Sermon and Worship Resources

Luke 16:1-15 · The Parable of the Shrewd Manager

1 Jesus told his disciples: "There was a rich man whose manager was accused of wasting his possessions. 2 So he called him in and asked him, 'What is this I hear about you? Give an account of your management, because you cannot be manager any longer.'

3 "The manager said to himself, 'What shall I do now? My master is taking away my job. I'm not strong enough to dig, and I'm ashamed to beg-- 4 I know what I'll do so that, when I lose my job here, people will welcome me into their houses.'

5 "So he called in each one of his master's debtors. He asked the first, 'How much do you owe my master?'

6 " 'Eight hundred gallons of olive oil,' he replied. "The manager told him, 'Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it four hundred.'

7 "Then he asked the second, 'And how much do you owe?' " 'A thousand bushels of wheat,' he replied. "He told him, 'Take your bill and make it eight hundred.'

8 "The master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly. For the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light. 9 I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.

10 "Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much. 11 So if you have not been trustworthy in handling worldly wealth, who will trust you with true riches? 12 And if you have not been trustworthy with someone else's property, who will give you property of your own?

13 "No servant can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money."

14 The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus. 15 He said to them, "You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of men, but God knows your hearts. What is highly valued among men is detestable in God's sight.

Turn in an Account of Your Stewardship

Luke 16:1-15

Sermon
by Maxie Dunnam

I’ve been thinking a lot about heaven lately. When you minister to the dying and the bereaved, you can’t help but think about what heaven is going to be like.

In the midst of all my pondering, I was helped by, of all people, Dennis the Menace. Under a tree, obviously just enjoying life and reflecting, a friend says “I wonder what heaven is like?” In successive frames that conveys seriousness, satisfaction and conviction, Dennis responds, “Well...it probably looks like toy shop.”....Sounds like a carousel....”....and smells like a Deli....

Wisdom comes from unlikely places. For Dennis, Heaven is as good as it gets. Looks like a toy shop, sounds like a carousel and smells like a Deli.” All right, Dennis. I can go on that, too. Wisdom comes from unlikely places. Jesus knew that, so He told the parable of the dishonest steward. It’s a troubling story...not one that we do not get the message on first reading. In fact there’s some confusing signals in that it demand we stop and work through them. Rehearse the story. An imaginary rich man had a steward. Now a steward is simply a manager, someone who manages the resources and wealth of another so the owner can enjoy the wealth without bothering to attend to the details of the management. Many rock stars, successful athletes, and people of that nature, who have great wealth, do the same thing. They hire mangers who, in turn employ accountants and lawyers to handle their client’s wealth. In Jesus’ story, we have a very wealthy person who employed a manager - in biblical language - a steward. The steward’s task was to take care of the wealth of the master. But the master discovered the steward , in some fashion, was squandering or abusing his stewardship. So, the master called him in and said, in a sense, “You are fired! Would you please put the books in order before I put you out the door?” The crooked employee then began to consider how he was going to live after he is kicked out on the street. He decided he was not strong enough to dig, and he was too proud to beg. What was he going to do? He hatched a very clever scheme. He invited all of his master’s debtors into the office and, one by one, he inquired how much money they owed the master. (We are getting a hint of why he was not a very good steward. He does not seem to know how much is owed the master.) Systematically, he reduced the indebtedness by as much as 50 percent, apparently so that when he was fired, he would have people who were indebted to him and his life would be the easier for it. Apparently the master discovered what was going on, - this is the thing that is so shocking to us coming from the lips of Jesus - called in the dishonest steward, and commended him for his shrewdness. (Dr. Carl L. Schenck, “Godly Shrewdness”)

Now that’s what’s troubling. The master commends the manager for his shrewdness. Actually the manager has been dishonest. What have we here? Is Jesus praising shrewdness? Is He affirming dishonesty?

The key to the parable is Jesus’ commentary on it in Verse 8: For the children of this age are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light.

Remember parables generally are pithy little stories that generally illustrate only one point. So the key to understanding this story is found in what Jesus says at the end of the story - - the children of this age are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light.

We need to see this parable as a trickster story — the kind of story that appears everywhere in every culture, and in every age. They are stories about how an underdog gets the best of the top dog, stories in which the mighty are knocked from their thrones and those of low estate are elevated. The heroes and heroines of these stories are people who, because of circumstances of poverty, or birth, or misfortune, are at a disadvantage in this life, or find themselves in a crisis, or in a situation of overwhelming odds. And in that situation they use creative and ingenious schemes to gain some advantage or to make a fool out of their adversary. That’s why they are so popular. They appeal to that instinct in all of us that roots for the underdog. That is, unless we happen to be the top dog. Br’er Rabbit stories are trickster stories told by oppressed blacks in the Old South. Huckleberry Finn had something of the trickster in him. (Mark Trotter, “Jesus and the Trickster”)

So Jesus tells this trickster story not to affirm dishonesty but to affirm shrewdness. Now don’t get ahead of me. Jesus is not calling us to be shrewd in the fashion that we use the word. Our use of the word carries a lot of extra luggage. In fact a part of the dictionary’s definition of shrewd includes the word sly. But the basic definition of the word is “sharp or wise; sagacious, artful.”

In that meaning of the word Jesus is affirming shrewdness. On another occasion He had called us to be “as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves.” Here the point of His parable is made clear in the commentary: “For the children of this age are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light.”

Let’s make one big point about the primary meaning of the parable and then move to our particular focus. The point is this: If we believe that Jesus is Lord, and that God keeps His promises, why do we allow ourselves to be defeated by adversity?

Now you wonder how I get that out of the parable? Go back to what Jesus said: The children of this age - - other translations have it the sons of this world - - are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light.

“The children of this world is a code word for those who live without faith in God. They don’t believe that their lives are guided by providence. They are what we would call in our day, secularists. They don’t believe that God guides the future. They don’t believe that there is such a thing as providence. They think it’s all up to them. They also believe that life is basically unfair, and that nothing will change that. But they are determined to make the best of things anyway. Nor do they complain about misfortune. They take life as it comes. And with gusto, they throw themselves into living the life that is given them.

Now here is the point. How much more should you, who believe in providence, who believe that life is fair, who believe that Jesus is Lord, and that His Kingdom is waiting for you, how much more should you take life as it comes, making the best of it, trusting that God keeps His promises, living life to the full in gratitude and in thanksgiving.

He invites the comparison. The children of this world are more shrewd than the children of light. The children of this world, the tricksters, are the ones who appear to be more faithful than the children of light. What faith ought to mean is that you don’t give up, and you don’t bemoan your fate, and you don’t complain that life is unfair. If you believe that the future is in God’s hands, then you keep on working, and you keep on believing, and you keep living your life to the full, even in the face of a crisis.

It is interesting to note that the early Christian theology, we would call it “primitive theology”, actually pictured Jesus as a trickster. It was in the first theory about what happened on the cross. It said the Jesus fooled death by trusting God. The message of the cross ever since then has been that death has no power over those who trust the Promise. That’s why Paul said, in his letter to the Corinthians, “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?...Thanks be to God who give us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Here is what that victory looks like. Bonnie Kittle taught Old Testament literature at Yale Divinity School. She lived with cancer for years. Few knew that. Those people in her classes, they did not know it.

She came into class one day and lectured on Moses’ farewell speech to the nation in the Book of Deuteronomy. It was a lecture of such special excellence that the class arose and gave her an ovation. Visibly moved, Bonnie Kittle came back into the class, told everybody to sit down. She told them that this would be her last class with them because she was going to the hospital. They were stunned. They didn’t know. She had never mentioned anything.

Her last lecture was on Moses’ farewell speech. Moses had taken the Israelites through the wilderness for forty years. He wanted now to enjoy the culmination of that pilgrimage and enter the Promised Land with them. But he couldn’t do it. He was not allowed. He accepted that in faith. He faced death now as he faced every other moment in his life, trusting in the providence of God. The class saw the parallel. The saw Bonnie Kittle had lived the same way.

Her father, at her memorial service, said this about her. “For these last three years this is the way she lived; with her husband and her two boys. Three surgeries, four bouts with debilitating radiation, a year and a half of chemotherapy, a wheelchair, and then finally confined to bed.” Then he asked, “Did she crawl or curse or complain or strike out against the world? No. After surgery she and her family went to Israel. There were four trips west; to Yosemite, Sequoia, Disneyland, Idaho, and Mt. Ranier and the Grand Canyon. Then finally they all went to England. There were the lectures, and a week at summer camp, and ordinations, and installations and counseling, and all the while, remaining a wife and mother.”

And then Dean Keck spoke. “She bonded with the one on whom death no longer holds a claim. And in her sometimes lonely battle for life, she knew that salvation is nothing if it does not deliver us from death.” And then he said this, “This is the victory of the victim which we celebrate.” The victory of the victim. (Mark Trotter, “Jesus and the Trickster”)

Now that’s the big point of the parable - - that we children of light ought to be at least as wise as children of the world. That we don’t have to cringe from life, that we don’t have to back away when life deals us a rotten hand.

So hear the question again: If we believe that Jesus is Lord, that God keeps his promises, why do we allow ourselves to be defeated by adversity?

II.

With that as the foundation, let’s move to other lessons in the Scripture. These lessons huddle around the suggestive phrase in verse 2: “Give me an accounting of your management, because you cannot be my manager any longer.

Now the old Revised Standard Version and the King James Version puts it in this way: “Give”...or “Turn in an account of your stewardship”

Isn’t that the request the Lord constantly makes of us? “Turn in an account of your stewardship.” Wouldn’t life take on more intentionality and seriousness if each of us closed our day deliberately responding to this request of our Lord? “Turn in an account of your stewardship.”

Let me suggest two areas that we might focus on. One, the degree of our devotion. How would you feel this morning giving an account of the degree of your devotion to Christ?

Do you remember the story of the rich young ruler? He came to Jesus wanting to know what he might to do inherit eternal life. Jesus responded to him “You know the commandments — do not commit adultery — do not kill — do not steal — do not bear false witness — honor your father and mother.” The young ruler responded, I have observed all these commandments from the early days of my youth. Then comes one of the most probing words in all of Scripture - - “One thing you lack.”

Often times we focus on what Jesus said following that - - “One thing you lack - - go sell all that you have and distribute it to the poor.” It’s important to hear that latter word - - but the first word is the most important one. One thing you lack.

If Jesus said that to you - - one thing you lack - - what would you expect Him to follow it up with? He may say go sell all that you have and give to the poor - - though my hunch is that is unlikely for most of us. But He would say something - - one thing you lack. What is the big thing missing in your life that betrays your full devotion to Jesus Christ?

Is it a lack of compassion for the poor?

Is it a disregard for the growing number of elderly in our nation who are hidden away as names and numbers in giant filing cabinets called nursing homes?

Is it a failure to even think about a vast prison population and a criminal justices system that produces and enhances criminal lifestyle rather than rehabilitation?

One thing you lack, Jesus said. “In as much as you did unto the least of these - - the poor, the hungry, the shelterless, the prisoners, the sick, the widow, the orphan - - in as much as you did it unto the least of these you did it unto me.”

One thing you lack. Do you lack a gentle spirit, a heart of mercy? Do you lack a passion to be like Jesus? Do you hunger and thirst after righteousness? Is your heart broken over the things that break Jesus’ heart? Do you ever look out over our city, as Jesus looked over Jerusalem, and weep for it?

If Jesus said to you, one thing you lack, what do you suppose He would focus on? In our Scripture He’s talking about money, and the use of money. And that is not unusual. In fact, Jesus talked as much about money as He talked about anything else. If you’re familiar with Jesus’ teaching, it is no surprise that He would close His lesson with that word in verse 13:

No slave can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth.

It’s one of the biggest issues in our life. Money and our use of it. Nothing is more telling of our devotion to Christ than our attitude toward and use of money.

An enormously rich man complained to a psychiatrist that despite his great wealth which enabled him to have whatever he wanted, he still felt miserable. The psychiatrist took the man to the window overlooking the street and asked, “What do you see?” The man replied, “I see men, women, and children.”

The psychiatrist then took the man to stand in front of mirror and asked, “Now what do you see?”

The man said, “I see only myself.”

The psychiatrist then said, “In the window there is a glass and in the mirror the is glass, and when you look through the glass of the window, you see others, but when you look into the glass of the mirror you see only yourself. The reason for this, “said the psychiatrist, “is that behind the glass in the mirror is a layer of silver. When silver is added, you cease to see others. You only see yourself.”

Whenever your devotion to money and material things causes you to be self-centered, you in essence deny God’s intention for your life. It is also a denial of the Christ, for Jesus came into the world so that we might be in union with God.

The implication in the parable that Jesus told is that if you allow money to be your master, there is no way you can say “Yes!” to God. There are some things money cannot buy. Money will buy a bed, but not sweet dreams. Money will buy books, but not wisdom. Money will buy a house, but not a home. Money will buy pleasure, but not joy. Money will buy a crucifix, but not a Savior. (Dr. Rodney E. Wilmoth, “Mentor, Mediator, and Master”)

Give an account of your stewardship, Jesus says to us. Make course corrections in life as a response to His probing word: One thing you lack.

Maxie Dunnam, by Maxie Dunnam

Overview and Insights · How to Use Money and Possessions (16:1–31)

Often Jesus discusses the use of possessions in connection with discipleship. He opens with the puzzling parable of the shrewd manager (16:1–13). When a manager is faced with losing his job, he decides to act shrewdly by reducing what people owed his boss, perhaps by removing his own commission. In the end, both the boss and the manager gain honor, an important consideration in a culture that values honor and despises shame. Jesus doesn’t commend anything unethical here, but he does pay tribute to the manager’s clever shrewdness (16:8). Jesus then encourages disciples to use wealth to enhance relationships (16:9). How we handle small things is the best indicator as to how we will handle big things (16:10–12). In addition, we can’t ser…

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Luke 16:1-15 · The Parable of the Shrewd Manager

5 "So he called in each one of his master's debtors. He asked the first, 'How much do you owe my master?'

6 " 'Eight hundred gallons of olive oil,' he replied. "The manager told him, 'Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it four hundred.'

7 "Then he asked the second, 'And how much do you owe?' " 'A thousand bushels of wheat,' he replied. "He told him, 'Take your bill and make it eight hundred.'

13 "No servant can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money."

Commentary · The Parable of the Shrewd Manager

The focus on the salvation available for the humble ends at 15:32, marking a shift in the text. But the textual divisions in this unit remain a bit arbitrary. The parable of the dishonest steward is one of the most difficult to interpret in Luke. Where does the parable end? Does it end with verse 7, 8a, 8b, or 9? Is the master in verse 8 Jesus or the master of the steward in the parable? Why does the master praise the dishonest manager (16:8)? And what is the message of the parable for the church? Before we begin to answer these questions, a few preliminary matters need attention. The manager is not merely an ordinary household servant, but an estate manager, the agent of his master. He probably handled all the economic affairs of the master. He is charged with dishonesty (16:1), and the charge must be true because no self-defense is attempted (16:3). The master fires the manager and asks for a final accounting sheet so that his successor can conduct business (16:2). The manager realizes his predicament. He is a white-collar worker, and so he cannot handle manual labor. Also, it would be a blow to his pride to beg. By lowering the bills of the debtors, he will win their friendship, ensuring a future place for himself (16:4–7).

We cannot interpret this parable any further until we answer some of the previous questions. First, it is probable that the parable ends at 8a. Second, the “master” referred to in verse 8 is not Jesus but the master of the steward. Identifying the master as Jesus is problematic because then the parable ends suddenly and unexpectedly without any indication of how the master responded to the manager’s dishonesty. The comment in verse 8b is probably from Jesus because it seems clear that a religious application is now being drawn from the story. Thus the parable ends in the middle of verse 8, closing with a comment from the manager’s master. Third, almost all scholars agree that the master is not praising the dishonesty of the manager. Praise for dishonesty is inexplicable. Some scholars argue that the master is praising the manager because when the manager reduces the debts he is only eliminating the interest from the debts. According to the Old Testament the taking of interest was forbidden, but in this case the manager exacts interest so that he can line his own pockets. On this interpretation the master does not praise the manager for his dishonesty; instead, he commends the manager for renouncing the illegal practice of charging interest. This interpretation is attractive because it removes the problem of the master commending his steward for dishonesty, but it is not the most obvious meaning of the text. There is no indication in the text at all that the manager has decided not to charge interest. And the interest in verse 6 is improbably high—100 percent! Moreover, the master in verse 8 praises his dishonest employee, showing no indication that he has just done something that is righteous. If the above analysis is correct, why does the master praise his manager? Not because of the employee’s illegal and immoral behavior (although he does act immorally) but because he does something that is clever and prudent.

The lesson that Jesus draws from the parable, then, involves both comparison and contrast—use money wisely and prudently as the steward did, but do not use it dishonestly as he did (cf. 16:10–12). When Jesus refers to “unrighteous mammon” (so KJV; rightly translated in the NIV as “worldly wealth” [16:9, 11]), he is not saying that money is intrinsically evil, only that it is easily abused and used for evil. The lessons Jesus draws from this parable are as follows: (1) Use your money for kingdom purposes so that in the end your use of wealth will indicate that you are worthy of entering into heaven (16:9). This is not salvation by works, but salvation with works. (2) If one is faithful in handling a small amount of money, one will be faithful with large amounts (16:10). (3) One who cannot be trusted with money cannot be trusted with spiritual riches (16:11). (4) One who cannot handle his or her own affairs will not be called on to manage the affairs of another (16:12). In verse 13 Jesus penetrates to the root; no one can give exclusive service to both God and money.

Clearly the reproof of the greedy Pharisees (16:14–15) continues to focus on money, but it takes the discussion in a new direction. Apparently the Pharisees were ridiculing Jesus because they imagined some compatibility between serving God and serving money. Jesus replies that their attempt at self-defense is hollow because God penetrates to the true state of their hearts. An attempt to appear pious before people without being pious before God is detestable to God.

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

Big Idea: Our heavenly well-being depends on how we have handled the possessions entrusted to us here on earth.

Understanding the Text

Two more parables (16:1–8a, 19–31) follow the three in chapter 15. In the light of the interpretive comments on the first parable in 16:8b–9, both parables make a connection between life on earth and life in heaven, and the focus in both is on wealth and how we use it, a prominent theme in Luke that has already been given sustained attention in chapter 12 (summed up in the call to store up treasure in heaven in 12:33–34) and, more indirectly, in chapter 14. The same theme will recur especially in 18:18–30.

Between the two parables is a collection of sayings, with a change of audience (from the disciples to the listening Pharisees) in 16:14. Most of these sayings (16:8b–15) continue to relate to the theme of the responsible use of possessions, but the three sayings in 6:16–18, taking up issues of dispute between Jesus and the Pharisees, are on different subjects.

Historical and Cultural Background

A steward (NIV: “manager”) was an employee given wide-ranging executive responsibility for running his employer’s estate and dealing with his tenant farmers. The debts of oil and wheat represent the agreed rents, in kind, for land leased out by the rich man. The manager unilaterally reduces the rent on the assumption that his employer, having delegated his authority, would not know what amounts had been agreed.

An alternative view[1] is that the employer knew the agreed rents, but by the time he saw the altered contracts, he was unwilling to forfeit the reputation for generosity that had resulted from the reduced rents, wrongly assumed to have been authorized by him.

A different reading[2] assumes a financial rather than an agricultural setting. The rich man (or the manager on his behalf) has loaned out large sums of money at interest, but the loans have been expressed in commodity terms in order to avoid the Jewish prohibition of “usury” (lending money at interest). The manager uses his unsupervised authority to remove the “interest” element from those debts, thus pleasing the debtors but leaving his employer unable to protest because that part of the bill could not be legally defended.

Numerous variations on these basic approaches have also been suggested. The following notes assume the first of these options.

Interpretive Insights

16:1 accused of wasting his possessions. The charge is not merely of incompetence but of dishonesty (16:8). The manager will not dispute the charge of misappropriation, and he takes it for granted that he will (justly) lose his job (16:3–4).

16:3–4 people will welcome me into their houses. Unable or unwilling to face the humiliation of earning or begging his living, he plans to use his present position of authority, while he still can, to curry favor with the tenant farmers. By putting them in his debt, he will have a cushion of goodwill to fall back on, possibly even another job to go to.

16:6–7 Nine hundred gallons of olive oil . . . A thousand bushels of wheat. The quantities are large, indicating relatively wealthy tenant farmers, who thus would be valuable friends for the dismissed manager to have on his side.

make it four hundred and fifty . . . make it eight hundred. No reason is indicated for the difference in treatment (one is given a 50 percent reduction, the other only 20 percent), and it would be inappropriate allegorization to look for a symbolic reason.

16:8 The master commended the dishonest manager. The commendation is not, presumably, for his dishonesty (for which he was firing him) or for having cheated him yet further by reducing the rents, but for his initiative and foresight, even at his employer’s expense. If this seems an improbably objective assessment by the man who has been cheated, we should note that characters in a parable do not have to behave as in real life. An alternative reading, that this is Luke’s editorial comment (saying that Jesus, the kyrios, expressed this opinion after finishing the parable), produces an incoherent sequence, since Jesus continues speaking in the next verse, with no indication of an editorial interruption.

the people of this world . . . the people of the light. This is an unusual formulation of words for the contrast between disciples and the rest of society. “People” is literally “sons”; the Qumran community described themselves as the “sons of light” as opposed to the “sons of darkness.” True disciples may have something to learn from worldly common sense, in this case the manager’s canny instinct for self-preservation, however much they must distance themselves from the world’s basic values.

16:9 use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves. “Worldly wealth” is literally “the mammon [Aramaic for ‘possessions’] of unrighteousness” (cf. 16:11, where the Greek says “unrighteous mammon”). Money and possessions lend themselves to ungodly purposes, but they can also be used for good ends (the Aramaic translation of Deut. 6:5 has “Love the Lord your God with . . . all your mammon”). The mention of “eternal dwellings” indicates that the “friends” represent not earthly supporters but rather a heavenly reception committee. Just as the manager made sure he had a refuge after he lost his job, so disciples should ensure that they will be welcome in heaven when this life is over. A responsible and generous use of possessions is one way to make such preparation (cf. 14:14).

16:10–12 Whoever can be trusted with very little. This short complex of sayings may originally have been independent, but it follows appropriately from the comments on the message of the parable in 16:8–9. The way you use your possessions on earth shows whether you can be trusted with spiritual wealth.

16:13 No one can serve two masters. This saying is found also in Matthew 6:24, linked to its context here by the catchword “mammon” (16:9, 11, 13). The NIV translation is misleading: many people do hold two jobs with different employers at the same time. But “serve” is literally “be a slave of,” and one cannot be wholly owned by two slave owners. This pithy saying sums up the theme of the priority of God over any earthly interests that has run through much of the Gospel. It ensures that the parable is not taken as giving too positive an account of the value of possessions. “Money” here is “mammon,” picking up the term translated “wealth” in 16:9, 11.

16:15 What people value highly is detestable in God’s sight. “Detestable” is a word often associated with idolatry: their love of money is in effect worship of the false god “mammon.” Like many of Jesus’s sayings, this one is not to be pressed to the conclusion that God disapproves of all human aspirations. The literal sense, “what is exalted among people,” perhaps indicates proud conceit (the Pharisees’ self-justification and the admiration that they seek from others) rather than valuation in a neutral sense. Compare Isaiah 2:12–18. The saying possibly echoes Proverbs 16:5.

16:16 everyone is forcing their way into it. This is a new subject. Jesus’s proclamation of the good news of the kingdom of God has brought to fulfillment what until the coming of John the Baptist had been merely a hope for the future. “Forcing their way into it” suggests enthusiastic response, but the wording is unusual, and in light of the clearly negative parallel in Matthew 11:12, it can also be taken to mean “is using force against it” (possibly a comment on the Pharisaic opposition just noted). Another option would be “is being forced into it,” perhaps picking up the use of “compel” in 14:23. This is an obscure saying, but one that in some way underlines the climactic period of history inaugurated by John’s mission.

16:17 It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear. This is another independent saying (cf. Matt. 5:18), which is perhaps intended here to balance the sense of a new beginning in 16:16. The law and the prophets are being fulfilled in the kingdom of God, but that does not mean that they are dispensable. Matthew 5:17–20 and especially the examples that follow in 5:21–48 tease out the tricky blend of continuity and discontinuity that result from the fulfillment of the Old Testament in the ministry and teaching of Jesus.

16:18 Anyone who divorces his wife. This is the only teaching about divorce in Luke. Matthew 5:31–32 and Matthew 19:3–12 = Mark 10:2–12 fill out the picture of Jesus’s views, which were controversial in a Jewish society that generally accepted a man’s right to divorce his wife (not vice versa) on the basis of Deuteronomy 24:1–4. Divorce carried an automatic right for both man and woman to remarry. Jesus’s more rigorous teaching is based on the view that if God has made two people “one flesh” (Gen. 2:24) in marriage, that union cannot simply be set aside, so that a purported divorce with the remarriage that follows results in “adultery” by both parties, in that they are violating a one-flesh union that in God’s sight is still unbroken.

Theological Insights

The parable and the sayings that follow it in 16:8–15 contribute several key insights with regard to the relation of worldly possessions to the kingdom of God:

Despite its association with ungodly living (“the mammon of unrighteousness”), wealth can and should be used in God’s service.

The way we use our earthly wealth affects our heavenly well-being; compare the call in 12:33–34 to store up “treasure in heaven” by not clinging to earthly possessions.

To love possessions for their own sake puts us in conflict with God’s call on us: “You cannot be slaves of both God and mammon.”

The kingdom of God requires a reversal of the normal human scale of values.

The three brief sayings in 16:16–18 raise, but do not develop, important theological issues:

the radical change, beginning with John, as the Old Testament is fulfilled (and the position of John as the “hinge” between Old and New)

the balance of continuity and discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments, especially with regard to the continuing function of the law of Moses

Jesus’s rejection of divorce, with all the issues this raises for Christian ethics today

All these issues need to be filled out from other parts of the New Testament, noted above in “Interpretive Insights” on 16:16–18.

Teaching the Text

In view of the brevity of the independent sayings in 16:16–18, it is probably not appropriate to use them as a basis for teaching. If you do, you will need to range more widely than this passage to fill out the far-reaching issues that they raise (see “Theological Insights” above). This is a good passage to turn to when discussing the role of John the Baptist (see, e.g., 7:18–35).

The parable of the manager is a puzzle to many. Is Jesus really approving dishonesty? Why does he introduce and apparently commend such a disreputable character? These questions raise the issue of what parables are intended to achieve: they are not necessarily models for imitation (though of course some are [see 10:37]). So what is it about the manager’s self-interested action that Jesus commends and calls us to emulate? While some may be tempted to skip this unusual parable when teaching through Luke’s Gospel, in fact its strangeness can be a “hook” for gaining the interest of your audience. Read, narrate, or dramatize the parable, then ask, “What was Jesus thinking?! Why would he commend such a dishonest character?” Notice that in his teaching after the parable, Jesus himself draws out various applications:

1. Act shrewdly with the resources you have been given (16:8–9). This passage gives an opportunity to discuss our attitude toward and use of possessions. Too often Christians are so concerned with conservative and traditional ways of doing things that they do not use the creative and intellectual gifts God has given them. We should be as innovative and shrewd for the kingdom as our secular counterparts are in the marketplace. Encourage listeners to consider creative ways wealth may be used for heavenly benefit. While it is true that earthly riches can be an enormous impediment to our spiritual life (see 18:24–25), they can also be used greatly for God’s purposes. Discuss what is good, and what is bad, about “mammon” (possessions).

2. Get an eternal perspective and plan ahead for the inevitable future (16:9). Life is short and only what has heavenly value will last. Notice that the parable of the rich man and Lazarus follows in 16:19–31. How might that rich man have found “treasure in heaven”?

3. Be responsible in the little things and God will use you for greater things (16:10–12). The manager acted shrewdly, opening up greater opportunities. Jesus says the same is true in our Christian lives.

4. Serve the only Master who really counts (16:13). In the end, the manager’s loyalty to his earthly master counted for little. Our ultimate loyalty must be to God, who holds in his hands our eternal destiny.

Illustrating the Text

Wealth can be a tremendous hindrance to ultimate salvation.

Literature: Paradise Lost, by John Milton. In this great epic poem (1667) about the fall of Satan and his angels and the subsequent sin of Adam and Eve and their expulsion from the garden, Milton (1608–74) depicts one of the fallen angels as Mammon. The description of the viciousness of his fall is striking. In fact, the passage tells us that even in heaven Mammon was more caught up with the streets of gold than with the Divine (book 1, lines 678–90):

Mammon led them on,

Mammon, the least erected Spirit that fell

From Heav’n, for ev’n in Heav’n his looks and thoughts

Were always downward bent, admiring more

The riches of Heav’n’s pavement, trodden gold,

Than aught divine or holy else enjoyed

In vision beatific: by him first

Men also, and by his suggestion taught,

Ransacked the centre, and with impious hands

Rifled the bowels of their mother Earth

For treasures better hid. Soon had his crew

Opened into the hill a spacious wound

And digged out ribs of gold.3

Wealth can be an aid or a great hindrance to effective discipleship.

Quote: Money and Power, by Jacques Ellul. Ellul (1912–94), a French philosopher, law professor, and theologian, issues this warning:

When we claim to use money, we make a gross error. We can, if we must, use money, but it is really money that uses us and makes us servants by bringing us under its law and subordinating us to its aims. We are not talking only about our inner life; we are observing our total situation. We are not free to direct the use of money one way or another, for we are in the hands of this controlling power. Money is not only a manifestation of this power, a mode of being, a form to be used in relating to man—exactly as governments, kings, and dictators are only forms and appearances of another power clearly described in the Bible as political power. . . . That Mammon is a spiritual power is also shown by the way we attribute sacred characteristics to our money. The issue here is not that idols have been built to symbolize money, but simply that for modern man money is one of his “holy things.” . . . We understand then why money questions are not considered part of the moral order. They are actually part of the spiritual order.4

Anecdotes: There are many stories of people who, while wealthy, were also tremendously generous, giving away great quantities of money. R. G. LeTourneau (1888–1969), a renowned business magnate and inventor, known as the “man who moved mountains” for his expertise in designing and manufacturing earth-moving equipment, was also a Christian philanthropist who is said to have given away huge portions of his income without fanfare. Numerous other examples can be found, such as Christian doctors who have gone to impoverished countries to donate their services and resources or business people who have funded missionary endeavors.

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

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Abomination

Abomination is used of idols (e.g., 2 Kings 23:13, 24; Jer. 7:30; cf. Ezek. 8:10), forbidden practices (e.g., 2 Kings 23:24), and generally anything contrary to the true worship of Israel’s God (e.g., 2 Chron. 15:8; Isa. 66:3; Jer. 4:1; cf. forbidden foods [Lev. 11:10, 13, 42] and ceremonial defilement [Lev. 7:21]). The term also includes the prohibition of idol worship (Deut. 7:25; 27:15; 32:16) but can more widely apply to immorality (e.g., Lev. 18:22, 26 27), prophecy that leads to paganism (Deut. 13:13–14), blemished animals offered in sacrifice to Yahweh (Deut. 17:1), and heathen divination (Deut. 18:9, 12).

The “abomination of desolation” (NIV: “abomination that causes desolation”), or “desolating sacrifice,” refers to the desecration of the Jerusalem temple. The description occurs or is alluded to in Dan. 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; Matt. 24:15; Mark 13:14; Luke 21:20; 2 Thess. 2:4, as well as 1 Macc. 1:54–64. These texts seem to attest to two or three stages of fulfillment of the prophecy.

Bond

A bond typically represents a close relationship in Scripture. It can carry positive or negative connotations, as do related words such as “bondage.” In the sense of “chains,” bonds literally hold a slave to the master or a prisoner to the jail. God’s exiled people are likewise said to be held in bonds, from which he will rescue them (Jer. 30:8). Spiritually speaking, “bond” may describe the firm covenant relationship between God and his people (Jer. 2:20; 5:5; Ezek. 20:37). In the new covenant, believers are freed from bondage to sin and become Christ’s bondspeople (Rom. 6:16 22). This relationship with Christ in turn joins Christians to one another; in Ephesians this unity is called “the bond of peace” (4:3).

Covetous

To harbor an inordinate desire, especially for something belonging to someone else, often with intent to deprive that person of what is rightfully his or hers.

In the OT, the principal Hebrew term, khamad, indicates an unrestrained, selfish desire. A survey of its occurrences shows this desire directed most often toward things that belong to others or that are otherwise illicit (e.g., Josh. 7:21; Prov. 6:25; Mic. 2:2; but see Ps. 68:16: “God chooses”).

Notably, the tenth commandment prohibits coveting another’s possessions (Exod. 20:17; Deut. 5:21). It is unique among the Decalogue’s latter commandments (Exod. 20:12 17) because it targets an inward attitude rather than outward acts.

In the NT, a principal Greek term, epithymeō, represents a strong desire generally. Paul uses it when referencing the tenth commandment (Rom. 7:7; 13:9), so that the Greek term is similar to the Hebrew one in meaning. In contrast, James 4:2 employs epithymeō broadly to refer to evil desires that promote strife. The exact meaning of this word is determined by context (cf. Matt. 13:17, where Jesus speaks of those who “longed” to experience what his disciples did).

Job

The question of undeserved suffering has plagued humanity for as long as we have written records, as is demonstrated by several ancient Mesopotamian literary compositions going back to Sumerian times. Today too we wonder why bad things happen to good people. The book of Job raises this issue in the person of Job, a pious and blameless man who suffers unspeakable tragedies. However, the question of why Job suffers leads to an even more important question: Where can wisdom be found?

The genre of the book is a debate, the topic being the nature and source of wisdom. The various parts of the book contribute to this debate, beginning with the prose prologue (1:1 2:13) that introduces Job as a perfect wise man (1:1, 8–10). God presents Job as an example of a godly and wise man to “the Satan” (or “the accuser,” best understood as one of God’s angels, not the devil). No matter his exact identify, the accuser does not question Job’s character, but he does challenge his motivation. He believes that Job is righteous because God rewards him. God accepts the challenge and allows the accuser to harm his possessions and family, followed by a second round of suffering where the accuser afflicts by taking away his health. Job, however, persists in his proper attitude toward God. At the end of the prologue, we also hear of Job’s three friends, who move in to offer sympathy and support. They sit with him for seven days in silence.

Job is the first to break the silence, and what he says unsettles his friends. He complains about his present condition, cursing the day of his birth (Job 3). Job’s complaint triggers a debate about the cause of Job’s suffering as well as the best prescription to solve his problem (Job 4–31).

The three friends keep repeating the same argument. Job suffers because he is a sinner. They represent a traditional retribution theology, which states that if you sin, you suffer; therefore, if you suffer, then you must have sinned. The solution is obvious. Job needs to repent (4:7–11; 11:13–20). For his part, Job knows that he has not sinned in such a way to deserve to suffer as he is. But this creates a theological problem for him, since he too believes in the same theology of retribution held by the three friends. Thus, in his mind, God is unjust (9:21–24). Accordingly, his solution is to find God and present his case before him (23:2–7).

Although the subject of their debate is Job’s suffering, the heart of it concerns wisdom. Who is wise? Who has the correct insight into Job’s suffering? Both Job and the friends set themselves up as sources of wisdom and ridicule the wisdom of the other (11:12; 12:1–3, 12; 13:12; 15:1–13). The question “Who is wise?” dominates the book.

After their debate, a new character surprisingly emerges from the background. Elihu has observed the debate silently, but now he feels compelled to speak (Job 32–37). He is young and thus has deferred to the wisdom of the elderly, but he has been sorely disappointed. Now he realizes that wisdom is not always a matter of age, but comes from “the spirit in a person” (32:8). The reader expects a new argument from this brash young man, but instead Job is treated to another blast of the retribution theology of the three friends: Job suffers because he is a sinner (34:11, 25–27, 37).

Elihu represents another type of person who claims wisdom. Rather than age, he believes the spirit in a person gives wisdom. However, he comes up with the same old descriptions and solutions. This viewpoint is critiqued by silence; he is ignored. No one responds to his unpersuasive opinion.

At the end of chapter 31, Job had expressed his wish for an audience with God. Now he gets his wish. God appears in a whirlwind, an indication of his displeasure, and challenges Job’s purported wisdom: “Who is this that obscures my plans with words without knowledge?” (38:2). God then bombards Job with a series of questions that he cannot possibly answer, since he is not God. God also describes how he is the one who distributes and withholds power and wisdom to his creatures.

He never addresses the reasons for Job’s suffering or the question of suffering in general. That is not the main purpose of the book. He asserts his wisdom, thus answering the question of the book: “Who is wise?” Only God is wise. What is the proper response to God’s wisdom and power? Repentance and submission, and thus Job responds two times (40:3–5; 42:1–6).

The epilogue raises a number of interesting questions for the interpreter. After Job repents, God restores his health and prosperity beyond what he had enjoyed at the beginning of the book. Does this not concede to the argument of the three friends and Elihu? All along they have been urging him to repent and be restored. However, such an interpretation misses a key point. Job has not repented of any sin that had led to his suffering in the first place. No, he has passed that test. However, as time wore on, he had grown impatient with God. He never takes the counsel of his wife to “curse God and die” (2:9), but he does question God’s justice without ever breaking relationship.

A second issue concerns God’s statement that Job has “spoken the truth about me” (42:8). Did God not just spend two chapters criticizing him? The best way to understand this comment is to understand it as God’s affirmation not of every word that Job has spoken about him, but rather of how Job has responded to God in the end. After all, he had never abandoned God, even in his darkest hour.

Light

God begins his creation with light, which precedes the creation of sun, moon, and stars and throughout Scripture is an unqualified good (Gen. 1:3 5, 15–18; Exod. 10:23; 13:21). In the ancient world, people rarely traveled at night and usually went to bed soon after sunset. The only light in the home was a small oil lamp set on a stand, which burned expensive olive oil. Light is a biblical synonym for life (Job 3:20; John 8:12). Seeing the light means living (Ps. 49:19; see also Job 33:30). Conversely, darkness is often a symbol of adversity, disaster, and death (Job 30:26; Isa. 8:22; Jer. 23:12; Lam. 3:2).

John, who offers perhaps the most profound meditations on light, claims that God is light (1 John 1:5). The predicate appropriates the intrinsic beauty of light, a quality that draws people’s hearts back to the author of beauty. For the apostle, light represents truth and signifies God’s will in opposition to the deception of the world (John 1:9; 12:46). Light stands for purity and signifies God’s holiness as opposed to the unrighteousness of the world (John 3:19–21). Light is where God is, and it radiates from the place of fellowship between God and his creation (John 1:7).

Mammon

A transliteration of the Greek rendering of the Aramaic noun mamōnas, which signifies “wealth” and is translated by the NIV as either “money” or “worldly wealth” (Matt. 6:24; Luke 16:9, 11, 13). Only Jesus uses the term in the Bible. Since the early church retained the Aramaic, it is likely that the word itself retains significance. Jesus warns, “You cannot serve both God and mammon [NIV: ‘money’]” (Matt. 6:24 KJV). In this case, mammon is placed in parallel with God, which suggests that it has taken on the significance of an idol. Like all false gods, mammon promises pleasure to worshipers but ultimately enslaves them. However, Jesus also uses the term in a broader sense, “worldly wealth,” where it is not necessarily possessive and can be mastered and shrewdly redirected to advance the kingdom of God (Luke 16:9, 11).

Oil

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

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

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

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

Pharisees

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Servant

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

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

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

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

Stewardship

The management of available resources in the recognition that God is the owner and provider of all things. The Bible is clear that God is the maker and owner of all things. The psalmist wrote, “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it” (Ps. 24:1). God told Job, “Everything under heaven belongs to me” (Job 41:11). In the same way, God says, “The silver is mine and the gold is mine” (Hag. 2:8). Stewardship is based upon the principle that God is the maker of all things. Since God is the creator and owner of all things, God’s followers are charged with managing what he has given.

Wheat

Wheat was a major crop in Palestine throughout biblical times and was the most important crop during the patriarchal times (Gen. 30:14). Wheat is a winter crop that was sown by hand in November or December; it was ready for harvest in May and was commemorated by the Festival of Weeks. Between the time of the late monarchy and the time of the NT, wheat was not only a food source but also a source of export income (Amos 8:5). Wheat can be eaten in a variety of ways and was often used, ground into fine flour, as an offering at the tabernacle and temple (Lev. 2:1). In the NT, wheat is used to symbolize the good produce of the kingdom of God (Matt. 13:24 31; cf. 3:12).

Direct Matches

Bushel

It is difficult to imagine a world without consistent metrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economy to law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time, distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world, technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects of the universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers to light-years, milligrams to kilograms.

The metrological systems employed in biblical times span the same concepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, and volume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurements employed during the span of biblical times were not nearly as accurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexisting weight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundings of both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced the systems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers. There was great variance between the different standards used merchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region, time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honest scales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15; Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).

Furthermore, inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written records as well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significant differences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurements in the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity and liquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is to be expected, especially when we consider modern-day inconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint = 0.473 liters, while 1 US dry pint = 0.550 liters. Thus, all modern equivalents given below are approximations, and even the best estimates have a margin of error of + 5 percent or more.

Weights

Weights in biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13; Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into various animal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom was inscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement. Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significant amounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatly complicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.

Beka. Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahs or ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measure metals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).

Gerah. 1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20 shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).

Litra. Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight. Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to the modern British pound.

Mina. Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50 shekels. Used to weigh gold (1 Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver (Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefined the proper weight: “The shekel is to consist of twenty gerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekels equal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, there were arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of the servants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servants varying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying a monetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver or gold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’ wages for a laborer.

Pim. Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3 shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1 Sam. 13:21).

Shekel. Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent to approximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weight measurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight varied significantly at different historical points. Examples include the “royal shekel” (2 Sam. 14:26), the “common shekel” (2 Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,” which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25; Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, the shekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.

Talent. Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately 60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod. 25:39; 37:24; 1 Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1 Kings 20:39; 2 Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably is derived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.

Table 12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:

Weights

Beka – 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams

Gerah – 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams

Litra – 12 ounces = 340 grams

Mina – 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms

Pim – 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams

Shekel – 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams

Talent – 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms

Linear measurements

Cubit – 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters

Day’s journey = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse

Fingerbreadth – ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse

Handbreadth – 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters

Milion – 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers

Orguia – 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters

Reed/rod – 108 inches = 274 centimeters

Sabbath day’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2 kilometers

Span – 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters

Stadion – 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters

Capacity

Cab – 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters

Choinix – ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters

Cor – 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Ephah – 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Homer – 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Koros – 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters

Omer – 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters

Saton – 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Seah – 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Liquid Volume

Bath – 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Batos – 8 gallons = 30.3 liters

Hin – 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters

Log – 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters

Metretes – 10 gallons = 37.8 literes

Linear Measurements

Linear measurements were based upon readily available natural measurements such as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between the thumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method of measurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.

Cubit. Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6 handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, as the shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance from the elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height, width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen. 7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximate conversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half for meters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.

1 cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths

Day’s journey. An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25 miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a single or multiple days’ journey as a description of the distance traveled or the distance between two points: “a day’s journey” (Num. 11:31; 1 Kings 19:4), “a three-day journey” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “seven days” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2). After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyed for a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.

Fingerbreadth. The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately ¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was the beginning building block of the biblical metrological system for linear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describe the bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).

Handbreadth. Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit, or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the four fingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’s brief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table (Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1 Kings 7:26).

Milion. Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration of Roman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”

Orguia. Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as “fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably the distance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measure the depth of water (Acts 27:28).

Reed/rod. Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a general term for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance (Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).

Sabbath day’s journey. Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About 2,000 cubits.

Span. Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to three handbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretched thumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’s breastpiece (Exod. 28:16).

Stadion. Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai. Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13; John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).

Land Area

Seed. The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis of how much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1 Kings 18:32).

Yoke. Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. In biblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animals could plow in one day (1 Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).

Capacity

Cab. Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer. Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria (2 Kings 6:25).

Choinix. Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement, mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).

Cor. Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to the homer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly of flour and grains (1 Kings 4:22; 1 Kings 5:11; 2 Chron. 2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquid volume, particularly oil (1 Kings 5:11; 2 Chron. 2:10; Ezra 45:14).

Ephah. Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters). Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flour and grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day of reduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce only an ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to the bath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.

Homer. Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to 1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly of various grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos. 3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkey can carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed a direct link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16: “fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” A logical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalences might look something like this:

1 homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka

Koros. Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measure of grain (Luke 16:7).

Omer. Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10 ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in the measurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod. 16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s daily food ration.

Saton. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. The measurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).

Seah. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah, or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various dry goods (e.g., 2 Kings 7:1; 1 Sam. 25:18).

Liquid Volume

Bath. Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, which typically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in the measurement of water (1 Kings 7:26), oil (1 Kings 5:11), and wine (2 Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).

Batos. Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration of the Hebrew word bath (see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).

Hin. Approximately 4 quarts (1 gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to 1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek. 4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).

Log. Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72 bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture, specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).

Metretes. Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement of water at the wedding feast (John 2:6).

Gallon

The English word “gallon” is used in some Bible versions to render equivalent amounts for Hebrew or Greek measures. For example, the NIV translates the Greek for “one hundred batous” of olive oil (a batos was about eight or nine gallons) into its equivalent of “nine hundred gallons” (Luke 16:6). Similarly, the NIV translates the Greek for “two or three metrētas” (a metrētēs was about nine gallons) as “twenty to thirty gallons” (John 2:6).

Mammon

A transliteration of the Greek rendering of the Aramaic noun mamōnas, which signifies “wealth” and is translated by the NIV as either “money” or “worldly wealth” (Matt. 6:24; Luke 16:9, 11, 13). Only Jesus uses the term in the Bible. Since the early church retained the Aramaic, it is likely that the word itself retains significance. Jesus warns, “You cannot serve both God and mammon [NIV: “money”]” (Matt. 6:24 KJV). In this case, mammon is placed in parallel with God, which suggests that it has taken on the significance of an idol. Like all false gods, mammon promises pleasure to worshipers but ultimately enslaves them. However, Jesus also uses the term in a broader sense, “worldly wealth,” where it is not necessarily possessive and can be mastered and shrewdly redirected to advance the kingdom of God (Luke 16:9, 11).

Measure

Weights

Beka. Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahs or ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measure metals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).

Gerah. 1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20 shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).

Litra. Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight. Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to the modern British pound.

Pim. Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3 shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1 Sam. 13:21).

Table 12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:

Weights

Beka – 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams

Gerah – 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams

Litra – 12 ounces = 340 grams

Mina – 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms

Pim – 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams

Shekel – 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams

Talent – 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms

Linear measurements

Cubit – 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters

Day’s journey = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse

Fingerbreadth – ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse

Handbreadth – 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters

Milion – 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers

Orguia – 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters

Reed/rod – 108 inches = 274 centimeters

Sabbath day’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2 kilometers

Span – 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters

Stadion – 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters

Capacity

Cab – 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters

Choinix – ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters

Cor – 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Ephah – 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Homer – 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Koros – 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters

Omer – 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters

Saton – 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Seah – 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Liquid Volume

Bath – 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Batos – 8 gallons = 30.3 liters

Hin – 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters

Log – 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters

Metretes – 10 gallons = 37.8 literes

Linear Measurements

1 cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths

Milion. Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration of Roman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”

Reed/rod. Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a general term for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance (Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).

Sabbath day’s journey. Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About 2,000 cubits.

Stadion. Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai. Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13; John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).

Land Area

Seed. The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis of how much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1 Kings 18:32).

Yoke. Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. In biblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animals could plow in one day (1 Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).

Capacity

Cab. Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer. Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria (2 Kings 6:25).

Choinix. Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement, mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).

1 homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka

Koros. Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measure of grain (Luke 16:7).

Saton. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. The measurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).

Seah. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah, or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various dry goods (e.g., 2 Kings 7:1; 1 Sam. 25:18).

Liquid Volume

Batos. Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration of the Hebrew word bath (see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).

Hin. Approximately 4 quarts (1 gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to 1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek. 4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).

Log. Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72 bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture, specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).

Metretes. Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement of water at the wedding feast (John 2:6).

Measurement

Weights

Beka. Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahs or ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measure metals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).

Gerah. 1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20 shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).

Litra. Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight. Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to the modern British pound.

Pim. Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3 shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1 Sam. 13:21).

Table 12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:

Weights

Beka – 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams

Gerah – 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams

Litra – 12 ounces = 340 grams

Mina – 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms

Pim – 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams

Shekel – 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams

Talent – 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms

Linear measurements

Cubit – 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters

Day’s journey = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse

Fingerbreadth – ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse

Handbreadth – 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters

Milion – 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers

Orguia – 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters

Reed/rod – 108 inches = 274 centimeters

Sabbath day’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2 kilometers

Span – 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters

Stadion – 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters

Capacity

Cab – 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters

Choinix – ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters

Cor – 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Ephah – 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Homer – 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Koros – 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters

Omer – 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters

Saton – 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Seah – 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Liquid Volume

Bath – 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Batos – 8 gallons = 30.3 liters

Hin – 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters

Log – 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters

Metretes – 10 gallons = 37.8 literes

Linear Measurements

1 cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths

Milion. Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration of Roman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”

Reed/rod. Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a general term for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance (Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).

Sabbath day’s journey. Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About 2,000 cubits.

Stadion. Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai. Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13; John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).

Land Area

Seed. The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis of how much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1 Kings 18:32).

Yoke. Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. In biblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animals could plow in one day (1 Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).

Capacity

Cab. Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer. Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria (2 Kings 6:25).

Choinix. Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement, mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).

1 homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka

Koros. Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measure of grain (Luke 16:7).

Saton. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. The measurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).

Seah. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah, or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various dry goods (e.g., 2 Kings 7:1; 1 Sam. 25:18).

Liquid Volume

Batos. Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration of the Hebrew word bath (see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).

Hin. Approximately 4 quarts (1 gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to 1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek. 4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).

Log. Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72 bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture, specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).

Metretes. Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement of water at the wedding feast (John 2:6).

Oil

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

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

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

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

Riches

Both the OT and the NT view wealth as ultimately a result of God’s blessing (Prov. 10:22). Abraham shows the right attitude by refusing to accept plunder from the king of Sodom, recognizing God as the sole source of his riches (Gen. 14:23). Solomon’s wealth was seen as God’s favor (1 Kings 3:13). Wealth and riches are said to be in the house of persons “who fear the Lord” (Ps. 112:1–3). However, material success alone is not necessarily an indication of God’s approval, nor is poverty a sign of God’s disfavor. Fundamentally, neither poverty nor wealth can be superficially tied to divine displeasure or favor.

Balanced view. The Bible articulates a balanced view of wealth. It warns against having an arrogant attitude by failing to acknowledge that the source of wealth is God (Deut. 8:17–18). There is danger in trusting in riches (Pss. 52:7; 62:10). The rich are charged not to be haughty, and to set their hopes not on uncertain riches but rather on God (1 Tim. 6:17–18). The love of money is described as the root of all kinds of evil (1 Tim. 6:9–10), and it is therefore extremely difficult for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God (Matt. 19:24). The foolishness of materialism, making riches the center of one’s life, is shown in the parable of the wealthy farmer (Luke 12:15–21). Instead of monetary greed, the spirit of contentment is commended, because even if lacking on the material level, one still has the Lord (Luke 12:15; Phil. 4:11; Heb. 13:5). Material possessions should be gained rightly; effort and diligence are required (Gen. 3:19; Prov. 10:4). Obtaining wealth through dishonesty and ill-gotten gains is denounced and condemned (Prov. 11:26; 13:11; Jer. 17:11; Mic. 6:12).

God-centered perspective. Wealth and material possessions are to be viewed from a God-centered perspective. God is the one who provides everything; thus we should trust him for our daily needs (Matt. 6:25–34; Luke 11:3). Job’s confession in a time of loss, “The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away; may the name of the Lord be praised,” shows an admirable attitude to emulate (Job 1:21). God is the owner of all things, and we are simply stewards and administrators of God’s wealth. We need to remember that one day we will be accountable for the use of our wealth (1 Cor. 10:31). Jesus teaches us to seek the kingdom of God first rather than his material blessings (Luke 12:31–33). Anything that draws us away from serving God should be avoided. We cannot serve both God and mammon (Matt. 6:24). Our treasures are to be in heaven, meaning that our central focus should be on matters pertaining to the kingdom: “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Luke 12:32–34).

Responsibility and generosity. With the possession of wealth comes the duty to give generously to those in need (Prov. 11:24; 28:27). Prosperity is given as a means to do good; thus we ought to be rich in good deeds (1 Tim. 6:18). Although it is a duty of the covenant community to take care of the needy in the OT, it still emphasizes the voluntary heart (Deut. 15:5–11). In 2 Cor. 9:7, Paul presents the principle of giving in the NT: “Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” It should be not an exaction but a willing gift (9:5).

The Christian should emulate Jesus: “Though he was rich, yet for [our] sake he became poor, so that [we] through his poverty might become rich” (2 Cor. 8:9). Therefore, material offerings to Christ should not be a burden (1 Cor. 9:11). Sacrificial giving is an expression of love to the Lord (2 Cor. 9:12). It also generates thanksgiving to God from those who receive it (2 Cor. 9:11). Worldly wealth should also be used for evangelistic purposes (Luke 16:8). If we are faithful in the use of money, we can be trusted with the kingdom’s spiritual riches (Luke 16:12–13). Although riches do not have eternal value in themselves, their proper use has eternal consequences (Luke 12:33; 1 Tim. 6:19). One of the qualifications of a church overseer is to be free from the love of money, and a deacon must not pursue dishonest gain (1 Tim. 3:3, 8). A good name is to be chosen over great riches (Prov. 22:1). James condemns as sinful the attitude of favoring the wealthy over the poor. Nonpreferential love is the answer to prejudicial favoritism (James 2:1–9).

Stewardship

The term “steward” is used in the OT to refer to Joseph’s steward (Gen. 43:19; 44:1, 4) and to Arza, who was the steward of Baasha’s son Elah, who reigned over Israel (1 Kings 16:9 KJV). The steward was the manager who oversaw all household operations. Having a great deal of responsibility, the slave or servant in this position had to be someone whom the owner trusted. Jesus used similar terms in referring to a household manager in some of his parables (Matt. 20:8; Luke 16:1, 3). The concept of stewardship is applied to the believer as God’s servant. Believers are stewards for God in the sense that they manage God’s resources in this world.

The biblical concept of stewardship begins with Adam and Eve being charged with the responsibility of caring for the creative work of God (Gen. 2:15). In the garden of Eden, humankind was given the responsibility to care for the earth, manage it, and have dominion over it. On an individual level, all that Christians possess is intended to be used for God’s purposes and glory. Biblical stewardship involves more than financial resources, although certainly those are included. Proper stewardship involves managing every resource (time, talent, finances, opportunity) under the leadership of God, who owns it all.

Regarding financial matters, the Bible teaches that a tithe (one-tenth) of one’s income should be returned to God as a reminder that all one has comes from him (Lev. 27:30). The OT concept of the tithe is assumed by Jesus in Matt. 23:23 when he rebukes the scribes and the Pharisees for tithing and yet neglecting more important things such as justice and mercy. However, the tithe is not frequently mentioned in the NT. Rather than focusing on tithing, the NT focuses on the attitude of the believer in giving. Believers are encouraged to give sacrificially (Mark 12:41–44; Acts 2:44–45). In addition, Paul stresses giving in love with generosity (2 Cor. 9:6–8). Giving to others in need is a reflection of trust that God will provide for our own needs as we give to meet the needs of others. God expects that everything that one has will be used in ways that honor him.

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because Luke 16:1-15 is mentioned in the definition.

Beaten Oil

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

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

Borrow

The practice of borrowing and lending was strictly regulated in ancient Israel. Money could be lent to foreigners at interest, but money lent to other Israelites was regarded as charitable giving, and no interest could be charged on this (Lev. 25:35–37; Deut. 23:19–20). Although Israelite law included a system of debt cancellation every seven years, the expectation was that debts normally would be repaid before this time, since borrowing without repayment was the action of a wicked person (Ps. 37:21). Other laws governed a system of restitution related to damage on borrowed property (Exod. 22:15).

Borrowing took place only from a position of dire need, not for commercial purposes. In part, this was because of the perceived relationship between the debtor and the creditor: the one who owed money became like a servant (Prov. 22:7). Those who mortgaged their lands and homes during a time of famine were compelled to send their sons and daughters into slavery (Neh. 5:2–5). By contrast, freedom from borrowing was considered to be a sign of God’s blessing (Deut. 15:6; 28:12).

In the NT era, borrowing and lending took place more freely, for commercial purposes as well as in cases of immediate need, as indicated in several of Jesus’ parables (e.g., Matt. 25:14–30; Luke 16:1–9). Jesus gave instructions for lending generously without expectation of repayment (Matt. 5:42; Luke 6:33–35), though the issue is not addressed from the perspective of the borrower in the NT.

Borrowed

Borrower

Borrowing

False Gods

Definition of Terms

The term “pagan” has two separate but related definitions in the English language, both of which are somewhat misleading when applied to religions in the ancient Near East. The first definition defines a pagan as someone who follows a less-established religion or a person who is outside the mainstream of belief within a given society. Applying this definition to an ancient Near Eastern religion is somewhat misleading because often within biblical society the Jewish or Christian belief system was the religion that was outside the mainstream. Being outside the mainstream certainly was a fact of life for first-century Christians, who often were persecuted as if they were atheists and for their failure to acknowledge a pantheon of gods, which was a mainstream belief. In OT society the competing religions, especially the Canaanite and Babylonian pantheons, certainly were more widely accepted and followed. Even within Israelite society these non-Israelite religions offered a viable alternative to the religion of Yahweh. Thus, if one were to use this definition either in the OT or the NT, it likely would need to be applied to the religion of the Jews and Christians and not the prevailing religions of the Canaanites, the Babylonians, the Greeks, or the Romans.

The second English definition of the term “pagan” involves the worship of the gods or forces of nature that control the world. This definition is applied specifically to agrarian societies, where the changing of seasons, the bringing of favorable weather and growing conditions for the crops, the possibility for prosperity that good weather brings, and a general desire for fertility are part of the religious understanding and belief system. While this definition certainly applies to many of the non-Israelite religions followed by the Israelites’ neighbors and to some of the Greeks and Romans of the NT, it also would apply to many of the followers of Yahweh in the OT who saw Yahweh as the God of the mountains and storms in direct conflict with the Baal myth, which ascribed these traits to Baal (see below). Therefore, it is prudent to remember that the label “pagan gods” is anachronistic and should be used with care when discussing the religions described in the Bible.

On a related note, the terminology of “idolatry” is also often misunderstood. Most of the non-Israelite religions discussed in the Bible would have understood the images of their gods to be representations of the deity (or even a throne or meeting place for the god) rather than an object of worship in its own right. While they would have believed that the god dwelled in the object and was present when worship was being performed, they would not have believed that the object was the god. Most of the idols made in the ancient Near East are indistinguishable from one another unless one observes their specific weapons. This, coupled with the idol’s anthropomorphic representation, rather than a heavenly representation, suggests that the concern for early worshipers was not to worship an inanimate image, but rather to see a representation of the god who indwelled the image if worshiped correctly. It was the presence of the god that was desired. Thus, the prohibition against images in the OT is a prohibition against trying to depict Yahweh in any physical form.

When dealing with the non-Israelite gods of the Bible, it is helpful to divide them into historical periods. Within the OT, the major groupings of non-Israelite gods should include the gods of the Canaanites and the gods of the Babylonians (which are very similar to the gods of the Assyrians). To a lesser degree the gods of the Philistines, the Egyptians, and the Persians can also be considered. In the NT, the gods of the Greeks and the Romans (which often are assimilated Greek gods with new names) can be considered. Along with these somewhat artificial historical divisions are innumerable personal gods and local gods worshiped by small groups of people or even by a single town or village. For example, Gen. 31:30 references Laban’s gods, which Rachel steals when she leaves home to travel with Jacob. These personal gods likely played a huge role in the day-to-day life of the average person, but most often they are lost to history. Similarly in the NT, the mystery religions of the Greeks and the Romans likely played an important role in the lives of many people, but they are difficult to reconstruct because of the limited amount of documentation that has survived.

Canaanite Pantheon

There is considerable overlap between the Canaanite pantheon and those of the Mesopotamian cultures, and often this can create some confusion about the deities being discussed, especially their names and functions. Further complicating matters, the descriptions of gods within the Mesopotamian pantheons often have fluid identities, as different textual traditions conflict with each other at times. Both the Canaanite and the Babylonian pantheons borrow heavily from the Sumerian pantheon, which adds both to their similarities and to the possibility of confusion.

Without question, the most important god within the Canaanite pantheon was Baal. The story of Baal, often called the “Baal Cycle,” describes the life and deeds of Baal. The cult of Baal was a fertility religion, and all the events of Baal’s life were connected to the changing seasons and nature’s fertility. The Baal Cycle also explained how the worship of Baal affected the agricultural success of farmers. This detailed story of Baal was all but unknown, except for a few details that could be gleaned from the Bible, prior to the accidental discovery of the city of Ugarit and its extensive library in 1928 by a farmer plowing his field. The city of Ugarit appears to have been a major trading center between the years of about 1450 and 1200 BC. Besides Baal, other important deities within the pantheon were El, the elderly, long-bearded father god; Asherah, El’s wife, or occasionally portrayed as Baal’s wife or sister; and Mot, the god of death, usually represented as a snake.

Baal was the god of weather, especially thunder, lightning, and rain (Baal is almost always depicted with a lightning bolt in one hand and a rod of power in the other). Other representations or symbols of Baal include the bull (the strongest and most powerful animal of the ancient Near East), water, mist, dew, grain, oil, and any other symbol of fertility. Worship of Baal was intended to keep him happy in order to assure the coming of spring (preferably, early), the necessary rain for crops, and finally the lengthening of summer so that two crops could be planted and harvested. The second crop, which often was the crop that a farmer could sell for a profit (the first being reserved for the farmer’s own food), was especially tied to the favor of Baal. Baal was worshiped not only in hope of agricultural prosperity but also for family fertility in terms of children and for help in battle. The primary means for producing and keeping the favor of Baal was by offering the firstfruits of any harvest to him. When the first portion of a crop was harvested, it was expected that a portion of that harvest (most often a tithe) be offered to Baal in hopes of receiving his favor and extending the growing season. Not only were the first of the crops to be given to Baal but also the firstborn of all herded animals. It was also a common practice for the firstborn of a family to be given to Baal in human sacrifice. Baal is often referred to as Molek in the Bible (e.g., Jer. 19) when describing human sacrifice. Another practice of Baal worship was ritual sexual intercourse between a worshiper and a priest or a priestess. This ritual sexual activity was thought to increase the fertility of the worshiper, thereby increasing the chances of having more children.

Apparently for much of the history of Israel, especially during the monarchy, Baal worship offered an enticing alternative to the worship of Yahweh. In fact, the stories of Elijah and Elisha serve as a direct polemic against Baal worship. Most of the stories of Elijah and Elisha use the symbols of Baal to demonstrate that Yahweh is much stronger than Baal. By the time of the first century AD, Baal worship was a thing of the past, but some vestiges of the worship remained. For example, in the Gospels Jesus says that a person cannot worship both “God and money” (KJV: “mammon”) (Matt. 6:24; Luke 16:13). The Greek word translated “money,” mamōnas, is borrowed from Aramaic and actually refers to the worship of Baal, but by Jesus’ time it had evolved to take on the more generic definition “prosperity.”

Along with Baal, the worship of Asherah, a female member of the pantheon, was common. Although scholars are not completely sure of its form, it is believed that the reference in the OT to “Asherah poles” was likely a reference to a phallic symbol that represented fertility (Judg. 6:26; 1 Kings 14:23). Recently, several references to Asherah have been discovered in Kuntillet ‘Ajrud in northeastern Sinai, dated to about the eighth century. These inscriptions say that Asherah was the consort of Yahweh rather than Baal, providing further evidence for the amount of syncretism present in Israel during the monarchy. Another female deity, Ashtoreth (known also by her Mesopotamian name, “Ishtar”), is called “Queen of Heaven” several times in the book of Jeremiah (7:18; 44:17–19, 25).

In relationship to the infiltration of Baal worship into the northern kingdom is the debate about the nature of the “sin of Jeroboam” that was instituted by Jeroboam I when he, along with the ten northern tribes, ceded from Israel (1 Kings 12:25–33). At issue is whether Jeroboam was instituting a new religion based on the calves, thus becoming syncretistic with these tribes’ northern Phoenician neighbors (which would have been tantamount to introducing Baal worship into Israel), or simply rejecting the centrality of Jerusalem for Yahweh worship (which only a few years before had been centralized in Jerusalem by Solomon’s temple, resulting in the disenfranchisement of the Levites outside Jerusalem). Clearly, the southern kingdom viewed the events as apostasy, but whether the northern tribes did is unclear. Amos, for example, seems to focus his criticism of the cult at Bethel not on the worship itself but rather on the hypocrisy of the worshipers, who were not following the law as prescribed in the Torah.

Babylonian Pantheon

Although debate continues over the exact relationship between the two, the Babylonian pantheon had many elements similar to the Canaanite pantheon. There are dozens of primary documents about the religion of Babylon; the most important of them include the Enuma Elish, a creation story and apologetic for Marduk the chief of gods; the Atrahasis Epic, which has a version of the flood story in it; and the Epic of Gilgamesh, which describes the quest for eternal life by King Gilgamesh. Within the Babylonian pantheon, Marduk is the chief of gods, who is also the patron god of Babylonia. The Enuma Elish, which describes the creation of the world, deals primarily with the ascension of Marduk to the role of chief god by destroying the forces of chaos represented by the monster Tiamat and bringing order to both the pantheon and the natural world. Marduk, like Baal, had retained the most powerful cosmic weapons, which include water, rain, and war. The Epic of Gilgamesh describes the journey of King Gilgamesh, who is part human and part divine, in search of immortality. During the course of his trip, he learns that eternal life is reserved for the gods, and humans must make their mark on the world by what they do during their lives. The Babylonian religion and pantheon exerted its strongest influence on Israel during the exile. The biblical text clearly has been influenced by these Babylonian beliefs. However, the Bible consistently presents these viewpoints as contrary to the true worship of Yahweh and insists that only Yahweh deserves worship as the true creator of the world, vanquisher of chaos, and provider of prosperity and life.

Other Ancient Near Eastern Pantheons

The Egyptian gods are mentioned only briefly in the Bible. The most overt references to the gods of Egypt are found in the story of the ten plagues, which most scholars believe was a direct attack on the deities of Egypt by Yahweh. It is unclear if the calf described in Exod. 32 should be understood as an Egyptian god, a completely new or different god, or as a forbidden representation of Yahweh.

Little is known about the Philistine pantheon of gods, but it appears to be quite similar to the Canaanite pantheon (if not the same with local variations). The Philistines’ chief god, referred to in the Bible as “Dagon” (Judg. 16:23; 1 Sam. 5:2–7; 1 Chron. 10:10), likely also went by the name “Baal-Zebul” (“Lord Prince”), which in the OT is mocked by being changed to “Baal-Zebub” (“Lord of the Flies”) (2 Kings 1:2–3, 6, 16). In the NT, this god is recalled when the Pharisees accuse Jesus of being in league with Satan (Matt. 12:24; Luke 11:15 [Gk. Beelzeboul]). Because the Philistines were known as the Sea Peoples, it is not surprising that this deity had several fishlike qualities (including a fish tail).

New Testament Religion

In the NT, the Greek pantheon that was subsumed by the Roman pantheon was the common religious expression of the day. Like other ancient pantheons, these pantheons tried to explain the natural world by the involvement of various deities in nature. Proof that Jews living in the province of Judah were under constant pressure to assimilate to the Greek religion is provided in the reports of the books of Maccabees that describe the Jewish revolt against the Seleucids in what was essentially a religious war against assimilation. In the Gospels, little is said about the Greek or Roman pantheons, but the book of Acts contains several reports of Paul’s interaction with the Greeks and their religious practices. Especially notable is Paul’s interaction with the Athenians when he debated philosophers who were followers of the “Unknown God” (Acts 17:23). Three other deities are named in Acts, including Artemis in Ephesus (Acts 19:24, 27–28, 34–35), whom the Romans called “Diana,” and Zeus and Hermes (Acts 14:12–13), called “Jupiter” and “Mercury” by the Romans, whom Paul and Barnabas were mistaken for in Lystra when Paul preached and healed a crippled man.

Summary

The problem of God’s people Israel worshiping other gods permeates most of biblical history. These reports range over time from the early story of Rachel in Genesis, to the period of the judges when Micah’s images (Judg. 17:1–6) and Gideon’s ephod (Judg. 8:26–27) were worshiped, to when Solomon and his wives were worshiping foreign gods (1 Kings 11:5–8), to the time of Ahab when all Israel followed Baal, whom Elijah vanquished on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18:16–46). Depending on when one dates the book of Deuteronomy, the strong prohibitions against idolatry either went unheeded (if Moses wrote the book) or were a culminating statement of the anti-idolatry Deuteronomistic writer just before the exile. There is considerable debate about when Israel became an exclusively monotheistic nation (if it ever did), but by the eighth century BC, Isaiah and Amos castigate worshipers of these false gods. Clearly, by the time of Jeremiah, some factions within Israel (the prophet included) have begun to question whether the gods of the other nations even exist (Jer. 2:28). Finally, with the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, ironically, the worship of other gods is ended. It is certain that by the time of the first century AD, the evolution to a monotheistic view is complete, and Paul can claim that an “idol is nothing” (1 Cor. 8:4), and that any sin is tantamount to idolatry (Eph. 5:5).

Financial Planning

Little, if anything, in the Bible directly addresses financial planning, but some principles are relevant. The obvious need for basic financial planning was used by Jesus as an illustration for the cost of discipleship: those who seek to build a tower must count the cost before they begin (Luke 14:28). The motivation for financial planning ought not to be fear or anxiety (Matt. 6:25–26), for God can be trusted to provide. Appropriate motivations for good financial planning include the desire to store up wealth as an inheritance for one’s children (Ps. 17:14), to provide for one’s household (1 Tim. 5:8), and to avoid the dangers of debt and dependence on others (1 Thess. 4:11–12).

Financial planning ought not to be considered a guarantee of wealth, since the future is unknown to people, and the success of any venture is dependent upon God’s will (James 4:13–15). Neither should storing up wealth be viewed as a goal in its own right, for such wealth will be of no ultimate benefit to its owner (Ps. 49:10; Prov. 11:4). Hoarded wealth will only rot away (James 5:2–3); wealth is given by God to be used (Luke 16:11). In particular, the acquisition of wealth by ungodly means will not benefit its owner and will end up in the hands of the righteous, although this may not occur until a future generation (Prov. 13:22; 28:8).

Harmony of the Gospels

The desire to harmonize the differences between the canonical Gospels can be traced back to the second century, when Tatian (a second-century apologist) combined the four Gospels into one document known as the Diatessaron (Greek for “out of four”). This combined Gospel was used in the Syrian churches in the third and fourth centuries until it was replaced by the four canonical Gospels in the fifth century.

Material Common to More than One Gospel

All four Gospels portray Jesus as leading a group of disciples, preaching, healing, performing miracles, being crucified, and being raised from the dead. Matthew was written for a Jewish or Jewish Christian audience, reminding them that Jesus fulfills the Hebrew Scriptures. Mark was written for a Gentile audience, focusing more on narrative than on teaching and portraying Jesus as a man of miraculous, powerful action. Luke shows Jesus as one who is especially concerned for the poor and those on the fringes of society. John explains that Jesus, the eternal Word of God, is not a second god, but rather the one true God, sent by the Father to renew Israel.

People who are familiar with the content of the Gospel stories often confuse the information from different accounts. For example, there is actually no single story in the Bible about a “rich young ruler”: only Matthew describes the man as young (Matt. 19:20), and only Luke mentions that the man was a ruler (Luke 18:18).

Some material is found in all four Gospels, including information about John the Baptist, the miracle of the feeding of the five thousand, and the story of the crucifixion and the resurrection (although the individual accounts of the resurrection differ). Some material appears in three Gospels, especially in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. These three Gospels have therefore been labeled the “Synoptic Gospels” (syn = together, optic = view). Stories found in all three Synoptic Gospels include the transfiguration (Matt. 17:1–13; Mark 9:2–13; Luke 9:28–36); the healing of Jairus’s daughter and of a woman with a flow of blood (Matt. 9:18–26; Mark 5:21–43; Luke 8:41–56); and the rich young ruler (Matt. 19:16–30; Mark 10:17–31; Luke 18:18–30). The details do not agree in every respect in each account, but clearly they represent the same story and exhibit linguistic dependence on the same source(s).

A significant amount of material appears in two of the four canonical Gospels. Matthew and Mark have the story of a Syrophoenician woman (Matt. 15:21–28; Mark 7:24–30), and both Mark and Luke tell the story of a widow’s offering to the temple treasury (Mark 12:41–44; Luke 21:1–4). The most significant body of teachings and sayings found in two Gospels is the material shared by Matthew and Luke. Each of the Gospels contains material that does not appear in any other Gospel. Mark has the smallest amount of such material, John the largest.

The Gospel of John and the Synoptic Gospels

Based on a study of the material common to more than one Gospel, and the material unique to one Gospel, John’s Gospel usually is seen as distinct from the other three. The most likely explanation for this is that John was written later, with knowledge of the other Gospels, and therefore the author saw no need to repeat most of this material (except what was central to his purposes). Some of the distinctive features of John’s Gospel are the use of terminology such as “love,” “light,” “life,” “truth,” “abide,” “knowledge,” “world,” and the “I am” statements. Furthermore, certain Synoptic terms are either rare or absent—for example, “kingdom,” “demons,” “power,” “pity,” “gospel,” “preach,” “repent,” “parable,” “tax collector.” More so than the Synoptics, John is written from the vantage point of the resurrection and with the aid of hindsight as well as the Spirit. This is why the author of John’s Gospel does not refrain from adding commentary to Jesus’ words (e.g., 2:21–22; 7:39; 11:51–52; 12:16).

The Synoptic Gospels are more interrelated. In passages that appear in these three Gospels, there is often very close verbal agreement between them (e.g., the healing of the leper [Matt. 8:2; Mark 1:40–44; Luke 5:12–14]; the question of Jesus’ authority [Matt. 21:23–27; Mark 11:27–33; Luke 20:1–8]), implying a common source. In many sections that are found in all three Synoptic Gospels, two agree extensively and the third diverges (e.g., Matt. 20:24–28 and Mark 10:41–45 against Luke 22:24–27). When two Gospels agree and one disagrees, Matthew and Mark often agree against Luke, and Luke and Mark often agree against Matthew; but Matthew and Luke do not often agree against Mark and never do so in regard to the order of material. At other points, the Gospel accounts diverge quite significantly when referring to the same events. The infancy narratives in Matthew are quite different from those in Luke. The two accounts of the parable of the wedding banquet (Matt. 22:2–14; Luke 14:16–24) differ so significantly that it is difficult to decide whether they are two versions of the same parable or two different stories. Reports on the resurrection diverge across all four Gospels.

It is possible that these similarities and differences can be traced back to the oral presentation of the gospel. Apostolic preaching would have formed itself into set ways of retelling the events of Jesus’ ministry through repetition. These accounts may have been told originally in Aramaic before being translated into Greek to facilitate the Gentile mission. The authors of Matthew, Mark, and Luke could have been drawing from this common tradition in writing their Gospels. There is probably a degree of truth to this theory, but it cannot explain all the data. The theory does not account for similarities and differences in the order of events, nor does it explain why Matthew and Luke always return to Mark’s order after they deviate from it. A common oral tradition does not adequately explain similar editorial comments (e.g., cf. Matt. 24:15 with Mark 13:14), which suggest a common written source.

Some have argued that the apostles or others wrote records of the words of Jesus (memorabilia), which were collected and written down topically, from which the Synoptic Gospels were composed. As the church grew numerically and geographically, various collections of these memorabilia were made. Again, this is not beyond the realm of possibility; however, working against this theory is the complete absence of any reference to such records. Furthermore, as with the oral theory, it does not explain agreement in the order of material. It does, however, highlight the probability that the evangelists were using written sources.

Markan Priority and Q

On the assumption that the writers of the Synoptic Gospels employed a written source(s), several scholars have tried to reconstruct this original written Gospel from the material in the Synoptic Gospels. This document, which scholars call the Urevangelium (German for “original Gospel”), ended up bearing very close similarities with the Gospel of Mark. This is not surprising, since nearly all of Mark is repeated in Matthew and Luke. This led to the belief that Mark was the most primitive Synoptic Gospel, and that it was a common source for Matthew and Luke.

This belief in Markan priority, which has gained increasing popularity since the nineteenth century, has helped explain the similarities among the Synoptic Gospels. Traditionally, Matthew was thought to be the first Gospel to be written, hence the order of the Gospels in our NT. This belief in Matthean priority was upheld by several early church writers such as Augustine, who saw Mark as an abridgement of Matthew (Cons. 1.2). Augustine may have been more influenced by the traditional ordering of the Gospels than by an analysis of the Gospels themselves. Mark’s Gospel does not read like an abridgement; it is the shortest Gospel, but individual sections of it typically are longer and more detailed than in Matthew.

There are many reasons why the priority of Mark is probable. It is the shortest Gospel, containing 661 verses, whereas Matthew contains 1,068 and Luke contains 1,149. When their content is compared, 97.2 percent of Mark is paralleled in Matthew, and 88.4 percent of Mark is paralleled in Luke. It is easier to understand Matthew and Luke as using Mark and choosing to add additional material to it than to think of Mark as using Matthew, Luke, or both and deciding to omit material such as the birth narratives and the Sermon on the Mount. Mark has simpler Greek, which includes an extensive use of the present tense, redundancies (e.g., Mark 1:32: “that evening after sunset”; cf. Matt. 8:16: “when evening came”; Luke 4:40: “at sunset”), and various colloquialisms (e.g., the word for “mat” in Mark 2:4). Mark alone among the Gospels uses Aramaic terms such as abba (14:36), talitha koum (5:41), and ephphatha (7:34), although Matthew also mentions Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani (Matt. 27:46; Mark 15:34). It is easier to see how Luke and Matthew would have “improved” Mark than the reverse.

If we accept the priority of Mark, and Luke and Matthew’s dependence upon it, there are still the sections of Matthew and Luke that bear strong similarities with each other. From an analysis of the text of Matthew and Luke, it appears that these two evangelists did not know each other’s works. If one knew of the other’s work, why the divergence in some material such as the birth narratives? Alongside this, however, there are close similarities in other material: Matthew has 4,290 words that have parallels in Luke but not in Mark, and Luke has 3,559 words that have parallels in Matthew but not in Mark. The solution appears to be that Matthew and Luke were dealing with some material that they held in common, and that each of them also had other material that he drew on independently. The material held in common is commonly called “Q” (from the German word Quelle, meaning “source”); the material unique to Matthew is called “M” and that which is unique to Luke, “L.” Whether Q was a document is unknown, although it is more likely to be a collection of sources, as is also the case with M and L.

Many scholars argue that Q was a written rather than an oral source, based on the exact word parallels in the Greek text (e.g., Matt. 6:24 and Luke 16:13, where 27 of the 28 words are exactly the same). The presence of doublets (double accounts of the same incident) in Matthew and Luke may show dependence by the respective evangelists on both a Markan and a Q source (e.g., Luke 8:16; cf. Mark 4:21; Luke 11:33; cf. Matt. 5:15). Some scholars have tried to explain the sources geographically: Markan material originated in Rome, Q material in Antioch, M in Jerusalem, and L in Caesarea, but such speculations are far from proven.

Summary

Within all of this, in seeking to understand the harmony of the Gospels, it is important to be aware of what we do not know. Many of the solutions focus on a history behind the text to which we do not have access. Modern literary critics have tended to focus more on the text itself than its prehistory. There is merit in this because it affirms the priority of the text and allows the reader to understand how a part of the text functions within the larger literary unit. It also allows the evangelists to be more than collectors of sources, to have written distinctive theological accounts. Their different emphases may explain some of the differences between the Gospels. This approach, however, also has its dangers. Some who focus on the text over its original intent distance the text from the author’s purpose and therefore open the door for subjective interpretations that deny the difference between a correct and an incorrect reading of the text. It also raises the danger of reading an ancient text through modern eyes, losing sight of the original context.

The church has been well served by four Gospel traditions. The fact that esteem for the text has stopped overharmonization has been of great benefit, as the readers of the Gospels can appreciate various hues and emphases between the different accounts of the ministry of Jesus.

Jesus Christ

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

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jesus’ Life

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Identity of Jesus Christ

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jesus’ Purpose and Community

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Quests for the Historical Jesus

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

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

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

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

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

Justification

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

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

Common and Extraordinary Justification

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

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

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

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

Paul and Justification

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

James and Justification

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

Other Views on Justification

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

Materialism

Mina

Weights

Beka. Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahs or ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measure metals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).

Gerah. 1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20 shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).

Litra. Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight. Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to the modern British pound.

Pim. Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3 shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1 Sam. 13:21).

Table 12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:

Weights

Beka – 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams

Gerah – 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams

Litra – 12 ounces = 340 grams

Mina – 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms

Pim – 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams

Shekel – 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams

Talent – 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms

Linear measurements

Cubit – 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters

Day’s journey = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse

Fingerbreadth – ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse

Handbreadth – 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters

Milion – 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers

Orguia – 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters

Reed/rod – 108 inches = 274 centimeters

Sabbath day’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2 kilometers

Span – 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters

Stadion – 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters

Capacity

Cab – 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters

Choinix – ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters

Cor – 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Ephah – 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Homer – 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Koros – 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters

Omer – 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters

Saton – 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Seah – 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Liquid Volume

Bath – 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Batos – 8 gallons = 30.3 liters

Hin – 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters

Log – 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters

Metretes – 10 gallons = 37.8 literes

Linear Measurements

1 cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths

Milion. Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration of Roman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”

Reed/rod. Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a general term for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance (Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).

Sabbath day’s journey. Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About 2,000 cubits.

Stadion. Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai. Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13; John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).

Land Area

Seed. The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis of how much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1 Kings 18:32).

Yoke. Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. In biblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animals could plow in one day (1 Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).

Capacity

Cab. Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer. Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria (2 Kings 6:25).

Choinix. Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement, mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).

1 homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka

Koros. Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measure of grain (Luke 16:7).

Saton. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. The measurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).

Seah. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah, or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various dry goods (e.g., 2 Kings 7:1; 1 Sam. 25:18).

Liquid Volume

Batos. Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration of the Hebrew word bath (see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).

Hin. Approximately 4 quarts (1 gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to 1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek. 4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).

Log. Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72 bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture, specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).

Metretes. Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement of water at the wedding feast (John 2:6).

Nativity of Christ

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

Introduction

Jesus’ Life

The Identity of Jesus Christ

Jesus’ Purpose and Community

The Quests for the Historical Jesus

Pagan Gods

Definition of Terms

Canaanite Pantheon

Babylonian Pantheon

Other Ancient Near Eastern Pantheons

New Testament Religion

Summary

Parable

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

Parables in the Bible

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

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

Table 4. Major Parables of Jesus

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

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

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

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

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

Hidden treasure (Matt. 13:44)

Pearl (Matt. 13:45-46)

Net (Matt. 13:47-50)

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

Unmerciful servant (Matt. 18:23-35)

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

Two sons (Matt. 21:28-32)

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

Wedding banquet (Matt. 22:2-14)

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

Ten virgins (Matt. 25:1-13)

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

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

Growing seeds (Mark 4:26-29)

Money lender (Luke 7:41-47)

Good Samritan (Luke 10:30-37)

Friend in need (Luke 11:5-8)

Rich fool (Luke 12:16-21)

Unfruitful fig tree (Luke 13:6-9)

Lowest seat (Luke 14:7-14)

Great banquet (Luke 14:16-24)

Cost of discipleship (Luke 14:28-33)

Lost coin (Luke 15:8-10)

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

Shrewd manager (Luke 16:1-8)

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

Persistent widow (Luke 18:2-8)

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

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

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

Purpose of Jesus’ Teaching in Parables

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

Interpretation of Parables

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

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

Details in the Parable and its Allegorical Equivalent:

The man = Adam

Jerusalem = The heavenly city

Jericho = The moon (a symbol of mortality)

The robbers = The devil

Beating the man = Persuading him to sin

Priest and Levite = The Old Testament priesthood

Samaritan = Christ

Binding of wounds = Restraint of sin

Oil = Comfort of hope

Animal = Incarnation

Inn = Church

Innkeeper = Apostle Paul

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pim

Weights

Beka. Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahs or ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measure metals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).

Gerah. 1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20 shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).

Litra. Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight. Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to the modern British pound.

Pim. Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3 shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1 Sam. 13:21).

Table 12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:

Weights

Beka – 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams

Gerah – 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams

Litra – 12 ounces = 340 grams

Mina – 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms

Pim – 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams

Shekel – 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams

Talent – 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms

Linear measurements

Cubit – 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters

Day’s journey = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse

Fingerbreadth – ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse

Handbreadth – 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters

Milion – 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers

Orguia – 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters

Reed/rod – 108 inches = 274 centimeters

Sabbath day’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2 kilometers

Span – 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters

Stadion – 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters

Capacity

Cab – 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters

Choinix – ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters

Cor – 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Ephah – 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Homer – 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Koros – 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters

Omer – 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters

Saton – 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Seah – 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Liquid Volume

Bath – 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Batos – 8 gallons = 30.3 liters

Hin – 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters

Log – 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters

Metretes – 10 gallons = 37.8 literes

Linear Measurements

1 cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths

Milion. Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration of Roman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”

Reed/rod. Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a general term for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance (Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).

Sabbath day’s journey. Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About 2,000 cubits.

Stadion. Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai. Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13; John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).

Land Area

Seed. The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis of how much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1 Kings 18:32).

Yoke. Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. In biblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animals could plow in one day (1 Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).

Capacity

Cab. Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer. Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria (2 Kings 6:25).

Choinix. Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement, mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).

1 homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka

Koros. Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measure of grain (Luke 16:7).

Saton. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. The measurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).

Seah. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah, or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various dry goods (e.g., 2 Kings 7:1; 1 Sam. 25:18).

Liquid Volume

Batos. Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration of the Hebrew word bath (see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).

Hin. Approximately 4 quarts (1 gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to 1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek. 4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).

Log. Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72 bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture, specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).

Metretes. Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement of water at the wedding feast (John 2:6).

Talent

Weights

Beka. Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahs or ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measure metals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).

Gerah. 1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20 shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).

Litra. Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight. Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to the modern British pound.

Pim. Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3 shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1 Sam. 13:21).

Table 12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:

Weights

Beka – 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams

Gerah – 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams

Litra – 12 ounces = 340 grams

Mina – 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms

Pim – 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams

Shekel – 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams

Talent – 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms

Linear measurements

Cubit – 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters

Day’s journey = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse

Fingerbreadth – ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse

Handbreadth – 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters

Milion – 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers

Orguia – 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters

Reed/rod – 108 inches = 274 centimeters

Sabbath day’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2 kilometers

Span – 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters

Stadion – 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters

Capacity

Cab – 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters

Choinix – ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters

Cor – 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Ephah – 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Homer – 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Koros – 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters

Omer – 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters

Saton – 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Seah – 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Liquid Volume

Bath – 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Batos – 8 gallons = 30.3 liters

Hin – 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters

Log – 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters

Metretes – 10 gallons = 37.8 literes

Linear Measurements

1 cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths

Milion. Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration of Roman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”

Reed/rod. Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a general term for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance (Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).

Sabbath day’s journey. Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About 2,000 cubits.

Stadion. Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai. Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13; John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).

Land Area

Seed. The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis of how much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1 Kings 18:32).

Yoke. Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. In biblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animals could plow in one day (1 Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).

Capacity

Cab. Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer. Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria (2 Kings 6:25).

Choinix. Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement, mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).

1 homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka

Koros. Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measure of grain (Luke 16:7).

Saton. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. The measurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).

Seah. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah, or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various dry goods (e.g., 2 Kings 7:1; 1 Sam. 25:18).

Liquid Volume

Batos. Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration of the Hebrew word bath (see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).

Hin. Approximately 4 quarts (1 gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to 1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek. 4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).

Log. Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72 bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture, specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).

Metretes. Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement of water at the wedding feast (John 2:6).

Wealth and Materialism

Weights and Measures

Weights

Beka. Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahs or ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measure metals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).

Gerah. 1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20 shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).

Litra. Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight. Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to the modern British pound.

Pim. Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3 shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1 Sam. 13:21).

Table 12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:

Weights

Beka – 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams

Gerah – 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams

Litra – 12 ounces = 340 grams

Mina – 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms

Pim – 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams

Shekel – 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams

Talent – 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms

Linear measurements

Cubit – 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters

Day’s journey = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse

Fingerbreadth – ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse

Handbreadth – 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters

Milion – 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers

Orguia – 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters

Reed/rod – 108 inches = 274 centimeters

Sabbath day’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2 kilometers

Span – 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters

Stadion – 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters

Capacity

Cab – 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters

Choinix – ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters

Cor – 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Ephah – 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Homer – 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters

Koros – 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters

Omer – 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters

Saton – 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Seah – 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters

Liquid Volume

Bath – 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters

Batos – 8 gallons = 30.3 liters

Hin – 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters

Log – 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters

Metretes – 10 gallons = 37.8 literes

Linear Measurements

1 cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths

Milion. Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration of Roman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”

Reed/rod. Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a general term for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance (Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).

Sabbath day’s journey. Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About 2,000 cubits.

Stadion. Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai. Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13; John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).

Land Area

Seed. The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis of how much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1 Kings 18:32).

Yoke. Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. In biblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animals could plow in one day (1 Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).

Capacity

Cab. Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer. Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria (2 Kings 6:25).

Choinix. Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement, mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).

1 homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka

Koros. Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measure of grain (Luke 16:7).

Saton. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. The measurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).

Seah. Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah, or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various dry goods (e.g., 2 Kings 7:1; 1 Sam. 25:18).

Liquid Volume

Batos. Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration of the Hebrew word bath (see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).

Hin. Approximately 4 quarts (1 gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to 1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek. 4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).

Log. Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72 bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture, specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).

Metretes. Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement of water at the wedding feast (John 2:6).

Showing 1 to 50 of454 results

1. Hear No Evil

Illustration

Richard A. Jensen

Remains Of The Day is a powerful movie starring Anthony Hopkins and Emma Thompson. Hopkins plays the role of the chief butler at a large estate in England. Emma Thompson plays his chief assistant. The movie is set in the years immediately preceding and succeeding World War II.

The butler is the central figure in the film. He has come by his trade naturally. His father was a butler before him. The estate, therefore, is the only home he has ever known. He knows no other life. In this world he is a man of absolute dependability. He runs the large estate staff like clockwork. He is a model of efficiency. He is also a man who seems to have no emotions whatsoever. One evening, for example, while the staff is busily serving a marvelous banquet the butler is called aside. His father, who also works and lives at the estate, has taken ill. The butler goes quietly to his father's room. He finds his father is dying. He takes care of matters quite efficiently and goes back to the demands of the banquet. Not a tear is shed.

The head of the estate in these pre-war years in England is a man who has great sympathy for the German cause. Many meetings are held at his estate as he seeks to enlighten others in the cause of his sympathy. Much pro-Nazi discussion takes place around the ornately crafted tables of the estate. The butler is right there in the midst of all this. He hears the discussions but it seems to make no impression upon him whatsoever.

After the war the butler receives a warm letter from the woman who had in years past been his chief assistant at the estate. This was a woman who was greatly attracted to the butler. The butler either did not notice her attraction to him or he did not know how to comport himself in the presence of this beautiful woman. No one had ever taught him about love. At any rate, in response to her letter the butler gets the use of one of the cars of the estate to go and visit her with an eye to hiring her back to her old position. Watching the movie one hopes that, at long last, love will come to full bloom between these kindly souls. The entire movie works to build our suspense about this matter. She sends out all the clues in the world to him that she is interested more in him than in a position at the estate. But the butler cannot hear. The butler cannot see.

On his way to speak with his former assistant his car breaks down. He finds himself waiting for help at a local pub. The patrons of the pub ask where he is from. He mentions the estate. At first they mistakenly assume that he might own the estate. They ask him many questions. He can answer none of them. Two distinguished looking gentlemen get into the discussion with the butler. They have sized him up as a common man. They ask him his impressions of the former head of his estate. "Do you agree with the positions of your master?" they inquire. "What do you think of the war?"

The questions totally confuse the butler. "No, I don't have an opinion on that. No, I don't understand that." Those who have put the questions to him laugh at this common man who understands nothing. Just as they thought! The audience is left puzzled. The butler has heard many discussions at his master's estate concerning the war. He has been there. He has heard. He has seen. But he has heard and seen nothing. The butler cannot hear. The butler cannot see. "

2. Ashamed To Beg

Illustration

John G. Lynn

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3. The Crooked Accountant

Illustration

John E. Sumwalt

There was a rich bookie who had an accountant who was accused of mismanaging his business affairs. And the bookie called in the accountant and said, "Hey, man, what's this I hear about you? Turn in the books, you're fired!" The accountant thought, "What shall I do? I won't qualify for unemployment and I am too proud to go on welfare. I know what I'll do, I'll make sure that enough people owe me that I won't have to worry when I start looking for another job."

He called in all of the bookie's clients, one by one. "How did you do on your last bet?" he asked the first. "I lost $3,000," the man told him. "Let me check that on the computer," the accountant said. "That's what I thought, there was a mistake in the point spread on that game. You only owe $1,500." The next man was in arrears on several losing bets. "How much do you owe all together?" the accountant asked him. "Ten thousand dollars," came the reply. The accountant smiled at him and said, "Pay me 80 cents on the dollar and the slate is clean." And so it went, until the accountant had enough people in his debt that he could be certain of landing another job. When the rich bookie found out what his former employee had done, he bought him a drink and congratulated him on his shrewdness.

4. Parable of Giants and Pygmies

Illustration

The writer of "Gulliver's Travels" was able to criticize the pettiness of the king's court by making himself a giant on the shores of a little kingdom.

The Lilliputians were able to capture the sleeping giant by putting thousands of threads as their cables that pegged him down to earth.

As the giant he was able to see the selfishness and ridiculous behavior of petty people in big places.

Perhaps the writer was unaware of the parallel of truth found in the fact that a giant may be pegged down to earth and made prisoner by thousands of little habits which imprison great men.

God has made everyone of His children with tremendous possibilities, but so many of us let our lives be imprisoned by countless time-consuming activities that are of no consequence.

We are meant to serve Almighty God and the heavenly kingdom, but we often are expended in ways of social security.

The measure of a Christian man is not how large he may be physically or socially, but whether he is able to be big about his daily life. Qualities of a great spirit are the ability to forgive, the ability to be generous and the ability to be helpful.

The youth in their scouting days learn laws of greatness but as we move toward adulthood many are caught in the tiny threads of social fallacy. The ways of man and of God can be vastly different.

Can you forgive your neighbor? Can you love your enemy? Have you room for new ideas? Are you a spiritual giant or a pygmy?

5. Play It Safe or Take a Risk

Illustration

Mark Trotter

Rev. Mark Trotter tells of a mission in Mexico, sponsored by Mercy Hospital, in San Diego, and by Rotary International. Thirteen doctors from San Diego, and twice that number of nurses and other support staff, total of about fifty-five persons, paid their own way to go down as a surgical team to minister to poor children in Tehuacan, in the southern part of Mexico. He says,

“The call went out through the Rotary Club in that city for all those who do not have the means for medical attention to bring children with birth defects and crippling diseases to the clinic.

It was amazing. They came by the hundreds, mostly the very, very poor, carrying their children. Some teenagers, as well, some of whom have spent their life with their hand held over their face because they were ashamed of the way they looked. Some had been hidden by their parents because they did not want their neighbors to see what they believed was a curse upon their family. After an hour, or less, in surgery their appearance was changed, and they received new hope and a new life.

If you are hard-headed, you might conclude that the thousands of dollars that were spent last week in Tehuacan was just a drop in the bucket. It's not going to make any difference. I mean, the enormous suffering in this world, just wave after wave. It's not going to make any difference.

I talked to one of those Rotarians in Tehuacan who spent two years setting up this project. It's a complex business establishing this kind of a clinic in Mexico. I said, "Why did you do it?" He said, "We believe that we can change the world, and we are going to start right here."

It sounds naive. It is naive, when you compare it with the problems that exist, even the problems in his own state. But you are confronted with a choice in this life. That's the point of these parables. You are confronted with a choice. You can do nothing, and play it safe. Or, you can take a risk."

6. Looking Past Oneself

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

An enormously rich man complained to a psychiatrist that despite his great wealth which enabled him to have whatever he wanted, he still felt miserable. The psychiatrist took the man to the window overlooking the street and asked, "What do you see?" The man replied, "I see men, women, and children."

The psychiatrist then took the man to stand in front of mirror and asked, "Now what do you see?"

The man said, "I see only myself."

The psychiatrist then said, "In the window there is a glass and in the mirror there is glass, and when you look through the glass of the window, you see others, but when you look into the glass of the mirror you see only yourself. The reason for this, "said the psychiatrist, "is that behind the glass in the mirror is a thin layer of silver. When silver is added, you cease to see others. You only see yourself."

Whenever your devotion to money and material things causes you to be self centered, you in essence deny God's intention for your life. It is also a denial of the Christ, for Jesus came into the world so that we might be in union with God.

7. Beyond Skin Deep

Illustration

Leonard Sweet

Twentieth century novelist James Joyce declared "modern man has an epidermis rather than a soul." Post-modern culture goes Joyce even one step further. The skin we long for isn't even our own; it's cut and stitched, sculpted, tightened, tanned, lightened, suctioned, all according to whatever celebrity trademark, whatever perfect look we hope to emulate of our cultural gods and goddesses.

Jesus' parables challenge us to get beyond our skin deep preoccupation. The gospel is more concerned with our souls than with our skins. Jesus looks at the eternal, not the epidermal surface. Life is not what you make it. Life is what you let God make it.

8. I Have Never Told the Half of It!

Illustration

James W. Moore

Sometimes people tease me about speaking about God's love and grace so much and when they do, I think of Marco Polo. In the 14th century, when he came back to Venice from his travels in Cathay, Marco Polo described the incredible wonders he had seen there. People didn't believe him and for the rest of his life (and even on his death bed) they tried to get him to confess that he had lied and exaggerated about the wonders he had described. His last answer was: “I never told the half of it!"

That's the way I feel about God's love and grace – “I have never told the half of it!"

9. God’s Grace

Illustration

Robert McClelland

The grace of God is like the man who went into the clothing store to buy a suit and was shown a blue one. "No," the customer said, "That won't do. I want a green suit." So the clerk called out to his partner, "Turn on the green light, Joe, the man wants a green suit!"

It is not that things are changed. But we see them differently. In Christ we are given spectacles which give us a kingdom perspective. We see ourselves in a heavenly light; through God's eyes. We see how things really are. We need no longer suffer from the stigma that "sinner" - forgiven or otherwise - denotes. We can see ourselves as "heirs" with Christ of the Divine inheritance. The world is not changed, but we see it and ourselves in a new light; a kingdom light.

10. Good and Evil Live Side by Side

Illustration

Thomas C. Short

When I was a youth, I went to the movies, and I always came away from the theater knowing who were the good guys and who were the bad guys. The good guys usually wore fine clothing, rode white horses, used better English, had wholesome faces, and were nicer to their animals. Their saddles were often studded with jeweled stones. Many signs were given to help me understand who was good and who was bad.

Now as an adult, things are not nearly as clear and simplistic. I went to see a movie recently, and it was so complicated that it was several hours before I realized who was good and who was bad. And still I have some doubts about my conclusions.

In this parable, Jesus is telling us that evil is very cunning and shrewd. It is camouflaged so perfectly that we sometimes have difficulty recognizing it. It's not just a matter of knowing who are the good guys and the bad guys on the movie screen, but it is also difficult to differentiate between good and evil in our own lives. Good and evil live side by side and sometimes appear to be identical twins.

11. The Purpose of Wealth

Illustration

Donald M. Tuttle

New York is a city filled with landmarks. There's Broadway, Wall Street, the Empire State Building and the Statue of Liberty, just to name a few. But when terrorists turned their hijacked planes toward Gotham, their target was clear. They had set their sights on the two gleaming towers of the World Trade Center. And they did so because those towers were symbols of America's economic power. To destroy them was—in the minds of the hijackers—a blow to America's economic systems.

And they were right the financial fallout from the attack was devastating.

Hundreds of companies housed in the World Trade Center and the surrounding buildings lost not only millions of dollars in business but more importantly the people at the core of their success.
Insurers paid as much as $35 billion in attack-related claims.
The airline industry was crushed. More than 120,000 airline employees were laid off.
Restaurants dependent of convention business suffered. Taxi drivers who serve airports. Cruise lines. The list was endless.
The Dow Jones Stock Exchange fell dramatically.
And the wars? Who can calculate that toll?

Those who attacked the World Trade Center succeeded in striking a blow to the economy and well being of this country. As one stock market guru put it at the time, "If you were planning on your airline stocks for retirement, you best not quit your job anytime soon." Money that many thought they would have was no longer there. Confidence in the future was been shaken. And that is scary. But this crisis presented us with an opportunity. It invited us to reflect on the purpose of the wealth we created and counted on.

Jesus told the story of a man who faced just such a crisis.

12. I Didn't Speak Up

Illustration

Martin Niemoeller

With the Second World War behind him, the German Lutheran pastor, Martin Niemoeller, who was also a victim of the Nazi concentration camps, wrote his famous confession called "I Didn't Speak Up," and it is apropos: In Germany, the Nazis first came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak for me.

13. Increasing Our Standard of Giving - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

Before John Wesley became the founder of the Methodist Church he was a teacher at Oxford University back in the 1700's. When he began his career he was paid 30 pounds per year - in those days a lot of money. His living expenses were 28 pounds - so he gave 2 pounds away.

The next year his income doubled - but he still managed to live on 28 pounds - so he gave away 32 pounds. The third year he earned 90 pounds - lived on 28 - and gave away 62. The fourth year he earned 120 pounds - lived on 28 - and gave away 92. One year his income was a little over 1,400 pounds - he lived on 30 and gave away nearly all of the 1,400 pounds.

Wesley felt that with increasing income, what should rise is not the Christian's standard of living but the standard of giving. Increasing our standard of giving. What a great Christian man and what a great lesson he taught us. It is the same lesson found in the parable for today. Let's take a look. The Pharisees are standing off to the side watching Jesus as was their custom. Jesus' disciples are listening intently as he tells his story. Probably on this occasion there were more than just the 12. A large number of followers are gathered around. He tells them about a steward who handled all the business affairs of a wealthy man. But the steward has squandered his master's money; he was reckless and wasteful. Notice that this story follows another story about a reckless young man who squandered his father's wealth, the prodigal son. But in this story the reckless young man does not come to his senses in time and he is fired from his job.

Then he does something so shrewd and conniving. As he is cleaning out his desk and clearing out his things he calls in his master's debtors, those who had outstanding accounts, and cut those debts in half. You owe 800 gallons of olive oil? Write me check for 400 and we will call it even. You owe a thousand bushels of wheat? Write me a check for 800 and we'll call it even. He forgives the debts that are not his to forgive, and he gains friends in the process. As a result his master commends him.

So what is Jesus' point? Well, there's not just one point there are a few. Let's take a look.

First, He Explains the Wise Use of Worldly Wealth.
Second, Trustworthiness Is Measured by Character.
Third, Our Service Must Be Singular.

14. Wine Stewards

Illustration

Brett Blair

During World War II there was wine steward who was responsible for caring for the finest collection of wine in all of Europe in the wine cellars at the Chateau of Monaco. At that time in history, the chateau was well known for its vintage, rare wines. But the Nazis had overrun the city and now lived and dined in the chateau, expecting and wanting to drink the world's finest vintage wines.

The wine steward resented those "slimy Nazis" and cleverly and carefully hid all the rarest wines deep in the cellar, serving his enemy only the cheapest and youngest wines, pretending that those wines were the best. Of course the Nazi's in the arrogance never caught on. The steward is to be commended though, because of his shrewdness.

Note: Generally this is true. Though we could not completely confirm the wine steward part it's probably true as well. During WWII the bottles were famously concealed during the war behind seven layers of less important inventory, which were constructed as a false wall to cover up the hotel’s silverware, 20,000 precious bottles, and even the fortunes of some of the hotel’s important guests. It was reopened in 1945 by Sir Winston Churchill, who celebrated by sipping an 1811 rum, a few bottles of which still remain in the cellar awaiting purchase.

15. Finding Financial Freedom

Illustration

Brett Blair

Some of you may have read a remarkable short story sometime during your school years by D. H. Lawrence titled, “The Rocking‑Horse Winner." I wonder if you remember how the story begins?

It is a haunting tale about a family living above its means. The mother is considered by friends and neighbors to be the perfect mother, in spite of the fact that deep down she knows she has difficulty loving her three children. It's important to the husband to keep up the pretense of success the large house, staffed with servants but they are living on the edge, just like many families today. Listen as D. H. Lawrence describes this family's life situation:

“And so the house came to be haunted by the unspoken phrase: ‘There must be more money! There must be more money!' The children could hear it all the time though nobody said it aloud. They heard it at Christmas, when the expensive and splendid toys filled the nursery. Behind the shining modern rocking-horse, behind the smart doll's house, a voice would start whispering: ‘There must be more money! There must be more money!' And the children would stop playing, to listen for a moment. They would look into each other's eyes, to see if they had all heard. And each one saw in the eyes of the other two that they too had heard. ‘There must be more money! There must be more money!'

“It came whispering from the springs of the still-swaying rocking-horse, and even the horse, bending his wooden, champing head, heard it. The big doll, sitting so pink and smirking in her new pram, could hear it quite plainly, and seemed to be smirking all the more self-consciously because of it. The foolish puppy, too, that took the place of the teddy-bear, he was looking so extraordinarily foolish for no other reason but that he heard the secret whisper all over the house: ‘There must be more money!'"

That's the family backdrop to the story of “The Rocking‑Horse Winner." Quite an extraordinary picture: “There must be more money! There must be more money!"

I wonder if there are any homes in our community today that are haunted in that same way: “There must be more money!"

Let's talk about financial freedom. Jesus said on one occasion: “No servant can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money."

Here is the challenge for today: We want to break the grip money has on our lives. We want to affirm that Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is our god, and our only god. We want to affirm that the God who manifested Himself in Jesus of Nazareth is our god. This is who we are. That is why we are here in this room at this time. “Thou shalt have no other gods before me." We want God to be our god, not material possessions.

16. What Did You Do With What I Gave You?

Illustration

Brett Blair

There is a minister who has a friend who works downtown. His friend is something of an enigma, because he grows hot and cold about the Church and religion. But they are good friends. They have a good relationship. They get together often, have lunch together.

On one occasion he went to his office to meet him for lunch. He sat down to talk before they went out. The friend looked out his office window, and said, "Pastor, I think I've got it figured out now. The big guy is going to ask two questions when we get up to the gate. I'm serious now. I'm not kidding. I really mean this. The first question will be, 'What did you do with what I gave you?' Then he is going to ask, 'Who did you do it for?'"

17. The Art of the Con Man

Illustration

King Duncan

There's an old story that many of you may know about a young man in Montana who bought a horse from a farmer for $100. The farmer agreed to deliver the horse the next day. However when the next day arrived, the farmer reneged on his promise.

“I'm afraid the horse has died,"he explained.

The young man said, “Well, then give me my money back."

The farmer said, “Can't do that. I spent it already."

The young man thought for a moment and said, “Ok, then, just bring me the dead horse."

The farmer asked, “What you going to do with a dead horse?"

The young man said, “I'm going to raffle it off."

The farmer said, “You can't raffle off a dead horse!"

The young man said, “Sure I can. Watch me. I just won't tell anybody he's dead."

A month later, the farmer met up with the young man and asked, “What happened with that dead horse?"

The young man said, “I raffled him off. I sold 500 tickets at two dollars apiece and made a profit of $998 . .."

The farmer said, “Didn't anyone complain?"

The young man said, “Just the guy who won. So I gave him his two dollars back."

Now there's an enterprising young man. We might even call him something of a con man. There's something about a con man that captures the imagination. There have been several successful weekly television shows through the years in which the hero is a former con man now using his creative skills for the greater good.

Jesus once told a parable about a man with that kind of wily disposition. He, too, was something of a con man. Most of you know the story quite well.

18. How’s Your Spiritual Bank?

Illustration

King Duncan

A church member came to his pastor's study one day. The pastor could see that the man looked deeply troubled. The man said, “Pastor, I need to talk. I feel so empty, so dried up inside, I'm scared." His voice began to quiver just a bit. He said “Pastor, I have just come from the doctor's office, and he told me that I have only six months at best to live. After I left the office, I realized that I have no spiritual resources, no inner strength to cope with this. There is nothing to fall back on, to lean against. Many people would be surprised to hear me say that, for I have made lots of money, and people think I am a success not only at making money, but at being a strong, powerful person."

He then fell quiet, and the pastor waited in silence for him to go on. Finally the man said, “You know I'm poor in the things that count the most. I see it now. I've put my faith in the wrong things, and the truth is I am destitute, spiritually destitute. I could pick up the phone and call any bank in Houston and borrow any amount of money to do whatever I wanted to. Just on my name, Reverend, just on my name! Do you understand? I could borrow it on my name only."

The man then leaned forward and put his head in his hands, and said softly through tears, “I guess there are some things you can't buy or borrow."

This man's material bank was full to overflowing, but his spiritual bank was empty. Is that your situation? Then you are serving mammon and not God.

19. Like Running a Business

Illustration

King Duncan

There was an interesting legal question posed in The Saturday Evening Post recently. It seems that one lovely Sunday when the sermon was overlong, the congregation rushed, as usual, from its pews on the first syllable of "Amen!" Faithful Abigail, the only worshiper held entranced by the sermon, moved slowly and was trampled. She sued the church and its officials for damages.

"Those in charge of the church knew that most of the congregation stampedes after long sermons," Abigail argued. "They should have recognized the danger in the situation. Not being prepared to cope with it, they were negligent."

The church's attorney argued like this in response: "A church is a nonprofit organization manned for the most part by volunteers. No one has a right to expect it to be run with the smart efficiency of a business concern. Abigail, therefore, has no real claim."

If you were the judge, asks the writer, would you award damages to Abigail?

What I found interesting in this hypothetical situation was the characterization of the church. "A church is a nonprofit organization manned for the most part by volunteers. . . No one has a right to expect it to be run with the smart efficiency of a business. . . ."

Why not? What if we were as good at what we do as McDonald's is at what they do, or Coca Cola or Microsoft? What if we were as committed to spreading the good news of the kingdom of God as American business is to winning new customers? This is the point Jesus is trying to make. He wants people who bear his name to not only be nice people but to be people who make a difference in the world.

20. Shrewdness in Business

Illustration

King Duncan

There was once a young businessman in Germany named Neckerman who had a burning ambition to build his small retail store into a large chain of department stores. His problem was that no one knew his name. He couldn't attract customers. He had only limited capital.

This was shortly after World War II. As you might imagine there were shortages in Germany of almost everything. Thus, the existing big department stores saw no reason to cut prices. They sold whatever they could get at healthy margins. Neckerman saw this as an opportunity. If only he could position his store as the low-cost, high-value leader, he could build the enterprise of his dreams.

As it happened, Neckerman managed to acquire a large shipment of spools of thread. Thread was in great demand in those days. Clothes also were in short supply. Women were constantly repairing their families' old garments. The obvious step for Neckerman would have been to sell these spools of thread in his own store. It would undoubtedly attract more business.

Instead he offered the whole shipment of thread to the buyer for the largest department store chain in Germany at only a slight profit. The buyer for this chain jumped at the opportunity and in only a few weeks had sold all the thread at a much more substantial profit.

It usually takes several months to use up a whole spool of thread. Thus, the whole transaction was forgotten by the time the executives of this large chain started to notice crowds of people shopping at Neckerman's. Soon the reason became apparent. It was the spools of thread the large chain had purchased so eagerly from this young upstart. As German housewives finished their spools of thread, a piece of paper that had been wrapped about the spool under the thread fluttered out. It read like this: IF YOU HAD BOUGHT THIS THREAD AT NECKERMAN'S, IT WOULD HAVE LASTED TWICE AS LONG. Overnight, everyone knew the name Neckerman. From then on, the firm had no trouble attracting customers.

Shrewd. Even a little sneaky. Sometimes in business the line between ethical and unethical, shrewd and outright dishonest, is a little blurred. And nice guys, or gals, don't always finish first.

21. Earn, Save, and Give

Illustration

King Duncan

Eighteenth century evangelist John Wesley understood the spiritual struggle many people have with the place of money in their lives. Here was the irony of his ministry. The Wesleyan revivals were turning people, many of whom had serious drinking problems, into sober-minded, hardworking, responsible individuals. In fact, some of Wesley's converts became so successful that they began letting their commitment to Christ slide. They had allowed their success, their affluence, to become their god, and in reality, they were as lost as they were when Christ first touched their lives.

Wesley's solution? He saw only one: That they should EARN all they could, SAVE all they could and then GIVE all they could. Let me put his formula in the present tense, for it is a good one: Earn all you can, save all you can, give all you can. Many people today can do the first two, but they have difficulty with the third. Why? Because money has taken over first place in their lives.

22. Rooting for the Bad Guys?

Illustration

King Duncan

Movie producer William Castle was known in the 1950s for his low-quality horror films. In 1961, Castle did something totally unique in movie history: he let the audience choose the ending to his movie. Castle's movie, Mr. Sardonicus, was about a crazed, reclusive killer. Near the end of the film, ushers stopped the film and allowed audiences to vote on whether the killer should live or die. Then, the ushers ran the ending that the audience chose. The audience always chose death for the bad guy. It's a good thing human nature is so predictable. William Castle was counting on it. You see, he only filmed one ending to his movie, not two. He was so sure that the audience would vote to kill the bad guy that he only filmed that ending to save money. This quirky little story provides us a window into human nature: We have a yearning for justice.

Philosopher Immanuel Kant believed this universal desire of human beings to see justice accomplished pointed the way to God. He called it "a universal sense of oughtness." The Hero's Adventure is what it is sometimes called in storytelling. It is the classic formula of popular fiction. A virtuous person is called on to face overwhelming odds. He or she nearly loses possibly at the risk of his or her own life. Eventually, however, our hero is victorious. And vicariously we celebrate alongside the hero. We share in the pain of his challenge and near defeat, and we feel a sense of elation when our hero finally triumphs. It is rare, however, that an audience will celebrate an unhappy ending. It's such a downer. And rarely will an audience celebrate victory by a villain. Why, then, did Jesus allow a dirty, rotten scoundrel to triumph in one of his stories? You know which story I'm talking about. Jesus told his disciples a story about a rich man whose manager was wasting his possessions. So the rich man called his manager in and asked him, "What is this I hear about you? Give an account of your management, because you cannot be manager any longer."

23. Penney's Conversion

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

J. C. Penney was a man of advanced years before he committed his life fully to Jesus Christ. He had been a good man, honest, but primarily interested in becoming a success and making money. "When I worked for six dollars a week at Joslin's Dry Goods Store back in Denver," he confessed as he looked back on his life, "it was my ambition, in the sense of wealth in money, to be worth one hundred thousand dollars. When I reached that goal I felt a certain temporary satisfaction, but it soon wore off and my sights were set on becoming worth a million dollars."

Mr. and Mrs. Penney worked hard to expand the business, but one day Mrs. Penney caught cold and pneumonia developed, which claimed her life.

It was then that J. C. Penney realized having money was a poor substitute for the real purposes in living. “When she died,” he said, "my world crashed about me. To build a business, to make a success in the eyes of men, to accumulate money—what was the purpose of life? What had money meant for my wife? l felt mocked by life, even by God Himself." After several more fiery trials, J. C. Penney was financially ruined and, naturally, in deep distress.

That is when God could deal with his self-righteous nature and his love for money. After his spiritual conversion he could testify of God's working.

"I had to pass through fiery ordeals before reaching glimmerings of conviction that it is not enough for men to be upright and moral. When I was brought to humility and the knowledge of dependence on God, sincerely and earnestly seeking God's aid, it was forthcoming, and a light illumined my being. I cannot otherwise describe it than to say that it changed me as a man." (Submitted by Rev. John Fitts , Clearwater Community Church, Clearwater, Florida)

24. If Only I Had

Illustration

Lois Cheney

Once, a man said, "If I had some extra money, I'd give it to God, but I have just enough to support myself and my family." And the same man said, "If I had some extra time, I'd give it to God, but every minute is taken up with my job, my family, my clubs, and what have you every single minute." And the same man said, "If I had a talent I'd give it to God, but I have no lovely voice; I have no special skill; I've never been able to lead a group; I can't think cleverly or quickly, the way I would like to."

And God was touched, and although it was unlike him, God gave that man money, time, and a glorious talent. And then He waited, and waited, and waited. And then after a while, He shrugged His shoulders, and He took all those things right back from the man, the money, the time and the glorious talent. After a while, the man sighed and said, "If I only had some of that money back, I'd give it to God. If I only had some of that time, I'd give it to God. If I could only rediscover that glorious talent, I'd give it to God."

And God said, "Oh, shut up."

And the man told some of his friends, "You know, I'm not so sure that I believe in God anymore."

25. A Lifelong Allegiance to God

Illustration

King Duncan

The late Danny Thomas lost his life savings of $600.00 at a time when he was out of work. He and his wife, Rosie, had a baby on the way, and they needed money. Danny worked at part-time jobs so Rosie could buy groceries. He also borrowed money from friends. It was a tough time in his life. A week before the baby was born, Danny had the grand total of seven dollars and eighty-five cents to his name. What would he do? "My despair led me to my first exposure to the powers of faith," Danny would later recall.

On Sunday morning Danny went to church. When the offering plate was passed he put in his "usual one dollar." But something unexpected happened that day. A special missions offering was taken. The priest explained where the mission offering would go, and Danny felt he had to give something. "I got carried away," Danny said, "and ended up giving my seven dollars." He had given away all his money that Sunday. What in the world had he done? He walked up to the altar rail, got on his knees and prayed aloud. "Look, I've given my last seven bucks," he prayed. "I need it back tenfold because I've got a kid on the way, and I have to pay the hospital bill." He went home with a mere eighty-five cents in his pocket all the money he had in the world. "You won't believe this," Danny Thomas later wrote, "but the next morning the phone rang in the rooming house hall." It was a job offer. He was offered a part in a commercial. The job wasn't much but the pay was good seventy-five dollars. "I literally dropped the telephone receiver," Danny remembered. "First I whooped with joy; then an eerie feeling came over me." He remembered what he had prayed at church the day before. "The seventy-five-dollar fee," he said, "unheard of for me at that time, was almost exactly ten times the amount of money I had donated to the church."

The important truth about this story is not that Danny Thomas received a tenfold return on his money. He might have done just as well at the racetrack. The important thing was Danny Thomas' lifelong allegiance to God. Those of you who know his story know that St. Jude's Hospital for Children in Memphis Tennessee stands today as silent testimony to that allegiance. Often when God asks us, "What will you give?" we take the bit that we can spare, the part we can easily give and offer it to God. The question is one of total allegiance. How committed are you to God?

26. Parable of a Prayer and a Bank Account

Illustration

"When are you going to get your new bike, Johnny?" said Larry.

"I don't know if I will ever get it now," said John.

"What's the matter? Won't your father give it to you?" inquired his friend.

"We're not talking to each other. I'm mad at him," said John. "I've got money in the bank, but I don't know how to get it out."

"You'd better make up with your father," said Larry. "It's foolish to be angry with him. You just can't win that way."

It is true most people have money in the spiritual bank account. A great inheritance sufficient to supply all of their needs and all of their wants.

Some don't know how to get the money out of the bank and some are too stubborn to communicate with their Heavenly Father. They are offended by their own narrowness, stubbornness, and ignorance. These are reasons why people fail to accept their religious heritage; short-changing themselves in the joys of living.

They miss out on friendships and thrilling experiences. They are never quite ready to admit that they don't know how to pray and don't know how to communicate with God. So they tell their friends they are offended with the Church, the preacher, the religion or with God and continue in their unfulfilled dreams.

It is more than a pity -- it is human tragedy to live and not live, to desire love and not obtain it and to ignore the presence of God's love, when it is the answer to human suffering.

27. A Russian Resurrection

Illustration

Donald Dotterer

An old illustration about Russia with an update. You'll see in the update that Yancey picked up on a movement that seems to have held:

Columnist Philip Yancey, in an article titled "A Russian Resurrection," writes of his visit in October 1991 to the former Soviet Union. He says that it "would be hard to overstate the chaos that he found when he arrived in the Soviet Union, a nation that was about to shed its historical identity as well as its name." Yancey reports that one day the central bank ran out of money. Several days later the second largest republic withdrew from the union. There was a sense of crisis everywhere.

Doctors announced that the best hospital in Moscow might close its doors for lack of money. Crime was increasing nearly 50 percent a year. No one knew what the country would be like in a year or even six months. Who would be responsible for controlling the nuclear weapons? Who would print the money?

Certainly this once great empire was in confusion and turmoil. And yet Yancey found something else in his visit to Russia in the midst of chaos and financial hardship. An attractive young woman who was in charge of cultural affairs summed up the new attitude in Russia toward Christianity.

This Russian woman said softly but with great emotion: "We have all been raised on one religion: atheism. We were trained to believe in the material world, and not in God. In fact, those who believed in God were frightened. A stone wall separated these people from the rest."

Then she said, "Suddenly we have realized that something was missing. Now religion is open to us, and we see the great eagerness of young people. We must explore religion, which can give us a new life, and a new understanding about life."

There are now Russian language Bibles on display in the Kremlin government building. The church bells are sounding again, and the churches are full of worshipers. Women in babushkas are publicly kneeling in prayer outside the great cathedrals, an act that just a few short years ago would have required great courage.

So it is. Here is a genuine miracle of God in our time. As Philip Yancey concludes, here, in the former Soviet Union, which was officially atheistic until 1990, here in perhaps the least likely of all places, here were the unmistakable signs of an authentic spiritual awakening. Here were the signs of spiritual resurrection.

LATE 2018 UPDATE

In Russia, there is a religious revival happening. Orthodox Christianity is thriving after enduring a 70-year period of atheistic Soviet rule. In 1991, just after the collapse of the USSR, about two-thirds of Russians claimed no religious affiliation. Today, 71 percent of Russians identify as Orthodox. One can now see priests giving sermons on television, encounter religious processions in St. Petersburg, and watch citizens lining up for holy water in Moscow. Even Moscow’s Darwin museum features a Christmas tree during the holidays. President Vladimir Putin has encouraged this revival and he has also benefited from it, both at home and abroad. Last year, he explained that Russia’s intervention in the Syrian civil war was designed to protect Christians from the Islamic State. Not only has the Orthodox Church supported this “holy war” but so have some American evangelicals, who are likewise concerned about Christians in the Middle East and praise Putin’s socially conservative policies.

See: https://religionandpolitics.org/2018/10/16/russias-journey-from-orthodoxy-to-atheism-and-back-again/

28. The Sheer Volume of Prayer

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

Let's say that one day you accidentally rip the only decent pair of jeans you own. So you decide to head to the mall to pay a visit to the Gap to buy a new pair. Let's say you enter the mall same as you always do but are immediately approached by a friend who asks if he can borrow $5 for some lunch over at the food court. No sooner do you slip your friend the money and you turn around to discover an old high school classmate staring at you, asking you if you can forgive her for that time she turned you down for a date years ago (and was kind of cruel about it at that). You say, "Sure, I guess so," but no sooner are those words out of your mouth and another acquaintance of yours is in front of you, asking for your advice as to whether or not he should accept the promotion being offered to him at work. And then let's say that this goes on for quite a while with one friend after the next standing in front of you requesting this or that. Finally, after this goes on for an hour or two, you look up to discover that there is now a line of people running the length of the mall, all waiting to ask you for something.

Recently I heard about a videotape that someone made to illustrate what it might be like to be God. The tape runs for just over an hour and it features nothing but one person after the next making a request, asking for advice, seeking direction, requesting money, and so on. Face after face after face appears on the screen, each in a plaintive mode of asking for something. It's curious that Jesus more than once illustrates prayer with images of exasperation. In Luke 11 we have a friend at midnight baying for bread from someone already tucked cozily into bed. A few chapters farther on in Luke we find the parable of the unjust judge who finally gives in to the persistent widow not for any noble reason but just to get her off his back.

It has always struck me as odd that Jesus would use these somewhat negative images to talk about prayer. Surely we don't want to think of God as being exasperated but maybe just maybe Jesus, as the Son of God, knew what it was like to be barraged day and night by an endless line of people asking for advice, money, direction, or whatever! None of us would last very long if my scenario in the mall ever really happened. It is a credit to the almighty power of God that he is able to handle the simultaneous prayers of millions, if not billions, of people all the time.

29. In Good Standing

Illustration

Staff

A lady in the north of England said that every time she got down before God to pray, five bottles of wine came up before her mind. She had taken them wrongfully one time when she was a housekeeper, and had not been able to pray since. She was advised to make restitution.

"But the person is dead," she said.

"Are not some of the heirs living?"

"Yes, a son."

"Then go to that son and pay him back."

"Well," she said, "I want to see the face of God, but I could not think of doing a thing like that. My reputation is at stake." She went away, and came back the next day to ask if it would not do just as well to put that money in the treasury of the Lord.

"No," she was told, "God doesn't want any stolen money. The only thing is to make restitution."

She carried that burden for several days, but finally went into the country, saw that son, made a full confession and offered him a five-pound note. He said he didn't want the money, but she finally persuaded him to take it, and came back with a joy and peace that made her face radiant. She became a magnificent worker for souls, and led many into the light.

My dear friends, get these stumbling stones out of the way. God does not want a man to shout "Hallelujah" who doesn't pay his debts. Many of our prayer meetings are killed by men trying to pray who cannot pray because their lives are not right. Sin builds up a great wall between us and God. A man may stand high in the community and may be a member of some church "in good standing," but the question is, how does he stand in the sight of God? If there is anything wrong in your life, make it right.

30. Parable of the Counterfeit Money

Illustration

"Mother, look what I got," said Jimmy. "A man gave me all these big pieces of money. Now I'm rich. Is it alright if I buy an ice-cream cone for you and me?"

"Let me see that money," said his mother. "I am sorry Jimmy you can't buy anything with this money. It is no longer of any value."

Jimmy said, "You mean it is no good Why? It is even bigger than the money in my bank!"

"It is difficult to tell you Jimmy, but our government didn't make this money and money is not good unless the people that make it stand behind it."

"Gee, that makes me feel bad," said Jimmy. "I thought I was rich."

Learning a proper set of values and backing up one's word with action is an important part of human development. We have noted in public print that some large multi-million dollar business transactions have been sealed with a handclasp.

Jimmy was fooled by the size and the shape of his false money, and adults, too, are often deceived as to the value of stocks and bonds and the value of human activities. Christians learn that the Way to Christ's Kingdom is through His Church and according to His Word and through faith in a Risen Christ. The value of personal faith in God is indicated by how much action backs up the word of the believer. Mankind has great expectancy of those who believe in Christ; and those, who stand at the altar of their Church and vow their allegiance and loyalty in God's service as members, are God's money ready to be spent in Christian causes. Some may be counterfeit in their commitments.

"A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil; for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh. And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?"

31. What Can You Bear?

Illustration

Charles Ryrie

What is fruit? Actually the question ought to be phrased in the plural: What are fruits which a Christian can bear? The N.T. gives several answers to the question.

ONE, a developing Christian character is fruit. If the goal of the Christian life may be stated as Christlikeness, then surely every trait developed in us that reflects His character must be fruit that is very pleasing to Him. Paul describes the fruit of the Spirit in nine terms in Galatians 5:22-23, and Peter urges the development of seven accompaniments to faith in order that we might be fruitful (2 Peter 1:5-8). Two of these terms are common to both lists: love and self-control. The others are joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, virtue, knowledge, endurance, piety, and brotherly love. To show these character traits is to bear fruit in one's life.

TWO, right character will result in right conduct, and as we live a life of good works we produce fruit (Colossians 1:10). This goes hand in hand with increasing in the knowledge of God, for as we learn what pleases Him, our fruitful works become more and more conformed to that knowledge. When Paul expressed how torn he was between the two possibilities of either dying and being with Christ or living on in this life, he said that living on would mean fruitful labor or work (Philippians 1:22). This phrase could mean that (1) his work itself was fruit, or (2) fruit would result from his work. In either case, his life and work were fruit. So may ours be.

THREE, those who come to Christ through our witness are fruit. Paul longed to go to Rome to have some fruit from his ministry there (Romans 1:13), and he characterized the conversion of the household of Stephanas as the first fruits of Achaia (I Corinthians 16:15).

FOUR, we may also bear fruit with our lips by giving praise to God and thankfully confessing His name (Hebrews 13:15). In other words, our lips bear fruit when we offer thankful acknowledgement to the name of God. And this is something we should do continually.

FIVE, we bear fruit when we give money. Paul designated the collection of money for the poorer saints in Jerusalem as fruit (Romans 15:28). Too, when he thanked the Philippians for their financial support of his ministry, he said that their act of giving brought fruit to their account (Philippians 4:17, KJV).

32. How Are We Tempted Today?

Illustration

King Duncan

William Willimon, in his book What's Right with the Church (San Francisco: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1985), tells about leading a Sunday School class that was studying the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness. After careful study and explanation of each of the three temptations, Dr. Willimon asked, "How are we tempted today?" A young salesman was the first to speak. "Temptation is when your boss calls you in, as mine did yesterday, and says, `I'm going to give you a real opportunity. I'm going to give you a bigger sales territory. We believe that you are going places, young man.'

"But I don't want a bigger sales territory," the young salesman told his boss. "I'm already away from home four nights a week. It wouldn't be fair to my wife and daughter."

"Look," his boss replied, "we're asking you to do this for your wife and daughter. Don't you want to be a good father? It takes money to support a family these days. Sure, your little girl doesn't take much money now, but think of the future. Think of her future. I'm only asking you to do this for them," the boss said.

The young man told the class, "Now, that's temptation."

Jesus overcame his first temptation by putting his complete trust in God. That's a good example for us. We're so concerned about "having it all." The wise person trusts that God will provide all that he or she needs.

33. Lent: Giving Up

Illustration

Billy D. Strayhorn

Self Denial is about making a sacrifice that makes a difference, focusing on the Cross and reminding ourselves what Christ gave up for us. Rev. Craig Gates of Jackson Mississippi has a great list of suggestions. He says we should:

GIVE UP grumbling! Instead, "In everything give thanks." Constructive criticism is OK, but "moaning, groaning, and complaining" are not Christian disciplines.

GIVE UP 10 to 15 minutes in bed! Instead, use that time in prayer, Bible study and personal devotion. A few minutes in prayer WILL keep you focused.

GIVE UP looking at other people's worst attributes. Instead concentrate on their best points. We all have faults. It is a lot easier to have people overlook our shortcomings when we overlook theirs first.

GIVE UP speaking unkindly. Instead, let your speech be generous and understanding. It costs so little to say something kind and uplifting or to offer a smile. Why not check that sharp tongue at the door?

GIVE UP your hatred of anyone or anything! Instead, learn the discipline of love. "Love covers a multitude of sins."

GIVE UP your worries and anxieties! They're too heavy for you to carry anyway. Instead, trust God with them. Anxiety is spending emotional energy on something we can do nothing about: like tomorrow! Live today and let God's grace be sufficient.

GIVE UP TV one evening a week! Instead, visit someone who's lonely or sick. There are those who are isolated by illness or age. Why isolate yourself in front of the "tube?" Give someone a precious gift: your time!

GIVE UP buying anything but essentials for yourself! Instead, give the money to God. The money you would spend on the luxuries could help someone meet basic needs. We're called to be stewards of God's riches, not consumers.

GIVE UP judging others by appearances and by the standard of the world! Instead, learn to give up yourself to God. There is only one who has the right to judge, Jesus Christ.

34. The Dollars Are in the Way

Illustration

King Duncan

Henry Ford once asked an associate about his life goals. The man replied that his goal was to make a million dollars. A few days later Ford gave the man a pair of glasses made out of two silver dollars. He told the man to put them on and asked what he could see. "Nothing," the man said. "The dollars are in the way." Ford told him that he wanted to teach him a lesson: If his only goal was dollars, he would miss a host of greater opportunities. He should invest himself in serving others, not simply in making money.

That's a great secret of life that far too few people discover. Money is important. No question about that. But money is only a means by which we reach higher goals. Service to others. Obedience to God. God comes to the rich man and says, "You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?" The answer was clear. The rich man had put his trust in things. Now he was leaving these things behind.

35. Life's Little Fragments

Illustration

Max Lucado

Once there was an old man who lived in a tiny village. Although poor, he was envied by all, for he owned a beautiful white horse. Even the king coveted his treasure. A horse like this had never been seen before such was its splendor, its majesty, its strength.

People offered fabulous prices for the steed, but the old man always refused. "This horse is not a horse to me," he would tell them. "It is a person. How could you sell a person? He is a friend, not a possession. How could you sell a friend?" The man was poor, and the temptation was great. But he never sold the horse.

One morning he found that the horse was not in the stable. All the village came to see him. "You old fool," they scoffed, "we told you that someone would steal your horse. We warned you that you would be robbed. You are so poor. How could you ever hope to protect such a valuable animal? It would have been better to have sold him. You could have gotten whatever price you wanted. No amount would have been too high. Now the horse is gone, and you've been cursed with misfortune."

The old man responded, "Don't speak too quickly. Say only that the horse is not in the stable. That is all we know; the rest is judgment. If I've been cursed or not, how can you know? How can you judge?"

The people contested, "Don't make us out to be fools! We may not be philosophers, but great philosophy is not needed. The simple fact is that your horse is gone, and you are cursed."

The old man spoke again. "All I know is that the stable is empty, and the horse is gone. The rest I don't know. Whether it be a curse or a blessing, I can't say. All we can see is a fragment. Who can say what will come next?"

The people of the village laughed. They thought that the man was crazy. They had always thought he was a fool; if he wasn't, he would have sold the horse and lived off the money. But instead, he was a poor woodcutter, an old man still cutting firewood and dragging it out of the forest and selling it. he lived hand to mouth in the misery of poverty. Now he had proven that he was, indeed, a fool.

After fifteen days, the horse returned. He hadn't been stolen; he had run away into the forest. Not only had he returned, he had brought a dozen wild horses with him. Once again the village people gathered around the woodcutter and spoke. "Old man, you were right, and we were wrong. What we thought was a curse was a blessing. Please forgive us."

The man responded, "Once again, you go too far. Say only that the horse is back. State only that a dozen horses returned with him, but don't judge. How do you know if this is a blessing or not? You see only a fragment. Unless you know the whole story, how can you judge? You read only one page of a book. Can you judge the whole book? You read only one word of a phrase. Can you understand the entire phrase?

"Life is so vast, yet you judge all of life with one page or one word. All you have is a fragment! Don't say that this is a blessing. No one knows. I am content with what I know. I am not perturbed by what I don't."

"Maybe the old man is right," they said to one another. So they said little. But down deep, they knew he was wrong. They knew it was a blessing. Twelve wild horses had returned with one horse. With a little bit of work, the animals could be broken and trained and sold for much money.

The old man had a son, an only son. The young man began to break the wild horses. After a few days, he fell from one of the horses and broke both legs. Once again the villagers gathered around the old man and cast their judgments.

"You were right," they said. "You proved you were right. The dozen horses were not a blessing. They were a curse. Your only son has broken his legs, and now in your old age you have no one to help you. Now you are poorer than ever."

The old man spoke again. "You people are obsessed with judging. Don't go so far. Say only that my son broke his legs. Who knows if it is a blessing or a curse? No one knows. We only have a fragment. Life comes in fragments."

It so happened that a few weeks later, the country engaged in war against a neighboring country. All the young men of the village were required to join the army. Only the son of the old man was excluded, because he was injured. Once again the people gathered around the old man, crying and screaming, because their sons had been taken. There was little chance that they would return. The enemy was strong, and the war would be a losing struggle. They would never see their sons again.

"You were right, old man," they wept. "God knows you were right. This proves it. Your son's accident was a blessing. His legs may be broken, but at least he is with you. Our sons are gone forever."

The old man spoke again. "It is impossible to talk with you. You always draw conclusions. No one knows. Say only this: Your sons had to go to war, and mine did not. No one knows if it is a blessing or a curse. No one is wise enough to know. Only God knows."

36. Accountable to God

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

Winston Churchill was once asked what his most awesome thought was. One would think that he would respond in terms of world politics, or at least British politics. But he said that his most awesome thought was that someday he would have to account to God for his life.

It might take a question like that, and someone to call us to deep reflection about our life, to cause us to think beyond our involvements today: beyond that challenge that we face, beyond the fun that we’re having, beyond the money that we’re making. It may not be a popular thought or even a thought that we’ve ever considered, but all of life says it’s going to be so. Someday we’re going to have to account to God for who we are and what we’ve done.

That’s not something to be fearful of, but something to challenge us.

37. Worship at a Deeper Level

Illustration

Staff

The story is told of a country boy who learned that a circus was coming to town. For many weeks he saved what coins he could, until he had the required fifty cents to pay for admission. On the appointed day he mounted the family mule and rode into town. As he arrived, the parade was just getting under way from the railway station to the circus grounds. The boy stood at the curbside and watched it all go by - the clowns, the animals, and all the rest. As the last of it passed, he suddenly realized that he still had his half-dollar clutched in his hand. He dashed out to a dancing clown and said, "Who do I pay?" The clown said, "I'll take your money." So the boy gave his money to the clown, remounted the mule and rode back home, believing he had seen the circus when all he had seen was just the parade.

Why do I tell this story? Because some folks, sadly, suppose they have gotten all there is from church simply because they have been there. There is more to worship than physical presence. As things are happening during the worship hour, one after another in scheduled order, there is another stream of happening which moves beneath it all. There is a deeper level to this Sunday morning event, a deeper current moving.

At the same time that hymns are being sung, and prayers are being prayed, and sermons are being preached, hearts are reaching out to God and God is moving into life. It is on this personal and deeper level that the experience of worship really takes place. May this be your experience today as we tarry in worship here.

38. A Matter of Excess

Illustration

Larry Powell

Before commenting directly about Mark 6:30-44, allow me to direct your attention to two Old Testament stories.

1. The first story is found in 2 Kings 4:1-7 and concerns the widow of a prophet whose creditors were about to foreclose her outstanding debt. Additionally, her two sons were to be carried away as slaves. Beside herself, the widow cried out to Elisha for help. Elisha asked her if she had anything in the house of value which might be sold to provide money toward the debt. "Only a partially filled jar of oil," she answered. Elisha surprisingly instructed her to go throughout the community collecting jars to be filled with her oil. We are probably safe to assume that if she did not feel rather foolish, there is a good chance her sons did. Here she went, gathering empty jars to hold the little bit of oil which did not nearly fill the jar it was in. When it was all said and done however, there was more oil than jars to put it in, enough money was available to pay the creditor, and the excess was sufficient for the widow and her boys to live on.

2. The other story is also found in 2 Kings and again deals with excess. A man brought Elisha twenty loaves of barley bread and was instructed by the prophet to feed a rather sizeable gathering. The man asked, "How can I feed 100 men with only twenty loaves of bread?" To make a long story short, let’s read the conclusion of the account: "Then he set it before them and they ate and had some left over" (2 Kings 4:42-44).

The account in Mark 6:30-44 bears striking similarities to the incidents mentioned above, especially the latter. For this reason, the feeding of the 5,000 is understood by many to be Jesus’ confirmation that his ministry was in the prophetic tradition of Elisha and under the authority of God. That is one way to interpret the miracle.

Another explanation was offered years ago by the distinguished Christian, Albert Schweitzer, who believed that the feeding of the 5,000 was an "eschatological sacrament" which was in fact a foretaste, or preview, of the greater feast to be held in the approaching Kingdom of God.

Of course, the simplest explanation is that Jesus was addressing a specific need at a specific time, and that that is the whole of it. However, let us not overlook the emphasis that Mark places upon the miracles of Christ as signs of his authority. We would perhaps be well within the mark to accept all three possibilities as legitimate.

I particularly like the quantity measure in the Elisha stories, the feeding of the 5,000 and other incidents throughout the Scriptures. The provisions were not merely sufficient for the immediate need, but always resulted in excess. Surely that must suggest something to us of the mind of God. His grace and love are more than sufficient for our needs.

39. The Healing Power of Touch - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

As Matthew's story begins this morning, Jesus, the great physician, is on his way to make an emergency house call. There was a little girl who was in a grave state and her father implored Jesus to come. We are told that a large crowd of the curious followed Jesus. Some were hoping he would succeed, others that he would fail; most probably got caught up in the excitement of the parade.

In this throng was one woman who was there for quite a different reason. We are told that for twelve years she had been suffering from a bleeding hemorrhage. Some modern scholars have theorized that this was a bleeding cancer. If this were the case she was, of course, beyond all medical help. Mark tell us that she had already been to all of the doctors and she had only gotten worse, and beside that they had taken all her money. Interestingly, Luke, who was a physician, tells this story as well, but he could not bring himself to tell that side of story. Call it professional pride but he is not about to say that she was taken for all her money by a long string of doctors.

How could she get the attention of Jesus? Her problem was of a very personal nature and she did not want to discuss the issue publicly. According to Levitic Law, a woman who was bleeding was considered unclean and under law could touch no one. There were many ancient taboos. She did not want to have to go through the disciples to see Jesus. She wanted the doctor and not the nurse.

She thus devised a plan. Having heard the stories of Jesus' power, she declared: If I but touch the hem of his garment I will be healed." We smile at that and say: How innocent, how naive.

She reached out from the crowd and touched the garment of Jesus. Immediately he stopped, bolted upright, and asked: "Who touched me?" The disciples were taken aback. Was this some kind of rhetorical question? Who touched you? Why master, look around, everyone is touching you. The New English version quotes their words as being: "What is the purpose in asking?"

Jesus replied with one of the most mysterious lines in the Bible. He said: "I felt power flow from me." For years I have been mesmerized with that verse. What exactly happened in that moment? Did the lady drain his battery? It sounds as though he is almost describing a power surge. "I felt power flow from me." Whatever happened the important matter of course is that in the midst of the crowd, Christ felt the touch of a single person. Don't ever say that in the enormity of the cosmos God cannot care about my concerns and me. Not only does God care, he actually solicits our concerns "Come unto me all ye who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you peace."

Daughter, said Jesus (and I might add parenthetically at this point that that is the only recorded time in scripture that Jesus used that term) daughter, your faith has made you well. And, we are told, she was immediately healed. The desperation of her faith thus became the channel that led to her healing. The story is saying there are two kinds of touch:

1. The first being physical touch.
2. The other is spiritual touch.

40. You Can't Inherit Faith

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

Somewhere recently I read this statement: “Most of the 500 wealthiest Americans got their money the old-fashioned way -- they inherited it!”

That may be the case with money, but it is not true with the most important things of life. It’s not true of character. Of course, we are influenced in character by our parents, but our own character is our own doing, by our own choices, the way we choose to live.

We may inherit money, but we do not inherit faith. Someone put it in a catchy line: “God has no grandchildren.”

Faith must be first-hand, personal, appropriated by each person. Too many of us are seeking to live on borrowed faith. The 500 wealthiest Americans may have gotten their wealth the old-fashioned way -- by inheriting it -- but we don’t get character and faith that way. They’re not inherited, they’re claimed, personally, and cultivated.

41. The Parable of the Talents - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

Jesus once told a story about a wealthy landowner who was preparing for a long journey. He called his three servants and divided his money between them, each according to their ability. To one servant he gave five talents, meaning a sum of money, to a second two, and to a third one talent.

Why is life like that? I don't know. We are all equal in the eyes of God. We are all guaranteed equal rights under the Constitution. In an election our votes are all equal. But when it comes to our abilities, we are as different as different can be. God simply did not make us all the same. There are some people who can handle five talents, there are some who can handle only one.

There are some persons who have great intellectual capabilities, and some who do not. There are some who have the ability to project and articulate their thoughts, and there are some who cannot. There are some who have physical prowess and attractive looks, and there are some who do not.

The important thing to remember is that each servant was given something. No one was left idle. You may not be a five talent person, but you have some talent. We all do. And you know something. I think that there are a whole lot more one and two talent people in this world than there are five talent people. Oh, there are some people who seem to have it all, I won't deny

that. But most of us are just one or two talent servants.

Why do we fear to step up and use our one or two talents. Why did the man in Jesus parable chose to do nothing with the one small sum he had been given him?

First, perhaps he feared failure.
Second, perhaps he played the game "if only." If only I had been given the talent of these other two men.
These may be sound reasons but more than likely he did nothing because he thought his one little talent wouldn't make a difference.

42. The Little Orphan Girl

Illustration

Mark Adams

After the first World War the United States gave vast sums of money to the dislocated orphans of Europe, but they still didn’t have enough money to meet the staggering need. In one of the places where they had set up an orphanage with funds from the states, a man came in leading a little girl. He was very thin, obviously suffering from starvation.

She also showed signs of malnutrition, eyes too large, her little abdomen distended, and her thin little legs and arms too small and too thin for her age. The man led her in and said to the person in charge, “I would like you to take in my little girl.”

The official at the desk asked him if she was his daughter and he said, “Yes.” He asked if the mother had been killed in the war and again the man said, “Yes.” The official then said, “We’re very sorry, but our rule here is that only full orphans can receive any help. If one of the parents is living then we can’t take responsibility, because we just don’t have enough room. There are too many full orphans for us to take a half orphan.”

The father looked down at his little girl, and then he turned and said, "You don’t understand. I’m sick. I was in a German prison during the war. I was half starved, and now I can’t work. I can barely stagger around. I brought her down for you to take care of her.”

And again the official said, “We’re sorry sir, but there’s nothing we can do. That’s the rule. We only care for full orphans.”

The father thought a moment and said, “Are you saying that if I were dead, you’d take care of my little girl, feed her, and she could live and have clothing and a home?”

The official replied, “Well, yes, that’s the rule.”

Then the father reached down and pulled his daughter’s thin little body up to himself and hugged her hard and kissed her. Then he put her hand in the hand of the hand of the man at the desk and told him, “I’ll arrange that,” and then he walked out of the room and committed suicide.

Often, we put "rules" and "restrictions" on God's love that we bestow upon others, according to our own preferences and ideals. But fortunately for us, God does not do the same. "For whoever knocks, the door will be opened."

43. Consumerism

Illustration

Brett Blair

Another set of "money-changers" in the church is consumerism. Church members have bought into the concept of consumerism. They don't see themselves as servants, but as customers to be waited upon. Complaints about the church are frequently followed with the expression: "I do pay my money." That is consumerism. It is a way of saying: I am the one who is to be served.

When a church buys into consumerism, they go about meeting the defined needs of the customers, rather than meeting God's need for a redeemed world. Too often people treat church membership as though they are selecting a supermarket rather than a relationship. The call of Christ is not for consumers; it is for disciples. If we treat church members as consumers, then at what point do they quit becoming customers and start becoming missionaries.

To make matters worse too many churches attempt to market themselves and in the process of developing a market strategy the subtle message is released: discipleship and missions are optional. Friends, they are not optional. The call of Christ is: You must loose your life in order to save your life. We dare not fall down before the idol of institutional success.

When consumerism gets into the church, more time is spent on membership and expenditures than God's dream of the Good News proclaimed, justice administered, and inclusiveness and healing accomplished. Discipleship cannot be seen as a church option, alongside volleyball and jazzercise.

Likewise, worship cannot be viewed as a weekly variety show, but an opportunity for us to get in touch with the Transcendent God. And yes, clergy are guilty as well. Too much time is spent encouraging people to think positive about their sin.

44. Spiritual Investment

Illustration

David Beckett

Financial planners will tell you that you don't need to wait until you have a lot of money. You can begin investing even with a little. Some of the principles we are asked to follow might shed some light on our understanding of this parable.

The first principle is to learn about the companies you are considering for investment. For many busy folks this means leaving the research to professional financial managers.
A second principle of investment is to diversify. Don't put all your eggs in one basket. Don't invest all your money in one stock.
A third is to be aware of the risks. Some investments might bring strong returns, but they also might leave you with heavy losses. And the fourth principle of investment is to think long term. Don't be a day trader. Stay in for the long haul.

Being a part of what God is doing in the world is something you and I can do today! We don't have to wait until we have a lot of faith. We don't have to wait until we are stronger in the faith. We don't have to wait until we know God better. We can participate in God's kingdom now! We are called to use the gifts God has given us already.

45. Asking for Help

Illustration

Richard J. Fairchild

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

46. The World of the Prophet

Illustration

James T. Batchelor

What would you do if someone gave you one million dollars and then told you to come back as often as you liked and you could have whatever money you needed whenever you wanted? Just ask and it is yours. What if he told you to tell all your friends and they could also come and have a million dollars? Do you think you would tell your friends? Do you think you would show up regularly to receive more from this very wealthy and very generous person?

What would you think if you told your friends and they had you arrested? What would you think if people said you were an idiot for getting money from this generous person? What if people killed you for telling them about this person who was giving away free money? Would you expect people to accuse you of being narrow minded when you told people that they couldn't get free money from any other person? Would you expect people to say things like, "You know if we get our money every week, we won't really appreciate it?" Would you expect people to hunt down this very wealthy, very generous person and kill him?

Welcome to the world of the prophet. If you were to take these examples and replace the money with forgiveness, you would exactly describe the insanity that faces the prophet, the apostle, and all the messengers of God. God wants to cover us in His gifts of forgiveness, life, and salvation and for some reason, that makes people angry.

47. Giving Guidelines

Illustration

Paul Borthwick

On the corporate level, ethical purity is mandatory if we are to experience the full blessing of God. George Mueller of Bristol, England, a man known for his prayers of faith and his mighty influence on others, set forth seven statements of ethical commitment. How would modern Christian organizations fare under the light of these guidelines, as quoted by Catherine Marshall in Beyond Our Selves?

No funds would ever be solicited. No facts and figures concerning needs were to be revealed by the workers in the orphanage to anyone, except to God in prayer.
No debts would ever be incurred.
No money contributed for a specific purpose would ever be used for another purpose.
All accounts would be audited annually by professional auditors.
No ego-pandering by publication of donor's names, with the amount of their gifts, would be allowed; each donor would be thanked privately.
No "names" of prominent or titled persons would be sought for the board or to advertise the institution.
The success of the institution would be measured not by the numbers served or by the amounts of money taken in, but by God's blessing on the work, which Mueller expected to be in proportion to the time spent in prayer.

48. Zacchaeus - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

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

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

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

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

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

1. Jesus reaches out to the outcast and sinner

2. The most difficult aspect of our Christian faith

49. Our Value in God's Eyes

Illustration

A well-known speaker started off his seminar by holding up a $20 bill. In the room of two hundred, he asked, "Who would like this $20 bill?" Hands started going up. He said, "I am going to give this $20 bill to one of you but first, let me do this." He proceeded to crumple the $20 bill up. He then asked, "Who still wants it?" Still the hands were up in the air. "Well," he replied, "What if I do this?" And he dropped it on the ground and started to grind it into the floor with his shoe. He picked it up, now all crumpled and dirty. "Now who still wants it?" Still the hands went into the air.

"My friends, you have all learned a very valuable lesson. No matter what I did to the money, you still wanted it because it did not decrease in value. It was still worth $20. Many times in our lives, we are dropped, crumpled, and ground into the dirt by the decisions we make and the circumstances that come our way. We feel as though we are worthless. But no matter what has happened or what will happen, you will never lose your value in God's eyes. To God, dirty or clean, crumpled or finely creased, you are always priceless."

50. Give Your Delimma To The Lord

Illustration

Keith Smith

Dr. Charles Stanley, a prominent minister of a large church in Atlanta, tells the story of a time when their church needed two million dollars to relocate to a larger facility. The only problem was they didn't have the money. One day, the board members told Dr. Stanley to get a loan from the bank because the deal sounded good. However, Dr. Stanley told the group that they needed divine direction, so they all packed their gear and took off for a state park for the weekend for a time of prayer. All weekend they prayed earnestly that God would give them direction and help them resolve the problem that they were facing.

When they finally left the park, they still didn't have any clear direction about how to purchase the building. But they were committed to waiting on God. A few days later, Dr. Stanley had a message to call a man He had never met. He lived in another state. The man said that he wanted to help Dr. Stanley's ministry.

Immediately, Dr. Stanley called him back, and the stranger said, "I have had you and your ministry on my mind the past several days. I notice that you never ask for money on the broadcast, and I was wondering if you have any needs."

Dr. Stanley explained the situation about the building and how they needed two million dollars to purchase it. The stranger said, "I think I can handle that." And he gave that church two million dollars. That church had a problem; they gave their problem to Jesus; and their problem was solved.

Showing 1 to 50 of 454 results