Sermon and Worship Resources

Colossians 1:15-23 · The Supremacy of Christ

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

21 Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior. 22 But now he has reconciled you by Christ's physical body through death to present you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation-- 23 if you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel. This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.

The Incomparable Christ

Colossians 1:15-20

Sermon
by David E. Leininger

Life was difficult. It always was for prisoners. There were meager rations and hard labor. Sometimes restrained and tortured by the stocks or collar. Left with festering wounds in damp, abandoned cisterns converted to maximum security dungeons. Why was he here? His only crime was criticizing the king for stealing his own brother's wife, Herodias. Herodias wanted John killed, but Herod Antipas was reluctant — he knew the people thought highly of John.

John's ministry had begun in the wilderness where he subsisted on an ascetic diet of locusts and wild honey. He wore the dress of a prophet, camel's hair, and a leather belt. John preached the need for repentance in preparation for the coming of the Messiah, the Christos, the anointed one, and called on people to be baptized in recognition of their cleansing — thus his nickname, John the Baptizer or John the Baptist. John was a man of high ethics — he preached fairness and sharing: A person who had two coats should give one to a someone who had none; tax collectors were warned to collect no more than their due; and soldiers were instructed to rob no one and be content with their wages, with fairness and with sharing. But sharing your brother's wife was a bit much. So here he was in the royal prison.

Meanwhile, John's cousin, Jesus, was continuing a ministry that had commenced some months before. Indeed, it had begun as the two were together in the wilderness at the Jordan. John was convinced that this Jesus was the Messiah, the Christ, the one who had been prophesied for centuries, one who would be specially anointed to carry out God's plan for Israel. The Christ would be great David's even greater son, and a new day would dawn with his appearing. John had been excited at the arrival of Jesus. Jesus asked for baptism, but John was reluctant, claiming to be unworthy even to lose the thongs of Jesus' sandals. But Jesus persisted, John relented, and at the special moment saw the Spirit of God descend as a dove and heard a voice from heaven saying, "You are my Son, whom I love, with you I am well pleased" (Mark 1:11).

It had been months since that day by the Jordan. But no revolution had begun, Rome was still master of Israel, and Herod remained on the throne. Here John was in prison. What was going on? So he sent two of his disciples to inquire: "Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait for another?" (Matthew 11:2 NRSV).

Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait for another? Not only the question of an ancient text, but the question that has been repeated ever since, until the end of time, and will continue to be asked by every human heart.

Of course, the answer of the gospel, the faith in which we have been raised, says absolutely! Yes, Jesus is the one. This Jesus is unique. He is the incomparable Christ.

Read through the text from Colossians, and you will find what sounds remarkably like a Confession of Faith. That is not accidental. Paul makes these ringing statements in answer to some questions about Jesus that had been raised in the Colossian church (and others as well). The questions were not centered around, "Are you the one or should we wait for another?" but rather, "Just what do we make of you?" "How should we understand Jesus?"

Paul declares that Jesus Christ is the "image of the invisible God" (Colossians 1:15). The Greek word for image is eikon; even though we force Paul to jump through the centuries to explain, computer junkies know about icons — click on the icon, and you get the whole program. In the eikon Jesus, you have, not just a picture or some representation, you actually have God.

Paul then talks about creation and says Christ is the "firstborn" (Colossians 1:15). Firstborn is understood in the ancient world as more than simply order of appearance; it is a title of honor. Thus, for Paul, firstborn of all creation means that this one unique individual must be accorded the highest honor creation can offer.

Now Paul moves to discuss Christ's relationship to the church. He calls him the "head of the body" (Colossians 1:18). If the church is the "body of Christ" (Colossians 1:18), (a phrase Paul has used previously), then the image is one of direction — the church does not go about its task running around like a chicken (or anything else) with its head cut off. The body moves at the head's bidding. Through history we can see some strange (and even awful) things that the church has done in the name of its head, but overall, the record of the church's accomplishments in making life on this planet more as God originally intended is remarkable.

Paul says Christ is the "firstborn from the dead" (Colossians 1:18). This Christ is not some fascinating figure of history through whom we learn by old example; no, this Christ not only lived and died but rose again and meets us and greets us at every turn. And he will "in everything ... have the supremacy" (Colossians 1:18).

Finally, Paul describes Christ's relation to the universe. He says, "God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him." "Fullness" was a theological term that had its roots in Greek philosophy — pleroma — this was ultimate perfection, and it was the goal of the faithful, not to go to heaven (if there were such a place) but rather finally to be absorbed into the pleroma. Paul says, "No" — the pleroma has come to be with us, "to reconcile" — break barriers, build bridges to make peace.

Now for the really startling assertion. How is this reconciliation effected, this peace made? It is made "through his blood, shed on the cross" (Colossians 1:20). That's right. No pretend Christ, no seemingly real Christ, as some wanted to assert. This one bleeds red blood when you cut into his meaty flesh.

Strange, isn't it? The sovereign God of all the universe coming in a human body, suffering and dying? Really? "Are you the one or should we wait for another?" Thus, the strange answer to John the Baptist's disciples. Not, "Hang in there for just a bit longer and the revolution will begin." Instead, "Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them" (Matthew 11:4-5 NRSV). This is different, very different.

Yes, King of kings and Lord of lords, but there is something unique with this king — instead of being draped with the trappings of an all-powerful potentate, he reigns as a suffering servant. Our sovereign Lord is revealed in the one who walked the dusty roads of Palestine, who had no place to lay his head, who emptied himself in obedience all the way to the cross. How do we honor such a king? He talks about feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, welcoming the stranger, and then this strange king says we show we care for him when we care for someone in need. This is different.

"Are you the one, or are we to wait for another?" (Matthew 11:2). The earliest Christian creed — perhaps also a password among persecuted believers — may have been the three simple words, Kyrios Iesous Christos meaning "Jesus Christ is Lord." This is the incomparable Christ.

CSS Publishing Company, Inc., Lectionary Tales for the Pulpit, by David E. Leininger

Overview and Insights · The Supremacy of Christ (1:15–23)

1:15-23 is the central paragraph of the entire letter. In 1:15–17, Christ is praised as the Lord of all creation. Jesus perfectly reveals the invisible God and reigns supreme over all creation, including all thrones, powers, rulers, and authorities (1:15–16). He existed before creation, and creation holds together in him (1:17). Jesus C…

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Colossians 1:15-23 · The Supremacy of Christ

Commentary · The Hymn to Christ

1:13–14 · The Father rescues his people: Verse 12 prepares the reader for a further discussion of God’s kingdom with its insistence on the church’s rightful inheritance of it. (On the kingdom of God in Paul, see also Rom. 14:17; 1 Cor. 4:20; 6:9; 15:24–28.) Verses 13–14 explain how this inheritance has been accomplished. Paul makes clear that the Colossians had lived in darkness, that is, in sinfulness. God rescued them through his beloved Son, and now they are in the light (see Luke 16:8; John 12:36; 1 Thess. 5:15). Paul describes forgiveness in terms of release from captivity, a theme he will develop more fully later in the argument, when he speaks of Christ’s overcoming the powers and authorities (1:16; 2:10, 15).

1:15–20 · The Son offers reconciliation:Verses 15–20 contain some of the most poignant and provocative Christology in the New Testament. The passage sounds like a poem or hymn, prompting scholars to wonder whether Paul authored this section (Wright, 64) or appropriated it from the church (Dunn, 83). Yet most agree that the hymn fits the context well and that Paul used it to expand on key themes of God’s kingdom, creation, and Christ’s power in reconciling humans to God. Christology informs cosmology by declaring that creation is going somewhere—the goal of creation is new creation rooted in Christ (Col. 3:10). Again, Christology validates soteriology (theology dealing with salvation), for the new people of God are reconciled to him and each other through the cross of Christ (Col. 2:13–14). Christology corroborates eschatology in its insistence that Christ’s resurrection is but the first fruits of a believer’s eternal life in glory (Col. 3:4).

In declaring that Christ is the image of the invisible God, Paul asserts that pagan idols are not representative of God, for God is invisible, except through the Son (see John 1:18). Moreover, as the image of God, Christ reflects the Godhead in its divine nature. Christ being the source of all things, Paul concludes that all things are held together and function for Christ. He is the firstborn—not only in terms of rank but also in a temporal sense, as indicated in 1:18 (“the firstborn from among the dead”). Paul does not mean that Christ is the first created being—in response to Arius, Athanasius writes, “But if all the creatures were created in him, he is other than the creatures, and is not a creature, but the Creator of the creatures” (Orations against the Arians 2.62)—but rather that Christ is the exalted preexistent one who was with God at creation, though he was not preexistent in his human form. These key ideas play out in Colossians 3:9–10, wherein Paul admonishes the Colossians to live in their new self, “which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator.” Christ is the means through which creation was made and is sustained. He brings the new creation into being; and the Colossians have entered into it, as their lives are now “hidden with Christ in God” (3:3).

In Christ all things were created, including thrones and powers and rulers and authorities. Paul may be thinking of magic, astrology, or the oppressive political powers holding sway in his day. He may be thinking of paganism and/or the Jewish law as it functioned within the Gentile church. Most likely, Paul is speaking in the broadest terms of anything that claims ultimate authority or precedence in a believer’s life—anything that is feared or honored above Christ.

The fact that Christ is preeminent over creation has consequences for humanity. Specifically, Christ is the head (kephalē) of the church, which Paul identifies as his body. And Christ is the beginning (archē). Both of the terms in Greek carry the sense of source, creative initiative, or first principle as well as leader. N. T. Wright (104) says, “The word ‘head’ was as flexible and evocative in Hebrew or Greek as it is in English, and we should not squeeze all Paul’s uses of it into exactly the same mould” (see also Wright, 74). In the ancient world, it was common to speak of the cosmos or the state as a body (Plato, Timaeus 31b, 32a; Livy, Histories 2.32.9–12; Epictetus, Discourses 2.10.4–5). Philo, a first-century Jew, declares that divine Reason (Logos) is the head of the cosmos (On Dreams 1.128; Questions and Answers on Exodus 2.117). Paul may be drawing on all these nuances when he expresses that Christ is the head of the church—Christ is the source, the leader, and the mind of the church.

It is Christ’s resurrection that secures his supremacy. Christ has always had preeminence in principle, but the resurrection made that supremacy actual in time by defeating sin on the cross. The reward is not only authority over all things but also the resurrection of his body (literally and figuratively as the church).

The purpose behind Christ’s death and resurrection, as 1:20 makes clear, is to reconcile all things to God. Christ is fully God (1:19) and as such is able to carry out the redemption plan, which redeems and reconciles all creation—his creation—to God. The cross made peace between God and his creation; it reconciled all things, which suggests that its power was not limited to human sin but covered the ramifications of sin throughout all creation. This reconciliation is available to all by faith. Paul is not claiming a universal salvation here; rather, he is emphasizing the scope of Christ’s redemptive work—all people can be reconciled, through faith (1:23; see also 2 Cor. 5:10).

1:21–23 · The Colossians stand firm in faith and hope: After finishing the great hymn of praise to Christ, Paul now presents the implications of his Christology. He explains that in the past the Colossians were alienated from God. From God’s perspective, the situation that created their alienation has been fixed on the cross. Does Paul imply that this “fix” is conditional, when he adds “if you continue in your faith” (1:23)? He is not suggesting that every once in a while the cross is ineffectual in atoning for sin or declaring that God might decide at some point to reject the cross as sufficient remedy for all sin. Paul is not insinuating that the Colossians are to muddle along as best they can and hope that their faith manages in the end to carry them to heaven. The point Paul makes is that the Colossians must stay the course, both in mind and in behavior. They must remain connected to the head, Christ, for the body cannot live without its head. Paul gives no hint that he is worried they might not reach this goal.

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

The Hymn to Christ

Scholars are virtually unanimous in their opinion that verses 15–20 constitute a hymn. Since the existence of hymns in the early church was common (Phil. 2:5–11; Col. 3:16; Eph. 5:19), it is not difficult to believe that this is a carefully written poem intended to convey a specific self-contained message about Christ to the readers at Colossae.

Paul has already alluded to the work of Christ with respect to deliverance and the forgiveness of sins (1:13, 14). In the hymn he continues to draw attention to the person and work of Christ in cosmic and soteriological (pertaining to salvation) terms. Later, in 1:21–23, he shows the readers that they were reconciled to lead a moral and obedient life under the lordship of Jesus Christ.

Whereas most scholars agree on the hymnic nature of these verses, there is less unanimity surrounding such issues as the structure, author, source, and meaning and purpose of the passage.

The Structure of the Hymn
These verses have been arranged poetically in a number of ways. According to some reconstructions of the Greek text, the NIV translation would read as follows:
Strophe I
1:15—He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
1:16—For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth (visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him).
Strophe II
1:17—He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
1:18a—And he is the head of the body (the church);
Strophe III
1:18b—He is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead (so that in everything he might have the supremacy).
1:19—For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him,
1:20—and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven (by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross).

The Author of the Hymn
If Paul is considered to be the author of the epistle, then why are there so many questions about the authorship of this specific hymn? The reasons for this are varied and complex, but they center around the fact that (a) the passage contains many words and phrases not found elsewhere in Paul’s writings, and (b) it was not uncommon for Paul to incorporate previously existing traditional material into his letters. Normally, this included hymns, confessions, creeds, and liturgical materials used by the early church. Where this occurs, Paul could be regarded more as an editor than as the original author.

Most of the Christ hymn in Colossians has come to be regarded as a pre-Pauline composition. Though scholars may disagree on its precise origin, they are quite certain that Paul, in adopting the hymn, modified it in order to apply it to the specific situation at Colossae. (The phrases in parentheses in the reconstruction just given reflect the additions, i.e., interpolations, that Paul may have made from the original hymn. The meaning and purpose of these interpolations will be dealt with later.)

The Source of the Hymn
A number of sources for the hymn have been suggested. Some scholars have analyzed the content of the hymn in light of the OT and think that it has its origin in some type of rabbinical Judaism. Others have come to appreciate its Gnostic background and thus reconstruct its meaning based upon ideas and language familiar to the teachings of Gnosticism at the time of Paul. Another group of interpreters sees the hymn originating from the circles of Hellenistic Judaism, which, by the first century, had become very syncretistic in its beliefs and practices. Thus it is not uncommon for these authors to draw from Stoic, Gnostic, Hellenistic, and Jewish sources.

The hymn may have had several stages of development: first, as a non-Christian hymn created in the milieu of Greek philosophy and used by groups such as the Stoics and Gnostics; second, as a Christian hymn celebrating the cosmic role of Christ in Hellenistic-Jewish terminology; third, as a Pauline hymn that contains specific additions to correct the erroneous ideas of the false teachers in Colossae.

The Purpose and Meaning of the Hymn
It has been mentioned earlier that Paul’s motives for adopting and applying this hymn center around his concern that the Colossians maintain a correct understanding of the person and work of Christ against the false teachings that they have been receiving. They were in danger of falling away from the truth of the gospel to man-made traditions. Paul wants them to remember to follow the gospel as they learned it from Epaphras: “So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live in him, rooted and built up in him, strengthened in the faith as you were taught” (2:6, 7).

The primary purpose of the hymn is to establish the superiority or the preeminence of Christ in all things (1:18).

Outline of the Hymn: The preeminence of Christ
A.  Christ’s preeminence in the cosmos (1:15–17)
1.   The image of the Creator (1:15a)
2.   The agent of creation
a.   Of the visible world (1:15b)
b.   Of the invisible world (1:16)
3.   The means of cohesion (1:17)
B.  Christ’s preeminence in the church (1:18–20)
1.   As its Head (1:18a)
2.   As its Lord (1:18b, 19)
3.   As its Reconciler (1:20)

1:15 He is the image of the invisible God. By image, Paul does not mean mere resemblance or similarity, because the Greek word used is eikōn. This communicates the idea that Christ participates in and with the nature of God, not merely copying, but visibly manifesting and perfectly revealing God in human form (in 2 Cor. 4:4 Paul talks about “the glory of Christ, who is the image of God”).

The result of the Incarnation is that the invisible God has become visible in the God-man, Jesus Christ. The Apostle John, in a different context, records statements that Christ made: “I and the Father are one” (10:30), and “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (14:9). Such a claim could not be made for any angel or spiritual power. Christ’s sovereignty is attested to by his personal and unique relationship to God.

By bearing the image of God in this way, Christ stands apart from the created order as the firstborn over all creation. The phrase firstborn (prōtotokos) has often been taken in a temporal sense implying that Christ is the first one to be created and thus belongs to the created order. Apparently the false teachers at Colossae had relegated Christ to the status of a created being. This heresy has a long history, for it was championed by the Arians in the fourth century A.D. and continues to be perpetuated by the Jehovah’s Witnesses today.

Paul does not mean that Christ belongs to creation in a temporal way. The issue here is primacy of function, not priority in time. Since Christ participates in the act of creation, he stands over and beyond the created world as the agent by which everything came into existence.

1:16 After establishing Christ’s superiority in the created order, Paul moves on to the invisible world of heavenly and earthly beings. The “all creation” (1:15) is expanded by the phrase that by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth. The Greek uses two prepositions that aid in the understanding of the action intended: God created the whole universe by (dia) and for (eis) him. In other words, Christ is both the agent and the goal of creation. He must not be relegated to the same inferior position as other spiritual powers. All of creation finds its goal in Christ alone. The use of the perfect tense of “created” (ektisthē) shows that what has taken place in God’s creative activity continues to be effective into the present.

One gets the impression that Paul is taking great pains to avoid any misunderstanding on this matter. He already has emphasized that all things (used twice in this verse) were created by Christ. Now he amplifies this by the terms heaven and earth and visible and invisible. This includes all spiritual forces, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities.

These terms represent a view and classification of spiritual powers that were current in the first century. People believed that the world was inhabited by all sorts of alien powers that were a threat to human beings (Rom. 8:38; 1 Cor. 15:24; Eph. 1:21; 6:12; 1 Pet. 3:22). The fact that the reference to these powers is a probable interpolation by Paul into the hymn suggests that these powers were given undue prominence by the false teachers. Paul’s point is that these powers are subject to Christ’s superiority since they were created by and for him. He is Lord over all these powers (2:10, 15).

1:17 The phrase he is before all things reaffirms some of the things that Paul has already said about Christ. But the new thought is that, in him all things hold together. The Greek word synestēken here connotes preservation or coherence. Thus the Lord who creates the universe also sustains it.

1:18 From cosmic sovereignty, Paul turns to discuss Christ’s preeminence in the church by using the head-body imagery. He has convincingly established Christ’s lordship over the world; now he establishes Christ’s lordship in the church.

If the church can be regarded as a Pauline interpolation, then an earlier version of the hymn must have proclaimed Christ as head of the body only. There is much speculation as to the source of the head-body metaphor in Paul’s writings. Some scholars are attracted to the idea of “corporate personality” in which all of humanity is considered to be “in Adam.” The counterpart in the NT is that, since all Christians are “in Christ”—that is, the church—they can be regarded as the body of Christ. Most scholars, however, believe that the idea comes from Hellenistic conceptions of the cosmic body.

In several Greek sources, including the writings of Plato, the Stoics, and the Alexandrian Jew Philo, there are numerous mythological conceptions of the universe as a body that is governed by a “head.” Here, the cosmos is filled by the deity and consequently viewed as the body of the deity over which there is “Wisdom” or “Logos” as its head. The common belief was that, just as a person’s physical body needs direction and guidance from the head, so the body of the cosmos needs a head such as Logos or Wisdom as a unifying principle.

What the Greeks attributed to Wisdom or Logos for headship, the early church attributed to Christ. He, in other words, is the divine Logos (cf. John’s prologue in 1:1–3) who governs the body (sōma) of the cosmos. It is quite possible that a Christian version of this hymn initially celebrated Christ’s headship over the cosmos. The new development in Colossians is that Paul interprets body not as cosmos but as church. In other words, although Christ is head of the whole world, only the church is his body.

The identification of the church as the body of Christ over which Christ is the head in Colossians (1:18, 24) and Ephesians (1:22, 23; 4:15, 16) is not the same as the description of the “body” in Romans and 1 Corinthians. In those two epistles (Rom. 12:1–8; 1 Cor. 12:4–31), Paul uses the concept of the church as the body of Christ and emphasizes the mutual relationships and obligations that exist among its members by virtue of their spiritual gifts. There the “head” is simply mentioned along with the other members of the body (1 Cor. 12:14–26). Only in Colossians and Ephesians is Christ designated as head over the church. The reason for this surely lies in Paul’s intention to proclaim the lordship of Christ over all things. He wants the Colossians to know that the church is the place where Christ exercises his sovereignty over the cosmos.

This Lord is the beginning of the body’s life, vitalizing and energizing it by virtue of his resurrection. Paul utilizes the phrase firstborn for the second time (cf. 1:15) in order to re-emphasize the priority of Christ. The final result of this is Christ’s absolute preeminence (so that in everything he might have the supremacy).

1:19 Paul goes on to say that God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him. There are two significant problems connected with the translation and interpretation of this verse.

The first problem is with the meaning of fullness (plērōma). In 2:9, plērōma is equated with all of God’s nature as it dwells in Christ (“for in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form”). On this basis one is justified in giving it the same meaning as in 1:19 rather than seeing it in some Gnostic way in which plērōma is regarded as the totality or fullness of aeons emanating from God and filling the space between heaven and earth. Nevertheless, one aspect of the false teaching in Colossae was that it gave undue prominence to those supernatural powers that filled the universe by regarding them as intermediaries between God and the world. Paul corrects this by affirming that the full nature of God dwells in Christ exclusively.

The second issue centers around the subject of pleased. The Greek literally reads “because in him (Christ) was pleased all the fullness to dwell.” At least three possibilities have been suggested: (a) to make Christ the subject, thus giving the meaning that he (Christ) was pleased that all the fullness of God should dwell in him; (b) to make plērōma the subject, resulting in a translation adopted by the RSV (“for in him all the fulness was pleased to dwell”); and (c) to regard God as the subject. Hence the NIV: For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him).

The main argument against this third view is the introduction of God as the subject in a hymn that concentrates on Christ (God has not been mentioned since 1:15). But the Greek text does permit it, and the meaning has support elsewhere in Scripture (cf. Christ’s baptism and transfiguration). These technicalities, however, should not detract from the essential truth that Paul wishes to stress, namely, that Christ is the dwelling place (katoikēsai, “to take up residence”) of God. As such, another factor of Christ’s sovereignty is established.

1:20 A final tribute is given to Christ as the agent of reconciliation. God was pleased that his fullness should dwell in his Son (1:19). Now, God was also pleased through him [the Son] to reconcile to himself all things. Reconciliation implies an existing estrangement or hostility that needed to be corrected (1:12, 22; Eph. 2:16). The all things that are reconciled are clarified by the phrase whether things on earth or things in heaven. In other words, it is not just the church (humanity) that has been reconciled; the reconciliation wrought by Christ extends to the entire cosmic order. By doing this, Paul shows the Colossians that every part of the universe is included in the reconciling work of Christ. His love has no limits!

One needs to be careful not to push this language to the extreme. Some have understood it very broadly and believe that humanity and all spiritual powers—including the evil angels—are at peace with God. But such a teaching needs to be interpreted in the light of everything Paul, and indeed the entire NT, say about such doctrines as reconciliation and salvation. The main point Paul makes is that everything has been brought into harmony through Christ.

The third Pauline interpolation in this hymn includes the phrase by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross (cf. Rom. 5:1ff.). This locates reconciliation in a historical act, accomplished by the shedding of Christ’s blood on the cross. Paul will have no part of some cosmic drama that may have been perpetuated by the false teachers.

There is a question regarding himself. The RSV and NIV are ambiguous enough that one may take it to mean either God or Christ. The same construction (eis auton) is used in 1:16, where Christ is the object. The GNB is probably correct in interpreting the verse to mean that reconciliation is to God (“God … brought back to himself all things”). Thus reconciliation is through Christ but to God!

Additional Notes

1:15 See H. Kleinknecht, “eikōn,” TDNT, vol. 2, pp. 389–90.

1:16 See W. Michaelis, “prōtos,” TDNT, vol. 6, pp. 865–82; Schweizer, Colossians, has a good section on the history of interpretation of this problem, pp. 250–52.

1:18 “The [Greeks] all thought that the universe was something like a giant body ruled by the gods or, as more and more pagan Greeks would express it in the time of the New Testament, by a god or a supreme power or a universal spirit. There are some who had already used the figure of God as the head of the body, the universe. A Jewish philosopher and contemporary of Jesus, Philo of Alexandria, had already spoken of the logos (which means word and/or mind and/or spirit of God) being the head of the universe. Thus, everybody understood that Christ could be the head of the world” (Schweizer, “Christ in the Letter to the Colossians,” p. 460).

On “body,” see Schweizer, “sōma,” TDNT, vol. 7, pp. 1024–94; Barth, “Head, Body, Fulness,” Eph. 1–3, pp. 183–210; Bruce discounts a Greek influence on Paul’s theology with respect to these concepts (pp. 200–205).

1:19 On “fullness,” G. Delling, “plērēs, plēroō,” TDNT, vol. 6, pp. 283–311; Lohse, pp. 52–59; P. D. Overfield, “ ‘Pleroma’: A Study in Content and Context,” NTS 25 (1979), pp. 384–96; Robinson, Ephesians, pp. 87–89.

1:20 Barclay lists four different theories on the interpretation of “reconciliation” in this verse: (1) the angels needed reconciliation and redemption because they were under sin; (2) according to Origen, even the devil and his angels would be reconciled in the end; (3) the phrase just emphasizes completeness; and (4) the angels were reconciled to God but not to humanity (The Letters to Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians, pp. 148–49).

The Application of the Hymn to the Colossians

1:21 In the verses following the Christ hymn (1:21–23), Paul resumes the same kind of pastoral concern so evident in his thanksgiving and prayer (1:3–19). He reminds his readers that the cosmic and ecclesiastical reconciliation that he has just described in the hymn is true for them as well (once you … but now he has reconciled you). They have been made acceptable to God and now are challenged to continue in the truth that they have been taught.

One way to appreciate what God has done is to remember what one was before God’s grace was experienced personally (cf. 1:26; 3:7; Rom. 6:22; 11:30; 1 Cor. 6:11). Hence Paul reminds them that in their pre-Christian state they were alienated from God, and as such, they were God’s enemies. This enmity manifested itself in an evil manner of life and thought. This stands as quite a contrast to their Christian walk (described in 1:10).

1:22 But a great change has taken place in their lives because God has acted decisively in Christ. Paul picks up the key word reconciliation from the hymn (1:20) and reminds them that God reconciled them by Christ’s physical body through death. Both the hymn and this verse emphasize the personal and historical act of Christ. Perhaps the false teachers had either denied or minimized the reality of Christ’s incarnation and death. The emphasis on Christ’s physical death may also be a polemic against those teachers who included the angels in the work of reconciliation but who, in contrast to Christ, do not have a body.

Reconciliation has a moral aspect as well. The GNB captures the Greek parastēsai, which expresses purpose (to present you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation). Some commentators believe that the terminology used here has a sacrificial or cultic meaning (cf. Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19). However, the main idea appears to be judicial, that is, those who have been reconciled to God are acquitted of all charges; they are holy, pure, and faultless when they stand before him (Eph. 5:27; Jude 24).

The message for the Colossians is that all of this is true for them now. This is their standing before God because it is his gift to them through Christ. Nevertheless, there is a future aspect in all of this because the “already” and the “not yet” are so characteristic of Paul’s writings. What Christians possess now they will have in full at the final Parousia of Christ.

1:23 Lest his readers entertain any idea that their status in Christ can be treated with indifference, Paul emphatically reminds them of an important condition that needs to be kept in mind: if you continue in your faith, established and firm. Salvation, although a free gift from God, must be kept. Thus those who have received Christ are admonished to abide or to persevere in Christ (John 8:31; 15:4–7; Acts 14:22; Rom. 11:22; 2 John 9).

To counter the threat of their eroding faith and shifting hope, Paul draws upon building metaphors that, as elsewhere in Scripture, portray strength, endurance, and security (Matt. 7:24–27; 1 Cor. 3:10–15; Eph. 2:19–22; 1 Pet. 2:4–10). The recipients can only have such a foundation, established and firm, by following in the faith and hope of the gospel that initially was proclaimed to them as well as to the whole world.

With these themes of faith, hope, and the universality of the gospel, Paul returns full circle to ideas expressed in his opening thanksgiving (1:3–8). There, his concern was that the Colossians see this as evidence for the truth of the gospel; here, he admonishes them to apply this truth to their lives continually.

Paul closes this section by stating that he is related personally to this gospel as a servant (diakonos). By doing this, he shows his commitment to the message that the Colossians have heard as well as his identity with his co-workers Epaphras and Tychicus, who likewise are servants of the gospel (1:7; 4:7). The statement also serves as a transition to the following verses where Paul outlines his ministry to the church.

Additional Notes

Schweizer summarizes the hymnic nature of this passage rather well when he writes: “It is no longer a matter for dispute that we have in these verses a hymn which has been taken over by the author. The prerequisites for this are present, as far as form is concerned; there is a certain rhythm in the construction both as a whole and in detail. There is also a portrayal of Christ, self-contained and surpassing anything that might be expected in the context; and again, there is the customary opening by means of the relative pronoun. More importantly, the distinctive characteristics of the style of the author of the Epistle are not found here, although they otherwise appear throughout the letter, while a plethora of unusual concepts also appear. Above all, however, one cannot help but notice the theological difference between the hymn itself and the commentary which the author of the Epistle provides” (pp. 55–56).

On the reconstruction of the strophic divisions of the hymn as presented by E. Norden, J. M. Robinson, and Schweizer, see Cannon, pp. 19–23. Martin divides the passage into three parts: Strophe I (1:15–16); Strophe II (1:17–18a); Strophe III (1:18b–20), pp. 55–56. See also Martin’s Reconciliation, pp. 111–26.

For a recent presentation of the hymnic material in the NT, see Cannon, pp. 6–9, esp. n. 17, for bibliographical sources. For Cannon’s discussion of 1:15–20, see pp. 19–37. Lohse lists twenty-three significant studies on the hymn (pp. 41–46). Other helpful sources include W. McCown, “The Hymnic Structure of Colossians 1:15–20,” EQ 51 (1979), pp. 156–62; Schweizer, pp. 55–88; idem, “The Church as the Missionary Body of Christ,” NTS 8 (1961), pp. 1–11; idem, “Christ in the Letter to the Colossians,” pp. 455–62. On the baptismal nature of the hymn, E. Käsemann, “A Primitive Christian Baptismal Liturgy,” in Essays on New Testament Themes, SBT 41 (London: SCM, 1964), pp. 154–59.

1:21 The Greek word apallotrioō (alienated, “estranged”) occurs only here and in Eph. 2:12; 4:18. The use of the perfect tense (apēllotriōmenous) emphasizes that their alienation (you were alienated) was a continuous state of being.

1:22 Anyone using the Greek text will discover a number of variant readings on the idea of reconciliation, showing the struggle that translators have had with this verse. The NIV, along with other English translations, accepts the active “he reconciled” rather than the passive “you (plural) were reconciled.”

1:23 The phrase proclaimed to every creature under heaven (cf. 1:6) is not to be taken literally unless it refers to the Roman Empire. Rather, this is a polemical statement to show the inclusiveness of the gospel as opposed to the exclusivism of the false teaching.

Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by Arthur G. Patzia, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Blemish

The physical defect on a sacrificial animal that makes it an unacceptable offering to the Lord (Lev. 22:17 25), or the physical defect on a priest that disqualifies him from performing certain priestly functions (Lev. 21:17–24). In the NT, Christ is the once-for-all sacrificial lamb without blemish or defect. In Christ, Christians are presented to God as holy and without blemish (Eph. 5:27; Col. 1:22; Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19).

Blood

The word for “blood” in the Bible is used both literally and metaphorically. “Blood” is a significant biblical term for understanding purity boundaries and theological concepts. Blood is a dominant ritual symbol in biblical literature. Blood was used in sacrifices and purification rites, and it was inherently connected to menstruation, animal slaughter, and legal culpability. Among the physical properties of blood are the ability to coagulate, the liquid state of the substance (Rev. 16:3 4), and the ability to stain (Rev. 19:13). Blood can symbolize moral order in terms of cult, law, and power.

The usage of blood in the OT is predominantly negative. The first direct mention of blood in the biblical text involves a homicide (Gen. 4:10). Henceforward, the shedding of human blood is a main concern (Gen. 9:6). Other concerns pertaining to blood include dietary prohibitions of blood (Lev. 17:10–12), purity issues such as the flow of blood as in menstrual blood (Lev. 15:19–24), and blood as a part of religious rites such as circumcision (Gen. 17:10–11; Exod. 4:24–26).

Leviticus 17:11 contains a central statement in the OT concerning the significant role of blood in the sacrificial system: “The life of a creature is in the blood.” Blood was collected from all animal sacrifices, and blood was poured onto the altar (Lev. 1:5).

The covenant with Abraham was sealed with a covenantal ritual (Gen. 15:10–21). Moses sealed the covenant between the Israelites and God with a blood ritual during which young Israelite men offered young bulls among other sacrifices as fellowship offerings (Exod. 24:5). Moses read the words of the Book of the Covenant and sprinkled the blood of the bulls on the people, saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words” (Exod. 24:7–8).

During the Passover observance at the time of the exodus, blood was placed on the sides and tops of the doorframes of the Hebrews (Exod. 12:7). Not only altars were sprinkled and thus consecrated with blood, but priests were as well. Aaron and his sons were consecrated by the application of blood to their right earlobe, thumb, and big toe, and the sprinkling of blood and oil on their garments (Exod. 29:20). On the Day of Atonement, the high priest entered the holy of holies and sprinkled blood on the mercy seat to seek atonement for the sins of the people (Lev. 16:15).

Many events in the passion of Christ include references to blood. During the Last Supper, Jesus redefined the last Passover cup: “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:28). Judas betrayed “innocent blood” (Matt. 27:4), and the money he received for his betrayal was referred to as “blood money” (Matt. 27:6). At Jesus’ trial, Pilate washed his hands and declared, “I am innocent of this man’s blood” (Matt. 27:24).

The apostle Paul wrote that believers are justified by the blood of Christ (Rom. 5:9). This justification or righteous standing with God was effected through Christ’s blood sacrifice (Rom. 3:25–26; 5:8). The writer of Hebrews stressed the instrumental role of blood in bringing about forgiveness (Heb. 9:22). In the picture of the ideal community of Christ, the martyrs in the book of Revelation are situated closest to the throne of God because “they triumphed over him [Satan] by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death” (Rev. 12:11). The blood of the Lamb, Christ, is the effective agent here and throughout the NT, bringing about the indirect contact between sinner and God.

Christ

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Church

The nature of the church is too broad to be exhausted in the meaning of one word. To capture its significance, the NT authors utilize a rich array of metaphorical descriptions. Nevertheless, there are those metaphors that seem to dominate the biblical pictures of the church, five of which call for comment: the people of God, the kingdom of God, the eschatological temple of God, the bride of Christ, and the body of Christ.

The people of God. Essentially, the concept of the people of God can be summed up in the covenantal phrase: “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Exod. 6:6 7; 19:5; Lev. 26:9–14; Jer. 7:23; 30:22; 32:37–40; Ezek. 11:19–20; 36:22–28; Acts 15:14; 2 Cor. 6:16; Heb. 8:10–12; Rev. 21:3). Thus, the people of God are those in both the OT and the NT eras who responded to God by faith and whose spiritual origin rests exclusively in God’s grace.

The kingdom of God. Many scholars have maintained that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus inaugurated the kingdom of God, producing the overlapping of the two ages. The kingdom has already dawned but is not yet complete. The first aspect pertains to Jesus’ first coming, and the second aspect relates to his second coming. In other words, the age to come has broken into this age, and now the two exist simultaneously. This background is crucial in ascertaining the relationship between the church and the kingdom of God, because the church also exists in the tension that results from the overlapping of the two ages. Accordingly, one may define the church as the foreshadowing of the kingdom. Two ideas flow from this definition: first, the church is related to the kingdom of God; second, the church is not equal to the kingdom of God.

The church and the kingdom of God are related. Not until after the resurrection of Jesus does the NT speak with regularity about the church. However, there are early signs of the church in the teaching and ministry of Jesus, in both general and specific ways. In general, Jesus anticipated the later official formation of the church in that he gathered to himself the twelve disciples, who constituted the beginnings of eschatological Israel—in effect, the remnant. More specifically, Jesus explicitly referred to the church in two passages: Matt. 16:18–19; 18:17. In the first passage Jesus promised that he would build his church despite satanic opposition, thus assuring the ultimate success of his mission. The notion of the church overcoming the forces of evil coincides with the idea that the kingdom of God will prevail over its enemies and bespeaks the intimate association between the church and the kingdom. The second passage relates to the future organization of the church, not unlike the Jewish synagogue practices of Jesus’ day.

The church and the kingdom of God are not identical. As intimately related as the church and the kingdom of God are, the NT does not equate the two, as is evident in the fact that the early Christians preached the kingdom, not the church (Acts 8:12; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). The NT identifies the church as the people of the kingdom (e.g., Rev. 5:10), not the kingdom itself. Moreover, the church is the instrument of the kingdom. This is especially clear from Matt. 16:18–19, where the preaching of Peter and the church become the keys to opening up the kingdom of God to all who would enter.

The eschatological temple of God. Both the OT and Judaism anticipated the rebuilding of the temple in the future kingdom of God (e.g., Ezek. 40–48; Hag. 2:1–9). Jesus hinted that he was going to build such a structure (Matt. 16:18; Mark 14:58; John 2:19–22). Pentecost witnessed to the beginning of the fulfillment of that dream in that when the Spirit inhabited the church, the eschatological temple was formed (Acts 2:16–36). Other NT writers also perceived that the presence of the Spirit in the Christian community constituted the new temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16–17; 2 Cor. 6:14–7:1; Eph. 2:19–22; see also Gal. 4:21–31; 1 Pet. 2:4–10). However, that the eschatological temple is not yet complete is evident in the preceding passages, especially in their emphasis on the need for the church to grow toward maturity in Christ, which will be fully accomplished only at the parousia (second coming of Christ). In the meantime, Christians, as priests of God, are to perform their sacrificial service to the glory of God (Rom. 12:1–2; Heb. 13:15; 1 Pet. 2:4–10).

The bride of Christ. The image of marriage is applied to God and Israel in the OT (see Isa. 54:5–6; 62:5; Hos. 2:7). Similar imagery is applied to Christ and the church in the NT. Christ, the bridegroom, has sacrificially and lovingly chosen the church to be his bride (Eph. 5:25–27). Her responsibility during the betrothal period is to be faithful to him (2 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:24). At the parousia the official wedding ceremony will take place, and with it the eternal union of Christ and his wife will be actualized (Rev. 19:7–9; 21:1–2).

The body of Christ. The body of Christ as a metaphor for the church is unique to the Pauline literature and constitutes one of the most significant concepts therein (Rom. 12:4–5; 1 Cor. 12:12–27; Eph. 4:7–16; Col. 1:18). The primary purpose of the metaphor is to demonstrate the interrelatedness of diversity and unity within the church, especially with reference to spiritual gifts. The body of Christ is the last Adam (1 Cor. 15:45), the new humanity of the end time that has appeared in history. However, Paul’s usage of the image, like the metaphor of the new temple, indicates that the church, as the body of Christ, still has a long way to go spiritually. It is not yet complete.

Creation

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

Creature

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

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

Cross

A cross is an upright wooden beam or post on which persons were either tied or nailed as a means of torture and execution. The Latin cross was shaped like a t and was the type most commonly used by the Romans. Jesus was crucified probably on a Latin cross, which allowed for a convenient place for a sign (called a titlos in John 19:19) to be placed above his head (Matt. 27:37 pars.).

Not long before the Romans took over Palestine, the Jewish ruler Alexander Jannaeus crucified about eight hundred Pharisees who opposed him in 86 BC. This gruesome event was out of character for the Jewish nation and was frowned upon by the Jews of the day as well as by the later Jewish historian Josephus. But it was the Romans who perfected crucifixion as a means of torture and execution. The Romans called crucifixion “slaves’ punishment” because it was intended for the lowest members of society. It became the preferred method of execution for political crimes such as desertion, spying, rebellion, and insurrection. Roman crucifixion was common in NT times and extended well into the fourth century AD.

As for the significance of Jesus’ crucifixion, the OT teaches that it is blood that makes atonement for sin (Lev. 17:11). Just as sacrificial lambs shed their blood on the altar for the sins of Israel, Jesus shed his blood on the cross for the sins of the world (John 1:29). The crucifixion of Jesus was the greatest atoning event in history. His blood, which provided the means for a new covenant, was poured out for many on the cross (Matt. 26:28). The cross, as gruesome as it was, was the means through which Christ died “for our sins” (Gal. 1:4). Jesus freely scorned the shame of the cross so that we might be reconciled to God by his shed blood (Col. 1:20; Heb. 12:2).

Jesus also bore the curse of God in our place when he died on the cross. The one who hangs on a tree is divinely cursed (Deut. 21:23). God’s curse is a curse upon sin, death, and fallenness. Jesus took God’s curse upon himself in order to redeem us from that curse (Gal. 3:13).

Jesus demonstrated the humble nature of his mission and ministry by his obedience to death, even death on the cross (Phil. 2:8). For Jesus the cross was not simply his martyrdom, as if he simply died for a worthy cause; it was the pinnacle example of obedience and love in the Bible. Jesus called his followers to take up a cross and follow his example of selfless sacrifice (Matt. 16:24). Jesus’ cross is a symbol of his love, obedience, and selflessness.

Most of all, the cross reveals the unconditional love of God, who offered his Son as the atoning sacrifice for sin (John 3:16; 1 John 4:10). The brutal cross reveals the beautiful love of Jesus, who willingly laid down his life (1 John 3:16).

Earth

Israel shared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. This worldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon the primeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having four rims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rims were sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters. God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth and shaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12 13).

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

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

Faith

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Father

People in the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin. Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family was the source of people’s status in the community and provided the primary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.

Marriage and divorce. Marriage in the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between two families, arranged by the bride’s father or a male representative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’s price.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction but also an expression of family honor. Only the rich could afford multiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself was celebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.

The primary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to produce a male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. The concept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs, especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.

Marriage among Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jews sought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev. 18:6 17). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew. Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainly outside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness. Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romans did practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinship group (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategic alliances between families.

Greek and Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. In Jewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorce proceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release her and repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (in particular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Sira comments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to the father (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictive use of divorce than the OT (Mark 10:1–12).

Children and parenting. Childbearing was considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman and her entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to this blessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, and specifically their husbands.

Children were of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. An estimated 60 percent of the children in the first-century Mediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.

Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting style based on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and evil tendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent evil tendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The main concern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty. Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stage children were taught to accept the total authority of the father. The rearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girls were taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so that they could help with household tasks.

Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak of fidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT, the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In their overall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to in familial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod. 4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16; 64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).

The church as the family of God. 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 fictive kinship, 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. Entrance into the community was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was eventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18). Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the community of his followers, God’s family—the church. See also Adoption.

Firstborn

The first child born to a married couple. In the OT it most commonly refers to the first male child, upon whom special privileges were bestowed. The OT describes some of the privileges associated with being the firstborn son: he would receive a double portion of the inheritance (a privilege codified in the law in Deut. 21:17), the paternal blessing (Gen. 27; 48:17 19), and other examples of favoritism (e.g., Gen. 43:33). The importance ascribed to the firstborn is also attested in the legislative requirement that the firstborn—people, animals, and produce—belong to Yahweh (Lev. 27:26; Deut. 15:19; and of people, note Num. 3:12–13), so stressing his primacy over Israel.

“Firstborn” language is also used figuratively in the OT. It is used of Israel as Yahweh’s firstborn in Exod. 4:22–23, wherein Pharaoh’s failure to release Yahweh’s firstborn results in the destruction of Egypt’s firstborn. God also declares the Davidic king to be his firstborn son in Ps. 89:27, highlighting the special favor that he would enjoy. “Firstborn” language can also be used figuratively to describe anything that receives a greater share, such as “the firstborn of Death” in Job 18:13 (NRSV) and “the firstborn of the poor” in Isa. 14:30 (NRSV).

Somewhat surprisingly, God does not adhere to the significance of primogeniture, frequently bestowing his favor on those who were not firstborn: Abel over Cain, Isaac over Ishmael, Jacob over Esau, Joseph and Judah over Reuben, Ephraim over Manasseh, Moses over Aaron, David over his brothers, and Solomon over Adonijah.

The NT presupposes an understanding of the significance of the firstborn. Jesus is specifically identified as Mary’s firstborn (Luke 2:7, 23). However, the description extends beyond mere notions of human primogeniture when Jesus is described as “firstborn over all creation” (Col. 1:15) and “firstborn from among the dead” (Col. 1:18; cf. Rev. 1:5). These expressions, in line with figurative use of “firstborn” language in the OT, express Jesus’ privileged place in both creation and the new creation.

Gospel

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

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).

Holy

Holiness is an attribute of God and of all that is fit for association with him. God alone is intrinsically holy (Rev. 15:4). God the Father is holy (John 17:11), as is the Son (Acts 3:14), while “Holy” is the characteristic designation of God’s Spirit (Ps. 51:11; Matt. 1:18). God’s name is holy (Luke 1:49), as are his arm (Ps. 98:1), ways (Ps. 77:13), and words (Ps. 105:42).

With reference to God himself, holiness may indicate something like his uniqueness, and it is associated with attributes such as his glory (Isa. 6:3), righteousness (Isa. 5:16), and jealousy—that is, his proper concern for his reputation (Josh. 24:19).

God’s dwelling place is in heaven (Ps. 20:6), and “holy” functions in some contexts as a virtual equivalent for heavenly (11:4). God’s throne is holy (47:8), and the angels who surround it are “holy ones” (89:5; cf. Mark 8:38).

A corollary of God’s holiness is that he must be treated as holy (Lev. 22:32)—that is, honored (Lev. 10:3), worshiped (Ps. 96:9), and feared (Isa. 8:13).

While “holy” is sometimes said to mean “set apart,” this does not appear to be its core meaning, though it is an associated notion (Lev. 20:26; Heb. 7:26). Holiness, as applied to people and things, is a relational concept. They are (explicitly or implicitly) holy “to the Lord” (Exod. 28:36), never “from” something.

The symbolic representation of God’s heavenly palace, the tabernacle (Exod. 40:9), and later the temple (1 Chron. 29:3), and everything associated with them, are holy and the means whereby God’s people in the OT may symbolically be brought near to God. For God to share his presence with anything or anyone else, these too must be holy (Lev. 11:44 45; Heb. 12:14).

The OT system of worship involved the distinction between unclean and clean, and between common and holy, and the means of effecting a transition to a state of cleanness or holiness (Lev. 10:10). People, places, and items may be made holy by a process of consecration or sanctification, whether simply by God’s purifying presence (Exod. 3:5) or by ritual acts (Exod. 19:10; 29:36).

God’s faithful people are described as holy (Exod. 19:6; 1 Pet. 2:9). In the OT, this is true of the whole people of God at one level, and of particular individuals at another. Thus, kings (Ps. 16:10), prophets (2 Kings 4:9), and in particular priests (Lev. 21:7) are declared to be holy. While the OT witnesses to some tension between the collective holiness of Israel and the particular holiness of its designated leaders (Num. 16:3), the latter were intended to act as models and facilitators of Israel’s holiness.

Hope

At times simply indicating a wish (2 Cor. 11:1), in the Bible the word “hope” most often designates a disposition of soul, the grounds for one’s hope, or the outcome for which one hopes. At its core, biblical hope is hope in God, rooted in God’s covenant faithfulness (Ps. 62:5 8; Jer. 14:8; 17:13; Rom. 4:18; 5:1–5). Hope trusts God in the present and lives even now on the strength of God’s future accomplishments (Gal. 5:5; Heb. 11:1).

In the NT, hope is closely associated with Christ and his saving work. Christians now live by hope in Christ (Eph. 1:12; 1 Pet. 1:3; 3:15); indeed, he is “Christ Jesus our hope” (1 Tim. 1:1), and his future appearing is “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). Thus, hope refers to eschatological glory (2 Cor. 3:11–12; Eph. 1:18). It is “the hope of the resurrection” (Acts 23:6; cf. 24:15; 26:6–9), our transformation into Christ’s likeness (1 John 3:1–3). That expectation stimulates various hopes for God’s plans to be realized in one’s own or others’ lives (1 Cor. 9:10, 13; Phil. 2:19, 23; 2 Tim. 2:25; 2 John 12). So hope is named repeatedly as an essential Christian attribute (Rom. 12:12; 15:4, 13; 1 Cor. 13:13).

Minister

In the NT the most common word used for “minister” is diakonos (e.g., 2 Cor. 3:6), and for “ministry,” diakonia (e.g., 1 Cor. 16:15 [NIV: “service”]). These words function as umbrella terms for NT writers to describe the whole range of ministries performed by the church. They can describe either a special ministry performed by an official functionary (1 Cor. 3:5) or one performed by any believer (Rev. 2:19). In the early church, ministry was based not on institutional hierarchies but on services performed (1 Tim. 3:1 13).

The ministry of Jesus. The church’s mind-set flows out of the way in which Jesus understood his ministry. He described his ministry pattern as that of serving (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; John 13:4–17). Thus, he called his disciples to follow a model of leadership in the new community that did not elevate them above others (Matt. 20:20–28; 23:8–12; cf. 1 Pet. 5:3).

Jesus’ ministry provides the paradigm for the ministry of the church. The NT writers describe the threefold ministry of Jesus as preaching, teaching, and healing (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; Mark 1:14, 21–22, 39; Acts 10:36–38). The disciples carried on the earthly ministry of Jesus by the power of the Spirit. They too engaged in preaching, teaching, and healing (Matt. 10:7–8; 28:19–20).

The ministry of the church. The church, because it is the body of Christ, continues these ministry responsibilities. In 1 Pet. 4:10–11 is a summary of the overarching ministries of the church, which include speaking the words of God and serving. As a priesthood of believers (Exod. 19:4–6; 1 Pet. 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:5–6), individual members took responsibility for fulfilling the various tasks of service. Thus, all Christians are called to minister (Rom. 15:27; Philem. 13; 1 Pet. 2:16). Even when a member strayed, it was another believer’s responsibility to confront that wayward person and, if necessary, involve others in the body to help (Matt. 18:15–20).

Although ministry was the responsibility of all believers, there were those with special expertise whom Christ and the church set apart for particular leadership roles (Eph. 4:11–12). Christ set apart Apollos and Paul for special ministries (1 Cor. 3:5; Eph. 3:7). The church called on special functionaries to carry out specific ministries. For example, the early church appointed seven individuals to serve tables (Acts 6:2). They appointed certain ones to carry the relief fund collected for the Jerusalem Christians (2 Cor. 8:19, 23). As special functionaries, Paul, Apollos, Timothy, Titus, the elders, as well as others accepted the responsibility of teaching and preaching and healing for the whole church.

All the ministries of the church, whether performed by believers in general or by some specially appointed functionary, were based on gifts received from God (Rom. 12:1–8; 1 Cor. 12:4–26). God gave individuals the abilities necessary to perform works of service (Acts 20:24; Eph. 4:11; Col. 4:17; 1 Tim. 1:12; 1 Pet. 4:11). The NT, however, makes it clear that when it comes to one’s relationship and spiritual status before God, all Christians are equal. Yet in equality there is diversity of gifts and talents. Paul identifies some gifts given to individuals for special positions: apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers (Eph. 4:11). The description here is of special ministry roles that Christ calls certain individuals to fulfill based on the gifts given to them. The ones fulfilling these roles did not do all the ministry of the church but rather equipped the rest of the body to do ministry (Eph. 4:12–13). No one can boast in the gifts given to him or her because those gifts were given for ministry to others (1 Cor. 4:7). Thus, gifts lead to service, and in turn service results in leadership.

It becomes the responsibility of those who lead to equip others for ministry. When others are equipped for ministry, they in turn minister and edify the whole body (Eph. 4:15–16; 2 Tim. 2:1–2). The goal of all ministry, according to Paul, is to build up a community of believers until all reach maturity in Christ (Rom. 15:15–17; 1 Cor. 3:5–4:5; Eph. 4:12–16; 1 Thess. 2:19–20).

Paul

A Pharisee commissioned by Jesus Christ to preach the gospel to Gentiles. His Jewish name was “Saul” (Acts 9:4; 13:9), but he preferred using his Roman name, especially when he signed his letters.

By our best estimates, Paul spent about thirty years preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ (AD 34 67)—a ministry that can be divided roughly into three decades. The first decade of his ministry (AD 34–46) has been called the “silent years,” as we have few details from Acts or the Pauline Epistles about his activities. For example, we know that he preached in Damascus for a while and spent some time in Arabia (a total of three years [Gal. 1:17–18]). He made a quick trip to Jerusalem to meet Peter and James the brother of Jesus. Then he returned home to Tarsus, evidently preaching there for several years, until Barnabas brought him to Antioch in Syria to help with the ministry of this mixed congregation of Jews and Gentiles (Acts 9:26–30; 11:25–26). In the second decade of his ministry (AD 46–59), Paul spent most of his life on the road, an itinerant ministry of preaching the gospel and planting churches from Cyprus to Corinth. For most of the third decade (AD 59–67), Paul ministered the gospel from prison, spending over two years imprisoned in Caesarea, another two to three years in a Roman prison (Acts ends here), released for a brief time (two years?) before his final arrest and imprisonment in Rome, where, according to church tradition, he was executed.

During his itinerant ministry, Paul traveled Roman roads that led him to free cities (Ephesus, Thessalonica, Athens) and Roman colonies (Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe, Troas, Philippi, Corinth). Founding churches in urban centers afforded Paul more opportunities for ministry and for his work of making and repairing tents. Traveling within the borders of the Roman Empire also provided a better chance of protection as a citizen. At first, Paul and Barnabas covered familiar territory: Cyprus (Barnabas’s home region) and Anatolia (Paul’s home region). Then, with successive journeys Paul and other missionary companions branched out to Asia Minor, Macedonia, and Achaia. Some of the towns that Paul visited were small and provincial (Derbe, Lystra); others were major cities of great economic and intellectual commerce (Ephesus, Corinth, Athens). In the midst of such cultural diversity, Paul found receptive ears among a variety of ethnic groups: Gauls, Phrygians and Lycaonians, Greeks, Romans, and Jews. Previously, Paul’s Gentile converts had worshiped many gods (local, ethnic, and imperial), offered sacrifices at many shrines and temples, and joined in all the religious festivals (often involving immoral and ungodly practices). After believing the gospel, Paul’s predominantly Gentile churches turned from their idolatrous ways to serve “the living and true God” (1 Thess. 1:9). Their exclusive devotion to one God quickly led to economic and political problems, for both Paul’s converts and the cities of their residence. No more offerings for patron gods, no more support for local synagogues or the imperial cult—Paul’s converts were often persecuted for their newly found faith by local religious guilds (idol makers!) and civic leaders courting Roman favor (Acts 17:6–9; 19:23–41; Phil. 1:27–30; 1 Thess. 2:14–16). Indeed, Paul often was run out of town as a troublemaker who preached a message that threatened both the Jewish and the Roman ways of life (Acts 16:19–24; Phil. 3:17–4:1). It is no wonder that Paul’s activities eventually landed him in a Roman prison. It was only a matter of time before his reputation as a “lawbreaker” caught up with him (Acts 21:21). But that did not stop Paul. Whether as a prisoner or a free man, Paul proclaimed the gospel of Jesus Christ until the day he died.

Paul was a tentmaker, a missionary, a writer, a preacher, a teacher, a theologian, an evangelist, a mentor, a prophet, a miracle worker, a prisoner, and a martyr. His life story reads like the tale of three different men: a devout Pharisee, a tireless traveler, an ambitious writer. He knew the Scriptures better than did most people. He saw more of the world than did most merchants. He wrote some of the longest letters known at that time. To his converts, he was a faithful friend. To his opponents, he was an irrepressible troublemaker. But, according to Paul, he was nothing more or less than the man whom God had called through Jesus Christ to take the gospel to the ends of the earth.

Principalities

One of the names given to spiritual realities that were created by God in Christ but are now corrupted. Paul says that it is these “principalities” (Gk. archē), not “flesh and blood,” that form the real opposition for Christians (Eph. 6:12 KJV). Synonyms that appear in various Bible translations are “rulers,” “authorities,” “powers,” “spiritual forces,” and “thrones” (Rom. 8:38; Eph. 3:10; 6:12; Col. 1:16).

Reconcile

The restoration of a relationship from a state of hostility to one of peace.

The need for reconciliation between God and humanity begins when Adam and Eve rebel against God. What has been a relationship of intimate fellowship becomes one of fear and mistrust as Adam and Eve’s sin brings God’s judgment (Gen. 3:14 19). But in the midst of judgment is the cryptic promise of a descendant of the woman who will crush the serpent and end the estrangement between God and humanity (3:15). The rest of the OT gives glimpses of what reconciliation will be like. God gives the sacrificial system as a means to deal with sin and restore fellowship with him (Lev. 1–7; 16). Despite Israel’s sin, God pursues reconciliation with Israel like a husband chases after a wayward wife (Hos. 1–3). Israel’s hope for reconciliation is often expressed in terms of a desire for peace. Although Aaron’s benediction asks God to give peace to his people in the present (Num. 6:24–26), God’s people look forward to the day when a covenant of peace will be established through the Suffering Servant and announced to the ends of the earth (Isa. 52–54).

What is largely hinted at in the OT is stated explicitly in the NT. Paul in particular explains how believers are reconciled to God and the consequences of that reconciliation. God, not humanity, has taken the initiative. Even though we were sinners subject to God’s wrath, alienated from God and enemies in thought and act, Christ died for us (Rom. 5:6–11; Col. 1:21). As the last Adam, Christ has removed the barrier that our sinful rebellion had created between God and humanity by taking the punishment for our sin. Thus reconciliation is a gift that God offers to humanity (Rom. 5:11), not something that we do to appease God. Because God has reconciled us to himself through Christ, he has entrusted us with the ministry of reconciliation (2 Cor. 5:19). Using his people as ambassadors, God appeals to humanity to be reconciled through the work of Christ, whom, though sinless, God made sin for us “so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor. 5:20–21). God’s purpose in reconciliation is to present the believer “holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation” (Col. 1:22). The result of reconciliation is the joy that comes from being at peace with God (Rom. 5:1–2, 11). In view of this, Paul’s frequent greeting “grace and peace” in his letters takes on new light as his desire for believers to experience the reality of their reconciliation to God.

Reconciliation between God and humanity makes it possible for people truly to be reconciled to one another. Even the natural hostility between Jew and Gentile has been overcome by the work of Christ. Through the cross, Christ “destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations” (Eph. 2:14–15). As a result, Jew and Gentile have been brought together in one body as fellow citizens of God’s kingdom who stand on equal footing before God (Eph. 2:16–22).

Drawing upon the prophetic hope of the OT, the NT also speaks of a cosmic reconciliation. Through Christ, God is pleased “to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross” (Col. 1:20). By this Paul does not mean the salvation of everyone, but rather that the reconciling work of Jesus is the means by which God restores the created order to peace. Whereas the first Adam’s sin brought a curse upon creation, Christ, as the last Adam, has brought peace that will culminate in new heavens and a new earth free from the effects of sin and death (Isa. 65:17; Rev. 21–22). It is there that God will dwell with his people forever in perfect harmony (Rev. 21:2–5).

Servant

There are numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized as following a servant-master model. These included service to the monarchy (2 Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in the temple (1 Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also see extensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:1 11; Lev. 25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concerned with the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelines for their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaves who had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of six years. On the seventh year, known also as the Sabbath Year, they were to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent away empty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s “threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slaves also had certain rights that gave them special privileges and protection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, were allowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays (Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their master permanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also, severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death (Exod. 21:20–21).

Slavery was very common in the first century AD, and there were many different kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in an extended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they might choose to sell themselves into this situation (1 Pet. 2:18–25). Although slavery was a significant part of society in the first century AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery. Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obedience for slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25; 1 Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1 Pet. 2:18–21). Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves (Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned by the apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1 Tim. 1:10–11).

Jesus embodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled the role of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servant predicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in the Gospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve (Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5). Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the very nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).

The special relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured in the servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’s letters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses not so much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegiance and honor owed to Christ Jesus.

Works

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

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

Direct Matches

Blemish

The physical defect on a sacrificial animal that makes it an unacceptable offering to the Lord (Lev. 22:17–25), or the physical defect on a priest that disqualifies him from performing certain priestly functions (Lev. 21:17–24). In the NT, Christ is the once-for-all sacrificial lamb without blemish or defect. In Christ, Christians are presented to God as holy and without blemish (Eph. 5:27; Col. 1:22; Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19).

Christ

Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.

Old Testament

According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.

The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.

First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.

Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).

Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.

A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”

New Testament

The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.

All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.

The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.

The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).

The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.

Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).

Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).

A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.

We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).

The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).

James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).

Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.

In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.

Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).

The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).

Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.

Summary

The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.

Church

Terminology

The NT word for “church” is ekklēsia, which means “gathering, assembly, congregation.” In classical Greek the term was used almost exclusively for political gatherings. In particular, in Athens the word signified the assembling of the citizens for the purpose of conducting the affairs of the city. Moreover, ekklēsia referred only to the actual meeting, not to the citizens themselves. When the people were not assembled, they were not considered to be the ekklēsia. The NT records three instances of this secular usage of the term (Acts 19:32, 39, 41).

The most important background for the Christian use of the term is the LXX (Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, dated c. 250 BC), which uses the word in a religious sense about one hundred times, almost always as a translation of the Hebrew word qahal. While qahal does not indicate a secular gathering (in contrast to ’edah, the typical Hebrew word for Israel’s religious gathering, translated by Greek synagōgē), it does denote Israel’s sacred meetings. This is especially the case in Deuteronomy, where qahal is linked with the covenant.

In the NT, ekklēsia is used to refer to the community of God’s people 109 times (out of 114 occurrences of the term). Although the word occurs in only two Gospel passages (Matt. 16:18; 18:17), it is of special importance in Acts (23 times) and the Pauline writings (46 times). It is found 20 times in Revelation and in isolated instances in James and Hebrews. Three general conclusions can be drawn from this usage. First, ekklēsia (in both the singular and the plural) applies predominantly to a local assembly of those who profess faith in and allegiance to Christ. Second, ekklēsia designates the universal church (Acts 8:3; 9:31; 1 Cor. 12:28; 15:9; especially in the later Pauline letters: Eph. 1:22–23; Col. 1:18). Third, the ekklēsia is God’s congregation (1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1).

The Nature of the Church

The people of God. Essentially, the concept of the people of God can be summed up in the covenantal phrase: “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (see Exod. 6:6–7; 19:5; Lev. 26:9–14; Jer. 7:23; 30:22; 32:37–40; Ezek. 11:19–20; 36:22–28; Acts 15:14; 2 Cor. 6:16; Heb. 8:10–12; Rev. 21:3). Thus, the people of God are those in both the OT and the NT eras who responded to God by faith and whose spiritual origin rests exclusively in God’s grace.

To speak of the one people of God transcending the eras of the OT and the NT necessarily raises the question of the relationship between the church and Israel. Modern interpreters prefer not to polarize the matter into an either/or issue. Rather, they talk about the church and Israel in terms of there being both continuity and discontinuity between them.

Continuity between the church and Israel. Two ideas establish the fact that the church and Israel are portrayed in the Bible as being in a continuous relationship. First, in the OT the church was present in Israel in some sense. Acts 7:38 suggests this connection when, alluding to Deut. 9:10, it speaks of the church (ekklēsia) in the wilderness. The same idea is probably to be inferred from the intimate association noted earlier existing between the words ekklēsia and qahal, especially when the latter is qualified by the phrase “of God.” Furthermore, if the church is viewed in some NT passages as preexistent, then one finds therein the prototype of the creation of Israel (see Exod. 25:40; Acts 7:44; Gal. 4:26; Heb. 12:22; Rev. 21:11; cf. Eph. 1:3–14).

Second, Israel in some sense is present in the church in the NT. The many OT names for Israel applied to the church in the NT establish that fact. Some of those are “Israel” (Gal. 6:15–16; Eph. 2:12; Heb. 8:8–10; Rev. 2:14), “a chosen people” (1 Pet. 2:9), “the circumcision” (Rom. 2:28–29; Phil. 3:3; Col. 2:11), “Abraham’s seed” (Rom. 4:16; Gal. 3:29), “the remnant” (Rom. 9:27; 11:5–7), “the elect” (Rom. 11:28; Eph. 1:4), “the flock” (Acts 20:28; Heb. 13:20; 1 Pet. 5:2), and “priesthood” (1 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 1:6; 5:10).

Discontinuity between the church and Israel. The church, however, is not totally identical with Israel; discontinuity also characterizes the relationship. The church, according to the NT, is the eschatological (end-time) Israel incorporated in Jesus Christ and, as such, is a progression beyond historical Israel (1 Cor. 10:11; 2 Cor. 5:14–21). Indeed, significant discontinuity is introduced by the fact that the church includes Gentiles as members of Israel, without requiring them to convert to Judaism first. Gentiles enter as Gentiles. However, a caveat must be issued at this point. Although the church is a progression beyond Israel, it does not seem to be the permanent replacement of Israel (see Rom. 9–11, esp. 11:25–27).

The kingdom of God. Many scholars have maintained that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus inaugurated the kingdom of God, producing the overlapping of the two ages. The kingdom has already dawned but is not yet complete. The first aspect pertains to Jesus’ first coming, and the second aspect relates to his second coming. In other words, the age to come has broken into this age, and now the two exist simultaneously. This background is crucial in ascertaining the relationship between the church and the kingdom of God, because the church also exists in the tension that results from the overlapping of the two ages. Accordingly, one may define the church as the foreshadowing of the kingdom. Two ideas flow from this definition: first, the church is related to the kingdom of God; second, the church is not equal to the kingdom of God.

The eschatological temple of God. Both the OT and Judaism anticipated the rebuilding of the temple in the future kingdom of God (e.g., Ezek. 40–48; Hag. 2:1–9; 1 En. 90:29; 91:3; Jub. 1:17, 29). Jesus hinted that he was going to build such a structure (Matt. 16:18; Mark 14:58; John 2:19–22). Pentecost witnessed to the beginning of the fulfillment of that dream in that when the Spirit inhabited the church, the eschatological temple was formed (Acts 2:16–36). Other NT writers also perceived that the presence of the Spirit in the Christian community constituted the new temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16–17; 2 Cor. 6:14–7:1; Eph. 2:19–22; see also Gal. 4:21–31; 1 Pet. 2:4–10). However, that the eschatological temple is not yet complete is evident in the preceding passages, especially in their emphasis on the need for the church to grow toward maturity in Christ, which will be fully accomplished only at the parousia (second coming of Christ). In the meantime, Christians, as priests of God, are to perform their sacrificial service to the glory of God (Rom. 12:1–2; Heb. 13:15; 1 Pet. 2:4–10).

The bride of Christ. The image of marriage is applied to God and Israel in the OT (see Isa. 54:5–6; 62:5; Hos. 2:7). Similar imagery is applied to Christ and the church in the NT. Christ, the bridegroom, has sacrificially and lovingly chosen the church to be his bride (Eph. 5:25–27). Her responsibility during the betrothal period is to be faithful to him (2 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:24). At the parousia the official wedding ceremony will take place, and with it the eternal union of Christ and his wife will be actualized (Rev. 19:7–9; 21:1–2).

The body of Christ. The body of Christ as a metaphor for the church is unique to the Pauline literature and constitutes one of the most significant concepts therein (Rom. 12:4–5; 1 Cor. 12:12–27; Eph. 4:7–16; Col. 1:18). The primary purpose of the metaphor is to demonstrate the interrelatedness of diversity and unity within the church, especially with reference to spiritual gifts. The body of Christ is the last Adam (1 Cor. 15:45), the new humanity of the end time that has appeared in history. However, Paul’s usage of the image, like the metaphor of the new temple, indicates that the church, as the body of Christ, still has a long way to go spiritually. It is not yet complete.

Sacraments

At the heart of the expression of the church’s faith are the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The former symbolizes entrance into the church, while the latter provides spiritual sustenance for the church.

Baptism. Baptism symbolizes the sinner’s entrance into the church. Three observations emerge from the biblical treatment of this sacrament. First, the OT intimated baptism, especially in its association of repentance of sin with ablutions (Num.19:18–22; Ps. 51:7; Ezek. 36:25; cf. John 3:5). Second, the baptism of John anticipated Christian baptism. John administered a baptism of repentance in expectation of the baptism of the Spirit and fire that the Messiah would exercise (Matt. 3:11 // Luke 3:16). Those who accept Jesus as Messiah experience the baptism of fire and judgment (which may be an allusion to undergoing the great tribulation/messianic woes that lead into the messianic kingdom). Third, the early church practiced baptism in imitation of the Lord Jesus (Matt. 3:13–17 // Mark 1:9–11 // Luke 3:21–22; see also John 1:32–34; cf. Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38; 8:16; Rom. 6:3–6; 1 Cor. 1:13–15; Gal. 3:27; Titus 3:5; 1 Pet. 3:21). These passages demonstrate some further truths about baptism: baptism is intimately related to faith in God; baptism identifies the person with the death and resurrection of Jesus; baptism incorporates the person into the community of believers.

Lord’s Supper. The other biblical sacrament is the Lord’s Supper. This rite symbolizes Christ’s spiritual nourishment of his church as it celebrates the sacred meal. Two basic points emerge from the biblical data concerning the Lord’s Supper. First, it was instituted by Christ (Matt. 26:26–29; Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:15–20; 1 Cor. 11:23–25), probably as an adaptation of the Passover meal. If that is the case, then, Jesus will have introduced two changes into the Passover seder: he replaced the unleavened bread with a reference to his body being given for us on the cross; he replaced the cup of redemption with a reference to his shed blood on the cross, the basis of the new covenant. Second, the early church practiced the Lord’s Supper probably weekly, in conjunction with the love feast (see 1 Cor. 11:18–22; cf. Jude 12). A twofold meaning is attached to the Lord’s Supper by the NT authors. First, it involves participation in Christ’s salvation (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24–25), and in two ways: participating in the Lord’s Supper looks back to the death of Jesus, in which the believer now shares; participating in the Lord’s Supper looks forward to Christ’s return, the culmination point of the believer’s salvation. Second, the Lord’s Supper involves identification with the body of Christ, the community of faith (1 Cor. 10:16–17; 11:27–33).

Worship

The ultimate purpose of the church is to worship God through Christ and in the power of the Holy Spirit (see, e.g., Rev. 4–5). The early church first worshiped in the Jerusalem temple (Acts 2:46; 3:1; 5:42) as well as in the synagogue (Acts 22:19; cf. John 9:22; James 2:2). At the same time, and into the near future, believers met in homes for worship (Acts 1:13; 2:46; 5:42; cf. Rom. 16:15; Col. 4:15; Philem. 2; 2 John 10; 3 John 1, 6). Although many Jewish Christians no doubt continued to worship God on the Sabbath, the established time for the church’s worship came to be Sunday, the day of Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 20:7; Rev. 1:10). The early church most probably patterned its order of worship after the synagogue service: praise in prayer (Acts 2:42, 47; 3:1; 1 Thess. 1:2; 5:17) and in song (1 Cor. 14:26; Phil. 2:6–11; Col. 1:15–20), the expounding of Scripture (Acts 2:42; 6:4; Col. 4:16; 1 Thess. 2:13; 1 Tim. 4:13), and almsgiving to the needy (Acts 2:44–45; 1 Cor. 16:1–2; 2 Cor. 8–9; James 2:15–17).

Service and Organization

Five observations emerge from the NT regarding the service and organization of the early church. First, the ministry of the church centers on its usage of spiritual gifts, which are given to believers by God’s grace and for his glory as well as for the good of others (Rom. 12:3; Eph. 4:7–16). Second, every believer possesses a gift of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:7; Eph. 4:7). Third, it is through the diversity of the gifts that the body of Christ matures and is unified (Rom. 12:4; 1 Cor. 12:12–31; Eph. 4:17–18). Fourth, although there was organized leadership in the NT church, including elders (1 Tim. 3:1–7 [also called “pastors” and “bishops”; see Acts 20:17, 28; 1 Pet. 5:1–4]) and deacons (1 Tim. 3:8–13), there does not seem to have been a gap between the “clergy” and the “laity” in the church of the first century; rather, those with the gift of leadership are called to equip all the saints for the work of the ministry (Eph. 4:7–16). Fifth, spiritual gifts are to be exercised in love (1 Cor. 13).

Cross

Types of Crosses

A cross is an upright wooden beam or post on which persons were either tied or nailed as a means of torture and execution. A cross could have several different shapes. The earliest was not a cross at all but rather a simple stake or pole on which persons were impaled. This simple stake evolved over time into more elaborate shapes with the addition of a crossbeam that was secured to the upright stake. The Latin cross was shaped like a t and was the type most commonly used by the Romans. Jesus was crucified probably on a Latin cross, which allowed for a convenient place for a sign (called a titlos in John 19:19) to be placed above his head (Matt. 27:37 pars.). Another form of cross, now referred to as a St. Anthony’s cross, was shaped like a T, with the crossbeam affixed at the top of the upright beam. A cross shaped like an X, having a crisscross pattern, is also known as a St. Andrew’s cross. Tradition holds that the apostle Peter was crucified upside down on this type of cross. A cross shaped like a +, the Greek cross, has the crossbeam in the center.

Crucifixion in Ancient Times

In ancient times, crucifixion was a method of execution used by many peoples, including the Assyrians, the Phoenicians, the Babylonians, the Persians, the Medes, and the Greeks. Historically, crucifixion’s barbaric predecessor was impalement. Victims often were beheaded first, and then their lifeless bodies were forced onto a large stake or spike (Gen. 40:19; 1 Sam. 31:9–10). Impalement originally was more about triumph and exposure than execution (Deut. 21:22–23; Josh. 8:29; 10:26; 2 Sam. 4:12; 21:9–10). But the Assyrians impaled their enemies by sticking them, still alive, onto pointed stakes, thus utilizing impalement as a method of execution. The book of Esther probably reflects the practice of impalement in the Persian period by describing how the king’s officials were executed (2:23; 5:14; KJV: “hanged”). In these verses, the Hebrew word that some English versions translate as “gallows” (’ets) actually means “tree,” and a noose for hanging was not used in Persia during this period. Impalement became a common form of execution.

Impalement as a means of execution eventually gave way to crucifixion. Crucifixion was especially prized by the Phoenicians, whose normal methods of execution—drowning, immersion in boiling oil, impalement, stoning, and burning—were seen as too quick and easy. Wanting their victims to suffer longer, they used crucifixion, a more severe form of execution. The Greeks also crucified victims on a stake or a cross. Alexander the Great crucified two thousand inhabitants of Tyre along the shoreline when he captured the city in 332 BC.

There is no evidence that ancient Israel fastened people to a stake or a cross as a method of execution. Instead, stoning was the preferred method of execution in Israel and was commanded by the law (Lev. 20:2; Deut. 22:24). The law did, however, permit the public display of an offender’s body “on a tree” or a “pole” after being executed (Deut. 21:22). The same expression is used in the book of Acts to describe Jesus’ crucifixion (5:30; 10:39; 13:29). In contrast to pagan nations that would leave a corpse hanging on a cross until the flesh either rotted away or was devoured by vultures, Israel was commanded to take the body down, not letting it remain on the tree overnight (Deut. 21:23). This explains why the Jews were so adamant that Jesus’ body be taken down before the Sabbath commenced at sunset (John 19:31). Being hung on a tree was especially abhorrent to Israel because it reflected God’s curse upon the offender (Deut. 21:23). Jesus was accursed by God as he hung on the cross, bearing the sins of the world (Gal. 3:13).

Crucifixion in New Testament Times

Roman Crucifixion

Crucifixion was a barbaric method of torture and execution whereby a victim was either nailed or tied to a wooden cross and left to die a long, agonizing death. It often was reserved for the most offensive criminals, such as thieves (Matt. 27:38), murderers, insurrectionists (Mark 15:7), and other political rebels. Disobedient slaves commonly were crucified. Crucifixion was so demeaning that Roman citizens were exempt and could be crucified only by direct decree of the emperor. Crucifixion also was used as a triumphant sign in times of war as victors demonstrated their conquests by hoisting their enemies upon crosses for all to see. It was viewed as a public symbol of strength and intimidation. Adding insult to injury, executioners stripped their victims and crucified them alongside busy roads and in public places where onlookers could gaze in horror.

Criminals often were flogged severely before crucifixion in a pseudo-compassionate effort to speed up the death process experienced on the cross (John 19:1). The victim was stripped, tied to a post, and then brutally beaten by several Roman torturers using whips with sharp pieces of bone or metal at the ends of the lashes. Such floggings were said to leave the victim’s bones and entrails exposed. The torturers did not stop until they either exhausted themselves or were called off by their commanding officers.

After the flogging, the offender was forced to carry the crossbeam, often weighing seventy-five to one hundred pounds, on his or her shoulders to the crucifixion site (John 19:17). The main upright beam, standing seven to nine feet tall, remained at the site of crucifixion and was used repeatedly. The victim was then laid down with arms stretched out across the beam and usually tied into position. Once the victim’s arms were secured by ropes, a soldier searched for the “hollow spot” in the wrist located just above the flexion area near the carpal bones. The metacarpal bones of the palms were too weak to support the weight of the body on the cross, so the wrist was a stronger alternative. However, the use of ropes to support the arms made the choice of little consequence. Either location was acceptable. A hammer was used to drive five-inch nails through both wrists, affixing the victim to the crossbeam. It was customary to offer the victim a narcotic cocktail to help ease the pain of crucifixion. Jesus refused this drink (Matt. 27:34; Mark 15:23).

After the victim’s arms were nailed to the crossbeam, it was hoisted up and secured to the upright post. This alone was very hard on the fatigued body of the victim, who already had lost a considerable amount of blood. This quick, upward motion caused orthostatic hypotension—very low blood pressure caused by a rapid vertical shift in body position. The victim’s blood pressure would drop to half of normal, while the pulse rate doubled. Victims frequently fainted due to the rush of blood away from the head during this upward motion. This motion probably is the imagery behind Jesus’ “lifted up” sayings (John 3:14; 8:28; 12:32). Jesus was quite literally lifted up onto the cross.

Next came the nailing of the feet. The Romans had several different ways of nailing the feet to the cross. Roman soldiers were notorious for twisting and contorting victims into odd positions while nailing them to the cross. Sometimes a victim’s legs were stretched downward, feet crossed, and one nail driven through both. A support block typically was placed behind the victim to support the weight of the body on the cross. A heel bone of a crucified man named “Yehohanan” (John) was discovered in an ossuary north of Jerusalem in 1968. A single nail had been driven through the side of the heel. Either the body was twisted so that the nail was driven through both heels, the right above the left, or each heel was nailed to opposite sides of the upright beam causing the victim to straddle the cross. A piece of wood was held against the heel before the nail was driven in, to act as a washer, preventing the foot from tearing free. The ossuary’s inscription describes Yehohanan as “the one hanged with knees apart.” Once nailed to the cross, the victim often suffered for several hours, even days, exposed to the hot sun as well as the insults of those passing by on the busy road (cf. Matt. 27:39; Mark 15:29; Luke 23:35; John 19:20). Extreme thirst was brought on by massive blood loss and exposure to the elements (John 19:28).

Because death could take several hours, it sometimes was hastened by a crushing blow to the legs with a club. Victims were unable to push their bodies upward to gasp for air or to keep their blood circulating. This final blow to the legs also caused intense pain and usually was enough to throw the body into shock, with death following soon afterward. Jesus was already dead when the soldiers approached to break his legs (John 19:32–33). This fulfilled what was written in the Scriptures: “Not one of his bones will be broken” (John 19:36; cf. Exod. 12:46; Num. 9:12; Ps. 34:20). Instead of breaking Jesus’ legs, a soldier thrust a spear into his side, which brought forth a sudden flow of blood and water, indicating that he was truly dead (John 19:34). This too was to fulfill Scripture: “They will look on the one they have pierced” (John 19:37; cf. Zech. 12:10). Bodies often were left on the crosses to be eaten by scavenging birds such as vultures. The Jews demanded that the bodies of Jesus and the two thieves crucified with him be taken down before the Sabbath that began that evening (John 19:31).

Physical Death by Crucifixion

Death by crucifixion resulted from a combination of factors. The most obvious was massive blood loss. With the nails being driven through the extensive artery systems of the wrists and feet, the victim lost a lot of blood. The severe flogging before being crucified also played a role and took its toll on the body. Blood loss also led to a depletion of oxygen supply to the vital tissues. Major organs failed due to lack of oxygenation. Another factor leading to death was suffocation or asphyxiation. The weight of the body hanging on the cross was too great for the tendons and muscles in the arms, so the victims were unable to hold themselves up in order to take in deep breaths. The victim’s upper body continued to sink lower until the lungs became too compressed and unable to take in large volumes of air. Victims could force themselves upward to gasp air by using their legs, but this was extremely painful. Preventing the victim from pushing upward in order to breathe was another reason for breaking the legs. The victim slowly suffocated for hours.

The ultimate cause of death was an eventual heart rupture due to massive blood loss and lack of oxygenation. As the pulse raced and blood pressure increased, the heart eventually burst due to the stress. This helps explain the reference to the “sudden flow of blood and water” in John 19:34. In the case of heart rupture, the right side of the heart still has some blood left in it while the sac that surrounds the heart, the pericardium, fills with water. The soldier’s spear pierced this sac and the heart, causing both blood and water to flow out.

The Meaning of Jesus’ Crucifixion

The OT teaches that it is blood that makes atonement for sin (Lev. 17:11). Just as sacrificial lambs shed their blood on the altar for the sins of Israel, Jesus shed his blood on the cross for the sins of the world (John 1:29). The crucifixion of Jesus was the greatest atoning event in history. His blood, which provided the means for a new covenant, was poured out for many on the cross (Matt. 26:28). The cross, as gruesome as it was, was the means through which Christ died “for our sins” (Gal. 1:4). Jesus freely scorned the shame of the cross so that we might be reconciled to God by his shed blood (Col. 1:20; Heb. 12:2).

Death of Christ

Old Testament

New Testament

Summary

Divinity of Christ

Old Testament

New Testament

Summary

Dominion

The word “dominion” translates several terms that express power, mastery, rulership, and authority. As the cosmic king, God has deputized humankind as his image bearer to “rule over” creation (Gen. 1:26, 28; Ps. 8:5–6). Human rulership is intended to be a stewardship for God, one of development, not domination.

Dominion is also found in political might (1 Kings 4:24), sometimes in the possession of Israel’s enemies (Neh. 9:28), and in God’s chosen king over creation (Ps. 72:8). There is also the messianic restoration of dominion (Mic. 4:8), dominion among supernatural beings (Eph. 1:21), and the ultimate dominion of Christ over all (Col. 1:15–20). The rule of sin and death is contrasted with the dominion of grace and resurrection (Rom. 5:14–21; 6:9–14). God’s dominion is his “sovereignty,” both in creation and redemption (Dan. 4:34; 1 Pet. 4:11; Jude 25).

Firstborn

The first child born to a married couple. In the OT it most commonly refers to the first male child, upon whom special privileges were bestowed. The OT describes some of the privileges associated with being the firstborn son: he would receive a double portion of the inheritance (a privilege codified in the law in Deut. 21:17), the paternal blessing (Gen. 27; 48:17–19), and other examples of favoritism (e.g., Gen. 43:33). The importance ascribed to the firstborn is also attested in the legislative requirement that the firstborn—people, animals, and produce—belong to Yahweh (Lev. 27:26; Deut. 15:19; and of people, note Num. 3:12–13), so stressing his primacy over Israel.

In some ancient Near Eastern cultures, the dedication of the firstborn to the deity manifested itself sacrificially (cf. 2 Kings 3:27; Mic. 6:7). Some have suggested that this idea is reflected in the OT, although 1 Sam. 1:11 indicates that in Israel some alternate form of dedication may have been understood. Nonetheless, Yahweh provided a redemptive alternative through sacrifice (Gen. 22; cf. Num. 3:12–13).

Fullness

Generally, the idea of fullness in the Bible implies completeness. Often the term has been applied to Jesus, who is considered to be the fullness of God in humanity. Paul writes that God was “pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him” (Col. 1:19). Paul similarly says that in Christ “the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form” (Col. 2:9). Not only is Jesus considered to be the fullness of God, but also those who follow him are considered to have the opportunity to experience fullness from God (Col. 2:10; Eph. 3:19; 4:13). Furthermore, Paul emphasizes the need for the gospel to be preached in its fullness (Col. 1:25).

Head of the Church

A metaphor used by the apostle Paul to speak of Christ’s relationship with the church, which he calls the “body of Christ” (1 Cor. 12:27). With the headship image Paul highlights Christ’s authority over all things (Eph. 1:22) and his vital union with the body (1:23). He portrays Christ as the goal of Christian maturity and growth (4:15) and as one deserving the church’s submission (5:23). Paul also employs headship language in the midst of a presentation of Christ as preeminent and divine, the creator and unifier (Col. 1:18).

When the Greek word for “head” (kephalē) is used figuratively of a person, it frequently depicts one of superior rank who occupies a role of authority over another (similar to the “headmaster” of a school). Possibly, kephalē can be used to describe one who is the source of another (similar to the “headwaters” of a river) or to merely emphasize an organic relationship of unity and interconnectedness with a body. See also Head.

Image of God

That humankind has been created in the image of God indicates its unique status above the animals because of a special similarity with God. This status authorizes humankind to rule the earth and requires respect toward people. The particulars of what the phrase “image of God” means have been understood in many ways.

The phrase is rather rare. It first appears in Gen. 1:26–27, and the same or similar phrases occur in five more verses (Gen. 5:1, 3; 9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7; James 3:9) that refer back to it. The NT also refers to Christ as the image of God and to believers becoming like the image of Christ.

Understanding Genesis 1:26–27

This makes Gen. 1:26–27 the starting point for understanding the phrase. Several factors come into play: the contrast with the creation of animals on the same day; the connection with humankind ruling the other creatures; other elements of the broader context; the meaning of the words “image” (tselem) and “likeness” (demut); the meaning of the preposition “in”; and the meaning and use of images in the ancient Near East.

In the immediately preceding context, animals are made “according to their kinds,” whereas humans are made “in the image of God.” The context directly following also makes a distinction between the two, granting humans rule, or dominion, over the animals. Being in the image of God certainly involves what makes humans unique in contrast to the rest of the animal kingdom.

The history of interpretation of the phrase “image of God” is long and voluminous. Just about anything from the broader context that seems important to the interpreter might be selected as the key meaning; or whatever philosophical system is dominant at the time when the interpreter writes might be tapped as the “obvious” explanation of what being in the image of God means; or perhaps the insights of a particular academic discipline or systematic theological system might be given preference. Thus, the meaning of being created in the image of God has been associated with many things, such as language, eternal soul, rationality, relationality, being male and female (often compared to the Trinity), physical appearance, dominion, and personhood. The wide variety is possible because the text of Scripture does not spell it out, and the options seem reasonable to their various proponents as explaining the uniqueness of humanity, something that clearly serves the context.

Although many of these insights may be reasonable and relevant, it can be problematic to select one as the key element. For example, to support the suggestion that being in the image of God means walking erect on two feet, one could point out that (1) humankind’s “walking” is in the broader context, (2) human beings “walking” with God uniquely contrasts to the circumstances of other animals, and (3) standing erect on two feet is a dominance move in the animal kingdom. But this is unlikely to be convincing to anyone, for good reason. And the many options offered by interpreters often look equally out of place from another’s perspective. For example, the text emphasizes that God created them “male and female,” a unity with a difference. God is a trinity, a unity with a difference. Is this, then, the image of God? Someone might point out that the animals are also male and female, and that the text does not necessarily have the Trinity in view (there are other explanations for the plural “us” in Gen. 1:26, which many consider better explanations).

Studying the words “image” and “likeness” does not quickly clarify the issue. “Image” normally refers to a statue, typically of a god. And “likeness” normally refers to similar physical appearance. The true God is a spirit, lacking a particular physical form, and he forbids making a statue of himself. If the three-dimensional human physique is not the point, what remains of the terms “image” and “likeness” is simply some notion of similarity. It is this vagueness that has promoted diverse understandings.

The preposition “in” is also much discussed, for it might mean “in” or “as.” Thus humanity is perhaps made in a like appearance to God, or in an unspecified similarity to God. Or humanity has been created as God’s image on the earth. The first emphasizes what humanity is (being), the second what humanity is to do (function). Yet the two, being and function, certainly are related, so the difference between them may be overstated.

The surrounding cultures of the ancient Near East made images of their gods. They believed not that the statue actually was the god but rather that it invoked the presence of the god and represented the god to the people as a central location for interaction. The Babylonian word for “image” is similar to the Hebrew and also usually refers to a statue or artistic representation. It is sometimes used figuratively about a king being the image of a god. And in Egypt we find the idea that humanity is the image of gods. This conceptual backdrop aligns with an understanding that being in the image of God relates to the function of ruling.

Additionally, the phrase “and let them rule over” occurs in a sequence that can indicate purpose or result. Thus, the passage may be rendered, “Let us make man as our image, as our likeness, so that they may rule.” That is, God set up human beings with a distinct nature for a distinct task, which he expressly includes when blessing them (Gen. 1:28). We might still infer from general revelation some of the details that are relevant to that uniqueness, but we should avoid elevating them in importance.

Other Biblical Passages

The passages that refer back to Gen. 1:26–27 emphasize honor and respect for human individuals. Humans are to dominate the earth, not one another. They should not kill one another; otherwise they become subject to the death penalty (Gen. 9:6), and they should not curse others but instead treat them with honor (James 3:9). But the motif has no real prominence other than being in the beginning of the Bible. After Gen. 9:6, the OT does not use the phrase “image of God.” The concept of human rule appears (e.g., Ps. 8), but the expression “image of God” is more a subpoint under a larger topic than it is a heading for biblical teaching.

In the NT, Jesus is twice identified by the Greek equivalent to the Hebrew phrase “image of God” (2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15). Especially in the context of Col. 1:15, the emphasis is on Christ’s deity and so part of a different topic, despite the similar wording. The two verses about believers that refer to the likeness of God and the image of the Creator (Col. 3:10; Eph. 4:24) deal with moral behavior and the sanctification of the believer (cf. Rom. 8:29; 2 Cor. 3:18). Although they do not directly refer to Gen. 1, they do address the common metaphor that humankind, by sinning, marred its imaging of God. To be conformed to the image of Christ restores how humanity images God in the world.

Peace

The word “peace” in both the OT (shalom) and the NT (eirēnē) primarily describes something sound and complete. It was a common form of greeting in both Testaments, and many word cognates from shalom are still in use among speakers of Semitic languages as daily greetings. Following the Hellenistic convention of letter writing, but with heightened appreciation for its distinctively Christian meaning, almost all letters in the NT include “peace” in their beginning or end sections.

The concept of peace in the Bible, however, goes far beyond the commonly held notions of peace as the absence of conflict and the existence of cooperation between parties. The Bible presents peace as the state of completion of God’s plan, fulfillment of his promise for his people on earth. Although peace among individuals, people groups, and nations is not absent from the biblical concept, a clear emphasis is laid on peace between humans and God. In fact, attaining peace on an individual level is tied more closely to one’s relationship with God than to one’s inner psychological state.

Old Testament. The biblical worldview maintains that this world is a broken and flawed place, a state fallen from shalom, which must be reinstated to secure peace. In the OT, the primary context in which peace is reinstated is the sacrificial system. The “peace offering” (shelamim; NIV: “fellowship offering”) requires animal slaughter and shedding of blood. Insomuch as the sacrifice of animals is painful and costly, so is the brokenness of the proper relationship between sinful humans and the holy God.

Another important dimension of restoring peace is through the coming Messiah. That the divinely appointed Messiah would someday come and institute peace in this troubled world is found in many OT prophets and is particularly vital to the theology of Isaiah. With much symbolic power, the messianic epithet in Isa. 9:6 ends with the “Prince of Peace.” The promise that this messianic king will establish peace on earth was a centerpiece of the hope that Israel held through countless crises. In one of the most passionate and powerful passages in the OT, Isa. 53 says that a figure, often called the Suffering Servant, will emerge to take the sin and guilt of God’s people upon himself and bring peace to them (vv. 5–6).

New Testament. For Christians, all these prophecies point to the person and office of Jesus Christ. Significant in their eschatological overtones, both Zechariah and Simeon mention peace in their pronouncements that the anticipated coming of the Messiah had just occurred right in their view (Luke 1:79; 2:29). At Jesus’ birth, the angels proclaim the coming of the Prince of Peace (Luke 2:14). This resonates well with the assertion that Christ is our peace (Eph. 2:14–15).

It is important that the peace mediated by sacrifices in the OT is directly dispensed by Jesus in the Gospels, as in healing the sick and comforting the downtrodden. He even commands peace over natural disturbances (a storm). Jesus specifically indicates that he will give peace to those who follow him. He greets his disciples by invoking peace (“Peace to you”), echoing the Jewish custom at that time, but certainly with a far greater and more powerful reality in mind. In the end, however, the price of true peace was the life of Christ. The peace between God and humans was shattered due to rebellion on the part of humans and the ensuing divine wrath. Since the penalty of sin and separation from God is death (Rom. 6:23), mending the broken relationship would be very costly. In some of the most theologically charged passages (Rom. 5:8–11; 2 Cor. 5:18–21; Col. 1:20–22; Eph. 2:14–17), Paul argues that God, who was the offended party in this breach of relationship, took the initiative to restore the relationship by, shockingly enough, giving up his Son as the peace offering. Thus, the gospel ministry into which Paul and all disciples are called is the ministry of reconciliation—restoring peace.

The “theology of peace” explored above has immense implications for Christian life. In some real sense, peace is the capstone of the rich blessings bestowed on the believer. Peace is a divine gift (John 14:27; 16:33; Rom. 5:1). It is God’s answer to prayer (Phil. 4:7). What armors Christians is the gospel of peace (Eph. 6:15). God is a God of peace (1 Thess. 5:23), and Christ is our peace (Eph. 2:14–15). Peace is what Christ left for his disciples (John 14:27; 16:33).

Person of Christ

Old Testament

New Testament

Summary

Personality

The study of human beings, their nature and origins. The Christian understanding of anthropology stems from a biblical view of humankind’s relationship to God.

The Origin of Humankind

According to Genesis, the creation of humankind took place on the sixth day of the creation week. The amount of narrative space allotted to this day (Gen. 1:24–31) testifies to the special importance of what happened. Human beings were made on the same day as the animals. Human beings were not given a day of their own, showing that they have a certain kinship with the animals, although they are far more than highly successful and adaptive mammals. This has implications for the care of animals and of the environment generally. The value of human beings and their special place in the created order is clear in passages such as Pss. 8:5–6; 104:14–15.

Created in the image of God. When it came to the making of human beings, God deliberated over this crucial step (Gen. 1:26). The plural of exhortation in “Let us make man in our image” signals that the decision to make humankind was the most important one that God had made so far. Genesis 1 says that human beings are like God in some way.

Various opinions have been canvassed as to what the “image” is. We cannot totally exclude the physical form of humans, given God’s humanoid form in OT appearances (theophanies; e.g., Isa. 6:1; Ezek. 1:26; Amos 9:1). The image has sometimes been interpreted as a task, the exercising of dominion (Gen. 1:28), with humanity appointed as creation’s king, ruling under God. But the image is better understood as the precondition for rule rather than rule itself. The image shows human worth (Gen. 9:6) and differentiates humans from all other creatures. It is proper for the Bible to use anthropomorphic language for God, for humans are remarkably like God. Both male and female are in the image of God (“in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them” [1:27]), so that the divine image is not maleness, nor is sexual differentiation the image. Commonly, the image of God is thought to be some peculiar quality of human beings—for example, rationality, speech, moral sense, personality, humans as relational beings.

Every century has its own view of what is the essence of humanity. However, nothing in the passage allows a choice among such alternatives. The point of the passage is simply the fact of the likeness, with no exact definition being provided. The fact of the image is the basis of the divine prohibition of murder and of the strict penalty applied to the transgressor (9:4–6). The fall into sin affected every aspect of the human constitution, and the Bible does not minimize the fact of human sinfulness (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Rom. 3:10–18); nevertheless, humans are still in the image of God (Gen. 5:1–3; 9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7). God’s plan of salvation is aimed at ridding creation (and especially humanity) of the baneful effects of sin, and this will be achieved through the work of Christ, who is the image of God (2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15–20; Heb. 1:1–3; 2:5–18). The outcome will be the conformity of believers in Christ to his glorious image (Rom. 8:29–30; 2 Cor. 3.18).

Place in the created order. God’s purpose in giving human beings the divine image is “so they may rule” (NET [Gen. 1:26b translated as a purpose clause]). The syntax suggests that the image is a presupposition of dominion. It is plain that such a delegated authority makes humans stewards. The vegetarian diet of Gen.1:29 (there was no eating of meat at first) represents a limitation to the human right of dominion. Adam’s naming of the animals was (in part) expressive of his sovereignty over them (2:19). Later, Noah was charged to bring pairs of animals into the ark to preserve them alive (6:19–20), showing care for other creatures. The patriarchs tended flocks (13:2–9; 26:12–14), and Joseph’s relief measures saved the lives of people and animals (47:15–18). The wanton destruction of the Promised Land was expressly forbidden (Deut. 20:19–20). Humanity is accountable to God for the stewardship of the earth. The divine command “be fruitful and multiply” (Gen. 1:28 NRSV) shows that God’s purpose is that the human race populate the whole earth.

At Gen. 2:7 the biblical narrative becomes thoroughly anthropocentric, picturing the little world that God establishes around the first man, so this account is quite different from the cosmic presentation of Gen. 1. In Gen. 1 humankind is the apex of a pyramid, the last and highest of a series of creatures; in Gen. 2 the man is the center of a circle, everything else made to fit around him, and his connection to the physical earth is emphasized. In either view, a very special place is given to human beings in the created order. The two pictures are complementary, not contradictory.

The “man” (’adam) is formed from the “ground” (’adamah), with the related Hebrew words making a pun. Man’s name reminds him of his earthy origins. He is made from the “dust,” which hints at his coming death. He will return to the dust (Gen. 3:19; cf. Job 10:8–9; Ps. 103:14; Isa. 29:16). The reference to “the breath of life” (Gen. 2:7) is due to the fact that this leaves a person at death (Job 34:14–15; Ps. 104:29–30), so man’s (potential) mortality is implied. Ironically, the making of man is described using the language of death. What is described in Gen. 2 is the making of the first man, from whom the rest of the human race has descended, not the making of humankind, though the word ’adam can mean that in other contexts.

The Nature of Humankind

Body, soul, and spirit. Arguments over whether human nature is bipartite (body and soul) or tripartite (body, soul, spirit) are not to be decided by arbitrary appeal to isolated verses. Verses can be found in apparent support for both the first view (e.g., Matt. 10:28) and the second (e.g., 1 Thess. 5:23), but certainly the first scheme is much more prevalent in the Bible. “Soul” and “spirit” can be used interchangeably (Eccles. 3:21; 12:7; Ezek. 18:31). Death is marked by the parting of soul/spirit and body, but it would be a mistake to think that human beings are made up of separate component parts, or that the physical body is only a dispensable shell and not essential to true humanity. The physicality of human existence in the “body” is owned and celebrated in Scripture, part of that being the positive attitude to sexuality when properly expressed (Song of Songs; 1 Cor. 7) and the nonascetic nature of biblical ethics (1 Cor. 10:31; Col. 2:23). The doctrine of the resurrection of the body is the fullest expression of this (1 Cor. 15), in contrast to ancient Greek thought that viewed the body as inherently evil and understood salvation as the immortality of the liberated, disembodied soul.

The different words used in relation to persons are only intended to refer to and at times focus on different aspects of unified human nature. References to the “soul” may stress individual responsibility (e.g., Ezek. 18:4 NASB: “The soul who sins will die”). In Ps. 103:1–2, “O my soul” expresses emphatic self-encouragement to praise God and is in parallel with “all my inmost being”—that is, “my whole being” (an example of synecdoche: a part standing for the whole [cf. Ps. 35:10]). These are ways of referring to oneself as a person who expresses will and intention (cf. Ps. 42:5–6, 11). The “flesh” is used to stress the weakness of mortal humanity (e.g., Isa. 40:6 RSV: “All flesh is grass”). The “heart” is the volitional center of a human being (Prov. 4:23; cf. Mark 7:17–23). The emotional and empathetic reactions of humans are described by reference to the organs: “liver,” “kidneys,” “bowels.”

Morals and responsibility. In Gen. 2 the complexities of the man’s moral relation to God and his relations with the soil, with the animals, and with the woman are explored. God deposited the man in the garden “to work it and take care of it” (2:15). The words chosen to designate the man’s work prior to the fall have an aura of worship about them, for they are later used in the OT for the cultic actions of serving and guarding within the sanctuary. The priests served by offering sacrifices, and the Levites guarded the gates of the sacred precinct. A theology of work as a religious vocation is presented. The man was a kind of king-priest in the garden of God.

The moral responsibility of humanity is signaled from the beginning. God’s command gives permission for the man to eat from “any tree” except one (Gen. 2:16–17) and as such indicates man’s freedom, so that this command is no great restriction. The wording “you are free to eat” reinforces the point about God’s generous provision. The prohibition is embedded in the description of God’s fatherly care for the man and gracious act in placing him in the garden. The divine restriction is slight and not at all overbearing, though the serpent will seek to make it appear mean-spirited (3:1). The command and prohibition are the very first words of God to the man, marking them out as of fundamental importance for the relationship between them. The prohibition (“you must not eat . . .”) is an absolute one in the style of the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). What is placed before the man is a test that gives him the opportunity to express his loyalty to God. A relationship of obedience and trust requires the possibility of choice and the opportunity to disobey (if that is what he wants to do). The moral nature and responsibility of individuals is not a late discovery by the prophet Ezekiel (Ezek. 18); rather, it is the presupposition behind the Mosaic law, for the commands of the Decalogue (“you shall not . . .”) are phrased as commands to individuals (as the Hebrew makes clear). On the other hand, the concept of corporate responsibility is also present (e.g., Achan’s punishment in Josh. 7).

Relationships. Human beings are relational by nature, as the creation of the woman as a helper and partner for the first man makes plain (Gen. 2:18–25). Later in Scripture this is put in more general terms, so that friendship and mutual cooperation are shown to be essential to life (Eccles. 4:7–12). The body life of the church reflects the same fact and need (1 Cor. 12). In Psalms, human needs and vulnerability find their answer and fulfillment in God, with the psalmist acknowledging his frailty and his creaturely dependence on God (e.g., Ps. 90). This also shows the folly of sinful human pride, against which the prophets so often inveighed (e.g., Isa. 2:9, 11–17, 22).

Principalities

One of the names given to spiritual realities that were created by God in Christ but are now corrupted. Paul says that it is these “principalities” (Gk. archē), not “flesh and blood,” that form the real opposition for Christians (Eph. 6:12 KJV). Synonyms that appear in various Bible translations are “rulers,” “authorities,” “powers,” “spiritual forces,” “thrones” (Rom. 8:38; Eph. 3:10; 6:12; Col. 1:16).

Providence

The word “providence” comes from the Latin word providentia, which means “foresight.” However, the modern theological use of the term refers not to foresight or foreknowl-edge per se but rather to how God continues to sustain and guide his creation. There is no single term in either the OT or the NT that translates as “providence.” The one time the word occurs in the NIV (Job 10:12), the Hebrew word (peqqudah) is one that the NIV in other places usually translates with words such as “care,” “charge,” or “oversight.” The concept of divine providence comes not from any one word but rather from numerous statements in the Bible that speak of God’s continuing supervision of his world. The biblical data can perhaps best be organized under four headings: created order, world history, salvation history, and individual history. These headings are, however, not discrete; they continually intersect.

Created Order

Scripture testifies in numerous places to God’s ongoing supervision of his creation. The psalms play a special role here. As one commentator has remarked, there are no nature lyrics in the psalms, only admiration and awe at how God runs his world. God actively cares for the land and waters it, causes grass to grow, plants trees, and makes sure that they are well watered (Pss. 65:9; 104:14, 16). God brings darkness on the land and tells the sun when to set and when to rise (Ps. 104:19–20). God is the zookeeper who makes sure all the animals are fed (Ps. 104:27). Every birth of every living creature is regarded as a new creative work of God, and he constantly renews the face of the earth (Ps. 104:30).

God blankets the earth with snow and lays down a sheet of frost (Ps. 147:16). When the snow and frost melt, it is because God commanded it by his word and sent breezes to make the melting waters flow (Ps. 147:18). Hail, snow, clouds, and stormy winds do their Master’s bidding (Ps. 148:8). God commands the morning to dawn and keeps the snow and hail in storehouses, ready to be deployed on the day of battle (Job 38:12, 22–23). The sea waves roar because God stirs them up (Jer. 31:35). God even speaks of being in a covenant relationship with his creation (Jer. 33:20, 25).

In the NT, we find that Jesus Christ himself sustains “all things by his powerful word” (Heb. 1:3). In him “all things hold together” (Col. 1:17).

World History

What happens on the world scene is under God’s sovereign control. If the nations are scattered over the world and speak different languages, it is because God made it so (Gen. 11:1–9). God determines whether the nations are blessed or cursed (Gen. 12:3). God is the one who has apportioned each nation’s inher-i-tance and has established their boundaries (Deut. 32:8). Yahweh is the God of Israel, which is his special possession, but he has also appointed deities for the other nations to worship (Deut. 4:19 [evidently false gods, but still under Yahweh’s sovereignty]). He judges the world and carries out justice for the peoples, foils the plans of the nations, forms the hearts of all people, reigns over the nations and guides them (Pss. 9:8; 33:10, 15; 47:8; 67:4).

It is by God’s sanction that kings reign, and a king’s heart is like a watercourse, which God can redirect at will (Prov. 8:15; 21:1). God “does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth” (Dan. 4:35). All thrones, powers, rulers, and authorities “were created through him and for him” (Col. 1:16). God is actively working to bring the whole universe and all peoples and nations under one head, his Son, Christ Jesus (Eph. 1:10).

Salvation History

Within world history, God has also worked through one particular people, the Israelites, to accomplish his redemptive purposes. When Joseph told his brothers that what they had intended to do to him for evil, God had intended for good, for “the saving of many lives” (Gen. 50:20), he may not have fully realized how much his words were in accord with, and could even be said to summarize, redemptive history. God took the harm that Joseph’s brothers intended and used it to fulfill the promises that he had made years earlier to Abraham with regard to what would happen to his descendants (Gen. 12:1–3). In the early chapters of Exodus, God’s sovereignty over the “forces of nature” intersects with his deliverance of the Israelites in the plagues that he brings on the Egyptians. Of course, God had raised up Pharaoh for the very purpose of displaying his own glory in victory over Pharaoh and “all the gods of Egypt” (Exod. 9:16; 12:12; cf. Rom. 9:17).

Throughout the ensuing Israelite history, God demonstrates his providential care for the Israelites. The Jews return from their Babylonian captivity because God raised up Cyrus, even though Cyrus did not acknowledge him (Isa. 44:28–45:13), for the very purpose of issuing the decree that allowed them to return. Even in narratives in which God’s name is not mentioned, such as the book of Esther, we are to understand that God is directing the action, and certainly the narrator wants us to connect the account of the origin of the festival of Purim (“lots”) with the idea that “the lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord” (Prov. 16:33).

In the NT the act that secures our redemption, the crucifixion of Jesus, is not an unforeseen occurrence that God makes the best of; rather, the death of Jesus is that which he himself would “accomplish” (Luke 9:31 NRSV [NIV: “bring to fulfillment”]). No one takes Jesus’ life from him; he lays it down of his own accord (John 10:18). Jesus even gives Judas Iscariot directions on the night of his betrayal (John 13:27). What happens in the crucifixion is in accord with “God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge” (Acts 2:23) and with what his “power and will had decided beforehand should happen” (4:28).

Individual History

Jesus promises that for those who seek the kingdom of God, “all these things will be given to you as well” (Matt. 6:33). If God feeds the birds of the air and clothes the grass of the field, much more will he take care to feed and clothe us (Matt. 6:26, 30). Indeed, “in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose” (Rom. 8:28).

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because Colossians 1:15-23 is mentioned in the definition.

Anthropology

The study of human beings, their nature and origins. The Christian understanding of anthropology stems from a biblical view of humankind’s relationship to God.

The Origin of Humankind

The Nature of Humankind

Atonement

The English word “atonement” comes from an Anglo-Saxon word, “onement,” with the preposition “at”; thus “at-onement,” or “at unity.” In some ways this word has more in common with the idea of reconciliation than our modern concept of atonement, which, while having “oneness” as its result, emphasizes rather the idea of how that unity is achieved, by someone “atone-ing” for a wrong or wrongs done. Atonement, in Christian theology, concerns how Christ achieved this “onement” between God and sinful humanity.

The need for atonement comes from the separation that has come about between God and humanity because of sin. In both Testaments there is the understanding that God has distanced himself from his creatures on account of their rebellion. Isaiah tells the people of Judah, “Your iniquities have separated you from your God” (59:2). And Paul talks about how we were “God’s enemies” (Rom. 5:10). So atonement is the means provided by God to effect reconciliation. The atonement is required on account of God’s holiness and justice.

Old Testament

In the OT, the sacrificial system was the means by which sins were atoned for, ritual purity was restored, iniquities were forgiven, and an amicable relationship between God and the offerer of the sacrifice was reestablished. Moses tells the Israelites that God has given them the blood of the sacrificial animals “to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life” (Lev. 17:11). In essence, this is the basic operating principle for atonement in the OT—the offering of the blood of a slaughtered animal in place of the life of the offerer. However, there have been significant scholarly debates regarding whether this accurately portrays the ancient Israelite understanding of atonement.

The meaning of “to atone.” First, there is disagreement over the precise meaning of the Hebrew word kapar (“to atone”). Among the more popular suggestions are these: to cover, to remove, to wipe out, to appease, to make amends, to redeem or ransom, to forgive, and to avert/divert. Of late, one very influential theory is that atonement has little or nothing to do with the individual offerer, but serves only to purify the tabernacle or temple and the furniture within from the impurities that attach to them on account of the community’s sin. This theory, though most probably correct in what it affirms, unnecessarily restricts the effects of atonement to the tabernacle and furniture. There are, to be sure, texts that specifically mention atonement being made for the altar (e.g., Exod. 29:36–37; Lev. 8:15). But the repeated affirmation for most of the texts in Leviticus and Numbers is that the atonement is made for the offerer (e.g., Lev. 1:4; 4:20, 26); atonement results in forgiveness of sin for the one bringing the offering. As far as the precise meaning of kapar is concerned, it may be that some of the suggested meanings overlap and that a particular concept is more prevalent in some passages, and another one in others.

There has also been debate over the significance of the offerer laying a hand on the head of the sacrificial animal (e.g., Lev. 1:4; 3:2). This has traditionally been understood as an identification of the offerer with the sacrifice and a transference of the offerer’s sins to the sacrifice. Recently this has been disputed and the argument made instead that it only signifies that the animal does indeed belong to the offerer, who therefore has the right to offer it. But again, this is unduly restrictive; it should rather be seen as complementary to what has traditionally been understood by this gesture. Indeed, in the rite for the Day of Atonement, when the priest lays his hands on the one goat, confesses Israel’s sin and wickedness, and in doing so is said to be putting them on the goat’s head (Lev. 16:21), this would seem to affirm the correctness of the traditional understanding. The sacrifice is thus best seen as substitutionary: it takes the place of the offerer; it dies in his stead.

The relationship between God and the offerer. Second, granted that the word kapar has to do with the forgiveness of sins, the question arises as to the exact effect that it has on the relationship between God and the offerer. The question here is whether the effect is expiation or propitiation. Does the offering expiate the sin—wipe it out, erase it, remove it? Or does it propitiate the one to whom the sacrifice is offered? That is, does it appease and placate God, so that the threat of God’s wrath is removed? In one respect, the distinction seems artificial; it seems logical that expiation naturally results in propitiation. On the other hand, the modern-day tendency to deny that God could possibly be a God of wrath makes the question relevant. In any case, there are certainly, in both religious and nonreligious contexts, passages where something like “appease” or “pacify” appears to be a proper rendering of kapar (Gen. 32:20; Exod. 32:30; Num. 16:46–47; 25:1–13; 1 Sam. 3:14). The effect of atonement is that sins are removed and forgiven, and God is appeased.

In conjunction with this last point, it is also important to note that there are a number of places where it is said that God does the kapar, that God is the one who makes atonement. Deuteronomy 21:8 calls upon God, literally, to “atone [NIV: “accept this atonement”] for your people, Israel.” In Deut. 32:43 God will “make atonement for his land and people.” Psalm 65:3 (ESV) states that God “atone[s] for our transgressions” (ESV). Hezekiah prays in 2 Chron. 30:18, “May the Lord, who is good, pardon [atone for] everyone.” In Ps. 78:38 (ESV), God is said to have “atoned” for Israel’s iniquity. Psalm 79:9 (ESV) asks God to “atone for our sins for your name’s sake.” In Isa. 43:3 kapar is translated as “ransom,” and God says to Israel that he gave “Egypt for your ransom.” In Ezek. 16:63 God declares that he will “make atonement” for all the sins that Israel has committed. It may be that in most of these passages “atone” is to be understood as a synonym of “forgive.” However, as many commentators have noted, in at least some of these passages, the thought is that God is either being called upon to take or is taking upon himself the role of high priest, atoning for the sins of the people. It is important to remember God’s declaration in Lev. 17:11 that he has given to the Israelites the blood of the sacrificial animals to make atonement for their sins. Atonement, no matter how it is conceived of or carried out, is a gift that God graciously grants to his covenant people.

That leads to a consideration of one particularly relevant passage, Isa. 52:13–53:12. In this text a figure referred to as “my [the Lord’s] servant” (52:13) is described as one who “took up our pain and bore our suffering” (53:4). He was “pierced for our transgressions” and “crushed for our iniquities” (53:5). “The Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all” (53:6). And then we are told, “Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,” and that “the Lord makes his life an offering for sin [NASB: “guilt offering”]” (53:10). There are many issues with regard to the proper interpretation of this “Servant Song” (as it is often called), one of them being whether the term translated “guilt offering” should really be thought of along the lines of the guilt offering described in the book of Leviticus (5:14–6:7; 7:1–10). But if the traditional Christian understanding of this passage is correct, we have here a picture of God himself assuming the role of priest and atoning for the sins of his people by placing their iniquities and sins on his servant, a figure regarded by Jesus and the apostles in the NT to be God’s very own son, Christ Jesus.

New Testament

The relationship between the Testaments. When we come to the NT, four very important initial points should be made.

First, God’s wrath against sin and sinners is just as much a NT consideration as an OT one. God still considers those who are sinful and unrighteous to be his “enemies” (Rom. 5:10; Col. 1:21). Wrath and punishment await those who do not confess Jesus Christ as Lord (John 3:36; Rom. 2:5; Eph. 2:3). Atonement is the means of averting this wrath.

Second, salvation is promised to those who come to God by faith in Christ Jesus, but there is still the problem of how God can, at the same time, be “just” himself and yet also be the one who “justifies” sinners and declares them righteous (Rom. 3:26). God will not simply declare sinners to be justified unless his own justness is also upheld. Atonement is the way by which God is both just and justifier.

Third, as we saw in the OT that, ultimately, God is the one who atones, so also in the NT God is the one who provides the means for atonement. It is by his gracious initiative that atonement becomes possible. If Jesus’ death is the means by which atonement is achieved, it is God himself who “presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement” (Rom. 3:25). It was God himself who “so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son” (John 3:16). God himself “sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins” (1 John 4:10). God “did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all” (Rom. 8:32). Additionally, Christ himself was not an unwilling victim; he was actively involved in the accomplishing of atonement by his death (Luke 9:31; John 10:15–18; Heb. 9:14).

Fourth, the atoning sacrifice of the Son was necessary because, ultimately, the OT sacrifices could not really have provided the necessary atonement: “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins” (Heb. 10:4).

Portrayals of Christ’s work of atonement. It has become common of late to refer to the different “images” or “metaphors” of atonement that appear in the NT. This is understandable on one level, but on another level there is something misleading about it. So, for example, when the NT authors speak of Christ as a sacrifice for sin, it is not at all clear that they intend for the reader to take this as imagery. Rather, Christ really is a sacrifice, offered by God the Father, to take away sins, and to bear in his own body the penalty that should have been placed on the sinner. Christ’s sacrifice has an organic connection to the OT sacrificial system, as the “full, final sacrifice.” The author of Hebrews would not have considered this to be imagery. In fact, a better case could be made that, from his perspective, Christ was the real sacrifice, and all the instances of sacrifice in the OT were the imagery (Heb. 10:1). So as we look at the different portrayals of Christ in his work of atonement in the NT, some of these may best be categorized as imagery or metaphor, while others perhaps are better described as a “facet” of, or a “window” on, the atonement. It should also be noted that the individual portrayals do not exclude the others, and in some cases they overlap.

• Ransom. Some passages in the NT speak of Christ’s death as a ransom paid to set us free (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; 1 Tim. 2:6; Heb. 9:15). The same Greek word translated “ransom” in these passages is rendered as “redeem” or “redemption” in other passages (Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14). Other forms of the same word are also translated “redeem” or “redemption” in Gal. 3:13–14; 4:5; Titus 2:14; Heb. 9:12; 1 Pet. 1:18–19; Rev. 14:3. A near synonym of these words is used in Rev. 5:9; 14:4, referring to how Christ “purchased” people by his blood. In most of these cases the picture is that of slaves who have been ransomed, redeemed, or purchased from the slave market. Sometimes this is referred to as an “economic” view of atonement, though this label seems a bit crass, for the purchase is not of a commodity but of human lives at the expense of Christ’s own life and blood. To ask the question as to whom the ransom was paid is probably taking the picture too far. But those who are ransomed are redeemed from a life of slavery to sin and to the law.

• Curse bearer. In Gal. 3:13–14, noted above, there is also the picture of Christ as one who bore the curse of the law in our place. The language is especially striking because rather than saying that Christ bore the curse, Paul says that Christ became “a curse.” This is an especially forceful way of saying that Christ fully took into his own person the curse that was meant for us.

• Penalty bearer. Closely related to “curse bearer,” this portrayal depicts Christ as one who has borne the legal consequences of our sins, consequences that we should have suffered; rather, because Christ has borne the penalty, we are now declared to be righteous and no longer subject to condemnation. This idea stands behind much of the argumentation that Paul uses in Romans and Galatians, and it also intersects with the other portrayals. Passages representative of this picture are Rom. 3:24–26; 4:25; 5:8–21; 8:32–34; Gal. 3:13–14; Eph. 2:15. It is also what should be understood by Peter’s description of Christ’s death as “the just for the unjust” in 1 Pet. 3:18 (NASB, NET), as well as in 2 Cor. 5:21, where Paul states that Christ has become “sin for us” so that we might become the “righteousness of God.”

• Propitiation. There are four passages where the NIV uses “atonement” or “atoning” in the translation to reflect either the Greek verb hilaskomai or related nouns hilastērion or hilasmos. This is the word group that the LXX regularly uses to translate the Hebrew verb kapar and related nouns. There has been much debate about the precise meaning of the word in these four NT texts, in particular, as to whether it means to “expiate” (“remove guilt”) or to “propitiate” (“appease” or “avert wrath”). The better arguments have been advanced in favor of “propitiate”; at the very least, propitiation is implied in expiation. The wrath that we should have suffered on account of our sins has been suffered by Jesus Christ instead. Although the specific word is not used, this is the understanding as well in those passages where it is said either that Christ died “for our sins” (1 Cor. 15:3), “gave himself for our sins” (Gal. 1:4), “bore our sins” (1 Pet. 2:24), or that his blood was poured out “for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:28; cf. Eph. 1:7).

• Passover. In 1 Cor. 5:7 Paul states that “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.” Although the Passover has not traditionally been thought of as a sacrifice for sin (though many scholars would argue that it was), at the very least we should recognize a substitutionary concept at play in Paul’s use of the Passover idea. A lamb died so that the firstborn would not. The Gospel of John seems to have the same understanding. Early in the Gospel, Jesus is proclaimed as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). And then in his account of Jesus’ passion, John narrates that his crucifixion was precisely at the same time as the slaying of the Passover lambs (John 19:14).

• Sacrifice. This theme has already been touched on in the other portraits above, but it is important to recognize the significance of this concept in the NT and especially in the book of Hebrews. There, Christ is portrayed as both sacrifice and the high priest who offers the sacrifice (2:17; 7:27; 9:11–28; 10:10–21; 12:24). He came, not as some have argued, to show the uselessness of the sacrificial system, but rather to be the “full, final sacrifice” within that system, “that he might make atonement for the sins of the people” (2:17).

Of course, it is not just the death of Christ that secures our redemption. His entire earthly life, as well as his resurrection and heavenly intercessory work, must also be recognized. But with regard to the work of atonement per se, Christ’s earthly life, his sinless “active obedience,” is what qualifies him to be the perfect sacrifice. His resurrection is the demonstration of God’s acceptance of Christ’s sacrifice (he “was raised to life for our justification” [Rom. 4:25]). But it was particularly his death that provided atonement for our sins.

Birthright

The birthright consists of the material blessings of a father being passed on to his sons. By right, the oldest son received a double portion of the inheritance received by the children (Gen. 25:29–34; Deut. 21:15–17; Luke 15:11–32). The birthright is often connected to, but needs to be distinguished from, the blessing. The blessing generally involved more of a focus on a spiritual allotment, but it crossed paths with the birthright with respect to future leadership and authority of the person (Gen. 27; 49). Royal succession was also a birthright, though God could countermand this privilege (1 Kings 2:15; 2 Chron. 21:3).

In the NT, Jesus’ birthright includes the throne of David, a position of honor as God’s unique Son, and creation itself (Rom. 8:29; Col. 1:18; Heb. 1:4–6). The low regard with which Esau viewed his birthright is also used as a warning in Hebrews to encourage Christians not to take their spiritual inheritance lightly (Heb. 12:16–17).

Book of Proverbs

Purpose

The preface to the book of Proverbs (1:1–7) introduces its intent to make its reader wise. Although the discourses of the book (chaps. 1–9) are the instructions of a father to his son, the preface widens the audience to include both the “simple” (1:4) and the “wise” (1:5). The preface also informs the reader that wisdom begins with the fear of the Lord, thus indicating that wisdom is more than practical advice. Wisdom is a theological truth.

Historical Background

The first verse of Proverbs associates the book with “Solomon son of David, king of Israel” (1:1). Solomon was the king of a united Israel in the tenth century BC, and his association with wisdom is well known from the historical books (1 Kings 3; 4:29–34; 10:1–13; 2 Chron. 1; 9:1–12).

Although Proverbs clearly attributes large sections of the book to Solomon (particularly 10:1–22:16; 25:1–29:27), it also recognizes other hands in the production of the book. First, 25:1, while associating Solomon with the following proverbs, also mentions the scribal activity of “the men of Hezekiah,” a Judean king from the late eighth and early seventh centuries BC. Second, 22:17–24:34 is connected to a group known as “the wise” (see 22:17; 24:23). Below, we will see that this section bears comparison with ancient Egyptian proverbial literature. Finally, there are sayings of two foreign kings, Agur (30:1) and Lemuel respectively (31:1).

In summary, Solomon is the fountainhead of the book of Proverbs. He created and collected proverbs, thus initiating the collection. After Solomon, other proverbs were added to the collection, including some of his own (25:1). We do not know precisely when the book came to a final form, though it was before the canon of the OT was closed.

Ancient Near Eastern Background

In 1 Kings 4:29–30 Solomon’s wisdom is said to surpass that of the “people of the East” as well as “the wisdom of Egypt.” Such a statement can be a compliment only if the wisdom of the broader ancient Near East had some measure of validity. Once the merit of ancient Near Eastern wisdom is recognized, we may not be surprised to see some measure of similarity between certain proverbs and wisdom from outside Israel.

The most famous comparison is between the thirty “sayings of the wise” in Prov. 22:17–24:22 and the thirty chapters of the Egyptian Instructions of Amenemope. The latter is dated before the time of Solomon and contains instructions similar to Proverbs. One example is the instruction “Do not move an ancient boundary stone” in Prov. 23:10 and the similar admonition in Amenemope 7.12.

More recently, the connections between Proverbs and ancient Near Eastern proverbs have been broadened to include not only other ancient Egyptian instruction texts but also Sumerian and especially Aramaic proverbial literature (particularly Ahiqar).

It appears that the faithful in Israel recognized that even observant pagans could stumble across truths about how God’s creation works. Even so, the faithful in Israel would not recognize their Egyptian counterparts as “wise” even when they were perhaps inspired by their insights into the workings of the world. After all, they did not have “fear of the Lord” and did not embrace Wisdom (see below).

Social Setting

The proverbs of the biblical book seem to come from different sectors of Israelite society. It is not surprising, considering the role of Solomon and the “men of Hezekiah,” that a number of proverbs originated and have their primary usage in the royal court (23:1–3). Even so, other proverbs originate in village life of agrarian society (10:5). When the latter are found in parts of the book attributed to Solomon, he might be the collector rather than the creator.

Text

The Greek translation of Proverbs has significant differences from the main Hebrew texts, particularly in its outline. While some scholars see this as evidence of two different editions of the book, others more plausibly argue that the Greek text is a very free translation that reflects Stoic philosophy and Jewish midrashic thinking. Modern English translations, thus, are based on the ancient Hebrew texts.

Literary Considerations

Structure. The book of Proverbs can be outlined in more than one way. As noted above, the book contains rubrics indicating different authors, and on that basis the book may be divided in the following way:

1:1: Solomon, for the whole book

10:1: Solomon, for 10:1–22:16

22:17: The wise (see also 24:23), for 22:17–24:34

30:1: Agur, for 30:1–33

31:1: Lemuel, for 31:1–9

Recognizing that 1:1 is a superscription for the entire book, and that 1:1–7 is a preamble certainly added late in the process of collection to describe the purpose of the whole book, we find the following structure:

Superscription (1:1)

Preamble (Stating the Purpose) (1:2–7)

Solomonic Proverbs (10:1–22:16; 25:1–29:27)

Sayings of the Wise (22:17–24:34)

Sayings of Lemuel (30:1–33)

Poem to the Virtuous Woman (31:10–31)

On a large scale, the most interesting structural insight is that chapters 1–9 contain extended discourses, while chapters 10–31 contain the proverbs per se (see “Genre” below). The discourses in the first nine chapters have the following outline:

The preamble (1:1–7)

Avoid evil associations (1:8–19)

Do not resist Wisdom (1:20–33)

The benefits of the way of wisdom (2:1–22)

Trust in Yahweh (3:1–12)

Praising wisdom (3:13–20)

The integrity of wisdom (3:21–35)

Embrace wisdom (4:1–9)

Stay on the right path (4:10–19)

Guard your heart (4:20–27)

Avoid promiscuous women (part 1) (5:1–23)

Wisdom admonitions: loans, laziness, lying, and other topics (6:1–19)

The danger of adultery (6:20–35)

Avoid promiscuous women (part 2) (7:1–27)

Wisdom’s autobiography (8:1–36)

Miscellaneous wisdom sayings (9:7–12)

The second part of the book (chaps. 10–31) seems more randomly structured, with the individual proverbs moving from one topic (laziness, parental authority, wealth and poverty, speech, etc.) to another in no apparent order. Some recent commentators have tried to discover a deep structure to the material, but they have failed to convince a wide audience. As we will see below (“Theological Message”), the fact that the discourses precede the proverbs has important theological significance.

Genre. Proverbs is a book of wisdom. On the surface, biblical wisdom appears to be practical advice about how to live life. How does one navigate difficulties in order to achieve success, defined as a happy, prosperous, productive life? In many ways it is similar to the modern concept of emotional intelligence. It is not so much a matter of knowing facts as it is a skill of living, saying the right thing and doing the right thing at the right time.

But careful reading of the book demonstrates that wisdom is deeper than practical lessons in living. Wisdom from the start involves a theological dimension. As explained more fully below, one cannot be wise unless one has a proper relationship with God. After all, “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge” (1:7).

As a book that teaches wisdom, Proverbs fits into a category of literature that includes Job and Ecclesiastes as well as various psalms (e.g., Pss. 1; 49; 73).

Within the book of Proverbs, we discover two dominant types of literature: the discourse and the proverb per se.

The discourse is the major genre of chapters 1–9. These are extended speeches, typically of a father to a son (e.g., 1:8–19), but occasionally of Wisdom to all the young men who are going by (1:20–33). Both the father and Wisdom encourage their hearers to stay on the path of wisdom, which leads to life, and to avoid folly, which leads to death. Most of the discourses of Proverbs begin with an exhortation that summons the hearer to pay attention and often gives motivation for doing so. It is followed by a lesson (notice, e.g., the extensive teaching about proper sexual relationships in chaps. 5–7). A conclusion typically talks about the consequences of listening or not listening to the lesson.

The bulk of the second part, chapters 10–31, is proverbs per se, though there are longer forms, such as the poem to the virtuous woman (31:10–31). The proverb is a short (typically a two-part parallel line) saying that provides an observation, warning, or encouragement concerning a certain type of behavior. An example is the observation in 10:4: “Lazy hands make for poverty, but diligent hands bring wealth.” Although this proverb simply makes an observation, it implicitly offers encouragement to live with diligence in order to avoid poverty.

The proverb as a genre makes no claim to universal truth. While some proverbs are always true by virtue of their link with a law that is always true (e.g., 30:20, reflecting the commandment not to commit adultery), the proverb itself does not claim to always be true. Proverbs are true only if applied at the right time and in the right situation. That is why we encounter contradictory proverbs such as 26:4 and 26:5, where the advice not to answer a fool is followed immediately by the advice to answer a fool. The wise person must read the situation in order to know which of these two proverbs is applicable.

The circumstantial nature of proverbs is also typically true of observations such as the one in 10:4, noted above. It is not always true that lazy people become poor or that hard workers become rich. The former might inherit a fortune, while the latter might have their hard work destroyed by a natural catastrophe.

In order to use proverbs correctly, readers and users of proverbs must recognize the circumstantial nature of the truth claims of a proverb. After all, proverbs misused are useless (26:7) and even dangerous (26:9).

Another common misuse of a proverb involves the “rewards” and “punishments” described in relationship to wise and foolish behavior. These are not promises. They are, instead, the most likely outcome from a particular course of action, all other things being equal. Thus, the advice to “start children off on the way they should go” tells parents the best route to a desired end (22:6). If they do so, it is likely that their children will not turn from the way of wisdom. But there is no guarantee. Other factors might lead the child astray.

Style. The book of Proverbs is poetry (see Imagery; Poetry). It utilizes figurative language to convey its message. Perhaps the most intriguing image in the book is that of Wisdom (see below). The poetry of Proverbs also uses sound plays as well as the acrostic form (31:20–31) (see Acrostic).

Theological Message

Fear of the Lord. According to Proverbs, no one can be wise without having the proper relationship with God (1:7). This relationship is characterized by “fear.” This fear is not horror, but it is more than respect. The point is that the wise person must understand that God, and no one else, is at the center of the universe, that God is more important than any human being. After all, God created the world (3:19–20; 8:22–31), so it is important to know one’s place before the Creator in order to understand how the world works.

Wisdom and Folly. The relational nature of wisdom as “fear of the Lord” is taught in yet another intriguing way. In 1:20–33; 8:1–36; 9:1–6 the reader encounters a woman, Wisdom, who invites all the young men (the readers) to dinner. Such an invitation presumes an intimate relationship. The location of Wisdom’s home on “the highest point of the city” (9:3) reflects the location of the temple and indicates that Wisdom stands for Yahweh’s wisdom, even Yahweh himself. On the other hand, in 9:13–18 another woman, Folly, issues a rival invitation. Her home too is on “the highest point of the city” (9:14), indicating that she stands for a god as well, but in her case the false gods of the nations. In chapter 9, the reader must decide with whom to dine, Wisdom (Yahweh) or Folly (false gods). Thus, wisdom and folly are not only practical, but also theological categories. Someone who acts wisely is behaving like a proper worshiper of the true God, whereas someone who acts foolishly is behaving like an idolater.

New Testament Connections

The Letter of James has many interesting connections with Proverbs. It describes “the wisdom that comes from heaven” (3:17) and speaks to a number of proverbial topics. In terms of the latter, the extensive teaching about speech is notable (3:1–12).

The most striking NT connection to Proverbs, however, comes in the association drawn between Jesus and Wisdom, particularly as she is described in Prov. 8. John 1 describes Jesus as the Word in language reminiscent of Wisdom, and he is connected with Wisdom in Matt. 11:19; Col. 1:15–20; Rev. 3:14. It is not that Wisdom is a prophecy of Jesus, but the NT associates this figure of Yahweh’s wisdom with Jesus because in him “are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col. 2:3).

Christ and Christology

Old Testament

New Testament

Summary

Christology

Old Testament

New Testament

Summary

Colossae

Colossians is a letter sent by Paul to a church in Colossae when he was in prison. The letter was Paul’s first direct contact with the church, which may have been started by one of his missionary associates, Epaphras (Col. 1:7). Epaphras was from Colossae (4:12), a city of Asia Minor located in the Lycus Valley, known for its fertile soil and green pastures. Some commentators suggest that Epaphras also started churches in Hierapolis and Laodicea (4:13), neighboring cities in the valley that were situated around the Lycus River about ten miles apart. Colossae was a free city located on the main Roman road that ran from Ephesus and Sardis toward the east, and it was populated by native Phrygians, as well as Greeks, Romans, and Jews. More than likely, the church was founded during Paul’s extended ministry in Ephesus, where persons from the region heard Paul’s gospel and from where Paul sent missionary associates such as Epaphras into the surrounding cities (Acts 19). Tychicus, the letter carrier (Col. 4:7–8), was also one of Paul’s associates from the same region; he decided to accompany Paul to Macedonia after the team left Ephesus (Acts 20:4).

The close association of these churches in Asia Minor and the time frame when the letters were written may explain why Paul’s letter to the Colossians is so similar in content to his letter to the Ephesians. Paul was in prison (probably in Rome) when he sent both of these letters (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10, 18). The instructions regarding Tychicus, the carrier for both letters, are identical, nearly verbatim (Eph. 6:21–22; Col. 4:7–8). The letters share the same outline, following some of the same themes, especially toward the end, where Paul gives instructions regarding the household. An affinity also exists between Colossians and Philemon, a letter sent to the patron of one of the house churches in Colossae. Most of the names mentioned by Paul appear in both letters: Timothy, Onesimus, Archippus, Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke (Col. 1:1; 4:9–17; Philem. 1, 10, 23–24). Paul was also in prison, along with Epaphras, at the time he sent his letter to Philemon. All of this indicates that these letters were written about the same time, from the same place, to the same region. Why did Paul send three letters to the same region, especially since letter production was so expensive? Why not send one letter to the entire region (like Galatians), to be read by all the house churches? Obviously, the problems of each church were so different that they required a separate authoritative word from their apostle.

Questionable Practices in Colossae

The Colossians were doing several things that Paul found troublesome, as we learn from Col. 2. They were judging each other for not keeping certain dietary regulations and holy days (2:16). Some were claiming superiority through personal worship experiences that involved visions of angels (2:18). Some subscribed to strict discipline of the human body, punishing themselves through various acts of self-abasement in order to curb fleshly appetites (2:23) and enhance their worship experiences (2:18). It seems that many of them were trying to live by an expanded version of the divine command given in the story of Adam, Eve, and the forbidden fruit: “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!” (2:21). Paul recognized that all these claims and rules had the “appearance of wisdom” but in reality were nothing more than traditions based on “self-imposed” religion, and that such ascetic practices were useless in denying fleshly appetites (2:22–23). Where did the Colossians get all these strange ideas that led to such bizarre behavior?

Paul described the false teaching as an imprisoning “through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces” in opposition to the teachings of Christ (2:8). Because the Colossian church was made up primarily of Gentile converts (1:27), many interpreters argue that the problems resulted from the meshing of the gospel with local, pagan ways. The Phrygians were known for their fascination with magical rituals, the ability to manipulate the powers (earth, wind, fire, spirits, angels, often referred to as “elementary principles of the world”) for human purposes. Paul’s description of the false teaching as a “hollow and deceptive philosophy” based on the “human tradition” may also reveal the influence of Greek ideas and Roman ways in the church. The Greeks operated with a dualistic worldview of spirit versus flesh, leading some philosophers to argue that punishing the body ensured purity of the soul. Furthermore, the Romans believed that the gods had given them power to rule the world, bringing fertility to the lands of conquered peoples. Worshiping Caesar brought economic rewards to devoted subjects of the empire. In other words, all this talk in the Colossian letter about power and sovereignty, philosophy and self-discipline was Paul’s way of dealing directly with the root of the problem: the syncretism of pagan ways and the gospel according to Paul.

Some interpreters believe that all these peculiar teachings derive not from pagan religions but rather from Judaism. After all, Paul’s references to observing the Sabbath, keeping commandments, and angelic worship point toward a Jewish context. Paul also affirmed that his Gentile converts were “circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands” (2:11), perhaps revealing his concern that Jewish ways were creeping into his Gentile church. He even put the church on notice, identifying those among “the circumcision” (Jews) who were trustworthy ministers of the gospel (he mentions only three, Barnabas, John Mark, and Jesus called Justus [4:10–11]). The implication, of course, was to ignore the rest of “the circumcision.” But if the troublemakers in Colossae were Jewish opponents of Paul, how does one explain all the mystical and ascetic elements of this false teaching? Some argue that the expression “worship of angels” was not an idolatrous practice of venerating angelic beings. Instead, the phrase should be translated “angelic worship,” implying that some Colossians claimed to have been transported to heaven and joined the angels in worship of God. This may have been similar to the experiences of an obscure form of Judaism: Jewish mystics who claimed to preserve esoteric revelations through out-of-body experiences of heavenly visions and auditions (see Paul’s description in 2 Cor. 12:1–7). Furthermore, the strict dietary code and sexual ethic of Jewish law were often interpreted by first-century pagans as promoting an ascetic lifestyle. In other words, Paul was countering a more cryptic branch of Judaism that flourished in a region known for its affinity for the mysterious.

Outline and Content

I. Introduction (1:1–14)

A. Greeting (1:1–2)

B. Thanksgiving (1:3–8)

C. Prayer (1:9–14)

II. The Person and Work of Christ (1:15–23)

III. Paul’s Role in Christ’s Mission to the Gentiles (1:24–2:5)

IV. False Teaching versus the Work of Christ (2:6–23)

V. Instructions on Life in Christ

A. In the church (3:1–17)

B. In the home (3:18–4:1)

VI. Generic Exhortations (4:2–6)

VII. Specific Instructions (4:7–9)

VIII. Final Greetings (4:10–17)

IX. Paul’s Signature (4:18)

Whatever the source of the false teaching referred to in Colossians, Paul attempts to correct the misbehavior of his Gentile converts by building an argument that the work of Christ is all-sufficient. Paul begins the letter by describing the person and work of Christ in cosmic terms (1:15–23). Next he recounts his role in the mission of Christ to bring the riches of the kingdom to Gentiles (1:24–2:5). After reminding the Colossians of their reception of the gospel, Paul juxtaposes the deceptive practices of the false teaching with the evidence of the work of Christ in them (2:6–23). Then he gives a number of instructions on what life in Christ is supposed to look like: in the church (3:1–17) and in the home (3:18–4:1). He concludes the letter with generic exhortations (4:2–6), specific instructions (4:7–9), and greetings (4:10–17). Finally, Paul signs the letter, obviously written by a secretary, with the simple request: “Remember my chains” (4:18)—a curious signature that makes the argument of his letter even more appealing.

The Power and Peace of Christ’s Kingdom

It is ironic that Paul chose to describe the work of Christ in such grandiose terms, picturing him as a mighty ruler over all creation, even while the apostle was in prison—an undeniable sign of Roman sovereignty. In Col. 1, in some of the loftiest language Paul ever used to describe Christ’s kingdom authority, the apostle reminds his converts that the Lord is “the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation” (v. 15), an obvious reference to Christ’s deity. Then Paul piles on the attributes, presenting Christ as the creator of all things, even angelic creatures (v. 16), the sustainer of all things (v. 17), the head of the church, the eternal one, the guarantor of the resurrection (v. 18), the fullness of God (v. 19), the reconciler of all things—the one who made peace with the enemies of God through his blood on the cross (vv. 20–22). Despite Paul’s circumstances and what Rome may claim, the apostle holds fast to the irrepressible sovereignty of Christ’s kingdom, displayed by Paul’s perseverance in the midst of suffering and the full assurance that every Colossian believer is “fully mature in Christ” (vv. 22–29). Indeed, all the treasures of Christ’s kingdom—love, knowledge, wisdom, discipline—are to be found in the life of his converts (2:1–5), unless someone “deludes” them into thinking otherwise.

Paul’s rhetorical strategy of extolling the power of Christ’s kingdom makes perfect sense in light of the false teaching that was plaguing the Colossian church. Apparently, the Colossians were persuaded to feel inadequate about their faith, vulnerable to the imposition of legalistic standards that ensured victory over fleshly indulgences. To counter his opponents, Paul unpacks the significance of the incarnation and the cross (2:9–15). Because Christ was God in flesh (in whom “all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form” [v. 9]), his death on the cross was a cosmic event that defeated all the powers that oppose God. Using military imagery, Paul argues that Christ canceled every debt against humanity when he nailed all “decrees” (even Caesar’s) to the cross. In that singular act of sacrifice, Christ disarmed the foes of God, humiliating them publicly by making a spectacle of them, triumphing over all powers (v. 15)—something that Caesar loved to do after successful military campaigns. Therefore, if Christ’s victory over all powers has been secured through his death, and since he rules as the firstborn of the dead (resurrection) over all creation, and since the Colossians are “fully mature in Christ” (1:28) because of their faith in him, then no pretense of self-abasement or angelic visions can diminish what Christ has done and will continue to do in the lives of Paul’s converts in Colossae. Christ is all they needed to overcome the powers.

In Col. 3, Paul tells how the Colossians draw upon the power of Christ when they “set [their] minds on things above, not on earthly things” (v. 2). The things on the earth are “sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed” (v. 5). Paul believes that his converts died with Christ (“hidden with Christ in God” [v. 3]) and therefore had set aside all these idolatrous practices when they put on the “new self,” being conformed to the image of Christ (vv. 8–10). This renewal will be found in all believers, regardless of ethnicity (v. 11), and will result in peace for all. Indeed, Paul sees the “peace of Christ” as the undeniable evidence of his reign exhibited in the hearts of those who believe (vv. 12–15). And what would that peace look like? Believers will be patient, forgiving one another with hearts full of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and love resulting in unity (vv. 12–14). Their worship of God will be characterized by songs of thankfulness and admonition, receiving the word with wisdom (v. 16). In their homes husbands, wives, and children will model deference and love, and masters and slaves will seek justice and fairness, as if they were serving Christ (3:18–4:1). The Colossians will be devoted to prayer, will treat outsiders fairly, and will be known for always speaking graceful words (4:2–6). In other words, where Caesar’s empire has promoted Roman peace by enforcing Roman law in provinces, cities, and households, Paul believes that the peace of Christ will rule the hearts of his subjects, establishing a kingdom of love and unity, in word and deed, in the home as well as the church. So, in his final greetings, Paul talks about faithful slaves and beloved siblings as sources of encouragement in the ever-expanding work of the kingdom of God (4:7–17), making his simple request, “Remember my chains” (4:18), sound more like an act of defiance than a pitiful plea.

Colosse

Questionable Practices in Colossae

Outline and Content

I. Introduction (1:1–14)

A. Greeting (1:1–2)

B. Thanksgiving (1:3–8)

C. Prayer (1:9–14)

II. The Person and Work of Christ (1:15–23)

III. Paul’s Role in Christ’s Mission to the Gentiles (1:24–2:5)

IV. False Teaching versus the Work of Christ (2:6–23)

V. Instructions on Life in Christ

A. In the church (3:1–17)

B. In the home (3:18–4:1)

VI. Generic Exhortations (4:2–6)

VII. Specific Instructions (4:7–9)

VIII. Final Greetings (4:10–17)

IX. Paul’s Signature (4:18)

The Power and Peace of Christ’s Kingdom

Crucifiction

Types of Crosses

Crucifixion in Ancient Times

Crucifixion in New Testament Times

Roman Crucifixion

Physical Death by Crucifixion

The Meaning of Jesus’ Crucifixion

Crucified

Types of Crosses

Crucifixion in Ancient Times

Crucifixion in New Testament Times

Roman Crucifixion

Physical Death by Crucifixion

The Meaning of Jesus’ Crucifixion

Crucifixion

Types of Crosses

Crucifixion in Ancient Times

Crucifixion in New Testament Times

Roman Crucifixion

Physical Death by Crucifixion

The Meaning of Jesus’ Crucifixion

Evangelism

Evangelism is the proclamation of the “evangel” (Gk. euangelion), the good news, of Jesus Christ. The content of the evangel includes Jesus’ birth, which was announced as good news to Zechariah by the angel Gabriel (Luke 1:19) and by the angels to the shepherds (Luke 2:10). The good news speaks of the reality of Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 17:18), is described as a message of grace (Acts 20:24) and reconciliation to God through the sacrificed body of Christ (Col. 1:22–23), and includes the expectation of a day of divine judgment (Rom. 2:16). Paul preached the gospel (from Old English gōdspel, “good news”) message, which he claimed had its origin with God, not humans (Gal. 1:11–12). He summarizes this message in 1 Cor. 15:3b–5: “that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve.” The introduction to the Gospel of Mark (1:1) may indicate that this written gospel could serve evangelistic purposes.

Evangelistic efforts in the New Testament. Numerous figures throughout the NT participated in evangelistic endeavors. John the Baptist’s preaching about the coming Messiah is described as evangelism (Luke 3:18). Evangelism was a characteristic activity of Jesus’ own ministry (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; Mark 1:14; Luke 20:1), which focused on proclaiming the advent of the kingdom of God (Luke 4:43; 8:1) and at times was targeted toward the poor (Matt. 11:5; Luke 4:18; 7:22). Jesus commanded those who follow him to engage in evangelism. He sent out the twelve apostles for evangelistic purposes (Luke 9:2), and he issued the Great Commission to this end (Matt. 28:18–20).

The missionary enterprise recorded in Acts demonstrates the efforts of the earliest Christians to spread the gospel. The apostles in Jerusalem (Acts 5:42) proclaimed the gospel in spite of great opposition and persecution, and believers who were scattered outside Jerusalem because of persecution spread the gospel in new locales (8:4). Philip evangelized Samaritans and an Ethiopian (8:12, 35). The ministry of Paul and Barnabas is characterized as preaching the good news (14:7, 15, 21; 15:35; 16:10; 17:18). Philip, one of the seven chosen to distribute food (6:5), was given the name “the Evangelist” (21:8). Timothy, additionally, is said to be Paul’s fellow worker in evangelism (1 Thess. 3:2; cf. 2 Tim. 4:5).

Evangelism was a central part of Paul’s ministry (Rom. 1:9; 1 Cor. 1:17; 15:1–2; Eph. 6:19; 1 Thess. 2:2, 9). He indicated an explicit interest in sharing the gospel with Gentiles (Rom. 15:16; Gal. 1:16; 2:7; Eph. 3:8) and with those who had never heard it (Rom. 15:20; 2 Cor. 10:16), and he expressed a desire to preach the gospel at Rome (Rom. 1:15). Paul wrote of the necessity of evangelism in order for people to be saved (Rom. 10:15), and he preached the gospel message free of charge (1 Cor. 9:16, 18; 2 Cor. 11:7). He listed the role of the evangelist in the church along with apostles, prophets, pastors, and teachers (Eph. 4:11).

Goal and methods of evangelism. Evangelism’s goal is to spread the gospel across ethnic and religious boundaries until it reaches all nations (Mark 13:10; Col. 1:23). To this end, Acts details an intentional effort by the earliest Christians to share the gospel with those who came from both Jewish and non-Jewish backgrounds. Acts 8:25 records Peter and John’s evangelistic efforts in Samaritan villages, and Acts 15:7 identifies Peter as an evangelist to Gentiles. An outreach specifically to Gentiles is chronicled in Acts 11:20, and Paul’s intentional program of traveling from city to city further contributes to this goal (Rom. 15:19).

The evangelists recorded in the NT demonstrate a range of methods and approaches to sharing the good news. They often began with a point of contact from the religious worldview of their audience. For instance, Philip used Scripture as a starting point in speaking with an individual who was familiar with some portion of it (Acts 8:35). Similarly, when addressing Jews, Paul preached Jesus as the fulfillment of various OT Scriptures (Acts 13:32–41), but when preaching the gospel to the Greeks in Athens, he acknowledged their religiosity and their previous worship of one called “an unknown God” (17:22–23). Evangelists sought opportunities to gain an audience, and Paul even took advantage of an illness to stay with the Galatians and share the gospel with them (Gal. 4:13). Finally, much of the evangelistic work in the early church was coupled with miraculous signs and wonders, which served to authenticate the message being proclaimed (Rom. 15:19; 1 Thess. 1:5).

Imagination

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

Immateriality

The nonphysical or spiritual aspect of reality. God is an immaterial (nonphysical) spirit being (John 1:18; 4:24; Acts 17:24; 2 Cor. 3:17) who created other nonphysical beings (i.e., angels and demons) but made humans as creatures with both physical and nonphysical aspects (Matt. 10:28; Luke 12:4–5; 2 Cor. 5:1–10; Phil. 1:21–24). Jesus is the ultimate combination of immaterial and material (John 1:14; Col. 1:15–20).

Incarnation

The term “incarnation” refers to something being “enfleshed” (Lat., in carne). It should not be confused with, or even related to, the similar term “reincarnation,” nor does it parallel polytheistic myths about redeemer gods created by Hellenistic and gnostic cults. Rather, in the context of Christian teaching, “incarnation” expresses what happened when Jesus, who had been with God for all eternity, stepped onto the historical scene as a human being (John 1:14; Col. 1:19; Heb. 2:14; 1 John 1:1–2). The Greek NT uses en sarki (“in flesh”) repeatedly as a reference to Jesus’ human nature. Hymns such as 1 Tim. 3:16 show the confessional character of Christ’s incarnation, giving it strong theological significance (cf. the similar confessional emphasis of Phil. 2:5–11). The defining power of such confessions comes to the fore strongly in 1 John 4:3 (cf. 2 John 7), where John deems those who reject genuine incarnation to be filled with the spirit of the antichrist. Paul understands Jesus’ work on the cross in light of the incarnation (Col. 1:22; cf. 1 Pet. 4:1) and considers incarnation the reason Christ could accomplish what the law of Moses could not (Rom. 8:3; Eph. 2:15).

It follows that incarnation is central to Christian theology, an indispensable tenet that cannot be reduced to a parenthetical aside to the doctrine of the virgin birth. If anything, it is the other way around. More significant than the timing and specific circumstances surrounding Jesus’ birth, which are detailed only as introductions to Matthew’s and Luke’s Gospels, the incarnation speaks to the theological importance of what God did by sending his Son. Put differently, the significance of the incarnation cannot be overstated; not only is Jesus God’s perfect revelation of himself, but also the fact that he stepped into the field of matter, participating directly in the history of his own creation, has forever changed human thinking and the pursuit of knowledge.

Incarnation and Science

Athanasius, who safeguarded the incarnation of Christ by his claim that Jesus was not just born in the likeness of God but was also himself the very nature of God, saw that Christianity provided a new starting point for all human understanding of the world. This new starting point made the foundational dualism of classical rationalism impossible (sensible versus intelligible, material versus spiritual). The Christian claim of God’s actual incarnation in Christ required a complete reconsideration of the relationship between God and the world. Ultimate reality was no longer unknowable; God had expressed himself fully in the person of Jesus Christ.

From this, the fourth-century Cappadocian fathers developed four foundational principles that enabled new approaches to scientific pursuits. (1) Since the cosmos is the creation of a rational God who has also made humans in his image, it follows that the cosmos in principle is comprehensible by the human mind. (2) Since God created the cosmos as a free act of his will, and it is not simply an emanation of God, the cosmos has relative autonomy. That is, not everything that happens is the direct will of God. (3) Since God created the heavens and the earth, it follows that the “heavenly bodies” are not (as Aristotle claimed) made of a substance different from the elements that comprise the earth (interestingly, Galileo was condemned by an Aristotelian church for claiming that the moon is made of the same substance as the earth). (4) Because of the incarnation, humans may use material means for the advancement of human salvation. This allowed the church not to follow the Hebrew tradition of rejecting Greek medicine.

Incarnation and Christian Faith

The biblical emphasis on incarnation moves faith from the realm of mythology to the realm of history. In contrast to mythological affirmations, where gods play out scenarios in “the heavenlies” that have fatalistic consequences for life on earth, incarnation grounds the Christian faith in factual, historical events. God is not “out there in the unknown,” but rather chose to step into history and reveal himself in a personal manner. In mythology, talk about god turns into fatalistic assertions; in biblical faith, talk about God turns into expressions of relationship. The fullness of Christ’s incarnation protects Christian faith from turning into aloof speculations on the eternal; rather, incarnation secures the connection to the real-life issues of the human situation. More than merely sending a vision to a “prophet,” God came to show humans how to live, prioritize, act, react, and so on.

Incarnation and History

Since the incarnation anchors the Christian faith in historical reality, history itself becomes revelatory and significant for a full understanding of God. Christ came and walked among people “in time,” and Christian believers want to know what that meant and means. Different from gnostic writings, for example, where God merely sends lofty, indefinite, timeless propositions for inner meditation (cf. Gospel of Thomas), biblical faith recognizes God’s actions on the turf of human life and acts in response to these. Because God revealed himself on the field of human history, his actions can be tested and investigated. Because he chose to come at a certain time, in a certain place, Christians are interested in that time and place. God does not hide; he wills to reveal. Incarnation shields Christianity against gradually disappearing into the mix of pagan religions, where everyone can construct a god in his or her own image.

Furthermore, a proper emphasis on incarnation prevents the Christian faith from becoming indifferent to the present world. Incarnation teaches that God desires to engage his creation. He sent his Son into the world to reveal to all humans what life in God’s kingdom looks like. God’s eager participation in human life through the birth of Jesus, as announced to a group of humble shepherds near the town of Bethlehem, generates a charge for the faithful to be involved in the transformation of this world. The incarnation calls followers of Jesus to live lives that actively proclaim that God’s love is participatory love (Heb. 2:18; 4:15).

Incarnation and God’s Being

At the heart of the biblical teaching about incarnation stands a statement about the very being of Christ. The story of the overshadowing of Mary by the Holy Spirit, causing her to give birth to “the Son of the Most High,” negates any notion that Jesus was merely an extraordinarily godly person, or prophet, whom God adopted. Rather, he was concurrently 100 percent God and 100 percent human—not “just” human, not “just” God, nor 50 percent of each.

The two natures of Christ present a rational difficulty for finite minds. In terms of function, one way to think about this may be to consider everything that Jesus said, did, and thought as an expression of who God is. Or one may assert that everything Jesus said, did, and thought was exactly what God would have said, done, and thought. The struggle of both language and comprehension at this point is to find ways of expressing how duality of form and function can concur with equality of being. Everything about Jesus is an exact expression of God, yet Jesus is not the Father.

The struggle to understand the meaning and significance of the incarnation has changed over time. Opposite the early Christians, who knew Jesus as a human being and therefore struggled to comprehend his divinity, modern Christians struggle with the significance of Jesus’ humanity. Since Jesus is the object of Christian worship and the content of hymns and praise choruses, his divinity receives most of the focus. This endangers the delicate balance, or tension, revealed in the biblical teaching on incarnation. Jesus must be 100 percent God to be the true Savior, not just someone who can point to a saving God. Concurrently he must be 100 percent human to be fully acquainted with human experience and misery.

Incarnation and the Birth of Jesus: Preexistence and Historical Existence

The NT describes the process, or method, of the incarnation as virginal conception. God’s Spirit overshadowed a young Jewish virgin, Mary, who then gave birth to Jesus. Although incarnation itself does not require such a method (God could have chosen a different method to bring Jesus to earth, as with the first Adam), Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts powerfully portray how God connected eternity to history.

Christ’s eternal nature is attested throughout the NT and belongs indisputably to the very core of Christian theology and understanding. John’s Gospel portrays this robustly through his delineation of Jesus’ existence before his historical birth in Bethlehem (John 1:1–14). Given this, it proves difficult to imagine a more “natural” link between Christ’s preexistence and his historical existence than we find in Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts. The virginal conception joins the preexistent (eternal) nature of Christ to his historical (temporal) existence in a way that preserves both natures as coexistent. Without the virginal conception, there must have been a point of adoption, a specific historical time, or situation, where Jesus became “Son of God.” The problem with any adoption theory is that it ultimately makes Jesus 100 percent human and 0 percent God. Adoption does not change being. The Gospel accounts of incarnation elucidate Jesus’ being. He is not just like God in what he does; he is 100 percent like God in who he is.

Labor

God the Worker

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

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

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

Human Labor

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

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

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

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

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

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

Letter to the Colossians

Questionable Practices in Colossae

Outline and Content

I. Introduction (1:1–14)

A. Greeting (1:1–2)

B. Thanksgiving (1:3–8)

C. Prayer (1:9–14)

II. The Person and Work of Christ (1:15–23)

III. Paul’s Role in Christ’s Mission to the Gentiles (1:24–2:5)

IV. False Teaching versus the Work of Christ (2:6–23)

V. Instructions on Life in Christ

A. In the church (3:1–17)

B. In the home (3:18–4:1)

VI. Generic Exhortations (4:2–6)

VII. Specific Instructions (4:7–9)

VIII. Final Greetings (4:10–17)

IX. Paul’s Signature (4:18)

The Power and Peace of Christ’s Kingdom

Logos

A Greek term meaning “word,” a title given to Jesus Christ that indicates his preexistent divine nature and his identity as the climactic revelation of God (John 1:1, 14; 1 John 1:1; Rev. 19:13).

Philosophical and Old Testament Backgrounds

The background of the Logos concept is complex. It has roots in both Greek philosophy (Stoicism) and the OT. Both of these likely influence to some degree the NT use of the term, but neither is decisive. The NT goes its own way in defining the Logos. The Logos is adapted to fit the unique NT context and redefined in a historical person, Jesus of Nazareth.

In Stoic thought, Logos was Reason, the impersonal rational principle governing the universe. Stoicism understood Logos as the omnipresent force used by God to create and sustain the world. Logos held the intricate workings of the world together. Philo, a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher, taught that the Logos was the ideal, primal human being from whom all other human beings derived.

Although the Stoic background of the Logos likely bears at least some influence on the NT use, the OT probably has a more direct influence. The Logos in the OT is closely associated with the Wisdom tradition (Prov. 8). Wisdom is personified as the “master worker” at God’s side during creation (8:30 NRSV). Similarly, Wisdom was “established from everlasting, from the beginning, before there was ever an earth” (8:23 NKJV). Wisdom, like the NT Logos, claims preexistence and participation in God’s creative activity.

The OT depiction of God’s Word as the agent of creation is perhaps an even more direct influence (Gen. 1). The phrase “In the beginning” (John 1:1) clearly echoes the introduction of the creation account (Gen. 1:1). The repeated phrase “And God said” in Gen. 1 illustrates how God is so powerful that he creates simply by speaking creation into existence. God’s Word is the powerful agent of creation (Ps. 33:6). In summary, God’s Wisdom and Word are both active agents in creation.

God’s Word is largely an impersonal force in Gen. 1, but it develops more personal characteristics in Isa. 55:9–11. God’s personified Word is sent by God in order to accomplish a specific divine purpose that will not fail (v. 11). It also returns to God, who sent it, after accomplishing its mission (v. 11). God’s Word functions as his personal and effective speech as it reveals God’s perfect will. Like Wisdom, God’s Word is personified and reveals God’s will to humanity, accomplishing its divinely ordained purpose. The Word of God as exemplified in Isa. 55 probably has the most direct influence on the NT use of the Logos.

New Testament Usage

Scholars debate which of the aforementioned concepts is the primary influence for the NT use of the Logos. Perhaps each bears at least some degree of influence, but more importantly, each is adapted and altered to fit the unique christological context of the NT. The NT goes its own way in defining the Logos; it is defined in the historical flesh-and-blood person of Jesus of Nazareth (John 1:14; 1 John 1:1; Rev. 19:13).

What is an impersonal force in Stoicism and the OT becomes profoundly personal in the NT. Similar to Stoic Reason, all creation is created by and through the Logos (John 1:3) and is even held together by him (Col. 1:16–17). But unlike Stoic Reason, the NT Logos is no abstract metaphysical principle but rather the historic person Jesus Christ. And unlike personified Wisdom, which was created by God (Prov. 8:22–25), the NT Logos exists eternally as God and was “with” God in the beginning (John 1:1–2). Where Wisdom is present with God and is one of his attributes, the NT Logos is God as the Second Person of the Godhead. Further, the Word of God in the Genesis creation narrative is largely an impersonal force by which God creates the universe, whereas Jesus is the personal agent of creation (John 1:3; Col. 1:16–17).

Finally, although Isaiah’s Word of God is God’s effective speech that leads to action and accomplishes its purpose, it remains impersonal. The NT language is strikingly similar to Isaiah’s Word of God, as Jesus is “sent” by the Father to do his will (John 4:34) and completes the work that God has given him to do (John 17:4). But while the Word of God in Isaiah remains a personification, the NT Logos refers to an actual historical person, the incarnate Lord Jesus Christ. The Word takes on flesh-and-blood humanity in Jesus and is the uniquely personal revelatory message of God. Jesus preached the Word with his mouth, enacted the Word with his actions, and embodied the Word in his person. “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us” (John 1:14).

Philosophy in the New Testament

The philosophy (“love of wisdom”) most familiar to the writers of the NT began in Ionia, among those who attempted to determine the fundamental substance of the universe without recourse to superstition and myth (the pre-Socratics). Platonists, Peripatetics (Aristotelians), Stoics, and Epicureans—all began in Athens, extending the work of Socrates (c. 469–399 BC), who was executed for challenging the status quo and “corrupting the minds of the youth.” But by the first century BC, Hellenistic philosophy had permeated the Mediterranean world. The ontological quest for the nature of being, however, had joined itself to ethics: What is the good life? Therefore, philosophy and the gospel, which also made claims about the “is” and “ought” of the universe, would compete for the hearts of the people. Acts relates that Paul debated with Epicureans and Stoics (17:18).

Epicureanism. Epicurus (c. 341–270 BC) founded a school in his garden. His followers believed that he was divine, possessing answers for all of life’s questions. The founder wrote didactic letters to disseminate his philosophy. By coining maxims and slogans for illiterate people to memorize and pattern their lives by, he became perhaps the first popular philosopher (perhaps the equivalent of a modern “self-help guru”). His disciples were evangelistic, traversing the Roman Empire to win converts. They carefully memorized his teachings and, after his death, preserved his writings, which often were cited in an unchanging canon.

Epicurus preached a “common sense” gospel. The goal of life is personal happiness. The greatest obstacle to happiness is anxiety. He proposed a four-part “cure,” an intellectual appropriation of these truth claims: (1) there are no divine beings who threaten us; (2) there is no next life; (3) what we truly need is easy to get; (4) what makes us suffer is easy to put up with. A fundamental Epicurean conviction is that life on this earth comes with no strings attached. The implicit atheism and selfishness of the system were largely unappealing to Jews and pious pagans.

Stoicism. More influential were the Stoics, who had many leaders and no single source of authority. Zeno (c. 336–264 BC) founded the school, which took its name from the “painted porch” (stoa) on the north side of the Athenian market where he lectured. Like the Epicureans, the Stoics saw the goal of life to be personal happiness, but they embraced providence, the ordering of all things for the best. Therefore, happiness is living virtuously according to nature, which involves a two-part process: (1) we conform our lives to the rational principle guiding the universe, what they called the “Logos,” or “Word”; (2) we resign ourselves completely and without complaint to whatever providence may send us. This is living a life of reason.

The impersonal nature of the Logos and seeming coldness to the human condition made Stoicism difficult for most people to embrace. Perhaps through the mediating reflection of the Jewish philosopher Philo (c. 20 BC–AD 50), who attempted to synthesize Scripture and philosophy, the apostle John interpreted the mystery of the incarnation, in part, by presenting Jesus as the Logos/Word (John 1:1–18; see also Col. 1:15–20).

Other forms of philosophy. Also prominent were Cynics, who embraced the defiance of Socrates, and Neo-Pythagoreans, who extended asceticism to the rejection of wine, marriage, eating meat (and for some, beans), sacrifice, shoes, all clothing except that made of linen, shaving, and dancing. The singular reference to philosophy in the Bible is negative (Col. 2:8; cf. Acts 17:18–21). The context suggests that Paul’s opponents were influenced by Neo-Pythagoreans (Col. 2:6–23; see also 1 Tim. 4:1–5; 5:23).

The early church did not embrace a singular position on philosophy. Tertullian (c. AD 160–240) famously asks, “What is there in common between Athens and Jerusalem? What between the Academy and the Church?” (Praescr. 7). But Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 150–215) claims, “For God is the source of all good things. . . . Thus philosophy was a preparation, paving the way towards perfection in Christ” (Strom. 1.5.28). The church fathers appropriated the precision of philosophical vocabulary in their attempt to rationalize the mysteries of the Christian faith.

Pseudepigraphy

A literary device whereby an author writes under a name other than his or her own (a pseu-donym) or a book is deliberately assigned to a fictitious author (pseudepigraphy). In the case of ancient Jewish practice, the name borrowed was usually that of some famous worthy of the past (e.g., Enoch, Ezra), with the aim of bolstering the credentials of the book to which the name was attached. This is a common phenomenon in the Apocrypha (e.g., 2 Esdras, Baruch, Epistle of Jeremiah). It is even more common in the large collection of Second Temple texts now known as the Pseudepigrapha (e.g., 1 Enoch, Odes of Solomon, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs). (See also Pseudepigrapha.)

Scholars continue to debate the morality of pseudonymity and whether it is proper for a pseudonymous book to be placed within the canon of Scripture. Some excuse pseudonymity as a mere stylistic device or explain it as a culturally accepted convention. Others put a positive spin on the phenomenon, and so, for example, claim that in the Pastoral Epistles literate disciples of Paul sought to apply his ideas to newly developing situations in the years following his death. Some argue that such deception for a good cause is legitimate because it helped to gain a hearing for orthodox teaching. Others totally reject pseudepigraphy, viewing it as little better than deception and forgery and thus unworthy of literature viewed as inspired by God. The last approach seems to be most consistent with a high view of Scripture.

Over the last two hundred years a number of biblical books have been identified by some scholars as pseudonymous, notably Daniel in the OT, and in the NT six letters in the Pauline corpus—Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, and the Pastoral Epistles (1–2 Timothy, Titus)—together with 2 Peter and Jude.

Old Testament

Certainly one mark of Jewish apocalyptic works is pseudonymity, and the book of Daniel is often viewed by critical scholars as no exception to this rule. It is difficult, however, to see how the name “Daniel” would have served to give the OT book named after him the desired authority, which is a major motivation for attaching a pseudonym.

Apart from the book itself, we essentially know nothing about this Daniel, whom it describes as living in Babylonia during the exile. In the book of Ezekiel we have two references to a Daniel (Ezek. 14:14, 20). In this passage the prophet says that when the land sins against God, “even if these three men—Noah, Daniel and Job—were in it, they could save only themselves by their righteousness.” There is, in addition, the further reference in Ezek. 14:16 to “these three men,” obviously referring to the same three men. Ezekiel speaks of these three men as embodiments of righteousness, but the fact that this Daniel figure is placed between two ancients (Noah and Job) suggests that he too is a figure of antiquity, not a contemporary of Ezekiel.

Ezekiel 28:3 taunts the king of Tyre: “Are you wiser than Daniel? Is no secret hidden from you?” Here “Daniel” (the Hebrew text at Ezek. 28:3 actually reads “Danel”) obviously is a proverbial figure of wisdom, and this implies that he may have been well known in Tyre and therefore could well have been Syro-Phoenician. There is in fact a “Danel” figure mentioned in Ugaritic literature (before 1200 BC). On the other hand, the Daniel of the book of Daniel is not a patriarch like Enoch, Noah, and Job, nor is he a famous figure like Ezra or the assistant to a prophet, as Baruch was to Jeremiah. Daniel is known only through the book that bears his name. In other words, the usual motivation explaining the use of a pseudonym does not apply to the canonical book of Daniel.

Also, the closing up and sealing of the book (Dan. 8:26; 12:4) is no mere device necessitated by using as a pseudonym the name of a man supposedly living in the time of Cyrus. Rather, the sealing signifies that much of the content of the later chapters of the book will be understood only when the predicted events begin to take place at a future time, with the book placing Daniel (its presumed author) in the sixth century BC.

New Testament

The Pastoral Epistles. With regard to the Pastoral Epistles, all three letters claim to be authored by the apostle Paul (1 Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1; Titus 1:1). In seeking to determine the time of composition within a chronology of Paul’s ministry, they must be dated toward the end of his life (in the case of 2 Timothy, perhaps only shortly before his death) and after the close of the book of Acts, which concludes with the apostle’s arrival in Rome (Acts 28). In his letter to the Romans, Paul anticipates a future mission to Spain (Rom. 15:23–29), but the Pastoral Epistles imply that he returned to the east. Ephesus and Crete are the presumed locations of his coworkers Timothy and Titus (see 1 Tim. 1:3; Titus 1:5). On this supposition, these letters arise from a further mission there and a second (and final) imprisonment. The fact that Acts says nothing about this is no evidence against the supposition.

It is not necessary to view the mundane ecclesiastical arrangements of the Pastoral Epistles as inconsistent with a charismatic model of leadership in other Pauline letters (note the address to “overseers and deacons” in Phil. 1:1). We know from Acts 14:23; 20:17–38 that Paul appointed elders in the churches that he founded. The theological differences between the Pastoral Epistles and earlier Pauline compositions should not be overemphasized. The stress laid upon “the faith” and “sound teaching” is exactly what might be expected if Paul anticipated his imminent removal from the scene.

The other alternative is the theory that after Paul’s death, members of a Pauline school (Timothy? Luke? Onesimus?) continued to supply letters under his name, addressing contemporary church issues in the guise of Paul, hoping to guarantee the legacy of the great apostle. Some scholars go as far as to assert that an admirer of Paul combined genuine Pauline fragments within a fictitious framework. The earliest listing of Paul’s letters is that of Marcion (c. AD 140), and he fails to mention the Pastoral Epistles. That omission may be explained in various ways. There is no evidence, however, that anyone in the early church (orthodox or heterodox) who knew of the letters doubted their authenticity.

Ephesians and Colossians. There is some textual uncertainty with regard to the words “in Ephesus” in Eph. 1:1, making it possible that the letter was originally a circular letter written by Paul to more than one church. The letter mentions no one by name except Tychicus (Eph. 6:21), who carried the letter (perhaps to different churches in turn). This is enough to explain its more general orientation than some other Pauline letters, and any supposed theological “development” is not beyond the likely boundaries of Paul’s expansive mind (e.g., his teaching on the church). The use of the “in Christ” formula in Ephesians is not substantially different from how Paul handles it elsewhere. The letter’s twofold structure of doctrinal exposition followed by practical instruction fits a common Pauline epistolary pattern. Indeed, F. F. Bruce refers to this letter as “the quintessence of Paulinism.”

In a number of ways Colossians and Ephesians share a common outlook. The Jewish Christian proto-gnostic false teaching combated in Colossians is not referred to in other Pauline letters, but it may have been a local Colossian variant. The letter is explicitly attributed to Paul, at both the beginning and the end (Col. 1:1; 4:18). Arguments about authorship based on style and unusual vocabulary are notoriously slippery and inconclusive. The high Christology of cosmic dimensions in Col. 1:15–20; 2:9–10, 15 is also present in undisputed Pauline letters (cf. Phil. 2:9–11). The obvious relationship of Colossians to the little letter to Philemon (e.g., Col. 4:9, 17; cf. Philem. 2, 12) is one of the strongest arguments in favor of the Pauline authorship of the former. Any theory of pseudepigraphy turns Col. 4:7–17, with its many names, into fanciful and free invention with little real purpose. Also, we might wonder why a later author chose to write under the name of Paul to a church that Paul himself did not found.

Second Thessalonians. Some view the futuristic timetable provided in 2 Thess. 2:1–12 as moving beyond Paul, with the world’s end not yet in sight, for the writer teaches that certain things have to happen before the return of Christ, whereas in 1 Thess. 4:13–5:11 Paul has a nearer end in view. In both letters, however, the apostle is seeking to dampen the wrong kind of apocalyptic excitement. In 2 Thessalonians, it is clear that Paul knows a tradition of Jesus’ teaching about the future, such as also found in Mark 13, so that there is nothing unreasonably “late” in the views expressed.

The substantial overlap in material between 1 Thessalonians and 2 Thessalonians is not evidence of the labors of a later disciple and imitator of Paul. It is highly ironic that some scholars suggest 2 Thessalonians is not a genuine letter of Paul: the letter itself condemns a fake letter supposedly from him that claims that the day of the Lord is already past (2 Thess. 2:2), and the original letter included a final greeting written in Paul’s own hand (2 Thess. 3:17).

Second Peter and Jude. As for 2 Peter, it was not as well known in the early church as 1 Peter, and some (according to Origen) were hesitant to accept it. Its author claims to be a witness to the transfiguration (2 Pet. 1:16–18). Such personal allusions need not be attributed to a later writer who was trying too hard to show that he was Simon Peter. The obvious connection of 2 Pet. 1:14 to what is recorded in John 21 does not prove that the writer was dependent on that chapter.

The remarkable parallels between 2 Peter and Jude show that one is dependent upon the other, though scholars are not unanimous about which letter was prior. We cannot rule out that Peter would use and adapt the writings of a less prominent leader such as Jude. Jude makes use of apocryphal books, but neither in Jude nor in 2 Peter do arguments against the particular brand of false teaching require a second-century (postapostolic) dating.

Pseudonymity

Old Testament

New Testament

Reconciliation

The restoration of a relationship from a state of hostility to one of peace. As such, the concept is far more common than the number of specific references might suggest. The Bible speaks of reconciliation on three levels: (1) God and humanity; (2) human beings with one another; and (3) God and creation.

God and Humanity

The need for reconciliation between God and humanity begins when Adam and Eve rebel against God. What has been a relationship of intimate fellowship becomes one of fear and mistrust as Adam and Eve’s sin brings God’s judgment (Gen. 3:14–19). But in the midst of judgment is the cryptic promise of a descendant of the woman who will crush the serpent and end the estrangement between God and humanity (3:15). The rest of the OT gives glimpses of what reconciliation will be like. God gives the sacrificial system as a means to deal with sin and restore fellowship with him (Lev. 1–7; 16). Despite Israel’s sin, God pursues reconciliation with Israel like a husband chases after a wayward wife (Hos. 1–3). Israel’s hope for reconciliation is often expressed in terms of a desire for peace. Although Aaron’s benediction asks God to give peace to his people in the present (Num. 6:24–26), God’s people look forward to the day when a covenant of peace will be established through the Suffering Servant and announced to the ends of the earth (Isa. 52–54).

Human Beings with One Another

As evidence of being reconciled to God, believers are called to pursue reconciliation with others: “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone” (Rom. 12:18). Pursuing reconciliation with others is so important that Jesus warns his followers that failure to do so can cause a rift in their own fellowship with God. That is why in the Lord’s Prayer God’s people are to pray, “Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us” (Luke 11:4). Since God has forgiven us for our rebellion against him, we ought to forgive others who have wronged us (Col. 3:13). Believers are even instructed to seek reconciliation with others before entering the presence of God (Matt. 5:23–24).

God and Creation

Redeem

The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More than a simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the grace of the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classical texts use the Greek word apolytrōsis (“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given to release a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. The group of words based on the Greek term lytron (“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. The corresponding Hebrew word padah is a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.

Old Testament

The experience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religious significance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included the dedication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13). Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), was redeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up to describe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continued to broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance from all Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included the whole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or the new age to come).

Another Hebrew term, ga’al, generally relates to the kinsman-redeemer. In the case of a person who had sold property due to poverty or even gone into slavery to pay a debt, a kinsman could become a redeemer by buying back the property (Lev. 25:25–28) and/or purchasing freedom from slavery (25:47–49). The book of Ruth describes this, detailing the relationship between the impoverished Ruth and Boaz, the kinsman-redeemer. The prophets and the psalms apply this understanding to how God redeems Israel (Isa. 43:1–3; Ps. 19:14; cf. Job 19:25). God, however, does not pay ransom to anyone (Isa. 52:3–4); rather, he causes redemption by his power (45:13).

The awaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’s ultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’s continued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant, God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon. Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was if God would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. This longing for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As the persecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamental period (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT and the NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianic hope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people from Greek and Roman oppression.

New Testament

The NT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). When Jesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slavery of sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many (Matt. 20:28 // Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the cross accentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17; 7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christian idea of ransom followed the accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death (Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with a ransom (Col. 1:13–14). The predominance of apolytrōsis in the NT, compared to common Greek literature of that period, underscores its significance for early Christian conceptualization.

Without reflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made an issue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlight Jesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12; cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need of the redeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of the redemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from one sphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another. Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted of monetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1 Pet. 3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of those he redeemed (antilytron hyper [1 Tim. 2:6]). God still did not pay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.

The OT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in the present, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills the NT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’s theological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’ redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from the slavery of sin (1 Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matter of ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already but not yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption is evidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).

Although redemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future (Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1 Cor. 15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions of redemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expects redemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption is universal; it restores the relationship between creation and the Creator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).

Redeemed

Old Testament

New Testament

Redeemer

Old Testament

New Testament

Redemption

Old Testament

New Testament

Salvation

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

Old Testament

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

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

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

New Testament

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

Components

In several passages (e.g., Rom. 5:1–11; Eph. 2:1–10; Titus 3:4–7) “salvation” is clearly a summary term for the totality of what God has done for his people in and through Christ. Salvation is such a rich and multifaceted work of God that it takes a variety of terms to bring out its fullness. “Regeneration” refers to the new life that God imparts, bringing a person from spiritual death to spiritual life (John 3:3–8; Eph. 2:4–7; Titus 3:4–7). “Justification” speaks of God declaring a person not guilty in his court of law on the basis of Christ’s sacrificial death and life of perfect obedience (Rom. 3:21–5:12; Gal. 2:14–21). “Atonement” describes Christ’s payment for sin and resulting forgiveness (Rom. 3:21–26; Heb. 2:17). “Redemption” captures the reality of God paying the price to bring his people out of their slavery to sin and into the freedom of the Spirit (Gal. 4:1–7; 5:1). “Reconciliation” refers to God turning hardened rebels and enemies into his friends (Rom. 5:10–11; 2 Cor. 5:18–21; Col. 1:20–22). “Adoption” extends that reality into the astonishing truth that God makes those whom he reconciles not just his friends but his sons and daughters (Rom. 8:14–25; Gal. 4:1–7). In “sanctification” God sets his people apart for his special purposes and progressively changes them into the image of Christ (1 Cor. 1:30 ESV, NRSV, NASB; cf. Rom. 8:29). The final component is “glorification,” when God brings to completion the work of salvation by granting his people resurrection bodies, removing every last stain of sin, death, and the curse and placing them in a new heaven and earth (Rom. 8:30; 1 Cor. 15:35–57; Rev. 21–22).

Prepositions of Salvation

Another way that the Bible fills out the nature of salvation is through the various prepositions connected to it. The prepositions in the following list are among the more significant.

From. Since the basic idea of salvation is rescue from danger, it is not surprising that Scripture describes that from which believers are saved. David cries out to God, “Save me from all my transgressions” (Ps. 39:8). Salvation from sin is possible only through Jesus, for it is he who “will save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). Reflecting on the work of Jesus on the cross, Paul claims that because of the sacrificial death of Christ believers are saved from God’s wrath (Rom. 5:9–10). At the same time, the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus saved people from their slavery to sin (Rom. 6:1–11). As a result of these and other things from which Christ has saved people, on the day of Pentecost Peter exhorts his audience to be saved “from this corrupt generation” (Acts 2:40). Thus, the unanimous testimony of Scripture is that believers have been saved from their sin and its consequences.

To/into. Believers are saved not merely from something; they are saved to/into certain states or conditions. Whereas they were once slaves, believers have now been saved “into the freedom and glory of the children of God” (Rom. 8:21 [cf. Gal. 5:1]). Through the cross God “has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves” (Col. 1:13). Another way of stating this reality is to speak of the peace into which believers now have been brought as a result of Christ’s work on their behalf (John 14:27).

By. Scripture frequently uses the preposition “by” to express the instrument of salvation. Stated negatively, “It is not by sword or spear that the Lord saves” (1 Sam. 17:47). In the broadest sense, believers are saved from their sins by the gospel (1 Cor. 15:1–2). More specifically, salvation is by the grace of God (Eph. 2:5, 8). The preposition “by” can also express the agent of salvation. A distinguishing feature of Israel was that it was saved from its enemies by God (Deut. 33:29; Isa. 45:17). The same thing is meant when Scripture speaks of God saving his people by his right hand (Ps. 17:7) or his name (Ps. 54:1).

Through. The consistent testimony of the Bible is that salvation comes through faith (e.g., Eph. 2:8–9). Through faith, believers have been justified (Rom. 3:22; 5:1–2) and made children of God (Gal. 3:26). It is not righteousness based on the law that matters, “but that which is through faith in Christ” (Phil. 3:9). The remarkable actions of God’s people throughout history have been accomplished through faith (Heb. 11:1–40).

In. Especially in Paul’s writings the various components of salvation (see above) are modified with the phrase “in Christ” or “in him.” Believers are chosen (Eph. 1:4), redeemed (Eph. 1:7), justified (Gal. 2:17), and sanctified (1 Cor. 1:2) in Christ. Indeed, God has blessed believers “in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ” (Eph. 1:3).

With. Many of the components of salvation that believers experience are said to happen “with Christ.” Believers are united with Christ in his death, burial, and resurrection (Rom. 6:4–11; Gal. 2:20). With Christ, believers have been made alive, raised up, and seated in the heavenly realms (Eph. 2:4–6; Col. 2:13). Because of their union with Christ, believers share in his inheritance (Rom. 8:16–17; Gal. 3:29; 1 Pet. 1:4). Even the very life of the believer is said to be currently “hidden with Christ in God” (Col. 3:3).

Tenses of Salvation

The Bible speaks of salvation in the past, present, and future tenses. Pointing to a definitive experience in the past, Paul tells believers that “in this hope we were saved” (Rom. 8:24). Yet he can also speak of himself and other believers as those “who are being saved” (1 Cor. 1:18; 2 Cor. 2:15), pointing to a process that is ongoing. Just a few sentences after assuring believers that they have been justified already (Rom. 5:1–2), he can still say that believers will “be saved from God’s wrath” through Christ (Rom. 5:9–10).

The use of these three tenses reflects the “already and not yet” dynamic of salvation. Through the obedience, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus, God has rescued his people from their sins. But the final and complete realization of all the benefits of salvation must still await the return of Christ and the establishment of a new heaven and earth (Rev. 19–22).

Conclusion

Without a proper understanding of humankind’s plight as a result of its rebellion, the Bible’s repeated emphasis on salvation makes little sense. Because sin is humanity’s greatest problem, salvation is humanity’s greatest need. Given the breadth, width, and depth of what God has done to save his people from their sins through Jesus Christ, it is no wonder that the author of Hebrews asks, “How shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation?” (2:3).

Stoicism

Theology of Work

God the Worker

Human Labor

Trinity

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

Old Testament

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

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

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

New Testament

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

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

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

Relationships between Father, Son, and Spirit

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

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

Trinitarian Heresies

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

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

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

Showing 1 to 50 of634 results

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

Illustration

Phyllis Faaborg Wolk

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2. If Your Father Was….

Illustration

H. Norman Wright

One of the main reasons people hold false perceptions of God is our tendency to project onto God the unloving characteristics of the people we look up to. We tend to believe that God is going to treat us as others do. The Gaultieres agree: We like to think that we develop our image of God from the Bible and teachings of the church, not from our relationships, some of which have been painful. It's easier if our God image is simply based on learning and believing the right things. Yet, intensive clinical studies on the development of peoples' images of God show that it is not so simple. One psychologist found that this spiritual development of the God image is more of an emotional process than an intellectual one. She brings out the importance of family and other relationships to the development of what she calls one's "private God." She says that, "No child arrives at the 'house of God' without his pet God under his arm." And for some of us the "pet God" we have tied on a leash to our hearts is not very nice, nor is it biblically accurate. This is because our negative images of God are often rooted in our emotional hurts and destructive patterns of relating to people that we carry with us from our past.

Imagine a little girl of seven who has known only rejection and abuse from her father whom she loves dearly. At Sunday School she is taught that God is her heavenly Father. What is her perception of Him going to be? Based on her experience with her natural father, she will see God as an unstable, rejecting, abusing person she cannot trust. Consider just a few ways in which your image of your father possibly may have affected your perception of God, which in turn affects your self-image.

If your father was distant, impersonal and uncaring, and he wouldn't intervene for you, you may see God as having the same characteristics. As a result, you feel that you are unworthy of God's intervention in your life. You find it difficult to draw close to God because you see Him as disinterested in your need and wants.
If your father was a pushy man who was inconsiderate of you, or who violated and used you, you may see God in the same way. You probably feel cheap or worthless in God's eyes, and perhaps feel that you deserve to be taken advantage of by others. You may feel that God will force you not ask you to do things you don't want to do.
If your father was like a drill sergeant, demanding more and more from you with no expression of satisfaction, or burning with anger with no tolerance for mistakes, you may have cast God in his image. You likely feel that God will not accept you unless you meet His demands, which seem unattainable. This perception may have driven you to become a perfectionist.
If your father was a weakling, and you couldn't depend on him to help you or defend you, your image of God may be that of a weakling. You may feel that you are unworthy of God's comfort and support, or that He is unable to help you.
If your father was overly critical and constantly came down hard on you, or if he didn't believe in you or your capabilities and discouraged you from trying, you may perceive God in the same way. You don't feel as if you're worth God's respect or trust. You may even see yourself as a continual failure, deserving all the criticism you receive.
In contrast to the negative perceptions many women have about God, let me give you several positive character qualities of a father. Notice how these qualities, if they existed in your father, have positively influenced your perception of God. If you father was patient, you are more likely to see God as patient and available for you. You feel that you are worth God's time and concern. You feel important to God and that He is personally involved in every aspect of your life.
If your father was kind, you probably see God acting kindly and graciously on your behalf. You feel that you are worth God's help and intervention. You feel God's love for you deeply and you're convinced that He wants to relate to you personally.
If your father was a giving man, you may perceive God as someone who gives to you and supports you. You feel that you are worth God's support and encouragement. You believe that God will give you what is best for you, and you respond by giving of yourself to others.
If your father accepted you, you tend to see God accepting you regardless of what you do. God doesn't dump on you or reject you when you struggle, but understands and encourages you. You are able to accept yourself even when you blow it or don't perform up to your potential.
If your father protected you, you probably perceive God as your protector in life. You feel that you are worthy of being under His care and you rest in His security.

3. THE CROSS

Illustration

John H. Krahn

The cross best proclaims the indisputable fact that we worship a caring God. It is the most popular of all Christian symbols. There is no Christianity without the cross.

The cross shouts God’s words of love to each of us. It is his proclamation of possibility beyond the present. In it is hope for the hopeless, love for the loveless, encouragement for the depressed, and the pronouncement of life beyond death for those who grieve the loss of a friend or contemplate their own demise. Its importance to our faith cannot be over-emphasized, its proclamation must never be subdued. It trumpets, "God cares!" That’s music to our ears - the best news we could ever hear.

As I look at the cross, I cannot help but think of a movie I saw years ago. Few movies in my life have had the impact of Ben Hur. Many scenes made an indelible impression - the great sea battle, the exciting chariot race, the repugnant leprosy colony. Yet, none hit harder than the crucifixion of our Lord. The sound of hammer on nail rings through the air, the cross rises until it suddenly thumps into place. Slowly Jesus’ blood begins to flow - one drop, then another ... a puddle forms beneath the cross. It begins to rain. Water mixes with more blood, and together they begin to trickle down the hillside. The trickle becomes a stream as the blood washes over God’s creation. We are reminded that the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin.

At Calvary God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. The blood of Christ pouring down the cross restored our relationship with the Father. We cannot fully understand the mystery of God’s plan to recapture a creation gone astray. We only know that all who come to the cross in simple, trusting faith are cleansed by his blood and find peace with the Father.

By his death Jesus has unchained us. Unchained - there is no better word for it. He has set us free from the wages of our sins that only pay dividends in hell and has set us on the positive pathway of a life with God. Our eyes need no longer be downcast; our head has no reason to be between our knees. We are no longer oppressed with our weighty sins, for we have been touched by none other than God. He has cared not just a little but powerfully. His power encountered our sin, and it was no more. His incredible desire to rescue us in spite of everything dispels even the worst sin. But we must be wise enough to permit ourselves and our sins to be encountered by that desire.

4. The Wild Goose

Illustration

Mickey Anders

Celtic Christians chose, not the dove, but the wild goose as a symbol representing the Holy Spirit. It sounds strange to us, but it has a long tradition in Ireland.

While the Roman Church imagined the Holy Spirit in the form of a peaceful, graceful dove, the Ancient Celts understood the Holy Spirit to be like a wild goose. When you hear of the Spirit descending like a heavenly dove on you, you hear harps and strings softly playing and get a peaceful feeling. The image of the Holy Spirit as dove has become so familiar and domesticated an image we pay little attention.

The image of a wild goose descending upon you is a different matter altogether. A wild goose is one noisy, bothersome bird. I like this image of the Holy Spirit as a wild goose because it jars us out of our complacency. We need such an image to correct our overly safe and overly sweet image of the Spirit. One preacher friend asked, "How many times can you sing 'There's a Sweet, Sweet Spirit in This Place' without your blood sugar reaching diabetic levels?"

When the Spirit comes in the Bible, it never seems to be sweet or safe. God's Spirit called the prophets to speak to Israel in words that were bold and sometimes dangerous. Ezekiel saw a vision of God's Spirit blowing through a valley of dry bones and bringing them to life. John the Baptist dressed in camel's hair and eating wild locusts proclaimed, "I baptize you with water but he who comes after me will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire." Paul gave this advice to young Timothy, "For this reason I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you through the laying on of my hands; for God did not give us a spirit of cowardice, but rather a spirit of power and of love and of self-discipline" (2 Timothy 1:6-7).

Neither safe nor tame, the Spirit inspired Paul to proclaim, "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28).

It was this wild Goose that Jesus referred to when he preached his first sermon and quoted Isaiah, saying, "For the Spirit of the Lord is upon me for he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor, to proclaim release to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of God's favor" (Luke 4:18).

5. Giving - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

There was a man who called at the church and asked if he could speak to the Head Hog at the trough. The secretary said, "Who?" Then she gathered herself and said "Sir, if you mean our pastor you will have to treat him with a little more respect than that and ask for the ‘Reverend' or ‘The Pastor.' But certainly you cannot refer to him as the Head Hog at the Trough." The man said, "I understand. I was calling because I have $10,000 I was thinking about donating to the building fund." She said, "Hold on for just a moment—I think the big pig just walked in the door."

Now I am sure the secretary wouldn't treat me like that, some of the laity perhaps but not the secretary! But we all are subject to changing our tune when money is suddenly involved. That is why this passage of Scripture has been an enduring image throughout the ages. We play favorites. We treat those who give more as if they are the pillars on which the church is erected.

But consider with me another image. Jesus, sitting opposite the place where the offerings were put, is observing the people make their donations as they come into the temple. He is not alone. Seated with him are the leaders—the Sadducees. It is startling to think of Jesus sitting with those whom he had scorned for their hypocrisy. Remember that as they watch there is no paper money, so all of the offerings make a terrible noise as they roll down this long horn shaped object and fall into the pool of coins. And here comes this little old lady and she has two small coins worth nothing and drops them in. They barely make a noise. You can almost see the Temple leaders as they roll their eyes and hope for better results with the next person who walks in the door. Jesus then calls his Disciples over and says, "This poor widow has put more in to the treasury than all the others." To the Sadducees this woman is a waste of time, but to Jesus she is the stuff by which Kingdoms are erected. Thus, at its heart, the story of the widow's mite is a strong reminder to the kingdoms of this world…

That the Kingdom of God is built by the widow as well as the wealthy.
That the Kingdom of God recognizes the level of sacrifice.
That the Kingdom of God warns us about pride.

6. GOD MADE ME, AND GOD DOESN’T MAKE ANY JUNK

Illustration

John H. Krahn

There are times in every person’s life when they suffer from feelings of inadequacy. Sometimes we even move from inadequacy to feelings of worthlessness. We feel we are not attractive enough or intelligent enough or as lucky as others. Success, as we dreamed of attaining it, has not happened to us. As we get older, childhood dreams of being someone important begin to vanish. Entering our middle forties, we begin to realize that our current position in life will not increase substantially.

The trappings of success are also elusive. We work so hard to have the good things in life and often find ourselves with little time or energy to enjoy them. There is no way to extend the 168 hours which comprise each week. The husband works fifty or more hours a week, and the wife works so the kids can go to college. In the process of trying to enhance the collective life of the family, less and less time is left to spend together sharing one another’s love and happiness. There is little wonder that we so often feel uptight and junky.

But God’s good word is that he made us, and he doesn’t make junk. In the Bible we read that we were created in the image of God. We were molded in the image of our Maker. Like God we can reason, we have a mind, a memory and a will. God even put us in charge of everything he created. God was pleased with his workmanship of man and said, "It is good." He made nothing more special or more beautiful than us. Made in the image of God, we even have the ability to control much of our destiny.

We should not think of ourselves as less than God thought of us. Look at your hands. They’re hands very much like the hands of Jesus. And Jesus was no junk. There should no more be a junky John or junky Mary or junky Kathy than a junky Jesus. Jesus was a man, and like us in every way with the exception of sin. And that is the difference. For you see, sin is the chief purveyor of junk in our lives. It was Adam and Eve’s sin of trying to be as God that tarnished the fullness of their image of God. It made them less than what God wanted for them. Sin brought with it pain and death. It pushed them away from God.

Yes, God made each of us, and he doesn’t make junk. We produce the junk in our lives when we let temptation get the best of us, when we try to attain unattainable goals and then labor under feelings of failure, when we get our priorities all mixed up, and when we walk life’s way apart from God.

Let’s not live one more day of our precious lives in a manner less than God desires. We confess our sins before the Almighty. We welcome Jesus’ entrance into our lives with all the power of the Holy Spirit. We pray, "Lord, lead me onto beautiful paths of meaningful life." And we boldly proclaim to ourselves and before the world, "God made me, and God doesn’t make any junk."

7. THE SCANDALOUS GOSPEL

Illustration

John H. Krahn

There is much in the Bible I don’t like. I don’t like the commandments that I have particular difficulty keeping. I am uncomfortable with those stories in which God harshly disciplines his wayward people, especially when I am feeling wayward. I am not particularly pleased with God’s demands that I worship him every Sunday, especially when I am on vacation in a strange community not knowing the location of the nearest church. I would not like to think that tithing is the generosity encouraged by Scripture and would rather only throw a five dollar or a ten dollar bill in the collection plate each week and spend the rest on myself.

Likewise I am uncomfortable when Jesus tells me in Matthew 10:34-39 that truth is more important than temporary harmony in the family or in the church. He says, "Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; ... I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law." He continues, "He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me." Whether or not this passage is to be taken literally is not the question. Rather, it states that following Christ means standing up for what is right, being principled rather than practical, serving the truth rather than the expedient even when it produces disharmony in the community, in the church, and within our family.

Biblical Christianity, as opposed to many popular notions of Christianity, is a venture for the strong and mature. It is forever impatient with the old, stubborn, bloodstained ways of the world. When we are in touch with God’s Word and the demands it produces in our lives, conflict and pain often enter as we speak out against injustice. It is true that the gospel of God’s love through Jesus Christ brings peace to troubled lives, but Jesus warns us that it is not to be peace by compromise or evasion.

Many of us enjoy wearing a finely fashioned silver or gold cross around our necks. Jesus says that, "He who does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me." Jesus calls us to bear a cross, not simply wear one. Our life needs to be one of involvement, one that sometimes produces tension for the sake of Christ.

We read Scripture and discover a Christ who conducted a ministry that produced much conflict. Jesus of Nazareth would have been excluded from most Call lists of churches who are seeking pastors. He would have been termed a trouble-maker, a boat-rocker. We celebrate our heritage as Christians when we stand up against the forces of darkness that compromise the Word of God, dehumanize people, and encourage us to do the smart thing rather than the right thing.

Jesus was a lousy politician and they crucified him. God does not call any one of us to be popular, but he calls all of us to be righteous. Our lives might well be the most scandalous when they are the most faithful.

8. Human Image-Bearers

Illustration

James Packer

The image of God in which man was and is made has been variously explained in detail. Although scholars may differ on the nuances of the phrase, there is general agreement that it has to do with dignity, destiny, and freedom.

The assertion that man is made in God's image shows each man his true dignity and worth. As God's image-bearer, he merits infinite respect. God's claims on us must be taken with total seriousness. No human being should ever be thought of as simply a cog in a machine, or mere means to an end.

The assertion points also to each man's true destiny. Our Maker so designed us that our nature finds final satisfaction and fulfillment only in a relationship of responsive Godlikeness which means, precisely, that state of correspondence between our acts and God's will which we call obedience. Living that is obedient will thus be teleological progressively realizing our telos (Greek for "end" or "goal").

Also the assertion confirms the genuineness of each man's freedom. Experience tells us that we are free, in the sense that we make real choices between alternatives and could have chosen differently, and theology agrees. Self-determining freedom of choice is what sets God and his rational creatures apart from, say, birds and bees, as moral beings.

9. God Will Provide

Illustration

Eric Ritz

On one occasion the famous English preacher, Charles H. Spurgeon, was greatly worried about his ministry in the city of London and if there were necessary resources to maintain this ministry. He became greatly depressed and filled with anxiety. Then God filled his mind with an image that made his anxieties and worries so insignificant. God gave him the image of a mouse in the large grain bins of Egypt under the leadership of Joseph. The mouse was worried about having enough to eat. Then in Spurgeon's mind came the image of a fish in the great river in London and how the fish worried about having enough water to breath and survive. As the images sank deep inside of Spurgeon he began to laugh and said, "Eat away little mouse, swim away little fish. God will provide all we need and more." And then addressing himself, he said, "Stop worrying little man, God has enough and more!"

The tragedy of most of our lives is that we worry so much about tomorrow that we never claim the resources that God has provided to live today.

NEW

10. Don’t Worry, God Has Enough!

Illustration

Eric Ritz

11. Meet in the Middle

Illustration

Tim Kimmel

Shortly after the turn of the century, Japan invaded, conquered, and occupied Korea. Of all of their oppressors, Japan was the most ruthless. They overwhelmed the Koreans with a brutality that would sicken the strongest of stomachs. Their crimes against women and children were inhuman. Many Koreans live today with the physical and emotional scars from the Japanese occupation.

One group singled out for concentrated oppression was the Christians. When the Japanese army overpowered Korea one of the first things they did was board up the evangelical churches and eject most foreign missionaries. It has always fascinated me how people fail to learn from history. Conquering nations have consistently felt that shutting up churches would shut down Christianity. It didn't work in Rome when the church was established, and it hasn't worked since. Yet somehow the Japanese thought they would have a different success record.

The conquerors started by refusing to allow churches to meet and jailing many of the key Christian spokesmen. The oppression intensified as the Japanese military increased its profile in the South Pacific. The "Land of the Rising Sum" spread its influence through a reign of savage brutality. Anguish filled the hearts of the oppressed and kindled hatred deep in their souls.

One pastor persistently entreated his local Japanese police chief for permission to meet for services. His nagging was finally accommodated, and the police chief offered to unlock his church ... for one meeting. It didn't take long for word to travel. Committed Christians starving for an opportunity for unhindered worship quickly made their plans. Long before dawn on that promised Sunday, Korean families throughout a wide area made their way to the church. They passed the staring eyes of their Japanese captors, but nothing was going to steal their joy. As they closed the doors behind them they shut out the cares of oppression and shut in a burning spirit anxious to glorify their Lord.

The Korean church has always had a reputation as a singing church. Their voices of praise could not be concealed inside the little wooden frame sanctuary. Song after song rang through the open windows into the bright Sunday morning. For a handful of peasants listening nearby, the last two songs this congregation sang seemed suspended in time. It was during a stanza of "Nearer My God to Thee" that the Japanese police chief waiting outside gave the orders. The people toward the back of the church could hear them when they barricaded the doors, but no one realized that they had doused the church with kerosene until they smelled the smoke. The dried wooden skin of the small church quickly ignited. Fumes filled the structure as tongues of flame began to lick the baseboard on the interior walls. There was an immediate rush for the windows. But momentary hope recoiled in horror as the men climbing out the windows came crashing back in their bodies ripped by a hail of bullets.

The good pastor knew it was the end. With a calm that comes from confidence, he led his congregation in a hymn whose words served as a fitting farewell to earth and a loving salutation to heaven. The first few words were all the prompting the terrified worshipers needed. With smoke burning their eyes, they instantly joined as one to sing their hope and leave their legacy. Their song became a serenade to the horrified and helpless witnesses outside. Their words also tugged at the hearts of the cruel men who oversaw this flaming execution of the innocent.

Alas! and did my Savior bleed?
and did my Sovereign die?
Would he devote that sacred head
for such a worm as I?
Just before the roof collapsed they sang the last verse,
their words an eternal testimony to their faith.
But drops of grief can ne'er repay
the debt of love I owe:
Here, Lord, I give myself away
'Tis all that I can do!
At the cross, at the cross
Where I first saw the light,
And the burden of my heart rolled away
It was there by faith I received my sight,
And now I am happy all the day.

The strains of music and wails of children were lost in a roar of flames. The elements that once formed bone and flesh mixed with the smoke and dissipated into the air. The bodies that once housed life fused with the charred rubble of a building that once housed a church. But the souls who left singing finished their chorus in the throne room of God. Clearing the incinerated remains was the easy part. Erasing the hate would take decades. For some of the relatives of the victims, this carnage was too much. Evil had stooped to a new low, and there seemed to be no way to curb their bitter loathing of the Japanese.

In the decades that followed, that bitterness was passed on to a new generation. The Japanese, although conquered, remained a hated enemy. The monument the Koreans built at the location of the fire not only memorialized the people who died, but stood as a mute reminder of their pain.

Inner rest? How could rest coexist with a bitterness deep as marrow in the bones? Suffering, of course, is a part of life. People hurt people. Almost all of us have experienced it at some time. Maybe you felt it when you came home to find that your spouse had abandoned you, or when your integrity was destroyed by a series of well-timed lies, or when your company was bled dry by a partner. It kills you inside. Bitterness clamps down on your soul like iron shackles.

The Korean people who found it too hard to forgive could not enjoy the "peace that passes all understanding." Hatred choked their joy.

It wasn't until 1972 that any hope came. A group of Japanese pastors traveling through Korea came upon the memorial. When they read the details of the tragedy and the names of the spiritual brothers and sisters who had perished, they were overcome with shame. Their country had sinned, and even though none of them were personally involved (some were not even born at the time of the tragedy), they still felt a national guilt that could not be excused. They returned to Japan committed to right a wrong. There was an immediate outpouring of love from their fellow believers. They raised ten million yen ($25,000). The money was transferred through proper channels and a beautiful white church building was erected on the sight of the tragedy. When the dedication service for the new building was held, a delegation from Japan joined the relatives and special guests.

Although their generosity was acknowledged and their attempts at making peace appreciated, the memories were still there. Hatred preserves pain. It keeps the wounds open and the hurts fresh. The Koreans' bitterness had festered for decades. Christian brothers or not, these Japanese were descendants of a ruthless enemy. The speeches were made, the details of the tragedy recalled, and the names of the dead honored. It was time to bring the service to a close. Someone in charge of the agenda thought it would be appropriate to conclude with the same two songs that were sung the day the church was burned. The song leader began the words to "Nearer My God to Thee."

But something remarkable happened as the voices mingled on the familiar melody. As the memories of the past mixed with the truth of the song, resistance started to melt. The inspiration that gave hope to a doomed collection of churchgoers in a past generation gave hope once more. The song leader closed the service with the hymn "At the Cross." The normally stoic Japanese could not contain themselves. The tears that began to fill their eyes during the song suddenly gushed from deep inside. They turned to their Korean spiritual relatives and begged them to forgive. The guarded, calloused hearts of the Koreans were not quick to surrender. But the love of the Japanese believers not intimidated by decades of hatred tore at the Koreans' emotions.

At the cross, at the cross
Where I first saw the light,
And the burden of my heart rolled away ...

One Korean turned toward a Japanese brother. Then another. And then the floodgates holding back a wave of emotion let go. The Koreans met their new Japanese friends in the middle. They clung to each other and wept. Japanese tears of repentance and Korean tears of forgiveness intermingled to bathe the site of an old nightmare. Heaven had sent the gift of reconciliation to a little white church in Korea.

12. Cosmic Embrace

Illustration

John Gibbs

In his nearly incredible report out of South Africa, No Future Without Forgiveness (New York: Image Doubleday, 1999), Archbishop Desmond Tutu's cosmic context of holy love is unmistakable: "There is a movement, not easily discernible, at the heart of things to reverse the awful centrifugal force of alienation, brokenness, division, hostility, and disharmony. God has set in motion a centripetal process, a moving toward the center, toward unity, harmony, goodness, peace and justice, a process that removes barriers. Jesus says, 'And when I am lifted up from the earth I shall draw everyone to myself' as he hangs from His cross with outflung arms, thrown out to clasp all, everyone, and everything, in a cosmic embrace, so that all, everyone, everything, belongs" (p. 265).

"Cosmic embrace." There's our answer to the sort of "purity laws" and taboos, even in Leviticus, that bear no gospel for man or beast. In cosmic embrace we rediscover the depth and scope of holy love.

13. Daring Words

Illustration

Larry Powell

The Gospel according to Mark, commonly accepted to be the earliest of the synoptics, relates that Jesus began his Galilean ministry by 1. making an announcement, 2. extending an invitation, and 3. issuing a command. It would be pressing the matter entirely too far to even remotely suggest that the sequence of events was intentional, yet there is a certain familiarity about the sequence itself. As a matter of fact, the three ingredients, broadly categorized above, probably bear a striking resemblance to the sermon you will likely hear in your particular church on any given Sunday: a. the announcement of a Gospel truth; b. the exhortation, with some degree of urgency, to accomplish something in the name of Christ, and c. the invitation to respond. Intentional or not, Jesus began his ministry with a format exceptionally accommodating to Gospel preachers. However, let us take up the sequence as described by Mark.

1. The announcement. The arrest of John the baptizer apparently served as the catalyst for Jesus to reveal the messianic secret. For thirty years, he had maintained a low profile, preparing himself, shaping his perspectives, waiting - waiting for the proper time to thrust himself prominently into the midst of human affairs. At last, the moment had arrived: "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel" (1:15). Daring words! He had made bold as a young man sometime earlier in his hometown synagogue to proclaim that the Scriptures had been fulfilled at his reading. The Nazarenes responded by chasing him from the community. He knew full well that there would be a more general uprising against him now by both civil and religious authorities. But there was no choice. The groundwork had been laid, preparations had been completed, John was in prison, and the alarm must continue to be sounded: "The kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel."

2. The invitation. He would need help. Passing along the Sea of Galilee he saw two brothers, Simon and Andrew. Without the slightest qualification, he said to them, "Follow me and I will make you fishers of men." Take notice that no questions were asked, no excuses offered, no "process planning" nor introspective "objective-setting" dialogue transpired. Mark says, "And immediately they left their nets and followed him." Going a little farther, two other brothers, James and John heard a similar, abrupt invitation to respond in like manner. How do you account for the fact that these four individuals, secure in employment, having obligations and immediate responsibilities, walked away from it all to follow one who had come upon them from behind, no questions asked? Perhaps a part of the answer is found in 1:22 where Jesus is referred to as one who spoke with "authority," and not as the scribes. This particular reflection upon the scribes, implying a certain insipidness, interests us. They possessed authority by virtue of their position. Why did they not speak with authority? Conjecture is risky business, but we have a notion that their recitations were mechanical, unfeeling, and sing-song. Devotion may have been reduced to formalized vocation, and the sharp edge of adeptness dulled by neglect. Figureheads occupy space but command little respect, whether they be scribes, ministers, bishops, church-school teachers, or members of a church staff. One must be more than simply a "figure-head." Perhaps we should each take counsel with ourselves regarding the phrase, "for he taught as one having authority, not as the scribes."

3. The command. Jesus rebuked an unclean spirit and commanded it to come out of a man in the synagogue, "and the unclean spirit ... came out of him" (1:26). Let us note the response: "They were all amazed and said ‘With authority he commands even the unclean spirits’ " (1:27).

Jesus began his public ministry with an announcement, an invitation, and a command, but most of all with authority.

14. Late Bloomers

Illustration

William G. Carter

Let's face it: as far as faith is concerned, some people are late bloomers. It takes a while for some people to gain understanding. Will Willimon tells about a church gathering where people were taking turns giving testimonies about their religious experiences. One man stood and said, "I was a Methodist for 38 years before anybody told me about Jesus." Will said he scratched his head when he heard that. What the man probably should have said was, "I was a church member for 38 years before I really experienced my faith and began to live it." That is, he had a delayed response. He was a late bloomer.

The problem, Will said, was the man sounded so smug when he said it. He made it sound as if there was an instantaneous experience that washed away his past. Well, says Will, what about all those teachers who put up with him while he was growing up in Sunday school? What about all of those preachers who tried their best to speak the gospel to him? What about all those Christians who tried to tell him about Jesus? Will felt like saying, "Listen, pal, it's nice that your faith is coming together, but what do you think we've been trying to get through your thick head for the last 38 years?"

15. Your Image of Yourself

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

Peter Ustinov was one of the great actors of his day. I don’t know much about him, but I was impressed by an interview some years ago during the filing of the movie “Death on the Nile.” He was talking about the images actors have to live with. “An image is an awful thing,” he said. “An actor says, ‘I’m going to do this or that.’ And someone will say, ‘What about your image?’”

Ustinov said, “I don’t know what my image is. I don’t want to know.”

And then he continued, “It is a sad state when the man looking at you in a mirror is more important than the man looking into the mirror.”

If you are overly concerned about your image -- if you are preoccupied with the impression you are making on other people -- the chances are that you are not certain of your identity. You don’t quite know who you are -- and, more seriously, you are not the person God created you to be.

16. What is Crucifixion?

Illustration

C. Truman Davis

What is crucifixion? A medical doctor provides a physical description: The cross is placed on the ground and the exhausted man is quickly thrown backwards with his shoulders against the wood. The legionnaire feels for the depression at the front of the wrist. He drives a heavy, square wrought-iron nail through the wrist and deep into the wood. Quickly he moves to the other side and repeats the action, being careful not to pull the arms too tightly, but to allow some flex and movement. The cross is then lifted into place.

The left foot is pressed backward against the right foot, and with both feet extended, toes down, a nail is driven through the arch of each, leaving the knees flexed. The victim is now crucified. As he slowly sags down with more weight on the nails in the wrists, excruciating, fiery pain shoots along the fingers and up the arms to explode in the brain the nails in the wrists are putting pressure on the median nerves. As he pushes himself upward to avoid this stretching torment, he places the full weight on the nail through his feet. Again he feels the searing agony of the nail tearing through the nerves between the bones of his feet. As the arms fatigue, cramps sweep through the muscles, knotting them in deep, relentless, throbbing pain. With these cramps comes the inability to push himself upward to breathe. Air can be drawn into the lungs but not exhaled. He fights to raise himself in order to get even one small breath. Finally carbon dioxide builds up in the lungs and in the blood stream, and the cramps partially subside. Spasmodically he is able to push himself upward to exhale and bring in life-giving oxygen.

Hours of this limitless pain, cycles of twisting, joint-rending cramps, intermittent partial asphyxiation, searing pain as tissue is torn from his lacerated back as he moves up and down against the rough timber. Then another agony begins: a deep, crushing pain deep in the chest as the pericardium slowly fills with serum and begins to compress the heart. It is now almost over the loss of tissue fluids has reached a critical level the compressed heart is struggling to pump heavy, thick, sluggish blood into the tissues the tortured lungs are making a frantic effort to gasp in small gulps of air. He can feel the chill of death creeping through is tissues. . .Finally he can allow his body to die.

All this the Bible records with the simple words, "And they crucified Him." (Mark 15:24). What wondrous love is this?

17. Saved Alone

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

In the year 1873, Horatio Spafford, a Christian lawyer from Chicago, placed his wife and four children on the luxury liner Ville de Havre sailing from New York to France. Spafford expected to join them in about three or four weeks after finishing up some business, but with the exception of his wife he never saw them again. The trip started out beautifully. But on the evening of November 21, 1873, as the Ville de Havre proceeded peacefully across the Atlantic, the ship was suddenly struck by another vessel, the Lochearn, and sank a mere thirty minutes later, with the loss of nearly all on board.

On being told that the ship was sinking Mrs. Spafford knelt with her children and prayed that they might be saved or be made willing to die, if such was God's will. A few minutes later, in the confusion, three of the children were swept away by the waves while she stood clutching the youngest. Suddenly the youngest child was swept from her arms. Mrs. Spafford became unconscious and awoke later to find that she had been rescued by sailors from the Lochearn. But the four children were gone.

Back in the United States, Horatio Spafford was waiting for news of his family, and at last, ten days later (after the rescue ship had reached Cardiff), it came. "Saved alone" was his wife's message. That night Spafford walked the floor of his rooms in anguish, as anyone would have done. But this was not all. For as he shared his loss with His Lord, a loss which could not be reversed in this life, he found, as many have, that peace which indeed passes all understanding. Toward morning he told a friend named Major Whittle, "I am glad to be able to trust my Lord when it costs me something." Then, sometime later, as he reflected on the disaster at sea, he wrote this hymn:

When peace, like a river, attendeth my way,
When sorrows like sea-billows roll;
Whatever my lot, Thou hast taught me to say,
It is well, it is well with my soul.

Though Satan should buffet, though trials should come,
Let this blest assurance control,
That Christ has regarded my helpless estate,
And hath shed His own blood for my soul.

My sin-Oh, the bliss of this glorious thought,
My sin-not in part, but the whole,
Is nailed to the cross and I bear it no more,
Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, O my soul!

And, Lord, haste the day when the faith shall be sight,
The clouds be rolled back as a scroll,
The trump shall resound and the Lord shall descend,
"Even so"—it is well with my soul.

18. Anything For Nothing

Illustration

J. McMath

Today's idols are more in the self than on the shelf.

Goudzwaard's three basic Biblical rules:

Every person is serving god(s) in his life.
Every person is transformed into an image of his god.
Mankind creates and forms a structure of society in its own image.

That for which I would give anything and accept nothing in exchange is the most important thing in my life. Whatever that is, is my god (cf. Isa. 44:6-20).

19. In the Form of a Man

Illustration

Daniel T. Niles

The Hindu temple is built in the form of a man. The outer court raised on pillars and open on all sides is the human body, the inner court with its wide spaces is the human mind, the shrine room is the human soul. Man moves within himself into himself and there finds the presence of God. The Muslim mosque, too, is built in the form of a man. The central dome is man's head and the minarets are his hands upraised in prayer. Man comes to God through an act of adoration and submission. The Buddhist dogoba, too, is built in the form of a man. Its figure is that of a man in the posture of meditation: legs crossed the body erect, and the head held straight and unmoving. The approach to reality is by way of inner withdrawal from the world.

The Christian church, too, is built in the form of a man, a man stretched out upon a cross. And this has made all the difference. The church does not ask its followers to find their way, or to discover truth within. The church says one man, Jesus of Nazareth is that way, is the truth. He is life. We put our faith in him knowing

20. Getting Attention

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

Just before the beginning of the Sunday service at Saint Bartholomew's on Fifth Avenue, New York City, a man wearing a large hat was discovered sitting in the front row. An usher moved to his pew, leaned in, and discreetly asked him to remove his hat. The man replied that he would not. The head usher was then summoned, made the same request, and received the same answer. About that time the president of the women of the parish arrived and was asked to assist. She had the same dismal result. Finally, with only two minutes remaining before the opening hymn, the senior warden of the parish was summoned. He tiptoed up beside the man and tried to seize the hat, but the man nimbly dodged and there was not time for further attempts.

As the opening hymn began and the procession entered the church, the man stood, removed his hat and did not put it on again.

At the conclusion of the service, the four frustrated people waited for the man at the rear of the church. The senior warden approached him and said, "Sir, about the hat: perhaps you don't understand, but in the Episcopal church men do not wear hats at worship." The man replied, "Oh, but I do understand. I've been an Episcopalian all my life. As a matter of fact, I've been coming to this church regularly for two years and I've never met a soul. But this morning I've met an usher, the head usher, the president of the church women, and the senior warden."

21. Tradition Is a Powerful Thing

Illustration

King Duncan

Years ago Harry Emerson Fosdick told about a church in Denmark where the worshipers bowed regularly before a certain spot on the wall. They had been doing that for three centuries bowing at that one spot in the sanctuary. Nobody could remember why. One day in renovating the church, they removed some of the whitewash on the walls. At the exact spot where the people bowed they found the image of the Madonna under the whitewash. People had become so accustomed to bowing before that image that even after it was covered up for three centuries, people still bowed.

Tradition is a powerful thing. The Pharisees had learned to substitute tradition, custom, habit for the presence of the living God. Traditionalism rears its head in many ways, in many times and in many places.

22. The Authority of the Church

Illustration

Brett Blair

Dr. W. A Criswell, Pastor of the First Baptist Church of Dallas Texas, said on one occasion on an airplane flight he found himself seated beside a well known theologian. He desperately wanted to start a conversation and they got to talking. The man told Dr. Criswell about how he had recently lost a little boy through death. Dr. Criswell listened as he told his story: He said he had come home from school with a fever and we thought it was just one of those childhood things, but it was a very virulent form of meningitis. The doctor said we cannot save your little boy. He'll die.

And so this seminary professor, loving his son as he did, sat by the bed side to watch this death vigil. It was the middle of the day and the little boy whose strength was going from him and whose vision and brain was getting clouded said, "Daddy, it's getting dark isn't it?" The professor said to his son, "Yes son it is getting dark, very dark." Of course it was very dark for him. He said, "Daddy, I guess it's time for me to go to sleep isn't it?"

He said, "Yes, son, it's time for you to go to sleep."

The professor said the little fellow had a way of fixing his pillow just so, and putting his head on his hands when he slept and he fixed his pillow like that and laid his head on his hands and said, "Good night Daddy. I will see you in the morning." He then closed his eyes in death and stepped over into heaven.

Dr. Criswell said the professor didn't say anymore after that. He just looked out the window of that airplane for a long time. Then he turned back and he looked at Dr Criswell with the scalding tears coming down his cheeks and he said, "Dr. Criswell, I can hardly wait till the morning."

The morning is coming. And we will see our loved ones. That's what Jesus is saying, "The gates of hell, the gates of DEATH, shall not prevail against the church!"

23. The Image of the Father

Illustration

Amy Butler

Thomas Troeger, a Presbyterian pastor and gifted preacher, tells a story of an experience he had once. He wrote:

"One day several years ago I was in a department store buying myself a new shirt when a complete stranger walked up to me and said, ‘You must be Henry Troeger's son.'

"I looked at this person and I said, ‘I don't believe I have ever seen you.'

"He said, ‘Oh, no, you have never met me at all, but a long time ago I worked with your father. I was a close colleague of his and when I saw you across the aisle of the store, I said to myself, `I'd know that face anywhere.'You are the very image of your father.'

"For several weeks after that, I would sometimes be going down the street, and maybe come around a corner, and catch my reflection in a store window. I started to see myself with the eyes of someone else. It is not like looking into the mirror in the morning. I would come around the corner, catch that reflection and I would think, ‘That's Henry Troeger.' All of a sudden I would be seeing how I bore the image of my father."

And so it is with us.

Each one of us is created with the image of God indelibly imprinted on our souls, so that, in some miraculous and inexplicable way, the diverse expressions of God that are you and you and you and me all come together to illustrate the mystery, to live together in community as we do our best to display for the world all the possibilities that the divine imprint on all of us could mean.

24. God Is Like a...

Illustration

Brian Stoffregen

To illustrate the idea of being drawn to God, I've thought of the image of bugs being drawn to a light. However, there are some problems with that picture. That instinct can lead to the bug's death when they are drawn to a "zapper" or get too close to a candle. In addition, the light does no work to draw the bug. The bug puts forth all the effort in being drawn. In the image of "hauling" fish, the fish do nothing. It is the fishermen who do all the work.

Some other images I've used: the spaceship Enterprise's tractor beam dragging a disabled ship farm tractors dragging implements Peterbuilts (Peterbuilt just sounds more biblical than Mack truck, although White trucks could be connected to biblical or spiritual themes) pulling a trailer

God is like a Peterbuilt / tractor / spaceship and we are like the trailer / implement / disabled ship. God hooks up to us and pulls us to Jesus, where Jesus promises to raise us up on the last day. Without the power of the tractor, the trailer goes nowhere. Without the power of God, we are helpless to come to Jesus.

25. No Celebration without Confession

Illustration

Brett Blair

Another set of "money-changers" in the church seem to have lost their reason for forgiveness. Catholic priests have expressed concern over the sharp decline in the number of people desiring to take confession. We hear a lot of talk about the word celebration in our church today. There can be no celebration until there is first confession. In the parable of the prodigal son, the banquet does not occur until the boy had first come to himself.

A Sunday School class in a church once made an unusual request one day. They requested that the prayer of confession be taken out of the order of worship. They gave the following reasons:

Confessions imply that we are bad people.
Our children will get a negative image of themselves.
Guilt is damaging; we need to think positively.
Worship should always be uplifting and make us feel good.

This sounds like the philosophy advocated by that book some years ago "I'm OK you're OK." Tell me then. If I'm OK and you're OK then what are we doing here? The refusal to acknowledge that we are sinful people is damaging the church today, and it is damage that is coming from within, not from without. We have bought in to the modern culture that we should have a positive self-image through positive thinking. Friends, sin is real, and it is too destructive to ignore. The cross reminds us just how serious our sin is. The failure to express our sin before God and one another devalues God's redemptive grace. It is not positive thinking that will remove our guilt; it is God's redemptive action.

26. Blood Ties

Illustration

John R. Steward

During World War II the Red Cross would provide blood for wounded soldiers. They had a practice of giving the name of the donor to the recipient so that the soldier could write and thank the donor if he should desire.

The Red Cross also had a policy that the blood that was given would be made available to anyone who would need it. That meant that even enemy soldiers could have the blood to save their lives.

Because the names of the donors were available, the medics developed a custom when the blood was needed for a Nazi officer. When a Nazi officer needed blood the medics would find a bottle of blood whose donor had a Jewish name. They would tell the Nazi that they had the blood that was needed to save his life. Then they would tell him that the blood was from a Jewish donor. Most of the Nazi officers would receive the blood but there were some who absolutely refused to receive it into their veins.

Adapted from Parables, Etc. (Platteville, Colorado: Saratoga Press), June 1985.

27. The Real Jesus

Illustration

Amy Butler

Philip Yancey says that we often have an image of Jesus that comes straight out of Hollywood films. We picture Jesus reciting his lines evenly and without emotion. We see him striding authoritatively through the flustered crowds. He already knows what to say in every situation and says it in measured tones with appropriate accompanying meaningful looks. Yancey calls this image "The Prozac Jesus".

But our Gospels tell a different story, and this exchange we read about today is one of those times we see the real, human Jesus. The Jesus we read about in the Gospels was fiery and compelling. People crowded around, put up with discomfort and hunger just to get to hear a little of what he had to say. He cried. He was moved by pity. He was frustrated with his disciples, angry with coldhearted legalists, grief-stricken at Calvary, and yes, even unsure about his purpose on earth.

Isn't this the essence of human striving to know God? We look at this watershed moment in Jesus' life, not as an example of God's impotence, but as proof of God's love. God, in human form, went through the process of discovering and growing his faith. What reassuring words for all of us to hear!

28. Cell Division or Unity

Illustration

Michael P. Green

In any flesh-and-bones body, there are a variety of cells. There are nerve cells, blood cells, muscle cells, and many others, each having a distinct function. The body operates smoothly, not because the cells get together and vote on what to do, but because each one does what it was designed to do. It is the function of the head to bring all these different functions together, so that the body operates effectively as each cell gives itself to the task of functioning according to its design.

Certainly the body would not operate properly if its cells chose to go their own way. Do you know what we call a rebellion of the cells of your stomach? We call it indigestion! A revolt of your brain cells is called insanity. Any time the cells in our body don’t operate properly, it means that the body is sick, that something is wrong with it.

Many of the problems in the church today are a result of our forgetting that the church is a body with a head, Jesus Christ. Instead we sometimes try to operate the church as an organization. As a result, the church has no more power than any other human organization at work in the world.

29. The Christmas Candy Cane

Illustration

Staff

Tradition holds that a candy maker wanted to make a candy that would be a witness, so he made the Christmas Candy Cane. He incorporated several symbols for the birth, ministry, and death of Jesus Christ. He began with a stick of pure white hard candy: white to symbolize the Virgin Birth and the sinless nature of Jesus, and hard to symbolize the solid rock, the Foundation of the Church and firmness of the promises of God.

The candy maker made the candy in the form of a "J" to represent the name of Jesus, who came to earth as our Savior. It could also represent the staff of the Good Shepherd with which He reaches down into the ditches of the world to lift out the fallen lambs who, like all sheep, have gone astray. Thinking that the candy was somewhat plain, the candy maker stained it with red stripes. He used three small stripes for the blood shed by Christ on the cross, so that we could have the promise of eternal life.

Another description is as follows:

The Candy Cane, used during the holidays, stands as an important Christmas symbol. A candy maker wanted to come up with an idea to express the meaning of Christmas through the imagination of candy. That is when he came up with the idea of the Candy Cane. There are several different symbols incorporated through the Candy Cane. First, he used a plain white peppermint stick. The color white symbolizes the purity and sinless nature of Jesus. Next, he decided to add three small stripes to symbolize pain inflicted upon Jesus before his death on the cross and a bold stripe to represent the blood he shed for mankind. Two other symbols are distinctive on the Candy Cane. When looked at, it looks like a shepherd's staff because Jesus is the shepherd of man. Then if you turn it upside down, you will notice the shape of the letter J symbolizing the first letter in Jesus' name. These five symbols were incorporated into this piece of peppermint stick so that we would remember what we really celebrate the Christmas season.

Wikipedia covers the German origins:

In 1670, in Cologne, Germany, the choirmaster at Cologne Cathedral, wishing to remedy the noise caused by children in his church during the Living Crèche tradition of Christmas Eve, asked a local candy maker for some "sugar sticks" for them. In order to justify the practice of giving candy to children during worship services, he asked the candy maker to add a crook to the top of each stick, which would help children remember the shepherds who visited the infant Jesus. In addition, he used the white color of the converted sticks to teach children about the Christian belief in the sinless life of Jesus. From Germany, candy canes spread to other parts of Europe, where they were handed out during plays reenacting the Nativity. The candy cane became associated with Christmastide.

30. Trifling with the Trinity

Illustration

Brett Blair

There's a trend on social media to cancel peoples livelihood for even the slightest offenses that the person attacking them doesn't like. It's been billed the "cancel culture." It's an evil behavior often by anonymous sources. But it's not new. More prevalent but not new. And it certainly has been in the church for a long time. Let's use the acrostic CCC: Christian Cancel Culture.

A religious weight loss program called Weigh Down created in 1992 by a woman named Gwen Shamblin grew from a small business conducted out of a home garage to a multimillion-dollar Nashville corporation with over 30,000 churches and organizations participating. But last year the whole movement was threatened and her business placed in jeopardy when Shamblin, on August 10th made comments regarding her beliefs in the Trinity. Here is what she said, "As a ministry, we believe in God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. However, the Bible does not use the word "trinity," and our feeling is that the word "trinity" implies equality in leadership, or shared Lordship. It is clear that the scriptures teach that Jesus is the Son of God and that God sends the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit does not send God anywhere. God is clearly the Head."

Her comments sent shockwaves through her community of followers and business partners. She was removed from the Women of Faith Web site, influential evangelical churches dropped her program, even some key employees left. Thomas Nelson, her publisher, quickly canceled the publication of her book that was then scheduled for release in one month. All of this because she trifled with the Trinity.

If you are confused as to why her words got her into so much trouble, that is quite understandable. The church has struggled to explain how God can be both One God and three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Where Mrs. Shamblin went wrong was in her statement that God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit were not equal in leadership. In an interview, she agreed that Jesus was both Lord and God but she maintained that Jesus held only a secondary and unequal relationship to the Father.

If you are still confused, let me ask you this: What is the conclusion of such a statement? It is this: Jesus is not fully God. This cuts at the heart of the church's historic teaching that Jesus Christ, in his very nature, was both fully God and fully man. It's a mystery which we accept through faith. Yet Shamblin tries to argue her point by saying that Christians grieve Jesus if they adhere to doctrines not found in Scripture. She says, "If God wanted us to refer to Himself, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit as the 'trinity,' He would not have left this word completely out of the Bible."

We must tread carefully when these kinds of claims are made. Just because a word is not in the bible doesn't mean that it is unbiblical. There are a lot of words that we use in the church that are not found in the Bible. In fact, the word Bible is not in the Bible.

Now we find ourselves this morning, on Trinity Sunday, struggling with this ancient doctrine. What are the essentials of our faith and why is the Trinity one of them? And how can we safeguard our pursuit of truth?

31. More than Numbers to God

Illustration

Lee Griess

Numbers. Our lives are filled with numbers. Each year we file our income taxes. Now that's an exercise in numbers to end all numbers games. Pages upon pages of numbers. And when it is finally prepared, we send it off to the Internal Revenue Service with our Social Security number on it. And the IRS takes all those numbers and puts them into a computer, along with the numbers of thousands and thousands of other people. And to them, we become a number.

The government knows us by our tax number. The state knows us by our driver's license number. The bank knows us by our account number. And when we retire, we'll be known by our Social Security number. And it goes on and on. In fact, sometimes I wonder if anybody knows us at all without a number!

And that's why this morning's Gospel reading is so significant, because it tells us that God knows us. He knows us intimately, in fact, better than we know ourselves. And that's important to remember. In spite of the fact that the image of sheep and shepherd is foreign to our experience, the words of the Gospel this morning hearken for us a truth that our human hearts long to hear. The Old Testament writer put it even more clearly when he wrote, "The Lord is my Shepherd, I shall not want." Jesus says it this morning, "My sheep hear my voice and I know them and they follow me, and I give them eternal life."

32. It’s Ok to Be Extravagant – Sermon Opener

Illustration

James W. Moore

A few years ago there was a true story about a man in New York City who was kidnapped. His kidnappers called his wife and asked for $100,000 ransom. She talked them down to $30,000.

The story had a happy ending: the man returned home unharmed, the money was recovered, and the kidnappers were caught and sent to jail. But, don't you wonder what happened when the man got home and found that his wife got him back for a discount? Calvin Trillin was the writer of this story. He imagined out loud what the negotiations must have been like: "$100,000 for that old guy? You have got to be crazy. Just look at him! Look at that gut! You want $100,000 for that? You've got to be kidding. Give me a break here. $30,000 is my top offer."

Mark Trotter concluded his rendition of the story with this thoughtful comment: "I suppose there are some here this morning who can identify with the wife in that story, but for some reason I find myself identifying with the husband. I'd like to think if I were in a similar situation, there would be people who would spare no expense to get me back. They wouldn't haggle over the price. They wouldn't say, 'Well, let me think about it.' I like to think that they would say, 'We'll do anything for you.'"

The point of that story is this: sometimes it's O.K. to be extravagant! Now, that is precisely what this story in the Gospel of Mark is all about. Remember the story with me. Jesus is on His way to the cross. It is just a few days before Passover. The chief priests and scribes are plotting against Him. Judas is about ready to betray Him. The crucifixion is less than a week away and Jesus knows it. Jesus and His disciples stop at Bethany. just a few days before, Jesus had raised Lazarus from the dead there in Bethany. Now, as they are having dinner, a woman comes to Jesus and does a beautiful but extravagant thing for our Lord. The Gospel of John tells us that the woman was Mary, (the sister of Martha and Lazarus). Mary brings an alabaster jar of very expensive ointment. She breaks open the jar and pours the costly perfumed oil on Jesus' head. She anoints His head with oil.

Why did she do that? Some say it was an act of gratitude in which she was thanking Jesus for raising her brother Lazarus from the dead. Some say it was an act of consecration in which she was baptizing Jesus to encourage Him to go into the HolyCity and do what had to be done. Others say it was a foreshadowing, an act of preparation, in which she was anointing His body for the death which was to come in Jerusalem a few days later. All say it was an act of love and kindness.

But Judas said it was a waste. If you lived strictly by the Judas mind-set, you would have no Spire on the church, no flowers on the altar, no art on the wall, no robes for the choir, no fine organ, no beautiful weddings. Your daughter would come to you and say, "I'm in love and I'm so happy. I want to get married." And you would say, "Well, why don't you just elope? It's much cheaper. It would be wasteful to have a wedding." But the Mary mind-set says, "Sometimes in the name of love and kindness and gratefulness; it's O.K. Indeed, it's beautiful to be extravagant." Let me show you what I mean.

1. First Of All, It's OK To Be Extravagant In Our Generosity.

2. Second, It's OK To Be Extravagant In Our Gratitude.

3. Third And Finally, It's OK To Be Extravagant In Our Graciousness.

33. Speaking for the Lord

Illustration

James Packer

Paul considered himself Christ's ambassador. What is an ambassador? He is an authorized representative of a sovereign. He speaks not in his own name but on behalf of the ruler whose deputy he is, and his whole duty and responsibility is to interpret that ruler's mind faithfully to those to whom he is sent.

Paul used this "ambassador" image twice both in connection with his evangelistic work. Pray for me, he wrote from prison, "that utterance may be given me in opening my mouth boldly to proclaim the mystery of the gospel, for which I am an ambassador in chains; that I may declare it boldly, as I ought to speak" (Eph. 6:18-20). He wrote also that God "gave us the ministry of reconciliation...So we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God" (2 Corinthians 5:18-20).

Paul called himself an ambassador because he knew that when he proclaimed the gospel facts and promises and urged sinners to receive the reconciliation effected at Calvary, he was declaring Christ's message to the world. The figure of ambassadorship highlights the authority Paul had, as representing his Lord, as long as he remained faithful to the terms of his commission and said neither less nor more than he had been given to say.

34. You Are What You Eat

Illustration

Brian Harner

"You are what you eat." Perhaps we use this popular saying somewhat flippantly to encourage people to eat the right thing. Food gives us the building blocks of our bodies. Meals are assimilated into our bloodstream and even into our bones. Perhaps it is no surprise that man is presented in Genesis 1 and 2 as a hungry person and the whole world is offered as his food. The command to eat of the food of this world in the creation account is second only to God's command to multiply and to have dominion over creation: "Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed...and every tree, which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat...." Man must eat in order to live. He will take the world into his body and transform it into himself. Yes, he is what he eats; and the whole world is one large banquet for mankind, minus the forbidden tree in the middle of the garden. Eating in God's good creation is the central image of life in the Garden of Eden.

Since eating is the activity of life itself, it should not surprise us that Jesus describes Himself as the food of life in today's gospel lesson: "My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in Me and I in him."

35. The Joy Of God

Illustration

Richard A. Jensen

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

36. The Nearest Willing Hand

Illustration

Carveth Mitchell

Two women were sitting in church. One woman said to the other, "I've always wished that God would touch me, but I suppose that's too much to ask."

The other woman replied, "That sounds like a reasonable desire. Have you prayed about it?"

"Well, no. Of course not."

"Why not? There's certainly nothing wrong with a prayer like that. You should pray about it."

"All right. Maybe I will sometime."

"Not sometime. Now. What better place to pray than here in the Lord's house?"

Thus persuaded, the woman reluctantly folded her hands, bowed her head and closed her eyes in prayer, asking that God would touch her. About ten seconds later the other woman gently laid her hand on the folded hands of the friend at prayer. She responded as most of us would do. She jumped and said, "He did it! He touched me." Then, after a moment's thought "But that felt an awful lot like your hand."

"It was my hand," her friend replied.

Disappointment was on the other face. "And I thought God had touched me."

"He did touch you. How do you think God touches people? That he comes down like a fog blanket or a pillar of fire? When God touches people he takes the nearest hand and uses that."

That sounds good, doesn't it? And it's almost right. Almost, but not quite. She left out one word. When God touches people he takes the nearest WILLING hand and uses that. The Gospel for today is a case in point.

37. Called Together

Illustration

Martin Luther

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

38. The Love of a Father - Sermon Starter

Illustration

King Duncan

It is not easy being a father. One cynic, speaking from his own experience, noted that children go through four fascinating stages. First they call you DaDa. Then they call you Daddy. As they mature they call you Dad. Finally they call you collect.

Today we salute fathers. Dads, we love you. The role of a Christian father is more important in today's world than ever before. It is a different roll than in earlier generations. In most households today Dad is called upon to play more of a nurturing role in caring for children. If Mom works outside the home, Dad must take a more active role in doing household chores. Dad is no longer "lord of the castle." Hopefully, however, he has not been reduced to being another of the vassals.

Today's father needs to be nurturing of his children, supportive of his wife, and yet at the same time provide the spiritual leadership of the home that the Bible accords to fathers. It is a rare man, a special kind of man, who can combine all three of these qualities. We salute Christian fathers this day. Your family needs you more than ever before.

The most common image that Jesus used in describing God was that of "Father." It makes me think that Joseph must have been a very special kind of father. We center much of our attention on his mother, Mary, but Joseph must have also combined those very special qualities of strength and gentleness that we associate with Jesus. Jesus had a very keen knowledge of the Old Testament Scriptures. In the Jewish home it was the father who had the primary responsibility for his son's religious instruction. Of course we know that Jesus had an unique relationship with God. Still, I have to believe that Joseph, though barely mentioned in the Gospel narrative, was probably an influential role model for Jesus. Why else would Jesus have chosen the imagery of "Father" to portray God?

In Matthew 10: 29-31 we have one of the most important Scriptural reminders of the love of our Heavenly Father for His children. "Are not two sparrows sold for a penny?" Jesus asks, "And not one of them will fall to the ground without your Father's will. But even the hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows." What a moving testimony to the very intimate love that God has for each of us.

1. Sparrows Do Fall from Skies

2. Life's Problems are Not Punishment for Our Sins

3. We Never Fall Beyond the Watchful Eye of the Father.

39. Full Devotion

Illustration

Edwin D. Peterman

Several years ago a couple of reporters conducted an experiment on the streets of Miami, Florida. They printed up a copy of the Bill of Rights in the form of a petition, put it on a clipboard, and then stopped people on the sidewalk and asked them to sign it. As you know, the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution are the Bill of Rights, and they were adopted and put into effect in December of 1791. The reporters were surprised at people's reaction when asked to add their names to the so-called petition. Most people glanced at the document, shook their heads, and walked on by without signing. Several people became angry with the reporters and accused them of being radical enemies of the American way of life. In fact, the experiment ended when the reporters found themselves surrounded by a dozen or so passers-by who were shaking their fists at them and calling them subversive Communists who ought to be thrown in jail.

What the experiment demonstrated is what we already know. Many citizens of the United States pay lip service to their country and its heritage. They claim to be loyal and patriotic in every way. They say they are proud to belong to a country as great as ours. And yet at the same time they haven't the vaguest notion what the United States Constitution actually says, and they consider the Bill of Rights to be a radical, anti-American document. In other words, these people claim citizenship, but they have not internalized the basic meaning of being a citizen. They claim the privilege, but they will not eat and drink the ethos of United States of America.

The same sort of thing is described in today's Gospel. Jesus says, I am the living bread that came down from heaven. . . Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Most people probably think Jesus is talking about communion. He isn't. He's talking about the difference between external lip service and internal embodiment. He's talking about the difference between admiring him and actually taking up one's cross and following him. He's talking about the difference between acting like a Christian on the outside and being a Christian on the inside.

40. The Meaning of All Religion

Illustration

Staff

What do we see in the image the gospel writer presents? We are told "they saw Jesus walking on the sea and coming near the boat". Certainly there is the man, Jesus, exercising a power no human has; there is the storm that presents such peril to those in the boat; there is the location distant from shore.

But what is behind what is told? What truth is present in the relation of the events?

Karl Barth expresses well what it is in "Der Romerbrief." We all "are encountered" by God.

"That we have found the Christ in Jesus of Nazareth is confirmed because all the manifestations of God's faithfulness are indications or prophecies of what has encountered us in Jesus. The hidden power of the law and the prophets is the Christ who encounters us in Jesus. The meaning of all religion is the redemption, the turn of the age, the resurrection, the invisibility of God that constrains us to silence in Jesus. The substance of all human happenings is the forgiveness under which they stand as it is proclaimed and embodied precisely in Jesus. No one need object that this power, this meaning, this substance is to be found not only in Jesus but elsewhere. For we ourselves affirm this very thing; indeed, precisely we can affirm it. What is known and found in Jesus is that God is found everywhere, that before and after Jesus mankind has been found by God; in him we have the criterion by which all finding and being found by God may be known as such and by which we can conceive this finding and being found as a truth of the eternal order. Many walk in the light of redemption, forgiveness, resurrection; but that we see them walk, that we have eyes for them, we owe to one. In his light we see light.

And that it is the Christ we have found in Jesus is confirmed because Jesus is the final word, which clarifies all the others and brings them to sharpest expression, of the faithfulness of God to which the law and the prophets bear witness."

41. Under His Wings

Illustration

Brett Blair

Listen to these great hymns that were sung during Jesus’ day in the Synagogues and Temple worship in Jerusalem.

Hide me in the shadow of thy wings. 17:8.
In the shadow of thy wings I will take refuge till the storms of destruction pass by. 57:1
Oh to be safe under the shelter of thy wings. 61:4
In the shadow of thy wings I sing for joy. 63:7
Under his wings you will find refuge. 91:4

How do we know these songs were sung? They are the songs found in the book Psalms. Psalm 17, 36, 57, 61, 63, and 91 speak of the protective wings of God. So when Jesus expressed his desire to comfort Jerusalem he used an image widely understood, “I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gather’s her chicks under her wings.” But Jesus’ desires go unfulfilled for Jerusalem was “unwilling,” Jesus said, to receive the shelter he offered.

But let us not miss a significant point being advanced here: In the Psalms it is Yahweh who longs to gather Israel under his protective wings. Here in the Gospel of Luke it is Jesus. An equation is being drawn. Jesus equals God. How very sad then that Israel refused.

42. Exchanging Our Eschatological Heritage

Illustration

William G. Carter

Neill Hamilton, who taught at Drew University for many years, once observed how people in our time lose hope for the future. It happens whenever we let our culture call the shots on how the world is going to end. At this stage of technological advancement, the only way the culture can make sense of the future is through the picture of everything blowing up in a nuclear holocaust.

The world cannot know what we know, that everything has changed in the death and resurrection of Jesus, that the same Christ is coming to judge the world and give birth to a new creation. And so, people lose hope. As Hamilton puts it: This substitution of an image of nuclear holocaust for the coming of Christ is a parable of what happens to Christians when they cease to believe in their own eschatological heritage. The culture supplies its own images for the end when we default by ceasing to believe in biblical images of God's triumph at the end.

The good news of the gospel is this: when all is said and done, God is going to win.

43. Familiar Things

Illustration

Alex Gondola

From time to time, all of us have been guilty of taking some remarkable things for granted, simply because they have become familiar to us. Take, for instance, the ancient and honorable game of golf. Most of us understand the basic principles of golf. Some of us play golf. Some of us play at it. But suppose you had to explain golf to someone who had never seen it before say an Aborigine from the Australian outback. Don't you think an Aborigine from the Australian outback might find our game of golf rather strange?

"Why is that big man trying to punish that little ball by hitting it with that long stick?" he might ask. "He's not trying to punish the ball," you explain. "He's trying to drive it. He wants to put the little white ball in the tiny hole way over there, about 500 yards away." "Why not just walk over and drop the ball in by hand? It would be a whole lot easier. Trying to hit such a small ball with such a long stick seems like a waste of time." "Well," you respond, "that's part of the challenge. Nobody wants to put the ball in the hole the easy way. In fact, we pay an expert a lot of money to make sure the ground around the hole is especially tricky. See the woods over there, and the rough grass and the pond and the sand traps? Those are all places where the little white ball can get caught or lost."

"Oh, now I get it!" says your friendly Aboriginal visitor. "If it takes a long time to put the ball in the hole, everyone is happy."

You shake your head. "No, if it takes a long time to put the ball in the hole, someone usually gets angry. See that man over there, throwing his clubs around and cursing? He's furious because he just hit his ball into the pond for the third time!" "Then, tell me," your friend asks, with a puzzled look, "why does he bother to play golf at all, if it only makes him angry?"

To which you respond, "That man comes here twice a week to play so he can relax!"

And so it goes. Familiar things, like golf, that we take for granted, can seem strange to others. At the end of the first century, in the time of the early Church, in the days when the Gospel of John was written, about 100 A.D. the sacrament of the Lord's Supper apparently seemed strange to some. It was even controversial. The scripture lesson that I read from John, chapter six, reflects the strangeness some found in the idea of the Lord's Supper an idea to which we have become accustomed. We agree as we take communion that we take the body and blood of Christ into ourselves. Many of the Jews in the first century apparently rejected that idea outright. And, John's passage indicates that even some of Jesus' disciples found the teaching difficult to accept. Take Christ's body and blood into ourselves? They thought it was just plain strange.

Perhaps we have become so familiar with the Sacrament of our Lord's Supper that we sometimes take it for granted. Our lesson encourages us to consider again what communion with Christ means.

44. Making Something Beautiful out of Busted Parts

Illustration

Julie Pennington-Russell talks about a friend of hers. She says, he's a man in his late 60's. Rugged, burly, brilliant guy. He's always reminded me a little of the MarlboroughMan. He studied at a prestigious university in the East some years ago, and then he moved to Texas to work on his doctorate. But somewhere along the way he became addicted to cocaine just tumbled into that dark hole. Lost his family, lost his place in graduate school, lost big pieces of himself. But somehow he washed up on the shores of a good church. And when he did, he was so fragile he looked like he'd been "rode hard and put up wet" as they say in Texas. But the folks in that church put their arms around that man and slowly he started to heal, and eventually, miraculously, even reunited with his wife and children.

We had this couple in our home for dinner and the man began to talk with Tim and me about where his life was going. "I want to believe," he said, "that my best days aren't behind me, and that my life can still count, can still make a difference for God." He sat at our table with his head in his hands. "I just can't help but feel like I've blown all of my best chances," he said. That's when his wife, who's just this wonderful, middle-aged bohemian Texas flower child kind of woman, reached over and took his hand and said and I'll never forget this she said, "Baby, you've got to take your sticky fingers off that steering wheel. If God could yank Jesus out of a grave, I figure he can make something beautiful out of busted parts." And I tell you what if I live to be a hundred and ten, I don't expect to hear the gospel better articulated than that.

45. Does It Feed Souls?

Illustration

The officer in charge of the royal pew in the chapel at Windsor, England, noted that King George frequently commented on the sermon as he left the church. If he had been blessed by it, he would say in a cheerful voice, "That will do very well. That will feed souls!"

When the preacher's delivery was cold and his words were lifeless and barren of Gospel teaching, he would shake his head sorrowfully as he left the pew and mutter under his breath, "That won't do. That just won't feed souls!"

The king's criterion for determining the value of a sermon is scripturally sound. Ministry of all kinds, whether oral or written, may well be judged by the same standard does it feed souls?

46. History of Christ the King Sunday

Illustration

Brett Blair

This is actually a pretty new festival in the church year. Its roots go back only to the early 1900's, when the world's great empires British, American, Spanish, French, German, Russian, Japanese were all at war or about to go to war somewhere.

The man who was the pope of the Roman Catholic Church at the time wrote a letter in which he dedicated the world to Christ the King. In the letter, he reminded the empires that God is present with the whole human race, even with those who do not know God.

After World War I, Pope Pius XI designated the last Sunday in October as Christ the King Sunday, a day to remember that Christ received power and honor from God and was thereby made ruler of the universe. Christ the King Sunday is the last Sunday of the church year for good reason. It's a time to reflect on Christ's return at the end of time to rule over all creation, a theme which echoes throughout Revelation, the last book of the Bible. But here's the powerful thing about this celebration. Pope Pius created the day because of the encroachment of secular forces upon society. Something he called anticlericalism.

In 1925 Pope Pius XI wrote the following:

If We ordain that the whole Catholic world shall revere Christ as King, We shall minister to the need of the present day, and at the same time provide an excellent remedy for the plague which now infects society. We refer to the plague of anticlericalism, its errors and impious activities.

With the term “anticlericalism,” Pius XI sums up the multifaceted war waged against Christianity by modern revolutions, characterized by a ferocious and indeed demonic hatred of the church, clergy, celibacy, religious life, communion, crucifixes, church buildings, parochial schools, the cross and Gospel, and anything that belonged to or bore the mark of the Church. “Anticlericalism” is a fitting term for all this.

It was an ideological war whose roots were only beginning to grow, and after decades of deep roots, has only now blossomed in our generation.

Pius XI continues:

This evil spirit, as you are well aware, venerable brethren, has not come into being in one day; it has long lurked beneath the surface. The empire of Christ over all nations was rejected. The right which the Church has from Christ himself, to teach mankind, to make laws, to govern peoples in all that pertains to their eternal salvation—that right was denied. Then gradually the religion of Christ came to be likened to false religions and to be placed ignominiously on the same level with them. It was then put under the power of the State and tolerated more or less at the whim of princes and rulers. Some men went even further, and wished to set up in the place of God’s religion a natural religion consisting in some instinctive affection of the heart. There were even some nations who thought they could dispense with God, and that their religion should consist in impiety and the neglect of God.

The rebellion of individuals and states against the authority of Christ has produced deplorable consequences. We lamented these in the encyclical Ubi Arcano; we lament them today: the seeds of discord sown far and wide; those bitter enmities and rivalries between nations, which still hinder so much the cause of peace; that insatiable greed which is so often hidden under a pretense of public spirit and patriotism, and gives rise to so many private quarrels; a blind and immoderate selfishness, making men seek nothing but their own comfort and advantage, and measure everything by these; no peace in the home, because men have forgotten or neglect their duty; the unity and stability of the family undermined; society, in a word, shaken to its foundations and on the way to ruin.

47. Is It From Within or From Without?

Illustration

Charles R. Leary

The Good News Bible version of the Gospel says: "what comes out of a person makes him unclean ... from the inside, from a person's heart, come the evil ideas which lead him to do immoral things..." (paraphrase) What is inside has to come out!

I saw a survey that compared the worst discipline problems in public schools in the 1940s and today. In the 1940s the worst discipline problems in public schools were: talking; chewing gum; making noise; running in the halls; getting out of turn in line; wearing improper clothes; not putting paper in wastebaskets! Some of the worst problems today are: drug abuse; alcohol abuse; pregnancy; suicide; rape; robbery; assault.

What an incredible shift in behavior patterns in only forty years. These harsh and shocking facts are calling us to make a corrective response. Can we, will we, make it? Clearly something is getting into our children that is coming out in intolerably destructive ways. What is it that in so short a time school problems have changed from "chewing gum" to drunkenness and drugs, from "getting out of turn in line" to getting out of life through suicide? What is defiling our children, if I dare use that term? Is it their fault or society's? Is it something within or without?

48. The Poverty in the Christmas Story

Illustration

Edward F. Markquart

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

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

49. The Temptations

Illustration

Glenn E. Ludwig

Maybe we need to rethink sin. Maybe we need to think of sin in broader categories than just "bad things done" or "good things left undone." Maybe the most uncomplicated definition of sin we could give would be our inclination to take the easy way out.

Our gospel text for today offers a good way to assess our new definition. The devil offers Jesus temptations which seem, on the surface, harmless enough. They are certainly not temptations to do evil. The devil is just encouraging Jesus to take the easy road in order to show the world that he really is the Son of God. Look, again, at these "harmless" temptations.

"Command this stone to become a loaf of bread." Temptation number one. Not a bad idea, really. Think about it. A lot of good could come from such a move. Changing stones to bread could move the world in a giant leap toward feeding the hungry masses. Thousands of lives could be saved. Isn't that worth some consideration? Think of the children we see with distended bellies. Think of the mothers who are too weak to feed their own children. Bread-making from stones could feed the world. Isn't God concerned with the hungry?

Or what about that second temptation? "Worship me," says the devil, "and to you I will give all authority over all earthly kingdoms."

Now, don't dismiss this one too quickly, either. There are some real possibilities here. Think about what it would mean if Jesus really were in charge around here. If Jesus had control, there would be no need for nuclear weapons of destruction. Wealth and resources would be shared more equitably. We wouldn't need a United Nations Peace Keeping Force to ensure the fair sharing of food supplies. It would be done, by Jesus, who had the power to make it happen. It's a plan that deserves some thought.

And what about that third temptation? "Jesus, throw yourself down from here" and let God perform a dramatic rescue. Again, think of the consequences. If Jesus did this, it would show that God can be manipulated to do what we want and what we need. It would show us once and for all that he really is here for us. And think of the consequences for Jesus' following.

Do you see the point of these three examples? The temptations were so subtle. And we could easily rationalize the outcomes! These "harmless" temptations could lead to Jesus being King of the World immediately and easily -- no more preaching to crowds on hillsides or by lakes, no more healing all those sick bodies, no more teaching to those who seem not to understand, and, most important of all, no cross to bear. It would have been the easy way out and it would have lead away from Calvary and death – but it also would have led away from Easter morning, and an empty tomb, and the death of death and sin, and the end of that real kingdom Jesus tried so desperately to explain to his followers.

The temptation of Jesus was to choose another way other than the cross. Maybe ... maybe that is our temptation too.

50. Who Is Jesus?

Illustration

John R. Brokhoff

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

Different Positions

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

1. The All-Human Jesus

Human

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

2. The All-Divine Jesus

Divine

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

3. The Half And Half Jesus

Human/Divine

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

4. The Adopted Jesus

Divine

Human

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

5. The Both And Jesus

Human & Divine

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

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

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

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

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

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

Showing 1 to 50 of 634 results