Jeroboam stretched out his hand, it “shriveled up, so that he could not pull it back.” Several complicated diagnoses have been offered to explain the “withered” hand, but it is possibly an example of cataplexy, a sudden loss of muscle power following a strong emotional stimulus. After intercession by the man of God, and the subsiding of the emotional outburst, the arm was restored.

The threat against the faithless shepherd of God’s people (Zech. 11:17), which included a withered arm and blindness in the right eye, may refer to a form of paralysis known as tabes dorsalis, or locomotor ataxia. Knifelike pains in the extremities and blindness characterize this disease.

Paralysis is frequently mentioned in the NT (Matt. 8:6; 9:2, 6; 12:10; Mark 2:3–5, 9, 10; 3:1, 3, 5; Luke 5:18, 24; 6:6; John 5:3; Acts 9:33; Heb. 12:12). The exact diagnosis for each of these cases remains uncertain.

The physician Luke’s use of the Greek medical term paralelymenos (Luke 5:18, 24) suggests that some of these cases were caused by chronic organic disease. Others clearly were congenital (Acts 3:2; cf. 14:8). It is not necessary to rationalize the origin of these examples of paralysis as hysteria or pretense. The NT writers regarded the healing of these individuals by Jesus and the apostles as miraculous.

Mental Illness and Brain Disorders

Cases of mental disease are generally described in the Bible by noting the symptoms produced by the disorder. The particular cause of a mental illness in the NT is often blamed on an unknown evil spirit or spirits (Luke 8:2). Such spirits, however, were subject to God’s control and operated only within the boundaries allowed by him (1 Sam. 16:14–16, 23; 18:10; 19:9). Accordingly, in the OT “madness” and “confusion of mind” were regarded as consequences of covenantal disobedience (Deut. 28:28, 34).

It has been argued that King Saul displayed early indications of personality disorder. Symptoms included pride, self-aggrandizement (1 Sam. 11:6; 13:12; 15:9, 19), and ecstatic behavior (10:11–12). A rapid deterioration in Saul’s character transpired after David was anointed and became more popular (16:14; 18:10–11). Since Saul demonstrated fear, jealousy, a sense of persecution, and homicidal tendencies, some scholars argue that he suffered from paranoid schizophrenia.

Nebuchadnezzar suffered a rare form of monomania in which he lived like a wild beast in the field eating grass (Dan. 4:33). David, in order to save his own life, feigned insanity or perhaps epilepsy before the Philistine king Achish (1 Sam. 21:12–15).

In the NT, individuals with mental disorders went about naked, mutilated themselves, lived in tombs (Mark 5:2), and exhibited violent behavior (Matt. 8:28). Such mental disorientation was often linked to demon possession. Examples include the Syrophoenician’s child (Matt. 15:22; Mark 7:25), the demoniacs at Gerasa (Matt. 8:28; Mark 5:2; Luke 8:27) and Capernaum (Mark 1:23; Luke 4:33), a blind and mute demoniac (Matt. 12:22; Luke 11:14), and a fortune-telling slave girl (Acts 16:16). While such behavior is clinically suggestive of paranoid schizophrenia or other mental disorders, the mind-controlling influence of some extraneous negative force cannot be ruled out.

Epilepsy (grand mal) causes the afflicted person to fall to the ground, foam at the mouth, and clench or grind the teeth (Matt. 17:15; Mark 9:17–18; Luke 9:39). The description of Saul falling to the ground in an ecstatic state (1 Sam. 19:23–24) and Balaam falling with open eyes may be indicative of an epileptic seizure. In the NT, Jesus healed many who suffered from epilepsy (Matt. 4:24; 17:14–18; Mark 9:17–18; Luke 9:38–42). Some scholars have linked the light seen by Paul on the road to Damascus with the aura that some epileptics experience prior to a seizure. His subsequent blindness has also been attributed to the epileptic disturbance of the circulation of the blood in the brain.

Childhood Diseases

The cause of the death of the widow’s son at Zarephath is unknown (1 Kings 17:17–22). The death of the Shunammite woman’s son has been attributed to sunstroke (2 Kings 4:18–37), although a headache is the only symptom recorded (v. 19). In both cases there is too little evidence to present an accurate diagnosis.

In the first case, the boy at Zarephath stopped breathing (1 Kings 17:17). This may leave the door open to argue that Elijah resuscitated the child. However, in the second case, the text clearly states that the Shunammite boy died (2 Kings 4:20), implying a resurrection.

Infectious and Communicable Diseases

Fever and other calamities are listed among the punishments for covenantal infidelity (Deut. 28:22). Three different types of fever may be intentionally described here: “fever,” “inflammation,” and “scorching heat” (ESV: “fiery heat”). Fever is also mentioned frequently in the NT (Matt. 8:15; Mark 1:30–31; Luke 4:38–39; John 4:52; Acts 28:8). Both Jesus and Paul healed individuals who had a fever. A number of these fevers were likely caused by malaria, since the disease was known to be endemic to the Jordan Valley and other marshy areas in Palestine.

Several epidemics in which numerous people died of pestilence or plague are mentioned in the OT (Exod. 11:1; 12:13; Num. 14:37; Zech. 14:12). The fifth plague of Egypt (Exod. 9:3–6) has been attributed to Jordan Rift Valley fever, which is spread by flies. Bubonic plague has been blamed for the malady that struck the Philistines (1 Sam. 5–6). However, it may have been the result of a severe form of tropical dysentery. Acute bacillary dysentery contracted in the military camp may also have been responsible for the epidemic that killed a large number of the Assyrian army (2 Kings 19:35).

Parasitic Diseases

Some scholars have repeatedly argued that the “fiery serpents” (NIV: “venomous snakes”) encountered by Moses and the children of Israel (Num. 21:6–9) were in reality an infestation of the parasitic guinea worm (Dracunculus medinensis). Microscopic fleas ingested in drinking water carry the larvae of this slender nematode into the body. The larvae move from the digestive tract to the skin. The adult worm, which may grow to a length of several feet, discharges its eggs into an ulcer on the skin. Death of the host occurs because of the resulting infection of the skin ulcers.

After the conquest of Jericho, Joshua cursed the individual who would endeavor to rebuild the city (Josh. 6:26). Later, Hiel of Bethel attempted to rebuild the city and lost two of his sons as a result of the curse (1 Kings 16:34). Elisha was then asked to purify the bad water at Jericho in order to allow a new settlement (2 Kings 2:19). Elisha obliged by throwing salt into the spring and thereby making the water potable (2:20–22). Recent archaeological study has discovered the remains of certain snails in the mud-bricks used to construct Jericho in the Bronze Age. These types of snails are now known to serve as intermediate hosts for the flatworm parasite that can cause schistosomiasis. The Schistosoma haematobium trematode infects the urinary tract and the bladder. It is possible that this type of parasite was responsible for the death of Hiel’s two sons.

In NT times, Herod Agrippa apparently died of the complications of a parasitic disease, perhaps being infested by the larvae of flies (myiasis) in the bowels. Luke mentions that he was “eaten by worms” (skōlēkobrōtos [Acts 12:23]). The father of Publius also suffered from dysentery (Acts 28:8).

Physical Deformities and Abnormalities

Individuals with deformities were disqualified from priestly service (Lev. 21:18–20). The list included lameness, limb damage, and dwarfism. The deformities mentioned here might have been congenital or acquired. Mephibosheth was dropped by his nurse (2 Sam. 4:4) and perhaps suffered damage to the spinal cord. Jacob possibly sustained injury to an intervertebral disk (Gen. 32:32) causing a deformity and a limp. The woman who was “bent over” (Luke 13:10–17) might have suffered from an abnormality of the spine similar to scoliosis. It is difficult to ascertain the origin of the “shriveled hand” of the unnamed individual healed by Jesus (Matt. 12:10–13; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–10). It could be congenital in character or a paralysis caused by any number of factors.

Diseases and Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Physical blindness is mentioned several times in the Bible. Blindness excluded one from serving as a priest (Lev. 21:18, 20). Blindness and deafness, however, were disabilities requiring special care from the community (Lev. 19:14; Deut. 27:18). The “weak eyes” of Leah may refer to an eye condition (Gen. 29:17).

Blindness in the biblical world was caused by various factors. Leviticus 26:16 speaks of a fever that destroys the eyes. Flies probably were responsible for much of the conjunctivitis found in children. John 9:1 mentions congenital blindness, which Jesus cured using mud made from spittle and dirt (John 9:6). In Mark 8:22–26 Jesus healed a blind man by spitting in his eye and laying hands on him (cf. Matt. 20:34 with Mark 10:52).

Congenital deafness would also be associated with mutism and speech defects because a child learning to speak depends on imitation and mimicry. Jesus healed a man who was deaf and could barely talk (Mark 7:32–37). The man’s inability to say much possibly pointed to a loss of hearing early in life.

Skin Conditions

Various skin and hair abnormalities are described in the Bible. Some made the individual unclean (Lev. 13:30; 14:54). The OT speaks of “the boils of Egypt” (Deut. 28:27; cf. Exod. 9:9). Skin ailments included tumors, festering sores, boils, infections, and the itch (Deut. 28:27, 35; Isa. 3:7). Job complained of a litany of ailments: broken and festering skin (7:5), multiple wounds (9:17), black peeling skin and fever (30:30), gnawing bone pain (2:5; 19:20; 30:17), insomnia (7:3–4), and wasting away (33:21). These symptoms have been diagnosed as indications of yaws or eczema. A poultice made of figs cured Hezekiah’s boil (2 Kings 20:7).

Leprosy was once thought to be a common problem in the biblical world. Leprosy (Hansen’s disease) is a slow, progressive chronic infectious disease caused by a bacterium. Symptoms include loss of sensation and loss of parts of the body. Evidence for this type of disease in Palestine is rare. Uzziah may have had a true case of Hansen’s disease. He was quarantined until the day he died (2 Chron. 26:21).

Scholars now suggest that the symptoms of the disease described in the Bible do not fit this pattern and thus do not signify leprosy (Hansen’s disease) as it is known today. Instead, the word that English versions translate as “leprosy” (Heb. root tsr’) probably refers to different types of infectious skin disease, often characterized by a long-standing, patchy skin condition associated with peeling or flakiness and redness of skin. Evidence points more toward psoriasis, fungal infections, or dermatitis.

This disease could appear in humans (Lev. 14:2), on buildings (14:34), and on clothing (14:55). It was not limited to the extremities but could occur on the head (14:42–44). It could run its course quickly (13:5–8). It made the individual ceremonially unclean, but it was also curable (Lev. 14:3; 2 Kings 5:1–27). Individuals with the disease were not necessarily shunned (2 Kings 7; Matt. 26:6 // Mark 14:3). Moses (Exod. 4:6), Miriam (Num. 12:10), and Naaman experienced this type of skin disease (2 Kings 5:1–27). Jesus healed many suffering from skin ailments (Matt. 8:2–3; Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–13), including the ten “men who had leprosy” (Luke 17:12–14).

Ailments of an Unknown Nature

Some cases in the Bible present insufficient evidence for scholars to render a clear diagnosis. King Asa suffered a disease in his feet (2 Chron. 16:12). However, in the OT the Hebrew expression for “feet” is sometimes used euphemistically for the sexual organs (Judg. 3:24 KJV). Because of this, the exact nature of the disease is ambiguous. Jehoram was afflicted with “an incurable disease of the bowels” (2 Chron. 21:18–19). Other unknown ailments factor in the deaths of the firstborn son of David and Bathsheba (2 Sam. 12:15), of Jeroboam’s son in infancy (1 Kings 14:17), of Elisha (2 Kings 13:14), and of Ezekiel’s wife (Ezek. 24:16).

Diseases and Physical Abnormalities

Ancient Near Eastern Influences

Biblical Concept of Disease

Circulatory Diseases

Paralysis

Mental Illness and Brain Disorders

Childhood Diseases

Infectious and Communicable Diseases

Parasitic Diseases

Physical Deformities and Abnormalities

Diseases and Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Skin Conditions

Ailments of an Unknown Nature

Doctor

Ancient Near Eastern Influences

Biblical Concept of Disease

Circulatory Diseases

Paralysis

Mental Illness and Brain Disorders

Childhood Diseases

Infectious and Communicable Diseases

Parasitic Diseases

Physical Deformities and Abnormalities

Diseases and Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Skin Conditions

Ailments of an Unknown Nature

Jesus Christ

The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.

Introduction

Name. Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title “Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). The name “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was a common male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ” is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually were named after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry of Jesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah (Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).

Sources. From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesus constitute the turning point in human history. From a historical perspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed, both Christian and non-Christian first-century and early second-century literary sources are extant, but they are few in number. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initial resistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Roman historian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,” since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailing worldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sources therefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christian sources.

The NT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry of Jesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels), and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four Source Hypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as a source by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (from German Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their own individual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additional sources.

The early church tried to put together singular accounts, so-called Gospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionites represents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Another harmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was produced around AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning the life of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, the Pauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John. Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4). The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was a passion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. The first extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’s letters (1 Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognized from the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1 Cor. 15:13–14).

Among non-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in a letter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governor of Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentions Christians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about the history of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius, wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Rome because of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Some scholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of “Christos,” a reference to Jesus.

The Jewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a story about the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus (Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in a different part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus is the Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). The majority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic but heavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source, the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but these references are very late and of little historical value.

Noncanonical Gospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of James, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, the Egerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these may contain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most part they are late and unreliable.

Jesus’ Life

Birth and childhood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesus was probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’s death (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of a virginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governor Quirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place in Bethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at the time of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars. Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to either confirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must be determined on the basis of one’s view regarding the general reliability of the Gospel tradition.

On the eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keeping with the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus” (Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home of his parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel of Luke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth in strength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke also contains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).

Jesus was born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered a temple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford to sacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’ earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, or metal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth was not a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground. Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently common first-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” (John 1:46).

Jesus was also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy were surely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnant before her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only the intervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal (Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem, far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinship hospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay with distant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcome because of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Mary had to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feeding trough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later in Nazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son” (Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming him as one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewise rejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucify him!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21; John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled (Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter, vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71; Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His own siblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamed of his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his mother into the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27) rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.

Baptism, temptation, and start of ministry. After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke 3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instant ministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that the temptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Luke identify three specific temptations by the devil, though their order for the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine intervention after jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’s kingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation, quoting Scripture in response.

Matthew and Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum in Galilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13; Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirty years of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity or perhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of the Levites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning of Jesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples and the sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).

Jesus’ public ministry: chronology. Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28, and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple had been forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as the temple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out the money changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding and expansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during the eighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry of John the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius (Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From these dates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of the reign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset of Jesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.

The Gospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast in John 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended over three or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a half years. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came on a Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death was therefore probably AD 30.

Jesus’ ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and his Judean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry in Galilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.

Galilean ministry. The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and around Galilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ first teaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30); the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for his calling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection and suffering.

All Gospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in his Galilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke 5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioning of the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers is recorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministry is the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke 6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, in particular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synoptics focus on healings and exorcisms.

During Jesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with his identity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority (Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family (3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner of Beelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesus told parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growing kingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humble beginnings (4:1–32).

The Synoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful. No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority or ability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized many demons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fed five thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark 6:48–49).

In the later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew and traveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are not written with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns to Galilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fear resolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee, where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ disciples with lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed the Pharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents (7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demanding a sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, who confessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus did provide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).

Jesus withdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician woman requested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans had long resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality that allotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere “crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,” Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-mute man in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’ travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The city was the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.

Judean ministry. Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry as he resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually led to his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem into three phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27). The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of the journey. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, and the demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem (Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45; Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journey toward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvation and judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase of the journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are the main themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).

Social conflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposte interactions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel (Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomic feathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who had little value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16; Luke 18:15–17).

Passion Week, death, and resurrection. Each of the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with the crowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark 11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Luke describes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during which Jesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).

In Jerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17). Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “began looking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segment of Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’ authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions (12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation (12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s own destruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, Judas Iscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’ arrest (14:10–11).

At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a new covenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29; Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned the disciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark 14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and later he prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agony and submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42; Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial, crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15; Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18). Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission by making disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8) and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return (Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).

The Identity of Jesus Christ

Various aspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels, depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses to Jesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning and examining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark 3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70; 23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritual realm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). At Jesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus was transfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voice affirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark 9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’ identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and other guards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf. Mark 15:39).

Miracle worker. In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers were part of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs and miracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of God over various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature, and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’ signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus his identity.

No challenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miracles and signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed a storm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke 8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13; Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised the dead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16; 8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculous feedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44; 8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked on water (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).

The Pharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark 8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4). The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—his death and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice, taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).

Rabbi/teacher. Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbis or Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguished him was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28, 32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathered disciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to join him in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).

Jesus used a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables (Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35; 21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark 4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18; 12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15, 19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33), used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark 10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons (Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke 13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.

Major themes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the cost of discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, his identity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings, observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’s kingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come to fulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).

Jesus’ teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. These conflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions in which the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus used these interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gave replies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’s will, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. The Synoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations of violating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answers to such accusations often echoed the essence of 1 Sam. 15:22, “To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as “I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). An overall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’ public teaching.

The Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than” ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outward obedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equal to murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfully amounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revenging wrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesus valued compassion above traditions and customs, even those contained within the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter of the law.

Jesus’ teachings found their authority in the reality of God’s imminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9), necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence (Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—the family of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged, “Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness” (Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among prophetic teachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his own grounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt. 10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).

Examples of a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include the occasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesus used an aphorism in response to accusations about his associations with sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners” (Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark 2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking the law, he pointed to an OT exception (1 Sam. 21:1–6) to declare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also applied the “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, since women suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly became outcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).

Jesus’ kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, and eschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internal transformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring on love (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus to bless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesus taught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” ones in Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful, and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godly character.

Some scholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic” for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end of time. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of his teachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).

Messiah. The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore the glories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability was common in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babylonian captivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace and protection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer, one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice and righteousness (2 Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16; Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2; Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whose suffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle of expectation in terms of a deliverer.

Jesus’ authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianic images in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearers called him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt. 12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesus as the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). In line with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesus focused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regeneration through his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).

Eschatological prophet. Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewish apocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God to intervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom of God. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ prophecies concerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2, 15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). In addition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representative of the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30). Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images of coming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt. 24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).

Suffering Son of God. Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth was paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa. 61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so he revealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptly portrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ own teachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13, 31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly career ended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewish components (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65; 15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24; 18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.

Jesus’ suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt. 27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John 19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror, bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyone hanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13). Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with a crucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed as a lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referred to this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed of the gospel” (Rom. 1:16).

Exalted Lord. Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46). The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of Jesus Christ indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday (Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) and risen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke 24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus was witnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples (Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appeared to as many as five hundred others (1 Cor. 15:6). He appeared in bodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43; John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesus ascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).

As much as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory over death was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost, Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises (Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31). Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through his resurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his life and work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him as Lord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31; Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).

Jesus’ exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification (Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and his intercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascension signaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John 14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return in glory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt. 19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom (1 Cor. 15:24; 2 Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).

Jesus’ Purpose and Community

In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, who preaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent (4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter the kingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, one made in Jesus’ blood (26:28).

In the prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identity of Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidings of salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of the gospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.

Luke likewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose of Jesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is the kingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John the Baptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesus answered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, as presented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery of sight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’ healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God already present in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20; 8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).

In the Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signs throughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, his identity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundant life is lived out in community.

In the Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community of God (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but they continued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).

Jesus’ ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’s family—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained by adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).

The Quests for the Historical Jesus

The quest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from a historical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary by scholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’ death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding of the church.

The beginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecture notes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously. Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus that rejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. He concluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles, prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’s conclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry of rationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continued throughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “first quest” for the historical Jesus.

In 1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of the Historical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: Eine Geschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of the first quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-century researchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming the historical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching an inoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’s conclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest. Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was an eschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days in Jerusalem.

With the demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as Rudolf Bultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historical Jesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’s former students launched what has come to be known as the “new quest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). This quest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was still dominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels is largely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.

As the rebuilding years of the post–World War II era waned and scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeological finds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on to what has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeks especially to research and understand Jesus in his social and cultural setting.

Jewish Parties

During the time of Jesus and in the couple of centuries prior, Judaism was not a monolithic entity but was comprised of different groups with varying religious concerns and political interests. This multifaceted nature of Judaism has caused scholars to question whether it would be better to speak of Judaisms rather than Judaism. Was Judaism cut from a whole cloth, or was it a box of fabric scraps? Perhaps it is best to speak of Judaism as a single entity, but one comprised of various factions with diverse beliefs and interests. This conclusion is justified because the diverse sentiments and interests were responses to the same religious and political issues, such as Torah, the temple, and foreign occupiers.

Pharisees

According to Josephus. The best source of information on the Pharisees, apart from the Gospels themselves, is the Jewish historian Josephus, who discusses the beliefs of various Jewish factions. In consideration of his Roman audience, he depicts these groups as Jewish philosophical schools. In his Antiquities, Josephus indicates a rough outline of the beliefs of the Pharisees and their political position in relation to the Sadducees and the general populace.

Josephus gives the following points in summation of the Pharisees’ beliefs. (1) The Pharisees believed some things are the result of fate, whereas other things are the result of human choice. (2) The Pharisees believed that the soul survives death in a place of either reward or punishment, and in the resurrection of the body. (3) Besides believing in the authority of Scripture, the Pharisees also had an authoritative body of oral tradition.

The Pharisees and the Sadducees had a difficult relationship, due not only to different religious beliefs but also to conflicting political aspirations. Josephus suggests that Jewish leaders gave patronage to one group or the other, or suppressed one group or the other, sometimes violently. In regard to the general populace, the Pharisees had a much better relationship with them than did the Sadducees, to the point that when Sadducees were magistrates, they had to rule according to the beliefs of the Pharisees or else the people would not listen to them.

In the New Testament. In the Synoptic Gospels, the Pharisees were one of the groups that opposed Jesus. It seems that the Pharisees most strongly opposed Jesus on issues related to their received tradition, which they considered to be as binding as the OT law. Two such legal issues were ceremonial washings before meals and working on the Sabbath. All three Synoptic Gospels narrate the Pharisees questioning Jesus concerning his and his disciples’ failure to follow the tradition of the elders by eating with “unclean,” that is, “unwashed,” hands (Matt. 15:1–2; Mark 7:1–5; Luke 11:39–41). Concerning breaking the Sabbath, the Pharisees confronted Jesus on various occasions, such as when Jesus healed on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:9–14; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–11) and when his disciples picked grain while walking through a field (Matt. 12:1–8; Mark 2:23–28; Luke 6:1–5).

Relationship with rabbinic Judaism. An issue concerning the Pharisees is their relationship with later rabbinic Judaism. There are basically two viewpoints on this matter, and both involve the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in AD 70. One position maintains that when the dust settled from the destruction of the temple, only the Pharisees remained standing, and rabbinic Judaism is their heir. Another view holds that after AD 70 sectarian Judaism disappeared, and rabbinic Judaism emerged from a coalescence of various Jewish groups. Although one cannot be certain, it seems that the former view may be closer to the truth, since in the Mishnah, Sadducean legal opinion is contrasted with Pharisaic, and the Pharisaic is invariably considered correct.

Sadducees

The Sadducees were an elite group of Jews connected with the priesthood. “Sadducee” probably means “Son of Zadok,” a descendant of the high priest Zadok from the time of David. Some members of the Qumran community used the term “Son of Zadok” as a self-designation as well, suggesting some common ancestry, if not direct identification, of the Sadducees and some members of the Qumran community.

Along with the Pharisees, the Sadducees were a religious-political group that sought the support of the ruling powers. It is in the context of the patron-retainer relationship that we first hear of the Sadducees. Josephus relates how the Hasmonean ruler John Hyrcanus switched from being the patron of the Pharisees to that of the Sadducees. When the Pharisee Eliezer suggested that Hyrcanus step down from the high priesthood due to his uncertain lineage, Hyrcanus became very angry and wanted Eliezer to be executed. The rest of the Pharisees suggested that he merely be bound and whipped, since they had a tradition of passing light sentences. A Sadducee suggested that they passed such a light sentence because they agreed with Eliezer that Hyrcanus was unsuitable to be high priest. Hyrcanus then cast his support behind the Sadducees and abolished the laws that the Pharisees had given to the populace.

Josephus gives the following general description of the Sadducees’ beliefs and relationship with the general populace. (1) The Sadducees rejected fate; things are the result of human action alone. Along with this, God stands aloof from humans concerning good and evil actions. Good and evil are the result of human action. (2) The Sadducees believed that the soul dies along with the body. (3) They accepted only the written law and had no oral tradition. Some take this last point to mean that they accepted only the Pentateuch as Scripture, but this goes beyond what Josephus says about them.

Josephus goes on to write that Sadducees were as contentious in their disputes with fellow Sadducees as with people outside the group, and they did not hold their elders in esteem. They had influence over the elite, but no say with the populace at large.

The book of Acts confirms that the Sadducees were closely connected to the priesthood (Acts 4:1; 5:17), and that they disputed with the Pharisees over the resurrection (Acts 23:6–8).

Essenes

The Essenes are the third “philosophical school” mentioned by Josephus. Most scholars consider the Qumran sectarians who produced the DSS to be Essenes. This has created a number of circular arguments, since the DSS are then used to confirm the nature of Essene beliefs. That being said, there is good evidence that the Qumran sectarians were at least in part Essene. The Essenes are not mentioned in the NT or in rabbinic literature, but they do appear in the writings of Josephus, Philo of Alexandria, and Pliny the Elder.

Josephus delineates the beliefs of the Essenes as follows. (1) They ascribed every happening to God. (2) They believed in the immortality of the soul.

Josephus writes at great length concerning the Essenes’ way of life. They lived an ascetic lifestyle, avoided pleasure, and devoted themselves to prayer. They shared all things in common and lived in harmony with one another. Some Essenes avoided marriage, whereas others regarded marriage and procreation as too central to human life to avoid. Certain Essenes could predict the future and interpret dreams. Concerning sacrifices, Josephus mentions that although they sent offerings to the temple, they had their own, superior sacrifices.

Philo writes that the Essenes were much admired due to their holy lives, living peaceably with one another and holding to the truth. Contrary to Josephus, Philo says that the Essenes did not sacrifice, but through study they kept their minds pure and holy.

The Essenes, as Josephus and Philo describe them, seem similar to the Qumran sectarians. The Qumran sectarians believed that God determines the fate of people (1QS 3:13–4:26). Although the sectarians believed in the immortality of the soul as well as divine reward and punishment, this does not seem to be emphasized in their writings.

Zealots

Scholars tend to use “Zealots” as a general term to refer to three different groups mentioned by Josephus: brigands, Sicarii, and Zealots. The three groups have different political ideologies and emerged at different times in the first century. They can all be described as revolutionaries.

The brigands were motivated not by religious or political ideology but by survival. Displaced from the traditional economic structure of Palestine—the agricultural village—by the Romans, the brigands stole from Jew and Roman alike. They hated the Romans because the Romans had driven them into poverty through taxation and transformation of the economy from subsistence-based agriculture to cash crops that could be sold more readily. (Money could be shipped to Rome more easily than crops.)

The other two groups, the Sicarii and the Zealots, fought the Romans and Jewish collaborators for political and religious reasons. They emerged at different times during the first century, and they should not be lumped together, for their methodologies and goals were somewhat different.

Josephus writes about what he calls the “fourth philosophy,” which he considers an alien element introduced into the religion and politics of Israel, begun in AD 6 by Judas the Galilean and Zadok the Pharisee. Their slogan was “No king but God,” and they engaged in a short-lived rebellion. It seems unclear whether the fourth philosophy should be a category that includes the brigands, the Sicarii, and the Zealots, or whether it is a group unto itself. Whatever the case, Josephus makes clear that this fourth philosophy is an anomaly in the history of Israel.

The Sicarii were a group of assassins who emerged in the AD 40s–50s. They specialized in mixing into Jerusalem crowds and murdering Jews who were friendly with the Romans, mainly the wealthy. The high priest Jonathan was one of their victims. At the start of the first Roman war, they commanded Jewish troops but were driven out by fellow Jews. They spent the rest of the war at Masada, conducting inconsequential exploits. They killed themselves in AD 73–74 rather than be captured by the Romans. Josephus writes that the leader of the Sicarii at the beginning of the first Roman war was Menahem, the son or grandson of Judas of Galilee. It has been speculated that Judas Iscariot’s surname may be derived from Sicarii, but the etymology is uncertain.

The Zealots emerged at the start of the first Roman war (AD 66–70). Josephus mentions them mainly in connection with the Roman war and seldom in other sections of his writings. They consisted mainly of people displaced by Roman activity in Galilee. They targeted the aristocracy that collaborated with Rome, the Romans themselves, and other revolutionary groups. One of Jesus’ disciples was called “Simon the Zealot” (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), but this is likely a reference to his zealous faith.

The first Roman war erupted when the Roman procurator Florus looted the temple. When nothing was done concerning this, the lower priests, the captain of the temple guard, Eleazar, and other revolutionary leaders decided to terminate the temple sacrifice made on the emperor’s behalf. This essentially started the Roman war and gave rise to the Zealots.

Herodians

The Herodians are mentioned three times in the Gospels. They are reported to have plotted, along with the Pharisees, to kill Jesus after he healed a man with a withered hand (Mark 3:6). They are also described, along with the Pharisees, as trying to trap Jesus concerning the lawfulness of paying taxes to Caesar (Matt. 22:16; Mark 12:13).

Labor

God the Worker

A biblical theology of work starts with God as the creator of all things. In the OT, the verb bara’ (“to create”) is used only with God as subject. The first verb in the Bible (Gen. 1:1), it occurs also in many other texts that describe God accomplishing what only God can do. Other terms such as yatsar (“to form, fashion”) and ’asah (“to make, do”) are used numerous times throughout the OT with either God or humans as subjects.

These three terms reinforce the portrayal of God as worker in Gen. 1–2 (cf. Isa. 45:7). God creates light and darkness; sky and earth; sun, moon, and stars; land and sea; plant and animal life; and humankind—in sum, all that is. He forms the “man” (Heb. ’adam) from the dust of the ground, bringing him to life by breathing into him the breath of life.

Elsewhere in the OT God is said to build, build up, or rebuild/restore (Heb. banah [e.g., Pss. 102:16; 147:2; Jer. 24:6; Amos 9:11]). Interestingly, God takes a rib from the man, which he then makes (lit., “builds into” [Heb. banah + le]) a woman (Gen. 2:22). He founds (Heb. kun) the earth (Isa. 45:18) and stretches out (Heb. natah) the heavens (Zech. 12:1). Further, wisdom is God’s “craftsman” (Heb. ’amon), taking part in the world’s creation (Prov. 8:30). The NT reveals Christ as the one through whom God creates all things (John 1:1–3; Col. 1:16). This brief sketch suggests the range of ways in which God’s work is described.

Human Labor

Ideally, work is performed as service to God (Col. 3:17, 22–24). Work is one way we express the divine image. God’s creation mandate to fill, subdue, and rule the earth implies work (Gen. 1:26–28), and God places the man in the garden “to work it and take care of it” (Gen. 2:15). The importance of work for human dignity as well as survival undergirds the laws of gleaning that make provision for the poor to gather their own food (e.g., Deut. 24:19–22). The expansion of human technologies and occupations (mela’kah [see Exod. 12:16]) reflects that dignity and God’s own diverse workmanship. Job 28 celebrates human industry and achievement while subordinating all to the prevailing value of wisdom, rooted in “the fear of the Lord.” Given the indispensable role of work within the limits of human life, diligence is commended (Eccles. 3:9–10), idleness condemned (Prov. 10:4; 12:24; 21:5; 2 Thess. 3:6–10). Work is essentially God’s good gift to us in creation.

But work now has negative aspects. In response to Adam’s sin, God curses the ground, introducing “painful toil” into the work cycle (Gen. 3:17–19; 5:29). We now eke out our living by hardship, finding frustration instead of bounty—a lifelong reminder that we are made of dust and will return to dust. The book of Ecclesiastes echoes this note of futility and raises sharp questions about the lasting value of human labor (1:2–3, 14; 2:4–11, 17–23; 3:9; 4:4–6; 8:16–17). Sin and death haunt the unfolding occupations in Gen. 4, and the episode of the tower of Babel in Gen. 11 signals God’s judgment on human pretension (cf. James 4:13–16). Excessive toil (workaholism) is a pitfall, not a virtue, for it expresses reliance on self rather than on God, who builds, protects, and gives rest (Ps. 127:1–2). Oppressive, unjust working conditions are cause for lament, and they incur God’s judgment (Exod. 5:6–19; Prov. 14:31; James 5:4–6).

Thus, Israel’s labor policy is to reflect God’s covenant faithfulness, generosity, and concern for the vulnerable. Moses’ law places limits on employers/masters to protect employees, slaves, and foreign workers from exploitation. The primary limit is God’s command that Israel keep the Sabbath holy by a complete cessation of labor (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15). This move prioritizes God’s covenant above human labor and sets a rhythm of work and rest. Exodus grounds the Sabbath in God’s rest from his work of creation on the seventh day. Deuteronomy ties it to Israel’s history of slavery in Egypt and deliverance by God; by keeping the Sabbath, Israel shows gratitude to God and guards against replicating Egypt’s oppressive policies.

Exodus 31–32 portrays work in its best and worst lights. The proper interplay of work and rest is seen in chapter 31, which narrates the divinely empowered work on the tabernacle, followed by a strong reminder to keep the Sabbath as a “sign” between God and Israel. In contrast, chapter 32 portrays artisanship put to the worst use, the making of a golden idol. Aaron fashions gold with a tool and makes the calf image, but later he tells Moses, “I threw [their gold jewelry] into the fire, and out came this calf!” (32:24). This remark anticipates the prophets’ later mockery of idol-makers (e.g., Isa. 44:9–20) and raises the issue of personal responsibility for the outcome of one’s labor: Aaron seeks to avoid being implicated in Israel’s idolatry by concealing his own role in the project.

Public labor issues increase in complexity when Israel adopts human kingship and engages in international trade (e.g., 1 Sam. 8; 1 Kings 9:15–23). Babylon deals a decisive blow to Judah’s statehood by deporting leaders and skilled workers. Many of these establish such viable, productive new lives in Babylon that when Cyrus later allows the exiled Judeans to return, they choose to remain.

The NT assumes the legitimacy of work and adopts the OT’s view that within proper limits work is a good gift of God. Jesus, however, has come to do his Father’s “work” (John 5:16–18), which entails calling some people away from their normal occupations to follow him, as well as a new approach to Sabbath observance (Mark 2:21–27; 3:4). These moves signal the urgency and newness of the kingdom of God. Consequently, the apostles are “co-workers in God’s service” (1 Cor. 3:9), and Christians are “God’s handiwork” (Eph. 2:10). In light of the resurrection, we offer to God work (Gk. ergon) and labor (Gk. kopos), not in futility but in hope (1 Cor. 15:58; cf. Rev. 14:13).

Medicine

Ancient Near Eastern Influences

Biblical Concept of Disease

Circulatory Diseases

Paralysis

Mental Illness and Brain Disorders

Childhood Diseases

Infectious and Communicable Diseases

Parasitic Diseases

Physical Deformities and Abnormalities

Diseases and Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Skin Conditions

Ailments of an Unknown Nature

Nativity of Christ

The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.

Introduction

Jesus’ Life

The Identity of Jesus Christ

Jesus’ Purpose and Community

The Quests for the Historical Jesus

Parallelism

About a third of the OT is poetic. Poetry is a more elevated way of speaking and writing than prose. It is a departure from normal patterns of speech and exhibits a high degree of attention to literary artifice. In poetry, how something is said is as important as what is said. Poetry employs various poetic devices and conventions that are less frequent in or completely absent from ordinary speech. Among these are acrostic, inclusion, chiasm, succinctness, parallelism, and the heightened use of imagery (see also Acrostic).

Hebrew poetry also employs the full range of figures of speech, including metaphor, simile, synecdoche (substituting part for whole or vice versa, such as “set sail” or “lying in wait for blood”), anthimeria (substituting one part of speech for another, such as “let the dry appear”), merism (the whole expressed with two opposites, such as “day and night”), anthropomorphism, personification (“let the rivers clap their hands” [Ps. 98:8]), and so on.

Inclusion and Chiasm

Inclusion (or inclusio) is a structuring device whereby a unit of text begins and ends with the same or a very similar word or phrase. Thus the included material is bounded and defined as a unit of text. For example, Song 2:8–17 begins, “Listen! My beloved! Look! Here he comes, leaping across the mountains, bounding over the hills. My beloved is like a gazelle or a young stag,” and it ends, “Until the day breaks and the shadows flee, turn, my beloved, and be like a gazelle or like a young stag on the rugged hills.” This opening and closing with the same metaphor bounds the enclosed material as a unit of text. Another example is the way Prov. 1:2–7 (NRSV) begins and ends with the words “wisdom,” “instruction,” and “understanding/knowledge,” which delineates these verses as a block of text.

Chiasm (or chiasmus) is a way of organizing material whereby the second half of a text is a mirror image of the first half. “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27 pars.) can be diagrammed as A/B/Bʹ/Aʹ. More and more elaborate chiasms have been proposed for various parts of Scripture, with many elements on each side. The flood narrative, the Abraham cycle, the book of Ruth, and so on may be written to a chiastic structure.

Succinctness and Imagery

One of the characteristics of Hebrew poetry is its succinctness; it says a lot with a few words. One way this is accomplished is through the use of imagery. “The Lord is my rock” (Ps. 18:2) compresses volumes of theology into a single image, thus requiring far less verbosity than if the concept had been stated without imagery. However, the trade-off is that more is required of the reader. The reader must ask, “How is the Lord like a rock?” and fill in the blank. This is true also of other ways that poetry is succinct—for example, its tendency to leave out particles and connectives. For example, “The Lord is my shepherd, / I lack nothing” (Ps. 23:1) leaves out a needed conjunction between the two phrases, which the reader must supply. Is it “The Lord is my shepherd, sooner or later I shall need nothing”? “The Lord is my shepherd, even so I shall need nothing”? Or “The Lord is my shepherd, therefore I shall need nothing.” The reader must decide the correct association between the two lines because the conjunction is purposely left out of the verse. Thus poetry engages the reader and must be read slowly and carefully.

Parallelism

The most recognizable feature of biblical poetry is the phenomenon of parallelism. This is the counterweight to succinctness. While poetry is designed to say much with few words, these words occur in line pairs, the second of which takes the thought further. For example, “Why do the nations conspire / and the peoples plot in vain?” (Ps. 2:1). Obviously, “nations” is parallel with “peoples,” and “conspire” with “plot in vain.” Line A and line B state in essence the same thought with different words, and they state it in the same way. This is called synonymous parallelism. “Lazy hands make for poverty, / but diligent hands bring wealth” (Prov. 10:4). In this verse, the parallel elements are opposites: lazy and diligent, poverty and wealth. This is called antithetical parallelism.

Sometimes, the second line completes the thought of the first line, forming complementary parallelism: “Israel, put your hope in the Lord / both now and forevermore” (Ps. 131:3). When a symbol is set in parallel with the thing symbolized, this is emblematic parallelism: “As the deer pants for streams of water, / so my soul pants for you, my God” (Ps. 42:1). Sometimes line B follows line A in time, forming sequential parallelism: “I call out to the Lord, / and he answers me from his holy mountain” (Ps. 3:4). When line B follows logically from line A, this is consequential parallelism: “In peace I will lie down and sleep, / for you alone, Lord, make me dwell in safety” (Ps. 4:8). Traditionally, when the relation between the lines does not fit into any defined category, the parallelism is called synthetic.

Paralysis

Ancient Near Eastern Influences

Biblical Concept of Disease

Circulatory Diseases

Paralysis

Mental Illness and Brain Disorders

Childhood Diseases

Infectious and Communicable Diseases

Parasitic Diseases

Physical Deformities and Abnormalities

Diseases and Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Skin Conditions

Ailments of an Unknown Nature

Physician

Ancient Near Eastern Influences

Biblical Concept of Disease

Circulatory Diseases

Paralysis

Mental Illness and Brain Disorders

Childhood Diseases

Infectious and Communicable Diseases

Parasitic Diseases

Physical Deformities and Abnormalities

Diseases and Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Skin Conditions

Ailments of an Unknown Nature

Poetry

Inclusion and Chiasm

Succinctness and Imagery

Parallelism

Ruler of the Synagogue

Origins

First-Century Synagogues

The Synagogue in the Bible

Synagogues frequently were locations of the teaching and healing ministry of Jesus. He began preaching the kingdom of God, teaching, and performing healing miracles in Galilean synagogues (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; 12:9; 13:54; Mark 1:21–29, 39; 3:1; 6:2; Luke 4:15–38, 44; 6:6–11; 13:10–17; John 6:59; 18:20). Later, the apostle Paul customarily initiated his mission work in the local synagogue at each of his destinations (Acts 9:19–20; 13:5, 14–15; 14:1; 17:1, 10, 17; 18:1–8; 19:8).

Sick

Ancient Near Eastern Influences

Biblical Concept of Disease

Circulatory Diseases

Paralysis

Mental Illness and Brain Disorders

Childhood Diseases

Infectious and Communicable Diseases

Parasitic Diseases

Physical Deformities and Abnormalities

Diseases and Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Skin Conditions

Ailments of an Unknown Nature

Sickness

Ancient Near Eastern Influences

Biblical Concept of Disease

Circulatory Diseases

Paralysis

Mental Illness and Brain Disorders

Childhood Diseases

Infectious and Communicable Diseases

Parasitic Diseases

Physical Deformities and Abnormalities

Diseases and Disabilities of the Eyes and Ears

Skin Conditions

Ailments of an Unknown Nature

Theology of Work

God the Worker

Human Labor

Wrath

Showing 1 to 50 of261 results

1. Eyes on the Unseen

Illustration

Larry Powell

The first scripture selection relates the healing of a man "who was deaf and had an impediment in his speech." Although nothing is mentioned regarding the faith of the man who was healed, faith was yet an active ingredient in the healing as exhibited by those who resolutely brought the man to Jesus. In verse 34, the phrase "looking up to heaven," underscores the intimate relationship with God that Jesus brought to that moment. Similarly, I have read that when Francis of Assisi preached, he never looked at his hearers, but instead fixed his eyes upon the sky as if expecting Christ to appear before he had completed the next sentence. Jesus, "looking up to heaven," apparently sought to acknowledge and intensify the power of God in his life for this moment of healing.

In our second passage, faith again is important to the healing, but this time it is the faith of the person to be healed, Bartimaeus. By faith, Bartimaeus cried out to Jesus even after being rebuked by those around him: "but he cried out all the more, Son of David, have mercy on me" (v. 48). Although blind, he threw off his cloak and ran to where Jesus was standing. Jesus said, "What do you want me to do for you?" and by faith Bartimaeus replied, "Master, let me receive my sight" (v. 51). Jesus’ reply underscores the point; "Go your way; your FAITH has made you well" (v. 52).

A congregation I once served included a young man who had been deaf from birth. He was a big, robust, handsome fellow whose sweet spirit enabled him to smile easily. During worship, he stood for the hymns and responsive readings, and participated as best he could in the entire service. During the sermon, his eyes were steadily fixed upon my lips, and in those few times when he was unable to lip-read what I was saying, he would turn to the young lady beside him and "sign" for clarification. I remember the day that he and the young lady came to my study to make plans for their wedding. She asked such questions as necessary and signed to him at intervals. As I spoke, she continued to interpret, even though he seemed already to understand. During the wedding ceremony, they held written copies of the vows and signed their pledges to each other. Before I left that congregation to acccept another appointment, the young man underwent an operation which enabled him to hear his first sounds. That was the first step. By God’s grace, one day, perhaps even now, he will be able to listen to all those things which you and I have grown accustomed to. Although different than the deaf man who was brought to Jesus, it will be a genuine miracle of healing, and it will have been done for one who has cried out from the silence in faith.

We are far removed in time and space from ancient Jericho where our Scriptures relate two of our Lord’s healings. However, as a society and as individuals, we yet stand in need of the healing touch.

Charles H. Scott’s familiar hymn says it well; "Open my eyes that I may see, glimpses of truth Thou hast for me ... Open my ears that I may hear voices of truth Thou sendest clear." And then the all-important third verse concludes, "Open my mouth and let me bear gladly the warm truth everywhere."

2. The Wounded Healers

Illustration

Ron Lavin

With all its imperfections, sins, blemishes, and warts, the Church of Jesus Christ is the intended healer of the world's wounds. Christians are called to be compassionate, wounded healers.

Perhaps, Henri Nouwen, the Roman Catholic theologian, has said this better than anyone else. The author of many books, Nouwen speaks of Christians as "wounded healers" who have compassion.

Compassion is not pity. Pity lets us stay at a distance. It is condescending.

Compassion is not sympathy. Sympathy is for superiors over inferiors.

Compassion is not charity. Charity is for the rich to continue in their status over the poor.

Compassion is born of God. It means entering into the other person's problems. It means taking on the burdens of the other. It means standing in the other person's shoes. It is the opposite of professionalism. It is the humanizing way to deal with people. "Just as bread without love can bring war instead of peace, professionalism without compassion will turn forgiveness into a gimmick."

3. A Good Word for The Pharisees

Illustration

Jirair Tashjian

It may come as a surprise to Christian listeners, who are used to thinking of Pharisees as hypocrites and enemies of Jesus, that in this passage it is Pharisees who warn Jesus to flee from Galilee because Herod wants to kill him. Not all Pharisees were hostile to Jesus. While Jesus and the Pharisees did not see things eye to eye, we find in Luke and Acts that Pharisees are often in the company of Jesus and not always antagonistic. Jesus is often invited to the home of a Pharisee for dinner (Luke 7:36, 11:37; 14:1). In Acts 5:33-39, when the Jewish Sanhedrin wanted to kill the apostles, a well-known Pharisee, Gamaliel, counsels them to be careful how they treat these men. If the undertaking of the apostles is of human origin, Gamaliel says, it will fail; "but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them in that case you may even be found fighting against God!" Some Pharisees had even become Christians (Acts 15:5). And of course we know that Paul himself was a Pharisee. In fact, in his defense before the Sanhedrin he uses the present tense and says, "I am a Pharisee" (Acts 23:6).

4. HAVING A REALLY GOOD FIGHT

Illustration

John H. Krahn

I believe it was the Mills Brothers who made popular the song, "You Always Hurt the One You Love." Fighting is one of the realities of married life. Unfortunately, most of us do not handle it well. Fighting is a negative way of communicating some very strong feelings. If we accept the premise that the point of all communication is to get closer to each other, then we might seek more constructive and positive ways of communicating our strong feelings rather than destructive fighting. Although space doesn’t permit us to consider all the suggestions for what I call "good fighting," let me mention just a few. Discover what you are really fighting about. What’s really underneath it all, then stick to the subject, don’t bring up past history. No name calling. Remember you are fighting with the one you love - hurt her and you are hurting yourself and your marriage.

Back to the Mills Brothers ... if we are able to hurt the one we love more than anyone else, then we, as a spouse, have the greatest ability to bring healing to our relationship. If we really want to heal the other person, we can. Healing not only after fights but throughout life. Healing comes through a gentle touch or by saying "I’m sorry" and really meaning it. Healing also comes through forgiving one another and accepting each other’s limitations.

Jesus Christ is the greatest facilitator of healing in marriage. He gives us the power to forgive our spouse - not because he/she deserves it but because he/she needs it. We forgive not only for his sake but for our sake and for our marriage’s sake. For marriage is something that we are in together, and when one or the other is hurting, both of us are hurting, and our marriage is hurting.

Those who are wise, work hard at their marriages. Those who are wiser work hard too, but they also invite God’s help in loving each other. If God wants your marriage to work, and he certainly does, then he is anxious to give you whatever you need to make it work. Both of you must keep strong in the Lord. There is a little Christian saying that goes, "When I try, I fail. When I trust, He succeeds." The best thing we can do in our marriage is not try so hard but to trust even harder.

As people, there will be those moments when we cannot help but express negative feelings to our spouse. Be careful not to try to hurt the person, but rather attempt to express how his/her actions are hurting you. Tell it like it is. Don’t hold back. But let the Lord help you share your strong communication in a loving manner. When you have a fight, have a good one.

5. Pastoral Prayer for First Sunday of Lent

Illustration

Joel D. Kline

Gracious God, how blessed we are to live and serve as a community of Your people. Gifted with the beauty of creation surrounding us, lead us into significant relationships that nurture and challenge us, as we experience the promise of life, and are grateful.

Lead us now, O God, as we seek, in this season of Lent, to journey with our eyes fixed on Jesus.

Lead us in righteousness, that our journey might be a journey in which we embrace Christ's ways of compassion and justice, grace and mercy, hope and right living.

Lead us, God, in peace, as we seek to keep our eyes fixed on Jesus.

Fill us with a peace that passes all human understanding, a peace the world cannot give to us, neither can it take away.

But, holy God, let us never be satisfied with personal peace alone. Lead us into paths of peacemaking and reconciliation. And God, we pray that You might soften the hearts of those world leaders who are far more inclined to wage war than to seek peace.

God, where there is brokenness, form us into instruments of forgiveness.
Where there is despair, make of us channels of Your hope.
Where there is division, may we be empowered to bring healing and wholeness.
Where darkness abounds, grant us courage to walk in the light, our eyes fixed on Jesus, the light of the world.

God of healing and compassion,

We hold before You now those in special need of Your healing touch …

God, make us mindful of those among us this day who silently hold hurts and brokenness within them. Teach us to look into one another's eyes and hearts.

We pray for those experiencing pain in their significant relationships, those who are yearning for new beginnings in life. We pray, O God, for young people facing untold pressures and challenges, and for older persons seeking to come to terms with limitations and losses. Whatever our life situations, O God, lead us in paths of right living, our eyes fixed on Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we pray. Amen.

6. Compassion for the Suffering

Illustration

Glenn E. Ludwig

In England in the 1940s a young woman entered Oxford University with little focus. She had no idea what to do with her life. But she soon came under the influence of a colorful professor of English, a writer with a gift, named C.S. Lewis. She became a Christian through much of his influence.

She left Oxford, against the advice of friends and family, and began to study nursing. After five more years of rigorous training, she was certified as a nurse.

But her story doesn't end there, for her questing, Christian spirit would not let her rest with the way things were. You see, she ended up working on a cancer ward in a London hospital. Gradually, she came to realize that most of the doctors ignored the patients who were deemed terminally ill. As a result she watched many of them die virtually alone.

Greatly troubled she felt that Christian compassion needed to be expressed to these patients in a visible way. She approached the hospital administration with an idea she had for surrounding those dying of cancer with friends and loved ones during their last days, rather than isolating them in sterile rooms with strangers. Her radical ideas were quickly rejected.

But undaunted, she decided to enroll in medical school to try to make a difference even though she was already 33 years old and would not graduate until she was 39. This she did and later a movement soon grew around her ideas that made it possible for dying patients to live their days in a setting of love and support.

Cicely Saunders, out of Christian compassion and a sense of calling to help in a specific way, began this movement in England in the 1950s. It later moved to the Americas and is now used everywhere and in every town. It is called the Hospice Movement, and it draws its inspiration from Jesus' own passion and compassion for his children -- "as a hen gathers her brood under her wings."

My prayer is that God will continually come to us in new ways and in fresh images, so that more Cicely Saunderses among us can be moved and inspired to take risks to join in God's compassion for his children. Amen.

7. Jerry's Faith

Illustration

John E. Sumwalt

In the Lutheran parochial school I attended as a child I was taught to fear God, and that I risked punishment for sin. When I was 17 years old, my younger sister died of a brain tumor, and I began to question everything that I had been taught. I could not understand how God could allow this. Her death left me confused and angry. I became more of a doubter than a believer. I came to the conclusion that I could only believe in myself. I pushed myself, I worked hard; I became an over-achiever and eventually a workaholic. This program propelled me to financial success, but it was accompanied by personal failure. I learned that the love of money can bring financial gains that are accompanied by personal loss.

I became an empty person. I couldn't stand success and began to self-destruct. I lost everything, my friends, those who had pretended to be my friends and my family. It was all like an unbelievable soap opera -- and before it was over I learned quite a bit about the judicial system, the Mafia, extortion and revenge. There were times when I feared for my life and for the lives of the members of my family. It was the kind of situation that causes one to think about taking his own life.

But I wasn't ready for that option. The love I had for my children gave me courage and made me determined to try again. I wanted to be a believer in something bigger than myself, but it was difficult. It would take a miracle. I carefully planned a comeback. I wanted to be successful again and not make some of the same mistakes. The task seemed monumental.

In the process I met an independent preacher named Andy. He worked for me on a part-time basis and we soon became friends. He wasn't pushy with his religion, so I decided to go to one of his church services on a Wednesday night. It was quite unusual to say the least. Wednesday night was testimony night. The opening song service was quite an experience. The songs had beautiful melodies and were easy to sing. When they sang songs like "He Touched Me" and "O, How I Love Jesus," I noticed that many had tears in their eyes as they sang with great feeling. I felt touched by this, and quite uncomfortable. The testimonies that followed were as impressive to me as the song service. People spoke about what God had done for them, how God answered prayer and healed them. Was this real? Do they know a different God than I do, I wondered? It was all so confusing.

I didn't know if I could believe it, but I went back to observe more. I knew these people had something I didn't have. I guess it was a simple faith in God. It seemed like a good way to live, but I still wondered if it was real. If there was no God, I think we would have to invent one to keep our sanity. I tried to keep an open mind on the subject. I found myself reading the Bible because I was hungry for truth.

One Saturday night my mother called to tell me that my grandmother was gravely ill. I needed strength to face this so I went to church the next morning before going to the hospital to see her. That morning Andy spoke of the healing power of Jesus. I cornered him after church and said, "Andy, are you sure he heals today?" He was sure. I marked several of the healing promises in my Bible and then I went to the hospital. As I entered the waiting room, I saw that many of my relatives were there to pay their last visit to Grandma. The pastor of her church was about to get on the elevator after praying with her. I stopped him for a brief talk. I said, "Don't you believe God has the ability to heal people?" He assured me he believed that God does have the power to heal, but he added that we all have a time to die. I knew he was right, but a voice in the back of my mind said, "Prove me and know that I am God."

I followed my cousin and his wife into Grandma's room in the intensive care unit. When I spoke to Grandma she regained consciousness, and her smile told me that she was pleased to see her oldest grandson. I got right to the point. "Grandma, do you want me to pray that God will heal you?" She agreed. The four of us held hands and I prayed for her healing. It was a special moment. The nurses and other members of the hospital staff who were present stood with tears in their eyes. When I finished I had a feeling that Grandma was healed. My cousin's wife knew it, also. Grandma fell into a deep sleep. When we went out to the waiting room, my relatives were talking about Grandma being ready to pass away. The doctor had told them that she would not live through the day. I said, "Grandma is not going to die today. She is healed." I went home and then back to the church for the Sunday evening service.

On Monday morning my mother called to tell me that Grandma had made a complete recovery. I said, "What did the doctor have to say about this recovery?" She answered, "He said it was a miracle." I believe God knew just what I needed. I had the audacity to take God at his word, and God cared enough not to let me make a fool of myself.

Author's Note: Gerald Wagner shared this story of his grandmother's healing with a new member class in our church in the Spring of 1990. It is printed here in his own words. Mr. Wagner, an independent semi-truck driver, lives in Kenissha, Wisconsin.

8. Give To God The Things That Are God's

Illustration

Phyllis Faaborg Wolk

"Tell us what you think, Teacher. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?" When the Pharisees asked Jesus that question, he responded with a request, "Show me the coin used for the tax," and someone handed Jesus a coin embossed with the head of the current Roman emperor, Tiberius. Engraved around his head was the inscription, "Tiberius Caesar, majestic son of the majestic God, and High Priest." "Whose image is on this coin?" Jesus asked. "The emperor's," they responded. "Well then," Jesus said, "give to the emperor what belongs to the emperor." The image of the emperor was embossed on the coin, therefore the coin belonged to him.

But in answering the Pharisees' question, Jesus didn't stop with the issue of taxation. He continued, "and give to God what belongs to God." As Jesus spoke the words, "give to God what belongs to God," standing right before him were those on whom the image of God had been embossed. The Pharisees, teachers of the law of Israel, children of Abraham whom God had claimed as his own, had been created from the very beginning in the image of God. In the image of himself, God had created them. They belonged to God. Those in whose eyes Jesus looked as he spoke were the coins of God. "Give to God what belongs to God," Jesus said. But when he spoke those words, the Pharisees left him and went away.

Should we pay taxes to the government? Yes, Jesus would say. But again, Jesus wouldn't stop there. Today he looks you in the eye and says, "Give to God what belongs to God." And as he looks at you, Jesus sees the image of God. In the beginning God created you and embossed his image upon you. In the waters of baptism, God marked you with the cross of Christ forever. God has given himself to you and has promised to love you and be with you forever.

Mrs. Detweiler was created in the image of God. She worked at Murray Elementary as the special education teacher. It didn't take her students long to recognize the image of God within her which made them feel special and loved. Even though she was a special education teacher, the students of Murray Elementary considered it a privilege to be invited to Mrs. Detweiler's room. The walls of her small classroom were covered with stars made out of bright yellow construction paper. Neatly written in black permanent marker on the star at the top of each row was the name of one of her students. As soon as a student finished reading a book, the title of that book was placed on another star that soon appeared directly beneath the star bearing the student's name. The more books a person read, the more stars accumulated under the name. Whenever her students finished a book, Mrs. Detweiler made them feel like stars, themselves. Her ability to make her students feel special and important was a mark of the image of God shining through her.

Mrs. Detweiler bore the image of God. She loved her students -- that was the image of God. She gave of herself by teaching them to read -- that was the image of God. She believed in her students -- that was the image of God. But even as one created in the image of God, Mrs. Detweiler would be the first to say that she had her faults. There were times when she let her students down; times when she lost her patience; times when her mood affected her ability to respond to her students enthusiastically. Mrs. Detweiler wasn't perfect, but she had been created in the image of God, claimed as God's child through her baptism and renewed each day with the gift of forgiveness. As she gave God what belonged to God by giving of herself to her students, Jesus worked through her. Through Mrs. Detweiler, God's love, acceptance and encouragement was shown to many students as they grew and matured into the people God had created them to be. As she gave God what belonged to God, God continued to give himself to her, revealing his love again and again through the sparkle in her students' eyes.

You are God's. His image has been placed within you. When I look at you, I see the image of God. I see the image of God in your faces as you greet one another before worship. I see the image of God each time you pray for each other and share one another's concerns. I see the image of God when I go to the nursing home and watch you hug and hold and gently speak with those who reside there. I see the image of God when I watch the Sunday school staff relate with the children -- so often God's love is given and received in the simple interactions they share. I see the image of God in the church kitchen, as members of this congregation work side by side to prepare a meal after a funeral or before a fellowship event. I see the image of God every time one of you gives to the Lord's work in a generous and cheerful way, sharing with others the blessings God has given you. God's image shines when you invite and welcome your neighbors to church -- not only those who are like you, but those who bring different perspectives and talents and needs to this body of Christ. I see God's image as this congregation reaches beyond itself to support missionaries and relieve world hunger. Whenever you give of yourself to others, the image of God within you is being revealed.

You are the bearers of God's image. Jesus said, "Give to God the things that are God's." You are God's. Jesus says, "Give yourself to God." But before you can even respond to Jesus' call to give yourself to God, God gives himself to you. Even before you have a chance to respond to Jesus' command, Jesus goes to the cross. Jesus goes to the cross to give to God what belongs to God. Jesus goes to the cross to give you to his Father in Heaven, who then blesses you with salvation and eternal life. Jesus goes to the cross for you and gives you life.

Give to God the things that are God's. When you give yourself to God, God will nurture his image within you. Jesus who now lives in you will give himself to others whenever you give of yourself to those in need. Jesus will use you to reveal God's love and forgiveness, to show all God's children how special they are to God, and to proclaim salvation to all who have been created in the image of God. Give to God things that are God's, remembering that Jesus has already given himself for you. Amen.

9. Some Rules Need to be Broken

Illustration

Larry Powell

Let us fabricate a situation in order to refer to an actual circumstance. Suppose that your family doctor spent the better part of his time enjoying the company of his cohorts, all of them healthy, sharing a common interest, and preserving the clinic by keeping it in good repair, yet never associated with persons beset by maladies. The clinic has been the medical center for as long as anyone can remember, but is used primarily for research and as a place to house medical books. The doctors are far too involved with perusing the records, studying cures, and maintaining the dignity of medicine to bother themselves with the sick and infirm. To carry this hypothetical situation further, let us say that a new doctor appears in town, totally unrelated to the time-honored clinic, independent of the guild. He seeks out the diseased, actually associates with them, and proceeds to cure their ailments. Immediately, the professional guild begins to question his credentials and stirs up public opinion against him.

Now read Mark 2:15-17. Jesus has invited certain tax collectors and "sinners" to dinner in his own home. The scribes and Pharisees, no doubt chaffed because Jesus had not invited them instead, raised a question which is, in fact, unintelligible for men of their profession: "Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?" Why was he not at the holy of holies with them observing proper rituals and diet? Why did he not take his fellowship with the saints, the "clean" and righteous? Jesus not only explained the messianic format, he also reprimanded them for their insular hypocrisy: "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick; I came not to call the righteous, but sinners."

The Pharisees were monitors of the Law. It is true ... there must always be individuals around us to call our attention to the rules, but it is an additional gift of grace when such persons possess at least a minimum of common sense. Some years ago, I received a telephone call from a parishioner who desperately pleaded that I come immediately to her house and rush her to the emergency room of a local hospital. Knowing that she had been experiencing difficulty with her pregnancy, I did not ask questions, but quickly ran to the car and hurried to her house. She was waiting on the front porch as I drove into the driveway. As I helped her into the car, she kept saying, "Hurry, hurry!" In a matter of moments I drove up to the entrance of the emergency room, jumped from the car and started around to open the door to assist the young lady inside. Even before I could reach the other side of the car, a man in uniform came charging from behind the sliding glass doors shouting, "You can’t park here ... this area must be kept open for emergency!" I explained to him that this was an emergency. "I can’t help that," he said, "you’ll have to move the car before you can bring her in." I had to move the car, park it at a considerable distance from the emergency room entrance and almost carry the expectant mother into the hospital. As I mentioned, there must always be individuals to remind us of the rules, but it is an additional gift of grace if they have a minimum of common sense.

The Pharisees scolded Jesus for associating with sinners (Mark 2:16), chastized him for plucking grain for nourishment on the sabbath (23-28), and rebuked him for healing a man with a withered hand on the same day (3:1-6). Jesus was threatening their security, their positions, and assuming their authority. Not surprisingly, rather than reassessing their own witness, they dug in all the more, and "stirred up the people against him."

10. What Is Caesar’s and What Is God's? - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

A young lady was soaking up the sun's rays on a Florida beach when a little boy in his swimming trunks, carrying a towel, came up to her and asked her, "Do you believe in God?" She was surprised by the question but she replied, "Why, yes, I do." Then he asked her: "Do you go to church every Sunday?" Again, her answer was "Yes!" He then asked: "Do you read your Bible and pray everyday?" Again she said, "Yes!" By now her curiosity was very much aroused. The little lad sighed with relief and said, "Will you hold my quarter while I go in swimming?"

The little boy was straightforward and honest in his questions because he wanted to entrust to the lady something valuable. The Pharisees are not being honest. They have no intent in entrusting Jesus with anything. They are not looking for the answer to a question. They don't want someone to hold their quarter. They are looking for a way to get rid of this trouble making Nazarene named Jesus.

The Pharisees were so angry it blinded them. Think for a moment about the ironies here: We know, because we live on this side of the resurrection, that Jesus was God. They thought he was demonic, an agent of Satan. We know that Jesus is the King of kings. They thought he wanted to be the King of Israel. We know that he was the Son of God. They thought he was simply Joseph and Mary's son. We know that Jesus has influenced the world for 2000 years. They thought his influence would end at the cross.

It's a fascinating story. We look at the Pharisees and we shake our heads. How could they have been so wrong when the truth was standing right in front of them? I believe they were upset because Jesus held them accountable and exposed their hypocrisy. "Teacher, we know that you are sincere," they say to him, "and teach the way of God." Not for a moment did they believe in Jesus' sincerity. It was a set up. It was a way of putting him at ease before they stabbed him in the back. Tell us then, they continue, what do you think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor?

I suppose we ought to be grateful to the Pharisees. In their question, which Jesus says was motivated by malice, they prompt one of the greatest of Jesus' teachings. It may not seem like much on the face of it, but the implications of this teaching have echoed through the centuries and they have shaped western societies. Jesus said, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's." Let us ask three questions this morning and find out why this little teaching has had such a great influence.

1. What Is Caesar's?
2. What Is God's?
3. Which Will You Choose?

11. The Beginning of Healing

Illustration

Henri Nouwen

When we think about the people who have given us hope and have increased the strength of our souls, we might discover that they were not the wardens or moralists, but the few who were able to articulate in words and actions the human condition in which we participate and who encouraged us to face the realities of life. Those who do not run from our pains but touch them with compassion bring healing and new strength. The paradox is that the beginning of healing is in the solidarity with the pain. In our solution oriented society it is more important than ever to realize that wanting to alleviate pain without sharing it is like wanting to save a child from a burning house without the risk of being hurt.

12. How Do You Measure Success?

Illustration

James W. Moore

Some years ago, Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote these powerful words. Listen…

"How do you measure success?
To laugh often and much;
To win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children;
To earn the appreciation of honest critics
and endure the betrayal of false friends;
To appreciate beauty;
To find the best in others;
To leave the world a bit better
whether by a healthy child,
a redeemed social condition,
or a job well done;
To know that even one life has
breathed because you lived…
that is to have succeeded."

I like that very much. It's a beautiful statement… but, somehow I want to add one more ingredient to the mix, namely... compassion! The spirit of compassion… the touch of compassion.

13. The Social Healing

Illustration

Roy W. Howard

The other day while visiting someone in a nursing home I stepped out of the elevator and into a room where frail men and women were slumped in wheel chairs in a posture that made my neck hurt looking at them. Their chins were on their chests or their heads were leaning limply on one shoulder. Some were drooling. All the chairs were lined up in front of a television showing a soap opera and the sound was much too loud for anyone, even those hard of hearing. It was a miserable sight. But then something unexpected happened.

A young girl, maybe 7 or 8 years old, stepped away from her mother who was visiting someone else. With her mother's encouragement this little girl placed her hand upon the hand of man slumped in a wheelchair, numb, the living dead. She looked at him and smiled as she said her name. "What's your name?" she asked. And, I believe I witnessed a healing taking place in the living room of that nursing home. The man tilted his head up slightly and looked at her. His face broke into a smile and he said his name. Then the little girl went from person to person in each wheelchair offering the same healing touch and the same welcoming benediction. No one tossed a wheelchair out the window and no one danced a jig, but I believe we all experienced, for a moment, the restoration of the community of life where everyone has a place. This is the social healing that Jesus brings through people like this little girl.

14. Wash One Another's Feet

Illustration

Lee Griess

Sociologist Robert Wuthnow of Princeton University has explored how it is that people make everyday ethical decisions. Many people, he found, perform deeds of compassion, service, and mercy because at some point in their past someone acted with compassion toward them. He wrote, "The caring we receive may touch us so deeply that we feel especially gratified when we are able to pass it on to someone else."

He tells the story of Jack Casey, who was employed as an emergency worker on an ambulance rescue squad. When Jack was a child, he had oral surgery. Five teeth were to be pulled under general anesthetic, and Jack was fearful. What he remembers most, though, was the operating room nurse who, sensing the boy's terror, said, "Don't worry, I'll be right here beside you no matter what happens." When Jack woke up after the surgery, she was true to her word, standing right there with him.

Nearly 20 years later, Jack's ambulance team is called to the scene of a highway accident. A truck has overturned, the driver is pinned in the cab and power tools are necessary to get him out. However, gasoline is dripping onto the driver's clothes, and one spark from the tools could have spelled disaster. The driver is terrified, crying out that he is scared of dying. So, Jack crawls into the cab next to him and says, "Look, don't worry, I'm right here with you; I'm not going anywhere." And Jack was true to his word; he stayed with the man until he was safely removed from the wreckage.

Later the truck driver told Jack, "You were an idiot; you know that the whole thing could have exploded, and we'd have both been burned up!" Jack told him that he felt that he just couldn't leave him.

Many years before, Jack had been treated compassionately by the nurse, and because of that experience, he could now show that same compassion to another. Receiving grace enabled him to give grace. Jesus said, "Now that I, your Lord and Teacher have washed your feet, you should wash one another's feet."

15. Paying Caesar

Illustration

David G. Hagopian

The poll tax mentioned in this passage was levied by the Romans against the Jews beginning in A.D. 6 when Judea became a Roman province. This poll tax was still around years later during Christ's ministry but when it was imposed for the first time, it provoked the rebellion of Judas the Galilean recorded in Acts 5:37 and discussed in more detail below. The Herodians favored the tax, but the Zealots, Pharisees, and people resented it. The Pharisees and the Herodians, though common adversaries in New Testament times on the very issue of rendering obedience and taxes to the Roman Empire, found themselves in common alliance in this instance to trap Christ in His words, trying to impale him on the horns of a serious dilemma. Should the authority of Caesar be recognized and the poll tax be paid to him?

If Christ were to have affirmed payment of the poll tax to Caesar, he would no doubt have pleased the Herodians but would have made Himself an even greater enemy of the Pharisees and an enemy of the people who shared popular resentment to the poll tax as an unlawful imposition by a heathen government. If, by contrast, Christ were to have denied that the poll tax be paid, he would have made Himself out to be an enemy of Rome and possibly, subject Himself to the charge of sedition.

16. Two Most Important Questions a Christian Can Answer - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

Isidor Isaac Rabi, a Nobel Prize winner in Physics, and one of the developers of the atomic bomb, was once asked how he became a scientist. Rabi replied that every day after school his mother would talk to him about his school day. She wasn't so much interested in what he had learned that day, but how he conducted himself in his studies. She always inquired, "Did you ask a good question today?"

"Asking good questions," Rabi said, "made me become a scientist."

In order to ask a good question I think you need to have noble motives behind the question. You have to want to know the truth. The Pharisees, by contrast, already had the answers to their questions. They felt they already knew the truth. How many times have we had it in for someone, asking a question designed to trap them? We do it to our loved ones all the time. In a moment like this we are not trying to learn; we are trying to injure.

The Pharisees come to Jesus once again with a question designed to do damage to the reputation of Jesus. And once again Jesus proves he is equal to the task. Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest? Now, even though this question was used to test Jesus, it is nonetheless an important question. Perhaps in the life of Israel at that time it was THE most important question. But Jesus had a question of his own. A question, which signified that the times were changing; a new theological season had come. He put this question to the same Pharisees who had tested him: "What do you think of the Messiah. Whose son is he?"

These were the two most important questions of that era and my friends they are the two most important questions of our time. Let us consider…

1. Which Commandment Is the Greatest?
2. What Do You Thing of the Messiah

17. In Love's Service

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

Thornton Wilder has a three-minute play entitled The Angel That Troubled The Water. It’s based on the story of Jesus at the pool of Bethesda. In it there are three characters: a doctor with a secret burden, praying that the angel may come; a confirmed invalid who has waited long for healing and upbraids the doctor for seeking healing for himself; and the angel who stirs the water to bring about the healing.

The angel says to the doctor, “Draw back, physician. This moment is not for you.”

But the doctor answers, “Surely the angels are wise. Your eyes can see the nets in which my wings are caught.” The angel passes him in haste, but speaks again to him, “Without your wound, where would your power be? In love’s service, only the wounded can serve.”

If we can believe that -- that in love’s service only the wounded can serve -- then we can bear our suffering graciously, even joyously.

18. Historical Information about the Sadducees

Illustration

Brian Stoffregen

It is generally thought that their name came from Zadok, who was the high priest under David, or possibly a later Zadok. The group by this name first appeared in the 2nd century BC and disappeared in the 1st century AD after the destruction of the temple in 70. There would be no need for temple priests if there were no temple.

According to Josephus as reported by the Harper's Dictionary of the Bible, "the Sadducees are said to reject the immortality of the soul, to attribute all human activity to free will and none to fate (or providence), and to reject other traditions, especially those of the Pharisees."

The article goes on to state:

The Sadducees were influential with only a few wealthy families and not with the people, who followed the Pharisees' interpretation of the law.... [they] were boorish in their social interactions,... they encouraged conflict with rather than respect for their teachers, were more stern than the Pharisees in recommending punishments for crimes, and ... aroused Herod's suspicions because they supported the Hasmoneans against him. From this data many commentators have surmised that the Sadducees were mostly priests and wealthy, powerful community leaders who sat in the Sanhedrin, were greatly hellenized (i.e., influenced by Greek culture), and cultivated good relationships with the Romans. [p. 891]

19. A Model of Faith

Illustration

Jerry Goebel

It may come as a shock to most Christians today, but we would do better to use this woman as a model of faith even more than the disciples. After all, we are neither Jewish nor Galilean; we have no familial claim or geographical claim to Jesus.

While the woman learns that the power of faith lies internally, the disciples learn that faith can't be measured by proximity to Jesus. They are right next to the Lord and yet they see the woman as a bother. They don't lead her to Jesus or attempt to heal her daughter, her faith does that. They are too blinded by their social and religious prejudice to offer miracles to anyone.

Jesus words are obviously not meant to cut down the woman (her compassion runs too deep to care if she is insulted). The words of Christ are meant to reprimand the disciples—and us—when our politics and religious agenda blind us to compassion.

Which faith most resembles mine? Am I like the cocksure disciples steeped in religious and cultural prejudice, deeply self-assured of my proximity to Jesus? Or, am I like the outcast woman of Lebanon, indentured by compassion and uncaring of insults if I can just save one soul?

20. A Power Higher Than I

Illustration

William B. Kincaid, III

After trying everything else, Shelly was present for her first Alcoholics Anonymous meeting. Skeptical and listening half-heartedly at first, the words of Martha caught her attention. Martha told the group, "I just knew that I could handle alcohol and my other problems on my own, but I couldn't. Seven years ago I came to my first A.A. meeting and since that time I have grown as a person beyond anything I could have ever imagined."

Martha exuded confidence and depth. She spoke of a power "higher than I," the God of Jesus Christ, and the way in which God now lived at the center of her life. Her words oozed with sincere encouragement and concern. Most of all, Martha exhibited a thankfulness which words could not express. Shelly, who came to the meeting doubtful that anything she would hear would change the way she felt or thought, made her way to Martha when the meeting was over. "I want what you have," Shelly told Martha, "I want what you have."

Shelly wanted the compassion and depth and hope which Martha knew, but she may not have realized fully how Martha came to know those things. Martha learned compassion from a time of deep personal suffering. She acquired spiritual depth from hours of praying when there was nowhere else to turn. She discovered hope by taking one step at a time because "one day at a time" was too much to be expected.

Shelly said, "I want what you have. Where do I get it?" And Martha told her, "It comes from being right where you are and doing just what you are doing." Martha went on to tell Shelly the oddest story about learning compassion when we are hurting, and learning love when we are excluded, and learning hope when we are helpless. In short Martha said that it is out of Egypt that we are called.

21. Creeds and Deeds - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

Rev. David Chadwell posed a rather interesting question: Which would you prefer for a next-door neighbor: a person of excellent habits or a person with a good heart? Which would you prefer for a good friend: a person of excellent habits, or a person with a good heart? Which would you prefer for a husband or a wife: a person of excellent habits, or a person with a good heart? Which would you prefer for a child: a child with excellent habits, or a child with a good heart?

It is wonderful to have a neighbor who conscientiously cares for his property while respecting your property. It is wonderful to have a friend who always treats you with consideration. It is wonderful to be married to a husband who always is thoughtful and courteous, or to a wife who always is gracious in her comments and deeds. It is wonderful to have a son or daughter who shows respect and uses good manners.

As wonderful as those situations are, none of them compare to having a neighbor, a friend, a husband, a wife, a son, or a daughter with a good heart.

When you discuss good behavior, you are discussing the quality of a person's self-control. When you discuss a good heart, you are discussing the quality of the person.

This is the focus of today's Scripture. Pharisees and teachers have come down from Jerusalem and, interestingly, they are gathered around Jesus watching the disciples. The disciples, it seems, are eating lunch. They have come in from the day's work. Too tired and too hungry to care that their hands and faces were dirty, they immediately sat down to eat without washing.

The Pharisees cease upon this ceremonial oversight and question Jesus: Why don't your disciples live according to the traditions of the elders and clean their hands before they eat? This is all that Jesus needs to hear. He sticks up for his disciples, turns on these teachers and says in essence, "Why do you not live according to the traditions of God and clean your hearts?"

What mistake did these Pharisees make? What is Jesus trying to convey, not only to them, but to us as well. For you see, it is just as easy for us to fall into a good habit and leave behind a good heart. What is Jesus' warning to us?

1. We prefer creeds rather than deeds.
2. We look at the outside not the inside.
3. But God requires good Creeds, Deeds, and Hearts.

22. FROM SOAP TO CERTAINTY

Illustration

John H. Krahn

Silhouetted figures made their way to the tomb as the first sliver of light graced the darkened earth. Jesus was dead. They still couldn’t believe it. It was like a bad dream of grand proportions. The ring of hammer upon nail still echoed in their ears; the horrendous sight of crucified bodies was burned indelibly into their brains. With him had died the hopes of eleven broken men. The sun had set on their lives, plunging them into forever darkness. Men and women who loved him, who believed in him, had their hopes raised to heaven only to then have them dashed to the depths.

A day of surprises was now dawning; the day of all days was commencing; a spirit of caring propelled the three women forward, not knowing how they would even be able to enter the grave. But God had opened the tomb. A rock, however big, would not block the Christ who spoke of faith great enough to move mountains. Entering the tomb, black Friday becomes Good Friday, hope returns to the hopeless, death is replaced by life.

Each of us has had our bad Fridays when someone has crucified our hopes, when someone close to us has scorned our love, when our hearts have worn the black band of betrayal, when we have sold our integrity for thirty pieces of silver, when the shadows of life outdistance the rays of sunlight. There is not one person who does not need healing in some aspect of his or her life. No one can stand before the cross and say, "Jesus, like you, I have no sin."

All of us know the Easter story, but what God really desires is that we all encounter the living Christ. I have seen the living Christ. I have been an eyewitness who has seen purpose enter into aimless lives. I have seen calmness overcome chaos. I have seen him strengthen the weak, bring healing to the sick, and comfort to the bereaved. I have seen him bestow joy and confidence to lives shattered by an angry and cruel world. I have experienced his presence in my life and in the lives of others.

I know that my Redeemer lives. I even know your Redeemer lives. If you know it too, praise God with your lives. Without the resurrection, death and taxes are the sum of life’s certainties. With Jesus Christ, our lives cease being daily soap operas and become divine certainties to be lived to the fullest with the final chapter to be played before the throne of Almighty God.

23. Our Gunsback Awakening

Illustration

By the time he was twenty-one years of age, Albert Schweitzer was already successful and world-famous as a musician and a philosopher. Then he entered medical school, became a medical doctor, and gave the remainder of his long life to the healing ministries of the mission hospital he established at Lambarene in French Equatorial Africa. What brought about this change in the focus and direction of this man's life?

Well, in a word, he became a dedicated and committed Christian. There came to him, he says, certain awareness, an awakening. He tells us about it in his book Out of My Life and Thoughts. He writes of "one brilliant summer morning" at Gunsback in 1896 when "there came to me, as I awoke, the thought that I must not accept this happiness as a matter of course, but must give something in return for it."

And so he did. His surging gratitude of spirit overflowed in kind acts of compassion touching the lives of more than 200,000 persons.

You know, somewhere along the way most of us need some kind of "Gunsback awakening." We need to become aware of how blessed we are and resolve to do something about it. May a Gunsback awareness of God's great goodness come with overflowing power upon us as we wait and worship here today.

24. He is the One We are Looking For

Illustration

John Thomas Randolph

You see, God through Jesus Christ is still bringing good news to the poor. He is still bringing those who were dead back to life again! He is still healing those who were broken!

In the May, 1982, issue of Guideposts magazine, Norman Vincent Peale tells of a woman who came to him for help. Her husband had been killed in a tragic car crash, and as a result, she felt numb, hopeless, and "broken.

Peale was able to help her by telling her a true story about a distinguished British violinist named Peter Cropper. Cropper's work was so outstanding that the Royal Academy of Music in London had honored him by lending him a priceless 258-year old Stradivarius. It is the dream of every violinist to be able to play such an instrument! But a terrible thing happened while Cropper was performing in Finland. He tripped and fell on top of the Stradivarius and broke it. Cropper's pleasant dream was turned into a horrible nightmare. He was, inconsolable.

Then a London violin dealer told him of a master craftsman who could repair the Stradivarius. To make a long story short, the repairs were so perfect they could not even be seen, and the soaring notes of the instrument were more beautiful than they had ever been before -- all because the broken parts were placed in the hands of a master craftsman who then applied his healing touch.

Yes, Jesus Christ is the one we have been looking for. Something terrible happens and our lives are broken. Then we turn them over to Jesus Christ who is the Master Craftsman of all time. He takes the broken pieces and puts them back together again, and we are better than new!

So go tell John and anyone else who will listen: The works of Jesus, what he is actually doing for us and others, affirm that he is the one we are looking for. There is no need to look "for another."

25. See the Resemblance

Illustration

Larry Powell

In all prrobablity, you know of some young boy who bears such a striking resemblance to his father that a person would know immediately, even in a crowd, that they were father and son. The father can be seen in the son. The Bible tells us that "God was Christ!" In what ways did the Son resemble the Father?

a. In his life. Jesus affirmed and celebrated life. His was not the attitude that this world and all that is in it are despicably evil ... that the object is to totally reject life with an eye always on "glory" ... that beauty in any form must be repressed as a tool of the devil. No, instead, Christ affirmed and celebrated life. Not a recluse, he enjoyed friendships with Lazarus, Mary, Martha, and others. He observed simple domestic gestures and was so impressed by them that he gave them a prominent place in his teachings (a woman sweeping a house, or drawing water at a well, baking bread, old wineskins bursting with new wine, lamps flickering in the night, patches on old garments). He enjoyed and absorbed the movements in nature and referred to them in order to illustrate his message; birds gathering into trees, foxes going into dens, figs withering, storm clouds boiling. Jesus affirmed life in such a positive manner, experiencing and relating to God’s great intention and design for all he had made, that we may understand life is not to be either seized nor rejected, but "lived" in an attitude of "Praise God!" In the harmony of Christ’s life with creation, we see something of God’s great intention and design for each of us.

b. In his ministry. Jesus’ ministry was characterized by the absolute "giving" of himself. He was, as one theologian puts it, "radically obedient" to God. In the same spirit, he was "radically giving" to others, always reaching, touching, healing, praying, searching, loving. The Bell Telephone Company did not originate the concept of "Reach Out and Touch Someone." The concept was in the mind of God before creation and the practice is as old as Eden. It was perfected in Jesus Christ, proclaimed in the New Testament, and is as relevant today as this morning’s newspaper. The ministry of Christ reveals a God who "spends" himself for creation.

c. In his teaching. Jesus was able to recognize and relate to God in the common life through his teachings. His life, ministry, and teachings combined to reveal a God of boundless love, caring, concern, and sensitive compassion. What he taught, he practiced. Even in death he was consistent with the witness of his life. Having spoken of "forgiving one’s enemies" and those who "despitefully use you," he gathered his words into action on Calvary. "Father, forgive them," he prayed. He taught so very much more, all of which was personified in his life. He showed that if the "good teacher" is flawlessly consistent, how much more consistent and loving must be our heavenly Father?

d. In his resurrection. Here, God unmistakably reveals himself. His power is beyond imagination. His promises are made good. His intentions and purposes will not be overthrown. His actual involvement in the world is confirmed. In the resurrected Christ, God is clearly revealed. God was, in all ways, in Christ!

26. Stronger after the Struggle

Illustration

Leonard Sweet

British naturalist Alfred Russell Wallace was without peer in the 19th century except for one name: Charles Darwin. One of Wallace's most astute observations about nature has gotten totally forgotten in the whole debate over the "survival of the fittest." Wallace made a surprising discovery about the saving nature of struggle.

One day Wallace was observing moths struggling to hatch out from their cocoons. One of the larger insects seemed to be having a particularly hard time getting out. After hours of watching this moth beat desperately with its yet undeveloped wings to break out of the cocoon, Wallace couldn't take it anymore. Moved by the creature's life-and-death struggle, Wallace decided to lend a helping hand. Gently, being careful not to injure the insect, Wallace used his sharp knife to cut open the remainder of the cocoon and freed the moth from that transformation chamber.

But something was wrong. The moth was not injured. It began beating its wings to pump them up. Its body unfolded and filled out. Yet in the ensuing days, compared to all the other moths that had struggled their way out of their cocoon captivity, Wallace's moth appeared smaller. Its movements were noticeably weaker. Even its wing and body color were less vivid, pale and dull. Over the course of its brief life span the "helped out" moth flew poorly, fed inefficiently, and finally died long before its time.

In this little experiment Wallace discovered that his compassion was actually cruelty. The struggle against the cocoon was nature's way of strengthening and developing the moth's wings so it could fly. The "easy-way-out," the struggle-free hatching, was a recipe for failure, not success. The struggle to break free from a cocoon was a necessary, life-enhancing, life sustaining part of a successful moth's existence. The struggle made the moths stronger, their shades of color more vivid, and increased their vitality.

Parents know this, but how hard is it for us to do this. One of the worst things we can do for our children is give them everything they want. Why? Because there will never be an end to "all we want." Give someone everything they want and they will simply want more.

One of the other worst things we can do for our children is to do everything for them. If you find yourself cutting your teenage son's meat for him, you know somewhere along the way you went too far, "helped out" too much. Doing everything for another, even out of love and compassion, insures the other will have a gray and dreamless life. Like the over-aided moth, they will have no strength, no vibrancy, no soaring spirit in their living.

In today's gospel text Jesus shows his great love for his disciples by sending them off, by themselves, without his help, to struggle alone.

27. Be Opened!

Illustration

David E. Leininger

In a Peanuts comic strip Charlie Brown and Linus come across Snoopy who is shivering in the snow. Charlie says, "Snoopy looks kind of cold, doesn't he?"

"I'll say," replies Linus, "maybe we'd better go over and comfort him."

They walk over to the dog, pat his head and say, "Be of good cheer, Snoopy."

"Yes, be of good cheer."

In the final frame, the boys are walking away, still bundled up in the winter coats. Snoopy is still shivering, and over his head is a big "?".

The message of the cartoon was powerful. The most noxious lifestyle of all is when compassionate words come from a care-less heart. Snoopy would no doubt prefer a blanket over a greeting. A compassionate heart is a reflection of the heart of God.

ALTERNATE CONCLUSION WITH THE MARK 7 PASSAGE

The Good News is that the Kingdom of God is not a pat on the head. EPHPHATHA...Be opened! Jesus exclaims and healing happens. Can the good news be limited? Is it merely a jesture? The story of a certain Gentile who sought healing for her daughter says no. "EPHPHATHA...Be opened!" It is not limited by geography. Not in Jesus' day, and certainly not in ours. "EPHPHATHA...Be opened!" It is not limited by race, or creed, or political persuasion. The Good News is not a mere jesture or word of well wishing. "EPHPHATHA...Be opened!" It is God in action in our world through you.

28. The Holy Spirit Doesn't Have A Copy Machine

Illustration

Richard A. Jensen

The wind of the Spirit blew through St. Mary's Parish but it did not seem to touch the life of Maria Sanchez. Maria had been a faithful member of St. Mary's Parish all of her life. She was baptized there, confirmed there, married there. And yet, when the Spirit blew new life into the lives of so many in the parish, Maria felt excluded.

Some called this blowing of God the "charismatic movement." Whatever it was called it certainly touched the lives of some of the members of St. Mary's in very special ways. Some spoke in tongues for the first time in their lives. Others spoke words of prophecy while others interpreted prophetic words and still others experienced the power of healing.

Maria Sanchez knew these people whose lives had been touched by God in new ways. She was excited for them. She joined them in some of their special prayer meetings. Maria's friends knew of the depth of her faith. This was not in question, at least not in the beginning. Maria was welcomed into their fellowship. She was excited to be there. She experienced the gifts of the Spirit as others exercised them. None of these new gifts were manifested in her life, however. That's where the problem arose.

Maria's newly "spirit-filled" friends wanted to pray for her with the laying on of hands so that she might also be filled with the Spirit and experience the work of God's Spirit in her life in new ways. Maria was more than willing to be prayed for. So the prayer fellowship prayed for Maria.

They prayed -- but nothing happened. No new gifts of the Spirit, that is, became manifest in Maria's life. They prayed for Maria at the next meeting as well. And the next and the next and the next! But -- nothing! It seemed 29to Maria that the matter got focused on the gift of speaking in tongues. "Everyone ought to have this gift," the others told her as they prayed and prayed for her. "Speaking in tongues is a sign of increased holiness," they told Maria.

The prayers did not seem to work, however. Maria Sanchez did not speak in tongues. She did not prophesy nor interpret prophetic utterances nor acquire new and greater faith nor experience new healing power. All the prayers seemed to be in vain. Maria Sanchez experienced all of this as a source of great guilt. What was the matter with her? What was wrong with her faith life? Why couldn't she speak in tongues? In the company of her "spirit-filled" friends she could only see herself as a spiritual failure.

One day Maria's aunt came to visit her. Maria knew her Aunt Carmen to be a woman of great faith. Maria told her aunt of her experiences with her spiritual friends and of her own despair over God's lack of presence in her life. Aunt Carmen heard Maria's story of pain and replied in great wisdom. "The Holy Spirit has been at work in your life ever since you were baptized," Aunt Carmen began. "It is the Spirit that has taught you to have faith in Jesus. It is the Spirit that has given you your many gifts for the common good of God's people. The Holy Spirit doesn't have a copy machine. Only you have been given the gifts that you have. The Spirit doesn't want you to be like anyone else. The Spirit gives each one of us a different assortment of gifts. Our spiritual task is to use the gifts the Spirit gives us for the common good.""

29. Bedside Manners

Illustration

Barbara Brown Taylor

One of the cruelest things that religious people can do is to blame [a lingering illness] on a lack of faith. Barbara Taylor recalls a problem she encountered when she served as a chaplain at Georgia Baptist Hospital. A group of Christians decided that part of their healing ministry was to go to the local hospital and pray for people who had cancer. They would go into patients’ rooms, gather around the beds and pray that the patients would have enough faith to be healed. It did not have a healing effect. “It had a bludgeoning effect, as people who were already ill got a strong dose of guilt and shame to go along with their chemotherapy.”

30. A Heart that Sings with Joy

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

"I saw them eating and I knew who they were." That saying, or some version of it, is well-known now. And it certainly describes the Pharisees whom we encounter in Luke 15:1-2. Jesus was welcoming the very folks whom the religious establishment had written off. Worse, he was at table with them, which was an intimate act of fellowship that implied a kind of personal bond and connection. So we're told the Pharisees muttered into their beards about this. Jesus overheard their comments and knew their hearts and so told them three stories that reveal the heart of God.

And that's really what is going on in Luke 15: we're not here first of all being given stories of the "go and do likewise" variety. The parable in verses 11-32 is not in Scripture first of all to encourage fathers to be forgiving of their naughty kids any more than the first two stories were an instruction to shepherds or a cautionary tale to take better care of your fiscal assets. No, all three reveal the heart of God — a heart that is broken clean in two by lostness but a heart that sings with a joy as wide as the cosmos when even the silliest sheep or the meanest of sons comes back and/or is found again.

31. The Healing of Jairus' Daughter and the Hemorrhaging Woman - Sermon Opener

Illustration

James W. Moore

A business executive became depressed. Things were not going well at work, and he was bringing his problems home with him every night. Every evening he would eat his dinner in silence, shutting out his wife and five-year-old daughter. Then he would go into the den and read the paper using the newspaper to wall his family out of his life.

After several nights of this, one evening his daughter took her little hand and pushed the newspaper down. She then jumped into her father's lap, wrapped her arms around his neck and hugged him strongly. The father said abruptly, "Honey, you are hugging me to death!" "No, Daddy," the little girl said, "I'm hugging you to life!"

This was the greatness of Jesus. He took people where they were and hugged them to life. That is precisely what we see Jesus doing here in this dramatic passage in Mark 5. He is loving needy and hurting people, hugging them to life. This passage is a fascinating one because here we have a story within a story, or two healing stories rolled into one and the people involved could not be more different.

On the one hand, the family of Jairus represented the "upper crust" of society. Jairus was the ruler of the synagogue. He was a man of substance, rich and powerful and religiously prominent. In the synagogue, he called the shots. He decided who would preach, what scripture would be read, and what hymns would be sung. He represented the Elite of Society, especially the religious world, but this day Jairus was troubled. His 12-year-old daughter was dying.

On the other hand, the hemorrhaging woman in the crowd was a social outcast. She was considered unclean as one who was under the judgment of God and therefore not allowed to set foot in the synagogue. In this magnificent passage, these two vastly different people, the down and out hemorrhaging woman and the upper-crust daughter of Jairus, are loved into life by our Lord.

Now, of course, there are many beautiful lessons here in Mark 5 in these two dramatic stories of healing, and we could go off now in any number of directions. But for the moment, let's look closely together at the power of love and the amazing, incredible things love can accomplish when it is given and when it is received.

1. Love Has the Power to Heal.
2. Love Has the Power to Reconcile.
3. Love Has the Power to Redeem.

32. You Can Make Me Well

Illustration

William R. Boyer

In the old musical Jesus Christ Superstar, there's a scene when the crowd grovels around Jesus, pulling on his hands and on his garments, crying,

See my eyes, I can hardly see.
See me stand, I can hardly walk.
I believe you can make me whole.
See my tongue I can hardly talk.
See my skin, I'm a mass of blood.
See my legs, I can hardly stand.
I believe you can make me well.

We all need physical healing. But we need spiritual healing even more.

33. Divorce and Children - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

The U.S. Census Bureau report for the decade of the 90's was released in 2001. Here are its disturbing findings concerning the family. Households headed by unmarried partners grew by almost 72 percent from 1990 to 2000. Most of these arrangements were men and women living together out of wedlock. Other studies have shown that cohabitation increased by close to 1,000 percent from 1960 to 1998. Households headed by single mothers increased by more than 25 percent, and those led by single fathers grew, get this, by almost 62 percent. And this next finding is astounding: For the first time ever, nuclear families dropped below 25 percent of households. That's a mom and a dad and children, the nuclear family, represents less than a quarter of all homes.

Another finding partially explains why this is happening: A third of all babies are born to unmarried women (33 percent) compared to only 4 percent in 1940. There are a growing number of women in their late 20's and 30's who are deciding to bear and raise children on their own. Our culture is teaching that this is normal. In this new world old taboos against divorce and cohabitation are disappearing. Culture is abandoning its commitment to lifelong marriage. It is predicted now, based on these trends, that about half of the children today will spend at least part of their childhood in single-parent homes.

This moral breakdown in our society has many factors: The sexual revolution of the sixties, the secularization of our society, the women's movement, even the increase in leisure time is responsible. But there is one reason more than any other for the demise of the family—divorce.

One day Jesus is in Judea, when a great crowd came to him. In this crowd are Pharisees who decide to step forward and test Jesus. They ask, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" In other words, is it God's will that a man should be able to divorce his wife? "What did Moses command you?" Jesus asked. The Pharisees knew the answer, ‘Moses permitted a man to divorce his wife and send her away." It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law, Jesus replied. His response is not so much a glimpse into the mind of God as it is an indictment on the human heart.

This morning let us look at God's heart concerning:

1. Divorce
2. Children
3. And the Family

34. Breaking the Rules

Illustration

Charles Swindoll

Charles Swindoll, in his book "The Grace Awakening," tells about one of his youth workers many years ago who was a member of an ethnic church. It was Scandinavian. Being a rather forward-looking and creative young man, he decided he would show the youth group a missionary film. We're talking about a simple, safe, black-and-white religious-oriented movie documentary. That film projector hadn't been off an hour before a group of the leaders in the church called him in and asked him about what he had done. They asked, "Did you show the young people a film?" In all honesty he responded, "Well, yeah, I did." "We don't like that," they replied. Without trying to be argumentative, the youth worker reasoned, "Well, I remember that at the last missionary conference, our church showed slides "

One of the church officers put his hand up signaling him to cease talking. Then, in these words, he emphatically explained the conflict: "If it's still, fine. If it moves, sin!" You can show slides, but when they start movin', you're gettin' into sin.

At first glance verse 41 seems cursory, "Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man." Why does mark mention this touch? Does he want to point out that Jesus took the risk of getting Leprosy? Does he want us to understand the depth of Christ's compassion that he would touch a leper? Is he simply trying to describe the moment? Unfortunately these are not the reasons that Mark carefully describes the touch. It is this TOUCH that gets Jesus into trouble with the religious leaders. It is this direct contact with a leper that banishes Jesus from Galilee. Mark's point is that Jesus broke the Mosaic law when he reached out and touched the man. In Leviticus the law states that a person is unclean if he has an infectious disease such as sores on the skin, and anyone who touches him becomes unclean and has sinned.

Doesn't this sound like our legalistic attitude today? If you heal a leper, fine. If you touch him, sin! You can heal all you want, but when you start touching lepers, your breaking the law and gettin' into sin. Because Jesus touched the leper he was regarded as unclean and a sinner.

Not only was the leper banished from the community but Jesus also because he chose compassion over ceremonial law they drove him out of the town because he chose to touch a man who was "unclean." Describe the sick and hurting as ceremonially unclean and you do not have to deal with them.

35. Asking for Help

Illustration

Richard J. Fairchild

Doctor Fred Collier, a retired physician tells this story about his youth.

He was a medical student in the Army Specialized Training Corps in 1945 when World War II ended. He was from a Kansas family that didn't have the kind of money he needed to complete medical school on his own. And so when he mustered out of the army, he had no idea how he'd ever finish school, if indeed he'd ever finish it all.

One day he happened to pick up a copy of a magazine in a barber shop. One of the articles talked about the kindness and compassion of Eleanor Roosevelt, whose husband, President Franklin Roosevelt had died just a few months before.

That article planted a seed in Fred's mind. He went to the local library and with the help of the librarian found Mrs. Roosevelt's home address. Then he sat down and composed a letter telling her about his plight. He wrote it and rewrote until he had it exactly the way he wanted it.

When he put the letter in an envelope and dropped it in the mailbox, even his young wife wondered if it was worth the time and the postage he'd spent on it.

To Fred's amazement, Mrs. Roosevelt agreed to meet him. When the meeting ended, she promised to help him. In the months and years ahead Fred got checks through Mrs. Roosevelt from a variety of sources, including her own personal checks. Fred, in turn, kept her informed of his progress and sent her copies of all his term papers. Her secretary said later that she always read them with great interest.

Later Mrs. Roosevelt visited the couple in their sparsely furnished apartment. The owner of the apartment nearly collapsed when he recognized the famous visitor.

When Fred finally finished Medical School he told Mrs. Roosevelt that he didn't know how he would ever be able to repay her. She said that repayment wasn't necessary nor desirable. Then she added "I will be adequately repaid if, when you are financially secure someday, you help out someone else who is truly deserving, as you were."

Doctor Fred Collier reached out for help and he received it. As did blind Bartimaeus. It is a hard thing to do, this asking, a difficult thing, a humbling thing, but there are times when we all need help, times when we must turn to our parents once again for help, or to our children. Sometimes it is to the church. Sometimes to God.

36. A People of Compassion

Illustration

H. Stephen Shoemaker

Here's a story from the desert tradition: A brother had committed a fault and was called before the council. The council invited the revered Abba Moses to join, but Abba Moses refused. They sent someone to get him, and he agreed to come. He took a leaking jug, filled it with water and carried it with him to the council. They saw him coming with the jug leaving a trail of water, and asked, "What's this?" Abba Moses said, "My sins run out behind me and I do not see them, and today I am coming to judge the error of another?" When the council heard these words they forgave the brother.

In solitude before God, faced only with ourselves, we learn the compassion of God. Perhaps it is not incidental that in the midst of ministry and the unrelenting needs of the crowd, Jesus, the good shepherd, called his disciples to join him in the desert: "Come away to a deserted place all by yourselves and rest awhile."

It is not all rest, all shabbat in the wilderness. There, wrestling with our own hearts in the darkness before God, we learn mercy the shepherd's prerequisite and become a people of compassion.

37. Love Does Not Compound Guilt

Illustration

Robert Allen

A few years ago I was in Washington, D.C., and I went on a tour of all the traditional sites like the White House, the Smithsonian, the halls of Congress and the Lincoln Memorial. There is something about standing in the Lincoln Memorial and reading the Gettysburg Address and the Second Inaugural Address which gives you goose bumps. One line in the Second Inaugural reminds you what a caring and compassionate man Lincoln was. He was speaking about the coming end of the War and he said: "With malice toward none; With charity for all."

Lincoln put this idea into practice on the day that news arrived in Washington that the war was over. A crowd gathered at the White House and a military band was playing some festive music. Lincoln stood on the balcony of the White House and spoke. Instead of lashing out against the South, he spoke of the horrors of war being over. He spoke of families getting back together. He spoke of a time of peace. Then he said, "In a few moments I want the band to play and I'm going to tell them what I want them to play."

Of course, the band started getting the "Battle Hymn of The Republic" ready to play. This had been the theme song of the North throughout the Civil War. But Lincoln crossed them up. He stood there and said: "The band will now play the theme song of the people we have called our enemy. They are not our enemies any more! We are one people again. I want the band to play 'Dixie.'"

Historians say there was a long, awkward pause. The band didn't have the music to "Dixie," but they finally got together and played, "Dixie." Lincoln knew that the South was not only hurting because of the horrors of the war, but also because of the shame that accompanies defeat. Lincoln was sending a clear signal to the South. Lincoln was telling everyone that there would be no punishment upon the South. Lincoln was saying that the South would be treated with love and compassion.

When you love, after the patterns of Jesus, caring and compassion become the cornerstone of your love. Love is not vicious or hostile. Love does not try to compound the guilt. Love doesn't try to rub salt in the wounds of shame.

38. Jesus Takes Command

Illustration

Phillip Yancy

Only one miracle made it into all four gospels. It transpired on the grassy hills by the shores of the Sea of Galilee at a time when Jesus' popularity and also his vulnerability was cresting. Wherever he went, a throng that included many deranged and afflicted trailed behind.

The day before the big miracle, Jesus crossed the lake to elude the masses. Herod had just executed John the Baptist, Jesus' relative, his forerunner and friend, and Jesus needed time alone to grieve. Doubtless, John's death provoked somber thoughts of the fate awaiting him.

Alas, there would be no secluded retreat. A huge swarm of yesterday's multitude made the ten-mile journey around the lake and soon hundreds, even thousands of people clamored around Jesus. "He had compassion on them," says Mark, "because they were like sheep without a shepherd." Instead of spending the day renewing his spirit, Jesus spent it healing the sick, always an energy drain, and speaking to a crowd large enough to fill a modern basketball arena.

The issue of food came up. What to do? There are at least five thousand men, not to mention the women and children! Send them away, suggested one disciple. Buy them dinner, said Jesus. What? Is he kidding? We're talking eight months' wages!

Then Jesus took command in a way none of them had seen before. Have the people sit down in groups of fifty, he said. It was like a political rally--festive, orderly, hierarchical--exactly what one might expect from a Messiah figure.

Unavoidably, we moderns read Jesus' life backwards, knowing how it turns out. That day, no one but Jesus had a clue. Murmurs rustled through the group on the packed hillside. Is he the one? Could it be? In the wilderness, Satan had dangled before Jesus the prospects of a crowd-pleasing miracle. Now, not to please a crowd but merely to settle their stomachs, Jesus took two salted fish and five small loaves of bread and performed the miracle everyone was waiting for.

Three of the Gospels leave it at that. "They all ate and were satisfied, and the disciples picked up twelve basketfuls of broken pieces of bread and fish," reports Mark with masterful understatement. Only John tells what happened next. Jesus got his time alone, at last. As the disciples rowed back across the lake, fighting a storm all the way, Jesus spent the night on a mount, alone in prayer. Later that night he rejoined them by walking across the water.

39. Scribe

Illustration

Stephen Stewart and Esther Lense

Ezra 7:6 - "... this Ezra went up from Babylonia. He was a scribe skilled in the law of Moses which the Lord the God of Israel had given; and the king granted him all that he asked, for the hand of the Lord his God was upon him."

In pagan Greek, the word "scribe," had a variety of meanings, including government secretary, recorder, clerk, and notary. In biblical Greek, however, it had a more specialized meaning, being used to translate the Hebrew word "sopher," a term which had undergone a change in meaning between the days of the Israelite kingdoms and the beginning of the Christian era.

In early biblical Hebrew "sopher" usually designated an important court official. During the first two-thirds of the period of the second commonwealth (@400 B.C. to 1 A.D.), where Judea was successively a province of the Persian, Macedonian, and Roman empires, "sopher" meant an interpreter of scripture. It was in this capacity that Ezra (@ 400 B.C.) was called a scribe. In the early part of the second century B.C. Jesus ben Sirach, the head of a school of wisdom in Jerusalem, celebrated the intellectual and moral pre-eminence of the scribes (Ecclesiastes 8:24--39:11).

During the last three centuries before the beginning of the Christian era the scribes were the professional interpreters and teachers of biblical law and ethics. Since the Jewish community enjoyed cultural autonomy under foreign rules it was premitted to govern itself by its own constitution, namely the Pentateuch. However, the Mosaic laws required interpretation and expansion to meet the needs of this later age and the work in interpretation was undertaken by the scholars whom we call the scribes.

The two leading religious-political parties, the Pharisees and Sadducees, both had their professional scholars and scribes, but as the Pharisees enjoyed greater influence among the Jews as a whole, it was the Pharisaic scribes whose interpretation of the law was considered authoritative by later Rabbinic scholars. It is the Pharisaic scribes who are meant in most of the Gospel references. It should not be noted also that the Gospels treat this word "scribe" as synonymous with "jurist" and "teachers of the Law" (i.e., biblical law).

The chief Jewish legislative and judicial body meeting in Jerusalem from about 200 B.C. to A.D. 70, known as the Great Sanhedrin, was made up of scribes of the Pharisaic party as well as the scribes and priests of the Sadducean party. Which party was in the majority throughout this period we do not know, but sources indicate that on certain matters the opinions of the Pharisaic scribes prevailed.

However, there was a difference in the usage of the word "scribes" between the Jewish and Christian writings of the first two centuries A.D. The Rabbinic sources of this period apply the word to the biblical interpreters and jurists of the period between Ezra and their own time, while the Pharisaic rabbis and scholars of their own time are called "sages," although they performed the same function as the scribes. The latter term was usually applied by them to less eminent persons, such as writers of legal documents, copyists, notaries, and teachers of elementary schools.

When the Gospels speak of scribes as contemporaries of Jesus, they meant the jurists and teachers who were called "sages" by the rabbis.

The chief functions of the scribes throughout the greater part of the second commonwealth were: 1. to interpret the biblical law and to provide new legislation by the construction of the written text or on the basis of the tradition of the leders (the oral law); 2. to give instruction in all fields of knowledge relevant to the study of Scripture; 3. to act as legal advisers to judges and those who administered the law.

Although they became preverted in their interpretations, so that eventually the word of the scribe was honored above that of the Law, and it became a greater crime to offend against the scribes than to break the Law, still we are indebted to them for the preservation of the Old Testament canon, which was formulated almost exactly as we have it today, at the. Council of Jamnia in A.D. 90, by these scribes.

To compare these men with their modern-day counterparts is a little difficult, since we are no longer a theocracy. However, I think we could compare their duties with those of legal advisers to heads of government, on whatever level, or to accomplished and efficient legal secretaries. If you will recall what was said about the doctors of law, I think the same would hold true here also for modern man.

40. An Example of Christ-like Thinking

Illustration

Staff

Patti Davis, the daughter of Ronald Reagan said that her dad made a lasting impression on her the day after the assassination attempt of 1982. She says, "The following day my father said he knew his physical healing was directly dependent on his ability to forgive John Hinckley. By showing me that forgiveness is the key to everything, including physical health and healing, he gave me an example of Christ-like thinking."

41. I Was Hungry

Illustration

Adrian Dieleman

I WAS HUNGRY and you circled the moon.
I WAS HUNGRY and you told me to wait.
I WAS HUNGRY and you set up a commission.
I WAS HUNGRY and you talked about bootstraps.
I WAS HUNGRY and you told me I shouldn't be.
I WAS HUNGRY and you had napalm bills to pay.
I WAS HUNGRY and you said, "Machines do that kind of work now."
I WAS HUNGRY and you said, "The poor are always with us."
I WAS HUNGRY and you said, "Law and order comes first."
I WAS HUNGRY and you blamed it on the Communists.
I WAS HUNGRY and you said, "So were my ancestors."
I WAS HUNGRY and you said, "We don't hire over 35."
I WAS HUNGRY and you said, "God helps those who help themselves."
I WAS HUNGRY and you said, "Sorry, try again tomorrow."

This was written in the 70's but I don't think things have changed all that much. The point is that those who consider themselves to be one of God's children in Christ MUST share with the needy. Those who worship God must show compassion to the hungry. This is not an option. This is a requirement from the Lord for those who are saved by grace through faith. Showing compassion is a test of the reality of our faith.

42. Healing Is a Mystery

Illustration

Mark Trotter

Healing is a mystery. We don't understand it. All we can do is to prepare our bodies to receive it. That's what doctors do. They do it with surgery, with medicine, and therapy. They prepare our bodies to receive the gift of healing.

And that's all you can do too. You can prepare to receive the gift through faith, through prayer, and through openness to the power in creation that heals.

43. A Drink of Water to a Thirsty Soul

Illustration

James W. Moore

For those conducting Communion this Sunday this illustration offers some strong tie-ins for a conclusion:

Have you heard the legend of the Fisher King? When the Fisher King was a boy, he was sent out to spend the night alone in the forest, as a test of his courage to be king. During the night, he had a vision of the Holy Grail—the cup used by our Lord at the last supper. He saw it surrounded by great flames of fire, and he immediately became excited by the prospect of the wealth and glory that would be his by possessing such a great prize.

Greedily, he reached into the flames to grab it, but the flames were too hot, and he was severely wounded. As the years went by, the Fisher King became more despondent and alone, and his wound grew deeper. One day, feeling sad and depressed and in pain, he went for a walk in the forest and came upon a court jester.

"Are you all right?" the jester asked. "Is there anything I can do for you?

Anything at all?"

"Well, I am very thirsty," the Fisher King replied. The jester took an old dilapidated cup from his bag, filled it with water from a nearby stream, and gave it to the Fisher King. As he drank, he suddenly felt his wound healing for the first time. And incredibly, the old cup he was drinking from had turned into the Holy Grail.

"What wonderful magic do you possess?" the Fisher King asked the jester. The jester just shrugged and said, "I know no magic. I only gave a drink of water to a thirsty soul."

This old legend underscores a great truth that is written large in the scriptures, namely this… Greed and selfishness bring pain and suffering, but love brings healing and life. We see it here in Mark 5 as Jesus reaches out to the hemorrhaging woman and the daughter of Jairus…love has the power to heal.

44. Get Your Hand off the Intercom!

Illustration

King Duncan

Would you mind a silly story from years gone by? At the end of their first date, a young man takes his favorite girl home. Emboldened by the night, he decides to try for that important first kiss. With an air of confidence, he leans with his hand against the wall and, smiling, he says to her, "Darling, how about a goodnight kiss?"

Horrified, she replies, "Are you mad? My parents will see us!"

"Oh come on!" he says, "Who's gonna see us at this hour?"

"No, please," she says, "Can you imagine if we get caught?"

"Oh come on," he persists, "there's nobody around, they're all sleeping!"

"No way," she says, "It's just too risky!"

"Oh please," he continues, "please, I like you so much!"

"No, no, and no. I like you too, but I just can't!"

"Oh yes you can. Please?"

"No, no. I just can't."

"Pleeeeease?"

Out of the blue, the porch light goes on, and the girl's sister shows up in her pajamas, hair disheveled. In a sleepy voice the sister says: "Dad says to go ahead and give him a kiss. Or I can do it. Or if need be, he'll come down himself and do it. But for crying out loud tell him to take his hand off the intercom button!"

There will come a time when all of us will push hard on God's intercom button, if not in our own behalf, certainly in behalf of someone we love. At that moment we will be thankful that we saw unlimited compassion in Christ. For there will come a time when we will rely on Christ's compassion.

45. The Complexity of the Situation

Illustration

The Constitution of the United States started off with only 7 articles and 21 sections that took up only four handwritten pages including signatures! 4 pages! But to that we added 27 amendments.

Today, the United States Code, which is all of the laws in this country, fills up around 80 volumes of books, nearly 800,000 pages, and this doesn't even include the Federal Regulations. In 1942, the Virginia Code was a single book that had 2800 pages. Today, the Virginia Code is a 25-volume set of books with 15,000 pages, nearly 20,000 separate laws! And that is just Virginia!

But, let's not think for a moment that we are the only ones to take something simple and make it complex. God gave the Israelites something simple to follow, the Ten Commandments. Just ten simple rules to follow. Nothing complex about it. But were the Israelites content with just ten commandments? Oh, no. They ended up making 613 separate commandments, 365 negative and 248 positive. Sounds like a lot doesn't it? Try following all those laws in order to be considered faithful and righteous, and you probably thought the original ten was hard enough.

For the lawyer and the Pharisees there was certainly a complex issue at stake. The Israelites were under assault from a man who claimed to be God, and who did God-like things. But this man was a Jew; he should have known better, no one is God, but God. Yet, he was a man who knew and quoted the Hebrew scripture, who knew the laws and commandments better than any religious leader.

The Pharisees had to put a stop to it, the situation was getting out of control, it was becoming too complex to let it go on much longer. This man must be stopped and the only why to stop him was to discredit him. And what better way to discredit Jesus, the Jew, than to ask him such a question, on a complex issue about the greatest commandment, that any answer he gave would spell defeat.

46. The Gospel on Trial

Illustration

Larry Powell

Let us begin by abruptly relating three contemporary examples:

1. In late March of 1981, a mother drove her son John to an airport in Denver, put him out, and told him not to come home again. He didn’t. A few days after being dropped off at the airport, John Hinckley shot and wounded President Ronald Reagan, presidential press secretary James Brady, Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy, and D.C. police officer Thomas Delahanty. A grim reminder that we inhabit a violent society.

2. Israel, the same family of earth from which emerged Jesus of Nazareth 2,000 years ago, today is the largest supplier of weapons to at least three countries in Central America. We live in a world of contradictions.

3. A recent ad in the New York Times invited persons to purchase a high-rise on Manhattan’s swank east side, and drive away in a free 1983 Rolls-Royce Silver Spirit. Apartments range from $583,000 to $1.2 million, but the automobile is free. Meanwhile, unemployment cripples thousands of our fellow citizens, and people stand in line to receive surplus cheese. Our society extends from the irresponsibly affluent to the painfully poor.

Change the examples above, but retain the italicized phrases, and see how similar our world is to that of Paul’s. The gospel was on trial then; it is on trial today. Has there been a time when it has not been on trial?

Both the Gospel and Paul were on trial in Jerusalem. But then again, as we have seen in Paul’s letters, the apostle had actually been on trial in Macedonia, Thessalonica, Beroea, Athens, Corinth, and Ephesus. Oh, he was not dragged into court in those places, but he was on trial all right. And now he had come to Jerusalem, bearing an offering collected from the Gentile churches. He had been warned not to enter the city (21:10-14), but he still came. Soon, he stood before Ananias, the Sadducees, and Pharisees ... on trial again. Whether intentional or incidental, Paul managed to accomplish a ruse which worked to his advantage. He reminded the assembly that he was a Pharisee and that he had been brought before them with respect to the resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in a resurrection, angels, or spirits; the Pharisees did. Shortly, they were so busy arguing among themselves that they forgot the real issue and Paul was dismissed.

Can you think of instances where Christians have been so busily engaged with arguing among ourselves that we have forgotten the real issue or reason for our existence?

47. There Is Always More Need

Illustration

Roger G. Talbott

You know how the disciples felt when the crowds showed up...

The two of you haven't had a night out without the kids in weeks. You finally get away. The waiter has just brought your appetizer when the baby-sitter calls and tells you the youngest has a high fever and has started throwing up.
You've been planning this vacation for six months. Your reservations are all made and three days before you are scheduled to go your mother calls and says your Dad is going to have a quadruple bypass as soon as the doctors can get his sugar stabilized.
You haven't had a day off in three weeks. Friday morning your sister calls, says her father-in-law has died and wonders if you could take her kids for the weekend.
It has been a very long day. You woke up before dawn because your arthritis hurt so much. You had to go to the grocery store and take your dog to the vet and on the way home your car started to act up and you had to leave it at the garage and get a taxi to take you home.
All you want to do is go to bed when the phone rings and it's your friend who lost her husband last month and she just needs somebody to talk to.

And always, when we think we have given all we have to give there is always more need: the starving people in the midst of a famine; refugees from war; the devastation of floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, and tornadoes; to say nothing of our neighbors in our community who are hungry; the children who need someone to care about them; the youth in our community who have nowhere to go and nowhere to grow; and that pee-wee team that needs a new coach.

Yes, we know how the disciples felt. Matthew doesn't have to tell us. We know that they felt frustrated and maybe even angry. Matthew doesn't have to tell us how the disciples felt. He does have to tell us how Jesus felt. He felt "compassion" for the crowd. That is, he felt what they felt. He felt the pain and desperation that would drive people to come so far to such an inconvenient place in the hope that they might find healing for their bodies and spirits and maybe even some meaning for their lives.

I'm not asking you to be a spiritual superman. We will obviously always be more like the disciples than we are like Jesus, but that's not our calling. Let us be more like Jesus. In every way. That's my prayer.

48. DOCTOR OF THE LAW

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

Luke 5:17 - "On one of these days, as he was teaching, there were Pharisees and teachers of the law sitting by, who had come from every village of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem;"

Acts 5:34 - "But a Pharisee in the council, named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, held in honor by all the people, stood up and ordered the men to be put outside for a while."

Later we will speak of the role of the lawyer in Jewish life, but here we are speaking of persons whom we might consider as being advanced beyond that specified role; men who specialized in the sacred statutes. These men concerned themselves with teaching rather than with the giving of written opinions. This is a strictly New Testament term, and the men themselves were of a type unique in history.

These men belonged to God, but not in a priestly way. They had nothing to do with worship; their dress was the same as that of the other Hebrews; they did not eat of the sacrificial meat; and, although they did make up a caste, they made no claim to belonging to the blood of Aaron nor the tribe of Levi. In the beginning they were simply the "scribes," but as they devoted themselves more and more to the study of religious questions, they began to be differentiated from the scribes; they felt themselves, and perhaps, with reason, to be an aristocracy of intellect and piety.

Although they traced their claim back to the time of Ezra, they became most prominent after the Maccabean wars, the national struggle against the Greeks. They had "built a hedge around the Law," and, by doing so, had preserved the essence of Judaism. They provided true intellectual life of the nation, and guided its thought; they controlled education, and particularly the higher education; they named the judges and fixed the jurisprudence; they uttered the commentaries on the Law in the synagogues; they had made the Great Sanhedrin not only a governing body and a supreme court; but also a theological college - in other words, they had the say in every phase of national life.

Today, we don’t have men who have powers of such broad scope and far-reaching potential, but we can perhaps compare these doctors of the law to the professors or heads of departments of our colleges and universities. And they became doctors of the law in much the same way that professors become professors. Any Hebrew at all could aspire to this position, no matter what his economic or sociological status. If a man left the vocation to devote himself to one of the most famous doctors, under whom he might study. After however long a period of time was necessary for him to have achieved a sense of readiness to teach, he was on his own, with students following him.

They more than studied the Law; they scrutinized every part of it and analyzed its application to the every day life of the Jews. To this degree, they went far beyond the modern professor, who seldom works with material of his own. Of course, these men weren’t working with extraneous material, either, but they were making individual judgments and applications that affected almost all of the people.

It was through the work of these men that was built up the Talmud - "the Instruction," or, "the Recitation." This is an extraordinary work, made up of two divisions. The first is the Mishnah, which is written in classical Hebrew; it is the basic canonical legal code, and its 63 tractates cover the whole field of human activity. The second is the Gemara, an immense commentary of the Mishnah; it was written in Aramaic, and there are two recensions, the Jerusalem and the Babylonian.

The greatest doctor of the Law of whom we know was Gamaliel, who might have been a teacher of St. Paul. We must tread warily when judging these men; there is a tendency to confuse them with the Pharisees of the worst kind which Jesus often criticized. But a doctor of the Law was not necessarily a Pharisee. They taught what they felt to be the truth, as our best professors do today, sometimes at risk.

And, as many professors have left works of inestimable value, so too the doctors of the Law left behind the Talmud, to which the expatriated Jews could cling as a symbol that the destruction of the Temple did not mean the end of their religion. We may not always agree with the opinions of our professors, but we must acknowledge the debt of their works, just as we must acknowledge the works of the doctors of the Law.

49. Moses’ Seat

Illustration

Brett Blair

The Jews had a tradition that stated that angels gave the law to Moses. Moses, in turn, passed it onto Joshua; Joshua passed it onto the elders; the elders passed it onto the prophets; and the prophets passed it onto those who led the synagogue, i.e., the Pharisees and the scribes. So, because the law originated with Moses, the position of being a teacher of God's law became known as Moses's eat. In fact in the synagogue, there was a raised platform at the front. On that platform was a special seat, reserved for the most respected teacher in the synagogue. Today, we speak in universities of the chair of philosophy or the chair of history. The chair is reserved for the most esteemed person in any given subject. Well, Moses' seat was, in essence, the chair of philosophy in ancient Israel. So Jesus is attacking the highest symbol of religious authority. Well, that's what the Pharisees and scribes claimed. He actually wasn't attacking the chair; rather, he was attacking those who occupied the chair. He was saying they were unworthy of the chair.

50. Hospitality Opens the Door for Healing

Illustration

Andrew R. Wolfe

Dr. Paul Tournier was a renowned Christian therapist and a spiritual writer. One day Bruce Larson, a pastor in California, asked Dr. Tournier how he counseled people. Dr. Tournier replied, "You know, I'm embarrassed, really, by all of the people who seek me out for counseling. I don't really know how to help people. I don't really do anything at all". He said simply, "What is important is that people are trying to find their way, and so I try to welcome them and I try to support them. And in that welcoming and in that supporting, the possibility for healing is opened."

When we extend hospitality, we open the door for healing to happen.

Showing 1 to 50 of 261 results