Sermon and Worship Resources

John 6:25-59 · Jesus the Bread of Life

25 When they found him on the other side of the lake, they asked him, "Rabbi, when did you get here?"

26 Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, you are looking for me, not because you saw miraculous signs but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. 27 Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. On him God the Father has placed his seal of approval."

28 Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"

29 Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

30 So they asked him, "What miraculous sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? 31 Our forefathers ate the manna in the desert; as it is written: 'He gave them bread from heaven to eat.' "

32 Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world."

34 "Sir," they said, "from now on give us this bread."

35 Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40 For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."

41 At this the Jews began to grumble about him because he said, "I am the bread that came down from heaven." 42 They said, "Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, 'I came down from heaven'?"

43 "Stop grumbling among yourselves," Jesus answered. 44 "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets: 'They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me. 46 No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. 47 I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your forefathers ate the manna in the desert, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which a man may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world."

52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"

53 Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever." 59 He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.

Tranquil: The Blessed Village on a Hillside

John 6:25-59

Sermon
by R. Robert Cueni

I am going to tell you a story. Keep in mind that it is just a story. In fact, because it has elements of magical impossibility, it can even be called a fairy tale. As such, it begins with that familiar line common to all good stories and fairy tales.

Once upon a time, there was a village named Tranquil. It was an enormously blessed place. Tranquil had no serious problems. There was no homelessness, no food kitchens for the hungry, no street crime, and no white-collar crime. The roads were without potholes and every village bridge was structurally sound. There was no unemployment and no one was dissatisfied with working conditions or pay rates. Every child had full opportunity for an excellent education. No citizen ever complained about being treated unfairly. The needs of every person were met. This little village set high on a hillside was richly blessed. Because the citizenry thoroughly understood this, every day the Tranqulians gave thanks for their good fortune.

One special circumstance made these blessings possible. The village was governed by the one they called the Giant. In his possession was a goose that laid eggs of solid gold. The proceeds from those eggs were used for the benefit of the people of Tranquil.

No one remembered from whence came this goose. It was rumored the Giant had imported the goose at great expense from a distant land. He then dedicated the golden egg production to the needs of the village. In exchange for his generosity, the Giant expected the loyalty of the people. A more well-founded rumor is that the Giant himself started that rumor about his bringing the goose into Tranquil. Actually no one knew how the goose came to be in the village. But mark this, a goose that laid golden eggs lived in Tranquil and that gold was behind the village's motto: "Tranquil, Where Contented People Have Their Needs Met."

Now do not misunderstand. This was not a village of great wealth. It was just a comfortable community. Every egg laid was not golden. Usually the goose eggs were of the ordinary variety: white, in a fragile shell, egg-shaped, and filled with the usual goose egg ingredients. Only on occasion did the goose deliver a solid-gold egg. When that happened, the people celebrated.

Tranquil was a great place to live. No one went hungry. The village budget always balanced. Strangers were always welcomed. Every person in this village on the hill kept a pleasant smile on his or her face. Of course, the goose was greatly loved and appreciated. In fact, spontaneous festivals of thanksgiving regularly erupted on the village green more frequently than the goose laid a gold egg. Life was good in Tranquil.

Then something changed. The goose, which never laid more than one golden egg per month, suddenly began to lay golden eggs every two weeks. No one understood why. They assumed it was another blessing to an already blessed village. According to established custom, the proceeds from the extra gold continued to be distributed, never equally, but always with fairness and justice. When the egg production doubled, the village doubled their celebrations of thanksgiving.

Eventually, a local scientist determined the cause of the goose's largesse. The magic had a logical explanation. New people assigned to caring for the goose had changed the brand of her feed. They also left the light burning in her coop an extra two hours every day. For reasons no one could explain, these changes increased the production of golden eggs.

Before long, one of the Giant's advisors openly wondered that if this new food and two more hours of light doubled the golden eggs, perhaps even more light and more of the new feed might be rewarded with even more golden eggs. With the Giant's permission, it was tried. The scheme worked. The experiments in adding food and light continued. In a matter of weeks, the light burned 24 hours each day in the goose coop and she always had food available. The goose began to lay a golden egg every day.

In a matter of months, there was more gold than could reasonably be used. One egg per month met the needs of the people. Finding good ways to utilize thirty golden eggs each month became unexpectedly problematic.

The usually generous people of Tranquil could have resolved this issue by distributing the extra eggs to neighboring villages. That idea was rejected when it was successfully argued that since the goose belongs to Tranquil, so do her eggs. The neighbors are entitled to nothing.

It was decided to keep all the golden eggs in hopes a way could be found to make the Tranquilians even more satisfied with their lives. That did not work. The abundance of gold awakened powerful passions from a dark shadowy recess within the people. They began to do things they never did before.

The Giant, you will remember, was the caring ruler of Tranquil. He was widely known as a generous man who cared as much for his people as he cared for himself. When the gold began to accumulate, he changed. To his closest advisors he claimed, "The people have all they need. I will keep this extra gold supply for myself." The Giant began to hide golden eggs in his castle.

The people of Tranquil had trusted the Giant's fairness and generosity. They became suspicious. "We are not getting our share," they complained. If pressed on the matter, people readily admitted that they had no real unmet needs. They began to contend, "Needs are not the issue. The Giant has more gold than he is sharing. Our needs are met. Now our wants must be met. We are entitled."

As might be predicted, some hotheads in Tranquil began to plot to break into the castle and steal the Giant's hidden gold. One group even planned to steal the goose and keep all the gold themselves. The Giant hired an army to protect his life and his gold.

Things began to change in Tranquil. Within a year, the Giant's royal treasury was filled to capacity. Every nook and cranny in the castle contained gold. The sheer abundance of gold eggs made it possible for the families who were close friends of the Giant to possess an egg for which they had no other use than to keep it as a prized possession. Of course, the economic conditions of most families stayed about the same. All their needs were met, while their wants increased and their sense of entitlement rose as bitter bile in the back of their throats.

No longer did the people rejoice and give thanks when the goose laid a golden egg. It happened too often to evoke celebration. The occasion no longer warranted dancing in the streets. No longer was there trust between the Giant and his people. Escalating levels of greed and selfishness made that impossible. The biggest change was that Tranquil was no longer tranquil. People lost sleep at night worrying about the possibility of someone stealing the golden egg they possessed. More often, they lost sleep fearing a robbery by someone who thought they possessed a golden egg when they did not. Even life on the streets in the village changed. The Giant's bodyguards and the soldiers hired to protect the castle roamed the village streets during their off hours terrifying the citizenry. No longer were visitors welcomed. Now they were looked upon with disgust. Strangers were thought to be potential thieves trying to benefit from the wealth of Tranquil.

It was a sad scene. The once-happy people of this village became a frightened, mistrusting, miserable lot. A dark, all-consuming passion had awakened within them. Some called it greed. Other's thought jealousy was a better term. Still others claimed it was only a desire to "get their fair share." By any other name it was like a "Gold Fever" that had a powerful demonic hold on the people of the village. The abundance of golden eggs, which should have been a blessing, was proving to be a curse.

Then came the inevitable. In hushed tones the Giant announced that the goose that laid golden eggs was dead. There had been warnings. Her health had been declining. No living creature could maintain the pace demanded of the beloved goose. In the frenetic effort to accumulate more gold, all the warnings signs had gone unheeded. "The goose is dead. Long live the goose."

This tale began with the familiar "Once upon a time." It ends with "they did not live happily ever after." A permanent fog of grief, anger, and sadness hung over the village. The place was never the same again. Trust in the Giant and other leaders eroded. Crime became commonplace. There were no more spontaneous celebrations of thanksgiving. Those were replaced by angry street demonstrations. Sometimes demonstrators demanded more of the gold be shared with them. Other times demonstrators wanted to make the point that they should never have to share with anyone. That con?ict is inevitable when a people jettison other values in favor of "It's all about me and what I want." The Tranquil village motto was eventually changed from "Where Contented People Have Their Needs Met" to "Dwelling Place of the Disgruntled."

There are several lessons that might be learned from this little tale. The story touches on the dangers of greed and selfishness. It says something about the importance of being a thankful people. It is also a warning. Take care lest you kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. For today, let us focus on what it teaches about that persistent issue: What makes people really happy, really satisfied, and really whole?

There is a man who lives in a big house in one of the city's better neighborhoods. His annual income ranks in the top 5-10% in the country. He recently returned from a church-sponsored mission trip to the rain forest of Central America. The church group built an addition on the school in a rural Mayan village. "I was surprised," the man said. "The villagers don't have much. They live in thatched-roof, dirt-floored houses. Their farms keep them fed, but little more. No one is oppressed, but opportunity is limited. They have none of the luxuries we take for granted. Yet the people in that little village are happy and disgruntled in about the same proportion as people are happy and disgruntled in my neighborhood. It seems that once basic human needs are met, accumulating more doesn't insure more happiness. I guess that should not surprise me. Jesus made that same point a multitude of times. I am enormously satisfied with my life, but I was a happy man when we were a young couple with two children, living in a rented house, owned one car and I had a job that didn't pay much."

John 6 opens with an account of Jesus feeding the five thousand. You know the story well. When the meal was over, Jesus and the apostles leave for the other side of the lake. The next day, some of those who got the free lunch come to Jesus in hopes of a repeat. The Master chastises them. "Very truly, I tell you, you are looking for me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures for eternal life" (vv. 26-27). He continues with instruction on how they ate from the bread of this world and became hungry again. If they eat of the bread of heaven, they will not become hungry again. Then he says, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty" (v. 35).

Thanksgiving Day is a very appropriate time to give thanks for the abundance of life's material blessings. Give thanks but do not get caught up in the mistaken notion that if you accumulate more of the wealth of this world, you will be a happier person. It doesn't work that way. Possessing more does not guarantee an increase of happiness. Satisfying life's deepest thirst and hunger does not come from drinking at the fountain of the world's treasures or from eating the bread from the baker's oven. Life's most persistent thirst and deepest hunger will be satisfied only by drinking at the fountain of eternal life and eating the bread of heaven.

Thanks be to God. Amen and Amen.

CSS Publishing Company, Inc., When walls shift and the ceiling collapses : cycle C sermons for Pentecost 3, Proper 23 through Thanksgiving based on the Gospel texts, by R. Robert Cueni

Overview and Insights · Jesus is the Bread of Life (6:22–71)

Overview: When the crowds locate Jesus, he chides them for wanting more bread and missing the spiritual significance of the sign (6:25–26). Instead, they ought to consume food provided by the Son of Man that leads to eternal life (6:27). There is only one work that God requires, and that is to believe in Jesus (6:28–29). Ironically, the people who had observed the feeding of the five thousand now demand of Jesus a miraculous sign, claiming that God supplied their forefathers with manna in the wilderness (6:30–31). Jesus reminds them that Moses was not the source of the manna. Rather, God is the one who gives true bread from heaven (6:32–33). When the crowd demands this heavenly bread, Jesus boldly proclaims, “I am the bread of life” (6:33–35). The problem is that the crowds have seen Jesus…

The Baker Bible Handbook by Hays and Duvall, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

John 6:25-59 · Jesus the Bread of Life

25 When they found him on the other side of the lake, they asked him, "Rabbi, when did you get here?"

28 Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"

29 Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

34 "Sir," they said, "from now on give us this bread."

52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"

Commentary · Jesus the Bread of Life

In the Capernaum synagogue (6:59) Jesus provides a full discourse explaining his person and work. Again, the discourse is propelled forward by inquiries (6:25, 28, 30, 34, 41, 52), and at each level the revelation of Christ deepens. Initially the crowds merely possess the surface apprehension of the miracle (6:25). They must go deeper and unveil the sign, for the signs are revelatory. Like the woman needing water (4:7), these people need imperishable food supplying eternal life (6:27; 4:14). For this food alone they must labor. What then is labor? Faith in Christ (6:29). But the human impulse is to demand evidence so compelling that we must believe. If Jesus is making personal claims on the order of Moses, then his sign must exceed that of Moses (6:30). In John 6:31 Jesus’s response is an intricate Jewish commentary (midrash) based on one or several Old Testament texts: “He gave them bread from heaven to eat” (cf. Exod. 16:4, 15; Ps. 78:24). The true bread they seek is not dependent on Moses (or Judaism): it is whatever God rains on humans as a gift, and which gives life (6:33). The Jews here resemble the Samaritan woman inasmuch as they are intrigued: “Sir, give us/me this bread/water” (6:34; 4:15).

The divine origin of Jesus is a favorite Johannine theme (3:13–31), and John often ironically presents it in innocent inquiries (e.g., 7:28, 34–36). So too the question of 6:25 about Jesus’s mysterious appearance in Capernaum goes unanswered, because now a theological response is at hand. Jesus is the bread of life that has mysteriously descended (6:35, 38). The twin themes of hunger and thirst (cf. chaps. 4, 6) are now satisfied. Belief is still the key (6:36; cf. 6:29); however, now a new note is struck. God is sovereign over the ministry of Jesus (6:38) as well as its results (6:37, 39, 44). Those whom God calls are effectively called and securely preserved (6:39–40; cf. 10:14–18; 17:6). In other words, the work of Jesus and the gathering of disciples are both a result of God’s perfect will.

From the crowd’s point of view this revelation is hard to accept, and they murmur (6:41–43). Is Jesus not a commonplace citizen of Galilee (cf. Mark 6:1–6)? How can he descend from heaven? But Jesus knows that further explanation will not complete what is lacking. The gift of faith and the ability to apprehend who Christ really is—these are divine things (6:44–48). Faith is not merely rational persuasion: it includes God’s drawing us (6:44). To stay in Judaism is death (6:49), but to consume the bread of life brings life (6:50–51).

But a deeper revelation is to come: the bread to be consumed is Jesus’s flesh offered in sacrifice (6:51). Still, the discourse is urged forward through a literal misunderstanding. How can humans eat his flesh (6:52)? The following explanation (6:53–58) reinforces this thought and draws on sacrificial images (flesh and blood). If symbolism is still at work (as it likely is), the symbols inevitably suggest the elements of the Lord’s Supper. It is not the sacrament that gives life; rather, salvation is found in the sacrifice behind it and the faith that it evokes (6:35, 40, 47). Outside the Eucharist an admonition to drink blood in any other Jewish setting would be incomprehensible.

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

The discourse begins as a dialogue between Jesus and the crowd, and becomes more and more of a monologue as it continues. The crowd had begun following him because of the miracles he had done (cf. 6:2), but since the multiplication of the loaves, they have been pursuing him as one who can satisfy their physical hunger and (they hope) their political ambitions as well (cf. 6:15). They think they have found him, but they have not. They have been fed, yet they have not begun to receive what Jesus has to give. Their search must therefore continue (cf. Luke 11:9–10). What they do not yet realize is that food is a metaphor. Like Jesus himself, whose food was “to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work” (4:34), they must work … for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you (v. 27; cf. the “water” Jesus offered to the Samaritan woman, 4:14). This work of God is to believe in the one he has sent (v. 29).

The mention of “believing” (rather than merely seeking or pursuing) draws from the crowd a demand for another miracle or sign comparable to that of the manna that Moses provided for the Israelites in the desert (vv. 30–31). The incident is recounted fully in Exodus 16, but Jesus’ questioners cite merely the psalmist’s summary of it: He gave them bread from heaven to eat (v. 31; cf. Ps. 78:24). The request is strange, coming so soon after a miracle that itself invites comparison with Moses and the manna. Why would those whom Jesus had miraculously fed only the day before ask for bread from heaven? It appears that the controlling term is not bread but the phrase from heaven. The scene recalls an argument between Jesus and the Pharisees just after the second feeding of a crowd in Mark and Matthew: “To test him, they asked him for a sign from heaven. He sighed deeply and said, ‘Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign? I tell you the truth, no sign will be given to it’ ” (Mark 8:11–12). In Matthew (16:4) there is one exception: “the sign of Jonah” (i.e., the resurrection of Jesus, cf. 12:39–41). Whether or not the occasion is the same in John 6, the apparent nature of the request is similar in the two instances. Nor is the incident unique within John’s Gospel. Jesus had been challenged in much the same way when he first visited Jerusalem (2:18) and had replied (as in Matthew) with a veiled reference to his resurrection (2:19). Here his answer is much more elaborate. He begins by adding certain interpretive comments to the psalm just quoted (v. 32):

Not …

But …

Moses

God (Jesus’ Father)

gave

gives

bread

true bread

The true bread is immediately defined as he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world (v. 33). The terms of the discussion are almost totally changed. It is not a question of what Moses did in the time of the Exodus but of what God is doing right now. It is not a question of manna from the sky but of a flesh-and-blood person who stands before them—Jesus, the son of Joseph (cf. v. 42). Jesus does not merely give bread (or a miraculous sign) from heaven. He is that bread; in all that he says and does, he is God’s miraculous sign. The crowd, not ready to grasp this distinction, still asks him, from now on give us this bread (v. 34). Their plea recalls that of the Samaritan woman (4:15), yet their situation is not the same as hers. Their hunger for food is satisfied, but not their hunger for miracles. These Jews who “demand miraculous signs” (1 Cor. 1:22) have not yet understood that to which Jesus’ miracles are pointing. They know that his miracles give life (v. 33) but not that life means believing in him (cf. 5:39–40).

At verse 35 the dialogue becomes a monologue with interruptions (i.e., vv. 41–42, 52). These interruptions by the crowd, now called “the Jews” (vv. 41, 52) can be used to divide the discourse into three sections: verses 35–40, 41–51, and 52–58. An alternative structure is in two sections (vv. 35–47 and 48–58), each introduced by the identical pronouncement, I am the bread of life (vv. 35, 48), and each subdivided by a dispute among “the Jews.” In either case the discourse as a whole is designated a synagogue discourse given (presumably on a Sabbath) in the synagogue at Capernaum (v. 59). At some point (perhaps v. 35?), the scene has shifted from the lakeshore to the synagogue, and the discussion has taken on a somewhat more formal character.

Many scholars prefer the threefold division of the discourse because of the definite breaks at verses 41 and 52 and because the last section is regarded by some as the work of a later editor, but if content is the prime consideration, the twofold division is more appropriate. Verses 35–47 unfold further the meaning of the phrase bread from heaven in the preceding Scripture quotation (v. 31), whereas verses 48–58 expand on the words to eat in the same quotation. Psalm 78:24 is the text, and verses 35–47 and 48–58 comprise a two-part synagogue sermon based on it. In the middle of each section, the hearers take offense at the claim Jesus is making—in verses 41–42 the claim to have come down from heaven, and in verse 52, the claim to be able to give them his flesh to eat.

Part One: The Bread from Heaven (vv. 35–47). The theme of the first section was anticipated in verse 33: The bread from heaven is Jesus. In verse 35, Jesus repeats the claim in the form of an “I am” pronouncement, the first of seven such pronouncements found throughout this Gospel:

I am the bread of life (6:35, 48; cf. vv. 41, 51).

I am the light of the world (8:12; cf. 9:5).

I am the gate for the sheep (10:7; cf. v. 9).

I am the good shepherd (10:11, 14).

I am the resurrection and the life (11:25).

I am the way and the truth and the life (14:6).

I am the true vine (15:1; cf. v. 5).

Of these, all but the fifth and sixth occur twice. The repetition allows Jesus to use the metaphors in different ways. In some instances the first use of the metaphor introduces Jesus in his uniqueness or in contrast to others who might claim a similar designation, and the second explores a particular aspect or implication of the metaphor. Here, the context suggests that Jesus is the true bread (v. 32) in contrast to the manna, just as he is the “true” vine (15:1), or the “good” shepherd in contrast to hirelings (10:11–13), or the sheep gate in contrast to thieves (10:7–8). Yet what dominates part one of the discourse is not the metaphor of bread but the personality of Jesus. Aside from a passing reference to hunger in verse 35, the metaphor lies mostly dormant until part two. In verses 35–47, Jesus speaks as the Son (v. 40) more than as bread of life. If he is bread, he is bread from heaven (vv. 38, 41–42; cf. v. 33), and it is on his divine origin and mission that the main emphasis falls. Though in his coming he satisfies hunger and thirst (v. 35), he is not “eaten” as bread. Those to whom he ministers have seen him (vv. 36, 40), come to him (vv. 35, 37, 45) and believe in him as the Son (vv. 35–36, 40, 47; cf. v. 29). The metaphor of eating is in the background (cf. v. 27), but Jesus prefers to speak in straightforward language. It is necessary to define for the crowd all that it means to come to him and follow him (cf. vv. 2, 5, 22–25), not so they will do it (for they will not), but for the sake of a “hidden” audience—the disciples (vv. 60–71) and, ultimately, the readers of the Gospel. The conclusion of part one is that in the fullest sense “coming to Jesus” means believing in him and receiving eternal life (vv. 40, 47). This is the food that never spoils (cf. vv. 27, 29) and that satisfies the deepest hunger. It is food this crowd will not taste (v. 36).

Implanted in the metaphor of bread from heaven is a sketch of the whole plan of salvation as seen in John’s Gospel (vv. 37–40). Jesus came down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me (v. 38; cf. 4:34). God’s will for Jesus is then spelled out twice, in parallel fashion:

… that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day (v. 39).

… that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day (v. 40).

The Father’s intent, realized through the Son, is a saving intent. Those who come to Jesus, those who see and believe, are those the Father has given him. The Father will see to it that they are kept safe; he will grant them new life as a present possession and raise them from the dead at the last day (cf. 5:24–25, 28). They are the Father’s gift to Jesus his Son.

Even as Jesus explains the plan of salvation to the crowd, he makes clear what the reader of the Gospel must already suspect, that the crowd itself is not a part of it: As I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe (v. 36). The crowd’s reaction to his words (vv. 41–42) is therefore no surprise. Verse 44 is the negative complement to verse 37: All whom the Father gives Jesus will come to him, and no one can come unless “drawn” to Jesus by the Father. A person is drawn by hearing the Father’s voice and learning from him. Though this “educational” process has deep roots in divine election and in the individual conscience (cf. 3:20–21), only the free outward act of coming to Jesus in faith proves that a person has been thus taught by God (v. 45). As far as human experience is concerned, to hear and learn from the Father means hearing and believing the message of Jesus, for only Jesus (having come from heaven) has seen the Father (v. 46; cf. 5:19; 8:38) and only he can interpret the Father to the world (cf. 1:18). In Jesus, the Father speaks (cf. 5:37–38).

Verse 47 summarizes the discourse thus far and reduces the divine message to its simplest terms: I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life.

Part Two: Eating the Bread (vv. 48–58). With the second occurrence of I am the bread of life (v. 48), the bread metaphor begins to come into its own, giving a new shape to the argument and a new dimension to the simple need of believing in order to gain life.

Attention centers on the phrase, to eat, in the Psalm 78 text. Jesus virtually repeats the word uttered earlier by his questioners, Your forefathers ate the manna in the desert (v. 49; cf. v. 31), adding significantly, yet they died. The manna is then contrasted with the bread that comes down from heaven (v. 50; cf. v. 33). Whoever eats this bread will not die, but live forever. Once more Jesus identifies himself with this bread. Specifically, he calls it my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world (v. 51). Here for the first time he connects the metaphor of bread with the prospect of his own death. His language recalls words attributed to him in the earliest account of the institution of the Lord’s Supper: “This is my body, which is for you” (1 Cor. 11:24; cf. Luke 22:19). His flesh or his “body” means the giving up of his body in death, just as Christ’s blood refers in the New Testament to the shedding of his blood on the cross. Paul uses “body” in this way when he says that Christians have “died to the law through the body of Christ” (Rom. 7:4), and “flesh” when he declares that “in his flesh” (Eph. 2:14) Christ destroyed the enmity between Jew and Gentile.

Near the beginning and at the end of part two of the discourse, Jesus speaks of eating the bread that is his flesh (vv. 50–52, 57–58):

which a man may eat (v. 50)

f anyone eats of this bread (v. 51)

this bread is my flesh (v. 51)

how can this man give us his flesh to eat? (v. 52)

the one who feeds on me (v. 57)

he who feeds on this bread (v. 58)

Verses 53–56 present a different phenomenon. Four times in rapid succession Jesus speaks of the twofold necessity of eating his flesh and drinking his blood. Nothing in the bread metaphor prepares the reader for the mention of drinking blood, so abhorrent to the Jewish mind (e.g., Lev. 17:10–14). Just when the Jews take offense at the notion of eating his flesh (v. 52), Jesus multiplies the offense many times over. Instead of explaining the statement away, he tells them they must drink his blood as well! The metaphor of eating flesh and drinking blood was used in the Old Testament for slaughter and utter desolation (e.g., Ezek. 39:17–20). Israel’s oppressors would be made to eat their own flesh and drink their own blood (Isa. 49:26).

Because such a meaning seems impossible in the present context, many scholars find in Jesus’ shocking language a symbolic allusion to the two elements of bread and wine in the Christian sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. If that is the meaning, it is argued, the passage (usually defined as vv. 51c–58, starting with the words, The bread that I will give him is my flesh) must have been added to John’s Gospel by a later editor. Neither Jesus nor the Gospel writer would have spoken so directly of the Lord’s Supper or made participation in it a condition of salvation (v. 53). If it is early tradition at all, it must have originated in the context of the last supper, as a variant form of the words of institution (“This is my body.… This is my blood”), not in Galilee at the height of Jesus’ ministry. But these conclusions are all based on the assumption that verses 51c–58 present a different teaching than the rest of the discourse. Is this the case? The only new factor introduced in verse 51 is the allusion to Jesus’ death (my flesh which I will give for the life of the world). Even the Synoptics represent Jesus as predicting his death while still in Galilee (e.g., Mark 8:31; 9:31), and there is no reason why John’s Gospel might not do so as well. The statement in verse 33 that Jesus gives life to the world surely hints at the notion that he gives his flesh for the life of the world. He has come down from heaven not to do my own will but to do the will of him who sent me (v. 38). It is only a small step from speaking of Jesus’ mission, or his obedience to the Father, to speaking of his death on the cross. In Gethsemane he will pray “not what I will, but what you will” (Mark 14:36).

Before discussing whether or not the references to eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood are sacramental, it is well to notice something closer at hand, the fact that they presuppose his violent death. Their effect is to intensify what is already implied by flesh alone in verse 51. The mention of blood adds no distinct theological dimension of its own but simply makes more vivid and shocking the notion that Jesus will give his life, his very flesh, for the sake of the world. The references to flesh and blood together stand within the framework of references simply to eating the bread that is Jesus (i.e., vv. 50–52, 57–58) and must be interpreted in light of these. The bread or flesh references, in turn, stand within the framework of Jesus’ mission. Only the truth (established in part one of the discourse) that he is the living bread that came down from heaven (v. 51) makes it possible to eat his flesh.

In verse 57 he bases the “eating” even more explicitly on his own mission and his relationship to the Father: The living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. What is this “eating”? Whatever the metaphor means concretely, it expresses a relationship to Jesus corresponding to Jesus’ own relationship to God the Father. As Jesus depends on the Father for his very life, so the person who eats Jesus depends on him for life. Though Jesus’ dependence on the Father is not explicitly described here in terms of eating, he had said earlier: “My food … is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work” (4:34). As the Father sent Jesus, Jesus will send out disciples (4:38; 17:18, 20:21). As his food is to obey the Father and complete the Father’s work, their food is to obey him and complete his work. This divine work was earlier defined as believing in Jesus (vv. 28–29), with the promise that he who believes has everlasting life (v. 47). But now faith is shown to involve discipleship. As Jesus obeyed the Father and completed the Father’s work by giving his life (cf. 17:4; 19:30), a disciple of Jesus will obey him and follow him even to death.

The language of violent death—eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood—points to the necessity, not merely to accept the reality of Jesus’ death for the life of the world, but to follow him in the way of the cross. In the Synoptics, when Jesus began to predict his Passion he added, “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it” (Mark 8:34–35). Later in John’s Gospel, Jesus will speak simultaneously of his own death and of what it means to be his disciple; “I tell you the truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds. The man who loves his life will lose it, while the man who hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life. Whoever serves me must follow me; and where I am, my servant also will be. My father will honor the one who serves me” (12:24–26). The metaphors vary, but the point is much the same. To eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood (v. 53) is not merely to partake of the benefits of Jesus’ death but to participate in the death itself by becoming his servant and disciple. It is to follow him and (in one’s own way) to share his mission and destiny. The point is not that actual martyrdom is inevitable but that if a person is faithful it is always a distinct possibility (e.g., 13:36; 15:18–16:4; 21:18–19).

Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, seems to have understood the metaphor along similar lines. As he sailed toward Rome, and martyrdom, he wrote: “I want the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David, and for drink I want his blood, which is uncorruptible love” (To the Romans 7.3). The emphasis on discipleship or martyrdom does not, of course, rule out a connection with the Lord’s Supper. It is likely that Ignatius saw the two aspects as interrelated and inseparable, and if Ignatius did so, the possibility must be allowed that John’s Gospel as well viewed the Lord’s Supper as a key expression and example of the Christian community taking up its cross to follow Jesus.

The promise of life in this chapter unfolds against a backdrop of death, not only Jesus’ death, but (potentially at least) the death of those called to follow him. It is the prospect of actual death that gives special poignancy to the recurring refrain I will raise him up at the last day (vv. 39, 40, 44, 54), and to the concluding assurances that those who eat will live forever (vv. 51, 58). Part two of the discourse ends where it began, with the ancestors in the desert who died and stayed dead even though they received the manna (v. 58; cf. v. 49). Jesus promises something far greater than manna in the desert: Life with him now and victory over death at the last day.

Additional Notes

6:27 On him God the Father has placed his seal of approval: Like 3:35–36, this brief explanatory clause is best understood as the Gospel writer’s reflection on the baptism of Jesus. There are several other such possible asides in this chapter that either carry the argument along (vv. 33, 50, 58) or add a necessary qualification (v. 46).

6:33 For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven. The abrupt use of the third person again suggests a parenthetical comment merging Jesus’ words with the words of the narrator in the manner of 3:13–21 or 3:31–36. The identification of Jesus with the bread from heaven in this verse seems to get ahead of the story, for such an identification does not become explicit on Jesus’ lips until v. 35. Also, v. 33 appears to be ignored in its immediate context. The crowd’s request in v. 34, from now on give us this bread, is most easily understood as a reply, not to v. 33, but to Jesus’ initial reference to the true bread from heaven in v. 32.

On the other hand, a serious attempt to give v. 33 a place in the give-and-take of an actual conversation would require that it be translated differently: “For the bread that God gives is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” Such a rendering is grammatically possible because the Greek word for bread is masculine (like the pronoun he). It avoids explicitly identifying Jesus with the bread (leaving that until v. 35) and makes the statement more at home in its immediate context. Either translation is legitimate, and it may be that the Gospel writer is being deliberately ambiguous. From the crowd’s standpoint the bread is “that which” comes from heaven (like the manna), yet the NIV translation is the appropriate one for the reader of the Gospel, who knows from the onset that the Bread is a person.

6:35 Will never be thirsty: It is important not to read back into this pronouncement the references in vv. 53–56 to drinking Jesus’ blood. Jesus is here presented simply as the giver of the water of life as in 4:14 and 7:37–38. The pronouncement is only loosely connected to the bread metaphor and the exposition of Psalm 78:24, for the verbs used are not “eat” and “drink” but “come” and “believe.”

6:36 But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. When did he tell them this? The most plausible answer is 5:38: “for you do not believe the one he sent” (cf. 5:40, 43, 46–47). When Jesus’ discourses take on a formal character, there is a sense in which his opponents are always the same people (i.e., “the Jews” 5:18; 6:41), whether he is in Galilee or Jerusalem and regardless of the occasion.

He did not tell them in so many words that they had seen him. The association of seeing with believing arises, rather, out of the present context. They ask to see a sign in order to believe (v. 30), but Jesus tells them that he is the sign (v. 35). Verse 36 could be paraphrased “But I told you that you do not believe—and you don’t, even though you have seen me” (contrast v. 40: “that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life”).

6:37 Whoever comes to me I will never drive away. Unlike the coming of the crowd in 6:5, the “coming to Jesus” referred to in vv. 35 and 37 is synonymous with “believing.”

6:39 That I shall lose none … but … raise them up: The relevant Greek pronouns in this verse are neuter and singular: lit. “that of everything he has given me I should not lose any of it, but raise it at the last day”; cf. v. 37a (lit., “everything that the Father gives me”). This grammatical feature suggests that Jesus views the redeemed corporately, as a single entity. In contrast, the pronouns in v. 40 are masculine singular, implying that the same promises are also held out to Christian believers as individuals.

6:41 The Jews. John’s Gospel often designates Jesus’ opponents as “the Jews” because in the writer’s day the Jews and the Jewish synagogue stood as a threat against the Christian community (cf. 16:1–2). Sometimes the term refers particularly to the religious authorities (e.g., 5:15–18), but here it becomes a designation for the crowd as it begins to grumble to itself about Jesus. The word grumble recalls the behavior of the Israelites in the desert in the time of Moses (cf. Exod. 16:2, 7, 8). Ironically, it was in response to their grumbling that God gave them the manna.

6:46 This time the narrator’s aside adds a qualification: “hearing” and “learning” from the Father is not the same as seeing him. Those who claim secret divine revelations are deceiving themselves and others. The thought is the same here as in the prologue. God reveals himself only in his Word (cf. 1:1, 18).

6:50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven: Once more the use of the third person suggests that the narrator is rephrasing Jesus’ claims from the perspective of a confessing Christian (cf. vv. 27b, 33). An alternation is thus created between “I” or “I am” pronouncements (vv. 48–49, 51), and confessional statements beginning with “this” or “this is” (v. 50, and “this bread” in v. 51). As elsewhere in John’s Gospel, the words of Jesus and the words of the believing community are regarded as almost interchangeable (cf. also v. 58).

6:54 Eats: Here and in vv. 56–58 a Greek word is used that normally means to “feed on” something as an animal feeds. Some say John has chosen this crude term deliberately to lend realism to the idea of eating Jesus’ flesh. But in the present tense he uses only this word for “eat” (cf. 13:18), and it is therefore best regarded simply as a peculiar feature of his style.

6:56 Remains in me, and I in him: This word for remains (Gr.: menein) is not used elsewhere in the chapter. It is used most conspicuously in Jesus’ farewell discourses (e.g., 15:4–10).

6:57 I live because of the Father … will live because of me: The meaning suggested by the context is that Jesus lives his life on earth from day to day in dependence on the Father, while the disciple, in turn, lives in daily dependence on Jesus. In 14:19, however, Jesus uses similar language to refer to his resurrection. It is possible that both aspects are in view here. Jesus lives because of the Father both in his life on earth and in resurrection from the dead, while the disciple lives because of Jesus in both senses as well. There is little doubt, however, that the emphasis in each case is on the present aspect, that is, from day to day.

6:58 This is the bread that came down from heaven.… The last of the asides by the Gospel writer virtually repeats v. 50, gathering into the pronouncement the phraseology of vv. 49–51 with which part two of the discourse began. This summary gives unity and cohesion to vv. 48–58 and makes it difficult to sever (as many have tried to do) vv. 51c–58 from the rest.

Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by J. Ramsey Michaels, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Blood

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bread

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

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

Capernaum

A fishing town located on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee (Matt. 4:13). The town was on an important trade route and was a center for commerce in Galilee. In Capernaum, Jesus called Levi (Matthew) from his “tax booth,” probably a customs station for goods in transit (Mark 2:13 17; Matt. 9:9–13; Luke 5:27–32). There may also have been a military garrison in Capernaum, since the town’s synagogue was built by a certain centurion whose servant Jesus healed (Matt. 8:8–13; Luke 7:1–10).

Capernaum served as Jesus’ base of operations during his Galilean ministry. In Mark’s Gospel, Jesus’ teaching and healing ministry begins there (Mark 1:21–34), and this is where he returned “home” after itinerant ministry around Galilee (Matt. 9:1; Mark 2:1; 9:33). Although Peter and Andrew were originally from Bethsaida (John 1:44), they lived in Capernaum, and their fishing business was located there. It was here that Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Mark 1:29–31) and a paralyzed man whose friends lowered him through a hole in the roof (2:1–12). Jesus later pronounced judgment against the town, together with Chorazin and Bethsaida, because of the people’s unbelief despite the miracles they had seen (Matt. 11:23–24; Luke 10:15). Archaeologists have discovered a first-century home under a fifth-century church in Capernaum. Christian inscriptions in the home indicate that it was venerated by Christians, suggesting to many scholars that this was Peter’s residence.

Desert

A broad designation for certain regions in Israel, typically rocky, although also plains, with little rainfall. These areas generally are uninhabited, and most often “wilderness” refers to specific regions surrounding inhabited Israel. A fair amount of Scripture’s focus with respect to the wilderness concerns Israel’s forty-year period of wandering in the wilderness after the exodus (see also Wilderness Wandering).

More specifically, the geographical locations designated “wilderness” fall into four basic categories: the Negev (south), Transjordan (east), Judean (eastern slope of Judean mountains), and Sinai (southwest).

The Negev makes up a fair amount of Israel’s southern kingdom, Judah. It is very rocky and also includes plateaus and wadis, which are dry riverbeds that can bloom after rains. Its most important city is Beersheba (see Gen. 21:14, 22 34), which often designates Israel’s southernmost border, as in the expression “from Dan to Beersheba” (e.g., 2 Sam. 17:11).

Transjordan pertains to the area east of the Jordan River, the area through which the Israelites had to pass before crossing the Jordan on their way from Mount Sinai to Canaan. (Israel was denied direct passage to Canaan by the Edomites and Amorites [see Num. 20:14–21; 21:21–26].) Even though this region lay outside the promised land of Canaan, it was settled by the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh after they had fulfilled God’s command to fight alongside the other tribes in conquering Canaan (Num. 32:1–42; Josh. 13:8; 22:1–34).

The Judean Desert is located on the eastern slopes of the Judean mountains, toward the Dead Sea. David fled there for refuge from Saul (1 Sam. 21–23). It was also in this area that Jesus was tempted (Luke 4:1–13).

The Sinai Desert is a large peninsula, with the modern-day Gulf of Suez to the west and the Gulf of Aqaba to the east. In the ancient Near Eastern world, both bodies of water often were referred to as the “Red Sea,” which is the larger sea to the south. In addition to the region traditionally believed to contain the location of Mount Sinai (its exact location is unknown), the Sinai Desert is further subdivided into other areas known to readers of the OT: Desert of Zin (northeast, contains Kadesh Barnea), Desert of Shur (northwest, near Egypt), Desert of Paran (central).

Wilderness is commonly mentioned in the Bible, and although it certainly can have neutral connotations (i.e., simply describing a location), the uninhabited places often entail both positive (e.g., as a place of solitude) and negative (e.g., as a place of wrath) connotations, both in their actual geological properties and as metaphors. The very rugged and uninhabited nature of the wilderness easily lent itself to being a place of death (e.g., Deut. 8:15; Ps. 107:4–5; Jer. 2:6). It was also a place associated with Israel’s rebellions and struggles with other nations. Upon leaving Egypt, Israel spent forty years wandering the wilderness before entering Canaan, encountering numerous military conflicts along the way. This forty-year period was occasioned by a mass rebellion (Num. 14), hence casting a necessarily dark cloud over that entire period, and no doubt firming up subsequent negative connotations of “wilderness.” Similarly, “wilderness” connotes notions of exile from Israel, as seen in the ritual of the scapegoat (lit., “goat of removal” [see Lev. 16]). On the Day of Atonement, one goat was sacrificed to atone for the people’s sin, and another was sent off, likewise to atone for sin. The scapegoat was released into the desert, where it would encounter certain death, either by succumbing to the climate or through wild animals.

On the other hand, it is precisely in this uninhabited land that God also showed his faithfulness to his people, despite their prolonged punishment. He miraculously supplied bread (manna) and meat (quail) (Exod. 16; Num. 11), as well as water (Exod. 15:22–27; 17:1–7; Num. 20:1–13; 21:16–20). God’s care for Israel is amply summarized in Deut. 1:30–31: “The Lord your God, who is going before you, will fight for you, as he did for you in Egypt, before your very eyes, and in the wilderness. There you saw how the Lord your God carried you, as a father carries his son, all the way you went until you reached this place.”

The harsh realities of the wilderness also made it an ideal place to seek sanctuary and protection. David fled from Saul to the wilderness, the Desert of Ziph (1 Sam. 23:14; 26:2–3; cf. Ps. 55:7). Similarly, Jeremiah sought a retreat in the desert from sinful Israel (Jer. 9:2).

Related somewhat to this last point is Jesus’ own attitude toward the wilderness. It was there that he retreated when he could no longer move about publicly (John 11:54). John the Baptist came from the wilderness announcing Jesus’ ministry (Matt. 3:1–3; Mark 1:2–4; Luke 3:2–6; John 1:23; cf. Isa. 40:3–5). It was also in the desert that Jesus went to be tempted but also overcame that temptation.

Father

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The church as the family of God. Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship, the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into the community was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was eventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18). Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the community of his followers, God’s family—the church. See also Adoption.

Heaven

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

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

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

I Am

The divine name, YHWH, revealed to Moses (Exod. 3:14) is related to hayah, the Hebrew verb for “to be.” The LXX renders this name with the phrase “I am” (egō eimi), which later OT writings employ as a title for God (Isa. 43:25; 51:12; 52:6).

A significant feature in the Fourth Gospel is John’s record of seven predicated “I am” statements within Jesus’ teaching: “I am the bread of life” (6:35); “I am the light of the world” (8:12); “I am the gate for the sheep” (10:7); “I am the good shepherd” (10:11); “I am the resurrection and the life” (11:25); “I am the way and the truth and the life” (14:6); and “I am the true vine” (15:1). With each metaphor Jesus expresses a contrast between himself and another. For instance, Jesus’ claim to be the bread of life differentiates him from the manna that appeared in the wilderness (6:49), while his identification as the good shepherd stands in contrast to the hired hand who abandons the sheep in a time of trouble (10:12 13). In these instances “I am” is likely an intentional choice meant to echo the divine name and reveal Jesus’ relationship of unity with God the Father.

The meaning of additional unpredicated but emphatic “I am” declarations in Greek by Jesus is debated (Mark 6:50; 14:62; Luke 24:39; John 6:20; 8:24, 28, 58; 13:19; 18:5). In response to Jesus’ declaration of “I am,” the high priest accuses him of blasphemy (Mark 14:64), the Jews desire to stone him (John 8:59), and the officials who come to arrest him “[draw] back and [fall] to the ground” (John 18:6). These reactions suggest that at least some who heard Jesus utter these words interpreted them as his claim to equality with God (cf. John 5:18).

Joseph

(1) The eleventh son of Judah and the first by Jacob’s beloved wife, Rachel (Gen. 30:24; 35:24).

Joseph was Jacob’s favorite, and so Jacob “made an ornate robe for him” (37:3). While shepherding with his brothers, Joseph had a dream indicating that he would one day rise to prominence over them. This was too much for his brothers to bear, and so they decided, after some deliberation, to throw him into a cistern and, rather than kill him, sell him to passing Ishmaelite/Midianite merchants (37:25 28).

Upon arriving in Egypt, Joseph was sold to Potiphar, an official of Pharaoh, and then thrown in jail after Potiphar’s wife falsely accused him of making sexual advances (chap. 39). While in jail, he accurately interpreted the dreams of Pharaoh’s cupbearer and baker (chap. 40). Two years later, he was called upon to interpret Pharaoh’s dreams (chap. 41). Joseph’s ability to interpret dreams plus his administrative skills saved Egypt from famine, which resulted in his elevation to being “in charge of the whole land of Egypt” (41:41).

It was the famine that brought Joseph’s family to Egypt to find food, which eventually led to their warm reunion, though not without some testing on Joseph’s part (chaps. 42–45). After Joseph made himself known to his brothers, they reconciled and sent for the elderly Jacob, who was awaiting news in Canaan. Thus, Jacob and his twelve sons lived in Egypt, and their descendants were eventually enslaved by a king “to whom Joseph meant nothing” (Exod. 1:8).

Joseph died in Egypt and was embalmed (Gen. 50:20–26). The exodus generation took his bones out of Egypt (Exod. 13:19), and he was later buried in Shechem (Josh. 24:32).

(2) The husband of Mary, mentioned only by name in Jesus’ birth stories in Matthew and Luke. According to Matt. 1:16, Joseph is a descendant of David, which establishes Jesus’ royal bloodline. Luke’s genealogy (3:23–38) downplays Jesus’ relationship to Joseph. In Matthew, Joseph is a recipient of several divine communications by means of dreams, announcing Mary’s conception (1:18–25) and commanding the flight to Egypt (2:13) and the return to Nazareth (2:19–23). In Luke, Joseph takes Mary to Bethlehem to give birth (2:4–7), presents Jesus in the temple for consecration (2:21–24), and brings Mary and Jesus to Jerusalem for the Passover feast when Jesus is twelve (2:41–52).

(3) A Jew from Arimathea, a secret follower of Jesus and member of the Sanhedrin who did not agree to put Jesus to death (Luke 23:50–51; John 19:38). He asked Pilate for Jesus’ body, wrapped it in linen, and placed it in his own tomb (Matt. 27:57–60). (4) Also known as Barsabbas or Justus, he was one of the two men proposed to take Judas Iscariot’s place among the disciples (Acts 1:23).

Manna

Miraculous, heavenly bread that God rained down for the Israelites to eat during their wilderness wanderings (Exod. 16:1 35). The word manna likely comes from the Hebrew phrase man hu’ (“What is it?”), reflecting the Israelites’ puzzled response to God’s gracious provision (Exod. 16:15). It resulted from a layer of dew that fell on the camp at night and evaporated in the morning, leaving fine flakes resembling frost on the ground (Exod. 16:14; Num. 11:9). Manna was white like coriander seed and tasted like wafers made with honey and olive oil (Exod. 16:31; Num. 11:8). It could be crushed into a paste and then either boiled or baked (Num. 11:8).

Miracles

Because Scripture sees all things as providentially arranged and sustained by God’s sovereign power at all times (Heb. 1:3), miracles are not aberrations in an otherwise closed and mechanical universe. Nor are miracles raw demonstrations of divinity designed to overcome prejudice or unbelief and to convince people of the existence of God (Mark 8:11 12). Still less are they clever conjuring tricks involving some kind of deception that can be otherwise explained on a purely scientific basis. Rather, God in his infinite wisdom sometimes does unusual and extraordinary things to call attention to himself and his activity. Miracles are divinely ordained acts of God that dramatically alert us to the presence of his glory and power and advance his saving purposes in redemptive history.

In the OT, miracles are not evenly distributed but rather are found in greater number during times of great redemptive significance, such as the exodus and the conquest of Canaan. Miracles were performed also during periods of apostasy, such as in the days of the ninth-century prophets Elijah and Elisha. Common to both of these eras is the powerful demonstration of the superiority of God over pagan deities (Exod. 7–12; 1 Kings 18:20–40).

In the NT, miracles often are acts of compassion, but more significantly they attest the exalted status of Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 2:22) and the saving power of his word (Heb. 2:3–4). In the Synoptic Gospels, they reveal the coming of God’s kingdom and the conquest of Satan’s dominion (Matt. 8:16–17; 12:22–30; Mark 3:27). They point to the person of Jesus as the promised Messiah of OT Scripture (Matt. 4:23; 11:4–6). John shows a preference for the word “signs,” and his Gospel is structured around them (John 20:30–31). According to John, the signs that Jesus performed were such that only the one who stood in a unique relationship to the Father as the Son of God could do them.

Just as entrenched skepticism is injurious to faith, so too is naive credulity, for although signs and wonders witness to God, false prophets also perform them “to deceive, if possible, even the elect” (Matt. 24:24). Christians are to exercise discernment and not be led astray by such impostors (Matt. 7:15–20).

The relationship between miracles and faith is not as straightforward as sometimes supposed. Miracles do not necessarily produce faith, nor does faith necessarily produce miracles. Miracles were intended to bring about the faith that leads to eternal life (John 20:31), but not all who witnessed them believed (John 10:32). Additionally, Jesus regarded a faith that rested only on the miracle itself as precarious (Mark 8:11–13; John 2:23–25; 4:48), though better than no faith at all (John 10:38). Faith that saves must ultimately find its grounding in the person of Jesus as the Son of God.

It is also clear that although Jesus always encouraged faith in those who came to him for help (Mark 9:23), and that he deliberately limited his miraculous powers in the presence of unbelief (Mark 6:5), many of his miracles were performed on those who did not or could not exercise faith (Matt. 12:22; Mark 1:23–28; 5:1–20; Luke 14:1–4).

The fact that Jesus performed miracles was never an issue; rather, his opponents disputed the source of his power (Mark 3:22). Arguments about his identity were to be settled by appeal not to miracles but to the word of God (Matt. 22:41–46).

Moses

Moses played a leadership role in the founding of Israel as a “kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:6). Indeed, the narrative of Exodus through Deuteronomy is the story of God using Moses to found the nation of Israel. It begins with an account of his birth (Exod. 2) and ends with an account of his death (Deut. 34). Moses’ influence and importance extend well beyond his lifetime, as later Scripture demonstrates.

Moses was born in a dangerous time, and according to Pharaoh’s decree, he should not have survived long after his birth. He was born to Amram and Jochebed (Exod. 6:20). Circumventing Pharaoh’s decree, Jochebed placed the infant Moses in a reed basket and floated him down the river. God guided the basket down the river and into the presence of none other than Pharaoh’s daughter (Exod. 2:5 6), who, at the urging of Moses’ sister, hired Jochebed to take care of the child.

The next major episode in the life of Moses concerns his defense of an Israelite worker who was being beaten by an Egyptian (Exod. 2:11–25). In the process of rescuing the Israelite, Moses killed the Egyptian. When it became clear that he was known to be the killer, he fled Egypt and ended up in Midian, where he became a member of the family of a Midianite priest-chief, Jethro, by marrying his daughter Zipporah.

Although Moses was not looking for a way back into Egypt, God had different plans. One day, while Moses was tending his sheep, God appeared to him in the form of a burning bush and commissioned him to go back to Egypt and lead his people to freedom. Moses expressed reluctance, and so God grudgingly enlisted his older brother, Aaron, to accompany him as his spokesperson.

Upon Moses’ return to Egypt, Pharaoh stubbornly refused to allow the Israelites to leave Egypt. God directed Moses to announce a series of plagues that ultimately induced Pharaoh to allow the Israelites to depart. After they left, Pharaoh had a change of mind and cornered them on the shores of the Red Sea (Sea of Reeds). It was at the Red Sea that God demonstrated his great power by splitting the sea and allowing the Israelites to escape before closing it again in judgment on the Egyptians. Moses signaled the presence of God by lifting his rod high in the air (Exod. 14:16). This event was long remembered as the defining moment when God released Israel from Egyptian slavery (Pss. 77; 114), and it even became the paradigm for future divine rescues (Isa. 40:3–5; Hos. 2:14–15).

After the crossing of the Red Sea, Moses led Israel back to Mount Sinai, the location of his divine commissioning. At this time, Moses went up the mountain as a prophetic mediator for the people (Deut. 18:16). He received the Ten Commandments, the rest of the law, and instructions to build the tabernacle (Exod. 19–24). All these were part of a new covenantal arrangement that today we refer to as the Mosaic or Sinaitic covenant.

However, as Moses came down the mountain with the law, he saw that the people, who had grown tired of waiting, were worshiping a false god that they had created in the form of a golden calf (Exod. 32). With the aid of the Levites, who that day assured their role as Israel’s priestly helpers, he brought God’s judgment against the offenders and also interceded in prayer with God to prevent the total destruction of Israel.

Thus began Israel’s long story of rebellion against God. God was particularly upset with the lack of confidence that the Israelites had shown when the spies from the twelve tribes gave their report (Num. 13). They did not believe that God could handle the fearsome warriors who lived in the land, and so God doomed them to forty years of wandering in the wilderness, enough time for the first generation to die. Not even Moses escaped this fate, since he had shown anger against God and attributed a miracle to his own power and not to God when he struck a rock in order to get water (Num. 20:1–13).

Thus, Moses was not permitted to enter the land of promise, though he had led the Israelites to the very brink of entry on the plains of Moab. There he gave his last sermon, which we know as the book of Deuteronomy. The purpose of his sermon was to tell the second generation of Israelites who were going to enter the land that they must obey God’s law or suffer the consequences. The form of the sermon was that of a covenant renewal, and so Israel on this occasion reaffirmed its loyalty to God.

After this, Moses went up on Mount Nebo, from which he could see the promised land, and died. Deuteronomy concludes with the following statements: “Since then, no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face. . . . For no one has ever shown the mighty power or performed the awesome deeds that Moses did in the sight of all Israel” (Deut. 34:10, 12).

The NT honors Moses as God’s servant but also makes the point that Jesus is one who far surpasses Moses as a mediator between God and people (Acts 3:17–26; Heb. 3).

The date of Moses is a matter of controversy because the biblical text does not name the pharaohs of the story. Many date him to the thirteenth century BC and associate him with Ramesses II, but others take 1 Kings 6:1 at face value and date him to the end of the fifteenth century BC, perhaps during the reign of Thutmose III.

Prophets

A prophet is a messenger of God, a person to whom God entrusts his message to an individual or to a nation. Indeed, the last book in the OT is named “Malachi,” which means “my messenger.” Isaiah heard God ask, “Whom shall I send?” and he cried out, “Send me!” (Isa. 6:8). A good template for understanding the phenomenon is Moses and Aaron. Moses was to tell Aaron what to say, and Aaron would say it. “Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet’” (Exod. 7:1).

In the NT period there were a number of prophets. John the Baptist could point to Jesus and proclaim him to be the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29). Agabus the prophet predicted a famine and, later, Paul’s arrest (Acts 11:28; 21:10 11).

Paul lists “gifts of the Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:4–11), including prophecy and various phenomena reminiscent of the OT prophets’ ecstatic state. Paul warns the Corinthians not to overdo this sort of thing and so to be mature (1 Cor. 14:19–20). Near the end of his life, in one of his last letters, he speaks of prophecy as normative in the church, particularly in establishing an authoritative body of elders to rule and especially to preach the gospel (1 Tim. 1:18; 4:14). Peter draws a connection between the ministry of the OT prophets and the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Evangelism seems to be the normative mode for prophecy today: forthtelling by calling people to turn from their sins to Jesus, and foretelling by speaking of his return and the final judgment.

Thus, all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they never participate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. The greatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus. John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure, but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection can proclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministry of any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).

Five prophetesses are mentioned in the OT: Miriam (Exod. 15:20), Deborah (Judg. 4–5), Huldah (2 Kings 22:14–20; 2 Chron. 34:22–28), Isaiah’s wife (Isa. 8:3), and Noadiah (Neh. 6:14).

Similarly in the NT, Peter recognizes God’s promise through Joel being fulfilled in the gift of prophetic speech to women as well as men at Pentecost (Acts 2:18); and Paul, acknowledging that women prophesy publicly in the congregation, is concerned only with the manner of their doing so (1 Cor. 11:5). The prophetess Anna proclaims the baby Jesus as the Messiah (Luke 2:36–38), Luke reports that the four unmarried daughters of Philip the evangelist also prophesy (Acts 21:8–9). The only false prophetess in the NT is the apocalyptic figure of Jezebel in Rev. 2:20.

Rabbi

A title applied to teachers and others in respected positions, literally meaning “my master.” By the NT era, the term was used in a more specific sense to refer to teachers of the Mosaic law.

In the NT, the title occurs only in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John, and it is most commonly used to address Jesus (Mark 9:5; 11:21; 14:45; Matt. 26:25, 49). The title is used more widely in John’s Gospel by individuals such as Nathanael and Nicodemus, as well as the group of disciples (John 1:38, 49; 3:2; 4:31; 6:25; 9:2; 11:8). The title conveys the respect of pupil for master and indicates the nature of the relationship that Jesus had with his followers.

Others were also called “Rabbi,” including John the Baptist and some of the Pharisees (John 3:26; Matt. 23:7). Although the Pharisees considered the title an honor, Jesus instructed his disciples not to allow themselves to be addressed as “Rabbi” and to acknowledge only one teacher, Christ (Matt. 23:8, 10).

Save

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

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

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

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

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

Seal

In the biblical world, documents were sealed with clay or wax (1 Kings 21:8; Job 38:14; Neh. 9:38; Jer. 32:10; Rev. 5:1). The integrity of the seal was assured by impressing an image into the soft substance, which would then harden and retain the unique image of the sender’s seal. The archaeological record attests this practice in the form of bullae (the impressions themselves, which survive long after the documents have disintegrated) as well as a large number of seals, which often were carved (Exod. 28:11; 39:6; Sir. 38:27; 45:11) into semiprecious stones or stone cylinders.

A person’s unique seal was closely identified with the owner and could be worn as a ring or pendant (see Gen. 38:18; Esther 8:8; Song 8:6). Besides documents, we have rec-ords of the sealing of caves (Matt. 27:66; cf. Dan. 6:17; 2 Macc. 2:5) and bags (Job 14:17; Tob. 9:5). In apocalyptic literature, seals are used to conceal prophecies of the future (Dan. 12:4) and to mark humans as belonging to God (Rev. 7:3 8).

Sign

Signs are visible, typically being an object, a mark, an event, or a custom. In addition, signs are symbolic, pointing to things not seen. Signs often reveal or share some quality with the unseen reality to which they point, and so they are a token of that reality. In the Bible, signs typically are caused or instituted by God, and in many cases they are miraculous. However, in a few cases signs are set forth as the work of other gods (as in Deut. 13:1 2) or as being instituted by merely human design (as in Num. 2:2). In summary, a sign may be defined as something seen that points to something unseen, and that is instituted or created to do so by someone’s intention.

Several examples support this definition. Keeping the Sabbath is a sign of God’s rest after creating the world (Exod. 31:15); the Sabbath rest itself imitates God’s rest. Circumcision is a sign of God’s promise to both Abraham and his descendants; circumcision is also a physical mark that is related to human fertility (Gen. 17:11). The rainbow is a sign of God’s promise not to destroy the world by water and rain; rainbows appear only with rain (Gen. 9:13). (In the original Hebrew text, both the custom of circumcision and the rainbow that appears after the great flood are called “signs.”) The early Passover plagues both bring and warn of judgment, while the healing miracles of Jesus both bring and promise blessing. While signs point to unseen realities, these realities do not diminish the value or importance of the visible world. Instead, the unseen realities themselves are ultimately expressed in the visible world.

Son of Man

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

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

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

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

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

Synagogue

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

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

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

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

Wise

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Works

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

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

Direct Matches

Bread

Generally made of grain, this staple of foods has been known to be in existence since prehistoric days, being mentioned in the oldest literatures of humanity. Though usually made of wheat, it can be made of any grain and also some kinds of beans or lentils. The Hebrew term, lekhem, is first used in Gen. 3:19 (see KJV) and is found throughout the Bible. The NIV uses the English word “bread” over 250 times.

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

Bread was such a basic part of life that it often was used in Scripture to represent the daily aspects of life and people’s most basic needs. During the days of Moses and the Israelites wandering in the desert, God provided for them special bread, manna, which they collected and ate each day, demonstrating God’s consistent care for them as they traveled (Exod. 16). Jesus used bread in the Lord’s Prayer to represent asking God to meet our basic needs (Matt. 5:11), and he called himself the “bread of life” to show that he is the one who “gives life to the world,” our ultimate sustenance (John 6:33–35). During this exchange with the Jews about the bread of life, Jesus foreshadows what takes place at the Last Supper with his disciples, suggesting that believers must “eat [his] flesh” (represented by bread) and “drink [his] blood” (represented by wine) (John 6:53–59; cf. Luke 22:19). Additionally, bread was used symbolically to represent those things that were present in daily life (Pss. 127:2; 80:5; Prov. 4:17; 20:17).

Eternal Life

Eternal life usually is mentioned in reference to human life, where it means unending life in the body, free from death. The expression, though most common in the NT, is drawn from the OT. The book of Daniel says that many who “sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt” (12:2). This yearning for eternal life is also expressed in Genesis, where those who eat of the “tree of life” will “live forever” (3:22). In Deuteronomy, God likewise declares, “I live forever” (32:40). Among the DSS, 4Q418 (frag. 69) and 1QS (4:7), both of which predate the NT, also refer to everlasting life.

The NT expression “eternal life” may seem to have a different meaning than the OT expression “everlasting life.” Any such appearance arises only in translation to English, for the underlying Greek words in the NT have the same meaning as the underlying Hebrew words in the OT. The words are already treated synonymously by the LXX, an ancient translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek (predating the NT).

The English word “eternal” may refer to eternity past and future, but in biblical usage that word does not generally refer to eternity past. This is evident where the NT mentions “eternal fire” (Matt. 18:8) and “eternal punishment” (Matt. 25:46). It is also indicated where eternal life is seen as a future reward for the righteous (Dan. 12:2; Luke 18:30; Rom. 2:7; Gal. 6:8; Titus 1:2; 1 John 2:25).

That life in the body is included in the NT concept of eternal life is evident from several considerations. Jesus says of everyone who believes in him, “I will raise them up at the last day” (John 6:40). The bodily nature of everlasting life is indicated by Jesus’ own resurrection, for his tomb was left empty. Jesus says after his own resurrection that a spirit “does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have” (Luke 24:39). The apostle Paul even writes that without the resurrection the Christian faith is invalidated (1 Cor. 15:12–19). When Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,” he does not mean that resurrection is of the human spirit, but rather that perishable flesh and blood must first be made immortal (1 Cor. 15:50–54; 2 Cor. 5:4).

The prospect of eternal life is often contrasted with death and punishment, just as the Bible more generally contrasts the prospect of life with death and lawless behavior. In Gen. 3, the sin of Adam and Eve shows that people turn from God out of self-interest, so everlasting life is not given to them. Much later, the people of Israel are warned that they will suffer death if they break faith with the true God to follow other gods (Lev. 26; Deut. 28; 30:15–20). Later still, the book of Daniel warns plainly that resurrection is to everlasting life or to everlasting contempt (12:1–3). The NT likewise, drawing at times from the Hebrew prophets (e.g., Isa. 66:22–24), contrasts the prospect of eternal life with the prospect of punishment for doing evil (Matt. 25:31–46; John 5:28–29; Rom. 6:23; Gal. 6:8; Rev. 20:10–15; 22:1–6).

Just as eternal life is contrasted with death, eternal life is sometimes referred to more fundamentally and simply as “life” (e.g., Matt. 19:17; Acts 11:18; 1 John 3:14). All life comes from God, through his divine word (Gen. 1; Deut. 30:20; John 1:1–4). The NT says that God gave his Son the power to give eternal life, since the Son does only what God the Father commands (John 5:19–30; 6:57–58).

The NT promises eternal life to all who believe (trust) in God’s Son (John 3:16; 3:36; 6:40; 11:25–26; 20:31; 1 John 5:13). To believe in God’s Son is to believe that God sent Jesus (John 17:8), to listen to Jesus’ message from God and so believe in God (5:24; 12:44), and to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah (20:31).

The belief in God and Jesus that secures eternal life is not mere mental assent, but rather is expressed in a life that turns from evil. Those who will receive eternal life are characterized by love rather than by hatred and murder (John 5:29; 1 John 3:14–15). Only the righteous will enter into eternal life, and they are marked by their care for Jesus’ brothers and sisters: feeding the hungry and clothing the poor (Matt. 25:31–46). They do not live for themselves, nor do they give free rein to all human desires, but instead they are led by, and walk in accordance with, the Spirit of God (John 12:25; Gal. 5:16–21; 6:8).

Heaven

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

The Abode of God

One of the challenges in understanding “heaven” as the present dwelling place of God involves God’s omnipresence. In one sense, God is present everywhere. David asks in Ps. 139:7, “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?” He answers that regardless of whether he goes as high up as anyone can go (“up to the heavens”), as low down as anyone can go (“in the depths), as far east as anyone can go (“the wings of the dawn”), or as far west as anyone can go (“the far side of the sea”), God is still there (Ps. 139:8–9).

At times, “heaven” becomes virtually a synonym for God himself. In the parable of the prodigal son in Luke 15, the son confesses to his father, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you” (v. 21). This son’s sin against “heaven” has nothing to do with environmental issues such as air pollution, and everything to do with his relationship with God. Note also Matthew’s expression “the kingdom of heaven” versus “the kingdom of God” used elsewhere.

The Final Dwelling Place for Believers

However, this picture of heaven is more complicated. It is true that heaven is sometimes used in Scripture to refer to the present abode of all departed believers who have left this present life and entered the intermediate state between death and the bodily resurrection (2 Cor. 5:4). It is this hope in a bodily resurrection that sets Christianity apart from other religions. Ultimately, the Christian hope is not that people will receive new physical bodies and float around some ethereal “heaven” like astronauts in outer space for all eternity. Instead, God has created human beings with physical bodies to inhabit a physical world, and our future hope is one of new resurrection bodies inhabiting new heavens and a new earth (Isa. 65:17; 66:22; 2 Pet. 3:13). Just as there will be a certain continuity between the bodies of believers in this present life and their new resurrection bodies (we will know one another), there will also be a certain continuity between this present earth and the new earth to come. Yet, at the same time, everything will also be changed and made new and perfect, as God has designed it to be (Rom. 8:18–21).

The clearest description of this new reality is found in Rev. 21–22, where John describes how he “saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth,’ for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away” (21:1). Here is “the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband” (21:2), when “God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (21:3–4). Even better than all the descriptions of such things as streets of “gold, as pure as transparent glass” (21:21) is that God himself will come and dwell in the midst of his people. As Paul has phrased it, “Now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face” (1 Cor. 13:12). The day will come when we will see God as he is, in all his glory (1 John 3:2).

Two other ideas complete our picture of life in these new heavens and new earth. Heaven will be a place of continued activity and service. Notice Jesus’ blessing in Matt. 25:21: “Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things.” The other principle is that there will be different degrees of reward. Although our ultimate reward is simply being with God himself, Paul also reminds us that if what believers do with their lives “survives, the builder will receive a reward,” and if what they do “is burned up, the builder will suffer loss” (1 Cor. 3:14–15 NRSV). Our choices make a difference for time and eternity (cf. Rev. 14:13). See also Heavens, New.

Heavens

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

The Abode of God

The Final Dwelling Place for Believers

Life

Life is a complex, multifaceted concept in the Bible. Various Hebrew and Greek terms convey the idea of life. Life is described in both a natural and a theological sense.

Life in the Natural Sense

In its natural sense, “life” may convey the following: (1) the vital principle of animals and humans, (2) the length of time that one has life, (3) the complete plot and cast of characters of an individual’s lifetime, or (4) the means for maintaining life.

First, life is the vital principle of animals and humans. This use of the term is its popular sense. It refers to the quality of having an animate existence or the state of being animate. Therefore, it is expressed in terms of ability or power; one who has life has the power to act. On the other hand, “death” is its antonym; one who is dead no longer acts. In the Bible, life in this sense applies to both animals and humans; however, the quality of life differs because humans are made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26; 5:1; 9:6). Life is manifested in the breath of life, so that one who no longer has the breath of life no longer has life (Gen. 2:7; 6:17; Job 12:10; 27:3; Rev. 11:11). At the same time, life is seated in the blood. For this reason, blood should not be consumed but should instead be poured out and buried (Gen. 9:3–5; Lev. 17:10–16; Deut. 12:23–25). Although life may cease because of physical causes (whether disease, murder, accident, etc.), God is ultimately the Lord of life. He gives life through his breath of life (Gen. 2:7; Ezek. 37:4–14); he sustains life through his spirit (Ps. 104:29–30; cf. Gen. 6:3; 1 Cor. 15:45); he delivers from death (Gen. 5:24; Ps. 30:3; 1 Cor. 15); he gives life and puts to death (Deut. 32:39; 1 Sam. 2:6). Life, therefore, is first and foremost a gift from God.

In a discussion of life as the vital principle, it is important to address the question of the afterlife. The Bible affirms the significance of both the material and the immaterial components of a human being. The body is not merely a shell in which the true person is housed. Death is not the soul’s escape from the body’s prison, as evidenced by the resurrection of the dead (Ezek. 37:1–14; Dan. 12:2; Luke 14:14; 1 Cor. 15). Human beings are not created to live a disembodied existence ultimately. The fate for those who experience eternal life is the resurrection of the body made from an incorruptible source (1 Cor. 15, esp. vv. 42–50). For others, their fate lies in eternal death (Matt. 25:46; Rev. 20:6–15; 21:8).

Second, in both Testaments, “life” may also refer to the duration of animate existence—one’s lifetime. The duration of one’s life in this sense begins at birth and ends at death (Gen. 23:1; 25:7; 47:9, 28; Luke 16:25; Heb. 2:15). This period of time is brief (Ps. 90:10; James 4:14). The Bible describes two ways that one’s lifetime may be extended: first, God gives additional time to a person’s life (2 Kings 20:6; Ps. 61:6; Isa. 38:5); second, one gains longer life by living wisely and honoring God (Prov. 3:2; 4:10; 9:11; 10:27).

Third, sometimes “life” refers to the complete plot and cast of characters of an individual’s lifetime. In other words, “life” may refer to all a person’s activities and relationships (1 Sam. 18:18 KJV; Job 10:1; Luke 12:15; James 4:14).

Fourth, “life” rarely may refer to the means of livelihood (Deut. 24:6; Prov. 27:27; Matt. 6:25; Luke 12:22–23). These passages highlight two aspects of life in this sense: (1) people are responsible to guard life; (2) God gives this life because of his great concern, which exceeds his care for the birds and flowers.

Life as a Theological Concept

Beyond its natural sense, life is developed as a theological concept throughout the Bible.

Old Testament. The first chapters of Genesis set the stage for a rich theological understanding of life. First, God creates all things and prepares them for his purposes. He is the creator of life, and life is a gift from his hand. The pinnacle of his creative activity is the creation of humankind. God blesses the man (Adam) and the woman (Eve) whom he creates. God prepares a special place, a garden, for them, so that they may be able to live in perfect communion with him, under his blessing. At the center of the garden lies the tree of life. The tree of life demonstrates that the garden is both the sphere of God’s provision and the symbol of life itself. At the same time, God commands the man not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, “for when you eat from it you will certainly die” (Gen. 2:17).

At this point, life and death take center stage. What follows in the narrative (Gen. 3) is a presentation of the meaning of life and death as theological concepts. Adam and Eve disobey the divine commandment. As a result, they die. However, their death is not death in the natural sense. Instead, when they disobey God’s commandment, there are three results: (1) a curse is pronounced, (2) they are exiled from the garden away from God, and (3) they are prevented from eating from the tree of life (3:14–24). Death in this case is not ceasing to breathe and move but is curse and exile; in other words, to die is to be removed from the place of God’s presence and blessing and be placed under a curse. Life, then, is the opposite: to live is to be settled in the place of God’s presence and blessing.

It is also important to recognize in this narrative that obedience to God’s commandment leads to life, but disobedience to his commandment leads to death. This principle is picked up throughout the Bible. Its clearest expression is found in Lev. 18:5: “Keep my decrees and laws, for the person who obeys them will live by them.”

This narrative also draws an important connection taken up in other parts of the Bible, especially Proverbs: the connection between life and wisdom. In the garden there are two trees at the center: the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Although there is some question concerning what is precisely meant by the knowledge of good and evil, it is likely that wisdom is in view. Two pieces of evidence support this conclusion: (1) knowledge and wisdom as well as good and evil are central concerns for the book of Proverbs; (2) the narrative associates the tree with wisdom. When Eve considers eating from the tree, she notices that it is like the other trees in that it has a pleasant appearance and is good for food (Gen. 2:9), but it is also distinct from the other trees because it is desirable for making one wise (3:6). By eating the fruit, she and Adam attempt to gain wisdom contrary to God’s command. As a result, this type of wisdom leads to death. However, true wisdom has the opposite effect. It leads to life, being a tree of life itself (esp. Prov. 3:18; also 3:1–2; 4:10–23; 6:23).

Although these themes—life, blessing, obedience, and wisdom—are found in various places throughout the Bible, they come together most explicitly in Deuteronomy. There devotion and obedience to God are viewed as the means of attaining wisdom and understanding (Deut. 4:5–9). Following God leads to living in the land that God had promised and enjoying his blessings there (28:1–14); however, forsaking God leads to all kinds of curses and ultimately to utter defeat and exile from the land (28:15–68). The choice to follow God and obey him or to forsake God and disobey him results in either life or death, good or bad, blessing or curse (30:15–20).

Life as a theological concept therefore has the following characteristics: being in the presence of God rather than exile, and experiencing his blessings rather than his curses. Such life may be attained through devotion and obedience to God and through the wisdom that comes from God.

New Testament. This concept of life forms the background for that of the NT as well. The NT often speaks of eternal life, especially in the writings of John. Eternal life is being in fellowship with God the Father and Jesus Christ (John 17:3). One may experience eternal life before natural death and beyond it into the eternal future (John 3:36; 5:24; 6:54; 10:28). At the same time, eternal life may refer more narrowly only to the time of perfect fellowship with God that lies beyond natural life (Matt. 25:46; Mark 10:30; Rom. 2:7). Because life consists of being in fellowship with God and living in his blessings, John can state that the one who believes in Jesus “has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life” (John 5:24). In other words, the person who believes in Jesus has been transferred from God’s curse to his blessing, from death to life. Furthermore, Jesus declares that he is life, and that those who believe in him will live and not die; that is, they will never be removed from his presence and blessing (John 11:25–26).

Rabbi

A title applied to teachers and others in respected positions, literally meaning “my master.” By the NT era, the term was used in a more specific sense to refer to teachers of the Mosaic law.

In the NT, the title occurs only in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John, and it is most commonly used to address Jesus. In Mark’s Gospel the disciples three times address Jesus as “Rabbi” (Mark 9:5; 11:21; 14:45). In Matthew’s Gospel only Judas calls Jesus “Rabbi” and only in the context of betraying Jesus (Matt. 26:25, 49). The title is used more widely in John’s Gospel by individuals such as Nathanael and Nicodemus, as well as the group of disciples (John 1:38, 49; 3:2; 4:31; 6:25; 9:2; 11:8). The title conveys the respect of pupil for master and indicates the nature of the relationship that Jesus had with his followers.

Sign

The word “sign” usually is a translation of the Hebrew word ’ot or the Greek word sēmeion. Signs are visible, typically being an object, a mark, an event, or a custom. In addition, signs are symbolic, pointing to things not seen. Signs often reveal or share some quality with the unseen reality to which they point, and so they are a token of that reality. In the Bible, signs typically are caused or instituted by God, and in many cases they are miraculous. However, in a few cases signs are set forth as the work of other gods (as in Deut. 13:1–2) or as being instituted by merely human design (as in Num. 2:2). In summary, a sign may be defined as something seen that points to something unseen, and that is instituted or created to do so by someone’s intention.

Divine Intervention

The word “sign” usually refers to an event that cannot be plausibly explained by natural or human causes but is consistent with intervention by God or by some other divine power. An important example of this occurs in the book of Exodus. In Exodus, Moses predicts each kind of plague that will occur and the time of its occurrence. Many of those plagues, such as the plague of locusts (Exod. 10:14–15), are events that could occur naturally. However, the merely natural occurrence of so many plagues in such a short time is quite improbable. It is likewise improbable that Moses could simply guess beforehand the type and timing of all these plagues.

Ultimately, a merely natural explanation for these plagues does not prove credible to the Egyptians. However, the plagues are consistent with acts of divine intervention, provided one does not rule out that possibility beforehand. They are consistent because Moses gives a plausible explanation of why God would intervene at this time, even though God had not intervened within living memory. All these evidences together are considered sufficient to infer that some god has caused the signs. The signs are portrayed as objectively known events. When Pharaoh refuses to admit that Moses can bring plagues, Pharaoh’s own officials say that he should know better (Exod. 10:7). The officials believe in the reality of the signs even though they do not follow the faith or God of Moses.

Throughout the Bible, signs give evidence of God’s direct action and identity, but they are not given as evidence for God’s existence. God’s existence is to be known by other means; for example, Paul writes that the existence of the Creator is “clearly seen” from the created world (Rom. 1:20).

Miracles and Faith

Miraculous signs often are given to validate a prophet and his message. Signs are especially frequent when that prophetic message is a covenant from God that has life-or-death consequences. Both the Mosaic covenant (Deut. 30:15–20) and the new covenant of Jesus (Luke 22:15–20; John 5:24–29) warn of life and death. In the OT, signs occur most prolifically at the hands of Moses. The signs manifested on behalf of Moses are explicitly given so that people will believe in Moses and follow God’s covenant (Exod. 4:1–9; 19:9).

Signs occur even more frequently and prominently in the NT. Jesus makes the lame walk, heals the blind, and even raises the dead (John 5:1–9; 9:1–7; 11:1–44). Throughout the Gospels, Jesus is characterized as performing many signs, and the signs are cited as one reason to believe in Jesus (John 20:30–31). The signs are characteristic of Jesus’ ministry and later of his apostles’ ministries. The tradition that Jesus performed signs is interwoven throughout the four Gospels as we have them, even in portions often thought to reflect earlier sources. The most important sign in the NT is the resurrection of Jesus, since this is the ultimate validation of Jesus by God, and the Christian faith hangs upon the truth of Jesus’ resurrection (1 Cor. 15:1–20).

Although signs are given to elicit faith, human nature and desires are such that reasonable belief does not always take root. As with Pharaoh, many others throughout the OT do not believe despite seeing signs (e.g., Num. 14:11; Ps. 78:11). In the Gospels, many will not believe any reports about miraculous signs. They instead demand to see signs personally (Mark 8:11–12; John 4:48; 6:30; 9:27–41; 20:29) or attribute them to Satan. The Passover signs were to be remembered and credited by later generations (Exod. 12:26–27). Similarly, the signs performed by Jesus were intended by the evangelists to be credited by readers who had not seen them (John 20:29–31). Belief is not expected without inquiry (John 4:39–42; Acts 17:11); however, unbelief in the face of evidence is seen as a human failing (John 11:37–40).

Synagogue

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

Origins

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

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

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

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

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

First-Century Synagogues

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

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

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

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

The Synagogue in the Bible

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

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

Works

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

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because John 6:25-59 is mentioned in the definition.

Bible Texts

Bible Texts and Versions The NT and the OT have considerably different but partially overlapping textual histories. For clarity, it is best to begin with a survey of the NT manuscripts and versions.

Greek texts. Although no autographs of the NT books survive, there exist more than five thousand Greek texts covering anywhere from a portion of a few verses up to the complete NT. Traditionally, these texts have been classified into five groups: papyri, uncials, minuscules, lectionaries, and quotations in patristic texts. The most important manuscripts are listed below.

The earliest texts of the NT are those written on papyrus. Ninety-eight of these manuscripts have been identified, and they are represented by a “P” with a numerical superscript. The earliest of these papyri is P52, which contains parts of four verses in John 18 and dates to the early second century. For substantial portions of the NT text, the most important papyri are found in the Chester Beatty and Bodmer collections. P45, P46, and P47, all from the Chester Beatty collection, are from the third century and contain large sections of the four Gospels, eight of the Pauline Epistles, Hebrews, and Revelation. Within the Bodmer collection in Geneva are four very important codices. P66 dates to around AD 200 and preserves most of the Gospel of John. P72 dates to the third century and contains the earliest copies of 1–2 Peter and Jude, which are preserved in their entirety, as well as Greek translations of Pss. 33–34. P74 dates to the seventh century and contains portions of Acts, James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John, and Jude. Finally, P75, which dates to the early third century, contains most of Luke and John 1–15. It is the oldest extant copy of Luke. Among the remaining papyri, forty-three have been dated to the early fourth century or before.

The second category of manuscripts is the uncials, which usually were written on parchment and span the fourth through the tenth centuries. About 270 uncials are known, and they range from a few verses up to complete copies of the NT or even the entire Bible. Uncials originally were denoted by capital letters, but when the number of manuscripts grew beyond these limits, a new system was employed whereby each manuscript was given a number always beginning with zero. However, the most important uncials are still usually known by their letter. Among the most important uncials are the following five manuscripts. Codex Sinaiticus (designated by the Hebrew letter à) dates to the fourth century and is the only uncial that contains the entire NT. It also has almost all of the OT as well as the early Christian writings the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. Dating from the fifth century, Codex Alexandrinus (designated as A) contains the OT, most of the NT—lacking only portions of Matthew, John, and 2 Corinthians—and 1–2 Clement. Along with Sinaiticus, the most important uncial is Codex Vaticanus (designated as B), which dates to the fourth century. It contains almost all of the OT and the complete NT, except for substantial portions between Hebrews and Revelation. It has been in the Vatican’s library for over five hundred years. The fourth important uncial is Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis (designated as D), which contains Greek and Latin copies of the four Gospels, most of Acts, and a few verses from 3 John. It dates from the late fourth or early fifth century. The fifth important uncial is Codex Washingtonianus (designated as W), which dates to the early fifth century and contains virtually all of the four Gospels.

The third category of NT manuscripts is minuscules. These texts date from the ninth century and later and comprise approximately 2,800 manuscripts, which are denoted by a number not beginning with zero. Among the more important minuscules are Codex 1, Codex 13, and Codex 33, which, along with their relatives, are considered reliable witnesses to early families of texts such as the Caesarean (1) or the Alexandrian (33). Codex 13 and its relatives are noteworthy for having the story of the adulterous woman at the end of Luke 21 instead of in John 8. The final two groups of NT manuscripts, the lectionaries and quotations in patristic sources, are not manuscripts in the strict sense of the term, but their use of portions of the NT presents important witnesses for the practice of textual criticism.

Versions. With the spread of Christianity during the time of the Roman Empire, the NT was translated into the language of the native peoples. These versions of the NT are important both for textual criticism of the NT and for the interpretive decisions that are reflected in how the text was rendered into a new language. Among the most important early versions of the NT are the following.

As Latin began to displace Greek as the dominant language of the empire, there was a need for a Latin version of the Bible. The earliest translation, known as the Old Latin or Itala, was made probably in the late second century, though the oldest manuscript (Codex Vercellensis) is from the fourth century. With the proliferation of Latin texts a standardized Latin translation became desirable, and in AD 382 Jerome was commissioned by Pope Damasus to provide a new translation known as the Vulgate.

Another family of NT versions is the Syriac texts. Around the late second century the four Gospels were translated into a version known as the Old Syriac. It is extant in two incomplete manuscripts that are probably fifth century. The translation that became the standard Syriac text is the Peshitta, which was produced in the early fifth century. It does not contain 2 Peter, 2–3 John, Jude, or Revelation because these were not considered canonical among the Syriac churches.

Other important versions of the NT from antiquity are the Coptic, Armenian, Georgian, and Ethiopic translations.

Old Testament

Hebrew texts. The text that has served as the basis for most modern editions and translations of the Hebrew OT is the Masoretic Text (MT), named after the Masoretes, the Jewish scribes who transmitted the text and added vocalization, accentuation, and notes to the consonantal text. The most important Masoretic manuscripts date from the end of the ninth century to the early eleventh century. Notable among these is the Leningrad Codex (AD 1008), denoted as L, which is the earliest Masoretic manuscript of the entire OT. Also important are the Aleppo Codex (c. AD 925), denoted as A, which preserves all of the OT except for most of the Pentateuch; the British Museum MS Or. 4445 (c. AD 925), denoted as B, which contains most of the Pentateuch; and the Cairo Codex (c. AD 896), denoted C, which contains Joshua through Kings and also the Prophets.

Although these manuscripts are much later than the biblical period, their reliability was largely confirmed with the discovery of the DSS beginning in 1947. Among the Qumran library are many manuscripts of biblical books as well as biblical commentaries, apocrphyal and pseudepigraphal works, and sectarian literature. All the OT books are represented among the scrolls that were found except Esther and Nehemiah, though the latter is usually presumed to have been at the end of Ezra but has not survived. The books with the most manuscripts are, in order, Psalms, Deuteronomy, and Isaiah. One of the striking characteristics of these scrolls is that they reflect a diversity of text types. For example, there is a copy of Jeremiah that is close to the Masoretic version, but also a manuscript of Jeremiah similar to the much shorter version found in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT).

Another Hebrew text of the OT is that of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which is the text transmitted by the Samaritans. It is similar to the MT in some respects but also has differences that reflect theological interests. The main manuscripts for the Samaritan Pentateuch are from the twelfth century.

Versions. Between the third and first centuries BC, the entire OT was translated into Greek. This version, known as the Septuagint (designated by the abbreviation LXX), became the main version of the OT used by the early church. Due to its adoption by the church, the LXX has been preserved in numerous manuscripts, including Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus. By the late first century BC or early first century AD, there were two revisions of the Greek text: the Proto-Lucianic version and the Kaige recension. The latter aimed to revise the Greek toward closer conformity with the Hebrew text and derives its name from its peculiar tendency to translate the Hebrew word gam (“also”) with the Greek work kaige. In the second century AD three other Greek translations were made by Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus, all of which revised the Kaige recension back toward the MT.

Another important early version of the OT consists of the Targumim, which are Aramaic translations or paraphrases (and sometimes extensive elaborations) of OT books. The official Targumim for Judaism are Targum Onqelos for the Pentateuch (c. second century AD), which is quite literal, and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan for the Prophets (sometime before the fourth century AD), which ranges from being quite literal to somewhat paraphrastic. Unofficial Targumim for the Pentateuch include Targum Neofiti and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. There are also various unofficial Targumim for the Writings section of the OT, except for Daniel and Ezra-Nehemiah (which are already written partly in Aramaic).

Besides the Greek and Aramaic translations, there are other important versions of the OT. Sometime in either the third or fourth century AD, the Peshitta of the OT was produced, though there is evidence that there were earlier Syriac translations of some books already circulating. Also important is a group of Latin translations known collectively as the Old Latin. These versions were produced sometime during the second century AD and were primarily made from already existing Greek translations rather than Hebrew texts. As with the NT, a later Latin translation was made by Jerome for the Vulgate.

Bible Versions

Bible Texts and Versions The NT and the OT have considerably different but partially overlapping textual histories. For clarity, it is best to begin with a survey of the NT manuscripts and versions.

Other important versions of the NT from antiquity are the Coptic, Armenian, Georgian, and Ethiopic translations.

Old Testament

Famine and Drought

Famine was the most devastating catastrophe to an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (Ruth 1:1–2; 2 Kings 25), it often was accompanied by disease or war, which in turn brought adversity to many levels of society (Jer. 14:12; Matt. 24:7), including that of the animals (Job 38:41; Joel 1:20).

Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile in anticipation of possible famine. In Egypt, Joseph implemented a grain ration that saved the people, supplied seed, and filled Pharaoh’s royal storehouses (Gen. 41:33–36; 47:23–24). Israel’s own temple contained storerooms (1 Chron. 26:15; Neh. 10:38–39). God used famine to encourage obedience from the Israelites (Deut. 11:17; 28:33) and as divine judgment upon them (Lev. 26:14–20; Jer. 29:17–18).

Famines had far-reaching results: price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen. 12:10; 26:1; Ruth 1; 2 Kings 6:24–29; Neh. 5:1–3; Lam. 2:20–21; 4:8–10). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid reality (Pss. 33:18–19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included its being free from famine (Ezek. 34:29; 36:29–30).

Joseph understood that God sent him ahead to Egypt to save his family from an international famine (Gen. 45:5–7). For forty years God tested the Israelites with hunger to rid them of self-reliance (Exod. 16:2–8; Deut. 8:2, 16). Moreover, God sent afflictions on Israel such as famine, drought, mildew, blight, and insects in order to arouse national repentance (Amos 4:6–12). This meant that sin and human suffering were tied to the land in interdependence (Lam. 4:3–4). Elijah’s contest with the Canaanite prophets of Baal vividly shows the theological implications of faith and food: Yahweh would prove that he was in control of nature’s forces (1 Kings 18:23–39; cf. Gen. 8:22). Even Elijah, however, required special divine care through this famine (1 Kings 17:1–6). For Amos, literal hunger funded his description of desperate spiritual hunger, “a famine . . . of hearing the words of the Lord” (Amos 8:11).

Jesus relived Israel’s experience in his own wilderness testing and rejected the bread that he could make for himself (Matt. 4:3–4; Deut. 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger are intended to develop humility and trust in God, the divine provider (Matt. 4:2), something that Israel did not learn very well. Jesus fed a second manna to five thousand people to draw them to the bread of life (John 6:35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for him (6:26–27). Famines are mentioned in the NT (Luke 4:25; Acts 7:11 [historical]; 11:27–30 [contemporary]).

Jesus taught that famines would be a sign of his coming. Yet, without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted the spiritual hunger and thirst of people (Matt. 5:6; John 4:14, 34; 7:37–38). Because eating is a powerful part of fellowship, heaven will merely remove the desperation of hunger, not the use of food (Gen. 43:34; Luke 22:15–16; Rev. 19:9; cf. 1 Cor. 4:11; Rev. 7:16; 21:4).

Flesh and Spirit

Because we lack precise knowledge of the Hebrew and early Christian beliefs about the relationship between the physical body and one’s spirit, discussions about flesh and spirit are difficult. Throughout both Testaments the word “flesh” usually refers to the physical body of both humans and animals, while the word “spirit,” although less specific, generally refers to the persona of an individual, that part of a human that relates most closely to God. Contrasting these, the prophet Isaiah says that the enemy Egyptian horses are “flesh and not spirit,” and so he implies that the spirit is stronger than the flesh. Isaiah says that those living in Jerusalem should put their trust in God and not the flesh (Isa. 31:3).

Probably the most specific instance of flesh and spirit being discussed together is in John 3:6, where the author quotes Jesus saying, “Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.” English translations capitalize the first of the two occurrences of the Greek word pneuma (“spirit”) in this verse, inferring that it is the Spirit of God who gives birth to the human spirit. Jesus tries to explain to Nicodemus that a person must be born again by the Spirit of God, much as a human birth produces human flesh.

In another passage, Jesus talks about the difference between the flesh and the spirit by first telling the disciples that they need to eat his flesh (John 6:53–54). This is taken to be a reference to the Eucharist and the need for the disciples to participate in that communion. Next, Jesus notes that his words are spirit and life; this draws a contrast between the physical “flesh” of the Eucharist service and the “spirit” of the words of God (John 6:63).

Paul, in the Letter to the Ephesians, draws a similar distinction between the flesh and the spirit when he says that the Christian struggle against the devil is “not against flesh and blood,” that is, against physical forces, but rather against “spiritual forces of evil” (6:12). Paul’s point is that Christians must not engage in warfare against physical forces of evil so much as they must struggle against those spiritual things that can harm one’s faith. This theme is again picked up in Phil. 3:1–11, where Paul says that circumcision of the flesh, which is a mutilation of the flesh, gains a person nothing, whereas those who worship by the Spirit of God have obtained the true circumcision and have gained Christ and the righteousness that comes through faith in him.

However, 1 John 4:1–3 warns that not every spirit is from God. John encourages his readers to “test the spirits” to determine whether they are truly from God. Interestingly, for John, this test involves the acknowledgment that Jesus came in the flesh from God.

Human Will

“Will” refers to a person’s wishes or desires and the power to act on those desires. In the Bible, human will is at times contrasted with God’s will or mercy (Rom. 9:16 ESV, NRSV; cf. John 1:13) or the power of the Holy Spirit (2 Pet. 1:21 NASB, NRSV). In his humanity, Jesus had his own will, but he chose to submit it to the Father’s will (Luke 22:42; John 6:38). See also Free Will; Will of God.

Lord's Prayer

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

Jesus and Prayer

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

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

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

The Lord’s Prayer: Matthew and Luke

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

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

Matthew 6:9-13….Luke 11:2-4

Our Father in heaven,….Father,

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

your kingdom come,….your kingdom come.

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

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

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

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

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

But deliver us from the evil one….

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

The Lord’s Prayer: The Petitions

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

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

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

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

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

The Lord’s Prayer: The Theology

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Summary

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

Meaning of Time

Time refers to both the real and the perceived passage of events in sequence. It is important to note that “perceived” and “real” need not be the same. For example, Jacob worked for seven years in order to marry Rebekah, “but they seemed like only a few days to him because of his love for her” (Gen. 29:20 [cf. 2 Pet. 3:8]). Jacob’s perception of time clearly was distinct from the real period of time that passed.

The Biblical Concept of Time

Time, as the sequential ordering of events that occur in space, pervades both human life and the biblical record of God’s dealings with the universe. The Bible recounts God’s plan for his creation, a plan with a beginning and an end, between which elements of the plan unfold in chronological sequence throughout history. The biblical concept of time is distinct from the cyclical concept found in some other religions, both in the ancient Near East and elsewhere. History thus moves toward a divinely predetermined goal through divinely appointed events that occur in sequence at appointed times according to God’s plan. Since God’s purposes for creation are expressed through time, the major points in his plan are apparent in a broad chronological sweep, beginning with creation, ending with judgment and the new creation, and centered upon the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus (cf. Mark 1:15).

That God acts within history to bring about his purposes is highlighted by the use of temporal language to make reference to events that have taken place in the past (Exod. 12:1–3) and are yet to take place (in particular through the use of expressions such as “the last day[s]” in, e.g., Isa. 2:2; Jer. 23:20; John 6:39–54). The emphasis therefore is not on some spiritual or otherworldly domain in which specifically religious experiences and events take place, a domain distinct from the physical world in which we live. Rather, the emphasis is on the way in which God directs and shapes history in order to bring about his purposes.

Furthermore, the Bible acknowledges that all events in history fall within the purview of God’s sovereignty through the acknowledgment that there is an appropriate time appointed for them (Eccles. 3:1–11; Ps. 31:15). God’s sovereignty over time extends to the future, and thus the prophets announce the future actions of God at certain times (Isa. 60:22; Ezek. 22:3; 30:3; Dan. 8:17). More specifically, definite times for the end and final judgment are established (Matt. 8:29), although the timing of the end is known only to the Father (Matt. 24:36; Mark 13:33).

Modern science treats time and space as related and essential components of the physical universe and thus of God’s creation. Since, therefore, time is created, it is not thereby immediately clear precisely what God’s relationship to time is, nor is this an issue directly addressed in the Bible. Although it is common to insist that since time is part of creation, God exists outside of time, it is not possible to deduce from this observation alone that God exists without some analogous notion of time within a divine frame of reference. Nor is the question readily resolved by appeal to biblical texts, for although a number of passages reflect upon God’s knowledge of the end from the beginning and speak of God predestining and foreknowing (terms that implicitly have temporal connotations), these can be read as either reflecting God’s interaction with the temporal aspect of the created universe or as divine accommodation to human language in order to communicate correctly with temporal human beings throughout history. Consequently, no definitive answer to these philosophical questions is available, and so proposals relating to the issue cannot be judged to provide certainty in these matters. All that can be said with certainty is that the Bible presents certain propositions that affirm time’s subservience to God.

Measuring Time

The Bible makes reference to a variety of different measurements of periods of time. These include Jubilees (Lev. 25:10), generations (Deut. 2:14), Sabbath years (Lev. 25:4), years, months, days, and hours. There are no shorter periods of time described by any defined measures in the Bible, reflecting a culture in which timekeeping was not dominated by devices that afforded such determinations (although terms for nonspecific short periods of time do exist, such as rega’, a “moment” [Exod. 33:5; Isa. 26:20]).

A number of passages appear to suggest that a day was considered to begin in the morning and end the following morning (e.g., Deut. 28:66–67; 1 Sam. 30:12; Isa. 28:19; Jer. 33:20). However, there are also texts that seem to suggest a different division of days, specifically the creation account of Gen. 1 (but see also Gen. 19:34; Lev. 7:15; Judg. 19:4–9; 1 Sam. 19:11). Nehemiah 13:19 has the day begin at sunset. By NT times, a full day generally was reckoned as beginning at sunset.

Days were also divided into parts. The Mesopotamian system for dividing the night into three watches appears paralleled in Exod. 14:24; Judg. 7:19; 1 Sam. 11:11, although by NT times the night was divided into four watches, paralleling the Roman and Egyptian practice (Matt. 14:25; Mark 13:35). More precise, shorter divisions of time tended to be later innovations; for example, the OT does not typically use an hour as a measure of time. Nonetheless, there were in the ancient world means by which shorter periods could be measured, such as sundials and water clocks, examples of which can be found dating to the second millennium BC in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The only possible reference to such a device in the Bible appears in Isa. 38:8, where the “stairway of Ahaz” is thought by some to have been used to measure time in some way.

When the LXX uses the Greek word hōra, it refers not to a period of sixty minutes, but usually to a point in time (e.g., Exod. 9:18). In other early Greek literature the term can refer to a variety of periods of time, including a season and a year. By the NT period, however, the division of the day into twenty-four hours had become normative (cf. John 11:9), and the NT makes numerous reference to times based on the hour of the day.

The week was a well-established measure of time, reflected in the creation story as well as in the celebration of the Sabbath. Months were based on a lunar calendar (the Hebrew words for “month,” yerakh and khodesh, are also used to refer to the moon) (see Calendar). Beyond years, the Bible also uses generations as a measure of the passage of time. Finally, other measures less readily associated with specific periods of time are used in the Bible, in particular in some apocalyptic prophetic texts such as Daniel.

Eternity

“Eternity” is another time-related concept that occupies an important place in the Bible. The modern scientific realization that time is part of creation has strengthened the notion, long affirmed by various philosophies, that “eternity” represents that which is outside time and apart from it and so is particularly associated with God’s existence. In contrast to this, however, when the Bible makes reference to “eternity,” it invariably has a temporal aspect, referring either to the distant past, the distant future, or else the entire expanse of time from distant past to distant future (e.g., Exod. 15:18; Ps. 9:5; Mic. 4:5). What is clear, however, is that God’s relationship to the temporal aspect of the universe does reflect that of one who is outside the constraints of that time (e.g., Ps. 90:2; 2 Pet. 3:8).

Predestination

The term “predestination” means “to determine or decide something beforehand.” Some form of the Greek verb proorizō (“to determine beforehand”) occurs six times in the NT (Acts 4:28; Rom. 8:29, 30; 1 Cor. 2:7; Eph. 1:5, 11). It is practically synonymous with the concept of foreordination and is closely related to divine foreknowledge (Acts 2:23; Rom. 8:29; 1 Pet. 1:1–2, 20). Various Scriptures indicate that God the Father is the one who predestines (John 17:6–10; Rom. 8:29; Eph. 1:3–5; 1 Pet. 1:2).

The specific objects of predestination are humans, angels, and the Messiah. These divine predeterminations occurred before the creation of the world and were motivated by the love of God (Eph. 1:4–5). In regard to humans, this means that in eternity past, God determined that some individuals would be the recipients of his salvation. However, this determination does not rule out the necessity of human choice, responsibility, and faith. The decision to predestine some individuals for salvation was based not upon anything good or bad in the recipients, but solely on God’s good pleasure and according to his holy, wise, and eternal purpose (Isa. 46:10; Acts 13:48; Rom. 11:33).

Predestination as Part of God’s Larger Plan

The scope of God’s plan. Predestination is a part of God’s all-encompassing eternal plan (Isa. 40:13–14; Rom. 11:34; Eph. 1:11). Several terms express God’s plan. Among these are his “decree” (Ps. 2:7), “eternal purpose” (Eph. 3:11), “foreknowledge” (Acts 2:23), and “will” (Eph. 1:9, 11). God’s plan involves all things that come to pass, including major and insignificant events, direct and indirect causes, things appointed and things permitted. It therefore encompasses both good and evil (Ps. 139:16; Prov. 16:4; Isa. 14:24–27; 22:11; 37:26–27; 46:9–10; Acts 2:23; 4:27–28; Eph. 1:11; 2:10).

The inclusion of evil in the plan of God does not mean that he condones, authorizes, or commits moral evil. The apostle John stresses that God is light and that there is no darkness in him at all (1 John 1:5). He is absolutely holy and cannot be charged with the commission of sin (Hab. 1:13). When addressing the topic of God’s plan and purpose, the biblical authors are careful to distinguish between divine causation and human responsibility. Both fall under the purview of God’s plan. There is divine certainty about what will happen, but moral agents are never under compulsion to commit evil (see Acts 4:28; Rom. 9:11; 1 Cor. 2:7; 11:2; Heb. 2:5, 10–16; 1 Pet. 1:2, 20; 2 Pet. 3:17). For example, when Luke refers to the greatest miscarriage of justice in the history of the world, the crucifixion of Christ, he indicates that it was predestined by God, but the moral turpitude of the act is attributed to “wicked men” (Acts 2:23). The dual nature of such events is aptly reflected in Joseph’s statement to his brothers who sold him into slavery: “You meant evil against me, but God meant it for good” (Gen. 50:20 NASB).

Whereas the all-encompassing plan of God relates to his sovereign control over all things, predestination appears to be restricted primarily to certain divine decisions affecting humans, angels, and the Messiah (Isa. 42:1–7; Acts 2:23; 1 Tim. 5:21; 1 Pet. 1:20; 2:4). With reference to humans, Paul states, “In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will” (Eph. 1:11). Some scholars limit predestination to those things “in him,” thus linking this work of God to his purpose in salvation. Others argue that the following phrase, “who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will,” demonstrates that all things fall under the purview of God’s controlling and guiding purpose (Eph. 1:11). It seems best to see the phrase “in him” as indicating the sphere in which believers are chosen and the term “predestinated” as one crucial aspect of the greater plan of God.

Divine foreknowledge and election. Some theologians argue that election and predestination are merely based upon God’s foreknowledge of those who will believe in him. Although God surely knows all those who will believe, the term “foreknowledge” connotes much more than simply knowing ahead of time who will come to faith. It means that God has sovereignly chosen to know some individuals in such an intimate way that it moved him to predestine them to eternal life (Rom. 8:29). Whereas the term “election” refers to God’s sovereign choice of those individuals, “predestination” looks forward toward the goal of that selection. Both predestination and election occur in eternity past (Eph. 1:4–5).

The purpose of predestination. Whereas election refers to God’s choice of individuals, predestination looks toward the purpose and goal of that choice. NT believers are designated as chosen by God and appointed to eternal life (Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4). The express purpose is that they be adopted as his children (Eph. 1:5) and, as beloved children, become “conformed to the image of his Son” (Rom. 8:29). The idea is that those whom God has chosen are predestined in view of the purpose that he desires to fulfill in them, that of becoming his children who are conformed to the image of his Son. The ultimate purpose behind this plan is to bring glory to God (Eph. 1:5–6, 11–12).

Predestination and Reprobation

In his plan, God has chosen some individuals, nations, groups, and angels to fulfill special purposes, implying that other individuals, nations, groups, and angels have not been selected for those same purposes (2 Thess. 2:13; 2 Tim. 2:10; 1 Pet. 1:2). With regard to God’s choice in salvation, this has led some theologians to argue that those not chosen for salvation are by default chosen for eternal damnation. They maintain that predestination applies not only to individuals whom God plans to save, but also to those whom he does not plan to save (Prov. 16:4; Matt. 26:23–24; Rom. 9:10–13, 17–18, 21–22; 2 Tim. 2:20; 1 Pet. 2:8; 2 Pet. 2:3, 9; Jude 4; Rev. 13:8; 20:15). This is sometimes called “reprobation.” The belief in the combined concepts of election and reprobation has been called “double predestination.”

While some scholars in the history of the church have argued that God is just as active in determining the reprobate as he is the elect, others have pointed out that God’s condemnation of the nonelect is based solely upon their sin and unbelief. A real distinction exists in the level of divine involvement with regard to the destiny of one class as compared with the other. God does not appear to have the same relationship to every event or thing in his creation. The degree of divine causation in each case differs. Scripture recognizes a difference between God’s direct working and his permissive will. In this view, God directly chooses some to be saved; however, he does not choose the others to be damned but rather passes them by, allowing them to continue on their own way and eventually suffer the just punishment that their sins deserve.

Whichever view one takes, it seems that the Scripture does not teach reprobation in the same way it teaches predestination leading to eternal life. Whereas the assignment to eternal death is a judicial act taking into account a person’s sin, predestination unto eternal life is purely an act of God’s sovereign grace and mercy not taking into account any actions by those chosen. Carrying the teaching of reprobation to the extreme threatens to view God as capricious, which clearly is not scriptural (1 John 1:5).

Predestination and Human Responsibility

God was in no way obligated or morally impelled to choose or predestine anyone to eternal life. His determination not to choose everyone in no way impinges upon his holy and righteous character (Rom. 9:13). On the contrary, justice would demand that all receive the punishment that they have rightly earned for their sins (Rom. 3:23; 6:23). Therefore, the predestination of some to become like his Son required that God exercise grace and mercy in providing for the cleansing of their sin, which he accomplished through the sacrifice of his beloved Son, Jesus Christ (Acts 2:23).

God’s predetermined plan does not force individuals to respond in predetermined ways, either to accept him or to reject him. In the one case, the sinner is drawn by God to himself but must also choose to place trust in Christ (John 6:37, 44). Even in the radical intervention of God in the life of Saul on the road to Damascus, where the divine call was indeed overpowering, Saul was given opportunity to respond either positively or negatively. In the case of those who are headed for eternal judgment, God’s working is not fatalistic or mechanistic in the sense that a person may want to choose God but God’s predetermined plan will not allow such a response. To the contrary, all are invited to come to Christ (Matt. 11:28; John 3:16). The apostle John clarifies, “Whoever comes to me I will never drive away” (John 6:37 [cf. Matt. 11:28]). Those who do not come to God refuse to do so by their own volition (Matt. 23:37; John 5:40). They are not merely unable to come to God but unwilling to do so (John 5:40; 6:65; Rom. 3:11). The NT teaches that Christ died for their sins (John 3:16), pleadingly warns them to repent, and cites their transgressions as the reason for their condemnation (1 Pet. 2:8; 2 Pet. 2:21–22; Jude 8–16). When all aspects of the issue are considered, there is indeed a mystery that lies outside the boundaries of our comprehension regarding God’s sovereign working and human choice.

Ruler of the Synagogue

Origins

First-Century Synagogues

The Synagogue in the Bible

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

Saints

Used as a reference for God’s people in the OT and NT, the Hebrew word qadosh (e.g., Ps. 16:3) and the Greek word hagios (e.g., Acts 9:13; 2 Cor. 1:1) emphasize being singled out or consecrated. The Hebrew root was also used to designate cult prostitutes (qadeshah) as “consecrated,” though in Scripture this use is relatively infrequent (e.g., Gen. 38:21; Deut. 23:17). Another Hebrew word sometimes translated “saint” is khasid (e.g., 1 Sam. 2:9; Pss. 30:4; 31:23 KJV), which emphasizes faithfulness and devotion to God. In biblical terms, then, the saints of God are those whom he has designated as belonging to him and who live in faithfulness to him. They are not necessarily noted for exceptional holiness or meritorious acts. Thus, Paul places “his saints” in parallel with “all who have believed” (2 Thess. 1:10 NRSV).

The Bible speaks of saints as sometimes being in need (Rom. 16:2; 2 Cor. 8:4; 9:1, 12) and persecuted (Rev. 13:7), but also as called to endure (Rev. 13:10) and offer help, especially to other saints (Rom. 12:13; Gal. 6:10; 1 Tim. 5:10). The saints are the recipients of the faith (Jude 1:3), of grace (Rev. 22:21), and of special equipping for ministry in the church (Eph. 4:12) and prayer (Rev. 5:8; 8:3–4). As those who belong to the Lord, the saints will be raised to eternal life (John 6:39; 1 Cor. 15:22–23).

“Saint,” however, has come to function as a title given to Christians of exceptional merit, beatified or canonized by the Roman Catholic Church. The need for canonization and beatification arose from the Catholic doctrine of the veneration, invocation, and intercession of the saints (see Augustine, Quaest. Hept. 2.94; Faust. 20.21) and is connected to the Catholic doctrine of the “communion of the saints” (a phrase drawn from the Apostles’ Creed), which includes believers in heaven, on earth, and in purgatory, recognizing them as saints in the general sense by virtue of their being redeemed and set apart for fellowship with God. These doctrines suggest that just as Paul, for example, sought the prayers of the church on earth (Rom. 15:30; 2 Cor. 1:11), so also prayer by members of the church in heaven might be sought. Canonization, then, publicly establishes which persons can be surely known to be in heaven and may be properly asked to intercede on behalf of the church on earth.

Protestants, on the basis of the unique intercession of Christ Jesus (1 Tim. 2:5), exclude invocation of heavenly saints as unnecessary and unwarranted. They further find no basis in the Scriptures for a doctrine of purgatory. Thus, Protestant understandings of the communion of the saints focus on the believers on earth, who, “being united to one another in love, have communion in each other’s gifts and graces and are obliged to the performance of such duties, public and private, as to conduce to their mutual good, both in the inward and outward man” (Westminster Confession of Faith 28.1).

Security of the Believer

The safety and endurance of a Christian’s salvation. Theologians over the centuries have debated whether salvation can be lost, but several lines of argument taken from Scripture support the teaching that salvation by its very nature is eternal.

Election and Grace

Passages on divine election reveal that those who come to faith do so not merely out of personal choice, but ultimately because they have been chosen by God (Eph. 1:4). God draws those whom he chooses, and they respond to his call (John 6:37, 44, 65). If genuine believers could lose their salvation, it would imply that God’s purpose and plan in election had been ineffective, an idea that contradicts Scripture (John 6:39).

The apostle Paul maintains that salvation is bestowed by God as a gift of his grace (Rom. 3:24; 6:23; Eph. 1:7; 2:8–9). This free gift cannot be merited or earned. It is not granted or withheld on the basis of a person’s moral character, no matter how noble or wicked, and it is never merited or forfeited through anything a person does, no matter how good or evil. Rather, it is granted due to something that lies within the nature of God—his gracious character, his purpose, and his free choice. Salvation endures due to the same perfections in God that cannot change (Mal. 3:6; James 1:17). Although salvation is bestowed as a matter of God’s grace, faith is the means by which it is received (Rom. 3:21–25). Yet faith is not a work and is never said to earn God’s grace (Eph. 2:8). Good works are the evidence of a life that has experienced the grace of God.

Rebirth and Eternal Life

Scripture reveals that salvation is imparted through regeneration or rebirth. Jesus describes it as being “born again” (John 3:3, 7). Paul uses a related concept when he writes that we are saved “through the washing of rebirth” (Titus 3:5). Peter teaches essentially the same thing: “He has given us new birth” (1 Pet. 1:3). The life that is imparted is “eternal” (John 3:16; 10:28; 17:2; Rom. 6:23). Paul maintains that God’s gifts and call are irrevocable (Rom. 11:29). Thus, there is no notion in the Scriptures that a regenerated follower of Christ ever becomes unregenerate, nor does eternal life ever morph into something temporal. In praying to the Father, Jesus notes that believers are a gift from the Father to the Son, and that none of them would be lost (John 17:2, 12). Judas Iscariot’s perdition clearly was part of God’s sovereign plan (John 17:12; Acts 1:16).

Protection of the Believer

The Holy Spirit is said to seal or be the seal of believers. Paul writes, “When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit” (Eph. 1:13). This refers to the divine ownership and protection granted to the believer, who has been given “the Spirit as a deposit,” guaranteeing that God will finish the work that he began (2 Cor. 5:5; Phil. 1:6). Jesus taught the same truth regarding the believer’s security: “No one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand” (John 10:28–29). Peter maintained this same confidence when he wrote that the believer is shielded through faith “by God’s power” (1 Pet. 1:5). One of the strongest arguments for the security of the believer is found in Rom. 8:38–39: “Neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Something greater than God would be needed to wrestle salvation from those to whom he has granted it.

Not all Christians believe that the Bible teaches eternal security, citing passages that seem to imply that a saved individual can again become lost and suffer eternal judgment, most likely referring to the severe yet temporal discipline of God directed toward his erring children or toward those who depart from the faith because they were merely professing believers (Matt. 13:20–21, 24–30; John 15:6; 1 Cor. 11:30–32; 2 Cor. 11:13–15; 2 Tim. 4:10, 14; Heb. 6:4–9; 10:26–31; 2 Pet. 2:1, 22; 1 John 2:19; 5:16; 2 John 9; Rev. 2:5, 16). But those who defend the doctrine believe these passages do not contradict this teaching; they merely reveal that God purposes to accomplish this work with the cooperation of the believer (1 John 5:4; Rev. 2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21).

The writer to the Hebrews, who lays down some of the most severe warnings in the NT, nevertheless maintains that God is “able for all time to save,” and that his readers did not belong to those who “shrink back and so are lost” (Heb. 7:25; 10:39 NRSV). Jude asserts that God is able to present the believer “without fault” before his presence (Jude 24). Essentially, this is what Jesus says in John 10:28–29: “They shall never perish” (cf. 17:12). The loss of one sheep would impugn the power and character of God, who not only saves by grace but also keeps us by his grace and in his grace (Rom. 5:2).

Sky

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

The Abode of God

The Final Dwelling Place for Believers

Word

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

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

Theology of the Word

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

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

Psalm 119

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

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

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

The Word of God

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

Showing 1 to 50 of222 results

1. A Double Recipe

Illustration

CSS

Karenza picked up the telephone for her study. It was Mr. Edwards calling about the summer parish meals. Each year they had chosen a theme for five weeks of supper gatherings. It had been a way to maintain fellowship during the summer months. He was writing a piece for the parish newsletter and wondered what the committee had decided on the theme.

"It will be bread," she replied. He was silent for a moment.

"Bread?" "Yes. Jesus calls himself 'the living bread' and there is a lot in that phrase that will keep us busy. I can think of several things; the program called 'Bread for the World,' the meanings of the daily bread we pray for in the Lord's Prayer, the role of bread in our lives. The list is a long one."

After the phone call was over, Karenza pondered the issue of bread. She remembered smelling the wonderful scent of baking bread when she was a child. But time and efficiency and schedules had made baking bread a thing of the past. She grinned to herself. Her husband, John, however, had been given a bread baking machine for Christmas and had discovered baking bread was a great way to relax after a busy work day. Their household had tasted some wonderful recipes lately.

But how to speak about bread to the congregation? She planned out the program and together with some other parishioners focused particularly on the last of their summer suppers.

On the final Wednesday when the congregation gathered for the evening meal, they sampled a variety of homebaked breads parishioners had brought; pita bread from the Spiros household, lefse from the Johnsons, nine-grain bread from the Sullivans. People joked together about eating every Wednesday night meal as a congregation.

Finally, several parishioners, including the teenage author of the play, enacted the scene of the last supper, creatively, reverently and thoughtfully. It concluded by the departure of the disciples and Jesus to the Mount of Olives.

As Jesus turned to leave he asked who had provided the bread for their meal. Two young women stepped forward and said they had. Jesus smiled and said, "Your bread filled us and has strengthened our spirits. Remember how much I enjoyed it."

2. The Bread Of Life

Illustration

John E. Sumwalt

When the INNS shelter program for the homeless started in Kenosha, I signed up for the training to be a volunteer. After I was trained, I was assigned a three-hour shift on a Sunday night at Lord of Life Lutheran Church, several blocks up the street from my own congregation. My shift was to be from 8:00 till 11:00 P.M. I helped to register the homeless persons as they arrived. Each person received a foam pad for a mattress, a small pillow, a sheet and a blanket. After they had received their gear, we took them into the fellowship hall where they were to sleep on the floor. There was a row of tables and chairs dividing the room. Men slept on one side and women and children on the other. No children registered that evening, but one young woman was in the late stages of pregnancy. Before my shift was through her labor pains had started and an ambulance had been called to take her to the hospital.

In all, about 25 persons came to the shelter on that cold November evening. Most of them were young men in their twenties and thirties. It was evident that they all knew each other, probably because they had sheltered together before on the street and in the churches after the INNS program began. A few of the men were quiet and kept to themselves, but several of them gathered around a large African-American man named Bill, who seemed to be a kind of leader in the group. They shared a warm camaraderie that was a joy to behold. They did not have homes and, in most cases, jobs, but they had each other, and they clearly enjoyed one another's company. About ten o'clock, I went into the kitchen to make popcorn and to distribute snacks that had been provided by members of the churches participating in the program. Almost everyone came to get a cookie and a cup of coffee and then went back to the table where some of the men were engaged in a game of cards. Bill brought out an apple pie which he said he had purchased from among the day-old items at one of the bakeries. He cut the pie up and began to distribute pieces to all of his friends. I stood there watching hungrily, hoping he might offer me a piece, too. I felt guilty about my feelings, because I knew I would be going home in an hour and I could have anything I wanted to eat out of our family's well-stocked pantry. I stood there looking on, envious of their fellowship as I wallowed in my suburban yuppie angst. Bill must have sensed my hunger, because just then he looked up and asked if I would like to have a piece of pie. I eagerly said yes, and quickly joined him and the others at the table. It felt very good to be included in their group. As I ate my pie and joined in the conversation, I became aware that we were sharing what our Lord Jesus called "the bread of life," and I knew I was in his presence.

3. I Put My Money on Jesus

Illustration

John Ortberg

Do you also wish to go away? I wonder sometimes how I would have responded to the question. Because at times the truth is I do wish to go away. I don't like thinking this about myself. But in times of temptation, in times when I deceive other people to avoid trouble or get what I want, in times when I deliberately close my eyes to the sight of those who are poor or marginalized because I don't want to feel guilty or bother to help. I too am one of the ones who wish to go away.

Do you also wish to go away? Peter's response is striking. He doesn't say yes, of course, but he doesn't quite say no either. Instead, in good Jesus-style, he answers back with another question: To whom else can we go? It is not, perhaps, the most flattering answer in the world, but it is honest. It's a little reminiscent of Winston Churchill's famous description of democracy as the worst form of government except for every other form that has ever been tried. Following Jesus may not always be easy or pleasant, or even totally comprehensible, but when it comes to the eternal-life business, to tell the truth there's not much out there in the way of alternatives.

As ethicist Lewis Smedes said, "This is where the trolley stops. . . Without Jesus we are stuck with two options: utopian illusion or deadly despair. I scorn illusion. I dread despair. So I put all my money on Jesus."

4. Bread Is Not a Mere Commodity

Illustration

John Macquarrie

The theologian John Macquarrie relates that the Scottish churchman, George Macleod, used to watch grain ships from Canada and the United States bringing their cargoes of wheat into Liverpool harbor, and he reflected that the wheat has the potentiality of becoming the body of Christ. This is the point at which sacramental theology spills over into the market place. Bread is not a mere commodity; things are not mere bits of matter. We can learn something of this from natural theology, but we learn it above all from Jesus Christ, the bread of God which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.

5. The Importance of Bread

Illustration

Billy D. Strayhorn

In our country bread is used to round out the meal. Can you imagine having sausage gravy without biscuits? Or spaghetti without a thick slab of garlic bread. Can you imagine going to the Olive Garden and NOT getting breadsticks? The only people I know who eat hamburgers or hot dogs without a bun are those on the Atkin's diet.

Bread is important. You can't have a BLT without the toast. You can't have a sub sandwich without a Hoagie roll. Beans without cornbread just don't seem right. Enchiladas or burritos without tortillas would just be a mess. Lox and cream cheese wouldn't taste right on anything but a bagel. An Egg McMuffin without the muffin would just be an egg. A peanut butter and jelly sandwich would be a sticky mess without the bread. Try and imagine pot roast without rolls; a patty melt or reuben without rye; seafood without hushpuppies; soup without crackers or BBQ without a big old hunk of Texas Toast.

Just the smell of baking bread can evoke all kinds of warm and toastie memories. Now, my purpose wasn't to drive you nuts or get your mouth watering. But to show you how important bread is to our everyday life.

In this passage, Jesus calls Himself the Bread of Life, Bread from Heaven. In so doing, He tells us that just as we need the daily staple of bread for our physical bodies, we also need the staple of "Bread from Heaven" for our spiritual lives.

6. Words of Encouragement

Illustration

Billy D. Strayhorn

Steven Morris was a special needs child in Mrs. Bernaducci's class. Steven was a thin African-American boy who was blind. His handicap negatively impacted his self-esteem. However, over a period of time, the teacher realized that Steven had exceptional hearing.

One day she put the class mascot, a mouse, into the trash can. The scratching noise created a minor panic until Steven located the mouse. Mrs. Bernaducci exclaimed: "Steven, you are truly a wonder."

The nickname caught on. The next year little Stevie Wonder, full of a sense of his own value, began playing the piano. Stevie 'Wonder' would go on to influence and change American music all because of Mrs. Bernaducci's faith and encouragement.

We all need that kind of encouragement. Especially in times like this. Times that try our souls. Times that cause stress and uncertainty. Times when we want of word of direction from God but God seems to be silent.

We need a word of encouragement. And that's what we get when we come to this table. A little bit of bread and a little bit of wine remind us that Christ died for us to prove God's love for us.

7. You Are What You Eat

Illustration

Brian Harner

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

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

8. A Messy Kitchen

Illustration

Here are actual signs found in the real kitchens of real people.

A messy kitchen is a happy kitchen and this kitchen is delirious.
A clean house is a sign of a misspent life.
If we are what we eat, then I'm easy, fast, and cheap.
Thou shalt not weigh more than thy refrigerator.
My next house will have no kitchen, just vending machines.
A balanced diet is a cookie in each hand.

These sayings point to some of our society's attitudes about food: 'only junk food is enjoyable', 'food is meant to satisfy us', 'if I had to cook it, it doesn't taste good', and 'as long as it's not good for me, I should eat as much as I want'. We stuff ourselves, trying to fill the hole inside of us with food, as if we could eat something that would satisfy us. But we could stuff ourselves at every meal and still be hungry for something deeper!

9. Why Are You Here?

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

One day a couple by the name of Herman and Mary were riding along in their shiny new car. Mary spoke up and said, "You know, Herman, if it weren't for my money, we probably wouldn't have this wonderful new car." And Herman just sat there and didn't say anything at all. As they pulled into the driveway, Herman turned off the motor and they quietly admired their new home. Then Mary said, "You know, Herman, if it weren't for my money, we probably wouldn't have this new house." And again, Herman just sat there and didn't say anything.

They got out of the car and walked in just as the delivery man finished setting up their new furniture. You know, Herman, said Mary once more, "If it were not for my money, we probably wouldn't have this new carpet and all this new furniture." And once more, Herman didn't say a word.

It happened again as they sat down in their new den and propped their feet up and watched the big screen TV in their new entertainment center. "You know, Herman," said Mary, "if it were not for my money, we probably wouldn't have this huge entertainment center."

And with that, poor Herman had had enough. He turned to Mary and said, "I don't want to hurt your feelings, Honey, but you know if it weren't for your money, I probably wouldn't be here either!"

What is it that brings you here? Why did you choose to become a part of this church? If you are not a member, what are you looking for in a church?

10. Sorry, Wrong Plane

Illustration

Staff

During one of the busiest times at Houston's Hobby Airport, a flight was delayed due to a mechanical problem. Since they needed the gate for another flight, the aircraft was backed away from the gate while the maintenance crew worked on it. The passengers were then told the new gate number, which was some distance away. Everyone moved to the new gate, only to find that a third gate had been designated. After some further shuffling, everyone got on board. As they were settling in, the flight attendant made the standard announcement, "We apologize for the inconvenience of this last-minute gate change. This flight is going to Washington, D.C. If your destination is not Washington, D.C., then you should 'deplane' at this time."

A very confused-looking and red-faced pilot emerged from the cockpit, carrying his bags. "Sorry," he said, "wrong plane." What happens when the pilot does not know where he is headed?

There are people today who are very confused because they have looked to the wrong persons to help them find the meaning they seek. There are hundreds of Religions in today's world. New ones are born every year. Many people are blindly accepting strange theologies - theologies that will not help them find the life that Jesus offers to you and me - the Living Bread of God.

11. Bread Is Wondrous

Illustration

Ladislas M. Orsy wrote: "There is something wondrous in the taste of bread. It is so ordinary yet it is so good. It is very democratic. It nourishes the poor and the rich. It goes well with meat or fish, with fruit or cheese. It may return three times a day to the table; it may even stay there all day long. Yet it never outstays its welcome." Jesus Christ said, "I myself am the bread of life. No one who comes to me shall ever be hungry; no one who believes in me shall ever thirst."

12. It’s for Sinners

Illustration

Billy D. Strayhorn

It was a Maundy Thursday, the Thursday before Easter. The Church was having the traditional communion service. This time the pastor suggested that they serve one another. He also suggested that as they pass the bread and cup they whisper, "The body of Christ, broken for you. The blood of Christ, shed for you."

As the service progressed, one man concentrated on remembering the pastor's words, and thought it would be nice to do this more often. Between him and the aisle was an older woman, not nearly so concerned with the pastor's exact words, but thoroughly understanding their meaning. As she served him she said softly, "Take it. It's for sinners."

Romans 5:8 says: "God showed His love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us."

What better proof of that love could there be. We didn't even have to get cleaned up. We didn't and don't have to do anything except open our hearts and let the love of God flood our souls. All we have to do is reach out our hand to receive the Bread of Life. For it is the Bread of Life who will sustain us and feed us and strengthen us in whatever situation comes our way.

13. Clothed in Human Flesh

Illustration

Billy D. Strayhorn

If something is too good to be true, then it probably isn't true at all. Such is one of the lessons that life teaches us. We learn early on that all too little is what it seems to be. We learn to be skeptical, to question, to doubt. And yet, sometime in life most of us are also taught to believe, even in the face of our skepticism. When does that happen? When did you first really believe something?

The authorities complained about what Jesus was saying. He was after all, Joseph and Mary's boy. They watched him grow up, saw him learn the trade of his father Joseph. "How can he now say, 'I have come down from heaven'?" It is hard to argue with the authorities in today's reading. Are their questions not also ours?

14. A Piece of Him

Illustration

At the time of the Napoleonic Wars, the famous British Admiral Horatio Nelson was due to be buried in St. Paul's Cathedral. His sailors lifted his casket over their shoulders and majestically carried his body into the cathedral. Draping his coffin was a magnificent Union Jack. After the service, the sailors once more carried his body high in the air, this time to the graveside. With reverence and with efficiency they lowered the body of the world's greatest admiral into its tomb. Then, as though answering to a sharp order from the quarterdeck, they all seized the Union Jack with which the coffin had been covered and viciously tore it to shreds, each taking his souvenir of the illustrious dead. A swath of colored clothe as a memento. It would forever remind them of the admiral they had loved. "I've got a piece of him," one sailor remarked, "and I'll never forget him."

In like manner, a piece of Christ - living bread - physically, spiritually, personally. Reaching out to receive him in faith is all that's required.

15. They Will All Be Taught By God

Illustration

Ralph Waldo Emerson

The deterioration of decency has accompanied quite proportionately the deterioration of society's interest in and support of religion. Historically and traditionally, the temple and church have been the schools of virtue. Not so necessarily as places of organizational denomination, but as places that teach children to replace selfishness with unselfishness, dishonesty with honesty, sensuality with self-control, and hatred with love.

The family is the strongest educator, but moral teachings in the family are based on what prophet and sage have inculcated. Those families that place emphasis on religious training are generally the ones whose children learn the greatest sense of decency. Any current quest for decency accompanies the current trend back to religious study.

Note: The entire article, this being the opening, was written by Ralph W. Emerson, David J. Steinberg, Celine Karraker, and Bruce Cartozian.

16. Bread from Home

Illustration

Staff

I'm reminded of a true story of a soldier who was severely wounded. When he was out of surgery, the doctors said that there was a good chance for recovery, but as the days progressed he wouldn't eat anything. The nurses and nuns tried everything, but he refused all food-drinking only water and juice.

One of his buddies knew why the soldier wouldn't eat - he was homesick. So his friend offered to bring the young man's father to visit him. The commanding officer approved and the friend went to the parents' home. As the father was about to leave for the hospital, the mother wrapped up a loaf of fresh bread for her son.

The soldier was very happy to see his father. Then his father said, "Son, this bread was made by your mother, especially for you". The boy brightened and of course he began to eat.

We are alll wounded in the battle of life. Wounded by sin, by trials and pains, by loss and by our forgetfulness of God.

We lose our taste for the food that strengthens our souls. Holy Communion gives us life, spiritual life, God's life. It gives us spiritual healing and spiritual strength.

17. I Shall Be Alive When You Are Gone

Illustration

W.B. Hinson

Thinking of the fullness and duration of this wonderful life, W. B. Hinson, a great preacher of a past generation, spoke from his own experience just before he died. He said, "I remember a year ago when a doctor told me, 'You have an illness from which you won't recover.' I walked out to where I live 5 miles from Portland, Oregon, and I looked across at that mountain that I love. I looked at the river in which I rejoice, and I looked at the stately trees that are always God's own poetry to my soul. Then in the evening I looked up into the great sky where God was lighting His lamps, and I said, ' I may not see you many more times, but Mountain, I shall be alive when you are gone; and River, I shall be alive when you cease running toward the sea; and Stars, I shall be alive when you have fallen from your sockets in the great down pulling of the material universe!'"

18. Christ in Me and I in Him

Illustration

Staff

A minister is walking along the ocean with his small son. The boy questioned his father about Sunday's sermon. The boy said, "Dad, I cannot understand how Christ can live in us and we live in him at the same time." Further down the beach, the father noticed an empty bottle with a cork in it. Taking the bottle, he half filled it with water, re-corked it and flung it out into the ocean.

As they watched the bottle bob up and down he said, "Son, the sea is in the bottle and the bottle is in the sea. It is a picture of life in Christ. You live under the Lordship of Christ and He lives in you."

19. Full Devotion

Illustration

Edwin D. Peterman

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

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

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

20. I Quit

Illustration

Staff

A guy joins a monastery and takes a vow of silence. He's allowed to say two words every seven years. After the first seven years, the elders bring him in and ask for his two words. "Cold floors," he says. They nod and send him away. Seven more years pass. They bring him back in and ask for his two words. He clears his throat and says, "Bad food." They nod and send him away.

Seven more years pass. They bring him in for his two words. "I quit," he says. "That's not surprising," the elders say. "You've done nothing but complain since you got here."

This gentleman at the monastery had something in common with the followers of Jesus: it's just too hard.

21. Not Ready for the Commitment

Illustration

Ye call Me Master and obey me not,
Ye call Me Light and see me not,
Ye call Me way and follow me not
Ye call Me Life and desire me not,
Ye call Me wise and acknowledge me not,
Ye call Me fair and love me not,

Ye call Me rich and ask me not,
Ye call Me eternal and seek me not,
Ye call Me gracious and trust me not,
Ye call Me Noble and serve me not,
Ye call Me mighty and honor me not,
Ye call Me just and fear me not,

If I condemn you, blame me not.

22. Everything Changes When You Are Called

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

John C. Purdy, a staff member of the Presbyterian Church U.S.A., has written a challenging book entitled Returning God's Call: The Challenge of Christian Living. In it, Purdy suggests that we need a new metaphor for the Christian life. He points out the inadequacy of the old metaphors such as "a soldier in God's army," "a scholar in the school of Christ," "a traveler a long the Christian way," "a citizen of the commonwealth; "and a member of Christ's body." Each of these metaphors has served us well in the past, Purdy says, but they are not as useful for today. The metaphor Purdy recommends with much vitality is "Hearers of the Call." His rationale is that this would be the image of one who has heard, and keeps hearing, a persistent summons to belief and action. "Hearers of the Call!" Whether we agree with Purdy or not, that reality is the key to our faithfulness as disciples.

The same author goes on to describe how, as a child, he would be outside playing hide and seek with his friends. Inevitably, his front door would open and his mother's voice would call, "John, time to come in!"

But Purdy said, "I would go on with hide and seek as though nothing had happened. And to anybody passing by, I looked no different from my playmates." "But", as Purdy continued, "I was different. I had been called - in; everything was changed.

23. Have You Taken Inventory Lately?

Illustration

The renown teacher and author Dr. David McLennon tells a story of his very first job in a small town general store. This was the day before mails and supermarket chains at least it was in his community. At age thirteen he was hired as a handy boy. He would sweep the flour, bag items for customers, put up stock. On one particular Saturday, he recalled, he heard the owner say to one of the clerks "It's that time of the year again, it's time to take inventory." Dr. McLennon wrote that this was a word that had not yet entered into his vocabulary. When an opportune moment arrived, he went up to the kindly older man and asked, Sir, what is an inventory? Patiently the owner explained that it was a time when you made a list of everything that you had from groceries on the shelves to wrapping paper and string. Still somewhat puzzled, the young McLennon then asked, Why?

"Well," responded the owner, "it's easy to forget exactly how much you have each year. Every now and then you have to take an inventory just to see what all you have."

That little story, to me, pretty well sums up what Thanksgiving is all about. It is a time when each of us needs to ask ourselves the question: Have I taken inventory of my life lately? Have I made an effort to count all the things that I do have in life instead of complaining about the things that I don't have. It is a good exercise especially when we are of a mind to brood or whine in self pity. Have you taken inventory lately?

What I am suggesting here is not some shallow "count your blessings" platitude. But from time to time, in a genuine kind of a way, we need to sit down and do some talking to ourselves about all of the gifts and opportunities and challenges that God has given each one of us. Perhaps there is a deep underlying wisdom in the children's poem that says: "Count your blessings one by one, and you might be surprised what the Lord has done."

24. The Real Meaning of Life

Illustration

Perhaps in the end it is the poet who comes closer to the real meaning of life than any of us could. Wrote poet Courtland Sayers:

5,000 breathless dawns all new;
5,000 flowers fresh in dew.
5,000 sunsets wrapped in gold;
1 million snowflakes served ice cold.

5 quiet friends, 1 baby's love;
1 white sea with clouds above.
1 June night in a fragrant wood,
1 heart that loved and understood.

I wondered when I waked that day in God's name how could I ever pay.

25. For That I Am Especially Thankful

Illustration

During a harvest festival in India, an old widow arrived at her church with an extraordinarily large offering of rice - far more than the poor woman could be expected to afford. The itinerant pastor of the church did not know the widow well. But he did know that she was very poor and so he asked her if she were making the offering in gratitude for some unusual blessing. "Yes," replied the woman. "My son was sick and I promised a large gift to God if he got well." "And your son has recovered?" asked the pastor. The widow paused. "No," she said. "He died last week. But I know that he is in God's care; for that I am especially thankful."

26. The Gratitude Attitude

Illustration

Billy D. Strayhorn

Rev. John R. Ramsey tells how in one church a certain person provided him with a rose boutonniere for the lapel of his suit every Sunday. At first he really appreciated it but then it sort of became routine. Then one Sunday it became very special.

As he was leaving the Sunday Service a young boy walked up to him and said, "Sir, what are you going to do with your flower?" At first the preacher didn't know what the boy was talking about. When it sank in, he pointed to the rose on his lapel and asked the boy, "Do you mean this?"

The boy said, "Yes, sir. If you're just going to throw it away, I would like it."

The preacher smiled and told him he could have the flower and then casually asked what he was going to do with it. The boy, who was probably no more than 10 years old, looked up at the preacher and said, "Sir, I'm going to give it to my granny. My mother and father divorced last year. I was living with my mother, but she married again, and wanted me to live with my father. I lived with him for a while, but he said I couldn't stay, so he sent me to live with my grandmother. She is so good to me. She cooks for me and takes care of me. She has been so good to me that I wanted to give her that pretty flower for loving me."

When the little boy finished, the preacher could hardly speak. His eyes filled with tears and he knew he had been touched by God. He reached up and unpinned the rose. With the flower in his hand, he looked at the boy and said, "Son, that is the nicest thing that I've ever heard but you can't have this flower because it's not enough. If you'll look in front of the pulpit, you'll see a big bouquet of flowers. Different families buy them for the Church each week. Please take those flowers to your granny because she deserves the very best."

Then the boy made one last statement which Rev. Ramsey said he will always treasure. The boy said, "What a wonderful day! I asked for one flower but got a beautiful bunch of flowers."

That's the thankful spirit. That's the gratitude attitude. And it's that attitude that should guide our giving and our lives. Like that boy's granny, God has blessed us so much. God has been so good to us that giving shouldn't even be a question. It should just flow from us naturally.

27. Thankfulness Can Be a Matter of Perspective

Illustration

How many of us have been jostled and crammed into a tiny airplane seat recently, only to lament delays caused by weather, extra fees demanded by the airlines for overweight bags, or the tiny bag of pretzels that have replaced meals on so many flights? It seems like the collective mood on airplanes is pretty grumpy these days.

But imagine what our ancestors just a few generations ago would have said if we could tell them about our ability to fly from city to city with such ease and frequency? Imagine trying to explain to a settler moving his family across the continent by wagon train that the trip could be done in a number of hours instead of months. Now think of the many citizens of this world who can not afford a luxury such as flight, who may not be able to freely visit family or do business across such vast distances.

Now think about the first time you looked out the window and saw the country sprawling out below you. Maybe it was nighttime and all the lights of the cities and towns were twinkling. Maybe it was daytime and you could see the hedgerows, highways, and the rivers delineating the landscape. Didn't you feel a sense of wonder? Don't you remember thinking, "Wow! That is unbelievable!"?

Along the way, many of us have lost the wonder of things like flying. We should try to keep things in perspective and remain thankful for the amazing things that we enjoy every day in our unbelievable present.

28. First National Thanksgiving Proclamation

Illustration

George Washington

Whereas, it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; Whereas, both the houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me "to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness!"

Now therefore, I do recommend next, to be devoted by the people of the states to the service of that great and glorious being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be, that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country.

29. Heavenly Bread and Earthly Bread

Illustration

Alex Gondola

"The two biggest sellers in any bookstore are the cookbooks and the diet books. The cookbooks tell you how to prepare the food and the diet books tell you how not to eat any of it." So observed Sixty Minutes commentator Andy Rooney (quoted by Fred Lyon in "The Savior Life Diet," Lectionary Homiletics, August, 1997, p. 21). I made a trip to the discount bookstore this past week to see if Andy Rooney was right. I discovered he was at least partly right. There were lots and lots of cookbooks there. I stopped counting at 250 different titles – because at 250 I was only half-way through the cookbook section! And, that didn't count the bargain bins!

There was an astonishing array of topics and titles. I found cookbooks for Christmas. And, it's only August! I found Visible Vegetables, The Terrific Pacific Cookbook, Glorious Garlic, 50 Ways with Fish, 365 More Receipts for Chicken, Cooking for Dummies, Dad's Own Cookbook: Everything Your Mother Never Taught You, to name only a few. (It was interesting to me that Cooking for Dummies and Dad's Own Cookbook were really near each other on the bookshelves!)

The bookstore didn't have quite as many diet books. But, there was a fair number of titles, including The Weigh Down Diet, Controlling Your Fat Tooth, The Suzanne Sommers Eat Great Lose Weight diet book, and The Ten Habits of Naturally Slim People. (Not being among the "naturally slim" myself, I thought I'd have a look in this one to see what I might learn. I discovered habit number eight was: only eat when you're hungry. Why didn't I think of that?)

And, whether or not the bookstore had them in stock, we all know there are lots and lots of other diet books and diet plans. It reminds me of the refrigerator magnet I once saw. It read, "A waist is a terrible thing to mind!"

Now, there's nothing wrong with having a healthy concern for our bodies. It's admirable, really. The "body is a temple of the Holy Spirit" (1 Corinthians 6:19, RSV). But I wonder if this obsession with getting food into us, and then getting those unwanted pounds off of us, isn't perhaps symptomatic of something else.

We may pursue the material when what we really need is spiritual. The hunger that drives us to cookbooks and restaurants (and then, to diet clubs or health clubs), the emptiness we try to pack with possessions, the way we may try to fill ourselves up with more recognition, more titles, more awards, more experiences; could these not be our spiritual emptiness crying out for God?

30. The Communion of Empty Hands

Illustration

Alex Gondola

There's a beautiful incident recorded by Thomas Pettepiece, a Methodist pastor who was imprisoned during WWII. He was a political prisoner, a prisoner of conscience. Pettepiece writes of his first Easter Sunday spent in prison. He was among 10,000 prisoners. Most of the men had lost everything: their homes, their jobs, their furniture, their contact with their families. It was Easter Sunday, and they wanted to celebrate Communion. But, they had no cup for Communion. They had no wine for Communion. They didn't even have water for Communion. Nor did they have any bread for the Sacrament.

So, they practiced the Communion of Empty Hands. "This meal in which we take part," Pettepeice said, "reminds us of the imprisonment, the torture, the death and final victory of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The bread is the body which he gave for humanity. The fact that we have none represents very well the lack of bread in the hunger of so many millions of human beings. The wine, which we don't have today, is his blood, and represents our dream of a united humanity, of a just society, without difference of race or class."

Then Pettepiece, the pastor, held out his empty hand to the next person on his right, and passed on the imaginary loaf. Each one took a piece and passed it on. Then he said, "Take, eat, this is my body, which is broken for you. Do this in remembrance of me." And together they ate the imaginary bread, trying to imagine tasting it.

After a moment they passed around the non-existent chalice, each imagining he was drinking from it. "Take, drink, this is the blood of Christ which was shed for you ... Let us give thanks, sure that Christ is here with us, strengthening us."

They gave thanks to God and then stood up and embraced each other. And a while later, one of the non-Christian prisoners came up to them and said, "You people have something special, which I would like to have." And the father of a girl who had died came up to Pettepiece and said, "Pastor, this was a real experience. I believe that today I discovered what faith is ..." (from Visions of a World Hungry, quoted in A Guide To Prayer, Rueben P. Job and Norman Shawchuck, editors, The Upper Room, p. 143).

31. Familiar Things

Illustration

Alex Gondola

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

32. A Hunger for God

Illustration

Alex Gondola

Someone has said that our model for living today is more like Madonna, the "material girl," than it is like Mother Teresa. Have we somehow confused our wants with our needs? So, we may be hungry not hungry for food, but hungry in another way. In one of her books, Mother Teresa writes: "The spiritual poverty of the Western world is much greater than the physical poverty of [Third World] people. You in the West have millions of people who suffer such terrible loneliness and emptiness. They feel unwanted and unloved ... These people are not hungry in a physical sense but they are in another way. They know they need something more than money, yet they don't know what it is. What they are missing really is a living relationship with God."

33. Thinking Metaphorically

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

Do you remember the 60's song by Simon and Garfunkel song which had the line, "Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio, a nation turns its lonely eyes to you. What's that you say, Mrs. Robinson? Joltin' Joe has left and gone away." Originally it was part of the soundtrack for the film The Graduate, the song "Mrs. Robinson" has became one of the 1960s' best-known, iconic ballads.

But in a 60 Minutes interview Paul Simon mentioned that some time after the song was released, he received a letter from Joe DiMaggio in which DiMaggio expressed his befuddlement at what in the world that song could mean. DiMaggio wrote, "What do you mean 'Where have I gone?' I haven't gone anywhere! I'm still around I'm selling Mr. Coffee." Then Mr. Simon smiled wryly at Mike Wallace and remarked, "Obviously Mr. DiMaggio is not accustomed to thinking of himself as a metaphor!"

But then, who is? Most, if not all, of us see ourselves as real people with literal, descriptive identities. For instance, I am a pastor, a husband, a father, a committee member, a volunteer, a son these are all straightforward descriptions of who I am in relation to the people around me in life. Like most people, I cannot readily conceive of myself as a symbol for something, as a kind of metaphor that represents something beyond myself.

Indeed, if someone came up to you at a party and said, "You are my shelter from the storms of life," well, you'd be taken aback. Then again, if you met someone who constantly spouted self-referential metaphors, you'd have to wonder about him or her. We expect people to denote themselves by saying things like, "I am a plumber" or "I'm a stay-at-home Dad." But our eyes would widen if someone said, "I am the oil that lubes my company's machine" or "I am the antibody that shields my family from the virus of secularism."

This is not a terribly typical mode of discourse. Yet Jesus, with some frequency, did refer to himself in a metaphorical mode, starting with John 6:35 when Jesus said, "I am the Bread of life."

34. Drawn Not by Wrath but by Love

Illustration

The author Ron Lee Dunn tells the story of two altar boys. One was born in 1892 in Eastern Europe. The other was born just three years later in a small town in Illinois. Though they lived very separate lives in very different parts of the world, these two altar boys had almost identical experiences. Each boy was given the opportunity to assist his parish priest in the service of communion. While handling the communion cup, they both accidentally spilled some of the wine on the carpet by the altar. There the similarity in their story ends. The priest in the Eastern European church, seeing the purple stain, slapped the altar boy across the face and shouted, "Clumsy oaf! Leave the altar." The little boy grew up to become an atheist and a communist. His name was Marshal Josip Tito - dictator of Yugoslavia for 37 years. The priest in the church in Illinois upon seeing the stain near the altar, knelt down beside the boy and looked him tenderly in the eyes and said, "It's alright son. You'll do better next time. You'll be a fine priest for God someday." That little boy grew up to become the much-loved Bishop Fulton J. Sheen.

There is the gospel! We are drawn, not by wrath and condemnation, but by love. God is love. God draws us by love. That's what Jesus meant when he said, "No one can come to me unless drawn by the Father who sent me."

35. God Is Like a...

Illustration

Brian Stoffregen

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

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

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

36. A Reminder of Our True Home

Illustration

Charles Hoffacker

At the foot of a great mountain in China lived a father and his three sons. They were a simple and loving family. The father noticed that travelers came from afar eager to climb the dangerous mountain. But not one of them ever returned! The three sons heard stories about the mountain, how it was made all of gold and silver at the top. Despite their father's warnings, they could not resist venturing up the mountain.

Along the way, under a tree, sat a beggar, but the sons did not speak to him or give him anything. They ignored him. One by one, the sons disappeared up the mountain, the first to a house of rich food, the second to a house of fine wine, the third to a house of gambling. Each became a slave to his desire and forgot his home. Meanwhile, their father became heartsick. He missed them terribly. "Danger aside," he said, "I must find my sons."

Once he scaled the mountain, the father found that indeed the rocks were gold, the streams silver. But he hardly noticed. He only wanted to reach his sons, to help them remember the life of love they once knew. On the way down, having failed to find them, the father noticed the beggar under the tree and asked for his advice.

"The mountain will give your sons back," said the beggar, "only if you bring something from home to cause them to remember the love of their family."

The father raced home, brought back a bowl full of rice, and gave the beggar some as a thank-you for his wisdom. He then found his sons, one at a time, and carefully placed a grain of rice on the tongue of each of them. At that moment, the sons recognized their foolhardiness. Their real life was now apparent to them. They returned home with their father, and as one loving family lived happily ever after.

Today we gather in this church to receive a reminder of home, a taste of food that will help us remember who we are. I mean the bread of life, our Father's gift to us. This is the food of God's kingdom, and reminds us that this kingdom is our true home.

37. For What Are We Hungry?

Illustration

James L. Mayfield

Sigmund Freud was convinced that of all the hungers and desires that motivate and drive us through life, the desire for pleasure, especially sexual pleasure, is the dominant one. There is a lot of evidence to support his view. Certainly the entertainment industry has discovered that sex sells movie tickets and raises TV ratings. And even a casual observer of human behavior is aware of the power of desire—not only sexual lust, but also that almost irresistible urge for one more piece of that delicious chocolate cake. The drive toward pleasure is powerful.

Alfred Adler did not deny that longing for pleasure is definitely one of the motivations of human behavior; however, he was convinced that our basic desire or hunger is for power; we want to be in control. Certainly, we all know what it is to want to be in control, and to feel not only uncomfortable but anxious, even fearful, when we are not. The hunger to be in charge and have our will done is a powerful drive. We see it at work in ourselves, and it is even easier for us to see it at work in others.

However, the psychiatrist Viktor Frankl, because of his experiences in a Nazi death camp, disagreed. He did not deny our human desire for pleasure and our longing to be in control. But when both of these were totally taken away in his experience in Auschwitz, he became convinced that the basic human hunger or the deepest drive within us is our deep longing for meaning and purpose. We want life and our lives to matter.

38. Bringing Home the Bacon

Illustration

J. Curtis Goforth

"Bringing home the bacon" is a phrase that probably originated in the village of Great Dunmow in England. In the twelfth century, the parish church of the village promised a side of bacon (called a flitch) to any man who could convince a jury of six local bachelors and six local maidens that he and his wife had "not wished themselves unmarried again" for a year and a day. The flitch trials as they are still called are held every four years to this day. It even gets a mention in Geoffrey Chaucer's famous Canterbury Tales. However the phrase originated, bringing home the bacon is a common expression we use in reference to bringing home money for the family, not a literal side of bacon. But I think this phrase reveals a lot about our culture.

We are so inextricably tied to food and to eating that even a casual phrase for making money is one involving food. We all have to eat to live, and some of us do the reverse of living to eat.

39. Mr. Thanksgiving

Illustration

Ashley Johnson

Years ago, Bob Vogelbaugh of Moline, Illinois, noticed that many of the customers at his grocery store made no special plans for Thanksgiving. Some of them were single and had no family with which to celebrate the holidays. Some were elderly and didn't want to travel far for the family gatherings. Vogelbaugh invited a couple dozen of his customers to his store on Thanksgiving day, where he prepared a feast for them. The community Thanksgiving gathering was such a hit that Vogelbaugh made it a yearly tradition. Today they call him Mr. Thanksgiving. In 2020 he was still going strong marking his 50th year providing a free Thanksgiving banquet to more than 2,000 residents of Moline.

40. How to Be a Pilgrim

Illustration

Alex Gondola

The Pilgrims had the courage to act on their commitments, no matter what. Do we?

Sociologist Robert Bellah, author of Habits of the Heart, is impressed by the power of religion. He once said, "We should not underestimate the significance of the small group of people who have a new vision of a just and gentle world. The quality of a culture may be changed when two percent of its people have a new vision (and act on it)."

Christians make up far more than two percent of most town, far more than two percent of Americans. So, why don't we have a greater effect: on issues of the environment, on justice for the needy, on the quality of life in our own city? Could it be we need more courage to act on our commitments? To be a Pilgrim means to stand up for what you believe, no matter what.

To be a Pilgrim also means sharing what you have, and turning thanks into giving. The Pilgrim colonists willingly shared all they had. During their first three years, all property was held in common. At one point, they were down to five kernels of corn per day for food. Still, they divided the corn kernels up equally. And, the original group of fifty that survived the first winter shared their limited food with the sixty newcomers who arrived in the spring.

One of their finest moments came in 1623, at the first real Thanksgiving. The small colony hosted over ninety Native American braves for three days. There was eating and drinking, wrestling, footraces, and gun and arrow-shooting competitions. It was the Pilgrims' way of saying "Thank you" to God, and to the Native Americans who had helped them survive. To be a Pilgrim means sharing and turning thanks into giving. How thankful and giving are we?

41. Manna from Heaven

Illustration

Norman Vincent Peale

Dr. Norman Vincent Peale once met a Dutch gentleman who told him a story of God's great providence during a time of suffering. He was just a child when World War II wreaked havoc on his country of Holland. Food was scarce, and the people of his town were in danger of starving. They were so hungry that they dug up tulip bulbs for food.

The pastor of the local church announced a prayer meeting to call upon God for help. For more than an hour, the people prayed fervently for food. As they prayed, the young boy felt the presence of God in the room, and he knew that God was answering their prayers.

The next morning, food aid flights came roaring over the town, dropping packages full of food. Like manna from heaven, the packages of food saved a starving people and renewed their faith in God's love and providence.

42. Spiritual Awareness

Illustration

Donald Macleod

In a broadcast address in London, T. S. Eliot talked about "spiritual awareness." He observed that many persons aspire to become Christians and believe, presumably, in the efficacy of the Christian faith, but never reach the stage of actually experiencing it. Aspiring towards real belief, i.e., becoming truly Christian, is one thing, whereas complete awareness of it is another. Aspiring can easily become an end in itself. And, as Charles H. Duthie of Edinburgh remarked: "It is a matter of living forever in the preface and never becoming involved in the story."

This condition of spiritual awareness is clearly defined by Jesus in the words of our text. It is a state of soul devoutly and eagerly to be aspired to, in contrast to what Lord Cecil of Britain once referred to as "believing in God in a commonplace sort of way." And, it becomes the gift and possession of any persons who are utterly dissatisfied with themselves, and who decide to fulfill those important requisites that make them completely satisfied in Christ.

43. Spiritual Poverty

Illustration

Mother Teresa

Mother Teresa wrote: "The spiritual poverty of the Western world is much greater than the physical poverty of the Third World. You in the West have millions of people who suffer such terrible loneliness and emptiness. They feel unwanted and unloved. These people are not hungry in a physical sense but they are in another way. They know they need something more than money, yet they don't know what it is. What they are missing really is a living relationship with God."

44. Bread for the Journey

Illustration

Charles R. Leary

A young man in a marathon race kept falling farther and farther behind the other runners. Suddenly he looked as if he were talking to himself and his legs began to move with a steady stroke. He began to pick up speed. By the time he reached the finish line he had passed all the other runners and had won the race. Afterwards, when someone asked him why he was talking to himself, he replied, "Oh, I wasn't talking to myself. I was talking to God. I was saying, "Lord, you pick them up, and I'll put them down.'"

Bread for the journey. Faith always moves forward. Life is a continuous series of journeys. Through all of them, ultimately, our aim is to nurture faith in ourselves, faith in each other, faith in God. All these journeys lead us to the grand finale journey into eternity. Good Lord, give us bread for the journey!

45. Togetherness in the Eucharist

Illustration

Charles R. Leary

Bread suggests togetherness, care and love, hopes and dreams, fun and adventure.

Let's say some new friends invite you to their house for a meal. When you are a guest in their home, they are sharing their intimacy with you. They are sharing with you some of the privacy of that place where they live every day, eat every day, love every day, work on their problems, argue from time to time, sleep and depart for work and pleasure and return for rest, every day.

After graciously receiving you, they show you around their home in which they take deep pride. Then you go to the dining room for the meal. You find the table set with care, the food exceptionally delicious, and the conversation flows easily. Simply put, it becomes a lovely evening and you leave feeling full in every way. You enjoy bread from the kitchen, but much more. You enjoy the bread of being graciously received, the bread of informed and lively conversation, and the bread of being in beautiful surroundings..

Magnify that thousands of times and you begin to have a glimmer of what the church perceives the Holy Eucharist to be. In the Eucharist Jesus and "Bread of Life" are one. In the Eucharist bread and wine are the elements that nurture faith in God.

46. Join the Winning Side!

Illustration

John Ortberg

Jim Wallis writes that when the South African government canceled a political rally against apartheid, Desmond Tutu led a worship service in St. George's Cathedral. The walls were lined with soldiers and riot police carrying guns and bayonets, ready to close it down. Bishop Tutu began to speak of the evils of the apartheid system how the rulers and authorities that propped it up were doomed to fall. He pointed a finger at the police who were there to record his words: "You may be powerful, very powerful, but you are not God. God cannot be mocked. You have already lost."

Then, in a moment of unbearable tension, the bishop seemed to soften. Coming out from behind the pulpit, he flashed that radiant Tutu smile and began to bounce up and down with glee. "Therefore, since you have already lost, we are inviting you to join the winning side."

The crowd roared, the police melted away and the people began to dance. Don't go away, Paul says. Put on your armor and dance. I am inviting you to join the winning side.

47. Lift Up Thine Eyes!

Illustration

Stephen M. Crotts

Norman Rockwell has a painting titled Lift Up Thine Eyes. Shown in his painting is the magnificent entrance to an urban cathedral. Vaulted high above its carved gothic doors are statues of the prophets, apostles, and martyrs. And right in the center is Jesus Christ, sitting on a throne at the right hand of God. On the sidewalk below the cathedral move the busy throngs of people amidst the noise and fumes of cars and taxis. The pastor of the church has just finished changing the public bulletin board. The sign, written for edification of the passers-by, reads: "Lift Up Thine Eyes!" The irony, of course, is in the scene below. Each person in the passing crowd is caught up with his own thoughts. No one looks up. Most appear gloomy, harried, and depressed. They hurry on with eyes glued to the pavement. Some are lugging their briefcases like millstones.

What a picture of modern life! And today, God's word paints much the same kind of painting for you who have taken time out from counting the cracks in your sidewalks to come into the Church and lift up thine eyes.

48. Lift Up Your Eyes

Illustration

Stephen M. Crotts

During World War II a delightful Christian English lady kept a personal diary. It tells of her husband's death in the war effort. It tells of food rationing and the horrible bombing of London . It tells of her children's evacuation to the countryside. One night during the bombings the woman confessed that she woke up and could not get back to sleep. She kept thinking of Hitler, invasion, and the S.S. troops. She trembled until she suddenly thought, "Where is Alexander the Great who gobbled up the world? Where is Caesar's dogmatic rule upheld on the tips of spears? Where is Napoleon? They are all in their graves and come to naught," she wrote. "And that is where Hitler will be, too. The same God reigns!" And she rolled over, laughed, and went back to sleep! The Mid-East, terrorism, crime, abortion is this what your eyes are upon? Are you gazing at the world, and only glancing at Christ? Rise above it! Lift up your eyes and see! The same God still reigns. Be assured!

49. The Image of Bread

Illustration

David E. Hall

Andy Rooney once pointed out that the two biggest sellers in bookstores are the cookbooks and the diet books. The cookbooks tell you how to make food irresistibly delicious, and the diet books tell you how to avoid eating it. Orson Wells once said, "My doctor has advised me to give up those intimate little dinners for four, unless of course there are three other people eating with me."

At a Weight Watchers meeting just after Easter, one woman said with pride, "This is the first year my children realized that chocolate Eastern bunnies came with ears." Eating is one of those areas of experience in which most of us feel qualified to claim expertise.

A scientist in California once computed that the average American eats sixteen times his weight in a year. A horse, on the other hand, only eats eight times his weight. Which means what? That if you eat like a horse, you're probably not overeating, and you shouldn't be overweight. It's eating like two horses that gets us into so much trouble.

Eating is fundamental to life. It's something all people in every age have taken seriously. And I believe that one reason Jesus used the image of bread to describe Who He was is because Jesus wants us to take Him as seriously as we do the other fundamental necessities of life.

50. Jesus Speaks Plainly

Illustration

Beth Quick

Preaching on this text, one pastor quips: "You can get away with murder if you are just a little vague. Let me tell you what that means. If you make a statement or a promise and you are just vague enough, you leave yourself an out. We have come to expect this kind of thing from politicians. A politician promises to "address" an issue. We think the politician will do something about the problem when in reality all they intend to do is make mention of it in a speech. After all, another word for a speech is an address." He continues, "If you can get away with murder by being vague, you can also get yourself killed by being too precise. If you say exactly what you mean, people will hold you to your words. Your precision has given them a standard by which to judge you and your actions. It gives them something solid to shoot at. Your enemies will love you for being too precise. If you beat around the bush you can get away scot-free, but if you say exactly what you mean they'll nail you." This, he argues, is exactly what is happening here with Jesus. He has been precise - he does not mince words - he says he is the bread of life, and that is what he means. And of course, the crowds who just the day before wanted to force kingship upon him now are confused, grumbling at his words, and questioning his authority.

One pastor writes, "In one way, what Jesus says is plain: He is talking about his divine identity. But even seeing that causes questions, for we humans simply cannot comprehend what it means to be divine. We know that to be divine is to be different-different from being human; but since we are not divine, it's hard to know what the difference is! But when Jesus says he is the heavenly bread of life, he gives us plenty of clues. Bread is something we eat. It nourishes us. It sustains us. And at points in our lives it even makes us grow. Maybe that's who Jesus is, God come to us to nourish us, to sustain us, and to make us grow. Moreover, maybe like bread, Jesus has to be consumed to do us any good!"

Showing 1 to 50 of 222 results