Sermon and Worship Resources

Luke 18:9-14 · The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector

9 To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else, Jesus told this parable: 10 "Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other men--robbers, evildoers, adulterers--or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.'

13 "But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, 'God, have mercy on me, a sinner.'

14 "I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted."

The Good, The Bad, And The Justified

Luke 18:9-14

Sermon
by Larry R. Kalajainen

The famous actor Gregory Peck was once standing in line with a friend, waiting for a table in a crowded Los Angeles restaurant. They had been waiting for some time, the diners seemed to be taking their time eating and new tables weren't opening up very fast. They weren't even that close to the front of the line. Peck's friend became impatient, and he said to Gregory Peck, "Why don't you tell the maitre d' who you are?" Gregory Peck responded with great wisdom. "No," he said, "if you have to tell them who you are, then you aren't."

That's a lesson that the Pharisee in our gospel reading apparently had never learned. His prayer, if it can be called that, is largely an advertisement for himself. He's selling himself to God. Little wonder that Luke describes him in the way he does, "The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself." That's a very apt description, isn't it -- he prayed with himself. He would have done better had he had Gregory Peck there to whisper in his ear that if he had to remind God who he was, then he wasn't.

The tax collector, on the other hand, didn't have to tell God who he was. He knew who he was and he knew that God knew who he was. His prayer is not an exercise in self-promotion, but a confession and a plea for mercy. He is not selling himself, but opening himself. And Jesus says, "It is this man who went home justified." To be justified means to be declared "not guilty." It means to be declared right. The tax collector is declared to be in the right relationship to God while the Pharisee, who is so certain of his own righteousness, is shown to be in the wrong relationship with God. He is not justified before the bar of God's justice which is the court of ultimate consequence.

We hasten to add, however, that this does not mean that the Pharisee was a bad person and the tax collector really a good person. There's no suggestion of that in this parable. The Pharisee was probably every bit as good and moral and generous as he claimed to be. When he gives that little speech about how he fasts and tithes and gives alms and prays frequently, he's not guilty of false advertising. There's no suggestion that he's a hypocrite -- pretending to be something he isn't. In fact, the Pharisees enjoyed great respect among the people of Israel because of the high standards of their morality, their ethics, and their piety. Nor is there any suggestion that the tax collector was really a good guy at heart -- something akin to the Hollywood version of the prostitute with the heart of gold or the thief who robs only from the rich in order to give to the poor. The tax collector was very likely every bit as bad as his reputation made him out to be. If he hadn't been crooked, he wouldn't have been a tax collector in the first place, for the Romans couldn't get honest people to be their lackeys. The only people who would serve as tax collectors were people who were interested in enriching themselves with little concern for how they did it. The contrast in the parable is not between the real, but hidden, goodness of the tax collector and the real, but hidden, hypocrisy of the Pharisee. Such a construction misses the point. If that were the case, it would not be at all hard to understand why it is the tax collector and not the Pharisee who is declared to be righteous and who goes home justified.

No, this parable is much more radical than that, and it is so because the gospel is radical. It goes to the root of the problem of human sinfulness and alienation from God. The gospel that Jesus proclaims in this parable is radical in at least three aspects: first, the parable tells us that God knows us as we really are; second, that God accepts us as we are; and third, that though God accepts us as we are, he never leaves us as we are.

The first of those three aspects of the gospel is familiar to us, though we may not live in awareness of it all the time. God knows who we are. We don't have to do a snow-job on God and sell ourselves to him. Like the line in the Christmas song about Santa Claus, "he knows if you've been bad or good," God knows us. But God's knowledge of us goes much deeper than that. He knows not only our actions, but our motives, our intentions, our deepest and most intimate secrets, he even knows what is in the depths of our unconscious minds. The psalmist said it well when he said, "While I was in my mother's womb, while I was being created in secret, behold, O Lord, you knew me altogether" (Psalm 139:13, 15).

Such knowledge can be a frightening thing if we operate on the "God rewards the good and punishes the bad" philosophy. If that is the way things work, then I'm in trouble, because I've got things inside me that I wouldn't want anyone else to know. There are parts of me that are too private, too painful, too intimate to share with anyone. So if I think that my acceptance by God depends on him not knowing about who I really am inside, then I'm lost. That's why the news that God knows exactly who I am, better than I know myself, is such a liberating piece of good news. I don't have to pretend. I am who God knows me to be. I don't have to be afraid of him finding out something I'm ashamed of, I don't have to close off part of my life to him; he knows me with a knowledge that is deep and wonderful and intimate and infinite. Paul reminds us that when our time comes to finally stand in God's presence our own knowledge will be full and complete: "One day," he says, "I shall know, even as I am fully known" (1 Corinthians 13:12). What a wonderful prospect! So if you've got something to hide, don't bother. God already knows more about you than you will ever know until that day when he grants you fullness of knowledge and that will be heaven.

But close on the heels of this truth, comes the next part. God not only knows who I am, but he accepts me as I am. I say this is radical because it goes right against the grain of the way most of us think. If something good happens to somebody we know, we say, "Well, you must be living right," meaning that their goodness has been rewarded. When something bad happens to us, we immediately begin to wonder what we've done to cause God to punish us. It is normal for us to think that God blesses those who are good and punishes those who are bad. That's the way we would do it if we were God, and we project our own ideas of justice and reward and punishment onto God. The only problem with that is that God doesn't quite fit our expectations of him.

As Karl Barth, the great theologian, would say, "God is God." He is not an idol created in our image. God is God. God acts as God acts. And Jesus says in this parable that God is a God who justifies the ungodly. He declares sinners to be in right relation to himself. He declares them not guilty. By human standards of justice, this is positively scandalous. God justifies the ungodly? Why? Because they are ungodly? No! God hates their ungodliness. Then why does he justify them? Because they trust in him for their justification, and that is the right or righteous thing to do. To throw oneself on the mercy of God is the right thing to do and God declares us righteous when we do it. That is the meaning of having faith or believing -- having faith in God, believing that God will act like God and have mercy on us. The problem most of us have is that we don't act like God, and therefore, we are scandalized when God acts like God.

Samuel Colgate, the founder of the Colgate business empire, was a devout Christian, and he told of an incident that took place in the church he attended. During an evangelistic service, an invitation was given at the close of the sermon for all those who wished to turn their lives over to Christ and be forgiven. One of the first persons to walk down the aisle and kneel at the altar was a well-known prostitute. She knelt in very real repentance, she wept, she asked God to forgive her, and meanwhile the rest of the congregation looked on approvingly at what she was doing. Then she stood and testified that she believed God had forgiven her for her past life, and she now wanted to become a member of the church. For a few moments, the silence was deafening.

Finally, Samuel Colgate arose and said, "I guess we blundered when we prayed that the Lord would save sinners. We forgot to specify what kind of sinners. We'd better ask him to forgive us for this oversight. The Holy Spirit has touched this woman and made her truly repentant, but the Lord apparently doesn't understand that she's not the type we want him to rescue. We'd better spell it out for him just which sinners we had in mind." Immediately, a motion was made and unanimously approved that the woman be accepted into membership in the congregation.

God accepts us as we are. There's not a sin too black, not a deed too awful, not a thought too horrible for him to forgive. What cuts us off from his forgiveness and the freedom such forgiveness brings is our thinking that we have to justify ourselves. Trusting in our own righteousness does not bring God's verdict of not guilty. Trusting in God's righteousness does.

But if we say that God justifies the ungodly, doesn't that appear to condone bad or sinful behavior? If God doesn't require us to change before he accepts us, then what's the use of being good at all? Why not sin boldly and have a good time? After all, the scriptures say that there is pleasure in sin, for a time. Ah, but here the third truth comes into play. God knows who we are; he accepts us as we are; but he never leaves us as we are. When God justifies us on the basis of our faith in him, he also transforms us and makes us better than we are.

The theological or biblical term for God's forgiving and claiming work in us is justification. The word for God's cleansing and purifying within us is sanctification. God starts with us just where he find us, whether in the palace or the pig sty, but he never leaves us there. For God's purpose is not just to rescue us from hell but to get us ready for heaven. So he's in the business of making us holy, or to put it as the writer of Ephesians 4:15 does, helping us "to grow up in every way into Christ who is our head." Maturity in Christ, spiritual adulthood, perfection in love -- these are all ways to describe God's work in our lives subsequent to the moment when he justifies us, or declares us righteous.

This sanctifying work of God's spirit within us, does not turn us into stained-glass saints, people who walk around piously with their hands folded in prayer all day. God's work within us is the most practical, down-to-earth (or perhaps we should say up-to-heaven) work imaginable. When we open our lives to his gracious presence, when we no longer trust in our own morality or good behavior or willpower, we find the most amazing things beginning to happen. As we experience more of God's love for us, we find ourselves becoming more loving toward others. People with bad tempers find that God's spirit within them enables them to control their temper. People with enslaving habits like alcoholism or addiction to gambling, find a resource that is beyond themselves and a source of strength to overcome those diseases of the soul. People with too much love of money and material things find that their values begin to change. People with deep insecurities and low self-esteem begin to see themselves and love themselves as God loves them and sees them.

This doesn't all happen at once, of course. Discipleship, sanctification, spiritual maturity, whatever you want to call it, is a life-long process. It's a journey. We don't become saints overnight, but we do become. That's the nature of the Christian life -- becoming conformed to the image of Christ.

The transforming work of the Holy Spirit in the life of a believer was the chief theme of John Wesley's life and work, and a distinctive contribution the Methodists make to the rest of the church. Wesley had a four-fold dictum: "All people need to be saved from sin; all people can be saved from sin; all people can know they are saved from sin; and all people can be saved to the uttermost." It is that latter that Wesley particularly emphasized. He called it "going on to perfection." He didn't mean a sinless kind of moral perfection, not a perfection in knowledge, but a perfection in love. The single identifying mark of the Holy Spirit's work in our lives is love. Do we love God and do we love one another? That's the test of our sanctification.

Wesley was always deeply disturbed when he saw Christians who were more like the Pharisee than the tax collector -- people who trusted in their own righteousness, and consequently, showed little evidence of the growing presence of God's love in their lives. Once while he was preaching, he noticed a lady in the congregation who was known for her critical attitudes toward others. All through the service she stared at his tie, with a frown on her face. At the end of the service, she came up to him and said very sharply, "Mr. Wesley, the strings on your bow tie are much too long. It offends me." Wesley immediately asked for a pair of scissors, and when someone handed them to him, he gave them to the woman and said, "Then by all means, trim it to your satisfaction." She did so, clipping off an inch or so from each side. "Are you sure they're all right now," he asked, and she replied, "Yes, that's much better."

"Then let me have the scissors for a moment," Wesley said, "for I'm sure you won't mind a bit of correction either. I do not wish to be cruel, madam, but your tongue offends me -- it is too long. Please stick it out so that I may trim some of it off." Needless to say, this critic got the point.

Now God may not take a pair of scissors to our tongue, but for some of us, that may be the part of us where he chooses to begin his sanctifying work, for it is one of the things by which we give most offense and sin against love. But whether it's our tongue or our ambition or our lust or our prejudice or our materialism or our pride or our self-righteousness, or whatever else our besetting sin may be, God will not be content until Christ's image is perfectly formed in us, and that is why he will never leave us as he finds us. Like a dentist who will insist on pulling the tooth with the abscess in it, rather than merely giving us some pain-killer, God will insist on removing the abscesses from our souls. We do not have to remove them to make ourselves acceptable to him; he accepts us warts and all, as the saying goes. But he will insist on giving us the full treatment, causing us a lesser pain in order to spare us an infinitely greater one -- the pain of a life without him.

What aspect of the gospel speaks most to your needs? Is it the fact that God knows you, and knows you intimately and fully? If so, then accept the freedom that God offers you. Open yourself to him, confess who you are to him, and you will find him gracious. Perhaps it is the second aspect which speaks most keenly to you -- that God accepts you as you are and declares us righteous on the basis of your trust in him. That too is liberating. Not only do you not have to hide your real self, but you do not have to make yourself good. Accept his love. Accept his forgiveness which he offers you in Christ. Accept his claim upon you. Accept your adoption into the family of God. Or maybe you've experienced that much of the gospel -- the knowledge that you are loved and accepted and justified -- but you have not experienced the transforming work of the Spirit in your life, because you have not understood or because you have not been open to allow him to work. If so, then open yourself to the Spirit as fully as you are consciously capable of doing; give him the freedom to cleanse away all that is incompatible with the love of Christ, accept his discipline, commit yourself to "going in for the full treatment."

This, too, is a work of faith, a matter of trust, for we do not make ourselves holy. It is God who makes us like Christ. We will not have better morals or better ethics or more willpower when we decide to. We will have them when we allow God to change our inner nature into conformity with the nature of Christ. When Christ is formed in us, then we will be better people with better behavior. So our salvation from God's knowledge of us in our mother's wombs to our perfected knowledge of ourselves and of him in heaven is the work of his grace and the product of faith. From beginning to end, we are saved by God's grace.

CSS Publishing Company, Inc, Extrodinary Faith For Ordinary Time, by Larry R. Kalajainen

Overview and Insights · True Righteousness (18:9–30)

The previous section (see 18:8) ended with a question: when Jesus returns, will he find faith on the earth? Now we get a clear picture of the kind of faith or righteousness Jesus is looking for. He tells the parable of the Pharisee and tax collector for the benefit of those who are confident of their own righteousness and look down on others (18:9–14). The story is a contrast between the prideful Pharisee who boasts about his exemplary piety and the…

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Luke 18:9-14 · The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector

13 "But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, 'God, have mercy on me, a sinner.'

14 "I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted."

Commentary · The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector

Again, it is hard to detect the relationship between the parable of the Pharisee and tax collector (18:9–14) and the preceding parable. Perhaps this parable illustrates the kind of faith (cf. 18:8) that God desires. Luke again begins the parable by making an editorial comment (18:9). This parable is addressed to the self-confident and self-righteous—those who look down on others with contemptuous disdain. On the one hand, the Pharisee, confident of his moral superiority, approaches the temple to pray. He praises God that he is not like other sinners and then lauds his own religious devotion. By fasting twice a week and tithing, he would be going beyond the requirement of the Old Testament law. On the other hand, the tax collector (see Luke 5:27–32) is deeply conscious of his own unworthiness. He stands far away, fearing even to raise his eyes. All he can ask for is mercy since he knows he is undeserving of God’s forgiveness. Jesus concludes by saying that the tax collector, rather than the Pharisee, was justified in God’s eyes. Here Luke is indicating that the Pauline doctrine of justification by faith apart from works has its roots in the teaching of Jesus. Verse 14b also teaches Christian humility. The beauty and power of this parable are inescapable. Modern-day readers identify with the tax collector, but in the process we have unconsciously uttered the prayer, “Thank God I am not like that Pharisee,” showing that the heart of the Pharisee lives in all of us.

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

Big Idea: We should pray with confidence that God will respond, but our confidence should be in God’s mercy, not in our own merits.

Understanding the Text

Parables have been a prominent feature in Luke’s narrative of the journey to Jerusalem, especially in chapters 14–16. The two parables in the present section, together with one further one in 19:11–27, will round out the collection before Jesus reaches Jerusalem. The first of these two parables is linked to the preceding section in that it finishes with a comment on the coming of the Son of Man. Its focus, however, is on present discipleship, and in particular on prayer, which has been a recurrent theme in Luke (see especially 11:1–13) and in his frequent mention of Jesus’s own prayers (3:21; 6:12; 9:18, 28–29; 11:1). The second parable continues the theme by depicting two people at prayer, though its introduction and conclusion point to a wider truth about the reversal of values in the kingdom of God. This truth will then be graphically exemplified in the stories of the children and the rich man, with Jesus’s comments on the latter, in 18:15–30.

Historical and Cultural Background

Local justice normally was administered by a council of elders, a significant part of whose role was to arbitrate in property disputes. The “judge” in this parable is acting alone, however (as apparently in 12:58; and cf. the request to Jesus in 12:13–14), and there is later evidence that a full council was not required for monetary arbitration. Widows are frequently mentioned in the Old Testament as typically vulnerable members of society, to whom therefore special consideration should be given. In this case the widow turns out to be far from helpless!

Both Pharisees (see the sidebar “Scribes and Pharisees” at 5:12–26) and tax collectors (see “Historical and Cultural Background” on 5:27–39) are by now familiar categories in this Gospel. There is a danger that the modern reader, familiar with the Gospel stereotypes (Pharisees as opponents of Jesus, tax collectors as his friends) may miss the radically subversive message of this parable when addressed to ordinary status-conscious Jews (18:9) at that time, for whom Pharisees were admirable for their serious observance of God’s law and tax collectors represented the irreligious underclass. The scene of this parable is the temple in Jerusalem, where Israelite men stood to pray in the court of Israel overlooking the court of the priests, where the sacrificial ritual took place (cf. 1:10).

Interpretive Insights

18:1 to show them that they should always pray and not give up. Luke sometimes gives an introductory “steer” to guide his readers’ interpretation of a parable (cf. 18:9; 19:11). This one is expressed in quite general terms; it does not relate specifically to praying for the coming of the Son of Man, which has been the subject of the preceding section and will return in 18:8b.

18:2 who neither feared God nor cared what people thought. The judge in the story represents God, but this initial description makes it clear that his character is not to be seen as a reflection of what God is like. Rather, he is shown as a selfish scoundrel in order to set up the “how much more” argument of 18:6–7. If even a man like this can be prevailed on, how much more so will a response be obtained from God, who really does care for his people’s good.

18:3 Grant me justice against my adversary. We are not told the nature of the dispute, but it may well have been about property. The root term for “justice” (edik-) used here and in 18:5, 7, 8 focuses on the vindication of someone who has been wronged, though it may also include the punishment of the wrongdoer (cf. the use in 21:22). A widow who fights her own case must have been without male support that she could rely on, and so she would more easily be exploited.

18:5 I will see that she gets justice, so that she won’t eventually come and attack me! His eventual compliance is purely selfish, to get rid of a personal nuisance (“keeps bothering me”). The unusual verb here translated as “attack” is literally “give a black eye to.” Some interpreters treat it here merely as a metaphor for “subdue” (cf. 1 Cor. 9:27, using the same verb), but in this none-too-serious parable context it is better taken literally: the poor man is afraid of being “handbagged” by the feisty little widow!

18:6 the unjust judge. There is a delicious irony in the (literally) “judge of injustice” going against his own nature to give the widow “justice.” But it is precisely this emphasis on his corrupt character that gives force to the “how much more” argument.

18:7 justice for his chosen ones. The Old Testament idea of Israel as a “chosen nation” gives rise in the New Testament to the description of God’s people as his “chosen ones” (only here in Luke, but see Mark 13:20, 22, 27; Rom. 8:33; Col. 3:12). The term suggests a strong contrast between them and the ungodly world out of which they are “chosen,” so that the “justice” spoken of here may be understood as the vindication of a persecuted minority. In the end God will make sure that his people do not lose out.

Will he keep putting them off? Various translations have been suggested for this obscure clause. The more usual sense of the verb would give “and he is patient with them,” hence, for example, the REB translation “his chosen, to whom he listens patiently while they cry out to him day and night.” But by different routes these contrasting translations reach the same essential sense: God takes notice of persistent prayers and can be trusted to answer them, even if not immediately.

18:8 when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth? This sentence does not link directly to the parable, and the reintroduction of the hope of the coming of the Son of Man (see 12:40; 17:22–37) shifts the focus from present discipleship into the future. Perhaps the coming of the Son of Man is understood as the time of the vindication of God’s people. In context, the “faith” that is referred to must be the persistence in prayer that the parable has inculcated, and the challenge is to maintain it until vindication comes.

18:9 To some who were confident of their own righteousness. This is another clear interpretive “steer” given by Luke. The preceding parable was told to disciples, but this is apparently for a wider audience. The description fits the “righteous” who stand over against repentant sinners in 5:32, and the attitude that has been displayed by Pharisees throughout the Gospel, especially in their disdain for the sinful company that Jesus kept (5:30; 7:39; 15:2); compare also Jesus’s comment on the Pharisees in 16:14–15. But to conclude that the parable applies only to Pharisees is to miss its point entirely: if the shoe fits, wear it!

18:11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed. Assuming a large number of men praying, we are to envisage two men standing separate from the crowd, but for opposite reasons: this man because he was too good to mix with others, the other keeping “at a distance” because he was too bad. An alternative reading changes the word order to read, “The Pharisee stood and prayed this to (about?) himself.”

God, I thank you that I am not like other people. There is no reason to think that this prayer is insincere: most Pharisees would have been able to claim truthfully to have avoided the sins listed, and to be living a life more strictly governed by God’s law than those of most ordinary people. But the smug self-congratulation is what stands out. It reminds one of the later rabbi who instructed Jewish men to thank God that they had not been born a heathen, a woman, or a slave. If, as was normal, he is praying aloud, the insensitivity is even greater, and an element of self-advertisement is added to his smugness.

18:12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get. These too represent a normal Pharisaic lifestyle (cf. 5:33; 11:42). The (possibly first-century) Christian manual the Didache instructs Christians to fast on Wednesdays and Fridays, not on Mondays and Thursdays as “the hypocrites” do. Both his fasting and his tithing go well beyond the demands of the Old Testament law, but to be a Pharisee was to be committed to a much more rigorous ritual code.

18:13 God, have mercy on me, a sinner. The description of the tax collector’s attitude conveys a sense of personal unworthiness, which, in view of Jesus’s comment in 18:14, we should probably take to include not merely low self-esteem but active repentance (as with the real-life tax collector in 19:1–10). “Have mercy on” is more literally “be propitiated toward”; he is seeking a new relationship with God.

18:14 justified before God. The Greek text has simply “having been justified.” In the original setting of this parable it would be reading too much into this verb to find here the whole Pauline theology of the acquittal of the sinner before God through the atoning sacrifice of Christ. The point is rather that the repentant tax collector was regarded by God as more “just” than the self-satisfied Pharisee. Such a conclusion challenges every conventional notion of “justice.” The basis of God’s assessment of the two men is not a simple record of what they have done but their current attitude toward him.

for all those who exalt themselves . . . and those who humble themselves. Here we have a repetition of 14:11; see comments there.

Theological Insights

1. The unjust judge. This parable raises the paradox that God knows and cares about our needs and yet expects his people to be persistent in praying for them. The “how much more” argument of the parable indicates that God is not like the judge, who needs to be badgered or cajoled into taking action, but the parable does not explain why, then, we still need to pray. The likely answer, that prayer, like all aspects of discipleship, is a partnership involving our will and action rather than a unilateral work of God that overrides our freedom and responsibility, must be supplied from elsewhere.

2. The Pharisee and the tax collector. This is not so much a “how to pray” parable as a sharp challenge to our conventional understanding of “goodness” in relation to God. Like so much in Luke’s Gospel, it turns accepted values upside down. The kingdom of God is the realm of grace, not of achievement. God’s love is not earned; it is freely given to those who are conscious of their need of it and yet their unworthiness for it.

Teaching the Text

These two parables can be taught together as a message on prayer, or separately with emphases on their respective themes of persistence in prayer and humble contrition before God.

1. The unjust judge. Remind listeners of the parable of the dishonest manager (16:1–9). Why did Jesus choose such disreputable characters for his stories? What is achieved by contrasting God with a selfish scoundrel? It is important to stress the “how much more” aspect of the parable. If such an unrighteous judge will respond to persistence, how much more will our loving Father respond. Share from your own experience or solicit others to share experiences of persistent prayer and its results. Were those prayers answered? In what way does it encourage persistent prayer? What would have happened if they had given up praying? This passage also provides an opportunity to discuss the frustration people experience when their prayers are not answered as they hope or expect. It is important to stress that the “justice” God’s people get in the end may not be in this life, but in eternity. Persistent prayer means persistent faith, even to the end. This helps to explain the reference, seemingly out of place, to the Son of Man at the end (18:8). Those who pray persistently even to the end will experience vindication at the coming of the Son of Man.

2. The Pharisee and the tax collector. In your teaching be sure to highlight the fact that, although we think of Pharisees as hypocrites, the original audience would have had great respect for them and complete disdain for the tax collector. Bring the parable into the present day by thinking of highly respected pillars of your society, and of those considered the lowest of the low. Do we still need this message? Is there something deep in our psyche that makes people ask, “What have I done to deserve . . . ?” Is grace still an alien concept for most people? Compare the Pharisee’s attitude with Jesus’s teaching in 17:7–10. How can a religious person get it all so wrong?

Illustrating the Text

Jesus enjoins us to persist in prayer and not give up.

Church History: Augustine of Hippo. For years Augustine’s (354–430) mother, Monica, prayed for him as he lived licentiously, shunning God. Eventually, in response to those prayers, Augustine was wonderfully converted. In his famous work The Confessions, which has been translated into more languages than any Latin writings except those of Virgil, he writes,

“You put forth your hand from on high,” and you drew my soul out of that pit of darkness, when before you my mother, your faithful servant, wept more for me than mothers weep over their children’s dead bodies. By that spirit of faith which she had from you, she saw my death, and you graciously heard her, O Lord. . . . You did not despise her tears when they flowed down from her eyes and watered the earth beneath, in whatsoever place she prayed. Graciously you heard her. . . . For almost nine years passed, in which I wallowed “in the mire of the deep” and in the darkness of error, and although I often strove to rise out of it, I was all the more grievously thrust down again. But all the while, that chaste, devout, and sober widow . . . ceased not in all her hours of prayer to lament over me before you. Her prayers entered into your sight.1

Autobiography: Out of a Far Country: A Gay Son’s Journey to God, a Broken Mother’s Search for Hope, by Christopher Yuan and Angela Yuan. Christopher Yuan, now an adjunct faculty member at Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, lived for years as a gay man, a central figure in St. Louis’s gay community and also heavily involved in selling and using drugs. Arrested for his involvement in drugs, he spent a number of years in jail. For seven years his heartbroken mother prayed faithfully for him, learning how to love him in godly ways and letting God change her. Finally, Christopher submitted his life to the Lord and has spent the years since basing his identity on Christ and living out this testimony before the world. This book (2011), written by both the son and the mother, is a story of hope and persistence.

God prefers a repentant sinner to a self-proclaimer of goodness.

Poetry: “The Apologist’s Evening Prayer,” by C. S. Lewis. In this poem the apologist asks God to deliver him from pretentiousness. At one point the poet prays, “Lord of the narrow gate and needle’s eye, / Take from me all my trumpery lest I die.”2

Story: “Revelation,” by Flannery O’Connor. Few writers expose the heart of pride and hypocrisy as does American author Flannery O’Connor (1925–64). In this story (published posthumously in 1965) a very self-absorbed, proud, middle-class, Southern woman, Ruby Turpin, is always thanking God that he has made her who she is, “a neat clean respectable white woman,”3overweight but with a good complexion and disposition. The story takes place in a doctor’s office, where she experiences a violent encounter that teaches her who will be first in the kingdom of heaven. The story illustrates well this principle.

Teaching the Text by R.T. France, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Fast

Fasting, often linked with prayer, was one avenue of appeal to God in the face of crises, both national and personal. Moses ascended to Mount Sinai and was with God forty days and nights without eating bread or drinking water, both before and after the Israelites’ sin with the golden calf (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 9:8 18). David fasted when his son was dying (2 Sam. 12:15–23). Esther called all the Jews of Susa to fast for three days before she ventured before the king (Esther 4:15–17). Joel called the people to repentance and fasting as the land was devastated by a locust plague (Joel 1:13–14; 2:12). Forty days of fasting, an echo of Moses’ experience, prepared Jesus to face the devil’s temptations (Matt. 4:1–11 pars.).

The OT prophets criticized Israelites who presumed that their religious obligations were met simply by fasting (Isa. 58:1–10; Zech. 7:1–5). When asked why his disciples did not fast and pray, Jesus indicated that sometimes fasting is inappropriate (Matt. 9:14–17 pars.). Luke recorded an addition to Jesus’ statement about new wine in old wineskins: “No one after drinking old wine wants the new, for they say, ‘The old is better’” (Luke 5:39), perhaps suggesting that the accumulation of fasting practices was “new wine” and they ought simply to observe the Day of Atonement.

Heaven

The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2 Cor. 12:2 4, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.

Although God is present everywhere, God is also present in a special way in “heaven.” During Jesus’ earthly ministry, the Father is sometimes described as speaking in “a voice from heaven” (Matt. 3:17). Similarly, Jesus instructs us to address our prayers to “Our Father in heaven” (6:9). Even the specific request in the Lord’s Prayer that “your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (6:10) reminds us that heaven is a place already under God’s full jurisdiction, where his will is presently being done completely and perfectly. Jesus also warns of the dangers of despising “one of these little ones,” because “their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven” (18:10). Jesus “came down from heaven” (John 6:51) for his earthly ministry, and after his death and resurrection, he ascended back “into heaven,” from where he “will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).

Given this strong connection between heaven and God’s presence, there is a natural connection in Scripture between heaven and the ultimate hope of believers. Believers are promised a reward in heaven (“Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven” [Matt. 5:12]), and even now believers can “store up for [themselves] treasures in heaven” (6:20). Even in this present life, “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20), and our hope at death is to “depart and be with Christ, which is better by far” (1:23). Since Christ is currently in heaven, deceased believers are already present with Christ in heaven awaiting his return, when “God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him” (1 Thess. 4:14).

Humble

In the OT, humility often refers to people of low social status, the disenfranchised, and those who suffer oppression and poverty (e.g., Prov. 22:22 23; Amos 2:7; Zech. 7:10). Scripture sometimes associates those socially marginalized with the ethical dimension of humility, thus making the social status equivalent to a subjective spiritual quality (Pss. 22:26; 37:11–17; 146:7–9; Zeph. 3:11–13). Social humiliation, however, does not necessarily lead to humility as a virtue. In a number of instances in the OT, the two remain distinct. In its subjective quality, humility involves submission to one in authority, usually to God (Exod. 10:3; Deut. 8:2–3, 16; Ps. 119:67, 71, 75). On some occasions humility is related to the act of repentance before God (e.g., Zeph. 2:1–3). When paired with “fear of the Lord,” humility implies a person who lives in a posture of pious submission before God (Prov. 15:31–33; 22:4).

Such is the case with Moses, whom the writer of Numbers describes in the following way: “Now Moses was a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth” (Num. 12:3). Moses’ humility in this situation is displayed in his intimate relationship with, and by his submissive attitude toward, the sovereign God (12:4–9).

In the NT, Christians take Christ as their model of humility (Matt. 11:29; Phil. 2:6–11). The NT writers also call on Christians to humble themselves before God (James 4:10; 1 Pet. 5:5–6) as well as others, including their enemies (Rom. 12:14–21; Phil. 2:3).

Mercy

Mercy is a distinguishing characteristic of the nature of God. God is called “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor. 1:3 NRSV [NIV: “Father of compassion”]). God is “rich in mercy” (Eph. 2:4; cf. 2 Sam. 24:14; Dan. 9:9). God’s mercy was demonstrated in his covenantal faithfulness to his people (1 Kings 8:23 24; Mic. 7:18–20). God redeemed the oppressed Israelites from slavery under Pharaoh because of his mercy, which was stirred when he heard their groaning and cry for help.

Jesus Christ lived a life full of mercy. He is, in a sense, the bodily manifestation of God’s mercy. Jesus expressed deep mercy whenever he saw the sick and the lost. The writers of the Gospels describe Jesus’ demonstrations of mercy when he healed the blind, the lame, the deaf, the leprous, the demon-possessed, and the dead (Matt. 9:36; 14:14; 20:34; Mark 1:41; 5:19; 6:34; 8:2; Luke 7:13; John 11:33). Jesus especially had compassion on the crowds, who did not have a spiritual leader, and he compared them to “sheep without a shepherd” (Matt. 9:36).

What is the proper response to God’s mercy and compassion? God expects believers to show the same kind of mercy toward other people. One of the best examples is the parable of the unmerciful servant (Matt. 18:23–35).

Pray

In the OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modern ways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayer does not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer to God, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray to humans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction between the sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in the OT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, such as that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. These should be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, but rather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” in recognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. In the NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.

A presupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and may indeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is not primarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of the one praying, but rather about God changing the circumstances of the one praying.

The depiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of the OT, but there are important developments.

Jesus tells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt. 6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Prayer to God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:19 20; John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26).

Prayer can also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him in the early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. Unlike anything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for their enemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke 23:34; Acts 7:60).

The Holy Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we are able to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is to be done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1 Cor. 14:15).

Jesus encourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke 18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).

Jesus becomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions (Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points (Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offers prayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers that are (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and not give up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overly literalized “pray without ceasing” in 1 Thess. 5:17 NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb. 5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and even now, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, our intercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb. 4:14–16).

Righteousness

Righteousness is an important theme in both Testaments of the Bible. The concept includes faithfulness, justice, uprightness, correctness, loyalty, blamelessness, purity, salvation, and innocence. Because the theme is related to justification, it has important implications for the doctrine of salvation.

Being careful to avoid imposing Western philosophical categories onto OT texts, we may say that the core idea of righteousness is conformity to God’s person and will in moral uprightness, justness, justice, integrity, and faithfulness. Behind the many and varied uses of righteousness language in the OT stands the presupposition that God himself is righteous in the ultimate sense (e.g., Ezra 9:15; Isa. 45:21; Zeph. 3:5). Righteousness is the expression of his holiness in relationship to others (Isa. 5:16), and all other nuances of righteousness in the biblical texts are derived from this.

Related to humans, righteousness is often found as the opposite of wickedness. Righteousness often occurs in evaluative contexts, where it relates to proper conduct with respect to God, the order of the world as he created it, the covenant, or law (e.g., Deut. 6:25). God reigns in righteousness and justice (e.g., Ps. 97:2), and humans should align their conduct with this righteous reign. Righteousness can be expressed as personal integrity with phrases such as “my righteousness” (2 Sam. 22:21, 25; Ps. 7:8) and “their righteousness” (1 Sam. 26:23). Unrighteousness is found in poetic parallel to injustice (e.g., Jer. 22:13); the unjust are parallel with the wicked (Ps. 82:2).

Righteousness language is more rare in the Gospels than one might expect in light of OT and Jewish intertestamental usage. These references fit with the Jewish setting: righteousness is required of God’s people, and unrighteousness is to be avoided. Righteousness is proper conduct with respect to God or Torah (Matt. 21:32) in contrast to wickedness (Matt. 13:49). Righteousness could be conceived as one’s own (e.g., Luke 18:9) and has its reward (Matt. 10:41). While the specific terms related to righteousness are infrequent in the Gospels, the broader concept of conformity to God’s will is widely apparent in calls for repentance, personal moral uprightness, mercy, and concern for the marginalized. The NT Epistles continue these general strands of the concept. Righteousness is related to personal conduct (1 Thess. 2:10; 1 Tim. 6:11; 2 Tim. 2:22; 1 Pet. 2:24) and is contrasted with wickedness (2 Cor. 6:14); it is a matter of doing, not knowing (Rom. 2:13). An example of righteousness in doing is the kindness shown by the prostitute Rahab, who hid the Israelite spies (James 2:25).

The NT does signal some new dimensions related to righteousness. In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5 7), Jesus extends the requirements of righteousness to conformity to his own teaching and directives, a shocking display of authority. In his mission to call sinners rather than the “righteous” (e.g., Mark 2:17), Jesus implicitly questions the righteousness of the “righteous.” In similar manner, personal righteousness in terms of a righteousness of one’s own is negative in the NT (Rom. 10:3; Phil. 3:6; cf. Luke 18:9).

The NT continues the OT theme of righteousness as it relates to God himself. God is righteous (John 17:25; Rom. 3:5; 9:14; Heb. 6:10; cf. Matt. 6:33). His judgments are righteous (Rom. 2:5), and his commands and laws are righteous (Rom. 7:12; 8:4). God is a righteous judge (2 Tim. 4:8). His saving activity is righteous; he does not compromise his own justice in justifying the ungodly (Rom. 3:24–26). The righteousness of God is contrasted with human unrighteousness and wickedness (Rom. 3:5; James 1:20). Since God reigns over creation in righteousness, human conduct should conform to that standard (e.g., Rom. 14:17). Jesus is also noted as righteous (Acts 3:14; 7:52; 22:14; 1 Pet. 3:18; 1 John 2:1, 29). He fulfilled righteousness in the absolute sense of demonstrating complete conformity to the nature and will of God (e.g., 1 Pet. 3:18). He also fulfilled God’s righteousness in the sense of his saving activity toward humans (e.g., 2 Pet. 1:1).

Tax Collector

In the Roman Empire, tax collectors (KJV: “publicans”) were employed to help collect taxes in the provinces. People bid for the job of tax collector, and they were compensated by collecting more than the required tax from the people. Tax collectors were despised by Jews as greedy because of the excessive profits they reaped. They also were counted as traitors because they worked for the Romans. In the NT, tax collectors often are associated with Gentiles and sinners (Matt. 5:46 47; 11:19; 21:32).

Jesus was criticized by the Jewish leaders for eating with “tax collectors and sinners” (Matt. 9:11). Jesus welcomed and taught tax collectors (Luke 5:29; 15:1). Matthew, one of Jesus’ disciples, was a tax collector (Matt. 10:3). Zacchaeus was a “chief tax collector,” which probably indicates that he was contracted with the Romans to collect taxes over a specific area, and he supervised others who did the actual collecting (Luke 19:2).

Direct Matches

God

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

Imagery of God

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

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

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

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

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

Names and Attributes of God

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

God of the Trinity

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

Parable

The word “parable” is used to speak of a particular literary form that communicates indirectly by means of comparative language, often for the purpose of challenging the listener to accept or reject a new way of thinking about a particular matter. Parables regularly incorporate concrete and accessible images from the daily life of the audience, and often they are terse and pointed, mentioning only the details relevant for an effective comparison. However, any attempt to define the term “parable” in a clear and concise way is complicated by the fact that both the Hebrew (mashal) and the Greek (parabolē) words regularly translated by the English word “parable” have much broader connotations. For instance, in the OT mashal can designate proverbs (Prov. 1:1), riddles (Ezek. 17:2), prophetic utterances (Num. 23:7, 18; 24:3, 15, 20, 21, 23), and sayings (1 Sam. 10:12); similarly, in the NT parabolē denotes proverbs (Luke 4:23), riddles (Mark 3:23), analogies (Mark 7:17), and more. Therefore, no comprehensive definition of parables is agreed upon by biblical scholars, and very little said about parables in general will apply to every parable.

Parables in the Bible

Although not designated with the Hebrew word mashal, the story of the trees (Judg. 9:7–15) and the story of the ewe lamb (2 Sam. 12:1–4) may be considered to be parables. Like many parables, the story about the ewe lamb told by Nathan prompts its audience, in this case David, to condemn the actions of a character in the parable before being confronted with the fact that the character and his conduct are symbolic of David himself. The parable is the vehicle used to bring about self-condemnation of its audience.

Although Jesus is not the only speaker of parables in the ancient world, the Gospels narrate a tremendous number of parables within his teaching. The major parables of Jesus are listed in table 4. The diversity of form represented in this list is striking. Some of the parables consist of short, relatively simple comparisons that lack the development of any significant story line. This is true, for instance, of the parables of the mustard seed, yeast, hidden treasure, and the pearl. Each of these offers a simple simile to explain some feature of the kingdom of God, a frequent topic in Jesus’ parables, and may include an additional sentence of clarification.

Table 4. Major Parables of Jesus

Wise and foolish builders (Matt. 7:24-27; Luke 6:46-49)

Sower and the soils (Matt. 13:3–8, 18–23; Mark 4:3–8, 14–20; Luke 8:5–8, 11–15)

Weeds (Matt. 13:24-30, 36-43)

Mustard seed (Matt. 13:31–32; Mark 4:30–32; Luke 13:18–19)

Yeast (Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:20-21)

Hidden treasure (Matt. 13:44)

Pearl (Matt. 13:45-46)

Net (Matt. 13:47-50)

Lost sheep (Matt. 18:12-14; Luke 15:4-7)

Unmerciful servant (Matt. 18:23-35)

Workers in the vineyard (Matt. 20:1-16)

Two sons (Matt. 21:28-32)

Wicked tenants (Matt. 21:33–44; Mark 12:1–11; Luke 20:9–18)

Wedding banquet (Matt. 22:2-14)

Faithful and wise servant (Matt. 24:45-51; Luke 12:42-48)

Ten virgins (Matt. 25:1-13)

Talents (Matt. 25:14–30; Luke 19:12–27)

Sheep and goats (Matt. 25:31-46)

Growing seeds (Mark 4:26-29)

Money lender (Luke 7:41-47)

Good Samritan (Luke 10:30-37)

Friend in need (Luke 11:5-8)

Rich fool (Luke 12:16-21)

Unfruitful fig tree (Luke 13:6-9)

Lowest seat (Luke 14:7-14)

Great banquet (Luke 14:16-24)

Cost of discipleship (Luke 14:28-33)

Lost coin (Luke 15:8-10)

Lost (prodigal) son (Luke 15:11-32)

Shrewd manager (Luke 16:1-8)

Rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31)

Persistent widow (Luke 18:2-8)

Pharisee and tax collector (Luke 18:10-14)

Parables such as the good Samaritan and the prodigal son, on the other hand, are significantly longer, contain developed plots, and present several central characters. Stories of this sort may use the characters as examples of behavior to be either emulated or avoided, as in the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector. Such parables may remain open-ended in an attempt to force the listeners into a decision about what should happen (the unfruitful fig tree), or they may include a clear, concluding explanation that leaves no doubt as to how the audience should change their belief or behavior as a result of the parable’s teaching (the moneylender). The degree to which each of these parables directly addresses the intended audience and the intended topic can vary greatly. For instance, although the parable of the rich fool directly addresses the subject matter of material wealth, the anonymity of the rich man in the story does not openly condemn any particular member of Jesus’ audience. Alternatively, a parable may treat a subject that differs from the intended one and expect the listener to transfer the lesson to another topic. This is the case with the parable of the weeds, which speaks explicitly about farming. Nonetheless, when the disciples seek an explanation of this parable, Jesus indicates that it is to be understood as speaking about that feature of the kingdom of heaven whereby the sons of the kingdom and the sons of the evil one intermingle in the world until the end of the age, when the sons of the evil one will be separated to face a fiery judgment (Matt. 13:36–43).

Other parables, such as that of the lost sheep, revolve around a central question posed to the listeners. By asking “who among you” would behave in the way described, the parable anticipates a negative response that asserts that no one would act in the manner detailed in the parable. The NIV frequently inserts the phrase “suppose one of you” in places where the introductory question “who among you” appears in Greek.

Purpose of Jesus’ Teaching in Parables

It is quite clear that Jesus regularly employed parables in his teaching, but his reason for doing so is less evident. Jesus’ own somewhat perplexing statement in Mark 4:10–12 indicates that his parables have the dual purpose of both revealing and concealing the secret of the kingdom, but one may wonder how it is that parables perform both functions simultaneously. If the goal of comparative language is to make clearer a concept or idea that is difficult, then certainly Jesus’ parables function in this way. Through the simple, accessible, and concrete word pictures that are his parables, Jesus discloses many characteristics and features of the kingdom of God, which is at best something of an enigma to his audience. By speaking to the crowds, albeit at times in an exaggerated fashion, about the things that they know, such as farming, banquets, baking, and other elements of everyday life, Jesus expands their understanding of what they do not know. However, the indirect quality of parables simultaneously blocks spontaneous understanding and therefore requires the audience to engage in additional reflection to ensure that they have truly grasped what is being taught. Likewise, the ability to address an issue by slyly sneaking up on it from behind results in parables that initially conceal their true purpose of convincing the listeners of a new way of thinking or behaving such that the conviction they are meant to induce comes with a surprise kick at the end.

Interpretation of Parables

Interpretation over the centuries. Throughout church history until the nineteenth century, parables were widely interpreted by means of the allegorical method. That is, all the surface details of parables were identified as symbols of some deeper spiritual truth. A classic example of allegorizing is Augustine’s interpretation of the parable of the good Samaritan, whereby he interpreted surface details of the text according to allegorical equations (see table 5). Allegorical interpretations of the same parable by other Christians, however, did not always result in the same interpretations of the symbols. For this reason, most scholars today reject the excessive allegorization of Augustine and others throughout church history. However, how many details in a parable, if any, are to be interpreted allegorically remains a central question in parable interpretation. For instance, in the parable of the mustard seed, are the mustard seed and the plant that it produces allegories for the unobtrusive beginnings yet manifest results of the kingdom? If so, what then of the man and the birds also mentioned in the parable? Are they symbols of a deeper spiritual truth such that the man is to be equated with God, or are they included only to augment the teaching of the parable such that the birds merely highlight the extreme size of the tree into which the seed has grown?

Table 5. Augustine’s Allegorical Interpretation of the Good Samaritan

Details in the Parable and its Allegorical Equivalent:

The man = Adam

Jerusalem = The heavenly city

Jericho = The moon (a symbol of mortality)

The robbers = The devil

Beating the man = Persuading him to sin

Priest and Levite = The Old Testament priesthood

Samaritan = Christ

Binding of wounds = Restraint of sin

Oil = Comfort of hope

Animal = Incarnation

Inn = Church

Innkeeper = Apostle Paul

The work of the German scholar Adolf Jülicher at the end of the nineteenth century has widely affected parable interpretation since that time. Jülicher asserted that parables are not allegories and therefore should not be interpreted allegorically at all. Instead, he argued that parables have only one main point, normally a general, religious statement. Interpreters since Jülicher continue to debate how much of a parable is significant and how many points of correspondence are intended. More-recent views have posited that Jülicher went too far in maintaining a strict distinction between parable and allegory, and many interpreters believe that allegorical elements are present in parables, with perhaps the main characters in a parable being the most likely candidates for allegorical interpretation. This renewed openness to allegorical features in parables is due in part to the recognition that the Gospels record Jesus’ own tendency to offer allegorical interpretations of his parables when his disciples inquire as to their meaning. This is most clearly seen in the parable of the sower and the soils, which includes details such as seed, birds, the sun, and thorns. Jesus reveals that the seed is to be interpreted as the message about the kingdom, the birds stand for the evil one, the sun is representative of persecution because of the gospel, and the thorns indicate worries and wealth (Matt. 13:18–23).

Guidelines for interpreting parables. It is generally best to recognize that not all parables are identical, and that one should consider several possible interpretive strategies before determining which approach best fits any given parable. Nonetheless, some broad guidelines for the interpretation of parables include the following:

1. The characters and plots within parables are literary creations and are not historical. The parable of the lost sheep is not a historical rec-ord of a certain shepherd whose sheep went missing. No actual invitation was issued for the great banquet in the parable. Rather, in a parable the listener is brought into a narrative world controlled by the storyteller and by implication has no need for details that the speaker fails to provide. Therefore, it does not matter whether the shepherd himself was at fault in the loss of the sheep, and the choice of food set before the banquet guests is inconsequential.

2. Parables often follow the principle of end stress. Interpreters should carefully consider how the parable ends when determining the meaning the parable is intended to convey. At times an explanatory conclusion to the parable is included and may be helpful in directing the reader toward the topic that is really being addressed. This is the case in the parable of the two sons, in which Jesus’ concluding explanation identifies tax collectors and prostitutes as those who are entering the kingdom ahead of those who have received John’s prophetic message but failed to accept it.

Recent studies on parables that reflect issues raised by two fields of study respectively known as form criticism and redaction criticism are likely to question the accuracy of such concluding statements as well as any introductory comments to parables that may also be presented in the Gospel text. Many scholars ask if and to what extent the Gospel writers made changes to the parables that they record. They wonder whether it is possible to discern the original context and circumstance in which Jesus relayed his parables, or whether the details of the original context had been forgotten by the time that the evangelists wrote. Could it be that any introductory and concluding comments included with some parables are not authentic to Jesus’ ministry but instead reflect issues that arose in the early church? In spite of the doubts of some, more-conservative scholars have presented arguments for the continued trustworthiness of the Gospel accounts about Jesus’ teaching including introductory or concluding statements associated with his parables.

3. Look for the use of OT symbols in Jesus’ parables. The parables of Jesus and the parables recorded in other rabbinical literature are replete with similar figures and images. Kings, banquets, weddings, farmers, debtors, and more appear with frequency; they perhaps developed into stock images to be used in stories in the ancient world. If such details appear in a parable, the interpreter should consider strongly whether some allegorical meaning is intended whereby a kingly figure represents God, a son represents the people of God, and a banquet indicates a time of coming judgment or reward.

4. Interpreters should exercise extreme caution regarding doctrinal teaching drawn from a parable, particularly if such doctrine cannot be confirmed by the theological teaching found in a nonparabolic portion of Scripture. For instance, in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, is one to conclude that conversations can occur between the dead who reside in hell and those who reside in heaven? Likewise, should one learn that it is possible for the deceased human to be sent back to the living with a message from God? These doctrinal issues seem to be outside the range of teaching intended by the parable, and support for these ideas cannot be found in other biblical texts.

5. In recognition of the indirect nature of the communication in parables, some interpreters question whether a parable’s meaning can be reproduced in propositional language. In other words, can the meaning of a parable be expressed in nonparabolic language, or is some necessary component lost when one changes the form? Similarly, is it possible for people who have heard the story of the good Samaritan repeatedly to be struck by the confrontational force that was central to its initial reception? Not only are the images of Samaritans and Levites foreign to the modern listener, but also the familiarity with the story that has resulted from its retelling over time has domesticated the parable such that the details that were meant to shock and surprise are now anticipated and predictable. In this way, are parables like jokes that have been repeated too many times until one becomes inoculated against the punch line? Because of these concerns about the inability of today’s listeners to truly hear the parable as it was meant to be heard, some interpreters may wish to consider how it could be recast with images common to today’s audience and retold in such a way that the listeners experience the surprising twist that the initial audiences felt.

Righteousness

Old Testament

Divine righteousness. Being careful to avoid imposing Western philosophical categories onto OT texts, we may say that the core idea of righteousness is conformity to God’s person and will in moral uprightness, justness, justice, integrity, and faithfulness. Behind the many and varied uses of righteousness language in the OT stands the presupposition that God himself is righteous in the ultimate sense (e.g., Ezra 9:15; Isa. 45:21; Zeph. 3:5). Righteousness is the expression of his holiness in relationship to others (Isa. 5:16), and all other nuances of righteousness in the biblical texts are derived from this. Either he reveals what is right or demonstrates rightness in his activity. God’s decrees and laws are righteous (Deut. 4:8; Ps. 119); his will is righteous (Deut. 33:21); his acts are righteous (Judg. 5:11; 1 Sam. 12:7; Ps. 71:24); his judgments are righteous (Ps. 7:11); and he always judges with righteousness (Ps. 96:13). In OT texts, divine righteousness is often linked to God’s saving activity, particularly in Psalms (e.g., Ps. 71) and in Isa. 40–66. Divine righteousness is much broader than deliberative justice (i.e., punishing the wicked and rewarding the righteous), though it does include it.

Human righteousness. Related to humans, righteousness is often found as the opposite of wickedness. Righteousness often occurs in evaluative contexts, where it relates to proper conduct with respect to God, the order of the world as he created it, the covenant, or law (e.g., Deut. 6:25). God reigns in righteousness and justice (e.g., Ps. 97:2), and humans should align their conduct with this righteous reign. Righteousness can be expressed as personal integrity with phrases such as “my righteousness” (2 Sam. 22:21, 25; Ps. 7:8) and “their righteousness” (1 Sam. 26:23). Unrighteousness is found in poetic parallel to injustice (e.g., Jer. 22:13); the unjust are parallel with the wicked (Ps. 82:2).

It seems likely that the OT understanding of righteousness was more concrete and less absolute than the typical thinking of most contemporary Western Christians. A more absolute way of understanding righteousness might lead one to think that a truly righteous person is sinless. While we do have references to absolute righteousness in the OT (e.g., Ps. 143:2; cf. Job 4:17; 25:4; Isa. 64:6–7), there are many more references to a righteousness grounded in particular or generalized situations (e.g., Pss. 32:11; 64:10). Another way of unpacking this conceptual difference is the helpful distinction between “ordinary” and “absolute” righteousness. Ordinary righteousness reflects the kind of righteousness that we intend when making comments such as “my wife is a righteous woman.” This means, taken in broad perspective, that her life is characterized predominantly by righteousness. This statement is not making a claim of sinlessness, absolute righteousness. The OT offers examples of comparative righteousness between people (e.g., Gen. 38:26; 1 Sam. 24:17; Jer. 3:11). Absolute righteousness is different from this. It is the extraordinary righteousness that we see in the person and work of God; he is righteous and without sin, totally holy in his dealings.

Noncanonical Jewish documents from the intertestamental period, while varying greatly in individual perspective, generally affirm OT views of human and divine righteousness. In these documents righteousness often is associated with mercy, goodness, justness, and concern for the poor and is contrasted with wickedness.

In Greco-Roman society, righteousness was one of the cardinal virtues and thus had an important influence in society. Greco-Roman righteousness did have some measure of abstractness as a kind of external norm, but this abstractness should not obscure the fact that righteousness often had a relational component in Greco-Roman literature and life. Righteous and unrighteous behaviors often were embedded in interpersonal relationships. Unrighteous deeds not only violated “transcendent” standards of righteousness, but also impacted humans.

New Testament

Ordinary human righteousness. Righteousness language is more rare in the Gospels than one might expect in light of OT and Jewish intertestamental usage. These references fit with the Jewish setting: righteousness is required of God’s people, and unrighteousness is to be avoided. Righteousness is proper conduct with respect to God or Torah (Matt. 21:32) in contrast to wickedness (Matt. 13:49). Righteousness could be conceived as one’s own (e.g., Luke 18:9) and has its reward (Matt. 10:41). While the specific terms related to righteousness are infrequent in the Gospels, the broader concept of conformity to God’s will is widely apparent in calls for repentance, personal moral uprightness, mercy, and concern for the marginalized. The NT Epistles continue these general strands of the concept. Righteousness is related to personal conduct (1 Thess. 2:10; 1 Tim. 6:11; 2 Tim. 2:22; 1 Pet. 2:24) and is contrasted with wickedness (2 Cor. 6:14); it is a matter of doing, not knowing (Rom. 2:13). An example of righteousness in doing is the kindness shown by the prostitute Rahab, who hid the Israelite spies (James 2:25).

The NT does signal some new dimensions related to righteousness. In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7), Jesus extends the requirements of righteousness to conformity to his own teaching and directives, a shocking display of authority. In his mission to call sinners rather than the “righteous” (e.g., Mark 2:17), Jesus implicitly questions the righteousness of the “righteous.” In similar manner, personal righteousness in terms of a righteousness of one’s own is negative in the NT (Rom. 10:3; Phil. 3:6; cf. Luke 18:9).

Divine righteousness. The NT continues the OT theme of righteousness as it relates to God himself. God is righteous (John 17:25; Rom. 3:5; 9:14; Heb. 6:10; cf. Matt. 6:33). His judgments are righteous (Rom. 2:5), and his commands and laws are righteous (Rom. 7:12; 8:4). God is a righteous judge (2 Tim. 4:8). His saving activity is righteous; he does not compromise his own justice in justifying the ungodly (Rom. 3:24–26). The righteousness of God is contrasted with human unrighteousness and wickedness (Rom. 3:5; James 1:20). Since God reigns over creation in righteousness, human conduct should conform to that standard (e.g., Rom. 14:17). Jesus is also noted as righteous (Acts 3:14; 7:52; 22:14; 1 Pet. 3:18; 1 John 2:1, 29). He fulfilled righteousness in the absolute sense of demonstrating complete conformity to the nature and will of God (e.g., 1 Pet. 3:18). He also fulfilled God’s righteousness in the sense of his saving activity toward humans (e.g., 2 Pet. 1:1).

“The righteousness of God” and extra-ordinary human righteousness. There is a significant OT connection between God’s righteousness and his faithfulness in saving activity (e.g., Psalms; Isa. 40–66). Although there are glimpses of righteousness related to God’s saving activity outside of Paul’s Letter to the Romans (e.g., Matt. 5:10; 6:33), a technical phrase, “the righteousness of God,” is used in three important texts in Romans (1:17; 3:21–22 [2×]; 10:3 [2×]). In the gospel, “the righteousness of God” is revealed, where “righteousness of God” could mean his divine righteousness in some sense, righteousness from God (NIV), God’s saving activity as related to his righteousness in fulfilling his covenant faithfulness (e.g., Psalms), or some combination of these.

The righteousness of God is further discussed in Rom. 3:21: “the righteousness of God” has now been revealed apart from the Mosaic law, though the OT testifies about it (cf. Rom. 4 and Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11; Heb. 10:38). This righteousness of God is clarified in that it is by trust in Jesus Christ for all, both Jews and Gentiles. The “righteousness of God” may be distinguished from righteousness as a character quality of God (Rom. 3:25–26). In fact, it must be, for God’s righteousness as a character quality was revealed in the OT, whereas “the righteousness of God” is “apart from the [Mosaic] law” (3:21).

In Rom. 10:3 Paul comments that the Israelites are ignorant of “the righteousness of God”; they are seeking to establish their own righteousness because they are not submitting to “the righteousness of God.” The Israelites certainly knew of God’s righteousness in terms of his character, judgments, and expectations of his people. The lack of submission to “the righteousness of God” occurs in the context of the Jewish rejection of Jesus (e.g., 9:32–33; 10:9–13). And Jesus is the key to understanding “the righteousness of God” in the other texts also.

In Rom. 1:17 the righteousness of God is revealed in the gospel, which is the power of God for salvation to all who trust in Jesus (1:3–5, 16). The righteousness of God in 3:21–22 is related to trust in Jesus (3:22, 25–26), who as a sacrifice of atonement (3:25) enables the justification and redemption of sinners (3:24, 26). In Jesus we become the righteousness of God (2 Cor. 5:21). The righteousness of God, then, is God’s saving activity revealed and manifested in the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ, whereby sinners are justified as both innocent and righteous in Christ.

Sinner

A person who fails to live up to God’s standard of holiness and righteousness. As descendants of Adam, infected with a sinful nature, all of humankind fits this definition (Ps. 14:3; Rom. 3:10). In biblical terms, “sinner” can also be used in contrast with the self-righteous, who do not see their sinfulness. In this sense, a sinner is someone who is humbled before God and who recognizes his or her need for God’s grace (Luke 5:30–32; 18:10–14). See also Sin.

Tithe

An offering of a tenth of the whole. Abram gives Melchizedek a tenth (Gen. 14:20; Heb. 7:2–9), and Jacob promises God a tenth (Gen. 28:22). These occasions reflect a practice already established in patriarchal times.

Under Moses, Israel is to give God a tithe of all its crops, flocks, and herds (Lev. 27:30–32). These tithes are received by the Levites for their sustenance; they in turn tithe from all that they have received (Num. 18:25–32). Deuteronomy specifies a yearly tithe eaten by the worshipers and every three years a storehouse tithe to provide for the Levites and for aliens, the fatherless, and widows (Deut. 14:22–29). Hezekiah (2 Chron. 31:5–8) and, later, Nehemiah (Neh. 10:37–38; 12:44–47; 13:10–13) reestablish this system. Malachi warns against slackness in tithing (Mal. 3:8–10).

Amos uses irony to underline that tithing cannot replace righteousness (Amos 4:4). Similarly, Jesus condemns scribes and Pharisees for neglecting justice, mercy, and faithfulness while tithing meticulously; instead, they should practice all of these (Matt. 23:23; cf. Luke 11:42; 18:11–12).

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because Luke 18:9-14 is mentioned in the definition.

Gestures

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

Head

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Body

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Clothes and Shoes

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

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

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

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

Prophetic Gestures

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

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

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.

Justification

Justification is an important topic because of its relationship to Christian salvation and sanctification. The word “justification” occurs only five times in the Bible (NIV), but related words comprise significant themes in both Testaments. Part of the difficulty in the exposition of “justification” is English terminology. English has two word groups that express the same conceptual range for single word groups in Hebrew and Greek. So in addition to words related to justification, such as “justly,” “just,” and the very important verb “to justify,” no discussion can avoid the terms “righteous” and “righteousness.” Care must also be exercised in allowing the biblical texts to determine word meaning, since both “justice” and “righteousness” terminology can have contemporary connotations foreign to the biblical texts.

Justification is often related to a legal setting in both Jewish and Greco-Roman contexts, with its judge, defendant, evidence, criteria for evaluating the evidence, verdicts, and the implications of verdicts. This is a good word picture for justification and is used in the Bible itself. As long as the legal picture is extended to everyday affairs, moral and ethical concerns, and different criteria for evidence evaluation, it is a fine starting point for understanding the doctrine of justification.

Common and Extraordinary Justification

The salvific importance of justification has greatly shaped the exposition that follows. Justification has been somewhat awkwardly divided into common and extraordinary justification, with the latter bearing a significant relationship to the doctrine of salvation. The former is discussed only briefly in OT and NT paragraphs. In common justification, a person’s works or deeds are judged according to a standard of righteousness. Righteous deeds are judged and given the verdict “righteous.” Unrighteous deeds are judged and given the verdict “unrighteous.” Extraordinary justification occurs when an unrighteous person or deed is judged and given the verdict “righteous” by some supernatural intervention.

Common justification in the OT may be described in various contexts: (1) in comparative or relative righteousness between humans (e.g., Gen. 38:26; Ezek. 16:51–52); (2) in specific or concrete situations with God as judge (e.g., 2 Chron. 6:23: “Judge between your servants, condemning the guilty and bringing down on their heads what they have done, and vindicating the innocent by treating them in accordance with their innocence”; (3) in specific or concrete situations with a human as judge (e.g., Deut. 25:1: “When people have a dispute, they are to take it to court and the judges will decide the case, acquitting the innocent and condemning the guilty”); (4) in giving justice (e.g., 2 Sam. 15:4; cf. Ps. 82:3); (5) in proving correct or right (e.g., Ps. 51:4; Isa. 43:9).

Extraordinary justification is much rarer in the OT. A possible example is Dan. 8:14, where in a vision the sanctuary is desecrated and after a time “will be reconsecrated” or, in other terms, “will be justified holy.” It seems quite unusual that the unholy “is justified” as holy. In Isa. 45:25 we find the promise that “in the Lord all the offspring of Israel shall be justified” (ESV). Another verse declares that Yahweh’s “righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities” (Isa. 53:11). The need for extraordinary justification and the deficiency of ordinary justification is clear in Ps. 143:1–2: “Lord, hear my prayer, listen to my cry for mercy; in your faithfulness and righteousness come to my relief. Do not bring your servant into judgment, for no one living is righteous before you” (cf. Job 4:17; 25:4). The last phrase might be translated “no person will be justified before you” and is cited by the apostle Paul in Gal. 2:16 (cf. Rom. 3:20).

In the NT, there are fewer references to common justification than in the OT and a much greater development of extraordinary justification, predominantly in the Pauline letters (for similar concepts in different terms, see, e.g., “kingdom of God” in the Synoptic Gospels or “eternal life” in the Gospel of John). Common justification in the NT may be described in various contexts: (1) in a specific situation with a human or God as judge and a person’s behavior as the object of judgment (e.g., Luke 16:15; 1 Cor. 4:3–4; perhaps Luke 10:29; 18:9–14); (2) when “wisdom is proved right,” meaning vindicated by the results (Matt. 11:19; Luke 7:35); (3) in the release from demands no longer binding (Rom. 6:7; cf. 1 Cor. 6:1); (4) in being proved morally right in fullness (1 Tim. 3:16; cf. Rom. 3:4).

Paul and Justification

Extraordinary justification in the NT is characteristic of the apostle Paul. Luke’s report of Paul’s synagogue sermon in Pisidian Antioch concludes with a brief overview of extraordinary justification (Acts 13:38–39). Paul proclaims that forgiveness of sins is available through Jesus. Every person trusting in Jesus is being justified “from all things from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses” (NKJV). The forgiveness of sins leads to the verdict “innocent” even though sinners apart from Christ are guilty before God of their unrighteous deeds.

In Gal. 2:16 the verb “justify” is used three times: (1) “a person is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ”; (2) “we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law”; (3) “by the works of the law no one will be justified.” The statements may be paraphrased in the active voice (expressing the implied subject) as in the following: (1) God is justifying a person not by works of Mosaic law, but by trust in Jesus Christ; (2) God justified us by trust in Christ, not by works of Mosaic law; (3) God will justify no person by works of Mosaic law. In Gal. 2:16, God is the subject, the agent who justifies (cf. 3:8; Rom. 3:26, 30; 4:5; 8:30, 33). The basis of justification is faith in Christ, not works of the Mosaic law. The meaning of the verb “justify” may be discerned from the context. This justification is related to the gospel (e.g., Gal. 2:14) and to receiving the Spirit (Gal. 3:2, 14), and the verdict of “righteous” for the person trusting in Jesus (Gal. 2:21; cf. 3:6, 11; 5:5; 1 Cor. 1:30; 2 Cor. 5:21).

Justification and righteousness are important themes in Paul’s letter to the Romans. At the beginning of the letter, Paul declares that he is not ashamed of the gospel because it is the power of God that brings salvation to all who believe. In the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith (Rom. 1:16–17). Paul argues in Rom. 1:18–3:20, a section abounding with righteousness language, that all humanity, Gentile and Jew, is under the power of sin (3:10), that no one is righteous (e.g., 3:10–18). All are subject to condemnation (i.e., the declaration of “guilty” and “unrighteous” [cf. 5:16]) rather than justification (i.e., the declaration of “innocent” and “righteous”). No human will be justified before God by works of the law; the law provides knowledge of sin (3:20).

The state resulting from this unrighteousness and sin is God’s wrath (e.g., Rom. 1:18). It is into this situation, this sad state of affairs where all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, that the righteousness of God, God’s saving activity long anticipated in the OT, is revealed in the person and work of Jesus Christ (3:21; 10:3). This righteousness is from God (3:22), a righteousness not related to human fulfillment of Mosaic law or righteousness of one’s own (Rom. 3:21; 9:31–32; 10:4; Phil. 3:6, 9; cf. Eph. 2:8–9). This righteousness comes from God by trust in Christ (Rom. 3:22; 5:1; 9:30; 10:10; Phil. 3:9). By trust in Christ, God justifies each human in his freely given grace, whereby the human is redeemed from unrighteousness and sin (Rom. 3:24).

The death of Jesus is the sacrifice of atonement by which forgiveness of sins is accomplished and made effectual in the human when one trusts in Jesus’ sacrifice (Rom. 3:25). This sacrifice demonstrates God’s righteousness (3:26) because he justly judges human sin in Jesus. The one who had no sin of his own became sin for us (2 Cor. 5:21; cf. Rom. 5:6, 8; 1 Cor. 15:3). In merciful forbearance, God passes over sins previously committed, delaying the execution of his justice, that he might justify the ungodly person who trusts in Jesus’ person and work (Rom. 3:26; cf. 4:5). This justification is of a different nature than ordinary righteousness on the human level or of the kind that can be obtained by observing the Mosaic law. In this extraordinary justification, God reckons a human innocent of sin and righteous by trust and apart from works of Mosaic law (3:28). Both Jew and Gentile are reckoned righteous under the same condition: trust in Jesus (3:29–30).

Although the revelation of the person and work of Jesus the Messiah was relatively new at the time Paul wrote his letter to the Romans, Paul emphasizes in Rom. 4 that this idea of justification by trust and not by works goes back to the forefather of the Jews, Abraham. Quoting Gen. 15:6, Paul demonstrates from Scripture that trust, not works, was the basis of extraordinary justification: Abraham believes God, and it is credited to him as righteousness. God justifies Abraham (i.e., God credits righteousness to Abraham) on the basis of Abraham’s trust in God. Paul also cites most of Ps. 32:1–2, from a Davidic psalm, to further demonstrate the consistency of justification by faith with previous revelation. In this quotation the crediting of righteousness apart from works is related to the forgiveness of transgression, where the verdict of the guilty becomes “innocent.” “He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification” (Rom. 4:25). Extraordinary justification of unrighteous sinners leads to the twofold verdict: innocent and righteous.

Titus 3:3–6 expresses the same doctrine of extraordinary justification. Humanity is under sin when Jesus appears. God saves in his mercy through Jesus, not on the basis of righteous human works. This saving activity is equivalent to being justified by Jesus’ grace (3:7).

James and Justification

There are three references to justification in James 2:14–26, which appear at first glance to contradict extraordinary justification as presented by Paul. In support of the claim that faith without deeds is useless (James 2:20), two questions are asked: Was not Abraham considered righteous for what he did, and was not Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did (i.e., justified by works) (2:21, 25)? James 2:24 rephrases this as a proposition: a person is justified by what he or she does, not by faith alone. The context of 2:14–26 demonstrates that although the terms “faith,” “works,” and “justification” are the same as Paul’s, they have different meanings for James. Faith appears in this passage as mere knowledge (2:19), without any implications for living (2:14–18). For Paul, faith is a radical commitment of trust that submits one’s entire life under the lordship of Christ, something much different from the mere belief portrayed as faith by James. Deeds or works in the James passage are the concrete manifestations of what one believes (2:18). Works in the Pauline justification passages are set in opposition to trust in the person and work of the Lord Jesus. Outside of the justification context, Paul is an advocate of works properly related to faith, righteousness, and holiness (e.g., Eph. 2:10; 1 Thess. 1:3; cf. Rom. 1:5; 6:1–23; 8:4; 12:1–2). Justification is also different. Pauline justification most commonly relates to the extraordinary justification of declaring unrighteous sinners “innocent” and “righteous” based on trust in Christ. Justification in James has greater ties to common justification, focusing on the righteousness of a specific act at a specific time.

Other Views on Justification

Shortly after the age of the apostles, the doctrine of justification was deemphasized in many circles of church life in favor of a more moralistic system. One group has repeatedly argued for centuries that justification infuses righteousness into the believer, and then the believer must do good works to complete justification. This conception fails to differentiate between sanctification and justification and also misrepresents justification. In justification God declares the believer innocent and righteous, forgiving sin by means of Christ’s sacrifice and imputing Christ’s righteousness to the believer. This is not “legal fiction,” since justification has past, present, and future aspects (Rom. 3:30; 8:30–34; Gal. 2:16; 5:5). Believers have been, are being, and will be justified by faith in Christ Jesus. Recently, some have claimed that justification is related exclusively to the inclusion of Gentiles into the people of God without “works of the law,” racial and national identity markers (e.g., circumcision or food laws). Among the weaknesses of this view, the key one is that both Jew and Gentile are in need of extraordinary justification (Rom. 3:9, 19–20, 23–26, 30; 9:30–10:13; Gal. 2:15–3:14).

Lord's Prayer

This prayer, found but not named as such in Matt. 6:9–13; Luke 11:2–5 (see also Did. 8.2, which follows the Matthean version), is a version of the Jewish Qaddish prayer revised around the theme of the kingdom of God and is a paradigmatic model of prayer given by Jesus to his followers.

Jesus and Prayer

Prayer was a key element of Jewish piety and devotion to God. It was a large part of meetings in synagogues, annual festivals, worship in the temple, and daily recitals of the words of the law. Jesus is remembered as withdrawing into lonely and desolate places for times of prayer (Mark 1:35; 6:46), most poignantly in the garden of Geth-semane (Mark 14:32–42 pars.). Jesus’ time in the wilderness probably was a time of prayer and fasting as well (Mark 1:12–13 pars.). Besides the Lord’s Prayer, another prayer of Jesus celebrates God’s revelation to the disciples after their short itinerant mission (Matt. 11:25–26 // Luke 10:21).

The evangelist Luke emphasizes Jesus at prayer more than any other Gospel writer. Luke’s Gospel portrays Jesus as praying at his baptism (3:21), prior to his selection of the Twelve (6:12–13), prior to Peter’s confession of him as Messiah (9:18), at his transfiguration (9:28–29), prior to his teaching on the Lord’s Prayer (11:1), for Peter (22:32), and twice while on the cross (23:34, 46). Jesus also taught much about prayer, concerning how his disciples are or are not to pray and how to show genuine devotion in the kingdom community without hypocrisy (Mark 11:24–25; Matt. 5:44 // Luke 6:28; Matt. 6:5–8; Luke 11:5–13; 18:1–14; 21:36).

In the Fourth Gospel, Jesus’ prayers underscore the unique nature of the relationship between the Father and the Son (John 11:41–42; 12:27–28). Jesus’ high priestly prayer for the disciples concerns their preservation and the role of the Holy Spirit in their lives (17:1–26). A distinctive characteristic of Jesus’ prayers is that God is addressed by the Aramaic word abba (“father”), and this became common in early Christian worship (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6).

The Lord’s Prayer: Matthew and Luke

The Lord’s Prayer takes distinct forms in Matthew and in Luke (see table 2). The differences in the two prayers might be attributable to Jesus teaching two different versions. More likely, Matthew and Luke both knew the prayer from a common source (written or oral), and Matthew’s version is a more liturgical elaboration of Luke’s shorter and more “original” version. Matters are complicated somewhat by the fact that later Christian scribes had a propensity for harmonizing the two prayers and sometimes amended them in their respective manuscripts. Both prayers agree that (1) God is the Holy Father, (2) the kingdom is yet to come in its fullness, (3) followers of Jesus depend on God for their daily provisions, (4) followers of Jesus depend on God for forgiveness, (5) which is reciprocated in the forgiveness of others, and include (6) the supplication that God not let them fall into the final tribulation.

Table 2. The Lord’s Prayer in Matthew and Luke

Matthew 6:9-13….Luke 11:2-4

Our Father in heaven,….Father,

hallowed be your name,….hallowed be your name,

your kingdom come,….your kingdom come.

your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven….

Give us today our daily bread….Give us each day our daily bread.

And forgive us our debts,….Forgive us our sins,

as we also have forgiven our debtors….for we also forgive everyone who sins against us.

And lead us not into temptation,….And lead us not into temptation.

But deliver us from the evil one….

For your is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen. [added in some later manuscripts; see NIV mg.]….

The Lord’s Prayer: The Petitions

The prayer can be broken up into a number of petitions. First is the petition addressed to God as Father and self-sanctifier. God is invoked as Father, and his name represents both his character as a loving father and his authority as the master over all creation. The prayer is theocentric, and it reads literally “let your name be sanctified,” which is a plea that God’s holiness will become more and more evident. The Lord’s Prayer is not some kind of “I want” list, but rather a burst of praise expressing the hope that God’s sheer goodness and Godness will be acknowledged by all.

The second petition is for God to finally establish his kingdom. The “kingdom of God” is more akin to God’s reign, rule, or government. It is referred to rarely in the OT (e.g., Dan. 2:44; Obad. 21); much more prominent is the theme of God as “king.” In many of the psalms God already is king of Israel and the nations (e.g., Pss. 93–99), and yet the prophets could look forward to the day when Yahweh would again show himself to be king precisely through his deliverance of Israel, which would be the ultimate expression of the kingly power (e.g., Isa. 52:7; Zech. 14:9). The prayer for the coming of the kingdom of God is a prayer for God to establish his reign or rule in its final and full manifestation on earth. Although the kingdom was partially present during Jesus’ ministry by virtue of his exorcisms and healings (e.g., Mark 1:15; Luke 11:20), it still awaits its final consummation. Matthew’s version has “on earth as it is in heaven” and may indicate a millennial view of the kingdom as supplanting earthly kingdoms, resulting in the transformation of the present age. The petition does not promote escapism from the world but rather points toward its eventual redemption and transformation by the glorious power of heaven becoming a reality upon the earth.

Third is the petition for daily provision of physical needs. The “daily bread” petition looks to God as the provider and caregiver of his people. Elsewhere in the Sermon on the Mount/Plain, Jesus preaches dependence on God as a means of escaping the worry and lure of wealth and money (Matt. 6:25–33 // Luke 12:22–34). Bread was a powerful symbol for sustenance and life (e.g., Prov. 22:9; Lam. 2:12; John 6:35, 48; Sir. 29:21; 34:25). The petition assumes that God is interested in the most mundane aspects of human existence, and that he gives what is needed, not always what is wanted. God sustains his people in their hour of need as proof of his fatherly care and compassion.

Fourth is the petition for divine forgiveness in coordination with mutual forgiveness among the community of Jesus’ followers. The prayer does not ask God to forgive persons who then in turn forgive others; rather, in reverse, the prayer implies that God forgives in the same way that humans forgive each other (Matthew) or on the basis of humans forgiving each other (Luke). The role of mutual forgiveness within the new covenant community is spelled out clearly by Paul in Colossians: “Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you” (Col. 3:13).

Fifth is the petition to be spared eschatological tribulation and the malevolence of Satan. The word peirasmos can mean “testing,” “trial,” “temptation,” or even “tribulation” or “ordeal.” The prayer could constitute a plea for help in the face of personal trials and struggles in the believer’s life and in the journey of discipleship (e.g., 1 Cor. 10:13; James 1:2), or it could denote a request to be kept from the eschatological ordeal that will precede the final and full establishment of the kingdom of God (e.g., Mark 14:36, 38; Rev. 3:10). Importantly, what is feared in this prayer is not experiencing the peirasmos but rather succumbing to it—the fear of failure. In addition, the prayer asks to be delivered from ho ponēros, “evil,” or (more likely) “the evil one” (cf. Matt. 5:39)—that is, the devil or Satan. God tests his people to strengthen them and prove their faithfulness, while Satan tempts people to subdue and destroy them. This prayer acknowledges the fragility and helplessness of the human state in the face of human, spiritual, and cosmic evil. The prayer seeks liberation from evil in the coming reign of God’s eschatological kingdom.

The Lord’s Prayer: The Theology

The theological framework, ethical exhortation, and social dynamics created or presupposed by the prayer are as follows.

First, God is the Father of the followers of Jesus. This is axiomatic in the Gospels and is repeated by the Christian prayer that addresses God the Father as “Abba” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6).

Second, an overarching importance is attached to the kingdom of God as the context in which all prayer is prayed. The tension of the prayer—the very fact of needs and the threat of continuing perils—exists only because God’s plan to restore Israel and renew creation has not yet been put into full effect. God’s kingdom has broken into the world through the work of the Son of God and the giving of the Holy Spirit, and yet it still awaits a final consummation, when God is “all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28) and finally repossesses the world for himself. The prayer presupposes the “now” and the “not yet” of God’s saving action and balances prayers of triumph and lament in light of current temptations and the coming victory of God.

Third, in this prayer salvation not only is spiritual (understood as going to heaven when one dies) but also involves the physical well-being of a person and healthy relationships within the believing community. Just as God is concerned with physical human needs, so should humans be with their fellow humans. If human beings forgive, then God also forgives them. Human relations are to mirror the values of heaven and the vision of the kingdom.

Fourth, the world order currently exists in partial subjugation to evil powers opposed to God’s rule, which is simply part of the dire situation of “this age.” The prayer presupposes an apocalyptic worldview characterized by dualism (God/Satan, good/evil, present/future, etc.), the necessity of encountering and persevering against evil, and divine intervention to put the world order right and replace it with the kingdom of God.

Fifth, discipleship involves a variety of traits and characteristics. This prayer depicts the disciple as trusting and as exhibiting faith in God’s purpose and plan. The prayer presumes that disciples cling to God in dependence upon him in their day-to-day need. The prayer assumes that disciples try to imitate God in reflecting goodness, love, holiness, and peace in their respective communities. The prayer also admonishes endurance in the face of trials and persistence (not repetitiveness) in the discipline of prayer.

Sixth, although the prayer does not have an explicit Christology, one can be found implicitly. It seems implied that Jesus is a mediator between the Father and the disciples, and that he possesses an important role in the final manifestation of the kingdom. It is, after all, the disciples of Jesus who are promised a special place in the kingdom and a special relationship with the God of Israel.

Summary

The Lord’s Prayer has remained a common thread in the devotional life of followers of Jesus for two millennia because it is simple, memorable, poignant, and yet profound. It is not the prayer of an elite few; it belongs to all who cry out to God as Father and see the way to God in Jesus Christ, the exalted Lord and Messiah of Israel. As teachings of Jesus hold immeasurable significance for the life, faith, praxis, and service of his followers, this prayer encapsulates a motif of Jesus’ own mission: God as king and the love of God for his own people.

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

Sorrow

Both the OT and the NT use several words that fall into the category of sorrow. Sorrow may be felt to different degrees as fits the severity of the circumstances. Likewise, it may be expressed in many ways, such as crying or weeping (Jer. 4:8; Joel 1:18), hiring professional mourners (Jer. 9:17; Mark 5:38), tearing one’s clothes (2 Sam. 13:19), wearing sackcloth (2 Sam. 3:31; Jer. 4:8), sitting in dust and ashes (Job 2:8; Luke 10:13), throwing dust over one’s head (Job 2:12), fasting (Esther 4:3), shaving one’s head or beard (Job 1:20; Jer. 41:5), and beating one’s chest (Isa. 32:12; Luke 18:13).

Because of sin and the curse, pain is inescapable and sorrow appropriate. Although people may respond negatively, sorrow can be a positive part of repentance, developing character (2 Cor. 7:10–11) or demonstrating sympathy to others (Rom. 12:15) as a response to their difficulties. The reality of pain highlights joy and anticipation of Christ’s return (John 16:19–22; Rev. 21:4; cf. Jer. 31:13).

While sorrow may first come from the circumstances or threat of punishment, it is an important component of repentance, as regret over wrongdoing can lead one to change behavior.

Showing 1 to 50 of217 results

1. Learn to Empty Yourself

Illustration

R. Curtis Fussell

A martial arts student was meeting with his master and teacher at a table, having tea. The student said to his master, "I've learned all you have to teach me about defending myself. I want to learn one thing more now. Please teach me about the ways of God."

The master took the teakettle and starting pouring the student's cup full of tea. Soon the cup was full and began to spill over onto the saucer. But the master continued to pour the tea until it spilled over the saucer and then onto the floor.

The student finally said, "Stop, stop, the tea is spilling over. The cup can't take any more." The master then looked at the student and said, "You are so full of yourself that there is no room in your life for God. It is not possible for you to learn the ways of God until you learn to empty yourself."

2. It's Not All That Bad

Illustration

Bill Bouknight

Most nice respectable American churches don't talk about sin, judgment, or hell. Why? Because they are post-modern. Most Americans read the Bible selectively, omitting those parts they don't like. The first thing many American churchgoers throw out is the concept of hell, because (in their view) a nice, well-behaved God wouldn't let anybody go to hell. After you lose hell, you lose a sense of sin. Nobody is guilty of anything. Everybody is just a victim.

The call to repent has no meaning. Dr. Calvin Miller of the Beeson Divinity School claims that instead of repenting we play a nice little game entitled, "It's not all that bad." It sounds like this---"Yes, I did have a brief affair, but my wife was not meeting my needs. I didn't divorce her, so don't call it adultery; it's not all that bad." "Yes, my daughter and her fiancée share the same bedroom when they visit us, but most engaged couples do. After all, this is the 21st Century; it's not all that bad." "Sure, I sometimes drink too much, but never in front of the kids. I don't do any harm and it never causes me to miss a day of work. It's not all that bad." Many American churchgoers live in a state of denial.

When Charlie Brown did something wrong, he felt humility. But when Bart Simpson does something wrong, he feels entitlement. What a huge moral slippage this reveals in our culture. (1) Jesus message of good news always began with the word "repent." "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near." (Matthew 4:17) Jesus bragged on a notorious sinner, a tax collector, because he uttered this simple prayer, "God, have mercy on me, a sinner." A prayer of repentance always rings bells in heaven. (Luke 18:10-14) The greatness of this tax collector was that he knew how to repent, how to say, "I'm sorry." All of us can be forgiven, if we are humble enough to say, "I'm sorry."

3. Bent to the Ground

Illustration

R. Curtis Fussell

A city boy visited his cousin who lived on a farm in the country. The city boy had never seen wheat growing in a field. It was an impressive sight for him, the wheat golden brown and ready for harvesting. He noticed that some of the wheat stood tall in the field, whereas some of it was bent low, touching the ground. The city boy said to his cousin, "I bet the ones standing tall are the best ones, aren't they?" His cousin smiled knowingly and reached over and plucked the head of one of the tall-standing wheat stalks and one that was bent to the ground. He rubbed each of them and the city boy saw that the tall one was almost empty of seeds. But the one bent to the ground was full of the promise of a rich harvest.

4. A High Opinion of Self

Illustration

R. Curtis Fussell

Evidence for an over inflated opinion of ourselves comes from the College Board that administers the Scholastic Aptitude Test, the SAT exam, which millions of high school students take each year. On that test there are a number of other questions besides the ones about math and English which the students are asked to answer. For instance, they are asked to evaluate their leadership ability.

Recently in an exam, seventy percent of the students rated themselves as above average in leadership, and only two percent as below average. Sixty percent rated themselves as above average in athletics while only six percent said below. When they rated themselves as to how easy they were to get along with, 25 percent said they were in the top one percent, sixty percent said they were in the top ten percent, and absolutely no one said he was below average in being easy to get along with.

Obviously high school students have a very high opinion of themselves; they have pride in themselves. Now is this the kind of pride that says, "I have something to offer this world to make it a better place," or is it the kind of pride that says, "I'm better than you"? The exam doesn't say. We hope it's pride that offers to build a better world; otherwise, it is arrogance.

5. The Beginnings of a Spiritual Journey

Illustration

George Hermanson

One of my sources of my spiritual grounding is the blues. Van Morrison's Hymns to the Silence has become the sound track of my soul. It floats around me and catches me in moments of solitude. It speaks to me of my journey, the things that have made me, the yearning for depth in prayer. It reflects a nostalgia for the innocence of youth, time that is gone, and a longing for a safe place to be ... the thirst for God. There is a spirit of rejuvenation and rebirth in Morrison's blues - there is no us and them. He sings.' No matter where I roam / I will find my way back home / I will return to the Lord."

The point of the song is an old one - "know yourself." The beginning of deep spiritual examination begins here. This is not a beating oneself up, but a prayer of have mercy on me. It is a modest understanding of oneself - that I need others to be more fully myself. I don't have to go it alone.

6. The Law and the Gospel

Illustration

David Ernst

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

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

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

7. Pride

Illustration

James Merritt

I heard about a fifth grader that came home from school so excited. She had been voted "prettiest girl in the class." The next day she was even more excited when she came home, for the class had voted her "the most likely to succeed." The next day she came home and told her mother she had won a third contest, being voted "the most popular."

But the next day she came home extremely upset. The mother said, "What happened, did you lose this time?" She said, "Oh no, I won the vote again." The mother said, "What were you voted this time?" She said, "most stuck up."

Well this Pharisee (in Luke 18:9-14) would have won that contest hands down. He had an "i" problem. Five times you will read the little pronoun "i" in these two verses. He was stoned on the drug of self. He suffered from two problems: inflation and deflation. He had an inflated view of who he was, and a deflated view of who God was.

His pride had made him too big for his spiritual britches. C. S. Lewis once said, "A proud man is always looking down on things and people; and of course, as long as you are looking down, you can't see something that's above you."

8. Our Own Vices

Illustration

Eric Ritz

Dwight L. Moody and Charles Spurgeon were great preachers of the nineteenth century. Moody admired Spurgeon from a distance and looked forward to the opportunity of meeting him in London. On that historic day, Spurgeon answered the door with a cigar in his mouth. Moody was aghast. "How could you, a man of God, smoke that?" Spurgeon took the cigar from his mouth, put his finger on Moody's rather inflated stomach, smiled and said, "The same way you, a man of God, could be that fat." Because we are usually blind to our own vices, we are hardly qualified to judge others.

9. Let Us Never Lack for Humility

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

Let's say that at some point in his life, Chip Brewster was the smartest math whiz in his class and the fastest running back on the football team at Hardy High School in Rapid Brook, Nebraska. He was the best of the best and felt mighty good about himself as a result. What he didn't know is that he seemed to be a big fish only because the pond he was in was so small. So one day he graduated high school and went on to study at the University of Michigan. Suddenly Chip met up with math geniuses who were so much smarter than him it wasn't even funny. He tried out for the football team and didn't even make the cut, having been left in the dust by running backs from all over the United States. And the next thing you know, Chip Brewster felt like nothing and nobody. The pride of Rapid Brook, Nebraska, was just a face in the crowd in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

All things being equal, Chip still had a lot going for him and much for which to be grateful. Once he recovered from the shock of becoming a small fish in a big pond, one hopes he was able to move forward. But there's nothing like a proper comparison to the wider world to give a puffed-up chest of pride a hard blow to the solar plexus. So also for us: if we keep our eyes fixed on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith, we will never lack for humility.

10. Self Worship

Illustration

R. Curtis Fussell

Girolamo Savonarola was one of the great preachers of the fifteenth century. He preached in the great cathedral of Florence, Italy, which contained a magnificent marble statue of the blessed virgin Mary. When Savonarola started preaching at this great cathedral, he noticed one day an elderly woman praying before this statue of Mary. He then began to notice that it was her habit to come every day and pray before the statue.

Savonarola remarked one day to an elderly priest who had been serving in the cathedral for many years, "Look how devoted and earnest this woman is. Every day she comes and offers prayers to the blessed Mother of Jesus. What a marvelous act of faith." But the elderly priest replied, "Do not be deceived by what you see. Many years ago when the sculptor needed a model to pose for this statue of the blessed Mother, he hired a beautiful young woman to sit for him. This devout worshiper you see here everyday is that young woman. She is worshiping who she used to be."

The first and perhaps the deadliest of the seven deadly sins is pride.

11. What Kind of Sinners Can Be Members

Illustration

Larry R. Kalajainen

12. If You Have To Tell Them Who You Are, Then You Aren't

Illustration

Larry R. Kalajainen

That's a lesson that the Pharisee in our gospel reading apparently had never learned. His prayer, if it can be called that, is largely an advertisement for himself.

13. Better to Be Honest

Illustration

Keith Wagner

One afternoon a carpet layer had just finished installing carpet for a lady. He stepped out for a smoke, only to realize he had lost his cigarettes. After looking around he noticed that in the middle of the room, under the carpet that he had just installed, was a bump. Ah, he thought, my cigarettes. "No sense pulling up the entire floor for one pack of smokes," he said to himself. So he got out his mallet and flattened the bump. Not long after, as he was cleaning up, the lady came in. "Here," she said, handing him his pack of cigarettes. "I found them in the hallway. Then she said, "Now. if I could just find Peep." "What is a peep," the man asked. "Not a what," she said. "A who. Peep's my pet parakeet."

It was an honest mistake and the carpet layer didn't know he was doing any harm by getting rid of the bump in the carpet. Sometimes however we aren't aware that our little mishaps may actually cause harm to someone else. Better to be honest, rather than try to hide our mistakes.

14. Everything He Says Is True

Illustration

Ray Pritchard & Brett Blair

When you read the story about the Pharisee, a number of specific statements are made about his piety. Please note this. Everything the man says about himself is true. For instance, when he says, "I thank you that I am not like other men," indeed he wasn't like other men. He had a standard of morality that was far above the standard of that day.

When he said, "I fast twice a week;" it happens to be literally true. The Pharisees fasted on Monday and Thursday of every week.
When he says, "I give tithes of all I possess," he means he tithes on the gross and not on the net. He went beyond the Law of Moses. That's no big deal; all the Pharisees did that.
When he says, "I am not a crook," he really isn't a crook.
When he says, "I am not like this filthy tax collector," he's really not like that guy.
When he says, "I do not commit adultery," he really doesn't commit adultery. He is faithful to his wife.
When he says, "I am honest, I am faithful, I am zealous for my religion," he means it and every word of it is true. He truly is a genuinely good man.

What we are to understand is this. When he prayed he was telling the truth. When he said, "Lord, you're lucky to have a guy like me, because I'm one of the best guys I know," it was really true. He really was a wonderful guy.

While he prayed, people would be standing around watching. And they would say, "Yep, he's a fine man." While he prayed, they probably applauded. He was the kind of guy you'd want living next door to you. A good citizen. A law-abiding man. A good, religious kind of person. If he were to come to this church today we'd love him because he would be faithful, loyal, and give us a lot of money. We'd probably make him an elder or a deacon. He's just that kind of guy. He looks really good on the outside. Everything he says about himself is absolutely true.

So what's wrong? Well, for all his goodness he isn't perfect, no one is, and the Law requires perfection. I like to call this narcissistic righteousness. What good is all the law if you don't have love? If you are not reaching out to those around you. If the center of your righteousness is You, you've missed the center. The center is love God and love your neighbor.

15. The Cunning Craftsman

Illustration

Allan J. Weenink

In her play, "The Zeal of Thy House," Dorothy Sayers imagines a stonemason working on an intricate carving for the chancel of Canterbury Cathedral, who clumsily lets his tool slip and spoils the whole great piece of stone assigned to him. It is a sad moment as the valuable and custom-cut stone stands misshapen. The architect, however, takes the tool out of the artisan's hand and although he remonstrates with him for his clumsiness, begins to enact forgiveness. He redesigns out of the spoiled carving a new and different figure which has its own part to play in the ensemble of the Cathedral, and then permits the blundering mason to complete it in all its glory. "So works with us," concludes Dorothy Sayers, "the cunning craftsman, God."

On reading it, this phrase stands out: "The cunning craftsman, God." As used, the word cunning does not mean some kind of craftiness which might be our modern interpretation. But taken in its pure sense it indicates skill, wisdom and ability. The phrase then really means that the Master artist God can take our blundering efforts and still make something useful out of them. He takes our mismanaged lives, our failed efforts, our missed marks, our shameful deeds, our alien attitudes, our sinful lives and out of his divine resourcefulness he saves the day by creating something new, worthy and wonderful that still has usefulness and beauty in the divine plan of things. It is a reassurance that we desperately need, but one on which we cannot presume.

16. Worth a Thousand Points

Illustration

John P. Jewell

Perhaps you have heard the story of the man who came to the gates of heaven to be greeted by St. Peter. Peter asks the man if he can give a brief history of his life with an emphasis on the good deeds he had done in order to gain entrance into the kingdom of heaven. "You will need 1000 points to be admitted," Peter tells the man.

"This will be a cinch," the man thinks to himself, "I've been involved in church from the days of my youth." Then he begins to list his activities for Peter. He was an officer in his youth group, served in every possible position he could as a youngster. Was on the Church Council and every committee the church had to offer. His list was extensive.

"Very impressive," Peter smiles at the man. An angel standing with them also smiled and nodded as he tallied the points and then whispered in Peter's ear. Peter tells the man,

"This is quite striking we seldom see men of your very good works. You will be pleased to know that you have 327 points! Is there anything else you can think of?"

The poor soul breaks into a cold sweat and begins to reach deep for every single act of kindness he could think of. He listed them as the angel scratched furiously on his angelic clip board and nodded his head in admiration. Peter looks at the clip board and says, "This is quite exceptional! You now have a total of 402 points. Can you think of anything else?"

The distressed guy strives to recall good deeds like the time he helped a little old lady across the street. He finally arrives at a grand total of 431 points and cries out... "I am sunk! There is no hope for me! What more could I have done? O Lord, all I can do is beg for your mercy!"

"THAT," exclaims Peter, "Is a thousand points!"

So also, the tax collector in Jesus' parable finds his hope in the grace and mercy of God.

17. The Worship Wars

Illustration

Stephen M. Crotts

We pastors call it The Worship Wars. One can see the frowning battlements in the faces seated in pews, hear the rumble of its artillery in negative comments, and feel the white heat of its lethal shrapnel in board meetings.

"It's boring!"

"Why, those songs are so old, every time I sing them I get a backache!"

"Worship is becoming a nightclub act! What will we do next?"

"Choruses are 7-11 worship. Seven words repeated eleven times!"

Any pastor, any active church member alive today is in the trenches of this warfare. Thankfully, the scriptures can be our guide through the mine-fields of this battleground. And today's text, a parable of Jesus, is a good place to begin. [read Luke 18:9-14]

Well, ladies and gentlemen, there you have it. Two men. The same church service. Two totally different approaches to worship.

Mr. Pharisee about whom Jesus said "... trusted in himself that he was righteous and regarded others with contempt," so cleverly told us he came to church with one eye on himself, one eye on his neighbor, and no eye on God. And I might point out that Jesus said even though this man went to church, he was not a part of the community for he was "standing by himself." And Jesus said pointedly that he was never forgiven by God, for "all who exalt themselves will be humbled." I guess you might say he was so self-conscious he lost his God-consciousness.

The second gentleman, however, the tax collector, "went down to his home justified." It seems that even though he was not satisfied with himself, God was.

So, from the text, which of these two men do you relate to in worship? You went to church today. What happened?

18. I Used to Be an Intellectual

Illustration

William R. Boyer

Albert Schweitzer was laboring one day, under the hot African sun, building his hospital at Lambarene. A large timber had to be raised into place, and try as he might, Schweitzer couldn't manage it. He looked up and saw a well-dressed African man standing in the shade of a tree, and asked him to lend a hand. "O, no," the man said, "I don't do that kind of work. I am an intellectual." And Albert Schweitzer, with five earned doctor's degrees, said, "I used to be an intellectual, but I couldn't live up to it."

When we are Christians we don't have anything to live up to, no pretenses to maintain, no privileges to guard. We can't be too low in the eyes of the world. We can't be losers enough. There is a wonderful peace and freedom in that.

19. They Only Ironed The Parts That Showed

Illustration

William R. Boyer

Pastor Mike Cope tells of inviting a college student and his girlfriend back to his home after church, to have lunch with him and his wife. "When we got to the house, I took off my suit coat and invited him to do the same. The boy hemmed and hawed for a long time until he could pull me aside, and what he whispered to me then reminded me of the way I used to live when I was in college." It seemed he had only ironed the cuffs and collar of his shirt. If he took off his jacket, his girl would see the rest of his shirt and know what a slob he was. He had only ironed the parts that showed. That was one of the major, ongoing complaints Jesus brought against the Pharisees, the religious leaders of his day. That they were phony. That they were not what they seemed to be. That they were hypocrites. That they only ironed the parts that showed.

20. Self Righteousness

Illustration

C. S. Lewis

C. S. Lewis recounts that when he first started going to church he disliked the hymns, which he considered to be fifth-rate poems set to sixth-rate music. But as he continued, he said, "I realized that the hymns (which were just sixth-rate music) were, nevertheless, being sung with devotion and benefit by an old saint in elastic-side boots in the opposite pew, and then you realize that you aren't fit to clean those boots. It gets you out of your solitary conceit."

21. The Prayer of Cyrus Brown

Illustration

Sam Walter Foss

Years ago Sam Walter Foss wrote a poem expressing the unimportance of the posture of prayer. He called it, The Prayer of Cyrus Brown:

"The proper way for a man to pray,"
Said Deacon Lemuel Keyes
"And the only proper attitude
Is down upon his knees."

"Nay, I should say the way to pray,"
Said Reverend Doctor Wise,
"Is standing straight with outstretched arms
And rapt and upturned eyes."

"Oh, no, no, no,"
said Elder Slow,
Such posture is too proud.
"A man should pray with eyes fast-closed
And head contritely bowed."

"It seems to me his hands should be
Austerely clasped in front
With both thumbs pointing toward the ground."
Said Reverend Doctor Blunt.

"Last year I fell in Hidgekin's well
Headfirst," said Cyrus Brown,
"With both my heels a-stickin' up
And my head a-pointin' down.
And I made a prayer right then and there,
The best prayer I ever said,
The prayingest prayer I ever prayed,
A-standin' on my head."

22. TAX COLLECTOR

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

Modern taxes are a recent development, but the practice of taxation is an ancient one. The comment, "There is nothing more sure than death and taxes" has won sympathetic agreement down through the ages.

Now, certainly, any thinking person will agree that taxes are a necessity of governmental life, but we seldom approve of the methods for collecting such taxes. We are always sure that there just has to be a better way! And this has been the attitude throughout recorded history. Away back at the time of the division of the kingdom, Adoniram, a tax collector for King Rehoboam, was stoned to death for his activities!

We have mention throughout all of the Bible of the taxes imposed on the people, either by God or by conquering nations, but the title of "tax collector" seems to be a strictly New Testament term. The problem goes back to the Ptolemaic rule over Palestine, after the death of Alexander the Great. Under Ptolemy, the taxation of each city was leased to the highest bidder and that sum was then to be paid to the royal Treasury. If his collection fell below the required sum, the tax collector had to make up the difference. Any amount that he collected above this required sum he was allowed to keep. Although the tax collectors generally had a better than average education, since they had to know how to read, write, and figure sums, they also had to be men who were not above using cunning or violence to collect the taxes.

Many persons tried to cheat them, and used many ingenious ways of doing so, so the tax collector had to be just a little bit smarter, to keep ahead of them. And, if cunning didn’t work, a show of violence could be counted on to do the trick. One tax collector beheaded twenty persons when they refused to pay their taxes, and then confiscated their possessions!

In New Testament times, Roman officials were directly responsible for the collection of regular taxes, such as poll and land taxes. There were many other taxes, however, which were farmed out to private contractors for a period of five years. Usually, these contractors were Romans, but, occasionally, they were Jews.

Tax collectors as a class have never enjoyed a great popularity, but those who operated in early New Testament times were particularly despised. You see, even though the Jews had a long history of domination by others, and, at some periods, had even accepted this domination and had risen to eminence within a captive state, this was never the feeling that they had toward the Romans. It’s true that many Jews recognized the many benefits that they derived from the Roman system, but still their captors were harsh, cruel people, and were held in hatred and fear. So, any Jew who had sold out to the Romans was doubly hated, as an apostate and a traitor, taking away from his own people to give to the hated Romans! The rabbis regarded tax collectors as the same as robbers and refused to allow them to be judges or even to give witness.

We know, of course, that Matthew was a tax collector, and that Jesus often dined at the homes of these men, a fact which the Pharisees played up to full advantage. Zacchaeus was a tax collector who saw the error of his ways and offered to restore by fourfold his deceitful gains and to donate half of his capital to charity!

Although we often grumble about the taxes we have to pay, especially in April of every year, I’m sure we are all aware of the necessity of the taxation procedure to keep the wheels of our governments running smoothly. Today’s tax men, who work for the Internal Revenue Service, are educated, trained men, who are not to be anathematized, even when we might be disgruntled. Rather, they are an important part of our economic picture, and as such we owe them thanks for keeping our country in a state of relative solvency.

23. Eternally Interceding

Illustration

Larry Powell

The Hebrew people knew that Moses was on Mount Sinai, but it seemed to them that he had been gone much longer than necessary. All manner of mummerings arose within the ranks. Had he deserted them? Had something happened to him? Finally, it was decided that they would raise up Aaron as their new leader. Moreover, an idol fashioned in the form of a golden bull was set in their midst as the new object of worship. Unexpectedly, Moses returned. The scene which followed included at least three emphases:

1. Pronouncement. God utters a blistering assessment of the Hebrew people: "I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiff-necked people" (32:9). Then follows an expression of his intention; "Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them" (32:10). As the Revelator was to put it centuries later, Israel had "forgotten its first love." Even as Moses was on the mountain top receiving the Ten Commandments, the people were fawning around the golden idol which had been fashioned from their own jewelry. It had been remarked that the people were just out of slavery ... they were tired of waiting on Moses to return to them ... they wanted to celebrate somehow and thank somebody. Not yet understanding the character of Moses’ God, they manufactured their own god to enable them to focus their celebration upon something. I believe the observation is correct inasmuch as we see latter-day versions of similar behavior, i.e., persons who want to celebrate life but are unable to understand the God of Christianity take unto themselves golden calves in some form or another. There are different causes of a stiff neck. Some are caused by sleeping in a draft, some are congenital, others due to injury or disease, and still others by arrogance and stubbornness. It is the latter malady to which God is referring in 32:9, the neck so stiff that it cannot bow to God. At the time of God’s pronouncement to Moses, the Hebrew people were in fact, in the words of Jonathan Edwards, "sinners in the hands of an angry God."

2. Intercession. Moses did not attempt to excuse his people, but instead undertook to intercede for them. He went to God in their behalf. I remember the story of the frail little country boy whose parents were so poor that they could not feed their family properly. The little boy , always undernourished, was sluggish and scarcely felt up to completing his assignments at school. One day the teacher announced the assignment and warned that anyone not completing it would be punished. Sure enough, the pale little youth failed to turn his work in when it was due. The teacher called him forward to the desk and told him to bend over. His hollow eyes looked helplessly at her as his bony body braced itself for a whipping. As he bent over, the bones in his back made little ridges in his shirt and his baggy pants were evidence of skinny legs and a tiny waist. The teacher raised the paddle. Suddenly, a little boy raised his hand and said, "Teacher, can I take his whipping for him?" That is a secular case of intercession. A theological case is "and while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us," and as the letter to the Hebrews suggests, Christ is "eternally interceding in our behalf."

3. Mercy. Certainly God was angry with the Hebrew people, just as he is vexed and saddened by those of us who become so stiff-necked that we cannot bow in an attitude of gratefulness for his leadership in our lives and the grace which always goes before us. It is often remarked, "When I stand before God in the judgment, I won’t ask for justice, I will ask for mercy." To be sure, none of us could survive the justice, but because of God’s promise to Moses, and the intercession of Christ, we do believe that there is hope for the sinner because a part of God’s character is mercy.

24. Zacchaeus - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

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

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

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

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

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

1. Jesus reaches out to the outcast and sinner

2. The most difficult aspect of our Christian faith

25. Growing In Grace

Illustration

James Packer

I am the least of the apostles. 1 Cor 15:9

I am the very least of all the saints. Eph 3:8

I am the foremost of sinners. 1 Tim 1:15

Humility and a passion for praise are a pair of characteristics which together indicate growth in grace. The Bible is full of self-humbling (man bowing down before God) and doxology (man giving praise to God). The healthy heart is one that bows down in humility and rises in praise and adoration. The Psalms strike both these notes again and again. So too, Paul in his letters both articulates humility and breaks into doxology. Look at his three descriptions of himself quoted above, dating respectively from around A.D. 59, 63, and 64. As the years pass he goes lower; he grows downward! And as his self-esteem sinks, so his rapture of praise and adoration for the God who so wonderfully saved him rises.

Undoubtedly, learning to praise God at all times for all that is good is a mark that we are growing in grace. One of my predecessors in my first parochial appointment died exceedingly painfully of cancer. But between fearful bouts of agony, in which he had to stuff his mouth with bedclothes to avoid biting his tongue, he would say aloud over and over again: "I will bless the Lord at all times; his praise shall continually be in my mouth" (Ps. 34:1). That was a passion for praise asserting itself in the most poignant extremity imaginable.

Cultivate humility and a passion for praise if you want to grow in grace.

26. The Categories of Salvation

Illustration

Brett Blair

Often you see bits of logic like the one below in christian literature. Take a look:

There are four basic categories of salvation:

Those who think they are saved, but aren't. Matthew 7:21-3
Those we think are saved, but aren't. 1 John 2:18-19
Those who are saved, but don't act like it: Corinthians.
Those who are saved, and they act like it.

I would agree with the basic tenets here but of course in more conservative circles this "saved" language takes on a very narrow definition. It's the "born again" thing. Could you not also use the word Christian rather than "saved" and say the same thing? Because doesn't the word saved mean justified. As in Romans 3: "justified freely by his grace." The shift is immediately recognizable. The emphases moves from my actions to be "saved" to the actions of Christ who justified me.

Finally, don't even try to wedge the word justified in replace of "saved," because then the logic of the 4 points starts to grind to halt.

27. And I Got in Myself

Illustration

Tom Rietveld

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

28. A Higher Value than Freedom

Illustration

Johnny Dean

If there's one thing we Americans value above everything else, it is freedom. We cherish, guard and exercise our freedom, and woe be unto those who threaten it in any way. We're even willing to go to war to defend freedom, whether it's ours or someone else's. We are the world's self-appointed watchdogs of freedom.

But Jesus says there's a higher value than freedom. The first words the writer of the Gospel of Matthew has Jesus speak are not about freedom, but about obedience to the will of God. That's what righteousness is all about, according to the gospel writer. Matthew uses the word righteousness seven times in his story of the life of Jesus, always connecting righteousness with being obedient to the will of God.

When Jesus comes to John the Baptist to be baptized in the Jordan, John protests. "It really should be the other way around here. You should be baptizing me. Why are you doing this?" And Jesus replies, "Just do it, John; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness."

29. Clothed with Humility

Illustration

John R. Gunn

The word "humility" means literally a low estimate of self. But this does not imply self-deprecation. When you hear someone deprecating himself, usually you can put it down as a sort of counterfeit humility. Someone has said, "The true way to be humble is not to stoop until you are smaller than yourself, but to stand at your full height before some higher nature that will show you how small your greatness is." "Walk humbly with thy God." Here is where we learn true humility. Walking with God, seeing ourselves by the side of His greatness, we see how little we are. And seeing how little we are is the first step toward becoming what we can and ought to be.

We never become truly great, we never do our best work until we are "clothed with humility"; until, like our Lord and Savior, we are willing to live to serve others.

30. Our King's Righteous Attire

Illustration

Michael P. Green

In the fable “The Emperor’s New Clothes, an unscrupulous con artist, seeking royal favor, promises to provide the emperor with an outfit of clothing that would be very special. So delicate and rare would be the fabric that the clothes would be undetectable to the touch. More importantly, they would be invisible to anyone of poor character or inferior ability. When the emperor received the empty hanger on which his new outfit was supposedly displayed, he could hardly admit not seeing the clothes without impugning his own suitability for royal office. So he admired the clothes (as did his advisors), put them on, and strutted proudly around his kingdom—stark naked!

We Christians can fall into the same trap. In the first part of Colossians 3, Paul said to “take off” practices such as fornication, lying, greed, and so forth. But the point is that we are to “put on” new practices to replace the old ones. Have we really donned those positive attitudes and actions of compassion, kindness, humility?

Sometimes the answer is “No.” Instead, we parade around showing off our new clothes of righteousness and refusing to admit the truth: that we are really naked. And we walk about, blinded to the fact that the world is snickering behind our backs because the righteousness we think we're wearing isn't the righteousness of Christ; rather, it is our own failed efforts!

31. How Can God Know All About Us?

Illustration

Unknown

A man named Gerhard Dirks, the "father of the modern computer," was one who had to face up to life's most important question. During the years of the Second World War he made many inventions that led to the development of the first computers. He and his family escaped from Hitler's Germany and later Russian occupation to the west. He was a brilliant man, reported to have an IQ of 208. He had over 140 patents with IBM and even attempted theoretically to reconstruct the human brain. But he became completely bewildered and shaken when confronted with the complexity and utter impossibility of such a reconstruction. He didn't know what to do or where to run. He had to face a choice: Either the human brain came about by a fantastic chance or by intelligent planning. Dirks re-established contact with an old friend and found out this friend had become a Christian. He saw the change in this man from being selfish and impatient to being patient and at peace. But, Dirks clung to his atheism because he could not understand how God can know all about us, every person in the entire world. He couldn't understand where God could possibly store all the information about every person that ever lived.

Dirks went with his friend to a discussion group where a man talked about God. Someone asked "What do you say to someone who thinks they are not a sinner?" The leader of the meeting told the man to take four pieces of paper and number them 1 to 4 and write a list of things on each piece of paper. On page 1, he said: write down every time you can remember when you said "yes" and meant "no" or said "no" and meant "yes." Then write down every time you can remember when you told an outright lie. Write down every time you gave someone a shady answer, every time you made a promise and broke it and every time you made a promise and never intended to keep it.

On page 2 write what it is that you hide from everybody. You don't have to show this to anyone, but to yourself. And, write down something that, if anyone found out about it, something inside you would wither.

On page 3 he said make a list of friends to whom you have done something that you would not want them to do to you. Never mind if they did something to provoke you, just put down your part.

On page 4 write the names of the people for whom you have done something good, and done it without hope of any compensation or reward of any kind. He then said "I think that any man who does that honestly will see that he is a sinner and that he is desperately in the need of salvation. He will know that the sin and the wrong he has written down is only the tip of an iceberg."

Dirks went home and did it, and the imbalance between paper 4 and papers 1, 2, and 3 were self-evident. He had to admit he was a sinner. And, suddenly it hit him. He knew where God stored data. He got his answer without even looking for it. God stored the information about Dirks IN DIRKS. Everything he had ever thought, seen, heard, said, done - everything was there in his own mind. He was his own "file." Every human being was his own "file." Now, he lost all his excuses for not believing in the Savior. People CAN change, because he saw the real changes in his friend. And, there is information for a final judgment - because every person carries his own data. He realized that he did not like himself and the way he lived. Just like when a computer has errors he needed to be "debugged." He fell onto his knees and prayed "Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me and wash me in your blood."

In a few minutes he stopped crying. He knew that something had happened. A wall had come down, the wall that had stood between him and his Creator. He hadn't known the wall was there, until it came down. It was the wall that Christ had demolished. Now, for the first time in his life, he knew what it meant to have fellowship with his Heavenly Father. Then he thought, it wasn't a wall, it was more like a sphere made of stone - a sphere that formed a prison. It had kept him in, and God out. He was now free of that prison!

32. 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).

33. Prayer of a 7th Century Irish Monk

Illustration

Dimma

O God, you do not wish any sinner to die, but want all people to turn from their sins and live. We pray for our sinful brother, forgiving all his wrong-doing and turning his heart towards you. By his own merits he deserves only punishment, but in your mercy we pray that you will bestow upon him eternal life.

34. Rejoicing for the Found

Illustration

Brian Stoffregen

In Dr. R. Alan Culpepper's commentary on Luke, he ends the first two parables in Luke 15 with the following observation:

In both parables, rejoicing calls for celebration, and the note of celebration may be exaggerated to emphasize the point. Neither sheep nor coins can repent, but the parable aims not at calling the "sinners" to repentance but at calling the "righteous" to join the celebration. Whether one will join the celebration is all-important because it reveals whether one's relationships are based on merit or mercy. Those who find God's mercy offensive cannot celebrate with the angels when a sinner repents. Thus they exclude themselves from God's grace.

I think that this is a very important question for churches today. More than one congregational member has not rejoiced over the influx of new members in the congregation. The non-rejoicing criticism seems especially prevalent when the "found" are somehow different from the mainstream members.

35. A Higher Value than Freedom

Illustration

Johnny Dean

If there’s one thing we Americans value above everything else, it is freedom. We cherish, guard and exercise our freedom, and woe be unto those who threaten it in any way. We’re even willing to go to war to defend freedom, whether it’s ours or someone else’s. We are the world’s self-appointed watchdogs of freedom.

But Jesus says there’s a higher value than freedom. The first words the writer of the Gospel of Matthew has Jesus speak are not about freedom, but about obedience to the will of God. That’s what righteousness is all about, according to the gospel writer. Matthew uses the word righteousness seven times in his story of the life of Jesus, always connecting righteousness with being obedient to the will of God.

36. Back To Basics: The Three R's of Baptism - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

Baptism is a powerful force in the life of a Christian for two reasons. It is something we share in common. Christians all over the world can say that they were baptized in Christ. You met a Catholic in Ireland. He was baptized. You met a Pentecostal in Nigeria. She was baptized. The second reason Baptism is a powerful force is that baptism takes us back to the basics. Now let me set these two ideas up for you with a couple of stories.

You perhaps at one time or another have seen on TV the old black and white video footage of the civil rights marches in the sixties. Martin Luther King often at the front received his share of stinging high-pressured water hoses. Rev. King once remarked that he and the other marchers had a common strength. He put it this way, as "we went before the fire hoses; we had known water. If we were a Baptist or some other denomination, we had been immersed. If we were Methodist, and some others, we had been sprinkled, but we knew water."

You and I know the water. All of God's children know the water. We share by our faith this common symbol, this initiation, this rite, this power of God over the deep and often raging chaos of life. We know water! All over the world Baptism unites us.

It also brings us back to the basics. Perhaps in our lifetime the most public statement of repentance was that of President Bill Clinton's. The one he made before a Prayer Breakfast on September 10, 1998. He summed up the task perfectly when he said, "I don't think there is a fancy way to say that I have sinned." Then he quoted from a book given him by a Jewish friend in Florida. The book is called "Gates of Repentance."

Clinton read this passage from the book: "Now is the time for turning. The leaves are beginning to turn from green to red to orange. The birds are beginning to turn and are heading once more toward the south. The animals are beginning to turn to storing their food for the winter. For leaves, birds and animals, turning comes instinctively. But for us, turning does not come so easily. It takes an act of will for us to make a turn. It means breaking old habits. It means admitting that we have been wrong, and this is never easy. It means losing face. It means starting all over again. And this is always painful. It means saying I am sorry. It means recognizing that we have the ability to change. These things are terribly hard to do. But unless we turn, we will be trapped forever in yesterday's ways."

Clinton's quote ended with this prayer: "Lord help us to turn, from callousness to sensitivity, from hostility to love, from pettiness to purpose, from envy to contentment, from carelessness to discipline, from fear to faith. Turn us around, O Lord, and bring us back toward you. Revive our lives as at the beginning and turn us toward each other, Lord, for in isolation there is no life."

What ever you might think of Clinton and his sincerity, he understood that he needed to do something very basic before the nation. He needed to repent. It's amazing isn't it? Not even a president can escape the basic truths of life. It's like in elementary school. Our parents and teachers understand the importance of building a strong foundation for a child's future. So, we were taught the basics, the three R's: Reading, writing, and arithmetic. Ever notice that only one of those begins with an R. I always thought the fellow that came up with that one needed to go back to school.

As parents and teachers and leaders today we would do well to remember that life is still composed of basics. That is why, when Mark chose to open his Gospel, he did so with the Baptism of Jesus at the Jordan. Baptism reminds us of the three R's of the soul: Repentance, righteousness, and revelation. So, don't be amazed when a president of the United States repents before the nation for even Christ himself, as we have just read, began his ministry identifying with the basics: repentance, righteousness, and revelation. Christ submitted himself to the basics. You ask me, Pastor, why should I be baptized? My answer is, Christ himself was baptized, so should you. Baptism begins the most basic elements of the Christian walk: Repentance from sin, a life of righteousness, and an understanding that God has reveled himself in Christ.

Let's take a look at our Lord's Baptism and what it tells us about the three spiritual R's:

1. The first R is Repentance.
2. The second R is Righteousness.
3. The third R is Revelation.

37. Clothing and Spiritual Change

Illustration

Mickey Anders

Clothing is a common New Testament metaphor for spiritual change. Paul wrote in Romans, "Clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature" (Rom 13:14).

And in First Corinthians, "The perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. (1 Corinthians 15:53).

In Colossians, we read, "Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience (Colossians 3:12).

Finally, in First Peter we are admonished, "All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because, 'God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble'" (1 Peter 5:5).

Being clothed anew is a consistent New Testament expression for holiness and righteousness. The old clothes have to come off and new ones put on.

This text confronts us with the paradox of God's free invitation to the banquet with no strings attached and God's requirement of "putting on" something appropriate to that calling. The theological point is that we are warned of the dire consequences of accepting the invitation and doing nothing except showing up.

38. Four Types of Pride

Illustration

John K. Bergland

Pride is the first of the seven deadly sins. One falls into pride when one lacks trust in God and his mercy and becomes arrogant, hypocritical, and self-centered. Reinhold Neibuhr, who has been referred to as the twentieth-century theologian of sin, summed up humanity's basic sin our unwillingness to acknowledge our creatureliness, our self-elevation in one word, PRIDE. Neibuhr described the four types of pride:

1. The pride of power wants power to gain security for self or to maintain a power position considered to be secure.

2. Intellectual pride rises from human knowledge that pretends to be ultimate knowledge. It presumes to be final truth.

3. Moral pride claims that its standards for virtue test and measure all righteousness. Niebuhr observed that most evil is done by "good" people who do not know that they are not good.

4. Spiritual pride is self-glorification. It claims that "self's righteousness" conforms to God's righteousness.

39. Pride

Illustration

John K. Bergland

Pride is the first of the seven deadly sins. One falls into pride when one lacks trust in God and his mercy and becomes arrogant, hypocritical, and self-centered. Reinhold Neibuhr, who has been referred to as the twentieth-century theologian of sin, summed up humanity's basic sin -- our unwillingness to acknowledge our creatureliness, our self-elevation, in one word: PRIDE.

Neibuhr described the four types of pride:

The pride of power wants power to gain security for self or to maintain a power position considered to be secure.
Intellectual pride rises from human knowledge that pretends to be ultimate knowledge. It presumes to be final truth.
Moral pride claims that its standards for virtue test and measure all righteousness. Neibuhr observed that most evil is done by "good" people who do not know that they are not good.
Spiritual pride is self-glorification. It claims that "self's righteousness" conforms to God's righteousness.

40. Man Up A Tree

Illustration

Larry Powell

Every church school child knows the story of Zacchaeus: "Zacchaeus was a wee little man, a wee little man was he; he climbed up in a sycamore tree, for Jesus he would see." For our purposes here, let us divide the story into three parts:

1. The person. Jericho was the gate city for Judea’s trade with the East, which meant that it was also the checkpoint for customs on imports and exports. Zacchaeus, as "chief tax collector," was in charge of collections and overseer of all other tax collectors in his district. Consequently, he was not only entitled to whatever revenues he could manage for himself, but also a share of what had been taken in by the other collectors. Opportunities for self-enrichment abounded and, from all indications, Zacchaeus allowed none to escape him. I would expect that at a very early age it had become clear to him that his choices would be severely limited. He was not physically suited for life in the country, nor strong enough to be a merchant who must travel long distances to trade. His childhood peers doubtless reminded him of his size by numerous remarks and omissions. But there was apparently one thing he could do well: cipher. He would excel in the area of his strongest ability and greatest interest ... money. The Scriptures depict him as short in stature, crooked in dealings, self-seeking, but interestingly enough, retaining a glimmer of moral consciousness.

2. The encounter. A large crowd had gathered to see Jesus as he passed through the city. Too small to see over the shoulders of others and unable to force his way to the front line, Zacchaeus climbed into a sycamore tree in order to see and, who knows, perhaps even to be seen. There is the possibility that the time had come in the little man’s life when his spirit cried out for peace and security ... the kind which the world cannot give ... something he had been unable to achieve by a lifetime of jaded aggressiveness. There is at least the possibility that something more than curiosity caused him to position himself in such a prominent place along the path of the one who was said to "forgive sinners." Whatever his reason, Jesus addressed him personally, went home with him to spend the day, and caused the people to complain, "He has gone in to be the guest of a man who is a sinner" (19:7).

3. The transformation. At some point during their visit, Zacchaeus stood up and said, "Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I will restore it fourfold." And Jesus said to him, "Today salvation has come to this house" (19:8-9).

The story of Zacchaeus is not an isolated incident. Other similarly tainted individuals have discovered that the deep places of their lives have been touched and embraced by one whose perception and discerning compassion penetrates beneath life’s surface and addresses a lingering need. Had our Lord considered the tax collector as others saw him ... niggardly, self-motivated, crooked, irritatingly ambitious ... had our Lord stopped there, considering only the topical evidence, Zacchaeus would have been left up in the tree. But Jesus did not take his meal in the home of a reprobate that day; he supped with a man who had a need, and as the shadows of evening gathered about Jericho, the need of at least one of its citizens had been met; "Today salvation has come to this house."

41. Didn't Know He Was Lost

Illustration

Robert Beringer

There are many who are bored, burned out, lonely and empty. Many people have tried to substitute the accumulation of things for good relationships, but no matter how much they get, something is still missing in life. Their pipe does not go down deep enough to draw living water, and they feel lost. There was a little boy who got separated from his parents in a large shopping center. The Security Department quickly located the child, and took him to an office while the frantic parents were paged over the public address. One of the security guards got a large ice cream cone for the boy, so when his parents arrived at the office, there was their little son happily eating his ice cream. Suddenly, as his parents embraced him, the child burst into tears. One of the security guards said, "Gosh, I guess he didn't know he was lost until he was found!"

Jesus once met a man named Zacchaeus who was like that. Zacchaeus was a Jew but he worked for the Romans as a tax collector, and he was about as popular as folks today who work for the IRS! In those days tax collectors gathered their funds with a little help from the Roman Army, and when Rome's needs were met, they could collect as much as their ingenuity permitted. Zacchaeus may have been small of stature, but he was a "big man" among the tax collectors. In fact, he was a "chief tax collector." He had a big home in Jericho, a very comfortable life, and although he had more enemies than friends, Zacchaeus outwardly appeared very successful.

42. Shaping People’s Lives through Forgiveness - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

At the University of Notre Dame in 1981 a rather prophetic lecture was given that predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union. The lecturer called Communism "a sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages are even now being written." A year later the same speaker told the British House of Commons that the march of freedom and democracy "will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash heap of history." Years later, in 1988, students at Moscow University sat and listened as this same speaker told them how the microchip would lead the way in expanding human freedom. Indeed, even that prediction is coming true. The Internet may be playing a critical role in dismantling china's communism. Remember now that this 1988, long before the advent of the Internet.

Who was this Speaker? This lecturer who looked into the future and was able to rightly discern where history was taking us? It was Ronald Reagan. Putting political preferences aside for just a moment I think all of us would have to agree that on at least a few crucial issues Reagan got it right. He looked into the future and steered us correctly. What is it that gives some people the ability to look at a situation and rightly sized it up? It seems to be a kind of gift doesn't it?

This is one of the qualities that separate the great men from the ordinary. In our story this morning (in Luke 7) certain insights are being expressed. A gathering of men at a dinner party has just witnessed a woman, who they all know to be a woman of ill repute, walk into the room with an alabaster jar of expensive perfume. She walks up behind Jesus and kneels. She is crying. As she weeps her tears fall onto his feet. She uses her hair as a towel to dry his feet and then she pours the expensive perfume on his feet. This is the scene and it is a sudden departure from the evening's festivities. But it now becomes the focal point of Jesus' teachings.

Now, listen to how the Pharisee sizes up the situation. He has two insights. On the first he is correct and on the second he is incorrect. Here they are: First he is correct about the lady. She was known in the community as a sinner. Her sin is not revealed to us but most of us could come pretty close in guessing it. Whatever it was the Pharisee rightly judged the woman's character. But here is where he failed. His insights and perceptions about Jesus were wrong. He said that if Jesus were a prophet he would know that this woman was a sinner and he would not let her touch him.

The Pharisee was wrong because the character of this woman was not lost on Jesus. And here is the beautiful part of the passage. Jesus knew who she was but he had moved beyond that to forgive the woman her sins. Jesus sizes up the situation and recognizes that grace is needed in this woman's life.

Now let's ask ourselves this question. Whether we are looking at an incredibly destructive institution or the loathsome practice of prostitution, whatever sin we find in the world are we able to look beyond the facts, size up the situation, see down the road and know what kind of grace is needed? We can do this if we can:

1. Be honest and call sin sin.
2. Use these moments to teach others.
3. Remember that redemption always wins in the end.

43. Service

Illustration

James W. Moore

Have you heard the beautiful children's story about the three trees? The trees were talking in the forest one day about their dreams for the future. The first tree said it would like to be made into a cradle, so that it might go on living as a support for the fragile life of a tiny new baby. The second tree wanted to be made into a big ship, so that it might go on living, carrying important cargo and influential people to exotic new lands. The third tree longed to stay right where it was, existing only as a tree, but growing ever taller, and pointing ever higher, to remind everyone that there is a God in heaven who loves them. Those were their dreams: One wanted to be a cradle, one wanted to be a mighty ship, and one wanted to be a tall tree, pointing people toward God.

But then one day the woodcutters came and chopped down the three trees...and destroyed their dreams. The first tree was not made into a cradle, but into a simple feeding trough, a manger for animals. But the manger was sold to a family in Bethlehem, and on the night Jesus was born, that simple feed box became the cradle for the Christ Child.

The second tree was built into a boat, but not the kind it had dreamed of--not a mighty ocean-going vessel--but a tiny inexpensive fishing boat. A man named Simon Peter bought the boat, and on one warm afternoon when the crowds pressed in, Jesus himself climbed aboard that small fishing boats that he might preach good news to the multitudes.

The third tree also was deprived of its dream. It wanted to remain standing tall and pointing toward God. Instead, it was cut down and shaped into a horrible instrument of torture, a cross. But it was on that very cross that Jesus was crucified, transforming a symbol of cruelty into a powerful reminder of God's eternal love for all the people.

The three trees were humbled, but in the plan of God, they were exalted.

That's the way it works: When we, in humility, give ourselves to God, our Lord can do great things through us and for us greater than we can ever imagine.

44. Ashamed To Beg

Illustration

John G. Lynn

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

45. Mastering the Virtue of Humility

Illustration

Our Daily Bread

"What do you think of the candidates?" That's what a reporter for a news magazine asked a young woman at Dartmouth University after a debate among presidential hopefuls. She didn't say a word about their positions on the issues or their skill at debate. She simply remarked, "None of them seems to have any humility."

Benjamin Franklin, the early American statesman, made a list of character qualities that he wanted to develop in his own life. When he mastered one virtue, he went on to the next. He did pretty well, he said, until he got to humility. Every time he thought he was making significant progress, he would be so pleased with himself that he became proud.

Humility is an elusive virtue. Even Jesus' disciples struggled with it. When Jesus learned that they had been arguing about who was the greatest, He responded, "If anyone desires to be first, he should be last of all and servant of all" (Mk. 9:35). Then He took a little child in His arms and indicated that we need to humbly serve others as if we were serving Christ.

If a news reporter were to talk to our friends, neighbors, or fellow church members and ask them to describe us, would they use the word humble?

46. No Record of Wrong

Illustration

John Flavel

There was a man in England who put his Rolls-Royce on a boat and went across to the continent to go on a holiday. While he was driving around Europe, something happened to the motor of his car. He cabled the Rolls-Royce people back in England and asked, "I'm having trouble with my car; what do you suggest I do?" Well, the Rolls-Royce people flew a mechanic over! The mechanic repaired the car and flew back to England and left the man to continue his holiday. As you can imagine, the fellow was wondering, "How much is this going to cost me?" So when he got back to England, he wrote the people a letter and asked how much he owed them. He received a letter from the office that read: "Dear Sir: There is no record anywhere in our files that anything ever went wrong with a Rolls-Royce."

Did Christ finish His work? How dangerous it is to join anything of our own to the righteousness of Christ, in pursuit of justification before God! Jesus Christ will never endure this; it reflects upon His work dishonorably. He will be all, or none, in our justification. If He has finished the work, what need is there of our additions? And if not, to what purpose are they? Can we finish that which Christ Himself could not complete? Did He finish the work, and will He ever divide the glory and praise of it with us? No, no; Christ is no half-Savior. It is a hard thing to bring proud hearts to rest upon Christ for righteousness. God humbles the proud by calling sinners wholly from their own righteousness to Christ for their justification.

47. National Righteousness

Illustration

Michael P. Green

The instructive motto of the State of Hawaii is a result of the influence of the Protestant missionaries who first came to Hawaii in 1820. It expresses a great truth in the Hawaiian language: Ua mau ke ia o ka aina i ka pono, which means, “The life of the land is preserved in righteousness.”

Righteousness is what preserves a nation, not a Declaration of Independence or a Constitution, and not even Congress or its laws. What sustains and perpetuates a national identity is the righteousness of its people—the reflection of their recognizing their need for God, worked out in their relationships with one another.

48. Pouring Me Into Me

Illustration

Michael P. Green

Self-righteousness is like a bottomless cup: though you pour and pour, you will never be able to fill it. Why? Because pouring yourself into yourself adds nothing to you. Nothing plus nothing always equals nothing. Instead, accept God’s righteousness rather than trying to accumulate your own. You will find that the righteousness he offers is real. And that is what fills the cup of sanctification.

49. Breaking Down Barriers

Illustration

Bill Hybels

“Jesus’ perspective was shaped by a deep sense of humility. It was a humility where none was called for; Jesus, as God, clearly deserved His titles, position, and praise. But as we have seen, Jesus “did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.” He wanted instead, to relate with man on an equal level. Where religious leaders of His day relished the separation between themselves and “the common people”, Jesus sought to break down the barriers, even those imposed by His divine rights. Humility was at the core of His philosophy. More times than not, He used His power for the powerless, showed love to the loveless, and served those who could not possibly return the favor. With characteristic consistency, He repeatedly rejected a Pecking Order based on conditional response.”

50. Never as Stereotypes

Illustration

John A. Stroman

Jesus always met men and women on the level of their need, regardless of who they were or what they had done. He met everyone as human beings, never as stereotypes. Stereotypes were as powerful then as they are now. Once a label is placed on a person the human being vanishes. Many labels were given to people in the New Testament such labels as tax collector, Samaritan, Roman soldier, prostitute, rich young man, Pharisee, sinner, publican, leper. They all appear in the gospel narrative, and every time Jesus completely ignores the label and deals with the person. This is certainly true of his encounters with Matthew, Zacchaeus, the traveler on the Jericho road, the centurion, Mary Magdalene, and Nicodemus. David H.C. Read points out that "Jesus knew the ugly side of society: the brutality of the occupation, the corruption of the tax system, the racial prejudices, the economic injustice, the religious hypocrisy, and the sexual degradation. But never once did these factors blind him to the reality of the human being, the unique son or daughter of God he saw before him."

Showing 1 to 50 of 217 results