Sermon and Worship Resources

Luke 10:25-37 · The Parable of the Good Samaritan

25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

26 "What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?"

27 He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' "

28 "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."

29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"

30 In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'

36 "Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"

37 The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him." Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise."

The Politics Of Love

Luke 10:25-37

Sermon
by W. Robert McClelland

Luke sets the familiar parable of the good Samaritan in the context of two commands: Love God and neighbor; and Go, do likewise! Furthermore, it is clear that by casting the parable with Jewish bad guys and a Samaritan good guy, Jesus wants our love to transcend ideological differences and respond to human suffering and injustice wherever it may be found.

Christian spirituality has always been characterized by its loving concern for others, but it has had trouble seeing the political dimensions of its love. In its focus on heaven it has approached the ills of this world with a first aid kit when major surgery was required. It has had difficulty seeing that the wounds needing treatment are inflicted by the political and economic structures of a society. One denomination official put it, "Local communities, churches, and judicatories have hunger programs that place an inordinate emphasis upon fast days, gleaners' groups, and food distribution programs which emphasize direct food relief, and then frequently ignore the necessity of dealing with systematic change and the fundamental causes of hunger and malnutrition."

There is a crucial distinction to be made between personal acts of love that aim to feed the poor, and political actions which seek to remedy the root causes of poverty. Of course, feeding the poor is required of us; as is offering a cup of water to the thirsty, clothing the naked, and visiting the prisoner. But we live in a world where political systems contribute to an economic stratification in which the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The lack of educational opportunities, lingering racism, inequality of taxation; all contribute to the complex malaise of poverty. Personal acts of love may salve consciences but they leave the disease untreated. A piety that cultivates personal virtues such as love and sensitivity to the needs of others - without addressing the societal causes of human suffering - fosters counterfeit love. Loving our neighbor forces us into the political arena where the decisions effecting the lives of people are made. Love must be spelled out politically and economically if we we are to carry out the biblical mandate to love God and our neighbor.

When Jesus spoke in his hometown synagogue he began his sermon to the local gentry by quoting the Old Testament prophet Isaiah, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord (Luke 4:18, 19)." His speech sounds strangely like that of a political candidate running for office, especially since he claimed that the promise was as good as fulfilled by his presence among them. But by doing so, Jesus nailed down one of the central planks to God's political platform.

In both the Old and New Testaments God is portrayed as the champion of orphans and widows, the maimed and the sick, captives and aliens. Scripture reveals the Divine bias for all those who yearn for a place in the sun and who can never find it. They have been crowded out and forgotten by those who already have a deep tan. To view the world through the eyes of Christ, as we are called to do, we must acknowledge, understand, and accept responsibility for our connectedness to each other in the human family.

This is not an abstract principle that Jesus puts before us. It is as concrete as our neighbor in need. We could paraphrase Jesus' words without doing mischief to his intent,

"I was hungry and you cut my food stamps, took away my school lunch, dumped 'surplus' crops like oranges to rot rather than let me eat them.

"I was thirsty and you continued to let the acid rain kill the fish in the lakes, and allowed river water to become unfit to drink.

"I was a stranger without a home and you wiped out the subsidies which were my only hope for a decent place to live.

"I was naked and you cut my welfare check so much that I could not buy clothes, you wiped out the community service agencies that were helping me, the job-training programs that gave me some chance of supporting myself, the day care centers which allowed me to work while my children received good care; you refused to provide an adequate minimum wage so that I can't afford to work anyway.

"I was sick and you capped Medicaid so that I was turned away from the hospital.

"I was in prison and you wiped out the legal services, so that 'equal justice under law' became a mockery. You took away the lawyer helping my family avoid eviction by a condo developer.

"You did all this and more, you said, to save your economy and balance your budget. But the money you had been spending to help me you added to your spending for implements of war.

"And you cut the taxes of the affluent so they would have even more while I would have even less."

Then Americans will answer, "Lord, when did we see you hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and would not help you?"

The Lord will reply,"I tell you, whenever you refused to help one of the least important ones, you refused to help me."

By telling the story of the Samaritan's love, Jesus shows us that to love the least important ones is to love God. The obligation to love God and others is given urgency by the one command, "Go, and do likewise!" To love the neighbor - that is, those who are the victims of oppression and injustice - is to love God. Our love of God is not measured by the orthodoxy of our beliefs or the earnestness of our praise. It is, rather, gauged by our restoration to wholeness those who have been oppressed. In our society that kind of love is inescapably political.

Most people are of the opinion that politics and religion do not mix, or at least ought not mix and, consequently, it is one of those taboo topics in the church. The belief trails a long history. I imagine the Pharaoh of vintage Egypt did not appreciate Moses coming to court with his impudent demand, "Let my people go!" He must have been a firm advocate of the separation of church and state, no doubt because to grant the demand, would have disrupted the economy of the nation. Nevertheless, Moses was there because of a Holy calling.

I mean to suggest that a biblical faith requires of us a mixture of religion and politics because it sees God's creation as a work of Divine love. Law is the political means by which we, in groups, respond to God's creative initiative to love our neighbors and care for our planet. To love in the way that God has loved us is to work toward a time when the law of the land reflects the Divine intention for the world.

The political groups of which we are unavoidably a part make decisions about those whom Jesus calls, "neighbors." These decisions are called public policy. People live and die because of them. As members of society and citizens of God's kingdom, we have a special obligation to participate actively in making these decisions of public policy.

Because the church is not a homogeneous group of people who see things eye to eye or who understand God's will in the same way, it will always be a place of lively discussion of diverse views as we try to discover what is God's will. To paraphrase James Gustafson's observation; the church is not a place of religious, much less political, agreement. It is, rather, a place of religious and political discussion in the light of Scripture. To short circuit this discussion by quoting a few isolated verses from the Bible is not only inadequate, but woefully naive. Scriptural proof-texts cannot be applied to our time as though no water has flowed under the historical bridge.

The issue of drinking, for example, is complicated, not only because of the modern technology of distillation which increases the alcoholic content of beverages, but the invention of the automobile. In the days of Jesus, a pedestrian had considerable time to get out of the way of a drunken ox cart driver. Today, travel is vastly different as are the issues involved. They do not lend themselves to the advice of writers for whom speeding automobiles and souped-up horsepower did not exist even in their wildest flights of imagination.

What does it mean to love my neighbor in a labor-management negotiation over wages and working conditions? Who is my neighbor? Is it the person across the bargaining table from me or is it those whom I represent and to whom I am responsible? What would Jesus do in such a situation? I must confess, I do not know and neither does anyone else. The Bible never envisioned big business much less labor unions.

We will, therefore, be left to our own best judgment about the question. We must risk some answer, but it will be a risk of faith and no doubt other Christians will see the matter differently. Hopefully we will make our decisions in the best light of our faith at the time, and not cop out by compartmentalizing it into worlds of the sacred and the secular; never the twain to meet. We can expect that when politics and religion mix in the arena of faith, as indeed they must, emotions will be ignited and people will get involved. But no one will be bored - a condition sadly present in many churches today. Religious discourse will be heated because it will matter. It will be relevant and carry consequences.

For those who want a biblical precedent for such a model of the church, let me suggest the motley group of disciples. There, following Jesus along the dusty roads of Galilee, was Matthew, the tax collector. His income was dependent upon retaining the Roman political party in power. He was a company man and voted a straight ticket. There, too, was Simon the Zealot, trudging side by side with Matthew on those hot dusty roads. Like Matthew he was also a disciple of Jesus. But his political persuasion led him to become a terrorist. Zealots were dedicated to the violent resistance of Roman oppression including the overthrow of the government. On any normal day, or dark night, Simon would have slipped a knife between the ribs of Matthew the tax collector, and done it to the glory of God! And Matthew would have turned Simon in to the authorities as a revolutionary. Yet there they were. Both of them. Side by side. Disciples of Jesus, not because they agreed with one another, but because they were both seeking to be obedient to the calling of discipleship. What is fascinating is that there is not a shred of evidence to suggest that either of them changed their political views. Assumptions to the contrary bring unwarranted presuppositions to the text. That which bound them together was not agreement about religion or politics but the fact that each of them, in his own way, was following Jesus. Which, in turn, meant they had to trust one another's faith and ethics even though they did not agree with either. Imagine the heated arguments they must have had as they walked and talked together! Never a dull moment!

The trouble with most churches today is that there is no evidence of that kind of diversity. Many church leaders, not to mention their constituents, find any difference of opinion, and certainly conflict, to be very threatening. They seek to avoid it at all costs, either by denying it or burying it. Consequently we have successfully screened out the differences or suppressed them in the name of peace and unity. The result is counterfeit love because it lacks political dimension.

The point to be gained is crucial. The unity of the church is not found in the oneness of our agreement - political or religious - but in our common allegiance to Jesus Christ. That which binds us together as a community of faith is our common desire to be obedient to God's will which as Luke reminds us is to love our neighbor - and do it now!

Christian faith is on trial in the eyes of the world. It looks at the church to see if we put our practice where our proclamation is. Our claim is that God was in Christ reconciling the world. Not merely forgiving it; reconciling it. Forgiveness moves in the direction of the righteous to the sinner and, thereby, maintains in many subtle ways the distinctions and the rifts between them. Reconciliation, on the other hand, is accomplished when equals who differ are able to accept, though not necessarily agree with, one another.

What usually happens in human relations, and certainly church relations, is not reconciliation in the midst of differences but the elimination of all differences. Not conflict managed creatively, but conflict denied. Churches either do not allow conflict; screening out certain practices, people, or beliefs, or they pretend that there are no differences and call themselves a fellowship of love simply because disagreements are not taken seriously. In neither case is reconciliation practiced. Because believers are not encouraged to disagree they do not know what to do with their differences. They become frustrated because they feel their views are not valued. They discover there is no room for them in the community of believers and tend to become bitter because they are not part of the power structure which successfully imposes its will on everyone else. As a result the differences go underground where they work as a cancer sapping the energy of the community of faith or erupt in open schism. Or they drop out altogether. Or they start another denomination.

If the church cannot demonstrate the reconciling power of Christ to the world, it will never be able to convince the world that it has any good news to offer. The world with all of its pluralism of perspectives and variety of viewpoints, will not be impressed by anything the church has to say as long as it sees simply another group of homogeneous people who enjoy scratching one another's backs. There are plenty of groups for bright bridge players or happy hymn singers.

But if the world sees a lively discussion of differences taking place within a fellowship of love, where the discipline of trust carries across the abyss of disagreement, it may take a second look. If the world sees the Word that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, Democrat nor Republican - sees that Word become flesh, it just may be convinced that there is something to this faith that we profess.

The church is a community of faith practicing godly love. We are called to be lovers. Christians do not leave their politics at the door of the church as they enter because the church is that group of Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives who is learning to be good Samaritans and love our neighbors in need.

C.S.S Publishing Co., FIRE IN THE HOLE, by W. Robert McClelland

Overview and Insights · Relating to People, to Jesus, and to the Father (10:25–11:13)

This section focuses on relationships. A lawyer tests Jesus with a question about how to gain eternal life. Jesus draws out the proper answer: love God and love people (Lev. 19:18; Deut. 6:5). Wanting to “justify himself,” the lawyer asks Jesus to define “neighbor” (10:29). In response, Jesus gives the parable of the Good Samaritan, in which we see the principle that love for another perso…

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Luke 10:25-37 · The Parable of the Good Samaritan

25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

26 "What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?"

27 He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' "

28 "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."

29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"

36 "Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"

37 The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him." Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise."

Commentary · The Parable of the Good Samaritan

In the telling of the parable of the good Samaritan (10:25–37) the lawyer wants to involve Jesus in a theological argument over what is necessary for eternal life (10:25). Instead of answering the question, Jesus directly asks the lawyer for his point of view. The lawyer responds by citing Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18; eternal life is inherited when one loves God with the totality of one’s being and one’s neighbor as oneself. Jesus agrees with this response (cf. Mark 12:28–33) but forces the discussion into the practical realm by saying, “Do this and you will live” (10:28). Some have thought that Jesus is speaking only hypothetically here because this answer would contradict salvation by faith. This is incorrect, for true faith always manifests itself in works (cf. James 2:14–26). The lawyer’s attempt at self-justification (10:29) probably stems from his realization that he is not fulfilling the twofold commandment, and his question leads into Jesus’s parable. The road from Jerusalem to Jericho was 17 miles long, and a traveler would descend 3,300 feet. Jericho lies 770 feet below sea level. Lonely roads were a prime place for robbers to strike (10:30). Both a priest and a Levite pass by when they see the wounded man (10:31–32). The priest would probably be returning from his time of service in the Jerusalem temple. Levites aided priests in the temple by carrying out minor duties related to the temple and its cult. The priest and Levite may have avoided the man because they thought he was dead, and they did not want to become ritually unclean. More probably, they were fearful of the robbers attacking them also. Jesus surprises his listeners by saying that a Samaritan helps the wounded man, for Samaritans were implacable enemies of the Jews (cf. Luke 9:51–56; John 4:9). It is interesting that Jesus does not say in the parable that Jews ought to love all people, even Samaritans. Instead, he does a more shocking thing. He uses the “unclean” Samaritan as an example of what neighborly love is. The Samaritan demonstrates his love in a practical way (10:34–35). In the ancient world, oil and wine were commonly used to soften wounds and as an antiseptic. Jesus exposes the real issue in this parable (10:36). Who is my neighbor? is not the question, but rather, am I a neighbor? The lawyer asked a calculating question (10:29) designed to exclude some from love’s grasp. Jesus’s story shows that love does not have any calculable limits. It may be significant that the lawyer does not say “the Samaritan” (10:37).

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

Big Idea: There are no limits to the disciple’s duty to love other people, even the most unlikely.

Understanding the Text

On Jesus’s journey to Jerusalem, which began in 9:51, much attention is focused on the nature and demands of discipleship. Here a question from someone outside the disciple group prompts Jesus to illustrate the central demand of discipleship by telling one of his best-loved parables. The famous “summary of the law” in the twofold demand to love God and to love one’s neighbor occurs in all three Synoptic Gospels, but Luke’s presentation of it is distinctive in two ways: first, it is the questioner, not Jesus, who first offers the summary; second, Jesus provides extensive comment on it in the form of the parable of the good Samaritan. The recent hostile reception of Jesus and his disciples by a Samaritan village (9:51–56) provides a telling backdrop to a parable that depends for its effect on the enmity between Jews and Samaritans.

Historical and Cultural Background

The mutual hostility between Jews and Samaritans goes back to the separation of Israel into the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah after the death of Solomon. It reached a peak in the attempts of the Samaritans to prevent the reestablishment of the kingdom of Judah under Ezra and Nehemiah. The separate Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim was destroyed by the Jewish king Hyrcanus in the second century BC, and Samaritans had desecrated the Jerusalem temple during Jesus’s boyhood. For the continuing standoff, see John 4:9. Luke’s Gospel is remarkable in that both here and in 17:11–19 a Samaritan is favorably contrasted with Jews (compare Matt. 10:5, where that Gospel’s only reference to Samaritans is wholly negative).

Rabbinic writings contain a number of attempts to summarize the demands of the 613 commandments of the Mosaic law in a few key texts (especially b. Mak. 24a, where surprisingly the chosen texts are not from the Torah itself, as here, but from the psalms and the prophets), but only Jesus (and his questioner here) seems to have brought together Deuteronomy 6:5 (“Love the Lord your God”) and Leviticus 19:18 (“Love your neighbor as yourself”) for this purpose.

Interpretive Insights

10:25 an expert in the law. This is perhaps a more highly trained professional than the normal scribes (NIV: “teachers of the law”), but the terms may be merely synonymous (see on 11:37–54). The question is probing (“to test Jesus”) but not overtly hostile, and Jesus’s acceptance of the lawyer’s answer suggests a more positive rapport than in most such encounters.

what must I do to inherit eternal life? An identical question will be asked by the rich ruler in 18:18 (and will receive a similarly searching and pragmatic response). The actual phrase “eternal life” occurs elsewhere in Luke only in 18:30, but it goes to the heart of Jesus’s message of salvation. This is not a legal nicety; it is a fundamental spiritual issue.

10:27 Love the Lord your God . . . Love your neighbor as yourself. Deuteronomy 6:5 was very familiar as part of the Shema, recited twice daily as a sort of creed by all pious Jews; it is its combination with Leviticus 19:18 that produces a potent new manifesto for godly living. The lawyer had asked for something to “do.” His choice of texts does indeed provide a central ethical principle, but it goes far beyond mere ethics by prescribing the relationship with God that underlies all godly behavior. It is remarkable that Luke allows the lawyer, rather than Jesus himself (as in Matthew and Mark), to utter this innovative and far-reaching summary of the law.

10:28 Do this and you will live. Is eternal life therefore to be “earned” by how we behave? But to love God with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind is much more than adopting a code of behavior; it is a spiritual relationship that affects all aspects of our life.

10:29 who is my neighbor? The questioner, however, focuses only on the second, more directly ethical, principle. As a lawyer, he wants his obligations spelled out with the limits clearly defined. In the Old Testament “neighbor” usually means a member of one’s own community, a fellow Israelite (extended in Lev. 19:33–34 to include foreigners resident within Israel), and it was assumed that the same standards need not be applied to one’s relations with people outside the community (cf. Matt. 5:43–47). So exactly who is it that I am commanded to love? Jesus has already given a provocative answer to this question in 6:27–36; now he puts it in the form of a story.

10:30 A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho. This steep descent of some seventeen miles through a desolate rocky area, connecting two wealthy cities, offered ample opportunity for bandits. The audience would assume that the unidentified traveler in this area is Jewish.

10:31 A priest . . . passed by on the other side. Coming away from the temple in a state of ritual purity, the priest perhaps was concerned to avoid contracting impurity by contact with what looked like (or might soon become) a dead body. In any case, it is always safer not to involve oneself in another person’s problems—and besides, the bandits might still be lurking nearby.

10:32 So too, a Levite. This person is a temple helper, thus a lesser personage than a priest, but also perhaps concerned with ritual purity. Both priest and Levite represent the pious elite from whom exemplary behavior might be expected.

10:33 But a Samaritan. A Jewish audience, having heard Jesus poke fun at the religious professionals, would expect the next character to be a Jewish layman or local rabbi, whose more humane response would put the priest and the Levite to shame. That might have provoked an irreverent chuckle. The introduction instead of a Samaritan, far outside his own territory, was as deliberately shocking as if a Southern preacher before the Civil War had set up a black hero to shame the pillars of white society.

10:34 brought him to an inn and took care of him. A Samaritan had good reason to be cautious of the reception that he might meet in a Jewish inn (presumably in Jericho), but this traveler’s evident familiarity with the innkeeper (10:35) suggests that he was a regular visitor whose wealth no doubt outweighed his dubious racial origin. Even so, he was a brave man, since to turn up with a badly wounded Jew thrown across his donkey was to invite dangerous misunderstanding.

10:35 he took out two denarii. This is about two days’ wages (cf. Matt. 20:2), enough to pay for a few days in the fairly basic accommodation at the inn. But the traveler’s care extends even to the possibility that a longer stay might be needed. His “compassion” (10:33) is not just impulsive; it is practical and thought through.

10:36 Which . . . was a neighbor to the man? In Leviticus 19:18 the “neighbor” is the one to be loved, and in that sense the “neighbor” in the story should be the wounded man. But Jesus sees the neighborly relation as reciprocal. A Jewish audience would regard it as particularly humiliating to receive such extravagant love from a Samaritan, of all people, so that Jesus’s concept of neighborliness goes far beyond a patronizing benevolence shown by the chosen people to those less fortunate.

10:37 The one who had mercy on him. Did the lawyer find the word “Samaritan” too uncomfortable to say directly? His words read literally, “the one who did the mercy with him,” an unusual expression that draws out the essentially practical nature of “mercy” (the priest and Levite may have felt pity, but they did nothing) and leads directly into the powerful application: “Go and do likewise.”

Theological Insights

Jesus’s debates with religious leaders are usually hostile, but here we see him in essential agreement with a legal expert. This summary of the law, offered by the lawyer and approved by Jesus, could hardly be faulted (see the admiring response of the scribe in Mark 12:32–33). It is not in his basic understanding of the law that Jesus was out on a limb, but in the radical comprehensiveness of the way he applied it. This parable subverts not the ethical demand of the law, but the Jewish sense of ethnic superiority.

The two chosen texts (Deut. 6:5 and Lev. 19:18) suitably sum up the two main aspects of religious duty, as expressed in the two “tables” of the Decalogue, one’s duty to God and one’s duty to other people. For other New Testament statements of the primary importance of love in fulfilling the law, see Romans 13:8–10; Galatians 5:14; James 2:8 (all of which focus on Lev. 19:18), and compare Jesus’s own summary in Matthew 7:12.

The parable of the good Samaritan, however, is not primarily a call to universal benevolence; rather, it is a challenge to social and ethnic stereotyping. For a Jew to be kind to a Samaritan might be unnatural, but such an act could afford a smug sense of superior goodness. But to be the recipient of unconditional love from a Samaritan would take a typical Jew far outside the comfort zone, since it challenges the very basis of Jewish identity as the true people of God. This parable, properly understood, is one of the most powerful challenges to racism in the Bible.

Teaching the Text

Ask most people what the name “Samaritan” suggests, and you will probably get an answer about going out of your way to help people in need. Samaritans are by definition “good.” That is precisely the opposite of what Jesus’s original audience would have thought, and it is important to communicate the hostility that the term would arouse in a Jewish audience. The parable is, of course, a fine example of helping someone in need, but that is not its main point, and the teacher should aim to expand the listeners’ awareness of its message. For this, it is important to read it in its context, as the answer to the lawyer’s question, “And who is my neighbor?” Try to identify an analogous group or ethnicity that would provoke a similar response for your audience. Some possibilities include an avowed atheist, a Mormon missionary, or a radical Islamist.

It would be easy to let the parable dominate the discussion, but loving one’s neighbor is only the second part of the love command in 10:27. Consider what it means to “love God.” How does this work out in relation to the four aspects of human life listed: “heart,” “soul,” “strength,” and “mind.” And what are the implications of loving your neighbor “as yourself”? Is Luke 6:31 relevant? Can the way we use the word “love” in our modern climate of thought become a hindrance to grasping the full implications of the dual love command?

The congregation or group could be invited to consider how far Jesus’s story reflects the nature of his own mission as Savior, coming to a lost and helpless world that has rejected him.

Illustrating the Text

Believers are called upon to show compassion to anyone who is in need.

Autobiography: Radiance in the Gulag, by Nijole Sudanaite. Sister Sudanaite, a Lithuanian Catholic, was arrested by the KGB for her work. This book, often compared to The Diary of Anne Frank, is her account of her arrest and exile in a Siberian labor camp, where she endured endless indignities and deprivations. Despite the hardship, her spirit remained strong and resolute, and she continually gave testimony to the God she believed in. While in the labor camps, people who knew her situation sent her care packages. In the camp, prisoners had to pay for many things out of their very limited wages, including housing and even to receive packages. Nevertheless, Nijole paid the fee, repackaged the things she received, and sent them to other Christians she perceived were suffering more than she was. As a believer in terrible circumstances she was still finding a way to show compassion to those in need.

Commentary: Preaching the Parables: From Responsible Interpretation to Powerful Proclamation, by Craig L. Blomberg. Blomberg writes,

Obviously there is an example here that we are supposed to imitate. . . . But do what likewise? Jesus could hardly expect twenty-first-century Americans to find a donkey, secure some oil and wine, look for every needy person, transport them to the local innkeeper, and pay him with two silver coins. We have to ask what a contemporization, what a modern equivalent to this passage might look like.

He goes on to say that the first thing that comes to mind is helping someone whose car has broken down on the road. However, he also notes that he has no mechanical ability. Then he tells about the time when he and a friend were driving on a snow-packed road in Yellowstone Park, and their car spun off the road into a ditch. A man with a truck came along and hauled them back onto the road. “The road that Jesus describes,” he writes, “was probably far more like that semi-isolated, snow-packed, slippery road in Yellowstone” than the streets and roads that he drives on most of the time. However, finally, what is crucial, he says, is that our attitude, no matter what a person’s need, be like that of the Samaritan—full of compassion. We must not become calloused.1

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

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Compassion

Love for those who suffer. The OT often refers to God’s compassion, especially toward those who, because of their sinfulness, deserve the opposite treatment. In Exod. 33:19 Yahweh takes pity on the Israelites after they have rebelled, making an idol for themselves and praising it for their deliverance. He renews his covenant with them, but he reminds them of his sovereignty in doing so: “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion” (cf. Rom. 9:15).

The NT points to God’s compassion at significant junctures in the Gospels and the Epistles. Jesus himself has compassion for the crowds who “were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd” (Matt. 9:36). He takes pity on the crowds, healing their sick and feeding them miraculously (14:14 21; cf. 15:32). The same connection between compassion and healing occurs in Matt. 20:34; Mark 1:41, this time on an individual level. The apostle Paul underscores this attribute of God, raising it to a title of sorts. The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is “the Father of compassion and the God of all comfort” (2 Cor. 1:3). James says that the Lord is “full of compassion and mercy” (5:11), and John depicts God as one who will wipe away every tear caused by persecution and trial (Rev. 7:17; 21:4). Because God is always dealing with broken sinners, his compassion for them coincides with his love (see Ps. 145:8); and this rescuing of the guilty sets an example for his people. They must go and do likewise, loving the unlovely, unwise, and even unrighteous.

Heart

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jericho

Jericho, “the city of palm trees” (Deut. 34:3; Judg. 3:13; 2 Chron. 28:15), is located about four miles west of the Jordan River and about ten miles north of the Dead Sea. It is located about 850 feet below sea level on a narrow plain across from one of the major Jordan River crossings. Its location was crucial to protect this important east-west route. Immediately behind the city the land rises quickly into a mountainous region known as the Judean Wilderness.

Jericho is possibly the earliest continuously inhabited city in the world, with archaeological finds going back perhaps as early as 9000 BC. Jericho is most famous for being the first city defeated by the Israelites during the conquest under Joshua (Josh. 5:13 6:27).

Jerusalem

The central city and capital of ancient Israel. Throughout its history, the city has also been referred to variously as Zion, Jebus, Mount Moriah, and the City of David.

The name “Jerusalem” occurs more than 650 times in the OT, particularly in the history of Israel, and in the NT more than 140 times. The OT prophets used the city as a symbol of God’s dealing with his people and his plan. Jerusalem is viewed collectively as God’s abode, his chosen place, and his sovereignty, while its destruction is also representative of God’s judgment on apostasy among his people (e.g., Jer. 7:1 15; 26:18–19; Mic. 3:12). The rebuilding of the city represents the hope and grace of God (e.g., Isa. 40:1–2; 52:1, 7–8; 60–62; Jer. 30:18–19; 31:38–39; Ezek. 5:5; Hag. 2:6–8; Zech. 8:3–8). Like the writers of the OT, the NT authors spoke of Jerusalem in metaphorical and eschatological terms. Paul used Jerusalem to contrast the old and the new covenants (Gal. 4:24–26), and the writer of Hebrews used it as the place of the new covenant, sealed through the blood of Jesus (Heb. 12:22–24). In Revelation the concept of a new Jerusalem is related to the future kingdom of God (Rev. 3:12; 21:1–22:5).

Jerusalem is located in the Judean hill country, about 2,700 feet above sea level. It borders the Judean desert to the east. The city expanded and contracted in size over various hills and valleys. There are two major ridges (Eastern and Western Hills) separated by the Tyropoeon Valley. The Eastern Hill contains a saddle, the Ophel Hill, and north of this is the traditional site of Mount Moriah, where later the temple was constructed. The Eastern Hill was always occupied, since the only water source is the Gihon spring, located in the Kidron Valley. Two other ridges were important for the city, as they were used for extramural suburbs, cemeteries, and quarries. To the east is the Mount of Olives, which is separated from the Eastern Hill by the Kidron Valley. To the west of the Western Hill is the Central Ridge Route, separated by the Hinnom Valley.

Law

In general, Torah (Law) may be subdivided into three categories: judicial, ceremonial, and moral, though each of these may influence or overlap with the others. The OT associates the “giving of the Torah” with Moses’ first divine encounter at Mount Sinai (Exod. 19 23) following the Israelites’ deliverance from the land of Egypt, though some body of customary legislation existed before this time (Exod. 18). These instructions find expansion and elucidation in other pentateuchal texts, such as Leviticus and Deut. 12–24, indicating that God’s teachings were intended as the code of conduct and worship for Israel not only during its wilderness wanderings but also when it settled in the land of Canaan following the conquest.

More specifically, the word “law” often denotes the Ten Commandments (or “the Decalogue,” lit., the “ten words”) (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4) that were delivered to Moses (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). These commandments reflect a summary statement of the covenant and may be divided into two parts, consistent with the two tablets of stone on which they were first recorded: the first four address the individual’s relationship to God, and the last six focus on instructions concerning human relationships. Despite the apparent simplistic expression of the Decalogue, the complexity of these guidelines extends beyond individual acts and attitudes, encompassing any and all incentives, enticements, and pressures leading up to a thing forbidden. Not only should the individual refrain from doing the prohibited thing, but also he or she is obligated to practice its opposite good in order to be in compliance.

Mercy

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

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

Oil

Almost all the oil to which the Bible refers is olive oil. Oil was used primarily for cooking, but also for medicinal purposes, cosmetics, lighting, and religious ceremonies.

Oil was one of the major export products of Palestine, with huge economic impact on Israel and Judah. Oil often was used as currency for other needed materials (Deut. 7:13; Neh. 5:11; Luke 16:6). For example, Elisha performed a miracle with oil to help a widow pay her debts (2 Kings 4:7). Oil was kept as part of the royal stores (2 Kings 20:13; 2 Chron. 32:28). There are dozens of ostraca that detail the trading, bartering, and selling of oil.

Oil was one of the main ingredients for cooking. A typical meal consisted of flour pressed together with oil and fried with oil on a griddle (1 Kings 17:12 16). This was also the typical way in which grain offerings were made at the tabernacle and temple (Lev. 2:1, 4–7). Oil was also used in lamps because it burned cleanly and produced bright light (2 Kings 4:10; Matt. 25:3–8). Lamps were used throughout the house. Small lamps, often no larger than a hand, were used to give people light when they were walking and traveling at night. In such instances, extra oil usually was carried as a reserve (Matt. 25:1–13). Both the tabernacle and the temple used olive oil to light their lamps. The finest oil was also used for sacrifices at the tabernacle (Exod. 27:20; 29:40; Lev. 24:2; Num. 28:5).

Oil was used cosmetically as well. For instance, oil was put in the hair for beauty (Eccles. 9:8). Oil was also the normal base for perfumes, mixed with a variety of spices (Esther 2:12). The tabernacle had special anointing oil that was mixed to make a perfume (Exod. 30:25). Oil was also used medicinally to help heal wounds, either by mixing it with other substances or by itself to help seal a wound (Luke 10:34). The elders of the church were commissioned to pray for and anoint the sick with oil (James 5:14).

Soul

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

Wine

An alcoholic beverage made primarily by fermenting grapes, wine was valued as both a pleasurable and a functional drink (Ps. 104:15; 1 Tim. 5:23) and therefore a staple of ceremonial practice and social gatherings (Exod. 29:40; John 2:1 3). For this reason, wine is a symbol of God’s blessing (Gen. 27:28; John 2:11), particularly for his covenant people (Isa. 25:6; 55:1; 1 Cor. 11:25). Yet the Bible also warns against the abuse of alcohol, which can lead to drunkenness and debauchery (Prov. 9:4–5; Eph. 5:18). Such abuse becomes a symbol of God’s curse for disobedience (Hos. 4:11; 9:2; Matt. 27:48–49).

Direct Matches

Coins

Pieces of metal stamped with a particular impression, used as a medium of exchange. From time immemorial people used animals, grain, or other commodities to barter (Hos. 3:2), pay taxes (1 Sam. 8:15), or as a measure of wealth (Job 1:3). Substituting smaller, more easily handled pieces of precious metal had obvious advantages. Gradually people used precious metal such as silver or gold along with commodities (Gen. 20:14–16) and then in place of them (37:28) as a means of payment. Such metal had been refined, but it could have been in most any form (rings, bars, ingots, dust) as long as it weighed the appropriate amount. Local and international standards developed to regulate the weights, and later the concept grew in popularity to use standard, authorized, clearly stamped pieces of precious metal—coins.

Old Testament. Minting of coins may have begun as far back as the late eighth century BC, and it gradually spread throughout the known world. The first coins apparently were made in Asia Minor using electrum, a natural alloy of gold and silver.

When the Persians took over much of the ancient Near East in the sixth century BC, the use of coins spread, and Persian coins came to the land of the Bible. At the end of the Hebrew Bible there is mention of large quantities of Persian coins called “darics” (1 Chron. 29:7; Ezra 8:27), also translated as “drachmas” (NASB) or “drams” (KJV) (Ezra 2:69; Neh. 7:70–72). These darics were stamped with the likeness of Darius the Great (521–486 BC) and were minted from gold and occasionally silver. At about the same time, silver tetradrachmas (four-drachma coins) from Athens made their way to the western shores of the Mediterranean. Local imitations of this coin were stamped with “YHD” to represent the province of Judah.

New Testament. Coins appear dozens of times in the NT; some have Hellenistic roots, while others come from the periods of Hasmonean or Roman rule.

For several centuries after Alexander the Great conquered the ancient Near East (fourth century BC), coins with the images of Alexander or his Seleucid or Ptolemaic successors were circulated in Judea. In particular, silver shekels from the Phoenician port cities of Tyre and Sidon enjoyed wide usage for a long time. Also called a “stater,” the shekel or four-drachma coin recovered by Peter from the fish’s mouth (Matt. 17:27) may have been such a Tyrian coin. Many or all of the thirty silver coins that the chief priests gave Judas for betraying Jesus (Matt. 26:15; 27:3) probably were Tyrian shekels as well, since this coin came to be the accepted currency at the temple in Jerusalem and the priests would have had a good supply of them.

After the Hellenistic rulers lost control of Judea during the rebellion led by the Maccabean or Hasmonean family in the second century BC, the Jews could mint their own coins for the first time. The honor of producing the first Jewish coin apparently goes to John Hyrcanus I (134–104 BC), son of Simon and nephew of Judas Maccabeus. Simon’s modest bronze lepton (pl. lepta), or prutah, has an inscription on one side and two cornucopias and a pomegranate on the other. Use of such agricultural symbols apparently fulfilled two purposes: it portrayed the fertility of the land that God had given his people, and it helped the Jews avoid depicting people on coins, as the Greeks and later the Romans would do. During this period devout Jews avoided such images in order to help fulfill the second commandment (Exod. 20:4), to avoid graven images. Hyrcanus I’s son Alexander Jannaeus (103–76 BC) minted great quantities of different types of bronze lepta, still often found in excavations in Israel today. These coins remained in circulation for many years, probably through the ministry of Jesus. Thus, the two small coins for which Jesus commended the widow for donating to the temple treasury (Mark 12:42; Luke 21:2) may well have been lepta of Alexander Jannaeus. The tiny lepton, typically smaller than a dime and worth only 1/400 of a shekel, also appears in Luke 12:59.

It is also possible that the aforementioned lepta were not minted by Alexander Jannaeus, since later rulers, including the Jewish king Herod the Great (40–4 BC), also minted large numbers of similar small bronze coins. Though not known for his piety, Herod continued to avoid human representations on his coins. For the most part, so did his sons and the later Roman procurators (including Pontius Pilate [governed AD 26–36]), who ruled Judea before the revolt in AD 66.

Other Roman coins, such as the silver denarius (pl. denarii) minted outside Judea, clearly did not avoid human representation, however. Jesus’ request for a coin with Caesar’s image and inscription (Matt. 22:15–22) refers to the denarius. The denarius in Jesus’ day could have portrayed the emperor Tiberius (r. AD 14–37) or even Augustus (r. 27 BC–AD 14), whose coins were probably still in circulation. The silver denarius came to represent the daily wage of a common laborer, as clearly shown in the parable of laborers (Matt. 20:1–16). The denarius also appears in many other passages, although modern translators sometimes use a more interpretive expression (“two silver coins” for “two denarii” in Luke 10:35; “a year’s wages” for “three hundred denarii” in Mark 14:5).

Although many of the references discussed above contain specific terms that can be identified with coins known from history, others cannot. General terms meaning “coins” or “pieces of money” sometimes appear, as when Jesus scattered the coins of the money changers (John 2:15), or the rather common term for silver that appears frequently and is often translated as “money” (Matt. 28:12; Luke 9:3) or “silver” (Acts 3:6; 1 Pet. 1:18) as well as “silver coins” (Matt. 27:3 GW).

Heart

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

Mind and Emotions

Mind. The heart refers to the mind, but not the brain, and in these cases does not involve human physiology. It is a metaphor, and while the neurophysiology of the heart may be interesting in its own right, it has no bearing on this use of language. We also should not confuse some modern English idioms or distinctions as being related to the biblical viewpoint. The Bible does not make a distinction between “head knowledge” and “heart knowledge,” nor does it employ language making the “heart” good or superior and the “head/mind” bad, inferior, or merely intellectual. It does not prize the emotional over the thoughtful; it has a more integrated viewpoint.

Deuteronomy 6:5 issues the command to love God with all one’s heart, soul, and strength. When the command is repeated in the Gospels, it occurs in three variations (Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). Common to all three is the addition of the word “mind.” The Gospel writers want to be sure that the audience hears Jesus adding “mind,” but this addition is based on the fact that the meaning of the Hebrew word for “heart” includes the mind.

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

Idioms

The word “heart” also appears in several idioms.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Inherit

Inheritance is an important concept that the Bible uses in several ways.

Family. In the ancient world every culture had customs for the passing of wealth and possessions from one generation to the next. In ancient Israel special provisions were made for inheriting land upon the death of the father. The firstborn son received a double portion; the rest was divided equally among the remaining sons. If a man lacked sons, priority went to the following in order: daughters, brothers, father’s brothers, next of kin (Num. 27:1–11). The OT provides guidance for additional circumstances (Gen. 38:8–9; Num. 36:6; Lev. 25:23–24; Deut. 21:15–17; 25:5–10; Ruth 2:20; 3:9–13; 4:1–12), with an overriding concern for the stability of the family and the retention of the land within a tribe. Under Roman law during the NT period, an heir had legal standing even while the father was still alive; his status was based on birth or adoption rather than the father’s death.

Old Testament. Even more prominent than family inheritance is the assertion that God gave the land of Canaan to Abraham and his descendants as an inheritance (Gen. 12:7; 15:18–21; 17:8; Num. 34:1–29; Deut. 12:10). This inheritance is God’s gracious gift, not something that Israel earned by its righteousness (Deut. 9:4–7). Descriptions of the land (“flowing with milk and honey”) and its fertility portray this gift as a new Eden, where God will dwell with his people (Exod. 3:8, 17; Lev. 20:24; Num. 16:13–14; Deut. 11:9–12). In some texts the language of inheritance moves beyond the land of Canaan to an international scope. In Ps. 2:8 the anointed king recounts God saying to him, “Ask me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession.” This expansion of inheritance from the land of Canaan to the ends of the earth prepares the way for a similar expansion in the NT (see Rom. 4:13).

God’s relationship with Israel is also described in terms of inheritance. On the one hand, Israel is described as God’s inheritance (Deut. 32:9; 1 Sam. 10:1; 1 Kings 8:51–53); on the other hand, God is Israel’s inheritance (Pss. 16:5; 73:26; Jer. 10:16; 51:19). This mutuality expresses the intimacy of God’s relationship with Israel.

New Testament. Inheritance language is taken up in the NT and expanded in a variety of ways. First and foremost, Jesus Christ is the “heir of all things,” the Son to whom the Father has given all authority in heaven and on earth (Matt. 28:18–20; Heb. 1:2–5). Through their union with Christ, believers share in Christ’s inheritance (Rom. 8:17), having been qualified by the Father to share in that inheritance (Col. 1:12). What believers inherit is described in various ways: the earth (Matt. 5:5), eternal life (Luke 10:25), the kingdom (1 Cor. 6:9–10; James 2:5), salvation (Heb. 1:14), blessing (Heb. 12:17; 1 Pet. 3:9). This inheritance was enacted by the death of Christ and sealed by his blood (Heb. 9:15–28). Believers experience the benefits of this inheritance through the Spirit now (Eph. 1:14, 18), but its fullness is reserved in heaven and awaits the consummation (1 Pet. 1:4–6).

The connection between the believer’s inheritance and the Spirit is especially prominent in Paul. In Gal. 4:1–7 Paul uses a combination of exodus and legal imagery to explain the gospel. Before Christ came, God’s people were heirs under the care of guardians and trustees. But once Christ came and redeemed them from under the law, they received their full inheritance as adopted sons and daughters. Central to that inheritance is the gift of the Spirit, who cries out, “Abba, Father.” It is this gift of the Spirit that definitively marks believers as sons and daughters rather than slaves. Because believers possess the Spirit as an inheritance in fulfillment of the promise to Abraham (Gal. 3:14; cf. Isa. 44:3–5), they have moved from bondage under the law to freedom in Christ (Gal. 5:1).

Inheritance

Inheritance is an important concept that the Bible uses in several ways.

Inn

The word “inn” appears twice in most English versions of the Bible (NASB, NRSV, NKJV, ESV, HCSB, NET): in the account of the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:7) and in the parable of the good Samaritan (10:34). The former is likely a mistranslation, since the Greek term (katalyma) probably refers not to a first-century hotel (Bethlehem was too small to have an inn), but either to a “caravansary” (a stopping place for caravans) or to a “guest room” in a private home (cf. Mark 14:14; Luke 22:11; so NIV). Because of the crowds associated with the census, Joseph and Mary were forced out of human accommodations and into an area reserved for animals; the baby Jesus was laid in a feeding trough (manger). The “inn” in the story of the good Samaritan (Luke 10:30–37) represents a different Greek term (pandocheion) and likely refers to a roadside inn. The Samaritan took the wounded man here for recuperation.

Innkeeper

One who owns, manages, or serves as host at an inn. The only direct reference to an innkeeper in the OT is in an Aramaic translation (Targum) of Josh. 2:1 that designates Rahab as such (cf. Josephus, Ant. 5.8, 30). The innkeeper (Gk. pandocheus) of Luke 10:35 was paid by the good Samaritan to care for the victim of robbers along the road from Jerusalem to Jericho. No innkeeper (only the “inn” or “guest room”) is mentioned in the nativity account of Luke 2:4–7.

Man

Origins, Composition, and Constitution

Origins. The Bible is not unique in offering an account of human origins. Interesting accounts are found in Sumerian (Enki and Ninmah, Hymn to E-engurra), Akkadian (Atrahasis Epic, Enuma Elish), and Egyptian texts (Pyramid Texts, Instruction of Merikare). These texts provide a helpful window into the biblical world and show the common concern to explain the origin and role of humanity in the world.

One distinct feature of ancient Near Eastern texts is that they generally speak of human origins in a collective sense. Specialists refer to this phenomenon as polygenesis. Such a collective creation better serves the purpose of the gods, who have made the human race as a labor force. In the Bible, however, the book of Genesis describes an original human pair who are the progenitors of the human race. This phenomenon is referred to as monogenesis. Humanity is not merely created to serve and do the work of the gods. Instead, it is a special creation of God, intended to bear his image.

Composition. The composition of humanity is described in Gen. 2:7: “The Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.” Humanity is not distinct from animals in having the breath of life (1:30). Indeed, the description of the composition of humanity is also quite, well, human. Genesis describes humans as made from the dust. Dust is not fertile, nor is it pliable. It refers to the earth and that which is dead. The wordplay between “man” (’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah) appears to be a major focus of the text (2:7) and suggests that the major connection being established concerns the first humans as archetypes.

Constitution. Certain passages of Scripture have led interpreters to posit a trichotomous nature of humanity (i.e., mind, body, soul; cf. 2 Cor. 4:16; 5:1–9; 1 Thess. 5:23). Likewise, even though the Greek language can bifurcate the soul (psychē) and the body (sōma), a kind of dualism should not be inferred from this (cf. Matt. 6:25; 27:50; Luke 10:27; 2 Cor. 4:11). Either approach is foreign to the unified biblical mind-set. The only dualism in the anthropological perspective of the NT is in the nature of humanity in relation to Christ’s new creative work.

Form and Function

Form: male and female. Just as God created man (’ish), he also created woman (’ishah) (Gen. 1:26–27). Although woman is initially created as a “suitable helper” (2:18), it should be noted that the underlying Hebrew term (’ezer) is used almost exclusively in reference to God elsewhere. This suggests that “suitable helper” does not indicate a difference of essence, value, or status.

The Bible describes woman as coming from the “side” of man, probably communicating something about their equality (Gen. 2:21–22). Thus, it should be understood that just as all humanity shares a connection to the ground, so also a man shares an intimate connection with a woman. Although the phrase “one flesh” often is taken as a euphemism, it probably is a remarkably descriptive statement of the archetypal nature of Adam and Eve (cf. 2:24).

Function: image of God. The distinction between humanity and the other animals created by God is that humans are created in God’s image. The concept of the image of God, however, is not unique to the biblical text (Gen. 1:26–27; cf. Instruction of Merikare). Throughout the ancient Near East, kings were thought to actually be the image of a god. In the Christian understanding, only Christ is the image of God (2 Cor. 4:4), whereas humanity is created in the image of God. Although this may imply a kingly role with regard to humanity’s function over the rest of creation, the main parallel should be seen in how images are meant to represent a god’s presence.

Humanity in Pauline Thought

Paul’s conception of humanity is thoroughly eschatological insomuch as his vision of Christ as the image of God is identified with Christ as “risen Lord.” Christ as the image of God is the final destiny of the humanity that is “in Christ” (1 Cor. 15:23–28; 44–49; Eph. 1:9–10). Because of the effects of sin, creation has been subjected to futility (Rom. 8:19–22), and humanity to death (Rom. 5:12–14; 1 Cor. 15:21–22). Yet Paul’s outburst of “new creation” (Gal. 6:15; cf. 2 Cor. 5:17) indicates his understanding of the cosmological, and therefore anthropological, effects of being united with Christ. Indeed, if God is making the “former things” into “new things” (2 Cor. 5:17; cf. Isa. 65:17–19), this new creative act certainly impacts humanity. That reality is already partially realized in the elimination of distinctions in this present “evil age” (Gal. 1:4), for in Christ “there is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one” (Gal. 3:28; cf. 1 Cor. 12:12–13; Gen. 17). Until the end, the Christian lives in the tension of already beginning to experience the act of new creation and not yet completely disinheriting the effects of sin (Rom. 8:18–30; 2 Cor. 12:5–10).

Mercy

Behind the English translation “mercy” lie diverse biblical words in Hebrew (khesed, khanan, rakham) and in Greek (charis, eleos, oiktirmos, splanchnon). These words are also translated as “love,” “compassion,” “grace,” “favor,” “kindness,” “loving-kindness,” and so on, depending on context. Hence, a conceptual approach to the meaning of “mercy” is best.

God’s Mercy

Mercy as part of God’s character. Mercy is a distinguishing characteristic of the nature of God. God is called “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor. 1:3 NRSV [NIV: “Father of compassion”]). God is “rich in mercy” (Eph. 2:4; cf. 2 Sam. 24:14; Dan. 9:9). God’s mercy was demonstrated in his covenantal faithfulness to his people (1 Kings 8:23–24; Mic. 7:18–20). God redeemed the oppressed Israelites from slavery under Pharaoh because of his mercy, which was stirred when he heard their groaning and cry for help. Here, the rekindling of God’s mercy toward the Israelites was depicted in terms of remembering his covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Exod. 2:23–25). Mercy is a manifestation of God’s faithfulness to his covenant. Hence, God’s mercy to his covenant people never ceases (Pss. 119:132; 103:17).

God has absolute sovereignty in electing the people to whom he wills to show mercy. A classic expression appears in Exod. 33:19: “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” Paul quoted this to explain God’s sovereignty in electing Jacob as the recipient of God’s mercy (Rom. 9:13–15). God’s mercy cannot be acquired by human effort or desire (Rom. 9:16). God even ordered the Israelites to show no mercy to the Canaanites because of their corruption and idolatry (Deut. 7:2).

Diverse images are used to describe God’s mercy. God is compared to a loving father who has compassion on his children (Jer. 31:20; Mal. 3:17). “As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lord has compassion on those who fear him; for he knows how we are formed, he remembers that we are dust” (Ps. 103:13–14). God’s compassion is also compared to that of a nursing mother who feeds her baby at her breast (Isa. 49:15). The images of the loving father and the loving mother reflect closely the heart of God’s mercy toward his chosen people. God is especially merciful to the needy, the weak, the afflicted, and the oppressed (Exod. 2:23–24; Ps. 123:2–3; Isa. 49:13; Heb. 4:16). God is called “a father to the fatherless” and “a defender of widows” (Ps. 68:5). Sinners appeal for God’s mercy when they request forgiveness (Ps. 51:1). “Have mercy on me” is a common form of expression when the psalmist entreats God for his forgiveness (Pss. 41:4, 10; 51:1). God’s mercy is also shown in his act of salvation and blessing (Exod. 15:13; Deut. 13:17–18; Judg. 2:18; Eph. 2:4–5).

God’s mercy in redemptive history. Redemptive history is a successive demonstration of God’s mercy toward his chosen people. It was because of God’s mercy that he took the initiative to save fallen human beings (Gen. 3:15). Death was the due penalty for Adam and Eve (Gen. 2:17), but God preached the good news of mercy that the descendant of the woman would someday crush the head of the serpent. In Rev. 20:2 that ancient serpent in the garden of Eden is identified as “the devil, or Satan,” whose head was crushed by Jesus Christ on the cross and is bound by the coming Messiah “for a thousand years” and will be “thrown into the lake of burning sulfur” (Rev. 20:2, 10). In spite of God’s judgment on Cain, the first murderer, God showed mercy by putting a mark on him so that no one would kill him (Gen. 4:15). As the psalmist later confesses, God proves himself as the merciful God who “does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us according to our iniquities” (Ps. 103:10).

Noah and his family were saved from the judgment of the flood because of God’s special mercy toward them (Gen. 6:8). Immediately after God confused the languages of human beings because of their challenge to him (Gen. 11:1–9), God showed mercy on Abram, “a wandering Aramean” (Deut. 26:5), and designated him to be the father of his chosen people (Gen. 12:1–3). Jacob’s election originated solely from God’s mercy, as Paul pointed out by quoting Scripture: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated” (Rom. 9:13). The exodus is also the clearest evidence of God’s demonstration of mercy toward his chosen people (Exod. 2:23–25). They were saved not by their own righteousness but rather by God’s mercy on the covenant people, who suffered under the bondage of Pharaoh’s slavery. God’s mercy reached its climax when he sent his only Son, Jesus Christ, to save sinners (Rom. 5:8). It is because of God’s mercy that we are saved, not because of our righteousness (Titus 3:5).

Christ’s Mercy

Jesus’ ministry of healing and evangelism was motivated by his deep mercy and compassion toward people in physical and spiritual need (Luke 4:16–21; cf. Isa. 61:1–2). Whenever the sick appealed to his mercy, Jesus never refused to dispense it to them (Matt. 15:22; 17:14–18). For example, he healed the two blind men who entreated his mercy (Matt. 20:30–34). When a leper, kneeling before him, entreated his mercy, Jesus touched him (risking his own uncleanness according to the law) and healed him (Matt. 8:2–3). When a centurion asked for Jesus’ mercy on his sick servant, he was willing to go and heal the sick man (Matt. 8:5–13). Jesus’ mercy was aroused especially when he saw people crying for the dead, and even he shed tears (John 11:33–35). When Jesus saw a widow crying for her dead son during a funeral procession, he comforted and had compassion on her and made her son alive (Luke 7:12–15).

According to Heb. 2:17–18, Jesus became “a merciful and faithful high priest” to make atonement for the sins of his people. He is also compared to the high priest who is able to sympathize with our weaknesses because he “has been tempted in every way, just as we are” (Heb. 4:15). His high priestly work on earth was highlighted in terms of his ministry of mercy toward his people. Like God’s mercy, Jesus’ mercy was shown in his actions of salvation (Luke 19:10; Eph. 5:2; 1 Tim. 1:14–16; Titus 3:4–7), of blessing (Mark 10:13–16), and of forgiveness (Mark 2:10; Luke 23:34). Paul’s personal experience led him to confess, “He saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy” (Titus 3:5). Jesus’ character of mercy was most vividly manifested on the cross when he prayed for the forgiveness of the crucifying soldiers and the cursing crowds (Luke 23:33–37).

Human Response to God’s Mercy

What is the proper response to God’s mercy and compassion? God expects believers to show the same kind of mercy toward other people. One of the best examples is the parable of the unmerciful servant (Matt. 18:23–35). The central focus of this parable is on the unmerciful servant, to whom a tremendous mercy is shown by the king, but who refuses to show a little mercy to his fellow servant. The parable concludes with the king’s statement that no mercy will be shown to those who do not show mercy and forgiveness to others. Hence, a forgiving attitude is a must for believers, who have received immeasurable mercy from God when he forgave their sins at the time of repentance. The Lord’s Prayer also includes the believer’s forgiveness of others as being inseparably linked to the request for forgiveness from God (Matt. 6:12). Jesus affirms this idea in a subsequent statement: “For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins” (6:14–15).

Mercy is one of the eight blessings in the Beatitudes: “Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy” (Matt. 5:7). Jesus’ response to the critical Pharisees reveals that our merciful life should precede our religious life (9:13). According to the parable of the good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37), the true neighbor is the one who shows mercy to the afflicted. Its conclusion, “Go and do likewise” (10:37), requires believers to show mercy to their suffering neighbors. At the last judgment the righteous are characterized by their lives of showing mercy to the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, the unclothed, the sick, and the imprisoned (Matt. 25:37–40). In Luke 6:36, Jesus summarizes the law of mercy: “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.” According to James, “judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful”; however, “mercy triumphs over judgment” (James 2:12–13). And according to the prophets, a merciless life is characteristic of godless people (Isa. 13:18; Jer. 6:23; 21:7; 50:42; Amos 1:11–12).

It is by God’s mercy that believers can persevere during the time of suffering (2 Cor. 4:1). Their prayer is the channel through which they draw God’s mercy. Hence, the writer of Hebrews exhorts believers to “approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy” (Heb. 4:16).

Neighbor

In the OT, “neighbor” is derived from the verb “to associate with.” This is an important connection because relationships of various kinds are central to the issue of neighbor. Depending on the context, a neighbor can include a friend (2 Sam. 13:3), a rival (1 Sam. 28:17), a lover (Jer. 3:1), or a spouse (Jer. 3:20). However, “neighbor” essentially defines someone who lives and works nearby, those with shared ethical responsibilities, rather than a family member (Prov. 3:29). Eventually, “neighbor” acquired the more technical meaning of “covenant member” or “fellow Israelite” (= “brother” [Jer. 31:34]). The legal literature prohibits bearing false witness against a neighbor (Deut. 5:20) as well as coveting a neighbor’s house, animal, slave, or wife (Deut. 5:21). Fraud, stealing, or withholding from a neighbor are prohibited (Lev. 19:13; Ps. 15:3). These are the negative stipulations. The theological ethics that arise from Lev. 19 are climactic—ethically, politically, socially, and economically. Positively, Israelites are to judge their neighbors justly (Lev. 19:15), loving their neighbors as themselves (19:18). Even the resident alien is to be protected by these core moral virtues (Lev. 19:33–34; cf. Exod. 12:43–49).

When the NT addresses the topic, not surprisingly it is Lev. 19:18 that is routinely cited. Asked about the greatest commandment, Jesus quotes Lev. 19:18 as the horizontal counterpart to loving the Lord (Matt. 19:16–30). A lawyer’s question put to Jesus, “Who is my neighbor?” elicits the parable of the good Samaritan (Luke 10:29). Jesus teaches that extending mercy is more important than conveniently defining “neighbor.” A neighbor was anyone someone met in need—Jew, Gentile, or Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37). Jewish law came to define “neighbor” in purely legal terms within Judaism. Jesus addressed the limits of one’s responsibility, challenging the particularism of Judaism, denouncing prejudiced love, and including non-Jews. Beyond “in” or “out” groups, believers are now to pray for their enemies (Matt. 5:43–48). Mission work continues to expand social, political, and economic boundaries. The OT reality of relationships is still in force, but “neighbor” in the NT now prioritizes fellow believers (Rom. 13:8–10; 15:2; Gal. 6:10; Eph. 4:25; James 2:8).

Oil

Almost all the oil to which the Bible refers is olive oil. Oil was used primarily for cooking, but also for medicinal purposes, cosmetics, lighting, and religious ceremonies.

Olive oil was produced in several different ways, but there were some common characteristics of all the different production methods. Olive trees were numerous in Israel and often were cultivated and planted in groves. The Mount of Olives in Jerusalem was so named because of the large olive groves there (2 Sam. 15:30). Olives were harvested sometime in the fall by handpicking them or hitting the tree to make the olives fall (Deut. 24:20). Next, the olives were partially crushed so that the kernels (pits) could be removed without crushing them. Crushing the kernel would result in ruining the oil. Then the pits were removed by hand, and the pitted olives were crushed to procure the oil. The olives could be crushed by foot (Mic. 6:15 NRSV), by beating them with a heavy stick, or by placing them in a shallow stone trench and rolling a stone wheel over them. Finally, the crushed olives were placed in a woven sieve to allow the oil to drain out. The remains of the olives were then soaked in water and pressed at least twice more. This produced more oil, though of much lower quality. As a result, oil was sold according to its quality level. By the time of the monarchy in Israel, there were several large mills that produced large quantities of oil both for use in the country and for export. The finest quality oil—the clear, pure oil drained off before pressing—was specially processed and suitable for ceremonial use.

Oil was one of the major export products of Palestine, with huge economic impact on Israel and Judah. Oil often was used as currency for other needed materials (Deut. 7:13; Neh. 5:11; Luke 16:6). For example, Elisha preformed a miracle with oil to help a widow pay her debts (2 Kings 4:7). Oil was kept as part of the royal stores (2 Kings 20:13; 2 Chron. 32:28). There are dozens of ostraca that detail the trading, bartering, and selling of oil.

Oil was one of the main ingredients for cooking. A typical meal consisted of flour pressed together with oil and fried with oil on a griddle (1 Kings 17:12–16). This was also the typical way in which grain offerings were made at the tabernacle and temple (Lev. 2:1, 4–7). Oil was also used in lamps because it burned cleanly and produced bright light (2 Kings 4:10; Matt. 25:3–8). Lamps were used throughout the house. Small lamps, often no larger than a hand, were used to give people light when they were walking and traveling at night. In such instances, extra oil usually was carried as a reserve (Matt. 25:1–13). Both the tabernacle and the temple used olive oil to light their lamps. The finest oil was also used for sacrifices at the tabernacle (Exod. 27:20; 29:40; Lev. 24:2; Num. 28:5).

Pity

To pity someone is to feel or express compassion toward that person. Of the two main Hebrew verbs translated “pity,” khus describes an attitude of merciful kindness toward a person (Deut. 25:12), and khamal refers to sparing someone from something negative (Lam. 2:2). When khus and khamal occur in the same sentence, the NIV generally translates them “pity” and “spare” respectively (e.g., Deut. 13:8; Ezek. 7:4). The Greek eleeō can also be translated “to have mercy” (Luke 17:13 NASB), while splanchnizomai graphically depicts compassion (Luke 10:33), as splanchna, from which splanchnizomai is derived, is the Greek word for “intestines” (compare English: “My heart goes out to you”).

Most often, when “pity” occurs in the Bible, lack of pity is under discussion. The Israelites were to show no pity to the Canaanites (Deut. 7:16), nor were they to pity those who violated the Mosaic law (Deut. 19:21; 25:11–12). God repeatedly warned the Israelites that he would show them no pity when he judged them (Isa. 9:17; Jer. 13:14; Ezek. 7:4). However, God does express pity (Ezek. 16:5–6; Zech. 8:14–15), particularly through Jesus Christ (Matt. 18:27; Mark 9:22; Luke 17:13–14) and Christians (1 John 3:17).

Samaritans

According to the Bible, the Samaritans are the descendants of the peoples whom Sargon II settled in Samaria after he conquered it and the northern Israelites (see also Samaria). As such, they were not quite Jewish, not quite Gentile. Although there is a Samaritan religious sect, it is a mistake to equate Samaritans in the Bible with one of the sectarians in every instance. Samaritans are mentioned rarely in the OT; for example, 2 Kings 17:29 reports that the Samaritans worshiped the gods that they brought from their home countries at high places that they made.

The NT mentions the Samaritans. The story of the woman at the well in John 4 depicts Jesus ministering to a Samaritan. We learn in this passage (John 4:9) that Jews like Jesus did not eat or drink from the same vessel as a Samaritan since they believed it would render them ritually unclean [see NET: “For Jews use nothing in common with Samaritans”]. One of the chief points of contention between Jews and Samaritans is highlighted in this passage: Samaritans believe that Mount Gerizim is God’s chosen worship site, not Zion. Also alluded to here is the Samaritans’ belief in a “returning one” (Aram. taheb), who will guide the Samaritans to repentance and reestablish proper worship. In John 8:48 Jesus’ opponents level a charge against him, asking him if he is not indeed a Samaritan and possessed by a demon.

In the Synoptic Gospels, Samaritans are variously depicted as being included in Jesus’ ministry (Luke 9:52) or excluded from it (Matt. 10:5). In other places in the Gospels, Samaritans are used as a foil by which Jesus indicts his listeners for not following God as well as they should. His Jewish audience would not have missed the point in his parable when the Samaritan proves to be a more compassionate neighbor than the priest or Levite (Luke 10:25–37), or when Jesus heals ten lepers and only one, a Samaritan, returns to praise God and give thanks (17:16). Given Luke’s emphasis on the inclusive nature of the Gospel, his mentioning of Samaritans in such positive ways highlights that emphasis.

In the book of Acts, Luke continues to use the Samaritans as an example of how the Gospel is for everyone. Peter and John, after confirming that Samaria had received and responded to the word, preached in the villages of the Samaritans (Acts 8:14–25).

Scholars are not certain when Jews and Samaritans became two different religious groups, but most likely this happened when John Hyrcanus destroyed the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim in 128 BC. Although there were tensions before this, as is evident in Nehemiah and in Josephus, before the destruction of their temple the rift probably was not complete.

The Samaritans exist today and have the following basic beliefs: (1) There is only one God. (2) Moses was the last and greatest prophet. (3) The five books of Moses are the only authoritative Scripture. (4) Mount Gerizim is God’s chosen place. (5) There will be a day of judgment and recompense. (6) The “returning one,” the Taheb, will appear.

Reconstructing the beliefs of the Samaritans before the fourth century AD is difficult because all we have before then are the sparse statements of outside sources and archaeological remains. Archaeological remains of a Samaritan synagogue on the Greek island of Delos include dedicatory inscriptions dated from the late third to early second centuries BC and the second to first centuries BC. These inscriptions mention those who worship on Mount Gerizim.

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because Luke 10:25-37 is mentioned in the definition.

Adummim

, Pass of A place name that occurs twice with respect to defining the border between Judah and Benjamin (Josh. 15:7; 18:17). It derives from the Hebrew word for either “ground” (“earth”) or “red.” Located on the leeward side of the Judean hills, the Pass of Adummim was part of the road from Jerusalem to Jericho that connected the hill country and Transjordan through the Jordan Valley. Its underlying bedrock is cenomanian limestone, whose exfoliation and disintegration yields the red soil (terra rosa), from which the slope probably derives its name. Several important biblical events occurred on this route, including the return of Michal to David (2 Sam. 3:14–16) and David’s flight from Absalom (2 Sam. 15–16). On his trips through Jericho to Jerusalem, Jesus traveled this route as well. The ruggedness of this route informs the parable of the good Samaritan, which Jesus told on his final trip along this route to Jerusalem (Luke 10:25–42).

Barnabas

A name given by the apostles to Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, missionary companion of Paul, and cousin of John Mark (Acts 4:36). Luke interprets the name “Barnabas” to mean (in Aramaic) “son of encouragement,” although this etymology is debated. Barnabas was known in the early church for his generosity and reconciling spirit.

Barnabas first appears in the book of Acts as a model of generosity for the Jerusalem church when he sells a piece of property to support the poor in the church (4:36–37). His example contrasts sharply with Ananias and Sapphira, who are judged by God for lying to the Holy Spirit concerning their own gift to the church. Barnabas next appears as the member of the Jerusalem church courageous enough to bring Saul, the former persecutor, to the leaders of the Jerusalem church (9:26–27). Later, when reports of Gentile conversions in Antioch were received in Jerusalem, Barnabas was sent to Antioch to supervise the work there. Barnabas went to Tarsus and brought Saul with him to Antioch (11:22–26). There they ministered together, at one point delivering famine relief to Jerusalem (11:30).

The church in Antioch received a revelation from the Holy Spirit to send Barnabas and Saul on the first missionary outreach (Acts 13:2). Accompanied by Barnabas’s cousin John Mark, they traveled to Barnabas’s home island of Cyprus and then to the Roman province of Galatia. Mark deserted the group in Perga and returned to Jerusalem, but Paul and Barnabas established churches in Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe (Acts 13–14). After returning to Antioch, Barnabas accompanied Paul to the Jerusalem council to settle the Judaizing controversy concerning whether Gentiles must keep the law and be circumcised to be saved (Acts 15).

Upon returning to Antioch, Paul suggested a return to the churches in Galatia. Barnabas proposed taking John Mark, but Paul refused, and the ensuing conflict resulted in Paul’s departure to Galatia with Silas, with Barnabas taking John Mark to Cyprus (Acts 15:36–41). This is the last we hear of Barnabas in Acts.

Paul mentions Barnabas five times in his letters (1 Cor. 9:6; Gal. 2:1, 9, 13; Col. 4:10). He refers to Mark as Barnabas’s cousin (Col. 4:10), speaks of their Jerusalem famine visit (Gal. 2:1, 9), and relates an episode of apparent hypocrisy when Barnabas withdrew from Gentile table fellowship under pressure from Jewish Christians (Gal. 2:13).

Later church writings attributed additional traditions to Barnabas. Clement of Alexandria claimed that Barnabas was one of the seventy sent out by Jesus in Luke 10 and also identified him as the author of the Epistle of Barnabas. Tertullian said that Barnabas wrote Hebrews, and the fifth or sixth century Acts of Barnabas describes his later ministry and martyrdom in Cyprus. None of these later traditions have sufficient evidence to confirm their historicity.

Beans

Common and valuable for food, beans were cooked while green in the pods or after being dried. Dry beans were threshed and winnowed like cereals and other grains. Beans are mentioned twice in the NIV (2 Sam. 17:28; Ezek. 4:9).

Beaten Oil

Almost all the oil to which the Bible refers is olive oil. Oil was used primarily for cooking, but also for medicinal purposes, cosmetics, lighting, and religious ceremonies.

Oil was one of the major export products of Palestine, with huge economic impact on Israel and Judah. Oil often was used as currency for other needed materials (Deut. 7:13; Neh. 5:11; Luke 16:6). For example, Elisha preformed a miracle with oil to help a widow pay her debts (2 Kings 4:7). Oil was kept as part of the royal stores (2 Kings 20:13; 2 Chron. 32:28). There are dozens of ostraca that detail the trading, bartering, and selling of oil.

Hate

A feeling of animosity, a disposition toward hostility, rejection, or negative favoritism.

Hate is as old as the conflict between Cain and Abel or as the rebellion of Satan. Many stories involve hatred and animosity between people (e.g., Gen. 37:4; 2 Sam. 13:22). Beside humans hating each other, people hate God and that which is morally upright (Exod. 20:5; Deut. 5:9; 7:10; 32:41; Pss. 68:1; 81:15; 120:6). It is correct, however, to hate sin (Pss. 97:10; 101:3; Prov. 8:13), as God does (Ps. 5:6; Prov. 6:16–19; Isa. 61:8; Rev. 2:6), though he takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezek. 18:23; 33:11). The two great commandments oppose the tendency to hate by calling us to love God wholly and love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev. 19:18; Deut. 6:5; 10:12; Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:33; Luke 10:27). The reverse is also commanded: we should not hate our neighbor (Lev. 19:17) nor even hate our enemy, but rather do good and pray for our enemy (Exod. 23:4–5; Prov. 25:21; Matt. 5:44; Luke 6:27; cf. Deut. 10:19). Hateful actions are not necessarily motivated by hateful feelings, as a father who does not give needed punishment to his son is said to treat him with hatred (Prov. 13:24).

With regard to a hate crime, the main issue was intent—that is, whether an accident had occurred or whether a murder had been committed deliberately, “with malice aforethought” (Num. 35:20). Hate was a criterion of intent and had to be established by multiple witnesses for the two parties involved. Having hate did not garner greater punishment or make it a worse crime; hatred signified that it was a crime because it was intentional (Deut. 4:42; 19:4, 6, 11; Josh. 20:5).

With regard to marriage, in a polygamous marriage there was a danger of preferential treatment: a loved wife and a hated wife. The law forbids reducing the care of one wife in favor of another (Exod. 21:10) and protects the rights of the firstborn son even if he is born to the hated wife (Deut. 21:15–17). Hatred may be expressed by either party withholding conjugal relations. This probably lies behind the description in Gen. 29:31 of Jacob hating Leah (some translations say “unloved”).

Rejection, favoritism, or preference may be called “hate,” as in the case of a nonpreferred wife in a polygamous marriage, in not choosing Esau to continue the covenant line (Mal. 1:2–3; Rom. 9:13), or in not having a greater love for Christ than anything else (Matt. 6:24; Luke 14:26; John 12:25).

Hatred

A feeling of animosity, a disposition toward hostility, rejection, or negative favoritism.

Heir

Inheritance is an important concept that the Bible uses in several ways.

Humanity

Origins, Composition, and Constitution

Form and Function

Humanity in Pauline Thought

Justification

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

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

Common and Extraordinary Justification

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

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

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

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

Paul and Justification

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

James and Justification

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

Other Views on Justification

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

Martha

The sister of Mary and Lazarus, who lived in Bethany (John 11:1–2). In Luke 10:38–42 and John 12:1–8, Martha is depicted as interested only in preparing and serving food to her houseguest, Jesus. As such, she is contrasted with Mary, who spends her time with Jesus. In Luke 10 Martha even enlists Jesus’ help in requesting that Mary join her in completing the necessary work. Jesus, however, declares that Martha is “worried and upset about many things” (v. 41) and Mary’s actions are more desirable. In a separate account (John 11:1–44), Mary and Martha send word to Jesus that their brother, Lazarus, is sick. Jesus delays the journey to Bethany in order to demonstrate the glory of God, which results in his raising Lazarus from the dead. Upon hearing of Jesus’ eventual arrival, Martha goes out to meet him and questions the timing of his journey. In their dialogue, Jesus confirms Martha’s faith in him (John 11:27), but before Jesus performs the miracle, she experiences doubt.

Money

New Testament. Coins appear dozens of times in the NT; some have Hellenistic roots, while others come from the periods of Hasmonean or Roman rule.

Myrtle Tree

Parable

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

Parables in the Bible

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

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

Table 4. Major Parables of Jesus

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

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

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

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

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

Hidden treasure (Matt. 13:44)

Pearl (Matt. 13:45-46)

Net (Matt. 13:47-50)

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

Unmerciful servant (Matt. 18:23-35)

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

Two sons (Matt. 21:28-32)

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

Wedding banquet (Matt. 22:2-14)

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

Ten virgins (Matt. 25:1-13)

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

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

Growing seeds (Mark 4:26-29)

Money lender (Luke 7:41-47)

Good Samritan (Luke 10:30-37)

Friend in need (Luke 11:5-8)

Rich fool (Luke 12:16-21)

Unfruitful fig tree (Luke 13:6-9)

Lowest seat (Luke 14:7-14)

Great banquet (Luke 14:16-24)

Cost of discipleship (Luke 14:28-33)

Lost coin (Luke 15:8-10)

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

Shrewd manager (Luke 16:1-8)

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

Persistent widow (Luke 18:2-8)

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

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

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

Purpose of Jesus’ Teaching in Parables

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

Interpretation of Parables

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

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

Details in the Parable and its Allegorical Equivalent:

The man = Adam

Jerusalem = The heavenly city

Jericho = The moon (a symbol of mortality)

The robbers = The devil

Beating the man = Persuading him to sin

Priest and Levite = The Old Testament priesthood

Samaritan = Christ

Binding of wounds = Restraint of sin

Oil = Comfort of hope

Animal = Incarnation

Inn = Church

Innkeeper = Apostle Paul

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pine Tree

Plants

Property

Inheritance is an important concept that the Bible uses in several ways.

Robbery

The acquisition of another’s property by force or threat. This crime was perpetrated by bandits (Hos. 7:1), often through ambush (Judg. 9:25). In Jesus’ parable of the good Samaritan, the robbers’ attack leaves the victim half dead (Luke 10:30). The eighth commandment’s prohibition against stealing (Exod. 20:15; Deut. 5:19) certainly includes robbery, which is explicitly condemned in Lev. 19:13. OT law does not distinguish robbery from theft, which is done by stealth or deception, likely because the unlawful seizure of another’s goods was seen as a civil crime and the legal emphasis was on the restitution of property along with some compensation for distress, which varied according to the item stolen and served as a deterrent to thieves (Exod. 22:1, 4; Lev. 6:1–7). If unable to make restitution, the criminal could be sold into slavery to pay the debt (Exod. 22:3). Should the violence of robbery result in injury, laws concerning personal injury applied (Exod. 21:23–25; Lev. 24:19–20). In fact, under certain conditions, the law addresses an injured thief as the victim and not the perpetrator of violence (Exod. 22:2–3). The two men crucified with Jesus are traditionally described as “robbers” (Matt. 27:38; Mark 15:27), though in this case the Greek word (lēstēs) likely refers to rebels or insurrectionists (NLT: “revolutionaries”). This was the Roman authorities’ way of casting them as common criminals rather than as freedom fighters.

God declares his hatred for robbery, contrasting it with justice (Isa. 61:8). Robbery is often an example of injustice, especially when perpetrated upon the poor (Isa. 10:2; Ezek. 22:29). Rescuing a victim from a robber is enjoined as a just action (Jer. 21:12; 22:3), one for which God himself deserves praise (Ps. 35:10). God describes himself as the victim of robbery as he accuses Israel of stealing from him by withholding its tithes (Mal. 3:8–9).

Greek has two different words to distinguish a robber (lēstēs) from a thief (kleptēs). In the NT, robbery appears primarily as a metaphor. Jesus uses it to represent false prophets (John 10:1, 8), his own plunder of Satan’s house (Matt. 12:29; Mark 3:27), and, in a reference from Jer. 7:11, those seeking economic gain in the temple (Matt. 21:13; Mark 11:17; Luke 19:46).

Shekel

New Testament. Coins appear dozens of times in the NT; some have Hellenistic roots, while others come from the periods of Hasmonean or Roman rule.

Steal

The Shema

Shema is the transliteration of a Hebrew word meaning “hear” (shema’ ), the first word of Deut. 6:4: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.” The text that begins with this verse is therefore referred to as the Shema. The Shema emphasizes the oneness of God and the obligation to love him and is the most important prayer in Judaism. It is recited twice daily and begins a weekly liturgical reading that includes Deut. 6:4–9; 11:13–21; Num. 15:37–41. These Torah passages emphasize monotheism and the centrality of the commandments.

Jesus called the Shema the greatest commandment (Mark 12:29–30; Matt. 22:37–38; Luke 10:27) and invoked it in teaching his oneness with the Father (John 10:30). Paul later expanded the Shema to include Jesus (1 Cor. 8:6).

Trees

Showing 1 to 50 of366 results

1. INNKEEPER

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

Luke 10:35 - "And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ "

There is little allusion to inns in the Old Testament, since the rigid laws of hospitality among the Hebrews made them unnecessary. It was a sacred duty to offer refuge within the home to any traveler. The first mention that we find of an inn is in the story of the return of Jacob’s sons from their visit with Joseph in Egypt. But, there too, the inn itself was in Egypt, not Palestine.

Whatever inns they had were located close to watering places and were probably just camping grounds, or, perhaps, just niches in the walls. The people who stayed there had to provide their own food, cooking utensils, and other provisions for living and sleeping. So, in the Old Testament period, we cannot speak of innkeepers, because there were none such.

However, by New Testament times, travel had increased, and it became necessary for stopping places to be provided for these travelers. Many of them provided accommodations for animals as well as people, since sometimes whole families, with all their possessions, would be on the move. We think at once, of course, of the first Christmas night, when Mary delivered her Child in the stable, because the innkeeper couldn’t find room for her in the inn.

Even at that, the innkeepers provided only the barest of necessities, and as absolute minimum of food and shelter. And, unfortunately, they were often thieves, who weren’t above stealing everything possible from their guests. In fact, the Mishnah (Yeb 16:7) says that the word of an innkeeper was doubted and (Ab Zar. 2:1) places them on the lowest scale of society. The same was true of female innkeepers. They certainly weren’t known for their high moral standards. In fact, Josephus and the rabbis considered Rahab an innkeeper, rather than a harlot, but it comes down to the same thing in the end.

Isn’t it nice to know that today, when we travel, we have clean, commodious hotels and motels at which we can stop to rest and refresh ourselves. We don’t have to worry about the hotel manager sneaking in in the middle of the night and stealing our wallets! And certainly the food and accommodations that are offered to us are designed with our comfort and well-being in mind.

I have wondered frequently what the innkeeper who cared for the man left lying by the wayside would have thought if he had been sent ahead to the twentieth century and given a hotel to manage. Pipe dreams? Perhaps, but intriguing, don’t you think? If we were given the choice, I don’t imagine any of us would take his inn over that managed so competently by the hotel or motel managers today.

2. Rising to the Occasion

Illustration

James W. Moore

Have you heard the story about the elderly woman who lived in a small town in East Texas... who had car trouble on the way to the supermarket one morning? Her car stalled at a stop sign... she tried everything to get her car started again, but no luck. Suddenly, a man in a pick-up truck came up behind her and with obvious agitation he started honking his horn at her impatiently. She doubled her efforts to get her car going. She pumped the gas, turned the ignition, but still no luck... the man in the pick-up truck continued to honk his horn constantly and loudly. I love what the elderly woman did. Very calmly she got out of her car, walked back to the pick-up and motioned for the man to lower his window and then politely she said: "I'll make a deal with you. If you will start my car for me I'll be happy to honk your horn for you!"

Now, that is what you call "Rising to the occasion!" and that is precisely what Jesus does here in Luke 10. The lawyer was "testing" Jesus... honking his horn loudly. He was trying to trap Jesus and trip Him up with a loaded question... but Jesus (as He so often did) rose to the occasion and passed the test with flying colors... and in so doing... He reminded the people back then (and us today) of what is the main thing in the Christian faith.

3. Be Kind!

Illustration

Ann Landers

Columnist Ann Landers once wrote, "Be kind to people. The world needs kindness so much. You never know what sort of battles other people are fighting. Often just a soft word or a warm compliment can be immensely supportive. You can do a great deal of good by just being considerate, by extending a little friendship, going out of your way to do just one nice thing, or saying one good word."

Being civil to one another is the least we can do. Every major religion or philosophy acknowledges that.

4. The Homeless Woman’s Poem

Illustration

A homeless woman once approached a preacher for help, but because he was busy and helpless, he turned her away and offered to pray for her instead. The homeless woman, it is said, wrote this poem as a response too that insensitive minister:

"I was hungry, and you formed a humanities group to discuss my hunger. I was imprisoned, and you crept off quietly to my chapel and prayed for my release. I was naked, and in your mind you debated the morality of my appearance. I was sick, and you knelt and thanked God for your health. I was homeless, and you preached to me the spiritual shelter of the love of God. I was lonely, and you left me alone to pray for me. You seem so holy, so close to God but I am still very hungry - and lonely - and cold."

5. Late For Class

Illustration

Johnny Dean

Years ago on a seminary campus a New Testament professor was lecturing on the parables. This professor was known for his strictness. He often penalized students even if they were tardy! After spending a fair amount of time on the parable of the Good Samaritan, he posted a notice on the board telling the students that that days class was being moved to the other side of the campus. On the only route to the new class room, he staged a drunk lying on the ground asking for help. To the professor's amazement, not one of the students stopped to help this man; they all were in too big of a hurry to get to class lest they be penalized for being late.

6. Evangelism Has Fallen on Hard Times

Illustration

Clovis G. Chappell

"Evangelism" is a beautiful word that has lost its winsomeness [effectiveness]. Somehow on its journey from the Jerusalem of yesterday to the Jericho of today it has fallen among thieves that have wounded it and stripped it, departed, leaving it half dead. It takes a rather rash Samaritan, therefore, to dare turn aside to set this poor chap upon his beast and take him to an inn and take care of him. This is especially true because a veritable procession of Priests and Levites are passing by, not only refusing to lend a hand, but, we fear, inwardly chuckling at the plight of the poor fellow, and secretly hoping that they are soon to see the last of him.

7. The Little Point

Illustration

Steven Burt

In Zen Buddhism there's a word, a concept, satori. It means "the little point." It's got to do with staring, for example, at a rose or a fly on the wall as you meditate, concentrating on one tiny point in the universe. As Westerners, we'd figure that, if we want to understand the world and ourselves in relation to it, we'd look at the world, at the larger picture. But to the Easterner, one begins to understand oneself in relation to the world by narrowing, not by widening, one's focus. To the Easterner, narrowing the focus is like concentrating all the energy into a laser. There's more, not less, power.

The satori then, is that moment of heightened awareness, that explosion of understanding, what we call the "Aha!" moment or the "Eureka!" experience that comes out of focusing on the little point. It's like a tightly compressed hand grenade of awareness exploding in the mind. That realization, that sudden awareness that the world can be different than it appears that which Social Darwinists call the "natural order of things" can be changed, that there can be peace in a world of war and violence--that realization of the possibility of the present Kingdom of God is what Jesus confronts his hearers with. His parable springs it on them, and it leaves some of them with their heads spinning.

8. Love of Christ

Illustration

G. Curtis Jones

Legend has it that a wealthy merchant traveling through the Mediterranean world looking for the distinguished Pharisee, Paul, encountered Timothy, who arranged a visit. Paul was, at the time, a prisoner in Rome. Stepping inside the cell, the merchant was surprised to find a rather old man, physically frail, but whose serenity and magnetism challenged the visitor. They talked for hours. Finally the merchant left with Paul's blessing. Outside the prison, the concerned man inquired, "What is the secret of this man's power? I have never seen anything like it before."

Did you not guess?" replied Timothy. "Paul is in love."

The merchant looked bewildered. "In Love?"

"Yes," the missionary answered, "Paul is in love with Jesus Christ."

The merchant looked even more bewildered. "Is that all?"

Smiling, Timothy replied, "Sir, that is everything."

9. The Precious Cleanser

Illustration

Staff

When evangelist John Wesley (1703-1791) was returning home from a service one night, he was robbed. The thief, however, found his victim to have only a little money and some Christian literature. As the bandit was leaving, Wesley called out, "Stop! I have something more to give you." The surprised robber paused. "My friend," said Wesley, "you may live to regret this sort of life. If you ever do, here's something to remember: 'The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from all sin!'" The thief hurried away, and Wesley prayed that his words might bear fruit.

Years later, Wesley was greeting people after a Sunday service when he was approached by a stranger. What a surprise to learn that this visitor, now a believer in Christ as a successful businessman, was the one who had robbed him years before! "I owe it all to you," said the transformed man. "Oh no, my friend," Wesley exclaimed, "not to me, but to the precious blood of Christ that cleanses us from all sin!"

10. Jesus Took the Man by the Hand

Illustration

Barbara Johnson

A man fell into a pit and couldn't get himself out.

A subjective person came along and said, "I feel for you down there."
An objective person came along and said, "It's logical that someone would fall down there."
A Pharisee said, "Only bad people fall into a pit."
A mathematician calculated how he fell into the pit.
A news reporter wanted an exclusive story on his pit.
A fundamentalist said, "You deserve your pit."
An IRS man asked if he was paying taxes on the pit.
A self-pitying person said, "You haven't seen anything until you've seen my pit."
A charismatic said, "Just confess that you're not in a pit."
An optimist said, "Could be worse."
A pessimist said, "Things will get worse."

Jesus, seeing the man, took him by the hand and lifted him out of the pit!

11. Every Man Our Neighbor

Illustration

John Wesley

Let us go and do likewise, regarding every man as our neighbor who needs our assistance. Let us renounce that bigotry and party-zeal which would contract our hearts into an insensibility for all the human race, but a small number whose sentiments and practices are so much our own, that our love to them is but self-love reflected. With an honest openness of mind, let us always remember the kindred between man and man; and cultivate that happy instinct whereby, in the original constitution of our nature, God has strongly bound us to each other.

12. Chip It Away!

Illustration

James W. Moore

There is a story about a man who had a huge boulder in his front yard. He grew weary of this big, unattractive stone in the center of his lawn, so he decided to take advantage of it and turn it into an object of art. He went to work on it with hammer and chisel, and chipped away at the huge boulder until it became a beautiful stone elephant. When he finished, it was gorgeous, breath-taking.

A neighbor asked, "How did you ever carve such a marvelous likeness of an elephant?"

The man answered, "I just chipped away everything that didn't look like an elephant!"

If you have anything in your life right now that doesn't look like love, then, with the help of God, chip it away! If you have anything in your life that doesn't look like compassion or mercy or empathy, then, with the help of God, chip it away! If you have hatred or prejudice or vengeance or envy in your heart, for God's sake, and the for the other person's sake, and for your sake, get rid of it! Let God chip everything out of your life that doesn't look like tenderheartedness.

13. 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.

14. The Flood Story

Illustration

Carveth Mitchell

During a severe flood in a Midwestern community, the water had covered the streets several feet deep. A man was sitting on his porch, where the water was up to that level. Two men came by in a rowboat, pulled over to his porch and said, "Hop in, Brother, we'll take you to safety." He replied, "Not me, thanks, the Lord will help me."

The water continued to rise to the level of his porch roof, and he was perched up there. Two men came by in a motorboat. They pulled over to his porch roof and said, "Hop in. Brother, we'll take you to safety." He replied, "Not me, thank you. The Lord will help me."

The water rose to the roof of his house, and he was sitting up there when a helicopter came by. The pilot hovered above and let down a rope ladder. "Climb in, Brother, and we'll take you to safety." He answered, "Not me, thank you. The Lord will help me." The water continued to rise and the man drowned.

When he got to heaven, he spoke to the Lord. (How Bishops know what goes on up there I don't know.) The man said, "I've always gone to church, read my Bible, given my tithe, and said my prayers. There I was in great need of your help. Where were you when I needed you?" The Lord replied, "Where was I? I sent you two boats and a helicopter. What more do you want?"

The man had failed to realize that when God touches people he takes the nearest willing hand (or rowboat or helicopter) and uses that.

15. The Temptation To Pass By On The Other Side

Illustration

Robert Beringer

Here's a story about how God's Spirit helped one man fight the impulse to pass by on the other side. On September 26, 1944, Ray Hamley, an RAF flying officer, and his crew flying an American-built B-25, dropped bombs on the town of Kleve just inside Germany's border with Holland. Ray was 21 years old, and his bombs that day hit the railroad station, a number of Nazi factories, and the town church. He had an inkling that day that one of his bombs hit the church, but war was war. On the ground that day a young woman in Kleve mourned not only the loss of her church, but the loss of her parents who happened to live in a house next to the church. For the town of Kleve, 647 civilians and 879 military personnel would die before the Second World War was over.

Meanwhile, Ray Hamley went home to England after the war, married his childhood sweetheart, and became the head of a primary school. But then in 1983, someone handed Ray a newspaper clipping that showed how the people of a little town in Germany named Kleve were rebuilding the Church of St. Mary that had been bombed during the war. Something triggered in Ray's memory. He found his old logbook in the attic, and suddenly realized that it had been his bomb that had destroyed the church back in 1944.

An impulse was born in his heart as he thought about that tiny town, and how the loss of their church must have touched those people. But then came the temptation to pass by on the other side. He says he thought to himself, "Come on, Ray, after all, the Nazis bombed innocent children in London and Warsaw; it was wartime; it was years ago; forget it, Ray, and get on with your life; it's not your concern." But thank God, Ray Hamley did not let those second thoughts win out. He wrote to the Mayor of Kleve, asking for the forgiveness of the townspeople, and requesting that his letter be read by the priest at the dedication of the new church building. In 1984, Ray got a reply from the people of Kleve, requesting that he and his family come and see the new church building. But again, those second thoughts attacked Ray, and he could not even answer the letter.

Once more the parish priest in Kleve wrote to Ray, this time with a letter signed by 500 parishioners offering their forgiveness in the name of Jesus Christ! Ray Hamley went to Kleve. His visit not only healed old wounds in his life, but brought about reconciliation between Ray's hometown in England and the people of Kleve in Germany. And it all happened because Ray Hamley was able to conquer his second thoughts, and not pass by on the other side! For Ray Hamley, this was a turning point in his life.

In you life you will one day have someone calling out to you for help. Let the Spirit of Christ help you respond as did the Samaritan.

16. The Jericho Road

Illustration

Robert Beringer

The Jerusalem-Jericho Road of Jesus' day was the scene of one of the most compelling stories our Lord ever told. To this day, the actual road is little more than a strip of rocky terrain which leads us from Jerusalem south to the village of Jericho. What is remarkable is that in just 15 miles, the elevation drops from 2,400 feet above sea level to 1,400 feet below sea level at the Dead Sea. (I will always remember those figures because when I once preached on this parable, I announced that the Dead Sea was 1,400 miles below sea level! Afterward, a parishioner said, "Pastor, I know you preachers go pretty deep for your sermons, but your message this morning takes the cake!")

17. The Shocking Samaritan

Illustration

Ben Squires

Biblical scholar Kenneth Bailey paints the picture of what it meant for the Good Samaritan to take the wounded man on his own donkey, ride into town, put him up at the inn, and care for him. There's an unwritten shock in the parable of Jesus, a shock only heard by people living in the context of the story, a shock lost on us, but when Bailey changes the location and races of the characters, we today might have a better sense of the impact Jesus meant to have with this parable.

Bailey writes that the Good Samaritan is like "a Plains Indian in 1875 walking into Dodge City with a scalped cowboy on his horse, checking into a room over the local saloon, and staying the night to take care of him. Any Indian so brave would be fortunate to get out of the city alive even if he had saved the cowboy's life."

18. My Friend

Illustration

Ronald Love

Frederick Douglass approached the front door of the White House, seeking admission into Abraham Lincoln's Second Inaugural Ball. Just as Douglass was about to knock on the door, two policemen seized him, barring the black man's entrance. Douglass, a large, powerful man, brushed the officers aside and stepped into the foyer. Once inside, two more officers grabbed the uninvited guest, all the while uttering racial slurs.

As Douglass was being dragged from the hall, he cried to a nearby patron, "Just say to Mr. Lincoln that Fred Douglass is at the door!" Confusion ensued. Then suddenly the officers received orders to usher Douglass into the East Room. In that beautiful room, the great abolitionist stood in the presence of the esteemed President. The place quieted as Lincoln approached his newly arrived guest, hand outstretched in greeting, and speaking in a voice loud enough so none could mistake his intent, the President announced, "Here comes my friend Douglass."

The President had called Frederick Douglass friend. Who dared demean Douglass if he was a friend of the President?

Jesus Christ, the Lord of the universe, has called us his brothers and his sisters. God has called us His own children. But not only us. Also the person who lies stripped and beaten by the side of the road. He " or she " is our friend, our neighbor. So we pause and we help, because once there was a man who paused on a cross for us.

19. Truth: The Most Powerful Idea

Illustration

Max Anders

Marilyn vos Savant, the brilliant woman who reportedly has the highest I.Q. ever recorded, writes a syndicated column in which she answers tricky questions from people who want the benefit of her intelligence. Someone wrote to ask what she thought is the most powerful idea. Marilyn vos Savant replied that "truth" was the most powerful idea she knew of, because it is not affected by how we relate to it. Whether or not we know it, or whether or not we agree with it, doesn't matter, because truth is still true.

Ms. vos Savant is right on target. Truth is powerful. You and I believe that truth is from God.

What is the Good News of the Gospel anyway? I believe it can be summed up in three verses: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1); "God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life" (John 3:16), and "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind; and, Love your neighbor as yourself" (Luke 10:27).

You and I may believe this thing and that about Scripture and about life in general, but these three statements are incontrovertible! They are true.

They don't need to be defended; they only need to be lived. There are people in our society who spend too much of their energy and time defending God as if God needed it.

Note: Marilyn vos Savant still has the recorded highest IQ according to Guinness because they have since retired the category

20. Just a Person across the Way

Illustration

Brett Blair

Edgar Guest, a renowned American poet at the turn of the century, tells of a neighbor by the name of Jim Potter. Mr. Potter ran the drug store in the small town where Edgar Guest lived. Guest recalled that daily he would pass his neighbor and how they would smile and exchange greetings. But it was a mere casual relationship.

Then came that tragic night in the life of Edgar Guest when his first born child died. He felt lonely and defeated. These were grim days for him and he was overcome with grief. Several days later Guest had reason to go to the drug store run by his neighbor, and when he entered Jim Potter motioned for him to come behind the counter. "Eddie," he said, "I really can't express to you the great sympathy that I have for you at this time. All I can say is that I am terribly sorry, and if you need for me to do anything, you can count on me."

Many years later Edgar Guest wrote of that encounter in one of his books. This is how he worded it: "Just a person across the way a passing acquaintance. Jim Potter may have long since forgotten that moment when he extended his hand to me in sympathy, but I shall never forget it never in all my life. To me it stands out like the silhouette of a lonely tree against a crimson sunset."

[Suggestion for personal application of this story]

I have wondered how it is that I want people to remember me when I come to end of my life's journey.

[name some personal accomplishments each followed by]

But I really don't care if someone remembers me for that. I really don't.

I do hope that people are able to say of me at the end of my life's pilgrimage: When we were sick he came to us; when we needed help, he was there; when I was down, he lifted me up. In short, I hope that my ministry is remembered for simple acts of kindness. For if that is the case, then my life would have been worth it and I might have come close to fulfilling the greatest commandment in life: Love God and love your neighbor.

21. The Good Samaritan - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

The parable of the Good Samaritan arises out of a discussion between Jesus and a Pharisee. Here is a religious lawyer and he is asking a question on the nature of the law. The stage is set by Luke with these words: "Behold a lawyer stood up to put him to the test." Well, it's not the first time and probably won't be the last time that a lawyer phrased a trick question. It was the kind of question in which any kind of an answer would pose still further problems. It was a test question: "Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life." Now right away we know that this man was a Pharisee, because the Pharisees believed in eternal life and the Sadducees did not. Jesus could tell that this man was an astute student of the law so he asked him: "What is written?" In other words, use your own mind to discern the essence of the law. Jesus, like a good discussion leader, throws the question right back in his lap.

The lawyer had a good answer. He said: "You shall love the Lord your God with all of your heart and soul and mind and strength and you shall love your neighbor as yourself." This was a direct quote from Deuteronomy 6. It was part of the Shema, a confession regularly made in Jewish worship. Jesus says: "Excellent. You are correct." If he were a teacher I suppose he would have said: "You get A+." I have no complaint with this says Jesus. Do this and you shall live. You have not only penetrated to the essence of the law but you have worded it succinctly.

The question had been asked and the answer given. You would think that the man would be pleased and go home. But lawyers are never happy. A lawyer's responsibility is to define the limits of liability. "But he, desiring to justify himself, asked ‘Who is my neighbor.'" In other words, where does my responsibility stop? Who exactly am I responsible for?"

At this point, instead of further defining the question, Jesus tells a story. A way of indirect teaching.

A certain rich man was going from Jerusalem to Jericho. We can surmise that this man was probably a Jew because this was a road going right through the heart of Judea. He had probably been up to Jerusalem to worship and now he's going back to the City of Palm Trees. It was a very long serpentine road starting at Jerusalem, the highest point, 2,500 feet above sea level, and going straight down to Jericho, nearly 800 feet below Sea Level. The lowest place on the face of the earth not covered by water the deepest city in the world.

The Jericho Road was a notoriously thief-infested stretch of rocky mountain road, a long, lonely seventeen miles crowded with caves and danger. Since the road was so often traveled by religious pilgrims and businessmen and because it was so crooked, robbers frequented the road often. In fact, the route was so ripe for pillage that it had been nicknamed "The Bloody Pass". By the time you rounded a bend the bandits were there and you really had no chance to escape. I suppose if there had been newspapers it would not have been unusual to read about the latest mugging on the Jericho Road.

And so, too, the particular traveler in Jesus story fell victim. He was ambushed, robbed, beaten, stripped, and left to die in a pool of crimson red. Now, the question in the story is who is going to stop and help? Who is it that will not fall prey to the temptation to pass by on the other side?

1. The Priest Passes By
2. The Levite Passes By
3. The Samaritan Stops

22. Seinfeld's Last Episode

Illustration

Brett Blair

Most of you remember the Seinfeld show and many of you were fans. In its final Episode, which aired at the end of the 1998 TV season, the main characters (Jerry, George, Elaine, and Kramer) receive a one year sentence for failing to help someone who was being robbed.

What happens is this: Jerry has just received a contract from NBC to do a sitcom and the network is flying them all to Paris as a gift. But their plane encounters problems and they are stuck in LakelandMassachusetts. Killing time wondering around on the sidewalks in this quaint New England town, they become innocent bystanders and witnesses of a car jacking.

Being New Yorkers and the kind of people they are they make fun of the guy who is being robbed. Kramer, who has a camcorder in his hands, films the incident as a curiosity. They never lift a hand, never shout out; they are 10 yards away, and could care less. They just stand there and casually watch! The robber speeds off with the car and the police arrive late on the scene. With the excitement over, and the poor victim standing dazed in the street, Jerry turns to his friends and suggest they go get something to eat.

They turn to walk off when the officer stops them and says, "Alright, hold it right there."

Jerry: Wha'?

Officer: You're under arrest.

Jerry: Under arrest, What for?

Officer: Article 223 dash 7 of the Lakeland county penal code.

Elaine: What, we didn't do anything.

Officer: That's exactly right. The law requires you to help or assist anyone in danger as long at its reasonable to do so.

George: I never heard of that.

Officer: It's new, its called the Good Samaritan Law, Let's go.

The series ends with them serving their time. The critics hated it. It was pretty bad but there was a redeeming quality to that last episode. For nine years Seinfeld's characters used, ridiculed, and made fun of everyone they met. The four of them were the Priest and the Levites of our modern world. We climb the ladder of success and FedEx gives you the world on time. This is our attitude. Stopping to help someone crimps our style and requires too much of our time.

Looking back on it I can't help but wonder if the script for that final episode was taken right out of Jesus' story of the Good Samaritan. George says that he never heard of that one. Truth is, the law isn't new. It's as old as the tablets Moses brought down from Mount Sinai. There's nothing NEW about it. The story of the Good Samaritan tells us how we are to treat others: Not just our friends, not just the people in our town or stranded on the road or in need, but the very people we despise or dislike or make fun of. In a word: Our enemies. The story of the Good Samaritan is a lesson on how the Law of Moses is to be understood and lived out.

23. Neighborly Prayer

Illustration

King Duncan

Some of you may be familiar with a story by journalist Tom Junod. It is a true story of a young man afflicted with cerebral palsy. Cerebral palsy did not affect this young man's mind, but it affected his motor skills and his ability to speak. The boy could only communicate through typing on his computer. In addition to his physical disabilities, the boy suffered emotional problems after some of his care givers callously abused him. Overwhelmed with self-hatred, the boy often hit himself. Using his computer, he wrote to his mother that he wished he could die.

There was one thing that seemed to bring the boy comfort: watching "Mr. Roger's Neighborhood." The kindly, mild-mannered Mr. Rogers emphasized that all people are valuable and worthy of love. His calming demeanor and accepting message touched the boy's heart and gave him hope.

One day a children's foundation set up a meeting between the boy and his hero, Mr. Rogers. Upon meeting Mr. Rogers, the boy became so nervous that he began hitting himself, and his mother had to take him to another room to calm him down. When he returned, Mr. Rogers carried on their conversation as if nothing had happened. And then Mr. Rogers ended the conversation by asking the boy a very special favor: would this boy pray for him? The boy was floored by this request. Would he pray for Mr. Rogers? He had always been the object of someone else's prayers. But from that day forward, the boy began praying for Fred Rogers, and he experienced a new sense of hope and self-esteem through this act of praying for a man he so admired.

When Tom Junod complimented Fred Rogers on this idea, Rogers reacted with surprise. He had been sincere in his request for the boy's prayers. As he said, "I didn't ask him for his prayers for HIM, I asked for me. I asked him because I think that anyone who has gone through challenges like that must be very close to God. I asked him because I wanted his intercession."

24. For His Neighbors

Illustration

King Duncan

Many of us are afraid of dogs. It is a common fear. The immortal scientist Louis Pasteur was far more frightened of dogs than most people. Even a distant bark would terrify him. In his mind he could still see a mad wolf which raged through his boyhood village bringing agony and death to many of his neighbors. "I have always been haunted by the cries of those victims," he said time and again. Yet in 1882, past the age of 60, Pasteur gave up all his other studies in an intense search for a cure for rabies.

For three long years, in spite of his deep seated fears, he risked his life living with mad dogs. At last he came through with a vaccine to cure the victims of rabies. On a July night in 1885 he tried the first injection on a little boy whose life seemed doomed. The boy lived. The remembered agony of his neighbors spurred Louis Pasteur to find a cure for this dread disease.

25. Easy to Rationalize

Illustration

King Duncan

I ran across a subtle piece of humor. Cal Holm tells about two liberal sociologists walking down the street. They see a man lying at the curb who is covered with cuts and bruises from a terrible mugging. One of the sociologists turns to his colleague and says, "Whoever did this terrible deed really needs our help."

It is so easy to rationalize, to justify, to find excuses for passing by on the other side. Undoubtedly the priest and the Levite had reasons for passing this man by. Self-giving love is so rare in this world.

26. Plastic Hearts

Illustration

King Duncan

A seven-year-old girl wrote Dr. Michael DeBakey, the famed heart surgeon in Houston, Texas, a note that asked this question, “Does a plastic heart have love in it?”

Dr. DeBakey replied: “Yes, a plastic heart has love in it, a great deal of love. The love in a plastic heart comes from many people who love other people, and don’t want them to die. So these people work all day and often all night to build a heart that will make people live longer.

“If you think of how much love there would be in hundreds of hearts, then that is how much love there is in a plastic heart.”

27. A Teddy Bear and Christmas

Illustration

Bill Bouknight

Jesus often taught by telling parables. These were simple, down-to-earth stories which expressed spiritual truth. Today, on this third weekend of Advent, I want to use a favorite Christmas story as a modern parable. This is a true story, told to me some ten years ago by Dr. Edward Bauman of Washington, D.C.

About 30 years ago a boy named Tony was born into a family in a Midwestern state. He was blind at birth. He suffered from an extremely rare eye problem for which there was no known cure. When the little fellow was about seven years old, his doctor read in the New England Journal of Medicine of a new surgical procedure that showed some promise for correcting this particular problem. A young surgeon at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston had developed it. The local doctor and the surgeon began communicating. The boy's full medical record was sent. A decision was made to try surgery. Since Tony's family could not afford the expenses involved, local churches and civic clubs helped out.

Tony had a favorite teddy bear which he kept with him almost all the time. This teddy bear had begun to show signs of wear. One eye was missing; one ear was chewed off; and through several holes the stuffing was oozing out. Tony's mother told him that she was going to buy him a new teddy bear to take to Boston. Tony rejected that offer in no uncertain terms. What good is a new teddy bear when you have an old, familiar, friendly one already broken in? So, the old teddy bear went to Boston and remained close to Tony through all the medical procedures leading up to surgery: the x-rays, tests, and consultations. In fact, the boy and his teddy bear were not separated until the anesthesia was applied.

Throughout this whole period the boy and the young surgeon were becoming great friends. In fact, the surgeon was almost as excited as the family about the possibilities of this surgery. Somehow there was a good chemistry of friendship and trust between physician and Tony. When the surgery was completed, Tony was heavily bandaged and had to remain quite still for a number of days. That is very hard for a 7 year old. But each day the surgeon was in an out of the room encouraging him.

Finally came the day for removing the bandages. For the first time in seven years of life, a little boy could see. Though the vision was blurred at first, it gradually clarified. For the first time Tony looked into the faces of his parents, saw a tree, and a sunset. The young surgeon was almost literally jumping up and down for joy.

Before long it was time for Tony to be discharged and to go home. The surgeon had been dreading this day because the two of them had become such good friends. On that final morning, the surgeon signed the necessary discharge papers. He gave Tony a big hug and said, "'Listen, I own stock in you. I expect to get letters from you regularly. Do you understand?"

Then Tony did something totally unexpected. He said to his surgeon friend, "I want you to have this," and handed him his teddy bear. The surgeon’s first impulse was to say, "Oh no, I can’t separate you two good friends." But something stopped him. With a flash of sensitive genius, the surgeon understood what Tony was trying to do. He wanted to give his dear surgeon-friend the most precious gift at his disposal, so full was his heart with love. The wise surgeon accepted the teddy bear with a hug and a thank-you, assuring Tony that he would take mighty good care of his friend.

For over ten years that teddy bear sat in a glass case on the tenth floor of Massachusetts General Hospital---one eye missing, one ear chewed half off, and stuffing oozing out of holes. In front of the teddy bear was the surgeon's professional name card. Just beneath his name he had written this caption: "This is the highest fee I have ever received for professional services rendered." A little boy had given the most precious item he had, out of a love-filled heart.

This is a parable of Christmas. 2000 years ago our gracious God, with a heart filled with love, looked out upon a sin-marred, tear-stained world. Had you and I been in charge we might have destroyed the whole mess and started over. But God's great heart was too full of love to allow that. So he gave us the most precious gift at his disposal; he gave himself. "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but have eternal life."

Confronted by such an awesome gift, our only fitting response is to fall on our knees and to enthrone the living Christ as our personal King of kings and Lord of lords.

28. Creeds and Deeds - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

29. What Is the Will of God?

Illustration

Rudolf Bultmann

"What, positively, is the will of God? The demand for love. "You shall love your neighbor as yourself!" as the second greatest commandment belongs together with the first: "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength" (Mk. 12:28-34) There is no obedience to God which does not have to prove itself in the concrete situation of meeting one's neighbor, as in Luke (10:29-37), probably unhistorical but with the right of correct understanding of the subject matter, makes clear by combining the illustrative narrative of the Good Samaritan with Jesus' discussion of the greatest commandment. The demand for love surpasses every legal demand; it knows no boundary of limit; it holds even in regard to one's enemy (Mt. 5:43-48).

30. Because He Wouldn’t Know; He Wasn’t Known

Illustration

Peter Hiett

In the movie Good Will Hunting, Will Hunting is a genius. He knows about everything with his head, but he uses that knowledge to hide from pain in his heart. He meets a counselor (played by Robin Williams) and guards his heart from the counselor by dissecting the counselor with his knowledge and crucifying the counselor's passions for art and his bride on his own knowledge. The counselor confronts him in a garden and says this:

You've never been out of Boston. So if I asked you about art, you could give me the skinny on every art book ever written. Michelangelo? - You know a lot about him . . . life's work, political aspirations, him and the Pope, sexual orientation, the whole works, right? But you couldn't tell me what it smells like in the Sistine Chapel. You've never actually stood there and looked up at that beautiful ceiling.

"If I asked you about war, you'd probably throw Shakespeare at me, right? "Once more into the breach, dear friends." But you've never been near one. You've never held your best friend's head in your lap and watched him draw his last breath, looking to you for help.

And if I asked you about love, you'd probably quote me a sonnet, but you've never looked at a woman and been totally vulnerable . . . known someone who could level you with her eyes . . . feeling like God put an angel on Earth just for you, who could rescue you from the depths of hell. And you wouldn't know what it's like to be her angel, to have that love for her and be there forever, through anything, through cancer. You wouldn't know about sleeping sitting up in a hospital room for two months holding her hand, because the doctors could see in your eyes that the term "visiting hours" didn't apply to you.

You don't know about real loss, because that only occurs when you love something more than you love yourself. I doubt you've ever dared to love anybody that much."

Will Hunting knew about beauty, truth, love, and life. But he was too frightened to know beauty, truth, love, and life, and living. Because he wouldn't know; he wasn't known. He was an act hiding a wounded heart.

"Behold, I never knew you," said Jesus.

Does He know you . . . or only the act?

31. The Universality of the Golden Rule

Illustration

Carl Jech

Despairing of the possibility of ever bringing about religious unity through doctrinal, philosophical or theological dialogue, a great many people have latched onto the Golden Rule as the ultimate expression of their faith. It is provocative and inspiring to discover the remarkable universality of this ethical principle. In Hinduism it is stated like this: "Those gifted with intelligence should always treat others as they themselves wish to be treated." The Shinto version is: "The suffering of others is my suffering; the good of others is my good." In Buddhism it is: "A person can minister to friends and familiars by ... treating them as he treats himself." Taoists say: "Regard your neighbor's gain as your own gain and regard your neighbor's loss as your own loss." In Islam: "None of you is a believer until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself." For Sikhs it is: "As thou deemest thyself so deem others. Then shalt thou become a partner in heaven." In Confucianism and Zoroastrianism the rule is stated in the same way as in the New Testament except that it is couched in negative terms: "Do not unto others what you would not they should do unto you." The Jewish equivalent in Leviticus 19:18 is "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

32. THE BEAUTY OF SELF-LOVE

Illustration

John H. Krahn

When we are emotionally healthy, all of us have a rather high regard of ourselves. It is natural and normal to enjoy the beauty of self-love. Although the Bible does not stroke self-love, it does not deny its validity either. What it speaks out against is selfish love, a love of ourselves that is exclusive of God and of others ... a love that has its priorities wrong. Whereas self-love is beautiful, selfish love is not.

In order to have the beauty of self-love, the Bible states that we must get our love priorities in order. The first object of our love must be God. The love God wishes demands the action of our whole personality. All of our being: moral, emotional, intellectual, and physical must go into our love of God. Only this is completely acceptable to God, and only this is adequate for his shaping of our lives. When we give God a mere fraction of ourselves, God himself becomes a mere fraction of what he might be to us.

Jesus not only wants to be in our lives but desires to be the master of our lives. He wants to be in the driver’s seat. If your life were likened to your automobile, where would Jesus’ place be in it? Would he be in the trunk like the spare tire only to be called forth in an emergency? Would he be in the back seat only being consulted occasionally for advice? Or, does he sit beside you, one with whom you have regular conversation? Or is he in the driver’s seat, at the controls, guiding your life in the direction he wants it to go?

When God is loved first and foremost and when we enjoy the beauty of a loving God, we can then enjoy the beauty of loving our neighbor. The word love in the Bible does not necessarily mean a personal liking, a sentimental affection, but rather it suggests our active good will in behalf of our neighbor. In other words, God says we are to love everyone even when we might not be able to like everyone.

Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan is a great model of neighborly love. The Samaritan overstepped all existing borders to do concrete costly acts of love, even to one considered an enemy. The teaching of Jesus is clear - the love of a neighbor has no boundaries.

Now we are at the point of insight. When we love God completely and have him guiding our lives and when we are enabled by God’s love for us to extend our love to all neighbors, we are now more able to enjoy the beauty of self-love. For we see our importance and our worth with the eyes of God, a God whose Son was not too high a price to pay to reclaim us. If God loved us so much, we can certainly love ourselves.

We are also able to love ourselves more when we let God rid our lives of feelings of hate for other people through the practice of neighborly love. And as we hate others less, as we are uncomfortable with others less, as we love others more, psychologically we will hate ourselves less, can be more comfortable with ourselves, and enjoy more of the beauty of self-love.

Innately we all have a sense of self-love essential for preservation. He has given us the gift of eternity through our Lord Jesus Christ and wants to bless us daily as we love and devote ourselves to him. And as we love God and our neighbor, our natural self-love moves out of the realm of selfishness. For you see, it is no longer exclusive, directing all energies inward. Now it is inclusive, for it is a love with priorities straight. God first, others second, and ourselves third. The beauty of God-love, the beauty of neighbor-love, the beauty of self-love, together they comprise the beauty of Christian love.

33. A Brain, A Heart, A Home, The Nerve

Illustration

Mickey Anders

One of the disadvantages of growing up in a very religious home like I did was that you never knew the end of Sunday night TV movies. When the annual showing of The Wizard Oz came on television every year, I sat through the tornado, saw the house that smashed the wicked witch of the East, and heard the munchkins sing about the yellow brick road. But then just as it got to the exciting parts, my parents announced that it was time for Training Union and Sunday night worship. In spite of all my protests, my parents packed me off to church. I didn't get to see the wizard or learn how Dorothy managed to get back home until I was an adult!

One of my favorite songs in that delightful musical is the one where the scarecrow, the tin man and the lion take turns singing, "If I Only Had…" It's a game that many of us still play today. "If I Only Had…" In the movie, each character had a different need. The scarecrow wanted a brain; the tin man wanted a heart; the lion wanted courage. And through it all Dorothy was looking for a home.

Like us, they were not complete persons. Each one needed something to balance out their personality or their lives. Like us, they seemed to emphasize one part of the personality to the exclusion of another. But it is only when a person develops wholeness that they truly find themselves. Only in wholeness are we at home with ourselves and with God.

Our Scripture passage for today reminded me of the song from the Wizard of Oz. In the text, Jesus makes a reference to the various parts of us in a way very similar to the musical's division of brain, heart, home, and nerve. Jesus says it this way: "Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength, and you shall love your neighbor as yourself."

34. Truly Accepting God's Teaching

Illustration

Adrian Rogers

If your kids see you putting other things ahead of God, they will become discouraged and disillusioned, like a young Jewish boy who once lived in Germany.

His father was a successful merchant, and the family practiced their Jewish faith. But then they moved to another German city, and the boy's father announced that they would no longer attend synagogue. They were going to join the Lutheran church.

The boy was very surprised and asked his father why the family was joining the Lutheran church. His father's answer was something like, "For business reasons. There are so many Lutherans in this town that I can make good business contacts at the Lutheran church. It will be good for business."

That boy, who had a deep interest in religion, became so disillusioned with his father that something died within him. He said to himself, 'My father has no real convictions." The incident helped to turn him against religion with a vengeance.

That young boy later moved to England and began to write. His name was Karl Marx. As the father of communism he wrote the "Communist Manifesto," in which he called religion "the opiate of the masses."

I wonder if world history would have been different had Karl Marx's father heeded the admonition of the great "Shema" of Israel:

"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: and you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might."

Your kids know whether you love God with all your heart. What they want to see is parents with such love and reverence for God that they bring Him into every area of their lives and put him first in everything. Kids want to see whether their parents love God enough to obey him.

35. GOD - THE STILL POINT IN A TURNING WORLD

Illustration

John H. Krahn

I believe that most of us are experiencing the crunch - the crunch of living - of doing business on the planet called Earth. The simple life has somehow eluded our grasp - even things that we could once take for granted like enough gas for our cars, sufficient oil for our homes, uninterrupted education for our children, and the prospect for a raise that would provide us a little higher standard of living - these things are no longer commonplace.

Often we are tempted to ask the question, "Where is God in this whole mess of living?" And the answer, I believe, is that God is the still point in a turning, increasingly chaotic world. God can still bring calm to chaos; he is still a source of hope in the face of despair; with him we can even snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. Yes, God is the still point in a turning world.

The psalmist knew that, for the world of chaos was turning even in his day. He said it this way, "God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble. Therefore, we will not fear though the earth should change, though the mountains shake in the heart of the sea; though its waters roar and foam, though the mountains tremble with its tumult." God is the only answer to chaos, for he is our refuge and strength. From him alone we can receive strength to go on. He is the source from which we must draw the power to overcome. There is no situation that can be deemed impossible, a lost cause, or insolvable as long as we continue to entreat the help of the Almighty. "We shall not fear," the psalmist says, even if our whole world is blowing up around us, for the Lord is still with us; he has not abandoned us.

"Be still, and know that I am God," the psalmist continues. Oil isn’t God. Cancer isn’t God. Money isn’t God. Yahweh, the God of Jacob, is God. He is still present, he has not abandoned the world. He is the author of life and love, so he doesn’t send cancer, sickness, or death. He doesn’t place greed and anger in the hearts of people; chaos and grief are not from him. He is the still point in the turning world; his love is constant - it doesn’t change.

Only the fool says in his heart there is no God. Only the fool tries to go the world alone. Martin Luther looked at all the pressures of his life one day and said, "I have so much to do today, that there will be no chance of getting it all done unless I spend at least four hours in prayer."

If your life is crowded, if grief or worry is consuming too much of your world, return to the still point and seek refuge in God. Receive renewed strength from the God of our fathers who spared not even his only Son so that we could not only have victory after death but also victory in life. Be still, and know that God is still God.

36. BE EASTER PEOPLE

Illustration

John H. Krahn

After the tomb was found empty and Jesus appeared to the early church on many occasions, doubt disappeared, and the early church had overwhelming confidence in the Lord. The church today must live and be about its ministry with the same Easter confidence. We say we rely on God’s mercy for our salvation; we need to give over all areas of our lives to God’s control. What aspects of ourselves are outside God’s control? Our temper? Our money? Our time? We need join the psalmist and say, "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me." Our trust in the Lord must be complete. We are no longer defeated people but powerful Easter people. Little children in danger or in despair literally run and throw themselves into the arms of their mother. This is confident faith. When was the last time we ran and thrust ourselves onto the Lord? A cautious step in his direction is better than none at all, but believing with abandonment is called forth by an empty tomb. God wants us to fall head over heels in love with him so he can bring the greatest joy and purpose possible into our lives.

God also encourages us to hold fast to hope without wavering. Scripture says, "Where there is no hope, the people perish." Too many of us view too much of our lives and the world as hopeless. Without hope, no great strides will be made in the future; there is no venturesome faith without hope. Without hope we burrow into the ground and live the life of a mole instead of walking freely in God’s sunlight. In a difficult situation, a hopeful people find the challenge and opportunity to do something great with God.

Confident in our faith, with an unwavering hope, the Lord also encourages us to stir up one another to love and good works. We must do something. Faith and hope must move from the abstract to the particular.

Easter people are called upon to celebrate the Festival of the Resurrection each Sunday, for each Sunday is a little Easter. "... Not neglecting to meet together," is how it is written in Hebrews. To break fellowship with the worshiping community is to pursue a weakening faith. It is also a form of denial of all that Christ means. True faith, strong faith, is never faith in isolation but must always be faith shared and strengthened through regular worship. We must encourage one another to be regular in worship and strong in the faith.

The end is drawing near. The Lord will return soon to reclaim his fallen creation. When the Lord of the church comes again, how will he find us? Will we be acting like people who have been touched by the meaning of the cross and the empty tomb? Therefore, let us continue to draw near to the Lord with a true heart and a confident faith. We hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering. We consider how to stir up one another to love and good works. We do not neglect to worship but encourage one another. In sum, we will all be Easter people.

37. Sadness in the Heart of God

Illustration

John Claypool

There is a Jewish parable that both parallels and illumines Jesus' story, and it has helped to clarify my understanding greatly. This one is about a "farmer who lived in Poland. For generations before him, his family had been very poor. One night he was awakened by an angel of the Lord, who said: "You have found favor in the eyes of your Maker. He wants to do for you what he did for your ancestor Abraham. He wants to bless you. Therefore, make any three requests that you will of God, and he will be pleased to give them to you. There is only one condition: your neighbor will get a double portion of everything that is bequeathed to you."

The farmer was startled by this revelation and woke up his wife to tell her all about it. She suggested that they put the whole thing to a test. So they prayed. "Oh, blessed God, if we could just have a herd of a thousand cattle, that would enable us to break out of the poverty in which we have lived for generations. That would be wonderful." No sooner had they said these words than they heard the sound of animal noises outside. Lo and behold, all around the house were a thousand magnificent animals!

During the next two days, the farmer's feet hardly touched the ground. He divided his time between praising God for such great generosity and beginning to make practical provisions for his newly acquired affluence. On the third afternoon, he was up on a hill behind his house trying to decide where to build a new barn when he looked across at his neighbor's field, and there standing on the green hillside were two thousand magnificent cattle. For the first time since the angel of the Lord had appeared, the joy within him evaporated and a scowl of envy took its place. He went home that evening in a foul mood, refused to eat supper, and went to bed in an absolute rage. He could not fall asleep because every time he closed his eyes, all he could see were his neighbor's two thousand cattle.

Deep in the night, however, he remembered that the angel had said he could make three wishes. With that, he shifted his focus away from his neighbor and back to his own situation, and the old joy quickly returned. Digging deep into his own heart to find out what else he really wanted, he began to realize that in addition to some kind of material security, he always wanted descendants to carry his name into the future. So he prayed a second time: "Gracious God, if it please thee, give me a child that I may have descendants." With that, he and his wife made love, and because of his experience with the cattle, he was not too surprised shortly thereafter to learn that she was expecting.

The next months were passed in unbroken joy. The farmer was busy assimilating his newly acquired affluence and looking forward to the great grace of becoming a parent. On the night his first child was born, he was absolutely overjoyed. The next day was the Sabbath. He went to the synagogue, and at the time of the prayers of the people, he stood up and shared with the gathered community his great good fortune: now at last a child had been born into their home. He had hardly sat down, however, when his neighbor got up and said, "God has indeed been gracious to our little community. I had twin sons born last night. Thanks be to God." On hearing that, the farmer went home in an utterly different mood than the one in which he came. Instead of being joyful once again he was filled with the canker of jealousy.

This time, however, his envy did not abate. Late that evening, he made his third request of God: "Please, gouge out my right eye."

No sooner had he said these words than the angel who had initiated the whole process appeared again and asked, "Why, son of Abraham, have you turned to such vengeful desirings?" With pent-up rage, the farmer replied, "I cannot stand to see my neighbor prosper. I'll gladly sacrifice half of my vision for the satisfaction of knowing that he will never be able to look on what he has."

Those words were followed by a long silence, and as the farmer looked, he saw tears forming in the eyes of the angel. "Why, O son of Abraham, have you turned an occasion for blessing into a time of hurting? Your third request will not be granted, not because the Lord lacks integrity, but because God is full of mercy. However, know this, O foolish one, you have brought sadness not only to yourself, but to the very heart of God."

38. The Kind Neighbor

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

I had been living in the neighborhood for about six months when the right time came...the time for me to share my faith with a neighbor. She was exasperated when I passed by. Everything had gone wrong during the day, and now her car wouldn't start.

"You're so kind," she said, after we had gotten the car started. "It's good to know there are Christians still around." The perfect opening for me to respond and share.

I was a bit amazed that she put being kind and being Christian together. Words often die or at least lose their power. They need people to keep them alive. The word kindness is a good illustration of this. It doesn't carry the weight it should. Maybe this is one of the prices we pay for technological progress. We lose the crucial dimension of human existence -- how we relate to each other.

The recovery of the meaning and practice of kindness may be one of our greatest needs.

39. 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.

40. CHEEK-TURNING POWER

Illustration

John H. Krahn

How many of us are in the process of developing ulcers? How many of us are carrying resentments? How much damage is being done internally because we will not forgive someone who hurt us deeply? How much of our daily life is being colored grey by an angry mind quarreling in fantasy bouts with an adversary, an ex-husband, an ex-wife, a relative, a neighbor, a fellow worker, or even a fellow parishioner? Who are suffering from high blood pressure or even heart problems because they have not forgiven completely?

In the face of all of this, we consider the love chapter in the Bible, 1 Corinthians 13, for some very good advice. Saint Paul, inspired by the Holy Spirit, writes, "Love is not irritable or resentful ..."

Snow is hardly news in many parts of our nation. After a blizzard, it takes a snowplow to tackle the snowdrifts and help us become mobile again. Resentments are like snowdrifts, and forgiveness is the snowplow. In the Christian life forgiveness is a snowplow that opens roads again, removing barriers so that we can communicate and listen to those with whom we had been at odds.

When a person offends us, we feel like punching him out. Many a child has done just that on the way home from school at a predetermined spot. Those of us who are mature are more sophisticated but no less harmful as we unleash a lethal tongue, or verbally stab people behind their backs. God reminds us in the epistle that love is not resentful.

Our Lord Jesus Christ gave us some pretty tough advice while he was alive. On the subject we are considering, he says, "But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also." Jesus states that the mere fact that we have been wronged does not give us the license to do wrong. Followers of Jesus are not to retaliate but must even be willing to suffer the same injury again. Cheek-turning power is no easy matter. It is perhaps as powerful a weapon as there is toward maintaining and even improving most human relationships. When I have been wise enough to use it, I can tell you firsthand that it works.

Love is the language of forgiveness. Love does not resent, it forgives. Cheek-turning love is Christian love in action. On our own, we seldom have the power to turn the other cheek. Such power is only possible when Jesus Christ lives within us. It comes when we practice the presence of God, inviting Jesus’ indwelling through prayer. Then as we partake of his body and blood, we not only receive forgiveness for ourselves, but we also receive the powerful presence of Jesus Christ: a presence that can cause a cheek to turn and a life of loving forgiveness to plow through snowdrifts of resentment.

41. Table Grace

Illustration

Gary Wilburn

In 1636, amid the darkness of the Thirty Years' War, a German pastor, Martin Rinkart, is said to have buried five thousand of his parishioners in one year, an average of fifteen a day. His parish was ravaged by war, death, and economic disaster. In the heart of that darkness, with the cries of fear outside his window, he sat down and wrote this table grace for his children:

'Now thank we all our God
With heart and hands and voices;
Who wondrous things had done,
In whom His world rejoices.
Who, from our mother's arms,
Hath led us on our way
With countless gifts of love
And still is ours today.'"

Here was a man who knew thanksgiving comes from the love of God, not from outward circumstances.

42. Believing with the Heart

Illustration

King Duncan

A cynical young medical student confronted a pastor: "I have dissected the human body," he announced, "and I found no soul."

The pastor said, "That's interesting. When you dissected the brain did you find a thought? When you dissected the eye did you find vision? When you dissected the heart did you find love?"

The student answered thoughtfully, "No, I did not."

The pastor said gently, "Of course you believe in the existence of thoughts, of vision, and of love. The human soul is the totality of man's existence in relationship with God. Just because you cannot locate it on a medical chart does not mean that it does not exist." Most people accept such reasoning. We believe with our heads, but that is not the kind of belief that faith in Christ is about. "Even the demons believe," say the scriptures, "and tremble."

Faith in Christ is more than mere intellectual assent. It is believing with the heart, with the will, with adoration, and action.

43. Something by Tolstoy

Illustration

Staff

It's very human to begin looking for something and then forget what you're looking for. Tennessee Williams tells a story of someone who forgot. It's the story of Jacob Brodzky, a shy Russian Jew whose father owned a bookstore. The older Brodzky wanted his son to go to college. The boy, on the other hand, desired nothing but to marry Lila, his childhood sweetheart a French girl as effusive, vital, and ambitious as he was contemplative and retiring. A couple of months after young Brodzky went to college, his father fell ill and died. The son returned home, buried his father, and married his love. Then the couple moved into the apartment above the bookstore, and Brodzky took over its management. The life of books fit him perfectly, but it cramped her. She wanted more adventure and she found it, she thought, when she met an agent who praised her beautiful singing voice and enticed her to tour Europe with a vaudeville company. Brodzky was devastated. At their parting, he reached into his pocket and handed her the key to the front door of the bookstore.

"You had better keep this," he told her, "because you will want it someday. Your love is not so much less than mine that you can get away from it. You will come back sometime, and I will be waiting."

She kissed him and left. To escape the pain he felt, Brodzky withdrew deep into his bookstore and took to reading as someone else might have taken to drink. He spoke little, did little, and could most times be found at the large desk near the rear of the shop, immersed in his books while he waited for his love to return.

Nearly 15 years after they parted, at Christmastime, she did return. But when Brodzky rose from the reading desk that had been his place of escape for all that time, he did not take the love of his life for more than an ordinary customer. "Do you want a book?" he asked. That he didn't recognize her startled her. But she gained possession of herself and replied, "I want a book, but I've forgotten the name of it."

Then she told him a story of childhood sweethearts. A story of a newly married couple who lived in an apartment above a bookstore. A story of a young, ambitious wife who left to seek a career, who enjoyed great success but could never relinquish the key her husband gave her when they parted. She told him the story she thought would bring him to himself. But his face showed no recognition. Gradually she realized that he had lost touch with his heart's desire, that he no longer knew the purpose of his waiting and grieving, that now all he remembered was the waiting and grieving itself. "You remember it; you must remember it the story of Lila and Jacob?"

After a long, bewildered pause, he said, "There is something familiar about the story, I think I have read it somewhere. It comes to me that it is something by Tolstoy." Dropping the key, she fled the shop. And Brodzky returned to his desk, to his reading, unaware that the love he waited for had come and gone.

This Tennessee Williams's 1931 story "Something by Tolstoy" reminds me how easy it is to miss love when it comes. Either something so distracts us or we have so completely lost who we are and what we care about that we cannot recognize our heart's desire.

44. Testing

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

A man and a woman who had been corresponding solely by mail fell in love with one another. They agreed to meet at the airport. Since they had never seen each other, they devised a plan that would help them recognize each other. She was to wear a green scarf and a green hat and have a green carnation pinned to her coat.

When the man got off his plane, he immediately began looking for her. Suddenly he saw a woman with a green scarf, green hat, and green carnation. His heart fell. She was one of the most homely women he had ever seen in his life. He was tempted to get back on the plane without approaching her. Nevertheless, he walked over to the woman, smiled, and introduced himself.

Immediately the woman said, "What is this all about, anyway? I don't know who you are. That woman over there gave me five dollars to wear these things." When the man looked over at the woman mentioned, he realized that she was one of the most beautiful women he had ever seen. The man approached the woman, who later explained, "All my life men have wanted to be with me, to be my friend, because of my beauty. They consider me beautiful. I want someone to love me, not just for my outward appearances, but for what I am inside.

45. TONGUE POWER

Illustration

John H. Krahn

The most powerful part of a person’s anatomy is that little, movable, muscular structure attached to the floor of the mouth. All of us at one time or another have been victimized by tongue power. In Shakespeare’s play Othello, Iago stands in awe of the tongue’s power when he says, "who steals my purse steals trash ... but he who filches from me my good name ... makes me poor indeed."

God commands that we say nothing about a neighbor which would even tarnish his name. He wishes that we defend our neighbor, speak well of him and put the best construction on everything. Unfortunately, we destroy him in three subtle ways.

First by gossiping. How often have we savored a choice piece of gossip and then shared it with someone else? "Have you heard about Jill? I saw her having lunch with her boss." Finger-pointing and fault-finding are favorite pastimes of the gossiper. The dubious art of gossip murders good character.

Our second subtlety is the sin of insidious inference. While not directly accusing, inference suggests that that which appears to be pristine on the surface may not be after all. A statement like, "Can’t imagine why Beth is so popular with the guys ... It’s certainly not her personality," is an example of this kind of destructive language.

Finally we can do violence to our neighbor by the unsaid word. Christians cannot isolate themselves from a situation in which a neighbor’s name is being maligned no more than they can be an uninvolved spectator of a rape. They must act in both cases. One can rape a name just as well as a body.

Tongue power - an awesome power! All would do well to pray the prayer of the psalmist, "Set a guard over my mouth, O Lord, keep watch over the door of my lips!"

46. Didn't You Know I Would Come

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

Rufus Jones lost a son of eleven years who was all the world to him. He wrote many years later about the experience, concluding with this luminous parable of how his own heart was opened to God's love:

"When my sorrow was at its most acute I was walking along a great city highway, when suddenly I saw a little child come out of a great gate, which swung to and fastened behind her. She wanted to go to her home behind the gate, but it would not open. She pounded in vain with her little fist. She rattled the gate. The she wailed as though her heart would break. The cry brought the mother. She caught the child in her arms and kissed away the tears. 'Didn't you know I would come? It's all right now.' All of a sudden I saw with my spirit that there was love behind my shut gate."

If you suffer with God you will find love behind your shut gate, a love that can lead you through the gate to be at home with all the children of God.

47. Everything He Says Is True

Illustration

Ray Pritchard & Brett Blair

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

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

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

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

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

48. THE MOST WONDERFUL GIFT

Illustration

John H. Krahn

One of the things that most young children fear are monsters. Unlike the imagined monsters of children, the early church had a real monster of its own. It was a most deadly enemy that roamed about. The monster was the notion that Christ alone was not adequate for a person’s salvation. And this monster gave birth to another monster, the monster of uncertainty over our own salvation. Both monsters were real - both were inspired by the devil. Unfortunately, they are still very much with us today. Many of us are puzzled and uncertain as to whether we will be saved. To solve the salvation puzzle we must kill the monster of uncertainty that suggests we trust in something other than Christ alone for our salvation.

Recently, I surveyed a large sample of our congregation. I was amazed to discover that so many were puzzled over the crucial question of their eternal life. Perhaps some of you reading this meditation do not feel certain that if you died tonight that you will be with God in heaven. Many who feel certain that they will go to heaven do not base such certainty on faith in Jesus Christ alone. The devil that roamed freely in the early church is still with us.

Brothers and sisters, our salvation is unreasonable, and this is what causes much of our puzzlement. We have been trained from childhood that we must work out our own problems and map out our own destiny. To think that God’s salvation is a pure gift, won for us by God’s actions and effected without any help or aid from us, militates against our, "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" philosophy.

Second, it smacks us where we hurt the most, right in our pride. Adults are hesitant about accepting gifts which they know they have not earned or merited. We do not want to feel obligated to anyone. It is not an easy matter for us to come before Almighty God and accept what he wants to give us - the most wonderful gift of eternal life. It takes a humble person to make such a confession from his heart and to stand totally dependent on God.

Third, for most of us, everything that we have has a price tag on it. Then we are confronted with the strange news of a gospel which declares that God’s salvation is a free gift. Our experience with every other valuable gift causes us to stop and think, "Is that reasonable? There must be a hidden cost, a string attached, we must have to do something. How can God really give us something so wonderful for nothing?"

In the survey of our congregation we also asked our people, "If you were to die tonight and stand before God and he were to ask you, ‘Why should I let you into my heaven?’ what would you answer him?" What would you answer him? Take a second, think about it. Let me share with you some answers others gave: "I’ve lived a Christian life, loving and caring for my fellowman." "I am a good person and love to help others." "I’ve tried my best to do what you have expected of me." What is the common element in all these answers? It is "I." Everyone emphasizes what I have done.

The Bible says, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is a gift of God, not because of works, lest any man should boast." Heaven is a most wonderful gift, it is not something earned or deserved, it is only received by faith. Our faith in Jesus Christ is the key that opens heaven to us.

49. A Good Word for The Pharisees

Illustration

Jirair Tashjian

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

50. The Meaning of Life - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

In Act 5 scene 5 of Shakespeare's Macbeth, the character Macbeth has heard that the queen is dead and he knows his own death is imminent. At this time he delivers his famous soliloquy:

Tomorrow, and tomorrow and tomorrow
creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, Out, brief candle
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
and then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot. Full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing.

Is Macbeth right? Is life nothing but a shadow having no substance, no meaning? Writers and philosophers since recorded time have tried to answer the question. I don't think any of them have been successful in answering the question to everyone's satisfaction. Some one once said that "Trying to speak about the ultimate reality is like sending a kiss through a messenger." I understand their point: Something of its truth is lost in the translation.

What is the meaning of life? A philosophical question to be sure but this is not only the philosopher's question. It is a genuinely human question and therefore a question that we all ask. It might be a question that is asked in despair or hope, out of cynicism, or out of sincere curiosity and a deep desire to have goals and guidance in life. However we raise the question about the meaning of life, it is our most basic and fundamental question.

And so it comes as no surprise that Jesus deals with this question and answers it. Surprisingly, the answer is not given in the context of an argument with the Jewish leaders or in a discussion with his disciples, and it is not given in the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus deals with so many fundamental issues. It is telling that Jesus deals with the meaning of life in the context of prayer.

In the context of what has been called, by many scholars, Jesus' High Priestly Prayer. [Pause] The Disciples are in the upper room, now. They have just finished the Passover meal and Jesus is thinking about his crucifixion which will occur within the next 24 hours. He knows he is about to leave his disciples alone in the world and he goes before God as a priest would, to intercede for them, to pray for them.

Listen again to his prayer. I am lifting out a few key verses: "While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe, but I will remain in the world no longer…Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name—the name you gave me—so that they may be one as we are one. Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your son may glorify you. For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life…and this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." It is in this third verse that Jesus delivers the meaning of eternal life and in essence the meaning of life itself. He says, "Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."

In essence, Jesus says, "the meaning of life is this: that you have a relationship with God, and me his Son, Jesus Christ." And that's the long and short of it! But, Jesus himself, understood just how difficult it was going to be not only for his disciples but for all of us to come to this very simple realization in life and so he prays for two key things. First, in order that we might understand the meaning of life…

1. He Prays for Our Protection from the World.
2. He Prays That We Might Know God.

Showing 1 to 50 of 366 results