Sermon and Worship Resources

Judges 21:1-25 · Wives for the Benjamites

1 The men of Israel had taken an oath at Mizpah: "Not one of us will give his daughter in marriage to a Benjamite."

2 The people went to Bethel, where they sat before God until evening, raising their voices and weeping bitterly. 3 "O LORD , the God of Israel," they cried, "why has this happened to Israel? Why should one tribe be missing from Israel today?"

4 Early the next day the people built an altar and presented burnt offerings and fellowship offerings.

5 Then the Israelites asked, "Who from all the tribes of Israel has failed to assemble before the LORD ?" For they had taken a solemn oath that anyone who failed to assemble before the LORD at Mizpah should certainly be put to death.

6 Now the Israelites grieved for their brothers, the Benjamites. "Today one tribe is cut off from Israel," they said. 7 "How can we provide wives for those who are left, since we have taken an oath by the LORD not to give them any of our daughters in marriage?" 8 Then they asked, "Which one of the tribes of Israel failed to assemble before the LORD at Mizpah?" They discovered that no one from Jabesh Gilead had come to the camp for the assembly. 9 For when they counted the people, they found that none of the people of Jabesh Gilead were there.

10 So the assembly sent twelve thousand fighting men with instructions to go to Jabesh Gilead and put to the sword those living there, including the women and children. 11 "This is what you are to do," they said. "Kill every male and every woman who is not a virgin." 12 They found among the people living in Jabesh Gilead four hundred young women who had never slept with a man, and they took them to the camp at Shiloh in Canaan.

13 Then the whole assembly sent an offer of peace to the Benjamites at the rock of Rimmon. 14 So the Benjamites returned at that time and were given the women of Jabesh Gilead who had been spared. But there were not enough for all of them.

15 The people grieved for Benjamin, because the LORD had made a gap in the tribes of Israel. 16 And the elders of the assembly said, "With the women of Benjamin destroyed, how shall we provide wives for the men who are left? 17 The Benjamite survivors must have heirs," they said, "so that a tribe of Israel will not be wiped out. 18 We can't give them our daughters as wives, since we Israelites have taken this oath: 'Cursed be anyone who gives a wife to a Benjamite.' 19 But look, there is the annual festival of the LORD in Shiloh, to the north of Bethel, and east of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem, and to the south of Lebonah."

20 So they instructed the Benjamites, saying, "Go and hide in the vineyards 21 and watch. When the girls of Shiloh come out to join in the dancing, then rush from the vineyards and each of you seize a wife from the girls of Shiloh and go to the land of Benjamin. 22 When their fathers or brothers complain to us, we will say to them, 'Do us a kindness by helping them, because we did not get wives for them during the war, and you are innocent, since you did not give your daughters to them.' "

23 So that is what the Benjamites did. While the girls were dancing, each man caught one and carried her off to be his wife. Then they returned to their inheritance and rebuilt the towns and settled in them.

24 At that time the Israelites left that place and went home to their tribes and clans, each to his own inheritance.

25 In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit.

Who's In Charge Here

Judges 21:24-25

Sermon
by James Merritt

I want to juxtapose two quotes to you: one you will not be familiar with; one you will be very familiar with. Here is the first quote, given by historian Christopher Dawson, over thirty years ago:

We have entered a new phase of culture we may call it the Age of the Cinema in which the most amazing perfection of scientific technique is being devoted to purely ephemeral objects, without any consideration of their ultimate justification. It seems as though a new society [is] arising, which will acknowledge no hierarchy of values, no intellectual authority, and no social or religious tradition, but which will live for the moment in a chaos of pure sensation.[1]

Now compare that quote with this very familiar quote: "Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it."[2] I want us to go back to the past, and then we will come back to the future. I want us to go back 3,000 years to a super power, the Nation of Israel.

If you lived in that day as a citizen of that nation, and moved in that society, you would have seen several things.

You would have seen moral confusion. Verse 25 speaks volumes and gives us an ocean full of truth about life in those days. "In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes." Right and wrong was up for grabs; truth had been thrown out the window; morality and immorality had become amorally. Every person had become his own yardstick, and every yardstick was a different length.

Imagine a man who gets tired of a yardstick being 36 inches long, and decides to create a new yardstick 15 inches long. He breaks it at the 15 inch mark, and then boasts to all of his neighbors that a yard is no longer what it used to be; and says as far as he is concerned, it is now 15 inches. You will have some idea of the type of society in which these words were written.

You would have also seen political chaos. Someone has said that a lot people believe in law and order, as long as they can lay down the law and give all the orders.

That was the situation 3,000 years ago. The police had become afraid of the criminals. There was no respect for the law. The political process had completely broken down. Guilty criminals were being acquitted because there was no single standard of justice to which everyone adhered.

Thirdly, you would have seen social confrontation. Neighborhoods had become war zones. When one person's right becomes another person's wrong, conflict becomes inevitable. God had been totally taken out of the equation. When God goes, anything goes, and when anything goes, everything goes.

If you had come along in that day and asked the question, "Who's in charge here?" the answer would have been no one. Because when everyone is in charge, no one is in charge.

It reminds me of the story of a state patrol officer who came up on a terrible accident; a car had run into a tree. There were four people in the car, unconscious and badly injured; a man and woman in the front seat, and two men in the back. There was a monkey hiding behind the tree. The police officer walked up to the monkey and said, "Do you know what happened here?" The monkey nodded his head.

The officer pointed to the man in the front seat, and said, "What was he doing?" The monkey held up his hand to his mouth as if he were drinking. The man pointed to the woman and said, "What was she doing?" The monkey began to flap his fingers together to show that she was talking.

He looked at the two men in the back seat and said, "What were they doing?" The monkey began to move his fists together to show they were fighting. The police officer looked at the monkey and said, "And what were you doing?" The monkey grabbed an imaginary steering wheel to show he was doing the driving.

Now when you have monkeys behind the steering wheel, a crash is inevitable. How did their society get to this point?

Well, first of all, they rejected biblical revelation. They rejected the word of God, and they rejected the God of the word. That was the root of the entire problem. The great Russian philosopher, Dostoevski, once wrote, "If God did not exist, everything would be permitted."[3]

One of the charges that God brought against the nation of Israel, through the prophet Hosea, is this: "I have written for him the great things of My law, but they were considered a strange thing." (Hosea 8:12) A stranger was not at home in Israel. He had no permanent dwelling place there. He was allowed to live there, but he had no voice in the land.

Being a stranger, he had no "say so" in the affairs of Israel. He possessed no vote. Whatever opinion he might have about important decisions was totally ignored. God said, "You have treated my word as a stranger." It has no voice in daily affairs; it cast no vote; when important decisions are made the Word of God is ignored.[4] That was the problem then and it is the problem now.

They rejected moral regulation. Sin that would slink down the back alley, now strutted up the main street. Everything was relative. Right and wrong was a private matter. Character and conviction were posse. The only "right" was a person's rights.

They rejected political rejuvenation. Because everybody was in charge, nobody was in charge. Because nobody was in charge, leadership, the one ingredient necessary to a great nation, was missing.

They rejected spiritual revitalization. Because family values and traditional morals were disappearing, the culture was dissipating, the home was dissolving, society was disintegrating.

The root problem, in short, was a rejection of authority. Now at this point let me give you a working definition of authority that we will revise at the end of this message. Authority is the God-given right for one person to make choices for another person.

Now when it comes to authority, you only have two choices: submission or rebellion. We are living in an age of open rebellion to all authority.

We see rebellion in the media. Movies now desecrate deity, elevate adultery, perpetrate immorality, venerate perversity.

We see rebellion in music. "Gangsta rap" glorifies rape, dignifies police killing, magnifies the use and abuse of women; it mocks parents, home, and family; planting in the hearts of our teenagers the seeds of destructive rebellion.

We see rebellion in morals. Fornication has become "co-habitation." Sodomy has become "a gay lifestyle." Perversity and obscenity is now defended in the name of "artistic freedom."

The bottom line of the society in which we live, is this: "Nobody is going to tell me what to do, and if it feels good I am going to do it." Social responsibilities have been replaced by personal rights. So I want to approach this subject of authority from three viewpoints:

I. The Reality of Authority

God has given us spheres of authority in three areas:

a. Politically

Paul said in I Tim. 2:1-2, "Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence." Not every authority is always God-guided, but every authority is always God-given.

The government better be careful in over-emphasizing the separation of "church and state" so it gets to the point of separating "God from government." Government may not understand it, but God is government's best friend. Paul said in Romans 13:1ff:

"Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience' sake. For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God's ministers attending continually to this very thing. Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor." (Romans 13:1-7)

b. Domestically

God has set up a standard of authority in the home, both for husband and wife, and parent and child. Eph. 5:22-23 says:

"Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body."

Men are to take the leadership role in the home. Anything with two heads is dead, anything with no head is a freak, and the husband is to be the head of the home, and the wife is to submit to her husband's loving leadership.

Likewise, for parent and child Paul plainly says:

"Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right." (Eph. 6:1)

c. Spiritually

In the church God has also set up a standard of authority. It flows from heaven down to the pew. Number one: the church is to be under the authority of the Son of God. When it comes to authority, Jesus is the source and strength of all authority. He said in Mt. 28:18, "Then Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth." Col. 1:18 also says, "And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence."

The church is to submit to the authority of the Word of God:

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." (II Tim. 3:16-17)

Now when we talk about the authority of the pastor, do not misunderstand this to in anyway conflict with the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers. We are all priests, but there is only one pastor. The staff is simply an extension of the pastor's ministry. Paul said, you are to follow my example, even as I follow the example of Christ.

Now here is a principle concerning authority in any area that you need to remember. If you cannot properly relate to the authority that God has placed over you, you cannot properly relate to the God that has placed that authority over you. If you reject one, you reject the other. "He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me." (Lk. 10:16)

II. The Resistance to Authority

The root of all of our problems we see today goes back to the rebellion against God's authority in the Garden of Eden. Adam and Eve had only one word of authority; that word was from God, and that word said this: "Do not eat of the forbidden fruit of the tree of life."

But they rebelled against that authority. They rejected the word of God, and they rejected the God of the word, and we have been paying for it ever since.

What you see from Genesis chapter 3 on, is the result of authority that is rejected. You see the same results in our society today.

a. Politically, There Will Be Anarchy

When authority breaks down, and the consequences of breaking authority cease to exist, mark it down, you are on your way to chaos. We used to say, "crime doesn't pay." But the truth of the matter is, in the culture in which we live today those who abuse and despise authority, are paid very well indeed.

Senator Phil Gramm recently wrote for the New York Times an article where he cited a study from Texas A&M that calculated the amount of time that a person committing a crime in 1990 could reasonably expect to spend in prison. The conclusions were shocking. On average:

A person committing murder can expect to spend 1.8 years in prison;
The expected punishment for rape is 60 days;
Robbery will bring an average prison time of 23 days;
A person convicted of arson can expect 6.7 days;
Aggravated assault averages 6.4 days;
A person stealing a car can reasonably expect to spend a day and a half in jail.[5]

Steve Farrar, having seen these statistics, makes this conclusion:

"With the breakdown of authority that began in our homes and spread to our schools and courts, it becomes clear that crime does pay, and it pays very well. America is quickly becoming a country that is sending a message to scores of young people, and the message is this:

Authority is not important;
You can willfully break authority (although we would prefer that you don't;
If you choose to break authority, and punishment cannot be avoided, we will make it as easy on you as we possibly can.[6]

That's the anarchy that we experience.

b. Domestically There Will Be Anxiety

God intended for the home to be the training ground to live in society at large. When authority breaks down in the home, it will inevitably break down in society. If a child is not taught to respect his father in the living room, he will then learn not to respect the police officer on the street, the principal in the classroom, or the judge in the courtroom.

I want you to listen to this quote by Charles Swindoll. He is speaking about deliberate disobedience from young people; willful defiance. He says:

"Teachers see it in today's classrooms, merchants face it in their shops, cops encounter it on a daily basis, youth workers in churches across America are forever forced to deal with it. Why? Because parents won't. The permissiveness found in homes today is downright disgusting. It is not uncommon to find child-centered homes where children intimidate their parents; afraid to be strong, hesitant to stand firm against the determined will of their youngster; parents create a domestic setting that becomes unbearable.[7]

That confusion, conflict, and chaos spills out into society, the school, the church, and the courtroom.

c. Spiritually, There Will Be Apostasy

Churches that reject authority will eventually reject, first of all, the Son of God. We have churches today who deny the deity of Jesus, the miracles of Jesus, the resurrection of Jesus, the uniqueness of Jesus.

They then reject the word of God. So today we have churches that ordain homosexuals as pastors, priests, and deacons. Recently, there was a Baptist church in Austin, Texas that was dis-fellowshipped from an association because they ordained a homosexual as a deacon, knowing he was living in a long-term relationship with another man.

They then reject the man of God. Pastors today are under constant attack. They preach too long, they preach too hard, they preach too straight, they are too aggressive, they are too evangelistic, they are growing the church too quickly. So many pastors today are under siege. Such are the fruits are the resistance to authority.

III. The Reception of Authority

When we get under God-ordained authority, the results will be nothing short of magnificent.

a. There Will Be Harmony Politically

Proverbs 29:2 says, "When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; but when a wicked man rules, the people groan."

b. There Will Be Happiness Domestically

Dr. Stanley Coopersmith, Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of California, studied 1,738 normal middle-class boys and their families beginning in the pre-adolescent period, and following them through to young manhood.

After identifying those boys having the highest self esteem, he compared their homes and childhood influences with those having a lower sense of self-worth. He found three important characteristics which distinguish them: the high esteem children were clearly more loved and appreciated at home than were the low esteem boys. The parental love was deep and genuine; not just an empty display of words. The boys knew they were the object of pride and interest, increasing their own sense of self-worth.

The high esteem group came from homes where parents had been significantly more strict in their approach to discipline. By contrast, the parents of the low esteem group had created insecurity and dependence by their permissiveness. Their children are more likely to feel that the rules were not enforced without discipline, because no one cared enough to get involved (if you are left without discipline, then you are illegitimate children and not sons).

Furthermore, the most successful and independent young men, during the later period of the study, were found to have come from homes that demanded the strictest accountability and responsibility. And as could have been predicted, the family ties remained the strongest not in the wishy-washy homes but in the homes where discipline and self-control had been a way of life.

The homes of the high esteem group were also characterized by democracy and openness. Once the boundaries for behavior were established, there was freedom for individual personalities to go undeveloped. The boys could express themselves without fear of ridicule, and the overall atmosphere was marked by acceptance and emotional safety.[8]

c. There Will Holiness Spiritually

Formerly the pastor is the leader of the church, but functionally three things must be in place if the pastor is to lead. There must be the standard of the word of the God, the steering of the Spirit of God, and the support of the people of God. If any, or all, of those things are missing, a pastor may lead, but nobody will follow.

Having said all of this, let me now give you my final definition of authority. Authority is God's right to lovingly guard and guide our lives by means of established authorities he has placed over our lives.

What is God's purpose of authority? Let me give you three as I close. First of all, submission to authority spiritually grows you. When the Lord Jesus got under the authority of his mother and his father, we read in Luke 2:52 that he "increased in wisdom and statute and in favor with God and men.

Submission to authority also spiritually guards you. The essence of submission is not "getting under the domination of authority, but rather getting under the protection of authority." Authority, as Bill Gothard puts it, is like an "umbrella of protection." When you get out from under it, you expose yourselves to unnecessary temptations. That's why the Bible compares rebellion to witchcraft. "Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft." (I Sam. 15:23) When you get out from under the umbrella of God's authority, you subject yourselves to the power of the devil.

Submission to authority also spiritually guides you. God has placed those in authority over us to guide us and to keep us from making mistakes and experiencing heartache we do not need to experience. So I hope and pray you can look at your life, and when the question is asked, "Who's in charge here?" you can answer "God, and whomever or whatever He has placed in authority over me."

[1] Vincent Ryan Ruggiero, Warning: Nonsense is Destroying America, p. 205.

[2]Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, Sixteenth Edition, p. 588.

[3] Irwin lutzer, Exploding the Myths that Could Destroy America, p. 20.

[4] Ronald Dunn, Praying for Others, p. 104.

[5] Phil Gramm, "Don't Let Judges Set Crooks Free," New York Times, 8 July, 1993, A13.

[6] Steve Farrar, Standing Tall, p. 24.

[7] Charles Swindoll, Growing Wise in Family Life, p. 116.

[8] Chuck Swindoll, Growing Wise in Family Life, p. 82.

Collected Sermons, by James Merritt

Overview and Insights · Killing One Another (20:1–21:25)

The other tribes of Israel descend on Benjamin and virtually destroy the entire tribe (just like they were supposed to do to the Canaanites, but didn’t) (20:1–48). In Judges 21 the people of Israel then feel remorse for the loss of Benjamin, but since they have taken an oath (another dumb oath) not to intermarry with the Benjaminites, they do not see any way to help re-establish that decimated tribe. Eventually they concoct a way for the Benjaminites to steal wives from a worship festival in Shiloh (ironically a community that was apparently worshiping the Lord properly). The book of Judges then ends with the repeated phrase that points to the governing chaos: “In those days there was no king in Israel; all the people did what was right in their own eyes” (18:1; 19:1; 21:25 NRSV).

So the en…

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Judges 21:1-25 · Wives for the Benjamites

1 The men of Israel had taken an oath at Mizpah: "Not one of us will give his daughter in marriage to a Benjamite."

4 Early the next day the people built an altar and presented burnt offerings and fellowship offerings.

24 At that time the Israelites left that place and went home to their tribes and clans, each to his own inheritance.

25 In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit.

Commentary · Wives for the Benjamites

A sign that the victory against Benjamin is not all it appears is that what follows is not celebration but nationwide mourning as the Israelites realize belatedly that a tribe among them is on the verge of disappearing (21:1–3). But instead of acknowledging their responsibility in the matter, Israel actually tries to put the blame on the Lord (20:3).

The solutions Israel comes up with to repopulate Benjamin (21:4–24) are highly ironic. Faced with the challenge of finding women for the six hundred Benjamites left without violating the oath they swore earlier not to give them their daughters in marriage, the Israelites inquire if any among them has failed to participate in the war with Benjamin. Discovering that the town of Jabesh Gilead has not participated, the assembly then sends warriors to the town to carry out their earlier oath to put to death any community not participating in the war. Only, the warriors are instructed to spare all the virgins so that they can be given to the Benjamites as wives.

But that still leaves them two hundred virgins short. Knowing that young women go out dancing at an annual festival to the Lord at Shiloh, the elders tell the remaining Benjamites to hide at the vineyard and to each abduct a young woman when they come out dancing. This way, since the parents did not willingly give their daughters to them in marriage, their collective oath will not be violated. The Benjamites then go and do accordingly.

The irony is that the war against Benjamin initially took place to avenge the raping to death of one woman: the Levite’s concubine. But by killing off an entire Israelite town to obtain virgins and by allowing the forcible abduction of young women at Shiloh, the Israelites have essentially sanctioned what amounts to the rape of six hundred young women. The remedy is thus far worse than the crime it sought to rectify. It is no wonder, then, that as the book comes to a close, the refrain “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as they saw fit” appears yet once more to sum up the era of the judges (21:25). Because this was an era when the Lord was not honored as king, everyone ended up doing as they saw fit.

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

Israel Preserved Intact: Just when it looked like one crisis was averted, another came to light. It is, however, not surprising, for that is how it is when chaos prevails, when “what is right in a person’s eyes, he/she does” (21:25). At the end of the book of Judges, the Israelites do not seem to be able to extricate themselves from the miry bog that they have gotten themselves into. Though they appear to call out to God for help, they still rely on their own absurd solutions that only make matters worse. We will see in this chapter that the same people who fought a holy war because some Gibeahite men kidnapped an Israelite woman and ravished her until she died, themselves murdered all of the women of Benjamin and all the married women of Jabesh Gilead, not to mention having kidnapped four hundred unmarried women from there and masterminded the kidnapping of two hundred girls from Shiloh. So who was the bad and who was the good? Again, if we find it difficult to decide, it is because they all were the bad. And the grace of the story, here and in all of the book of Judges, is that God—the supreme Judge and King (8:23; 11:27)—saved Israel from self-inflicted extinction.

21:1–4 While dramatic tension eases at the end of Judges 20, it builds up again immediately at the beginning of Judges 21. We are first informed of an incident that took place before the war began and has now come back to haunt Israel: The men of Israel had taken an oath. These words are disquieting if not frightening, for they recall another oath taken before holy war, by a judge named Jephthah (11:30–31), an oath that obliged him to sacrifice his only daughter in return for victory over the enemy. This story is both like Jephthah’s and not like it. Like Jephthah’s vow, it was impossible to undo; but unlike Jephthah, who “did to [his daughter] as he had vowed” (11:39), the Israelites found a way around their vow. But their way around turned out to be much more destructive, in terms of scope, than Jephthah’s vow.

With a little distance from the frenzied heat of battle, the Israelites began to question the wisdom of their oath not to give any of their daughters in marriage to a Benjamite. Passion had given way to compassion; they realized that if they honored their vow, Benjamin would die out with the death of the six hundred survivors. In their consternation, they cried out to the Lord (vv. 2–4). Although it is not stated explicitly, the text implies that they blamed God for what had happened; they did not ask for help but only expressed in very strong terms (weeping bitterly) their grief over the sure loss of one tribe from Israel. This was neither the first time nor the last time people would cry out to God with the question Why? In Israel’s case, we know the answer that they could not seem to see. Deception and confusion go hand in hand with chaos.

21:5–9 Significantly, God remained silent. But no matter, the Israelites came up with their own solution. They remembered a second oath—literally “the great big oath” (Hb.)—they had vowed before the war: anyone who failed to assemble before the LORD at Mizpah should certainly be put to death. The psychological gymnastics of this passage would be humorous if they were not so tragically universal. They weighed the vows according to first and second most important, and of course “the bigger one” was deemed more important, especially since a group had not shown up, the men of Jabesh Gilead.

Why had they not joined the other Israelites in the holy war against Benjamin? There appears to have been a special relationship between Benjamin and Jabesh Gilead that may have been based on their having a common maternal ancestor, Rachel (Gen. 30:23–24; 35:18). Their special relationship is demonstrated in stories about Saul, a Benjamite and first king of Israel (1 Sam 11:1–11; 31:11–13; 2 Sam. 2:4–7). The relationship was so strong that we might speculate that Saul’s maternal ancestor may have come from Jabesh-Gilead.

21:10–14 Satisfied with the solution, the assembly dispatches twelve thousand soldiers to carry out herem against Jabesh Gilead. They kill every male and every woman who is not a virgin. Every woman who is a virgin (four hundred women) they take to the camp at Shiloh in Canaan. The scene closes with representatives of the tribal assembly meeting with the Benjamites to offer them shalom—plus four hundred wives. The tragedy is staggering: genocide of almost an entire clan to replace wives that had just been destroyed, all that so a tribe would not be wiped out? Where is the shalom in this? It looks more like chaos!

21:15–17 The solution was good, but not good enough. The Israelites were able to pick up only four hundred virgins from Jabesh Gilead (v. 14b). This time they did not cry out to the Lord, but they grieved for Benjamin, because the LORD had made a gap in the tribes of Israel (v. 15). They clearly attributed the situation to the Lord. So what to do, so that a tribe of Israel will not be wiped out (v. 17)? Verses 15 and 17 form an inclusio that frames the statement of the problem, which was how to provide two hundred more wives for the Benjamites. The gravity of the crisis is communicated by the fourfold repetition of the phrase (with minor variation), here and in verses 3 and 6, that a tribe in Israel would not be obliterated. In accordance with Hebrew narrative convention, the repetitions with variation each time serve to underscore the issue of Israel’s continual existence as a whole (salem) people.

21:18–24 The Israelites were essentially back to square one, or at least square two. They as much as declare this by restating the problem: How can Israel be preserved intact if one tribe cannot continue because of our vow not to give our daughters to Benjamites? The solution was not long in coming. They instructed the Benjamites to hide in the vineyards at the annual festival of the LORD in Shiloh, and at the right time to rush from the vineyards and each man grab (NIV: seize; cf. 19:25, 29) a wife from the girls who were dancing in celebration and thanksgiving to the Lord. Then they were to take them off to the land of Benjamin (vv. 20–21). This solution yielded them two hundred wives, just what was needed.

The assembly knew that this solution was not kosher, so they also informed the Benjamites what the assembly would say when the girls’ fathers or brothers disputed their right to do this. They suggested they look the other way because the Benjamites were in dire straits; they did not get wives for them during the war. Moreover, they could not be accused of breaking the oath, because technically they (Hb. emphatic) did not give their daughters to them. The two hundred Benjamites did as they were told. They all caught wives . . . and carried them off . . . and rebuilt their towns. Likewise, the Israelites . . . went home . . . each to his own inheritance—and everyone lived happily ever after.

21:25 The story could have ended there. But it did not. The narrator, who has stood in the shadows during these last events, now moves into the spotlight. He has the last word. He solemnly speaks: In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit.

Additional Notes

21:1 The men of Israel had taken an oath: This was an absurd oath, as likewise was the solution they concocted. H. J. M. Nouwen (Show Me the Way: Readings for Each Day of Lent [New York: Crossroad, 1994], p. 74) notes that the word “absurd” is related to “the Latin word surdus, which means ‘deaf,’ ” while the word “obedient” comes from the Latin word audire, which means “listening.” He comments: “A spiritual discipline is necessary in order to move slowly from an absurd to an obedient life, from a life filled with noisy worries to a life in which there is some free inner space were we can listen to our God and follow his guidance. Jesus’ life was a life of obedience. He was always listening to the Father, always attentive to his voice, always alert for his directions.” This remarkably parallels the Hb. concept of Shema, “Hear, O Israel.” Regarding the kidnapped women of Shiloh, P. Trible (Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984], p. 83) comments, “The kidnapped women were as good as raped also.” This is not to justify what the men of Gibeah did or to minimize it, but only to point out how low the downward spiral has reached by this point.

21:3 O LORD, the God of Israel . . . why has this happened to Israel? This all too accurately reflects the human propensity for denial, which goes back to the garden of Eden story and causes people to blame God for everything, from natural disasters to children dying of starvation. The classic expression of blaming God for what humans in freedom have chosen is Isa. 63:17: “Why, O LORD, do you make us wander from your ways and harden our hearts so we do not revere you?”

Why should one tribe be missing from Israel today? That the preservation of all Israel was critical is indicated in the threefold reference to Israel in v. 3.

21:9 They discovered that no one from Jabesh Gilead had come to the . . . assembly: This sounds remarkably similar to the reproof in the Song of Deborah, specifically directed against Reuben, Gilead (Judg. 5:17), Dan, and Asher. This was pointed out to me in a private correspondence from R. Hubbard.

21:12 They took them to the camp at Shiloh in Canaan: The specification that Shiloh was in Canaan continues to interest interpreters. Boling (Judges, p. 292) believes that the reference to Canaan points to the fact that the story was very early, as early as, if not earlier than, the material at the beginning of the book of Judges, where references to Canaan appear more frequently. Furthermore, he suggests that “by allowing the notice about the location to stand intact, the late redactor signals the irony of the situation. Conditions in the land, after all was said and done, had not changed very much.”

21:23 Each man caught one and carried her off to be his wife: There is great irony here, because the Hb. expression for “to marry” is “to take a wife.” In this context, it takes on new meaning; for that is exactly what the Benjamites were instructed to do.

Insight: The Story of Judges

The story of Judges leads into the story of Samuel and Saul and most importantly David; and its author thus prepares his audience for the personalities and events that follow. Places such as Dan, Shiloh, Ramah, Mizpah, Bethel, Gibeah, and Jerusalem will again serve as settings for the continuing saga of Israel. It is striking that quite a number of the key places and personalities, especially in these final chapters, relate closely to the period of Saul’s leadership. Some scholars have suggested that this is precisely what was intended by the author of Judges, that he intentionally told the story of Benjamin’s (more specifically, Gibeah’s) atrocities in order to undercut Saul’s leadership and to thus promote the ascendency of the Davidic dynasty.

Be that as it may, three theological truths are unmistakably evident in the overall presentation of this period in Israel’s history. One is the terrible consequences of peoples’ turning their backs on God and their covenantal commitments. The second is that in spite of human failing and willful rebellion, God is gracious. Even the fact that there was a Samuel or a Saul or a David, that God had not wiped out all the tribes of Israel by the end of the period of the judges, is a miracle that must not be overlooked or taken lightly. All of which points to a third unmistakable theological truth, that God is sovereign. In spite of Israel’s repeated failure to live up to its covenant commitments, which led them down the path to chaos rather than to shalom, God, nevertheless and in spite of Israel, brought good out of it all. Chaos led to destruction and exile—but not death. Even out of exile, a new Israel was formed, one which had studied and learned the lessons from their history, and returned to the Lord. These then returned to the Land with a vision of a world ordered by the Lord God of Israel, when not only would the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob experience shalom and sedaqa, but through their witness, the Lord’s shalom and sedaqa would reach to the ends of the earth (Isa. 43:10; 45:22; 49:6). Of course, human nature being what it is, good resolve was not always realized. There continued to be ups and downs along the way. But even so, the Lord’s covenant love compelled him to continue to pursue his beloved, to “speak to her heart” and to offer his shalom to those, both far and near (Isa. 57:19), who would receive it.

Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by Cheryl A. Brown, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Altar

Altars were places of sacrifice and worship constructed of various materials. They could be either temporary or permanent. Some altars were in the open air; others were set apart in a holy place. They could symbolize either God’s presence and protection or false worship that would lead to God’s judgment.

Benjamin

The youngest son of Jacob and Rachel. Rachel died en route to Ephrath (Bethlehem) while giving birth to Benjamin (Gen. 35:18). Before she died, Rachel named her son “Ben-Oni,” meaning “son of my sorrow.” Jacob later renamed him “Benjamin,” meaning “son of my right hand.” Benjamin is the youngest of Joseph’s eleven brothers (35:22 26), and Joseph specifically requested to see him when the other brothers journeyed without him to Egypt to buy grain during a famine (42:1–16). See also Benjamin, Tribe of.

Bethel

Bethel’s situation and importance are explained by its copious springs and its location at the intersection of major ancient highways, the north-south mountain road and the east-west road from Jericho to the coastal plain.

The first mention of Bethel in the Bible is in Gen. 12:8, where Abram camped “east of Bethel” on his first entry into the promised land. He camped there again on his return from a stay in Egypt (13:3). On the first occasion Abram erected “an altar to the Lord.” When Abram returned to that spot, he “called on the name of the Lord.”

It was Jacob who gave it the name “Bethel,” meaning “house of God,” due to the dream he received in that location. In the dream he saw a ladder reaching to heaven, and God spoke to him (28:10 19). Its former name was Luz. God later appeared in Mesopotamia and spoke to Jacob, identifying himself as “the God of Bethel,” instructing him to return to his native land. The title taken by God implied that God would be faithful to his earlier promise to bring Jacob back to his land (31:13). Later God specifically instructed Jacob to settle in Bethel (35:1–6). Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died in Bethel and was buried there (35:8). God appeared to Jacob a second time in Bethel and spoke to him, reiterating the promise to give him the land of Canaan (35:9–15; cf. 28:13). All God’s dealings with Jacob are connected to the theophanies and divine promises associated with Bethel.

Bethel is mentioned a number of times in the account of Joshua’s capture of Ai, a city that lay to the east of Bethel (Josh. 7). The king of Bethel is listed among the kings defeated by Joshua (12:16). Under Joshua, the city was apportioned to Benjamin (18:13, 22), but the Canaanites repopulated it after the near extinction of the tribe of Benjamin (Judg. 20–21). Bethel was reconquered by the house of Joseph and incorporated into Ephraimite territory (Judg. 1:22–25; 1 Chron. 7:28), and later it became a fortress on its southern tribal border. Deborah held court between Ramah and Bethel (Judg. 4:5). Under the judgeship of Samuel, Bethel was one of his regular stops in his yearly circuit (1 Sam. 7:16). It continued throughout this period to be a sanctuary where offerings were made (see 1 Sam. 10:3).

This long-term cultic association explains the choice of Bethel as one of the two chief sanctuaries of the northern kingdom, the other center being in Dan. Jeroboam I built a royal shrine at Bethel to rival Jerusalem and to prevent the Israelites from drifting back to the Davidic dynasty (1 Kings 12:26–33). The prophet Ahijah’s criticism of Jeroboam’s actions were not due to Ahijah’s commitment to a central sanctuary at Jerusalem (14:1–16) but rather arose from the use of bull images (golden calves). This was not an innocent move by Jeroboam, returning to pre-Jerusalem and more ancient cultic symbols. This became known as the chief sin of Jeroboam son of Nebat. It tainted the northern kingdom (see 2 Kings 10:29) and eventually led to that kingdom’s judgment by God at the hands of the Assyrians (2 Kings 17:21–23).

The southern king Abijah captured Bethel from Israel in the latter part of Jeroboam’s reign (2 Chron. 13:19), but then it later returned to northern control. The unnamed “man of God” in 1 Kings 13 predicted the later destruction of the Bethel altar by King Josiah (1 Kings 13:1–3), a prediction subsequently fulfilled (2 Kings 23:4, 15–18). Bethel was visited by Elijah before his translation to heaven (2 Kings 2:2–4), and a company of prophets dwelt there. Elisha revisited Bethel after his master’s translation and cursed the forty-two youths who insulted him (2 Kings 2:23–25).

Hosea condemned the great wickedness of Bethel, presumably because of the false worship that went on there (Hos. 10:15), but more positively, he recalled that this was the location where God had talked with the patriarch Jacob (12:4). Jeremiah also explained the sad fate of Israel to be a result of their trust in Bethel (Jer. 48:13). Amos, in his condemnation of the worship system of the northern kingdom, ironically called to the people, “Go to Bethel and sin” (Amos 4:4). Later he dropped the irony and spoke plainly: “Do not seek Bethel” (5:5), predicting its destruction (5:6; cf. 3:14). It was in Bethel that Amos was criticized by the head priest Amaziah (7:10–17) and was told to no longer prophesy there because it was “the king’s sanctuary.”

The city was destroyed by the Assyrians about the time of their capture of Samaria (722 BC), but the shrine was revived in the form of a syncretistic cult at the close of the Assyrian period by the foreign peoples deported to the area (2 Kings 17:24–41). Some descendants of the inhabitants of Bethel were among those who returned from Babylonian exile in the first great caravan (Ezra 2:28; Neh. 7:32), and these Benjamite returnees resettled in their hometown (Neh. 11:31). Bethel prospered in the Hellenistic and Roman periods.

Camp

Temporary homes for seminomadic peoples as well as military personnel.

After the exodus and during the wilderness journeys, the Israelites resided in this type of settlement (Exod. 14:2, 9; Num. 33; Deut. 2:14 15). Moses led the Israelites out of the camp to meet with God at Sinai (Exod. 19:16–17).

Each tribe had its own camp (Num. 2). Because of the presence of God in its midst, Israel’s camp was to be holy. Leviticus and Deuteronomy contain laws regulating camp life (Lev. 14:3, 8; Deut. 23:10–11). Any unclean person or thing was to be put outside the encampment (Num. 5:1–4; Deut. 23:14). The angel of the Lord encamped around them (Ps. 34:7). The Israelite army encamped at numerous places during the conquest of Canaan (Josh. 4:19) and the monarchical period (1 Sam. 29:1).

The NT uses the Greek term parembolē to refer to the Israelite camp where animals sacrificed as sin offerings were “burned outside the camp” (Heb. 13:11–13). Since Jesus suffered outside the gate as a sacrifice for us, believers are called to join him outside the camp, “bearing the disgrace he bore.” Revelation 20:9 speaks of “the camp of God’s people.”

Canaan

Son of Ham, grandson of Noah, and the father of the families that would become known as the Canaanites (Gen. 10:6, 15 19). Oddly, in the account of Ham’s great sin against Noah (seeing his father’s nakedness), Noah cursed his grandson Canaan rather than his son Ham (Gen. 9:18–27). The explanations of such cursing vary, but the passage ultimately establishes the context by which the Bible explains the relationship of the Canaanites to the Israelites in the centuries that followed. The most plausible reasons for why Canaan rather than Ham was cursed center on the irrevocability of God’s blessing of Ham in Gen. 9:1 or that Canaan played some undescribed role in the sinful act. The curse also included a promise of animosity between Canaan and the sons of Japheth (9:27). This element of the curse probably found fulfillment with the entrance of the Philistines (Sea Peoples) into the land at about the same time Israel was entering it under Joshua’s leadership.

Compassion

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

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

Congregation

Primarily, the Israelite community united by a common bond to (or in covenant with) their God (Deut. 33:4; Josh. 8:35; 18:1; 1 Kings 8:5).

The terms also refer to Israelite gatherings for special purposes such as worship, war, lawcourt, and councils. They also refer to the assemblage of other peoples or beings such as divine beings, evildoers or enemies, beasts, and bees.

The NT uses both ekklēsia and synagōgē to refer to synagogue gatherings (Acts 7:38; 13:43). English versions translate both terms as either “congregation” or “assembly.” These translations render the ekklēsia in Heb. 2:12 as either “assembly” or “congregation,” whereas they translate synagōgē in James 2:2 as “assembly” or “meeting.” See also Church.

Dancing

The Bible often refers to songs, music, musical sounds and instruments, and dancing.

Instruments

Strings. The most frequently mentioned instrument is the kinnor, a lyre, also often referred to as a harp. The sound box of the harp is at the base, from which a straight or curved neck rises at a sharp angle so that the strings going from the box to the neck are of different length. The lyre has two uprights and a crosspiece on top, from which the strings of similar length stretch down to the sound box. The kinnor-lyre had eight to ten strings (based on Akkadian and Ugaritic findings and Jewish descriptions) and could be played with a pick or by hand. David’s “harp” was such a lyre. The “harp” mentioned in the NT (1 Cor. 14:7; Rev. 5:8; 14:2; 15:2) probably was also a lyre. Another OT lyre, or perhaps a harp, the nebel, complemented the kinnor-lyre. Jewish tradition about the strings implies that it produced a lower sound. The nebel-lyre is most often mentioned with other instruments, though occasionally alone. Another stringed instrument mentioned three times, the ’asor, may have been a harp or a lyre with ten strings (Pss. 33:2; 92:3; 144:9). In Pss. 45:8; 150:4 there is mention of “the strings,” which may refer to more than just the stringed instruments specifically mentioned in the Bible. The ancient world also had lutes, an instrument with a long, straight neck, fretted like a guitar or ukulele, proceeding from a small sound box.

Percussion. Timbrels, cymbals, and castanets or rattles are percussion instruments mentioned in the Bible. The timbrel was a hand drum, like a tambourine but without metal jingles. The timbrel accompanies dancing and may have been used by the dancers (Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1 Sam. 18:6). Cymbals may have been paired or individual, but it is not certain whether these latter were suspended cymbals or finger cymbals, being four to six inches in diameter. In 2 Sam. 6:5 there is mention of another percussion instrument, mena’an’im (the root of this word means “to shake”), perhaps “sistrums” (NIV) or “castanets” (NASB) (although the KJV renders it as “cornets”). Castanets were small hand-clappers joined with a string. Israel likely had all of these, though it is hard to know which is referred to in 2 Sam. 6:5. The cymbal is mentioned once in the NT (1 Cor. 13:1), though not as musically pleasing in that context.

Woodwinds and horns. The OT attests to both an animal horn, most frequently called a shopar, and a metal trumpet, the khatsotserah (Num. 10:2 10). The NT refers to a horn with a word used to translate both OT terms (salpinx). The ancient world had both flutes and shawms. Shawms have a bell-like flare at the end, while the shaft of a flute is straight to the end. What is likely a double-reed shawm is frequently translated “flute” (1 Sam. 10:5; 1 Kings 1:40; Isa. 5:12; 30:29; Jer. 48:36 [NIV: “pipes”]). It is unclear whether the instrument mentioned in Gen. 4:21; Ps. 150:4 commonly translated as “flute” is a woodwind or a stringed instrument. The NT also mentions a flute or reed instrument (Matt. 11:17; 9:23; 1 Cor. 14:7; Rev. 18:22) that could be played for dancing or mourning.

Dancing

The dancing mentioned in the Bible is usually celebratory and positive and is combined with singing or the playing of musical instruments. Such dancing may occur at any happy occasion but is mentioned most often in connection with victory or worship (e.g., Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1 Sam. 18:6). The women of Shiloh “join in the dancing” (Judg. 21:21) at an annual festival, which implies some manner of folk dancing. The dancing of Herodias’s daughter probably was erotic (Matt. 14:6; Mark 6:22), and the dancing of the Israelites around the golden calf probably was laden with sensuality as well (Exod. 32:19).

Family

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fellowship

The common experience/sharing of something with someone else.

The close and intimate fellowship that the members of the Trinity experience with one another (John 10:30; 14:10; 16:14 15; 17:5) is something that Jesus prays for his people to experience themselves (17:20–26). He asks that believers “may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me” (17:21). Just as the Father is in Jesus and Jesus is in the Father, believers are described as being in both the Father and the Son. The stated purpose for such fellowship is twofold: that the world may know and believe that the Father has sent the Son, and that the Father loves believers even as he has loved the Son (17:21, 23). Central to this fellowship between God and believers is the sharing of the glory that the Father and the Son experience (17:22). Jesus expresses similar truths in John 15:1–11 when he speaks of himself as the true vine and his followers as the branches who must remain in him because “apart from me you can do nothing” (v. 5).

Paul frequently speaks of the believer’s fellowship with Christ, even though he rarely uses the word “fellowship” to speak of this reality. It is God who calls the believer into fellowship with Christ (1 Cor. 1:9), but such fellowship involves both the “power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death” (Phil. 3:10). When believers celebrate the Lord’s Supper, they are participating in the body and blood of Christ (1 Cor. 10:16–17). Far more frequently, Paul expresses the concept of fellowship with Christ by his use of the phrase “with Christ.” Believers have been crucified, buried, raised, clothed, and seated in the heavenly realms with Christ (Rom. 6:4–9; 2 Cor. 13:4; Gal. 2:20–21; Eph. 2:5–6; Col. 2:12–13; 3:1–4). They also share in the inheritance that Christ has received from the Father (Rom. 8:16–17) and one day will reign with him (2 Tim. 2:12).

The fellowship that believers have with one another is an extension of their fellowship with God. John wrote, “We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ” (1 John 1:3). Just as walking in darkness falsifies a believer’s claim to fellowship with God, so also walking in the light is necessary for fellowship with other believers (1:6–7). Paul strikes a similar note when he says, “Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?” (2 Cor. 6:14–15). The point is not to avoid all contact with unbelievers (cf. 1 Cor. 5:9–10), but rather that the believer is so fundamentally identified with Christ that to identify with unbelievers should be avoided.

From the earliest days of the church, believers found very tangible ways to demonstrate that their fellowship was rooted in their common faith in Jesus. Immediately after Pentecost, “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. . . . All the believers were together and had everything in common” (Acts 2:42–44). This common experience led believers to voluntarily sell their possessions and share with any who had a need (2:45; 4:32). This meeting of very practical needs was motivated by a common experience of God’s abundant generosity in freely giving his Son (Rom. 8:32). The self-sacrificial sharing of resources became a staple of the early church (Rom. 12:13; Gal. 6:6; 1 Tim. 6:18) and provided an opportunity for Paul to demonstrate the unity of the church when he collected money from Gentile churches to alleviate the suffering of Jewish Christians in Judea (Rom. 15:26–27; 2 Cor. 8–9).

Gilead

The southern section of the Trans-jordan, with the Jordan River to the west, Bashan to the north, Ammon to the east, and Moab to the south. The Jabbok River ran across it from east to west, and “Gilead” could be used either more widely to describe the whole area or more narrowly to describe the land either south or north of the Jabbok. It was a high, fertile region, famed for its healing balm and spices (Gen. 37:25; Jer. 8:22; 46:11) as well as its pastures and livestock (Num. 32:1; 1 Chron. 5:9; Song 4:1; 6:5).

Guilt

Although the concepts of sin and guilt often overlap, a basic distinction between the two can be established. In the biblical sense, sin is basically violation of divine stipulations (what a person does or does not do), whereas guilt is the resulting state, or one’s “legal” status (what that person has become as a result). In essence, one commits sin and becomes guilty (Hab. 1:11).

The state of being guilty is further distinguished from the punishment that it draws, because one can be pronounced guilty and still be exempted from punishment. Nor should guilt be mistaken for the emotional response of the culprits toward themselves and their victims. No matter how sincere it may be, remorse does not eliminate the guilt.

In the biblical sense, guilt is something objective and separate from the will or intention of the culprit. One can pay back debt and render the obligation fulfilled. One cannot, however, cancel one’s own guilt. In the sacrificial system of the OT, the offender must perform restitution to the victim and also give a guilt offering to God. This reflects the notion that in committing sinful acts in violation of God’s laws, the culprit has offended not only the victim but also God. This is what David means in Ps. 51:3 4 (with his sin in full display before God, David realizes that he has sinned against God and God alone).

This is why those who scoff at the guilt offering are fools (Prov. 14:9). By doing this, they insult God’s being and character. Such a biblical view of guilt implies that forgiveness and restoration should come from without, from source(s) other than the culprit and victim. The Bible affirms that the only one capable of offsetting the cost of human sin is the sinless Christ, “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). His life was laid on the cross and offered as the acceptable sacrifice for the totality of guilt, and as a result it freed those who believe in him from the obligation of the guilt.

Inheritance

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

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

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

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

Israelites

The designation “Israelites” signifies the nation of Israel, which can be traced back to the children of Jacob (Gen. 46:8; cf. Exod. 1:9; Num. 1:45). To distinguish themselves from foreigners, Israelites called themselves ’ibrim, “Hebrews” (Gen. 43:32; Exod. 10:3). During the period of the divided kingdom, the name “Israelites” was used to refer to the Ephraimites (2 Kings 17:6; 18:11); during the Second Temple period, it took on a religious orientation (Sir. 46:10; 47:2; Jdt. 4:11; 2 Macc. 1:25 26). In the NT, true Israelites are not necessarily those descended from Israel or Abraham but rather those who trust in Jesus Christ, who is the fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham (Rom. 9:4–8; Gal. 4:21–31; cf. Rev. 21:12).

Jabesh Gilead

The exact location of the town Jabesh Gilead is unknown, but biblical descriptions place it in the northwest Gilead region. It may have been located near the Wadi Yabis. Both Tell el-Maqlub and Tell Abu Kharaz have been suggested as possible sites. Jabesh Gilead played prominent, if tragic, roles in three biblical events. Judges 19 20 records how the gross immorality of some men from Benjamin resulted in the other Israelite tribes attacking and nearly destroying the tribe of Benjamin. Because the people of Jabesh Gilead failed to assemble with the Israelite tribes at Mizpah (Judg. 21:8), all of its people were killed except for four hundred virgins, who were given as wives to the surviving Benjamites. Years later, 1 Sam. 11 records Saul, a Benjamite, saving Jabesh Gilead from the Ammonites. When the people of Jabesh Gilead heard that the Philistines had hung the corpses of Saul and his sons on the wall of Beth Shan, their warriors traveled all night to retrieve them and give them an honorable burial at Jabesh (1 Sam. 31:11–12). David blessed them for their bravery and kindness to Saul (2 Sam. 2:4–6).

King

A kingdom signifies the reality and extent of a king’s dominion or rule (Gen. 10:10; 20:9; Num. 32:33; 2 Kings 20:13; Esther 1:22). Some kingdoms were relatively small; others were concerted attempts to gain the whole world.

A kingdom presupposes monarchy, rule by an individual, human authority. Although kings only have as much authority as their armies and the general populace allow, they nevertheless exercise an almost absolute power, which invites either profound humility or hubris. Royal arrogance, unfortunately, is the primary motif characterizing kings in the Bible (e.g., Dan. 3).

God originally intended Israel to be governed as a theocracy, ruled by the one, true, living God (but see Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:14 20). Israel was to be a “kingdom of priests” (Exod. 19:6), but the people demanded a king (1 Sam. 8:1–22). However, even when God granted their request, God remained King over the king and even retained ownership of the land (Lev. 25:23, 42, 55). The Israelite king was nothing more than God’s viceroy, with delegated authority. With few exceptions, most of the kings of Israel and Judah were corrupted by authority and wealth and forgot God (1 Sam. 13:13–14; 15:28; Matt. 14:6–11). But God made a covenant with David, so that one of his descendants would become a coregent in a restored theocracy, the kingdom of God (2 Sam. 7:1–29; Pss. 89:3; 132:11). In contrast to David’s more immediate descendants, this coming king would return to Jerusalem humble and mounted on a donkey (Zech. 9:9; cf. Isa. 62:11). The Gospels present Jesus Christ as this king (Matt. 21:1–9 pars.). Those who are likewise humble will inherit the land with him (Matt. 5:5).

Land

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

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

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

Land of Canaan

A region generally identified with the landmass between ancient Syria and Egypt, including parts of the Sinai Peninsula, Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean, and southern Phoenicia (modern Lebanon).

In the Bible, the geographical reference “the land of Canaan” finds primary expression in Genesis through Judges. The promise to Abraham that his descendants would inherit the land of the Canaanites (Gen. 15:18 21) is the theological focal point of the uses of the term “Canaan” throughout these biblical books. Once that inheritance was achieved and Israel became a viable state, the term’s use seems to serve the double purpose of being both a geographical marker and a reminder of the nature of its former predominant inhabitants. The prophets drew upon the term to remind Israel of the land’s former status, both in its positive (Isa. 19:18) and negative (Isa. 23:11; Zeph. 2:5) connotations. The term is transliterated twice in the NT in the recounting of OT history (Acts 7:11; 13:19). One further connection between Canaan and the perspectives communicated concerning it in the OT is the apparent association of the land with corrupt trade practices. That is, while some believe that the word “Canaan” always meant “merchant” or some similar word, its use in Scripture suggests that the tradesmen of Canaan were of such disrepute in the recollection of ancient Israel that the term became a synonym for “unjust trader” (Job 41:6; Ezek. 16:29; 17:4; Zeph. 1:11; Zech. 14:21).

Mizpah

Meaning “watchtower,” this is the name of several sites in the Bible. (1) Along with “Galeed,” a name given to the heap of stones that memorialized the covenant made between Jacob and Laban (Gen. 31:48 49). (2) The place where the Israelites assembled in response to the military threat from Ammon and made Jephthah their leader (Judg. 10:17; 11:11). It may have been the home of Jephthah and may be the same place mentioned in Gen. 31:49. From Mizpah, Jeph-thah and Israel attacked the Ammonites. Mizpah became the place where Jephthah fulfilled his ill-conceived vow (Judg. 11:34–39). This location is most likely synonymous with the Ramath Mizpah in the territory of Gad (Josh. 13:26). (3) A city in the tribal allotment of Benjamin. It is listed between Beeroth and Kephirah and seems to have been close to Gibeon and Ramah (Josh. 18:26; 1 Kings 15:22; Neh. 3:7). Of the various places to bear the name “Mizpah,” the Benjamite location has the most biblical significance. The men of Israel gathered here to decide how to deal with the Benjamites’ behavior toward the Levite’s concubine (Judg. 20:1–3; 21:1–8). It was also here that Samuel called the people of Israel together to pray and renew their relationship with God after the ark of the covenant had been sent back by the Philistines (1 Sam. 7:5–6). As a result, when the Philistines attacked, God caused them to panic, and Israel had the victory. Samuel regularly visited Mizpah to render judgment for the Israelites (1 Sam. 7:16). Also, Saul was presented to Israel as its king at Mizpah (1 Sam. 10:17).

Taken collectively, these references show the religious and civic importance of the site for the fledgling nation. After the division of the kingdom, Mizpah became part of the southern kingdom of Judah. King Asa of Judah fortified Mizpah against King Baasha of Israel with materials used from Baasha’s fortification at Ramah (1 Kings 15:16–22). Mizpah became an important civic center once again after the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians in 587/586 BC. Gedaliah, the Babylonian-appointed governor of the conquered region, set up his government center at Mizpah (2 Kings 25:23–25). The importance of Mizpah is commemorated by Judas Maccabeus in the intertestamental period (1 Macc. 3:46).

Rock

In the OT, the “rock” (sela’, tsur) is an image of inaccessibility and so of refuge from danger (Isa. 7:19), but rocks will not provide refuge on the day of God’s wrath (Isa. 2:10, 19, 21; cf. Rev. 6:15 16). A great rock providing needed shade (Isa. 32:2) is a variation on this theme of protection. By extension, the image is applied to God himself in poetry (e.g., 2 Sam. 22:2; Ps. 31:3, in both cases parallel with “fortress”). God as the “Rock” is the object of trust (2 Sam. 22:3). This quality is an aspect of his incomparability: “And who is the Rock except our God?” (2 Sam. 22:32).

Shechem

(1) The son of Hamor the Hivite, who was the head of the town and environs of Shechem (Gen. 34:2; cf. Josh. 24:32; Judg. 9:28). He raped Jacob and Leah’s daughter Dinah, whose brothers killed him, Hamor, and the men of their town and plundered it in revenge.

(2) A crucial town in the hill country on the border of the tribal allotment of Ephraim (Josh. 20:7). Shechem is the first Canaanite town to be mentioned in the book of Genesis (12:6). Abraham camped at the site near the oak tree of Moreh, and God revealed himself to Abraham there, giving the first indication of the importance of the place. In response to God’s revelation, Abraham built an altar at Shechem. Later, Jacob settled in the region of Shechem and purchased land from Hamor the Hivite (33:18 19). When Hamor’s son Shechem raped Jacob’s daughter Dinah, her brothers Simeon and Levi killed the men of the region, and Jacob’s other sons pillaged the town of Shechem. Jacob buried his foreign gods at Shechem under the aforementioned oak tree in response to the revelation of God (35:1–4). It was in the general region of Shechem that Joseph later would seek his brothers and their flocks (Gen. 37). Israel would bury the bones of Joseph there in accordance with his wishes (50:25; Josh. 24:32).

Due to the revelation of God and its significance to the patriarchs, Joshua gathered the Israelites to Shechem after the conquest of Canaan and just prior to his death in order to renew the covenant (Josh. 8:30–35; 24). After the conquest the town was allotted to the Kohathite Levites and was one of the cities of refuge (Josh. 20:7; 21:21; 1 Chron. 6:67). However, in the period of the judges Shechem apparently was still under the cultural and religious influence of the Canaanites, as evidenced by the presence of the temple of Baal-Berith (Judg. 9:4). Abimelek, whose mother was a Shechemite, convinced the people of the town to make him their king. After three years, the Shechemites rejected Abimelek, and he killed many of them and destroyed the town (Judg. 9). It was at Shechem that the ten northern tribes made the decision to reject Solomon’s son Rehoboam and make Jeroboam their king. Jeroboam subsequently made Shechem his capital for a period (1 Kings 12).

Shiloh

Protected in the hill country of Ephraim, Shiloh was a secure location for the tabernacle and the ark of the covenant in the early centuries of Israel’s presence in the land. Judges 21:19 gives a remarkably precise location for Shiloh. It was “north of Bethel, east of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem, and south of Lebonah.” This means that it was centrally located in the hill country just off the internal north-south ridge route.

Although it is uncertain when the sanctuary at Shiloh was destroyed, it was likely by the Philistines as they later encroached well into Israelite territory (1 Sam. 13). Nevertheless, Shiloh remained a significant location. As the northern kingdom broke away from the south, Ahijah from Shiloh prophesied to Jeroboam son of Nebat (1 Kings 11:29–40) and later addressed Jeroboam’s wife (1 Kings 14:2–4). Jeremiah reminded the inhabitants of Jerusalem that God destroyed Shiloh, the first dwelling place for his name in the land, because of the wickedness of Israel and would do the same again to the temple in Jerusalem (Jer. 7:12–14; 26:6–9). Even the psalmist noted the tragedy: “He abandoned the tabernacle of Shiloh” (Ps. 78:60).

Watch

A chronological division of the night. The term is derived from soldiers or others guarding, or “watching,” something during specified portions of the night. In the OT, there apparently were three watches or divisions in the night. Gideon and his men struck the Midianites at the beginning of the “middle watch” (Judg. 7:19). The Roman system had four divisions or watches in the night, and the Gospels report Jesus walking on the lake during the “fourth watch” (Matt. 14:25; Mark 6:48 ESV, NASB, NKJV). The term can also be used to refer to the guard placed on duty to guard something (Neh. 4:9).

Woman

In the Bible, woman is first encountered along with man in Gen. 1:26 28. God created “man” in the plural, male and female, and commanded them to reproduce and to fill the earth and subdue it. Being created male and female is set in parallel to being created in the image of God. In the ancient Near East, perhaps the king would be thought of as the image of God. But in Genesis, not only is the first man the image of God, but the first woman participates in the image as well. This is all but unthinkable in the ancient world, and it suggests an unparalleled dignity and worth in womankind.

Genesis records that the human race fell through the instrumentality of a man, a woman, and the serpent. The serpent approached the woman, not the man. The woman was convinced by the serpent and ate the forbidden fruit. She gave some to her husband, who also ate it without saying a word. Thus, the woman can be blamed in part for the fall of the race. Adam was condemned because he “listened to [his] wife” (Gen. 3:17). Her judgment, for heeding the serpent, was pain in childbirth and a desire for her husband, who would rule over her (Gen. 3:16). The exact parameters of this judgment are unclear, but it appears that her desire will be for his position of leadership and will be perpetually frustrated.

Often in the Bible, women are motivated by their desire to have children. Rachel demanded of Jacob, “Give me children, or I’ll die!” (Gen. 30:1). She saw herself in competition with her sister, Leah, in this respect (30:8). The “fruit of the womb” is a reward, and like arrows, the blessed man’s quiver is full of them (Ps. 127:1–5). Note also the beatitude of Ps. 128:3: “Your wife will be like a fruitful vine within your house; your children will be like olive shoots around your table.”

In Genesis, the reproductive capability of slave girls is at the disposal of their owners. Thus, Rachel and Leah’s maidservants became surrogate mothers for a number of their sons (Gen. 30:3–10). Sarah also became frustrated at her inability to conceive, so she gave Hagar to Abraham. The result was great familial turmoil, finally resulting in the banishment of both Hagar and Ishmael, whom she bore to Abraham.

In the beginning, God joined one man and one woman together as husband and wife. But soon this idea was corrupted, and Lamech, a man from Cain’s lineage, is credited with the first polygamous marriage (Gen. 4:19). Although the patriarchs (such as Jacob) did have more than one wife, the household discontent and strife are what is highlighted in those stories, such as with Hagar. In the NT, an elder is to be, literally, a “one-woman man” (1 Tim. 3:2; ESV, KJV: “the husband of one wife”), meaning monogamous.

The Torah contains significant legislation regarding women. The daughters of Zelophehad argued that their father died without sons, so in Canaan they were disinherited. God agreed and decreed that in Israel daughters would inherit land in the absence of sons. Only if there were no children at all would the land pass to other kin (Num. 27:1–11).

When a man made a vow, he must fulfill it, but a young woman’s vow was subject to her father. If he remained silent, the vow stood, but if he expressed disapproval, then she was freed from it. If she was married, her husband governed her vows, but if she was divorced, then there was no responsible male over her, and her vow was treated as a man’s (Num. 30:1–16).

Sexual intercourse was also regulated in the law of Moses, insofar as the act rendered both parties ritually impure (Lev. 15:18). Both must bathe and were unclean until evening. A woman’s menstrual discharge also made her unclean for a week. Everything she sat or lay upon was unclean, as was anyone who touched these things. She must wash and offer sacrifice to become clean again (15:18–31).

If a man discovered on his wedding night that his bride was not a virgin, he could accuse her publicly. If her parents provided evidence that she had in fact been a virgin, then the man was severely punished for lying and not allowed to divorce her (otherwise, it was simply a matter of writing a letter to divorce her [Deut. 24:1]). If her virginity could not be proved, she was to be put to death by stoning (Deut. 22:13–21).

In the case of a rape of a betrothed virgin, if it occurred in the city, both the rapist and the victim were stoned, since apparently she had failed to cry out for help and thus, the law assumed, consented to sexual intercourse. If she was raped in the countryside, only the man was killed. But if he raped a woman who was not spoken for, his punishment was that he must marry her without possibility of divorce (Deut. 22:23–29).

Numbers 5:11–31 treats cases where a husband was suspicious that his wife had been unfaithful—that is, a matter of covenantal jealousy. The unprovable was left to God to punish.

In the Bible, women sometimes are afforded dignity beyond what is expected in an ancient Near Eastern provenance. Hagar is the only woman in all ancient Near Eastern literature who gave a name to a deity (Gen. 16:13). In Judg. 4:4, Deborah “judged” Israel (despite the NIV’s “leading,” the underlying Hebrew verb indicates “judging,” as in the NRSV). Even as judge, however, she did not lead the army against the enemy general Sisera; Barak did so. But Barak was unwilling to undertake this mission unless Deborah went with him (4:8). Thus, God ensured that the prestige of killing Sisera went to a woman, Jael (4:9, 21). Another prominent woman was Huldah, to whom the priests turned for guidance when the law was rediscovered (2 Kings 22:14).

Many biblical stories feature heroines. Mighty Pharaoh was undermined by two midwives in his attempt to destroy Israel (Exod. 1:15–21). Ruth the Moabite woman gave her name to the book that recounts her trek from Moab to Israel, including her famous oath of loyalty (Ruth 1:16–17). Esther too was a courageous woman whose book bears her name. Heroines are especially prominent in the Gospels, and the women there have the distinction of being the first to witness the risen Lord. Luke’s birth narrative is largely organized around Mary. Priscilla (with her husband) taught and helped to shape the early church (Acts 18:26). Paul lists many women in Rom. 16, calling them “deaconess,” “fellow worker,” and possibly even “apostle.”

Scripture also at times portrays various women as being temptations to men. Eve handed the fruit to Adam (Gen. 3:6). In the wilderness Israel worshiped Moabite gods in conjunction with sexual activity (Num. 25:1–9). Later, Israelites intermarried with Canaanite women, directly leading to worship of their idols (Judg. 3:6). Bathsheba was a temptation to David, and this began a series of events that marred his career as a man after God’s own heart. Solomon loved many foreign women, who turned him to worship their gods. After the exile, the Israelites were admonished by Nehemiah to put away their foreign wives lest history repeat itself (Neh. 13:26).

Women and marriage are used in the Bible as images for spiritual things. Paul writes that marital love mirrors the church’s relationship with Christ (Eph. 5:32–33). A man should love his wife as Christ loved the church. Revelation portrays the climax to human history in the figure of two women: the bride of Christ, adorned with righteous deeds for her husband (19:7–8), and the whore Babylon, drunk on the blood of the saints (17:5–6). The consummation of the age is when one is judged and the other enters her eternal marital bliss.

The book of Proverbs also separates humankind into two groups, symbolized by two women. Along the path of life, the youth hears the voices of Woman Folly (9:13–18) and of Woman Wisdom (1:20–33) calling out to him. Folly is incarnated in the flesh-and-blood temptation of the immoral woman (7:6–27), whereas Woman Wisdom has her counterpart at the end of the book in the detailed description of the woman of virtue (31:10–31). There, the woman who fears God is set as a prize far above earthly wealth—the highest blessing of the wise.

Paul uses two women from sacred history to help explain his gospel of law versus grace. Hagar the slave woman represents the Mosaic covenant given at Sinai, and the earthly Jerusalem—that is, a mind-set of slavery that futilely attempts to earn God’s favor by works of the law. Sarah was the free woman, and her son was the promised son, who represents the heavenly Jerusalem, the new covenant, and freedom from the requirements of the law (Gal. 4:21–31). Again, two women symbolize two paths and two peoples—one being slaves, the other being God’s free people.

Word

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

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

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

Secondary Matches

Bible

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

New Testament

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

The earliest texts of the NT are those written on papyrus. Ninety-eight of these manuscripts have been identified. The second category of manuscripts is the uncials, which usually were written on parchment and span the fourth through the tenth centuries. About 270 uncials are known, and they range from a few verses up to complete copies of the NT or even the entire Bible. The third category of NT manuscripts is minuscules. These texts date from the ninth century and later and comprise approximately 2,800 manuscripts, which are denoted by a number not beginning with zero.

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

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

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

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

Old Testament

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

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

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

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

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

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

Christ

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Direct Matches

Assembly

Primarily, the Israelite community united by a common bond to (or in covenant with) their God (Deut. 33:4; Josh. 8:35; 18:1; 1 Kings 8:5). Previous scholarship distinguished congregation (’edah) from assembly (qahal ), defining the former as the gathering of Israelites for a specific goal and the latter as the gathering of Israel as the special (covenant) people of God. This viewpoint was anchored in the LXX’s preponderant rendition of ’edah as synagōgē and qahal as ekklēsia. This sharp distinction between the two terms can no longer be sustained. The difference in the frequency of the two terms in the Hebrew Bible corresponds to the growth of the Scriptures: ’edah predominates in Genesis through Numbers, whereas qahal occurs more often in Deuteronomy, the Former Prophets, the Latter Prophets, and the Writings. The association of the verbal form of qahal with both nouns (’edah and qahal ) further buttresses the point (Exod. 35:1; Lev. 8:3; Num. 1:18; 10:7; Judg. 20:1; 21:5–8; 1 Chron. 13:2–5).

Bethel

The ancient site of Bethel is probably to be identified with the modern village of Beitin, 10.5 miles north of Jerusalem. Its location is described and pinpointed in Gen. 12:8; Judg. 21:19. Bethel’s situation and importance are explained by its copious springs and its location at the intersection of major ancient highways, the north-south mountain road and the east-west road from Jericho to the coastal plain.

From the patriarchs to the judges. The first mention of Bethel in the Bible is in Gen. 12:8, where Abram camped “east of Bethel” on his first entry into the Promised Land. He camped there again on his return from a stay in Egypt (13:3). On the first occasion Abram erected “an altar to the Lord.” When Abram returned to that spot, he “called on the name of the Lord.”

It was Jacob who gave it the name “Bethel,” meaning “house of God,” due to the dream he received in that location. In the dream he saw a ladder reaching to heaven, and God spoke to him (28:10–19). Its former name was Luz. God later appeared in Mesopotamia and spoke to Jacob, identifying himself as “the God of Bethel,” instructing him to return to his native land. The title taken by God implied that God would be faithful to his earlier promise to bring Jacob back to his land (31:13). Later God specifically instructed Jacob to settle in Bethel (35:1–6). Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died in Bethel and was buried there (35:8). God appeared to Jacob a second time in Bethel and spoke to him, reiterating the promise to give him the land of Canaan (35:9–15; cf. 28:13). All God’s dealings with Jacob are connected to the theophanies and divine promises associated with Bethel.

From the monarchy to the exile. This long-term cultic association explains the choice of Bethel as one of the two chief sanctuaries of the northern kingdom, the other center being in Dan. Jeroboam I built a royal shrine at Bethel to rival Jerusalem and to prevent the Israelites from drifting back to the Davidic dynasty (1 Kings 12:26–33). The prophet Ahijah’s criticism of Jeroboam’s actions was not due to Ahijah’s commitment to a central sanctuary at Jerusalem (14:1–16) but rather arose from the use of bull images (golden calves). This was not an innocent move by Jeroboam, returning to pre-Jerusalem and more ancient cultic symbols. It is not adequate simply to view Jeroboam’s calves as a “pedestal” upon which the Lord was believed to be enthroned (as accepted by W. F. Albright), for an explicit link is made with the idolatrous golden calf set up by Aaron in the desert: “Here are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt” (1 Kings 12:28 [cf. Exod. 32:8]). This became known as the chief sin of Jeroboam son of Nebat. It tainted the northern kingdom (see 2 Kings 10:29) and eventually led to that kingdom’s judgment by God at the hands of the Assyrians (2 Kings 17:21–23).

From the exile to the Roman period. The city was destroyed by the Assyrians about the time of their capture of Samaria (722 BC), but the shrine was revived in the form of a syncretistic cult at the close of the Assyrian period by the foreign peoples deported to the area (2 Kings 17:24–41). Some descendants of the inhabitants of Bethel were among those who returned from Babylonian exile in the first great caravan (Ezra 2:28; Neh. 7:32), and these Benjamite returnees resettled in their hometown (Neh. 11:31). Bethel prospered in the Hellenistic and Roman periods.

Congregation

Dance

Rhythmic movement of the body, usually to music. In the Bible, dancing usually has some form of religious significance. For God’s people in the OT, dancing was a joyous experience associated with celebration and worship. The various words used to describe dancing are descriptive: leaping, skipping, twisting, and whirling. Throughout Scripture, dancing is used as a symbol of rejoicing and as an antithesis to mourning (Ps. 30:11; Eccles. 3:4; Lam. 5:15). The sacred dances of the Hebrews expressed praise (Pss. 149:3; 150:4) and joy (Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1 Sam. 18:6–7; 21:11; 29:5; Ps. 30:11; Eccles. 3:4; Lam. 5:15). In ancient Jewish culture men and women danced in separate groups (Ps. 68:25; Jer. 31:13). Dance performers usually were groups of women, with one leading, on occasions of national celebration, such as after the crossing of the Red Sea (Exod. 15:20), after military victories (1 Sam. 18:6), and at religious festivals (Judg. 21:19–21). This may reveal the peculiarity of David’s conduct in dancing with all his might as the ark of the Lord was brought to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6:14; 1 Chron. 13:1–14; 15:1–29). Although dancing was reserved for occasions of religious worship and festivity, God speaks of a time of the ultimate restoration of his people from despair, when he promises that all Israel will rejoice in dancing (Jer. 31:4, 13).

Pagan worship also included dancing. The prophets of Baal, in their attempt to implore their god to appear, performed a kind of limping dance around Elijah’s altar on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18:26). Elsewhere, Aaron and the Israelites danced before the golden calf at the foot of Mount Sinai (Exod. 32:6, 18–19).

Dancing is also associated with pagan celebrations, as when Herodias’s daughter danced before Herod Antipas and his dinner guests at Herod’s birthday celebration. The result was the beheading of John the Baptist. In the manner of Greek entertainment, the dance of this young daughter, who perhaps was only twelve to fourteen years old (Matt. 14:6; Mark 6:22), probably was a sensual art form, a type of dance unheard of in Israel.

Dance is not limited to the pious, and it was found to be an integral part of everyday events of antiquity. Children danced (Job 21:11; Matt. 11:16–17; Luke 7:32), as did the young women at the vineyards, some while playing their hand drums (Judg. 21:21; Jer. 31:4, 13). The Shulammite’s dance (Song 6:13) was as beautiful as two dance troupes. Dancing is associated with family celebrations, as in the story of the prodigal son. When the prodigal son returned home, his exuberant father cried out, “For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found,” and so “they began to celebrate.” The older brother heard music and dancing, which commemorated the homecoming of the prodigal son (Luke 15:24–25).

Danced

Dancing

Feasts

The Israelites gathered regularly to celebrate their relationship with God. Such festivals were marked by communal meals, music, singing, dancing, and sacrifices. They celebrated, conscious that God had graciously brought them into a relationship with him. Within this covenant he had committed himself to act on their behalf both in regular ways, such as the harvest, and in exceptional ways, such as deliverance from Egypt. At the festivals, Israel celebrated God’s work in its past, present, and future and reaffirmed its relationship with this covenant God.

We know of Israel’s festivals from several calendars in the Mosaic legislation (Exod. 23:14–17; 34:18–23; Lev. 23; Num. 28–29; Deut. 16:1–17), calendars further clarified by the prophets (e.g., Ezek. 45:18–25; Zech. 14), and narrative material (e.g., 2 Kings 23:21–23). Some read discrepancies between calendars as evidence of multiple sources, but this fails to account for the various purposes that these calendars served. The narrative and prophetic passages suggest that Israel did not observe these festivals as frequently as, and in the ways, God intended (e.g., Amos 8:5), but when Israel sought to renew its relationship with God, it often did so with a festival (e.g., 2 Kings 23:21–23).

Passover and the Festival of Unleavened Bread

Israel’s religious calendar began with Passover, the day set aside to commemorate deliverance from Egypt. Occurring in spring, this single day was joined with a weeklong celebration known as the Festival of Unleavened Bread, during which all males were required to make a pilgrimage to the sanctuary and offer the firstfruits of the barley harvest (Lev. 23:9–14). Israel observed Passover with rituals that reactualized the night God’s destroyer spared the Israelites in Egypt. A lamb was killed, and its blood was put on the doorposts of the homes and on the bronze altar in the sanctuary. The lamb was roasted and served with unleavened bread and bitter herbs while those partaking—dressed in their traveling clothes—listened to the retelling of the exodus story. No yeast was to be found anywhere among them, no work was to be done on the first and last days of the festival, and offerings were to be brought to the sanctuary (Num. 9:1–5; Josh. 5:10–11; 2 Kings 23:21–23; 2 Chron. 30; 35:1–19).

Early Christians associated Jesus’ death with that of the Passover lamb (1 Cor. 5:7–8), encouraged by Jesus’ comments at the Last Supper (described by the Synoptic Gospels as a Passover meal [e.g., Matt. 26:17–30]). Perhaps Jesus meant to emphasize that just as Passover and the Festival of Unleavened Bread reminded God’s people of his deliverance and provision, his followers would find true freedom and full provision in him.

The Festival of Weeks

Also known as the Festival of Harvest, the Day of Firstfruits, or Pentecost (because it occurred fifty days after Passover), the Festival of Weeks took place on the sixth day of the third month (corresponding to our May or June). This marked another occasion when all Jewish men were required to come to the sanctuary. They were to bring an offering of the firstfruits of the wheat harvest, abstain from work, and devote themselves to rejoicing in God’s goodness.

Early in the NT period, if not before, this festival also became associated with the giving of the law on Mount Sinai. The Jews who assembled in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost as described in Acts 2 came to celebrate not only God’s provision but also the revelation of his nature and will. Significantly, God chose this day to send the Holy Spirit, the One who would produce a harvest of believers and reveal God more fully to the world.

The Festival of Tabernacles

So important was the Festival of Tabernacles (also known as the Festival of Ingathering or the Festival of Booths) that Israel sometimes referred to it as “the festival of the Lord” (Judg. 21:19) or simply “the festival” (cf. 1 Kings 8:65). Held from the fifteenth to the twenty-first of the seventh month (September–October), this was the third of the three pilgrimage festivals. For that week, Israel lived in booths to remind them of their ancestors’ time in the wilderness. They also celebrated the fruit harvest. They were to “take the fruit of majestic trees, branches of palm trees, boughs of leafy trees, and willows of the brook; and you shall rejoice” before God for seven days (Lev. 23:40 NRSV). Avoiding all work on the first and last days of the festival, they were to mark the week with sacrifices, celebration, and joy. Also, every seventh year the law was to be read at this festival (Deut. 31:10–11).

The Mishnah, a collection of rabbinic laws compiled around AD 200 but often reflecting earlier traditions, records how Israel observed this festival during the early Roman period. As part of the celebration, men danced and sang in the courtyard of the temple while Levites, standing on the steps that led down from the court of the Israelites, played harps, lyres, cymbals, and other instruments. Two priests blew trumpets—one long blast, then a quavering one, then another long blast—while walking toward the eastern gate. When they reached the gate, they turned back toward the temple and said, “Our fathers when they were in this place turned with their backs toward the Temple of the Lord and their faces toward the east, and they worshiped the sun toward the east [referring to the apostasy of the Jews as described by Ezekiel]; but as for us, our eyes are turned toward the Lord” (m. Sukkah 5:4). Another part of this festival involved the drawing of water for a libation offering from the Pool of Siloam with great ceremony and joy. John 7 records Jesus’ secretive departure to Jerusalem for the Festival of Tabernacles, where he spent several days teaching in the temple courts. It was on the last and greatest day of the festival when Jesus invited those thirsty to come to him and drink.

The Festival of Trumpets

Occurring on the first day of the seventh month (September–October), this feast marked the beginning of the civil and agricultural year for the Jews; it was also referred to as Rosh Hashanah (lit., “head/beginning of the year”). Observed as a Sabbath with sacrifices and trumpet blasts, this day was intended for rest and to begin preparations for the coming Day of Atonement. The Mishnah makes this connection more explicit by identifying the Festival of Trumpets as the day when “all that come into the world pass before [God] like legions of soldiers” or flocks of sheep to be judged (m. Rosh HaSh. 1:2).

The Day of Atonement

Some festivals, like Passover, looked back to what God had done or was doing for his people; other festivals, like Trumpets and the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), focused on the relationship itself. The latter was marked by repentance and rituals designed to remove the nation’s sins and restore fellowship with God. Coming ten days after the Festival of Trumpets, this was a solemn occasion during which the Israelites abstained from eating, drinking, and other activities. This was the only prescribed annual fast in the Jewish calendar, though other fasts were added in the fourth, fifth, seventh, and tenth months to mourn the Babylonian exile (Zech. 7:3, 5; 8:19).

In Leviticus, God clarified the purpose of this day: “On this day atonement will be made for you, to cleanse you. Then, before the Lord, you will be clean from all your sins” (16:30). Not only would the people be purified, but so also would the sanctuary, so that God could continue to meet his people there. Sacrifices were offered for both priest and people, and the blood was taken into the most holy place. Only on Yom Kippur could this room be entered, and only by the high priest, who sprinkled blood on the cover of the ark of the covenant. Leaving that room, he also sprinkled blood in the holy place (16:14–17) and then on the bronze altar in the courtyard.

Yom Kippur was marked by another ritual that symbolized the removal of Israel’s sins, this one involving two goats. One goat, chosen by lot, was offered as a sacrifice to God. The high priest placed his hands on the other goat and transferred to it the sins of the nation. He then released the goat into the wilderness, for “the goat will carry on itself all their sins to a remote place” (Lev. 16:22).

The Mishnah describes how this day was observed when the second temple stood. The high priest, having been carefully prepared, washed, and clothed, placed both hands on the head of a bull and confessed his own sins. After this, the lots were drawn for the goats; the goat to be sacrificed had a thread tied around its throat, while the other had a scarlet thread bound around its head. When the high priest had confessed the sins of the priests over the bull, it was slaughtered, and its blood was collected in a basin. Taking coals from the bronze altar and incense from the holy place, he then entered the holy of holies. There he placed the incense on the coals, filling the room with smoke to obscure the ark from his view. Returning to the holy place, he offered a short prayer, lest he pray too long and “put Israel in terror” that he had died performing the ritual. He returned to the courtyard and took the basin of blood back into the most holy place. Dipping his finger into the blood, he sprinkled it with a whipping motion, and repeated this seven times. He did the same with the blood of the goat chosen for sacrifice, and then he poured out the remaining blood at the base of the bronze altar.

Then the high priest laid his hands on the head of the scapegoat and said, “O God, thy people, the House of Israel, have committed iniquity, transgressed, and sinned before thee. O God, forgive, I pray, the iniquities and transgressions and sins which thy people, the House of Israel, have committed and transgressed and sinned before thee; as it is written in the law of thy servant Moses . . .” (m. Yoma 6:2). The goat was then led outside Jerusalem, where it was pushed down a ravine to its death, apparently to keep it from wandering back into the city.

The Mishnah recognized that rituals alone were insufficient for true forgiveness, for it contains this warning: “If a man said, ‘I will sin and repent, and sin again and repent,’ he will be given no chance to repent. [If he said,] ‘I will sin and the Day of Atonement will effect atonement,’ then the Day of Atonement effects no atonement. For transgressions that are between man and God the Day of Atonement effects atonement, but for transgressions that are between a man and his fellow the Day of Atonement effects atonement only if he has appeased his fellow” (m. Yoma 8:9).

The book of Hebrews uses the symbols of Yom Kippur to describe Jesus’ death. As the high priest entered the most holy place, so Jesus entered God’s presence, carrying not the blood of bull and goat but his own. His once-for-all death at the “culmination of the ages” (Heb. 9:26) not only allows him to remain in God’s presence (10:12) but also gives us access to God’s presence as well (10:19–22).

Sabbath Year

Every seven years, the Israelites were to observe a “Sabbath of the land” (Lev. 25:6 ESV), a time for the land to rest. They could not sow fields or prune vineyards, but they could eat what grew of itself (Lev. 25:1–7). Deuteronomy 15:1–11 speaks of all debts being canceled (some would say deferred) every seventh year, presumably the same year the land was to lie fallow. When Israel was gathered at the Festival of Tabernacles during this Sabbath Year, the law of Moses was to be read aloud. The Chronicler described the seventy years of Babylonian exile as “sabbaths” for the land, perhaps alluding to the neglect of the Sabbath Year (2 Chron. 36:21; cf. Lev. 26:43). Those returning from exile expressed their intent to keep this provision (Neh. 10:31), and it appears to have been observed in the intertestamental period (see 1 Macc. 6:48–53; Josephus, Ant. 14.202–10).

This year seems intended to maintain the fertility of the land and to allow Israel’s economy to “reset,” equalizing wealth and limiting poverty. Observing such a provision took great faith and firm allegiance, for they had to trust God for daily bread and put obedience above profit. Rereading the law at the Festival of Tabernacles reminded the Israelites of God’s gracious covenant and their required response.

Jubilee

God instructed Israel to count off seven “sevens” of years and in the fiftieth year, beginning on the Day of Atonement, to sound a trumpet marking the Jubilee Year. As in the Sabbath Year, there was to be no sowing and reaping. Further, the land was released from its current owners and returned to those families to whom it originally belonged. Individual Israelites who had become indentured through economic distress were to be freed. The assumption underlying the Jubilee Year was that everything belonged to God. He owned the land and its occupants; the Israelites were only tenants and stewards (Lev. 25:23, 55). As their covenant lord, he would provide for their needs even during back-to-back Sabbath Years (Lev. 25:21). The year began on the Day of Atonement, perhaps to emphasize that the best response to God’s redemptive mercy is faith in his provision and mercy to others. Although the Jubilee Year is commanded in the Mosaic law and spoken about by the prophets (Isa. 61:1–2; Ezek. 46:17), rabbis, and Jesus (Luke 4:18–19), Scripture is silent on how or if Israel observed this year.

New Moon

The beginning of each month was marked with the sounding of trumpets, rejoicing, and sacrifices (Num. 10:10; 28:11–15). There is some indication that work was to be suspended on this day, as on the Sabbath (Amos 8:5), and that people gathered for a meal (1 Sam. 20:5, 18, 24, 27). By faithfully observing this day, Israel was in a position to properly observe the remaining days, set up, as they were, on the lunar calendar. Paul learned of some in Colossae who were giving undue attention to New Moon celebrations (Col. 2:16).

Purim

Beyond the festivals commanded in the law of Moses, the Jews added two more to their sacred calendar, one during the postexilic period and one between the Testaments. Both commemorated God’s deliverance of his people from their enemies. A wave of anti-Semitic persecution swept over the Jews living in Persia during the reign of Xerxes (486–465 BC). God delivered his people through Esther, and the Jews celebrated this deliverance with the festival of Purim. Their enemies determined when to attack by casting lots, so the Jews called this festival “Purim,” meaning “lots.” It was celebrated on the fourteenth and fifteenth days of the twelfth month (February-March) with “feasting and joy and giving presents of food to one another and gifts to the poor” (Esther 9:22).

Festival of Dedication

During the intertestamental period, the Jews came under great persecution from the Seleucids, who outlawed the practice of Judaism and desecrated the Jerusalem temple. After recapturing the temple, the Jews began the process of purification. On the twenty-fifth day of their ninth month, in the year 164 BC, the Jews rose at dawn and offered a lawful sacrifice on the new altar of burnt offering which they had made. The altar was dedicated, to the sound of hymns, zithers, lyres and cymbals, at the same time of year and on the same day on which the gentiles had originally profaned it. The whole people fell prostrate in adoration and then praised Heaven who had granted them success. For eight days they celebrated the dedication of the altar, joyfully offering burnt offerings, communion and thanksgiving sacrifices. . . . Judas [Maccabees], with his brothers and the whole assembly of Israel, made it a law that the days of the dedication of the altar should be celebrated yearly at the proper season, for eight days beginning on the twenty-fifth of the month of Chislev [December], with rejoicing and gladness. (1 Macc. 4:52–56, 59 NJB)

Summary

What did God want to impress on his people by commanding and permitting these specific festivals? First, these festivals reminded Israel of God’s help in the past, how he delivered them from Egypt, provided for them in the wilderness wanderings, or protected them from their enemies. Second, the festivals were occasions to celebrate God’s present provision. He had promised to provide for his covenant partner; the festivals, especially those timed to occur at the harvest, were occasions to celebrate how faithfully he had kept that promise for another year and opportunities to commit to providing for the needs of others.

The festivals prompted the Israelites not only to look back to God’s help in the past and recognize God’s help in the present, but also to look ahead, anticipating the promised consummation. The OT announced God’s intention to bring all nations into full allegiance, and the festivals were occasions to anticipate that day. Isaiah spoke of a festival in which all the nations would share: “On this mountain the Lord Almighty will prepare a feast of rich food for all peoples, a banquet of aged wine—the best of meats and the finest of wines” (Isa. 25:6). God promised to bless “foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord to minister to him, to love the name of the Lord, and to be his servants, all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it and who hold fast to my covenant—these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house will be called a house of prayer for all nations” (Isa. 56:6–7). Micah predicted a day when the nations would go on pilgrimage to Jerusalem (Mic. 4:1–5), and Zephaniah anticipated when God would “purify the lips of the peoples, that all of them may call on the name of the Lord and serve him shoulder to shoulder,” even bringing offerings to the temple (Zeph. 3:9–10). According to Zechariah, a time was coming when “the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, and to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles” (Zech. 14:16). Israel’s festivals allowed them to look back at what God had done, was doing, and was going to do for them and, through them, for the whole world.

The Israelites experienced a wide range of emotions during these festivals, but the prevailing emotion was joy. They rejoiced in their selection by God, living “together in unity” (Ps. 133:1), in God’s deliverance, provision, and protection, and in the hope of God’s consummation of his plan. Over and over, God instructed them to gather and rejoice in his presence, suggesting a fourth insight: a God who desires his people’s happiness must love his people.

Finally, the festivals were occasions to recognize God’s rule over Israel. Especially in an agricultural economy such as Israel’s, to refrain from work on the Sabbath and on festival days was to confess God’s sovereignty over time and to admit dependence on God. To leave house and fields and travel to Jerusalem confessed faith in God to protect. Offerings of firstfruits confessed that the whole harvest came from God. When they gathered, it was in the sanctuary, God’s palace, yet another reminder that God was Israel’s king, and they were his subjects.

Festivals

Passover and the Festival of Unleavened Bread

The Festival of Weeks

The Festival of Tabernacles

The Festival of Trumpets

The Day of Atonement

Sabbath Year

Jubilee

New Moon

Purim

Festival of Dedication

Summary

Jabesh Gilead

The exact location of the town Jabesh Gilead is unknown, but biblical descriptions place it in the northwest Gilead region. It may have been located near the Wadi Yabis. Both Tell el-Maqlub and Tell Abu Kharaz have been suggested as possible sites. Jabesh Gilead played prominent, if tragic, roles in three biblical events. Judges 19–20 records how the gross immorality of some men from Benjamin resulted in the other Israelite tribes attacking and nearly destroying the tribe of Benjamin. Because the people of Jabesh Gilead failed to assemble with the Israelite tribes at Mizpah (Judg. 21:8), all of its people were killed except for four hundred virgins, who were given as wives to the surviving Benjamites. Years later, 1 Sam. 11 records Saul, a Benjamite, saving Jabesh Gilead from the Ammonites. When the people of Jabesh Gilead heard that the Philistines had hung the corpses of Saul and his sons on the wall of Beth Shan, their warriors traveled all night to retrieve them and give them an honorable burial at Jabesh (1 Sam. 31:11–12). David blessed them for their bravery and kindness to Saul (2 Sam. 2:4–6).

Lebonah

This city is located about ten miles north of Bethel and ten miles south of Shechem. Shiloh stands about three miles to its southeast. This city is mentioned only in Judg. 21:19, but since it can be identified with modern el-Lubban, it is helpful in fixing the location of biblical Shiloh.

Mizpah

Meaning “watchtower,” this is the name of several sites in the Bible. In some Bible versions, the name also appears as “Mizpeh.” (1) Along with “Galeed,” a name given to the heap of stones that memorialized the covenant made between Jacob and Laban (Gen. 31:48–49). (2) A region near Mount Hermon that was occupied by the Hivites (Josh. 11:3). (3) One of the towns occupying the region of the Shephelah, or coastal plain, listed in Josh. 15:38–39.

(4) The place where the Israelites assembled in response to the military threat from Ammon and made Jephthah their leader (Judg. 10:17; 11:11). It may have been the home of Jephthah and may be the same place mentioned in Gen. 31:49. From Mizpah, Jephthah and Israel attacked the Ammonites. Mizpah became the place where Jephthah fulfilled his ill-conceived vow (Judg. 11:34). This location is most likely synonymous with the Ramath Mizpah in the territory of Gad (Josh. 13:26). (5) A site in Moab where David had his parents stay, with the permission of the king of Moab (1 Sam. 22:3).

(6) A city in the tribal allotment of Benjamin. It is listed between Beeroth and Kephirah and seems to have been close to Gibeon and Ramah (Josh. 18:26; 1 Kings 15:22; Neh. 3:7). Of the various places to bear the name “Mizpah,” the Benjamite location has the most biblical significance. The men of Israel gathered here to decide how to deal with the Benjamites’ behavior toward the Levite’s concubine (Judg. 20:1–3; 21:1–8). It was also here that Samuel called the people of Israel together to pray and renew their relationship with God after the ark of the covenant had been sent back by the Philistines (1 Sam. 7:5–6). As a result, when the Philistines attacked, God caused them to panic, and Israel had the victory. Samuel regularly visited Mizpah to render judgment for the Israelites (1 Sam. 7:16). Also, Saul was presented to Israel as its king at Mizpah (1 Sam. 10:17).

The location of the Benjamite Mizpah is debated today, with two possible sites being possible: Nebi-Samwil is approximately four and a half miles north of Jerusalem, and Tell en-Nasbeh, the more likely site, is approximately eight miles north of Jerusalem.

Mizpeh

Repentance

The act of repudiating sin and returning to God. Implicit in this is sorrow over the evil that one has committed and a complete turnabout in one’s spiritual direction: turning from idols—anything that wrests away the affection that we owe God—to God (1 Sam. 7:3; 2 Chron. 7:14; Isa. 55:6; 1 Thess. 1:9; James 4:8–10).

Terminology. Two Hebrew word groups are associated with the concept of repentance: nakham and shub. Nakham means “to pant, sigh, groan, howl.” When used with respect to the circumstances of others and the feeling of sympathy that they engender, it refers to compassion. When used in reference to feelings generated by one’s own actions, it means “grief” or “remorse.” In this regard, nakham predominantly has God as the subject. The KJV translates it about forty times as “repent.” While one of the senses of nakham is that of grief over one’s actions, those actions are ethically neutral: it does not presuppose that they are inherently evil. The NIV is correct, therefore, in never translating nakham as “repent” where God is the subject. In most cases where God is its subject, the term highlights God’s compassion and comfort for the afflicted (Isa. 40:1–2; 49:13), or his grief over the dire consequences brought upon or intended for the disobedient and his subsequent commutation of their punishment (Exod. 32:12–14; Judg. 2:18; 2 Sam. 24:16; Jon. 3:10), or his grief over human self-ruinous obstinacy (Gen. 6:6–7; 1 Sam. 15:11). Even in the few cases where nakham has human subjects, it need not always be rendered “repent,” their concern for change of heart notwithstanding (cf. Exod. 13:17; Judg. 21:6).

The concept of repentance is better conveyed by the Hebrew verb shub (“to turn, return back, restore, reverse, bring back”) or its noun form in rabbinic Judaism, teshubah (“repentance”). While shub has many nonreligious uses, its theological significance derives from the sense of either “turning away from God” (apostasy [cf. Hos. 11:7; Jer. 11:10]) or “turning to God” (repentance [cf. 1 Sam. 7:3–4; Hos. 14:1]). Our concern is with the latter sense, which normally would be followed by God’s return to his people (Zech. 1:3; Mal. 3:7).

In the OT, shub is central to the concept of repentance. It is the key term employed in the entreaty to God’s people to return to him (2 Chron. 30:6; Isa. 44:22; Ezek. 14:6). The outward signs of repentance in the OT include fasting, mourning (sometimes while sitting in dust or pouring ashes or dust upon one’s head), rending garments, wearing sackcloth, and offering sacrifices (Lev. 5:5–12; 2 Kings 22:11, 19; Neh. 9:1; Joel 2:12–17). The Israelites became so preoccupied with these outward forms that God told them repeatedly that he no longer had interest in them, but rather sought contrition of the heart (Ps. 34:18; Isa. 1:10–16; 58; 66:2; Joel 2:13).

In the NT, the dominant terms used for repentance are the verb metanoeō and the cognate noun metanoia; the overwhelming majority of these occur in Luke-Acts. These terms are used to express the complete turnaround in one’s way of life, including conversion, faith, and regeneration (Acts 2:28; 3:19; 5:31; 20:21). Occasionally these two terms are complemented by epistrephō to stress the positive side of repentance, that of turning from sin or idols to God (Acts 9:35; 11:21; 26:20).

Elements of repentance. The constituent elements of biblical repentance include the following: (1) A recognition of one’s sin, its damaging effects on life and nature, its affront to God’s word and authority, and its dire consequences (Ezek. 18:4; Rom. 3:23; 8:19–22; Rev. 21:8). (2) Personal outrage and remorse over one’s sin, grief at one’s helplessness, and a deep longing for forgiveness, reconciliation, and restoration. (3) A personal response to God’s grace in choosing a new spiritual direction by breaking with the past and returning to God. This includes confession and renunciation of sin, and prayer for God’s forgiveness (Lev. 5:5; Prov. 28:13; 1 John 1:9). (4) In some circumstances, repentance may require restitution (Exod. 22:1–15; 1 Sam. 12:3; 2 Sam. 12:6; Luke 19:8). (5) At its core, repentance is a rejection of the autonomous life and the surrender of oneself to the lordship of Christ (Jer. 3:22; Mark 8:34–38). (6) The proof of true repentance is the worthy fruit of a changed life (Luke 3:7–14; Eph. 4:17–32; Col. 1:10).

Shiloh

The Israelites established their worship center at Shiloh after the conquest of the land (Josh. 18:1), and it was there that the assembly gathered in order to apportion the rest of the tribal allotments after Judah’s apportionment (18:8–10). When the tribes west of the Jordan faced the possibility of war with the two and one-half tribes that had returned to Transjordan, Shiloh was the central meeting place (Josh. 22:9–12). The “house of God” continued to be at Shiloh during the period of the judges (Judg. 18:31), and annual festivities were celebrated there (21:19–21).

The apparatus of the cult was in place at Shiloh when Eli was the high priest. Elkanah brought his two wives, Hannah and Peninnah, to Shiloh to worship each year. When Samuel was born to Hannah, she dedicated him to God at Shiloh (1 Sam. 1). Because Eli’s sons abused their privileges as priests (1 Sam. 2:14), God told Samuel that he would remove the priesthood from Eli’s family. That word is affirmed in 1 Kings 2:27: “So Solomon removed Abiathar from the priesthood of the Lord, fulfilling the word the Lord had spoken at Shiloh about the house of Eli.” God “continued to appear at Shiloh, and there he revealed himself to Samuel through his word” (1 Sam. 3:21).

When the Philistines were encamped at Aphek on the coastal plain, the Israelites engaged them in battle and lost. Viewing the ark of God as a magic box, the Israelites took it from Shiloh out to the battle, abusing the sanctity of that symbol. The ark was captured, and a man of the tribe of Benjamin ran uphill from Aphek through the rugged Shiloh wadi system and arrived at Shiloh to announce the news (1 Sam. 4:12).

Solemn Assembly

Passover and the Festival of Unleavened Bread

The Festival of Weeks

The Festival of Tabernacles

The Festival of Trumpets

The Day of Atonement

Sabbath Year

Jubilee

New Moon

Purim

Festival of Dedication

Summary

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because Judges 21:1-25 is mentioned in the definition.

Books of Samuel

The books of Samuel tell the story of how kingship began in Israel and was subsequently secured under David. Almost all of David’s own story is recounted in Samuel, including God’s promise to him of a dynasty. This promise became a key seedbed for the messianic hope within the OT, which finds its fulfillment in Jesus as David’s son (Matt. 1:1).

Genre and Purpose

Samuel is part of a block of texts running from Joshua through Kings (excluding Ruth), which is known in the Hebrew Bible as the Former Prophets. This block offers a more or less continuous account of Israel’s life in the land of promise from its entry under Joshua until the exile after Jerusalem was captured by the Babylonians (2 Kings 25). Any assessment of the genre and purpose of Samuel must consider its relationship to these surrounding texts, though it should also recognize the distinctive elements of Samuel itself.

At its simplest, Samuel is a work of narrative prose that tells how kingship began in Israel and was secured under David after the failure of Saul, though it also contains a number of important poems. Although contemporary history writing would not be done in the same way, since Samuel points to the ways in which God is active throughout this time, Samuel certainly offers a testimony to this crucial period in Israel’s history. It is not the whole story of the period, as its testimony is concerned with a specific set of issues, and that testimony is related through God’s purposes for Samuel, Saul, and David. But this observation is vital for appreciating that Samuel is not just the story of how kingship came to Israel but is specifically a theological examination of it. It explores how God was at work, fulfilling the hope for kingship that had been expressed through Judg. 17–21, while also providing hope that the exile was not the end of his purposes for Israel as a whole and the kings of David’s line in particular. We should not think of this as a dry piece of history writing, for an important element is also that the telling of this story should entertain and grip those who either read or (perhaps more likely) heard it. Knowing that God had acted in the past for his people and that these actions continued to be important was not enough; the excitement that this should generate also needed to be apparent in the skill with which the story was told.

Outline

I. The Rise of Samuel (1 Sam. 1–7)

II. The Birth of Monarchy (1 Sam. 8–12)

III. Saul’s Early Reign and Rejection (1 Sam. 13–15)

IV. Long Rivalry Narrative: David and Saul (1 Sam.16–2 Sam. 1)

A. David’s anointing and arrival at court (1 Sam. 16–17)

B. David within Saul’s court (1 Sam. 18–20)

C. David as an outlaw in Judah (1 Sam. 21–26)

D. David in Philistine territory and Saul’s death (1 Sam. 27–2 Sam. 1)

V. Short Rivalry Narrative: David and Ish-Bosheth (2 Sam. 2:1–5:5)

VI. First Summary of David’s Reign (2 Sam. 5:6–8:18)

VII. Narrative of David’s Court (2 Sam. 9–20)

A. David accepts Mephibosheth (2 Sam. 9)

B. The war with Ammon and David’s sin (2 Sam. 10–12)

C. Long rebellion narrative: Absalom against David (2 Sam. 13–19)

D. Short rebellion narrative: Sheba against David (2 Sam. 20)

VIII. Second Summary of David’s Reign (2 Sam. 21–24)

Composition

Authorship and sources. The books of Samuel are anonymous, and any assessment of their authorship needs to start with this basic fact. There is a tradition in the Talmud (b. B. Bat. 14b; 15a) that associates the book with Samuel, Nathan, and Gad, presumably concluding that the books of Samuel constitute the source mentioned by 1 Chron. 29:29. But this reference is only to information on David’s life and thus is unlikely to refer to the whole of Samuel. Since Samuel’s own death is recorded in 1 Sam. 25:1, the book’s title in our tradition (in the LXX the books of Samuel are the first two books of Kingdoms, which continue into Kings) is unlikely to refer to authorship. Rather, it is more likely that a later author has drawn together a range of source materials in order to offer a coherent testimony about the origins of kingship.

For some time, the main sources behind Samuel seemed to have been identified, and they included a series of Shiloh traditions concerning the end of the house of Eli and the rise of Samuel (1 Sam. 1:1–4:1a), an ark narrative (2 Sam. 4:1b–7:1; 6), traditions concerning Saul and the origins of kingship (1 Sam. 7:2–15:35), a history of David’s rise (1 Sam. 16:1–2 Sam. 5:5), a succession narrative (2 Sam. 9–20), and a Samuel appendix (2 Sam. 21–24). Within this analysis, the place of 2 Sam. 5:6–25 and 2 Sam. 7:1–8:17 remained unclear, but the general thought was that the sources were more or less placed one after the other in their chronological sequence. But the probability of this conclusion has been challenged in recent times because the various sections of the books are clearly aware of information in other parts, so that the whole is actually well integrated. In addition, the actual boundaries of the sources remained unclear. An unfortunate effect of the source theories is that they tended to downplay some parts of the book, especially 2 Sam. 21–24, as being of less importance, whereas some recent studies have shown that they are closely integrated into the rest of the book, tying together themes developed elsewhere while also showing the structural integrity of the whole of Samuel.

Samuel is likely the end product of several stages of material collected together, rather than being the product of sources that are kept intact, but it is still a unified work. Possibly the oldest material is the collection of longer poems in 1 Sam. 2:1–10; 2 Sam. 1:17–27; 22:1–23:7, all of which draws on common themes and language and comments on the nature of kingship. The opening and closing blocks form the bookends, raising the hope of kingship (1 Sam. 2:1–10) and then commenting on how the king must submit to God’s reign (2 Sam. 22:1–23:7). In the central poem (2 Sam. 1:17–27) David laments the deaths of Saul and Jonathan. It is likely that these poems were joined with the stories about Samuel, Saul, and David in the ninth century BC but were then carefully placed to comment on the stories and yet also be commented on by them. Further editing may have continued until the time of Hezekiah in the late eighth century BC. Later on, more or less the whole of Samuel as we know it was included in the Former Prophets, perhaps during the exile. The important point to note here is that Samuel is a carefully composed whole and not simply a collection of source materials.

Literary devices. Evidence for the nature of the book’s composition can be seen in how it employs certain literary devices throughout. Two that are worth noting are the way the text plays with narrative chronology and employs repetition in various forms. The play with narrative chronology means that although the movement of the book is broadly chronological (moving from the origins of the monarchy to the latter period of David’s reign), not every element is recorded in its actual chronological sequence, since at some points other factors were more important. Alternatively, at some points different narrative strands are brought into a chronological relationship with one another, most notably in comparing the locations of David and Saul in 1 Sam. 27–2 Sam. 1. A simple example of relating material outside its chronological sequence occurs in 1 Sam. 26:12, where it is said that God had caused Saul’s soldiers to sleep so that David could enter Saul’s camp only after David had reached Saul, though clearly the soldiers must already have been asleep.

At other points, the breaks with chronological sequence cover different stories about David. For example, in 2 Sam. 5:17–8:14 there are four accounts about David, two in which he overcomes enemies (5:17–25; 8:1–14) and two associated with events in Jerusalem and public worship (6:1–7:29). Since 7:1 tells us that David’s desire to build a temple came after God had delivered him from all his enemies, it follows that the events of chapter 7 must have come after those of 8:1–14. Here, arranging the material to highlight the theme of public worship was more important than placing it in chronological sequence.

This same section also demonstrates the use of repetition. Hence, 5:17–25 recounts two nearly identical defeats of the Philistines in which David must trust God, while the victories in 8:1–14 are twice said to come about because God gave David victory wherever he went (8:6, 14). Similarly, both 6:1–23 and 7:1–29 depend upon interest in the ark and thus mutually interpret each other. Other large-scale repetitions include two announcements of the coming of kingship (1 Sam. 2:10, 34), two announcements of the end of Eli and his family in the sanctuary at Shiloh (1 Sam. 2:27–36; 3:10–14), and two times when David does not kill Saul (1 Sam. 24; 26). In an oral culture, such repetitions are not evidence of poor composition but rather are a crucial tool for emphasizing the central themes being developed. In addition, variations within each repetition are a tool for increasing the audience’s interest, showing that the authors of Samuel were interested in both giving historical testimony and entertaining their audience.

Text

It is generally agreed that the text of Samuel poses more than its fair share of difficulties, something that can be seen in the often significant differences between the received Hebrew text (MT) and the early translations, especially the main Greek translation (LXX). For example, in 1 Sam. 17 the best-regarded edition of the LXX lacks vv. 12–31, 50, 55–58, and even in shared material it is sometimes significantly shorter. It is generally agreed that the Greek version resolves a number of anomalies, but is this because the MT has been expanded or because the LXX has been abbreviated? In addition, three significant Samuel manuscripts were found at Qumran. Although two of these are only fragmentary, one covers significant portions of Samuel. Although the disputed portions of 1 Sam. 17 are absent from it, there are some points where it appears to support the LXX and others where it agrees with the MT while also introducing some other issues of its own.

It is clear, therefore, that complex issues are involved in determining the text of Samuel, and one must avoid taking a doctrinaire position and allow each point to be resolved on its own merits. At the same time, the difficulties should not be magnified beyond reason, since large sections of the text can be established with reasonable certainty, and for all the problems, the MT remains a reliable guide. One might suggest in the case of 1 Sam. 17, for example, that the LXX text represents an early attempt to address apparent difficulties in the narrative (especially the question of when Saul met David) that nevertheless failed to realize that not everything in Samuel is narrated in exact chronological order. Nevertheless, anyone who compares different translations of Samuel (e.g., NIV and NRSV) will notice variants and should make use of good commentaries at that point.

Central Themes

The reign of God. Kingship lies at the heart of Samuel. But although it is concerned with the story of Israel’s first two kings (Abimelek in Judg. 9 is an aberration and probably only a local figure), it places their story within the framework of God’s reign. No matter what authority a king in Israel might claim, it was always subject to God’s greater authority. Indeed, Samuel makes clear that God did not need a king but rather chose the monarchy as the means by which his own reign might be demonstrated.

An important way in which God’s reign is demonstrated is through the motif of the reversal of fortunes, in which the powerful are brought down and the weak raised. This is announced in Hannah’s Song (1 Sam. 2:4–8) and is then demonstrated when God removed the corrupt family of Eli from their position of power in the sanctuary at Shiloh (2:27–36; 4:1–18). On the other hand, Samuel himself came to prominence even though he had no position of power. Saul, likewise, although a member of a relatively wealthy family (9:1–2), knew that he was not someone who had automatic power (9:21) but still was raised up to be king by God. Yet when he, like Eli before him, became corrupt and clung to power rather than submit to God, he too was removed so that he could be replaced (15:28–29).

David also came from a humble position as the youngest son in his family (1 Sam. 16:11), but unlike Eli and Saul, he would not grasp power for himself. Indeed, he twice refused to kill Saul when he had the chance (1 Sam. 24; 26) and punished those who claimed that they could exercise violence on his behalf (2 Sam. 1:11–16; 4:9–12). Even when it seemed that David had later lost all to Absalom, he held to the fact that he could reign only as long as he had God’s support (2 Sam. 15:25–26). This, in fact, is a central theme in 2 Sam. 7 when David wanted to build a temple for God, for there it is made clear that David cannot act without God’s authority, and that his descendants will have authority as long as they too submit to God (2 Sam. 7:11b–15). David’s closing songs (22:1–23:7) make clear that the king has no authority apart from God.

Kingship. Kingship in Israel is closely related to the theme of God’s reign. The possibility of kingship first arises in Hannah’s Song (1 Sam. 2:10) and is confirmed by the man of God who announces the judgment against Eli’s family (2:34). Both references occur before Israel’s elders requested a king because of the failure of Samuel’s sons (8:1–9), indicating that the request for a king did not take God by surprise. In addition, it indicates that authentic kingship in Israel could only be that which was initiated by God.

The story of Saul’s rise to the throne needs to be read in light of this. Although the human move to kingship stemmed from the request of the elders for a king (1 Sam. 8:4–9), it was still the case that Saul could become king only because of God’s decision. Although 1 Sam. 8–12 often has been broken down into supposedly conflicting sources, it is better to read it as a unified text but to note that the narrator’s voice is not equivalent to any of the characters that speak through it. When the text is understood in this way, it is possible to appreciate that kingship was part of God’s purposes for Israel, but it needed to follow his model. Kings in Israel could prosper only when they submitted to the greater reign of God. It was Saul’s mistake that he did not recognize this. David, although he made some terrible mistakes, always understood this truth, and his closing songs (2 Sam. 22:1–23:7) reflect on it. David learned what Saul never did: power is never something to be grasped; rather, it can only be accepted as a gracious gift from God to be used for his purposes.

New Testament Connections

The importance of the books of Samuel for the NT is far greater than its five direct citations there (Acts 13:22; Rom. 15:9; 2 Cor. 6:18 [2×]; Heb. 1:5) might indicate. The theme of kingship and the associated promise to David in 2 Sam. 7 are fundamental to the messianic hope throughout the OT and are picked up in the NT. Even when the NT cites other OT texts (such as Ps. 2) with reference to Jesus, it is still the books of Samuel that lie behind the citation. In addition, the NT frequently indicates that Jesus was a son of David (e.g., Matt. 1:1). Although such texts do not cite Samuel directly, they clearly allude to it because of God’s promise that David’s throne would be established forever (2 Sam. 7:16). Jesus’ ministry transcends that of David in every way, but we cannot understand his ministry apart from David and God’s promise to him.

Feast of Ingathering

Passover and the Festival of Unleavened Bread

The Festival of Weeks

The Festival of Tabernacles

The Festival of Trumpets

The Day of Atonement

Sabbath Year

Jubilee

New Moon

Purim

Festival of Dedication

Summary

Ignorance

At creation, God made human beings to depend on him to reveal his purposes, so that their response to life would always involve trust in, and loving obedience to, his counsel. The entrance of sin created a barrier between people and God. Fallen humanity, in its autonomy, seeks to understand the world apart from knowledge of God (1 Cor. 2:14).

In Scripture, ignorance frequently refers to one’s inability to understand who God is or one’s true identity and purpose (Eph. 4:18). In ignorance, humanity disregards God’s revelation (Rom. 1:22–25). The darkened, idolatrous heart is the source of human blindness (Jer. 17:9; Ezek. 14:2–3). Satan holds people captive in blindness (2 Cor. 4:4). God revealed himself through prophetic messengers, but throughout the OT, God’s people disregarded their message. Although God raised up judges to lead his people, they repeatedly reverted to idolatry: “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as they saw fit” (Judg. 21:25).

Jesus is the true light, which gives light to every person (John 1:9). Yet people loved darkness and would not come into the light for fear that their deeds would be exposed (John 3:20). However, through the Word, the Spirit can transform the hearts of people such as Paul, who formerly opposed Christ and his church in ignorance and unbelief (1 Tim. 1:13).

Ignorance, however, does not always entail sin. Our finitude implies that our knowledge will always be limited. God has appointed teachers to facilitate our growth in understanding (Eph. 4:11–12).

Instruments

The Bible often refers to songs, music, musical sounds and instruments, and dancing. We can infer several details about the instruments from their descriptions in the Bible as well as from archaeological finds and other ancient texts. NT references to music are scant; the OT material may be supplemented by ancient Near Eastern resources from Egypt, Canaan/Israel, Ugarit, and Mesopotamia.

Music

Style. In all likelihood, Israel’s music sounded much like that of its neighbors. This conjecture is particularly strengthened by findings from Ugarit, a city on the Syrian coast across from Cyprus. These findings, roughly from the time of the judges, mention some of the same musical instruments found in the Bible, some of which have been uncovered by archaeologists. The style of the poetry is very similar to the Song of Deborah (Judg. 5). Lyrically, some of the descriptions and titles used by the Canaanites for Baal are applied by Israel to Yahweh, to assert that he is the true God who has these attributes. Given these similarities in text, poetic style, and instrumentation, it is most probable that Israel’s music sounded much like that of its neighbors. Still, there is some evidence for regional styles. The direction to play psalms “according to gittith” (superscription to Pss. 8; 81; 84) may refer to the style of Gath, and similar regional interpretations are proposed for other directions in the psalms.

Lyrics. The lyric side of Israel’s songs exhibits rhythm and deliberate structure. The most obvious planned structure is the alphabetic acrostic, where the poet or songwriter composes one or more verses to begin with successive letters of the Hebrew alphabet. But the psalms exhibit many other structures involving symmetries and balance, such as equal halves, centered lines, symmetrical patterns of stanza length, and other features. The lines themselves usually demonstrate balance among their parts, having similar numbers of beats or accented syllables. Several lament poems exhibit a particular pattern known as qinah meter, which presumably also fits a musical template.

Performance. The performance of the psalms was, on at least some occasions, accompanied by multiple instruments and performed in a choir to achieve the volume necessary for community gatherings, which had no amplification equipment. It is generally assumed, though not known, that all choir members sang melody rather than in parts. They may well have integrated solo performances and musical interludes. From the poetry of the psalms, we observe different speaking voices. That is, in some instances, we hear the voice of the king, or of the people generally, or an official who addresses the audience, or a priestly or prophetic speaking voice, even the words of God himself. This is very suggestive that public performance may have brought different singers to the foreground at different times. There are also poems that employ a repeated refrain, suggesting an antiphonal performance, and others in which the priests or people in Jerusalem take up parts different from those of the arriving worshipers. While the exact execution of these songs is speculative, these elements suggest a certain amount of pageantry, at least for community settings. David is responsible for setting up Israel’s musical orders for the temple, with professional musicians with rotating responsibilities (1 Chron. 16; 25).

Instruments

Strings. The most frequently mentioned instrument is the kinnor, a lyre, also often referred to as a harp. The sound box of the harp is at the base, from which a straight or curved neck rises at a sharp angle so that the strings going from the box to the neck are of different length. The lyre has two uprights and a crosspiece on top, from which the strings of similar length stretch down to the sound box. The kinnor-lyre had eight to ten strings (based on Akkadian and Ugaritic findings and Jewish descriptions) and could be played with a pick or by hand. David’s “harp” was such a lyre. The “harp” mentioned in the NT (1 Cor. 14:7; Rev. 5:8; 14:2; 15:2) probably was also a lyre. Another OT lyre, or perhaps a harp, the nebel, complemented the kinnor-lyre. Jewish tradition about the strings implies that it produced a lower sound. The nebel-lyre is most often mentioned with other instruments, though occasionally alone. Another stringed instrument mentioned three times, the ’asor, may have been a harp or a lyre with ten strings (Pss. 33:2; 92:3; 144:9). In Pss. 45:8; 150:4 there is mention of “the strings,” which may refer to more than just the stringed instruments specifically mentioned in the Bible. The ancient world also had lutes, an instrument with a long, straight neck, fretted like a guitar or ukulele, proceeding from a small sound box.

Percussion. Timbrels, cymbals, and castanets or rattles are percussion instruments mentioned in the Bible. The timbrel, also known from Egypt and Ugarit, was a hand drum, like a tambourine but without metal jingles. The timbrel accompanies dancing and may have been used by the dancers (Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1 Sam. 18:6). Cymbals may have been paired or individual, but it is not certain whether these latter were suspended cymbals or finger cymbals, being four to six inches in diameter. In 2 Sam. 6:5 there is mention of another percussion instrument, mena’an’im (the root of this word means “to shake”), perhaps “sistrums” (NIV) or “castanets” (NASB) (although the KJV renders it as “cornets”). Egyptian sistrums were small, forked, metal instruments with three sliding crossbars that had hooked ends. Archaeologists have also found rattles made of pottery, with ceramic balls inside. Castanets were small hand-clappers joined with a string. Israel likely had all of these, though it is hard to know which is referred to in 2 Sam. 6:5. The cymbal is mentioned once in the NT (1 Cor. 13:1), though not as musically pleasing in that context.

Woodwinds and horns. The OT attests to both an animal horn, most frequently called a shopar, and a metal trumpet, the khatsotserah (Num. 10:2–10). The NT refers to a horn with a word used to translate both OT terms (salpinx). The ancient world had both flutes and shawms. Shawms have a bell-like flare at the end, while the shaft of a flute is straight to the end. What is likely a double-reed shawm is frequently translated “flute” (1 Sam. 10:5; 1 Kings 1:40; Isa. 5:12; 30:29; Jer. 48:36 [NIV: “pipes”]). It is unclear whether the instrument mentioned in Gen. 4:21; Ps. 150:4 commonly translated as “flute” is a woodwind or a stringed instrument. The NT also mentions a flute or reed instrument (Matt. 11:17; 9:23; 1 Cor. 14:7; Rev. 18:22) that could be played for dancing or mourning.

Simplicity and complexity. Instruments such as horns, trumpets, and some percussion instruments were not used only for making music. The blowing of the ram’s horn or the trumpet might be used to sound the alarm, convene an assembly, or in preparation for an announcement. Aaron was to wear metal bells on the hem of his robe when entering the holy place (Exod. 28:33–35). Some of the percussion instruments may have been used to augment dance and keep rhythm more than to make music for singing. The strings were the primary instruments to accompany singing, though they were not necessarily accompanied by song.

A few Assyrian texts treat the tuning and playing of music with technical notations. From their string designations and tuning directions we can infer that their scales utilized seven notes as in the modern octave (seven notes plus one repeating). The notes for tuning stringed instruments suggest that the tunings produced different scales. Musical theory, then, was not completely absent. Many of the pictorial representations of musicians from Egypt and Mesopotamia include multiple instruments being played together (cf. Nebuchadnezzar’s instructions in Dan. 3:5, 7, 10, 15 and David’s celebration in 2 Sam. 6:5). These are not simply multiple kinds of noisemakers, although community gatherings would require volume. Rather, they exhibit a sense of understanding which instruments complemented each other well. While the singing of the ancient Near East no doubt included chanting, singing with multiple instruments suggests something more melodious than mere chanting interspersed with the strumming of a lute. This music could be styled to fit different moods, to soothe, to celebrate, to mourn, to worship. It is reasonable to suggest that the music accompanying the psalms reflected the wide range of emotions mentioned in the text.

Dancing

Justice

The concept of justice pervades the Bible, especially, though not exclusively, the OT. The key biblical terms that convey this concept include mishpat, tsedeq/tsedaqah, yashar in the OT and the dik- word group in the NT (whose noun and verb forms are translated respectively as “righteous” and “justify” or their respective cognates). The biblical concept of justice is an embodiment of two contemporary concepts: righteousness and justice. The former designates compliance with the divine norm, while the latter emphasizes conformity to a societal standard of what is right and equitable. Focusing exclusively on the latter hinders the correct understanding of justice in the biblical sense. Additionally, the biblical understanding of this concept is encumbered by the use of differing English terms to translate the same Hebrew or Greek terms.

Mishpat and Tsedaqah

Mishpat inherently encompasses the idea of judicial activism consisting in the provision of standard criteria (legislation, instructions, directives) for conduct and adjudication, and/or the actual arbitration between parties with the goal of ascertaining culpability or otherwise and administering the requisite sanctions or acquittal. Tsedaqah, on the other hand, emphasizes the established norm of just order for right conduct both in the larger society and for individuals. Whereas mishpat emphasizes the action that seeks to establish or enforce right patterns of behavior for the common good, tsedaqah stresses the practice (or lack thereof) of such a norm in society, or between individuals, or an individual’s compliance with such a norm.

When used in combination as a hendiadys (or word pair), these two terms signify an inherent requirement for conformity to an established norm (whether in the religious sphere or in civil society) or the requirement of loyalty or right conduct between individuals. To the person who stands to benefit from this norm, it approximates a right (i.e., a claim). Conversely, implicit duty is placed upon the person who ensures the conformity to such an established norm. This fact is better appreciated when we reckon with the covenantal nature of requirements for justice in the ancient world, in which both parties have both claim and responsibility. Broadly speaking, this concept also implies good governance, which accrues order to life and common benefits to all members of the community.

This idea is exemplified even in passages that do not use this precise phraseology (mishpat utsedaqah). Judah’s widowed daughter-in-law, Tamar, had an inherent right to be provided with a (kinsman-redeemer) husband to raise up progeny for her deceased husband, while Judah had the incumbent duty of giving her in levirate marriage to his surviving son. When Judah failed to execute his duty, Tamar entrapped him into an incestuous relationship, from which she conceived. When condemned to die for adultery in a clannish court setting, Tamar revealed the identity of her unborn child’s father, to which Judah responded by saying, “She is more righteous than I, since I wouldn’t give her to my son Shelah” (Gen. 38:26). That is, she acted more in conformity to the norm than he did. In another instance, Yahweh, while challenging the Judeans concerning their loyalty to him in a covenant lawsuit setting, asks, “A son honors his father, and a slave his master. If I am a father, where is the honor due me? If I am a master, where is the respect due me?” (Mal. 1:6). It is Yahweh’s right as father and master to receive honor and respect, while it is their duty to give him both.

God as the Source and Model of Justice

To be just, then, implies conformity to that which is right—yashar (the standard or norm). In Scripture, this standard is the revealed divine will and character. Compliance to it is often expressed in biblical narrative as doing what is “right [or good] in the Lord’s sight” (Deut. 6:18; 12:28; 1 Kings 14:8; 22:43), while its antithesis is doing what is “evil in the eyes of the Lord” (Judg. 2:11; 1 Kings 11:6; 14:22) or doing what some human figure(s) “saw fit” (Deut. 12:8; Judg. 17:6; 21:25).

Therefore, the source of justice is God himself. It flows from his essential character as one who is both just and righteous, whose actions are flawless, perfect, upright, and just (Deut. 32:4; 1 Sam. 12:7; 2 Sam. 22:31; Job 37:23; Ps. 89:14). God is the righteous lawgiver, hence the one who establishes the norm for right conduct (Deut. 4:4–8; Ps. 19:7–9). He requires justice of all his creatures (cf. Gen. 9:5–6; Exod. 21:12, 28–29). God also judges righteously (Gen. 18:25; 1 Kings 8:32; Ps. 9:4, 9; Jer. 9:24) and defends and vindicates the weak and oppressed (Deut. 10:18; Ps. 103:6). The responsibility of maintaining justice in the human community, however, he delegates to its leaders, such as civil magistrates or political officials, and requires them to execute this responsibility with integrity, equity, and impartiality (Deut. 1:16–17; 16:18–20; Ps. 82:2–4; Prov. 31:8–9; John 7:24; 1 Pet. 2:13–14). God’s requirement of justice in the human community is not limited to its leaders only; it is incumbent upon everyone therein (Ps. 15:1–5; Mic. 6:8; Zech. 7:9; 8:17; Matt. 23:23).

Executing justice requires doing all that is essential to bring about the divine order implicit in creation and explicit in revealed truth, to produce harmony in all relationships in which humankind is involved (divine-human, human-human, and human-nature). This has the twofold result of restraining evil and advancing the benefits of just living within the human society. Thus, the fruits of justice are to be seen in all spheres of human life, such as spirituality (2 Cor. 5:17–21), morality and ethics (Phil. 4:8; Col. 3:5–9; Titus 2:11–13), social justice (Exod. 22:21–24; Isa. 56:1; Amos 2:6–7; Ezek. 22:7–29; James 2:1–9), and economic justice (Amos 5:11; 8:4–6; James 5:1–6), as well as in the environment (Deut. 20:19–20; Pss. 96:9–13; 104:1–31; Eccles. 2:5–6; Rom. 8:19–22).

Additionally, the outworking of justice produces (re)distribution and retribution. Distribution means that those blessed materially share of their blessings with those in need (Deut. 15:1–15; Ps. 112:5–9; Prov. 28:27; Isa. 58:1–11; 2 Cor. 8–9). Retribution relates to the vindication and deliverance of the oppressed and judgment on the wicked (1 Sam. 2:7–10; Job 36:5–10; Ps. 72:4; Luke 4:17–20). This is both attested in biblical Israel’s experience (Isa. 1:17–20; 5:1–9; Jer. 5:26–29; Mic. 2:1–3) and is being anticipated at the final judgment (Isa. 66:24; Dan. 12:1–3; Matt. 25:31–46; 2 Thess. 1:5–10). The vindicated obtain God’s love and grace, while the judged receive his justice. Justice and love, therefore, are the two sides of God’s holiness.

Lute

Music

Instruments

Dancing

Lyre

Music

Instruments

Dancing

Music

Music

Instruments

Dancing

Pipe

Music

Instruments

Dancing

Sela

The Hebrew word sela’ may designate any rocky height or cliff (see also Rock), but it is also used as a proper name, “Sela,” implying some sort of “rock fortress.” (1) A fortress city in Edom that King Amaziah captured and renamed “Joktheel” (2 Kings 14:7). It is near Buseirah (biblical Bozrah) in modern-day Jordan. (2) A site in Amorite territory (Judg. 1:36) of unknown location. (3) A city in Moabite territory (Isa. 16:1), perhaps the same place as in Judg. 1:36. (4) Sela Hammahlekoth, in the Desert of Maon, is the place where Saul left his pursuit of David and went to meet the Philistines (1 Sam. 23:24–28). (See Sela Hammahlekoth.) (5) Sela of Rimmon (NIV: “rock of Rimmon [pomegranate]”), in the wilderness of the territory of Benjamin, east of Geba; perhaps the large cave 1.2 miles east of Geba. Six hundred Benjamites fled here to escape the Israelites (Judg. 20:45–47; 21:13). (6) “Sela” occurs also in Isa. 42:11, but it is difficult to know whether it indicates only a craggy dwelling place (cf. Jer. 48:28) or perhaps refers to the site in 2 Kings 14:7 or Isa. 16:1.

Showing 1 to 50 of132 results

1. DANCER

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

Judges 21:23 - "And the Benjamites did so, and took their wives according to their number, from the dancers whom they carried off; then they went and returned to their inheritance, and rebuilt the towns, and dwelt in them."

Psalm 87:7 - "Singers and dancers alike will say, ‘All my springs are in you.’ "

Dancing has formed a part of religious rites and has been associated with war and hunting, with marriage, birth, and other occasions, since the recorded history of man. It grew out of three basic human reactions: 1. the desire to imitate the movements of beasts, birds, even the sun and moon; 2. the desire to express emotions by gestures; 3. gregarious impulses.

Throughout past ages dancing has been associated with worship. Closely related to religious praises was the sacramental dance in which worshipers sought to express through bodily movements praise or penitence, worship or prayer. Out of the primitive dances the esthetic dance of civilized ancient nations slowly developed. In these the primary concern of the dancers was to reveal grace, speed, and rhythm, often to appeal to the carnal nature of both participants and spectators. Vashti refused to expose herself because of this (Esther 1:12).

The Hebrews developed their own type of dancing, associated with worship. Basically, it was like modern religious shouting by individuals, or processions of exuberant groups. Three things characterized it: 1. sexes never intermingled in it, except where pagan influences had crept in; 2. usually dancing was done by women, with one leading, as in the case of Miriam; 3. dancing usually took place out of doors.

Hebrew contains six verbs to describe the actions of dance:

1. sahok - usually translated as sporting or playing and conveys the expression of joy in dancing.
2. rakod - original meaning was "to leap like a lamb"
3. karkar - suggests a round dance and may refer to turning on the heel in one sport
4. hol - to writhe or to turn
5. pesah - refers to a limping dance
6. hag - means "holiday," possibly from the word hug meaning "circle" or "dancing in a circle"

For ages, dancing has been accompanied by clapping of the hands, and percussion and other noise-making instruments seem to be native to it. In some cases, antiphonal singing accompanied the dancing. The Romans introduced the Greek dance to Palestine. At first the Primitive Christian churches allowed the dance, but it soon caused degeneracy, and was forbidden.

Today we have dancers of just about every tradition, and many churches are using the dance as re-interpretations of the biblical message. Also, considering the athletic nature of many of the dances, it is not at all off base to say that the modern gymnast can also be considered as a counterpart of the ancient dancer. Certainly the fluidity of movement and the grace inherent in gymnastics would allow this.

2. You Are Not My Students

Illustration

At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten students waiting for a professor to return to his office. They needed his signature to add his course, and the forms were due early the next day. Five were wise and five were foolish. The wise ones brought something to eat while they waited, but the foolish ones did not. The professor was a long time in coming, and as they waited all afternoon, they got very hungry. The foolish ones said, "Give us some of your food." But the wise ones answered, "No, we only brought enough for ourselves, and there isn't enough to share. Go to the cafeteria and buy something." But while they were on their way to the cafeteria, the professor arrived. He signed the forms of those who were waiting, then locked his office and went home. Later that evening, the others telephoned him at home and said, "Sir! Sir! Come back and sign our forms." But he replied, "I tell you the truth, you are not my students." Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.

3. One Way Out

Illustration

Edward F. Markquart

The year was 1275 BC, before Christ. The land was Egypt. The ruler was Pharaoh. The leader of the Jews was Moses. The Jews had been in slavery for four hundred years to the Egyptians, building their cities and pyramids. But God had sent the plagues, and now the Jewish nation was beginning their exodus from slavery. And at this particular moment, they were stopped by a body of water, the Red Sea, and the Egyptian chariots and horses were rapidly coming to attack and bring death and extinction. It seemed there was no way out and then a miracle. Suddenly, before them, the Red Sea opened up and there was only one way. Only one way out. Only one way to avoid death and extinction and that was through the Red Sea.

That paradigm, that visual image of only one way out of death and extinction is deeply woven into the theology of the Old Testament and New Testament. I still can clearly see a picture poster from a Bible Series that I used to teach of a high piece of land on the left, a deep chasm in the middle and a high piece of land on the right. The high piece of land on the left represented Earth; the high piece on the right represented Heaven; and then there was a bridge in the form of a cross that went from Earth to Heaven. It was only on the cross of Christ that we moved from Earth to Eternity. It was the only way. It is the only way.

4. The Maidens In The Shadows

Illustration

Staff

I will never forget the story of a famous bishop who spoke at a theological seminary. He repeated Jesus' story of the wise and foolish maidens. Then he looked those seminarians in the eye and challenged them. "Young men, would you rather be in the light with the ten wise maidens or out in the dark with the ten foolish maidens?" I am not certain the bishop was able to finish his message. For those who stand in the shadows there is the grudging obeisance to religion, but there is also that nagging suspicion that we would rather be out in the dark with the ten foolish maidens.

5. Storing What We Do Not Need

Illustration

W. Robert McClelland

Jesus did not condemn the man for eating, drinking and being merry, nor even for being rich. Rather the man was called foolish for building bigger barns. The point of the story is that the entrepreneur was planning to store more of his wealth than he needed to eat, drink and be merry. Look again at the words of the story. The man says, "What shall I do for I have nowhere to store my crops?" Not true! He has barns. His problem is that his harvest has been so great that his present storage facilities will not hold all of the grain. So he decides, "I will tear down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain. Then and only then will I have ample goods to eat, drink and be merry." Again, not true! He already has ample goods. He does not have to live in the moment. He has barns for his future. They may not be as big as he would like, but he has plenty to eat, drink and be merry. The man already has enough wealth to enjoy Shalom. He has a sense of well-being and security because God has generously blessed his land with fruitfulness. Fortune has smiled on him and he has been able to accumulate a sizeable portion of this world's goods.

The point of the story is not that there is something wrong with amassing some wealth, but that he was intending to store it all by building bigger barns and storing it. He was called "foolish" because he did not recognize that his wealth had brought him happiness and that it could do the same for others if only it were not locked up in those bigger barns. His sin was not that he had become wealthy, but that he wanted to hoard all his wealth. His sin was not that he ate, drank and was merry, but that he was withholding the means for others to do the same. He had become a bottleneck in the flow of Shalom blessings to others.

The story, so understood, is not a teaching condemning the foolishness of gathering wealth. It is rather a parable which condemns the refusal to share the wealth we do not need. It warns about the shortsightedness of failing to be a good custodian of the abundance that God entrusts to us.

6. Modern Proverbs

Illustration

M.R. De Haan II

Well-trained is the son who can hang onto his father's words as well as he can a flyball (Prov 4:4).

Happy will be the child who cries because his dad loves him (Prov 10:12)

A wise father hates sin in order to love his son.

A good father shows the value of a book as well as a buck.

The dad who wonders how much of a teacher he needs to be would do well to go to the school of Solomon.

The man who finds a good woman should show his son how to avoid a bad one (Prov 2,5,6,7,9).

What a father knows about sex might help his children as much as surprise them (Prov 23:26-8).

A wise son makes a glad dad as much as a foolish one makes a glum mum (Prov 10:1).

Thank God for Fathers who not only gave us life but taught us what to do with it.

If you're amazed at how hard your dad can make it for you, try it without him (Prov 15:5).

Double whammy; foolish son and contentious mammy (Prov 19:13).

7. Public Pressure

Illustration

Brett Blair

Lloyd J. Ogilve, in his book Life without Limits, tells the story of a pastor who in the space of one week heard the following comments from various people:

A woman said, "I'm under tremendous pressure from my son these days. I can't seem to satisfy him, however hard I work. He really puts me under pressure."

A young man said, "My parents have fantastic goals for me to take over the family business. It's not what I want to do, but their pressure is unbearable."

A college woman said, "I'm being pressured by my boyfriend to live with him before we are married. You know...sort of try it out...to see if we are right for each other."

A husband said, "My wife is never satisfied. Whatever I do, however much I make, it's never enough. Life with her is like living in a pressure cooker with the lid fastened down and the heat on high."

A secretary said, pointing to her phone, "That little black thing is driving me silly. At the other end of the line are people who make impossible demands and think they are the only people alive."

A middle-aged wife said, "My husband thinks my faith is silly. When I feel his resistance to Christ, I wonder if I'm wrong and confused. As a result, I've developed two lives; one with him and one when I'm with my Christian friends."

An elderly woman said, "My sister thinks she has all the answers about the faith and tries to convince me of her point of view. I feel pressured to become her brand of Christian, but I keep thinking if it means being like her, I don't want it at all. When she calls, I just put the phone on my shoulder and let her rant on while I do other things. A half-hour later, she's still on the line blasting away, but I still feel pressure."

A young pastor at a clergy conference said, "I hardly know who I am any more. There are so many points of view in my congregation, I can't please them all. Everyone wants to capture me for his camp and get me to shape the church around his convictions. The pressure makes me want to leave the ministry."

All of these persons have one thing in common. They are being pressured by other people. We all, at one time or another, experience people-pressure. The question is how will it effect our judgment? That is the question Herod faced. After making an oath to a pretty young girl that she could have up to half of his kingdom, she surprised him and asked for the head of the Baptist. Mark 6:26 indicates that the King was thrown into distress, he knew it was wrong, but because of his oath and his dinner guests, he did not want to refuse her. He sent the executioner and on a platter was delivered the head of a holy man.

8. Living the Faith – Star of Peace

Illustration

Joel D. Kline

Pastor Joel D. Kline writes:

"Some years ago I read a novel by Jan de Hartog entitled Star of Peace. It's the story of a ship's captain transporting 250 Jews from Nazi Germany to Montevideo, Uruguay, the last port in the world willing to receive Jewish refugees. When the ship arrives there, however, it is soon discovered that all of the passengers' visas are forgeries, and authorities tell the captain that his only option is to return the Jews to Germany, regardless of the fate facing them there. The captain, recently converted to Christianity, cannot in good conscience do so. And so he hatches a plan to unboard the passengers by night along the coast of the United States, hoping then to arouse public support to keep the refugees in the US. But the Coast Guard catches wind of what the captain wants to do, and at every step thwarts his plan.

Weeks pass, and finally the American authorities determine that their only resolution is to have the captain declared mentally unstable. That would require the signature of the ship's doctor, a man named Hendrik who generally went to great measures to avoid involvement in controversial issues. Indeed, Hendrik seldom thought much of anyone beyond himself. But the experience on board the ship had begun to affect him deeply, and when pressure began to be placed upon him by government officials, Hendrik refuses to become a part of the scheme. Finally in frustration Hendrik cries out, "I'll see you all in hell first before I collaborate in your neat little scheme. Insane? He's not insane; he's putting his faith into practice. And the fact that you consider that to be insane tells me more about you and my government than I care to know!"

It's remarkable, isn't it, what can happen when we begin to stake our lives on the conviction that ours is a God who is in the business of making all things new. Even more, it's remarkable what can happen when we respond to God's invitation to join in the task of living and proclaiming life in God's kingdom.

9. God Is Like a Shepherd

Illustration

Frederick Buechner

'God's in His Heaven, all's right with the world,' Robert Browning wrote, and the psalm is not saying that any more than you or I can say it either. Whoever wrote it had walked through the valley of the shadow the way one way or another you and I have walked there too. He says so himself. He believed that God was in his Heaven despite the fact that he knew as well as we do that all was far from right with the world. And he believed that God was like a shepherd.

When I think of shepherds, I think of one man in particular I know who used to keep sheep here in Rupert a few years back. Some of them he gave names to, and some of them he didn't, but he knew then equally well either way. If one of them got lost, he didn't have a moment's peace till he found it again. If one of them got sick or hurt, he would move Heaven and earth to get it well again. He would feed them out of a bottle when they were new-born lambs if for some reason the mother wasn't around or wouldn't 'own' them, as he put it. He always called them in at the end of the day so the wild dogs wouldn't get them.

I've seen him wade through snow up to his knees with a bale of hay in each hand to feed them on bitter cold winter evenings, shaking it out and putting it in the manger. I've stood with him in their shed with a forty watt bulb hanging down from the low ceiling to light up their timid, greedy, foolish, half holy faces as they pushed and butted each other to get at it because if God is like a shepherd, there are more than just a few ways, needless to say, that people like you and me are like sheep. Being timid, greedy, foolish, and half holy is only part of it. Like sheep we get hungry, and hungry for more than just food. We get thirsty for more than just drink. Our souls get hungry and thirsty; in fact it is often that sense of inner emptiness that makes us know we have souls in the first place.

There is nothing that the world has to give us, there is nothing that we have to give to each other even, that ever quite fills them. But once in a while that inner emptiness is filled even so. That is part of what the psalm means by saying that God is like a shepherd, I think. It means that, like a shepherd, he feeds us. He feeds that part of us which is hungriest and most in need of feeding.

10. 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.

11. The Landmark

Illustration

Brett Blair

Henry Emerson Fosdick tells this story: Some years ago a little church on the coast of England was ruined in a hurricane. The congregation thought themselves unable to rebuild. Then one day a representative of the British Admiralty came to the clergyman to ask if they intended to reconstruct the church. The clergyman explained why they could not do it. "Well," said the representative of the British navy, "if you do not rebuild the church we will. That spire is on all our charts and maps. It is the landmark by which the ships of the seven seas steer their course." A true parable, that! Never more than now, when the souls of men need divine help, stable and secure, strong, sustaining, and empowering, was the church's message needed.

Though the hurricane of hell brought the sins of the world down upon the body of Christ, crushing the life from his limbs, that life would be restored. And the spire of the cross stands to this day for the souls of men who need divine help: Stable and secure, strong sustaining, and empowering help!

Note: This story has been described by some sources as an urban legend.

12. Storing What We Do Not Need

Illustration

Staff

13. The Tragedy of the Unprepared Life - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

There's a true story that comes form the sinking of the Titanic. A frightened woman found her place in a lifeboat that was about to be lowered into the raging North Atlantic. She suddenly thought of something she needed, so she asked permission to return to her stateroom before they cast off. She was granted three minutes or they would leave without her.

She ran across the deck that was already slanted at a dangerous angle. She raced through the gambling room with all the money that had rolled to one side, ankle deep. She came to her stateroom and quickly pushed a side her diamond rings and expensive bracelets and necklaces as she reached to the shelf above her bed and grabbed three small oranges. She quickly found her way back to the lifeboat and got in.

Now that seems incredible because thirty minutes earlier she would not have chosen a crate of oranges over the smallest diamond. But death had boarded the Titanic. One blast of its awful breath had transformed all values. Instantaneously, priceless things had become worthless. Worthless things had become priceless. And in that moment she preferred three small oranges to a crate of diamonds.

There are events in life, which have the power to transform the way we look at the world. Jesus' parable about the ten virgins offers one of these types of events, for the parable is about the Second Coming of Christ. But Jesus doesn't come right out and say this. Rather, he let's the story describe it for him. The woman on the sinking Titanic understood, in the light of her current circumstances, that she must make preparations for living on a lifeboat. Diamonds would not suffice, only the precious resources of an orange were good enough. Likewise, in this world where Christ may return at any moment, the parable warns, we must be ready.

Weddings are one of these kinds of events. And every time I have a wedding, I admonish those in the wedding to be ready, to make a special effort to be ready on the day of the ceremony. I plead with them to arrive early and be dressed and ready to go. Sometimes it works out and sometimes it doesn't.

Jesus' parable about a wedding, is told not from the vantage point of the bride and groom, but of the ten young maidens who had been invited to the happy occasion, five of them were foolish, said Jesus, five of them were wise. What was the measure of their wisdom? In a word, their readiness to be a part of the event. All of the young women had oil in their lamps, but five had an additional supply.

This is, of course, foreign to our concepts of weddings today. Weddings in our society are announced for a specific time and place, and if things are late in getting started, those invited guests begin to fidget a bit. But in first century Palestine, a wedding could happen anytime within several days. The uncertainty was considered a part of the excitement of the wedding. The bridegroom hoped to catch some of the bridal party napping. But fairness required that some announcement be made, so just before the big event a messenger was sent through the streets shouting: Behold the bridegroom commeth." The alert ones in the wedding party would respond, and the others would be left behind.

In Jesus parable, the cry came at midnight. This was often the case; most bridegrooms chose to come late at night. The sleeping attendants were awakened. It was then that they realized that they did not have enough oil in their lamps to get through the night. Panicked, they attempted to borrow some from the other bridesmaids. But they responded, "If we give you our oil, there won't be enough for us. Hurry out to the dealers and buy some yourself." So the five foolish maidens hurried out, but by the time they returned the door had already been closed. They knocked on the door and pleaded to be a part of the festivities, but the groom said: "If you belonged at this event you would already have been present." Jesus concluded: Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour.

What is this parable suggesting to us? I would like to make a few suggestions…

1. Some things cannot be borrowed.
2. Some things cannot be put off.
3. We can miss out on great opportunities.

14. HOW TO KNOW THE WILL OF GOD

Illustration

John H. Krahn

How often has each of us struggled over an important decision? We considered the variety of alternatives; often we discussed the decision with our family and friends. Sometimes we prayed over it and sought God’s direction. "What would God want me to do?" we asked ourselves.

Unfortunately, there is much confusion about the subject of the will of God. The words, "It is the will of God," are used too freely. A catastrophe happens and people say glibly, "It’s his will." We sometimes do inappropriate things and pass them off by saying God willed that we did it. Many talk about searching for the will of God as if it were somehow lost and needed to be found.

First and foremost in God’s will is that all people be saved. The Bible tells us that God wills all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. Throughout Scripture we find God desiring that everyone have the joy of Jesus as their Lord and Savior. To not have Jesus is to be firmly in sin’s control ... to have faith in the Son of God is to be alive to our full creative potential as he controls our lives. Through a cross and a vacant grave our salvation has been secured. Jesus, unlike any of the gods in other religions, is a personal God, and those who know him personally will be well on their way to know the Father’s will. To have said, "I believe in Jesus Christ as my Savior" is to have taken the first step.

Our second step in knowing the will of God is to be Spirit-filled. In Ephesians 5:17 we read, "Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is." To not be willing to understand the will of the Lord is to be foolish. Now what is the will? We continue to read in verse 18, "And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery; but be filled with the Spirit." Now most of us are at least qualified to discuss what it’s like to be filled with wine or some other spirited liquid. To be drunk is to be controlled by the agent within. We act differently when we have the spirit within us. Likewise to be filled with the Holy Spirit is to be controlled also by an agent within. We have no more control over ourselves than we would have if we were drunk with alcohol. To be filled in the Spirit is to be dominated and controlled by the Spirit.

The third and final step in discovering the will of God for our lives you’re really going to like; you’ll eat it up. It is to do whatever you want to do. That’s right. Do what you want when you have a decision to make. In the Book of Psalms we read, "Delight in the Lord, and he will give you the desires of your heart." Notice that it says the desires of our hearts are given to us by God when we delight in him. God puts the desire in our hearts so that what we want is really what God wants. His will becomes our will, and conversely, our will is his will. The third step is possible when we have taken the first step of believing and the second of being filled by the Holy Spirit. Having taken the first two steps and having become well-versed in Scripture, we follow our desires (really God’s) and live according to his will. We set out in life without fear, and as we make our way, he provides us with the necessary corrections along the course.

15. Mental Blocks to Creativity

Illustration

Roger von Oech

Mental blocks to creativity:

The right answer
That's not logical
Follow the rules
Be practical
Avoid ambiguity
To err is wrong
Play is frivolous
That's not my area
Don't be foolish
I'm not creative

Above all beware of No. 1. It stops most all creativity.

16. Save Early and Often

Illustration

George Fooshee

"The wise man saves for the future but the foolish man spends whatever he gets." Proverbs 21:20.

Overspending leads many people into financial disasters. And the Bible calls such spenders fools! I don't know many people who deliberately choose to be foolish. When it comes to money, the way to be wise is to be a saver.

Here are four simple rules given by the late financier, J.P. Morgan, for saving money.

Start early. Today is the day to start your savings program.
Save a definite amount.
Save regularly and systematically.
Employ your savings productively.

17. The Absurdity of the the Resurrection

Illustration

Thomas Long

In John Updike's A Month of Sundays there is a story that illustrates the absurdity of the the resurrection and maybe the story is more about beleif in it is a bit absurd: Clint Tidwell is the pastor of a church in a small Southern town, and one of his blessings and one of his curses is that the 80-year-old owner and still-active editor of the local newspaper is a member of his congregation. The blessing part is that this old journalist believes Tidwell to be one of the finest preachers around, and, wishing the whole town to benefit from this homiletical wisdom, he publishes a summary of Tidwell's Sunday sermon every Monday morning in the paper. The curse part is that this newspaperman, though well meaning, is a bit on the dotty and eccentric side, and Tidwell is often astonished to read the synopses of his sermons. The man owns the newspaper; nobody dares edit his columns, and the difference between what Tidwell thought he said and what the editor actually heard is often a source of profound amazement and embarrassment to Tidwell.

Tidwell's deepest amazement and embarrassment, however, came not when the newspaper editor misunderstood the Sunday sermon but, to the contrary, when he understood it all too sharply and clearly. It was early on the Monday morning after Easter, and Tidwell, in his bathrobe and slippers, was padding out the carport door to retrieve the Monday newspaper. The paper was lying at the end of the driveway, and, as Tidwell approached, he could see that the morning headline was in "second coming" sized type. What could it be? he wondered. Had war broken out somewhere? Had the local bank failed over the weekend? Had a cure for cancer been discovered? As he drew close enough to focus on the headline, he was startled to read the words, "Tidwell Claims Jesus Christ Rose From The Dead."

A red flush crept up Tidwell's neck. Yes, of course, he had claimed in yesterday's sermon that Christ rose from the dead, but golly, was that headline news? What would the neighbors think? I mean, you're supposed to say that on Easter, aren't you, that Christ rose from the dead, but that's not like saying that some person who died last week had risen from the grave, is it? Suddenly, as he looked at the screaming headline, what had been a routine Easter sermon had Tidwell feeling rather foolish.

Indeed, it is foolish the foolishness of the gospel. Those who gather on this Easter Day to sing and say that "Jesus Christ is Risen Today" do so not because we have proved anything philosophically, discerned some mystical key to the Scripture, or found some unassailable piece of historical evidence. We believe in the resurrection because the beloved disciple, the forerunner of all Easter faith, believed and passed the word along all the way into the present, prompting frail folks, like Tidwell and like us, to say what we believe: "I believe in Jesus Christ, born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, crucified, dead and buried. He descended into hell -- and dare we believe it? Dare we wager everything on it? -- rose again on the third day."

18. We Must Speak the Truth

Illustration

Brett Blair

Henry Augustus Rowland, professor of physics at Johns Hopkins University, was once called as an expert witness at a trial. During cross-examination a lawyer demanded, "What are your qualifications as an expert witness in this case?"

The normally modest and retiring professor replied quietly, "I am the greatest living expert on the subject under discussion." Later a friend well acquainted with Rowland expressed surprise at the professor's uncharacteristic answer. Rowland answered, "Well, what did you expect me to do? I was under oath."

The church must speak the truth, like the Physics professor. We are not the bearers of some of the truth or half the truth. We Christians are the bearers of All the Truth. Jesus is not a way to God he is the way. The Christ is not, as Mohammad said, a prophet. He is God incarnate. Our heavenly Father did not send a representative to earth; he sent his only Son. It may sound arrogant to those outside the church but we can do nothing less. We are under oath. We are His followers bound by what we have heard the Spirit reveal to our hearts and obligated to speak it to the world.

19. What Is Grief?

Illustration

Dr. Wright

Dr. Wright defines the following terms so we can get a grasp the nature and the impact of grief on our lives:

Grief is defined as Intense emotional suffering caused by loss, disaster, misfortune, etc. Acute sorrow - deep sadness. The word is derived from the Latin verb meaning to burden. Indeed, you do feel burdened. You are carrying a heavy load of feelings.

Mourn is defined as to feel or express sorrow. Mourning is the expression of grief. The word is derived from a Gothic verb meaning to be anxious, and it comes ultimately from an Indo-European base meaning to remember; to think of. Mourning involves remembering and thinking of the deceased, and this makes you feel anxious or uncomfortable.

20. Historical Background

Illustration

Theodore F. Schneider

There was open hostility among Jews and Samaritans in Jesus' day. Enmity had been brewing for centuries, and especially since the return of the exiles from Babylon in the sixth century B.C.E. Though it may be that by Jesus' day few remembered the stories of its origin, but the hostility was still there and mutually shared.

Believed by tradition to be the remnant of the lost tribes of Israel which disappeared after the fall of Samaria to Sargon II of Assyria in 722 B.C.E., the Samaritans had retained many of the traditions of their Hebrew heritage, including their version of the Pentateuch (the Torah) and festivals such as Passover. In 586 B.C.E. the Southern Kingdom, Judah, fell to the Babylonians and many of its leaders and people were carried into exile.

Upon the return of the exiles from Babylon in 538 B.C.E., the Samaritans offered their help in rebuilding the temple in Jerusalem, a generous gesture that turned their back upon the loyalties of the earlier traditions of the Northern Kingdom and the ancient patriarchal tradition for worship at Shechem, the valley between Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal. Their offer was refused! Instantly there was hostility. The Samaritans countered by building their own rival temple on Gerizim, and by creating troublesome rumors about the exiles within the court of Cyrus, the Persian king. Though this Samaritan temple was destroyed by John Hyracnus in 128 B.C.E., the rivalry over these two sites raged on into Jesus' day.

21. The Last Time

Illustration

Charles Swindoll

There was a couple (let's call them Carl and Clara) whose twenty-five year marriage was a good one. Not the most idyllic, but good. They now had three grown children who loved them dearly. They were also blessed with sufficient financial security to allow them room to dream about a lakeside retirement home. They began looking. A widower we'll call Ben was selling his place. They liked it a lot and returned home to talk and plan. Months passed.

That fall, right out of the blue, Clara told Carl she wanted a divorce. He went numb. After all these years, why? And how could she deceive him...how could she have been nursing such a scheme while they were looking at a retirement home? She said she hadn't been. Actually, this was a recent decision now that she had found another man. Who? Clara admitted it was Ben, the owner of the lake house, whom she inadvertently ran into several weeks after they had discussed the sale. They'd begun seeing each other. Since they were now "in love," there was no turning back. Not even the kids, who hated the idea, could dissuade their mother.

On the day she was to leave, Carl walked through the kitchen toward the garage. Realizing she would be gone when he returned, he hesitated, "Well, hon, I guess this is the last time " His voice dissolved as he broke into sobs. She felt uneasy, hurriedly got her things together, and drove north to join Ben. Less than two weeks after she moved in with Ben, her new lover, he was seized with a heart attack. He lingered a few hours...and then died.

22. 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.

23. Bridge Building Belongs to You and Me

Illustration

Brett Blair

Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall told this story: There were two unmarried sisters who had such a bitter fight that they stopped speaking to each other. Unable or unwilling to leave their small home, they continued to use the same rooms and sleep in the same bedroom. A chalk line divided the sleeping area into two halves. The chalk divided rooms so that both sisters could come and go and get her own meals without trespassing on their sister's space. In the black of night, each could hear the breathing and snoring of the foe. For years they coexisted in grinding silence. Neither was willing to take the first step to reconciliation.

Then one night one sister got up to go to the bathroom and fell, breaking her hip. The other sister awakened by the fall and the scream of pain jumped out of bed crossed the chalk line and came to her sister's side. After a few typical sister jabs at why she would do such a foolish thing as trip on her own feet, the sister held her foe of the past few years until the paramedics came and carried her to the hospital with her sister at her side. In those moments of darkness came the truth and power of love and light.

In telling this story Thurgood Marshall was speaking about the legal system. He made his point with these words: "the legal system can force open doors, and sometimes even knock down walls, but it cannot build bridges. That job belongs to you and me."

24. Outside of Himself

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

As some commentators have pointed out, it appears that it was particularly Jesus' engagement with the demonic that was causing Mary and Jesus' brothers to arch their eyebrows the sharpest. It all seemed a little bizarre to them. In verse 21 they say literally that they had to get him on home because Jesus was exeste, a word meaning to stand outside of yourself. Even today we may refer to a person who is an emotional wreck as being "beside himself" with grief. The idea is that someone has taken leave of his senses (or his senses have taken leave of him) and so what remains for the time being is a person whose emotions are unchecked and unregulated. This is the family's assessment of Jesus.

Apparently all Jesus' talk about invisible kingdoms of God and the casting out of demons led members of his own family to the conclusion that Jesus was seeing things that no one else could see and the reason was simple: he was out of his ever-loving mind! And it does appear that it was especially Jesus' emphasis on the demonic that yielded this opinion because no sooner does Jesus' family accuse him of being mad, and the religious leaders chime in with their own verdict. Because they limit their comments to the demonic, it's a good bet that it was this aspect of Jesus' ministry that was generating the most discussion. In the opinion of the scribes, Jesus was himself a devil. If Jesus seemed to have inside information as to the goings-on in the demonic realm, the explanation was simple and obvious: pulling a page from the old "it takes one to know one" playbook, the religious leaders lambaste Jesus as being himself a demon incognito.

It was a ridiculous thing to say, and finally completely foolish, too. Why would the devil be shooting himself in the foot? What kind of military commander blows up his own tanks? No, if Jesus seems to be plundering the realm of the devil, it's because he had already bound and gagged the devil himself and so now his lesser hosts were easy targets for Jesus. Jesus did his work not because he had the power of the devil but because he had already demonstrated power over the devil.

25. The Greatest Law

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

Dick Hyman is a newspaper feature columnist who writes humorously about laws that are still on the books but outrageously irrelevant. For instance, did you know that in Waterloo, Nebraska, barbers are forbidden by law to eat onions between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.? In Kentucky, there is a state law that orders all citizens to take a bath at least once a year.

All these laws seem ridiculous to us now. We laugh at them because it’s foolish to keep laws which have long outlived their usefulness. But have you thought lately about that law which will never be outdated? Jesus said it was the greatest law: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength, and your neighbor as yourself.”

If we lived by this twin-pronged law of Jesus, we would not have to legislate in so many areas of life.

26. Truth Tellers

Illustration

Steven Molin

For generations, the Quakers refused to follow the legal system’s requirement that witnesses in court must place their hand upon a bible and “swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” They were criticized, and ridiculed and in some cases, incarcerated for their refusal to take an oath. But because they gained the reputation of being honest people, they are, in some courts, no longer required to swear on the bible. They are known as truth-tellers.

Perhaps the old joke that we have told for generations is not just funny but also true. Lena says to her husband “Ole, why don’t you tell me you love me anymore?” And Ole replies “I told you fifty years ago that I loved you, and if that ever changes, I’ll let you know.” Even Ole was a truth-teller.

27. BARBER

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

Ezekiel 5:1 - "And you, O son of man, take a sharp sword; use it as a barber’s razor and pass it over your head and your beard; then take balances for weighing, and divide the hair."

According to the dictionary, a barber is one who shaves or trims the beard and dresses the hair. And that’s about the extent of what barbers did in ancient times. This is a very ancient occupation, dating back to early Egyptian times. Hair, of course, had great significance for the Hebrews, as much as for any other ancient peoples.

We recall the children who were dedicated as Nazirites, and so forbidden to cut their hair. We certainly recall what happened to Samson when he violated this injunction! There is a mysterious force that is connected with hair, perhaps because the ancients were aware that it kept growing for a period after death and so assumed that it had a separate life of its own, perhaps for some other reason, but, whatever, it was important.

The beard was particularly important to a Hebrew. It was a sign that a man was very unhappy if he didn’t care for his beard, and if he shaved it off, he was in deep mourning indeed. To cut off a man’s beard was to insult him very deeply. There’s another footnote to history - since the Romans were clean-shaven, it is most probable that the Jews continued to be bearded as a further act of rebellion. Where have we heard that before? Today’s youth aren’t quite so modern as they would like to think!

The hair of the head, also, was a matter of great care and concern, particularly during the New Testament period. The wealthy were very fond of wearing it long, a practice that disgusted St. Paul (1 Corinthians 11:15). Depraved young men, says Josephus, would sprinkle their hair with gold dust to make it more brilliant. Old men like Herod, again according to Josephus, dyed it. And, again, unkempt hair was a sign of sorrow; even more so a shaven head or one with hair pulled out by the handful.

Although we find mention of barbers in the Bible, there is a very real question as to their real occupation. Since it is likely that most men did their own personal grooming chores, the idea has been propounded that the barbers were really more of hairdressers for the women.

But, be that as it may, for the wealthy and the royal, there were without question a professional group who were responsible for the care of the hair and beards of their patrons. And if they also took on milady, well, why not?

That certainly wouldn’t be too unusual today, either. The world’s most famous hairdressers are men. But our friends the barbers don’t have to feel downgraded in any way. Even though long hair and beards may have many of them on the verge of bankruptcy, they can remember that the world has gone through this before, and emerged short-haired and clean-shaven. And we will assume that it will do so again.

28. An Answer To Prayer

Illustration

"Mom, why am I called Samuel?" The boy asked the question one day during the evening meal. Nervously she toyed with her dinner napkin. She hadn't dared tell anyone for fear that they would think her foolish. After all, she lives in the modern world, not the world populated by Old Testament characters. All of her friends knew that for years she had tried everything possible in order to be able to have children.

First there were the specialists who insisted on taking all sorts of tests, making all sorts of observations, and trying to figure out what the biological impediment was. Then there were the endless sessions with counselors trying to find out whether or not there were emotional blocks. Other counselors had indicated that perhaps her concerns about her husband were interfering with conception. The list of tests and the observations seemed to go on without end.

Almost unconsciously she kept going to church. Every week she would be in her regular place. Every week she sang the hymns, prayed the prayers and joined in the celebrations of the church. She also prayed silently that God would be able to work a miracle. Yes, she had a certain amount of trust in the miracles of science and medicine. She would hardly have been willing to discount the insights of psychologists. But if anyone had bothered to ask her what she really trusted she would have had to say that she really trusts in the power of God.

Among some of her friends this was a little too much. "Surely you don't think that prayer itself will make much difference, do you?" they would ask. "Surely you don't intend on trusting something you can't see or measure?" said others. In fact, she had overheard one acquaintance suggest that perhaps she was getting a little too involved in the church.

Nevertheless, she kept her doctor appointments and remained active in the church.

At length she and her husband received the great, long-anticipated news. Her pregnancy test revealed that she would indeed have a baby.

The name, what should the child's name be? Should they name the child after a favorite aunt? an uncle? perhaps a friend. No, the now-expectant mother knew what the child's name would be. It would have to come from the Bible, maybe the Old Testament. If it's a boy, then Samuel would be his name.

Years later, when the boy had gotten old enough to wonder, he asked one day, "Mom, why is my name Samuel?" her answer came softly, "Son, everyone else may say that you are the result of modern science and medicine. But your father and I are convinced that you are a gift from God. So we called you Samuel which means 'I have asked of the Lord,' You are an answer to prayer."

29. Illustrations for Lent Easter Old Testament Texts

Illustration

Jon L. Joyce

1. God destroys as well as preserves [Isaiah 42:14]

Luther says that God is to be both loved and feared. The same God of compassion who is eager to show love to those who turn to him is equally determined to root out and destroy evil. Isaiah is warning us not to be lulled to sleep by thinking only of the kindness of God. He who shows patience toward our waywardness will eventually cease to overlook unatoned sin and will destroy. He holds all the power of the universe in his hands to work his ends. Our eternal destiny is for him to determine. Are we tempting God by clinging to things he opposes? Remember God has said, "I will destroy." The time to repent and make peace with him is now.

2. Christ will restore sight [Isaiah 42:16]

A blind beggar walking down a street on a day in spring carried a sign saying, "It is April, and I am blind." How pitiful that he was blind at any time. But on a spring day it was even worse; he could not see the newly formed leaves on the trees, or the beautiful flowers blooming on every hand. He could not see the earth bathed in sunshine or the glow of a sunset in the western sky. But another blindness is even worse. It can come to those who have retained their physical sight. There is a saying, "None is so blind as he that will not see." When Isaiah talks of the blind he includes everyone who does not have spiritual insight. Children laugh at the phrase, "I see, said the blind man." Yet it is true that the physically blind can see many things which the person with sight overlooks. So God promises to help us in our spiritual blindness. He will show us the path of righteousness, reveal opportunities to serve our fellow man, to improve ourselves, and to see the Christ who is hidden from those who do not believe in Him.

3. Idolators shall be ashamed [Isaiah 42:17]

Idol worship seems like something out of the long past. It brings to mind visions of ignorant people in an earlier age bowing down before a statue which to them is their god. So this verse does not seem to apply to the one who reads it today. Here is where we deceive ourselves. Idolatry is a very subtle thing. It was said of Sampson that he did not know when the Lord had forsaken him, and thought he could go on in strength as he had before. So idolatry creeps upon anyone who is not alert. It is so easy to cater to oneself; to want fame and fortune so badly that we slowly let these desires come between us and God. Beware lest great shame come upon you because idols of today have subtly replaced God in your objectives and desires.

4. God will be praised for his law (Gospel) [Isaiah 42:21]

Our age is one of much disdain for God’s law. The ten commandments are regarded by many as out of date. They are as foolish in disdaining God’s rules and thinking they have outgrown them as was a certain sailor. The captain had pointed out the north star before turning over the wheel to the young seaman. He told the young man to steer constantly toward that star. The captain then took a nap and upon awakening found that the ship was not on course. When he questioned the young sailor what had gone wrong, he was told, "I have sailed past that star, show me another one." No one can sail past the ten commandments. They remain as up-to-date as the day’s news announcements. God has chosen to give honor to his eternal rules, whether they be revealed in the Ten Commandments or in Jesus Christ. The wise will realize the worth of God’s laws and strive to obey and honor them.

30. The Duty of Preparedness

Illustration

William Barclay

Jesus' story was not unfamiliar to his listeners. There was a story during Jesus' day that was told by the Rabbis and it went like this:

There was king who invited his guest to a feast, without telling them the exact date and time; but he did tell them that they must wash, and anoint, and clothe themselves that they might be ready when the summons came. The wise prepared themselves at once, and took their places waiting at the palace door, for they believed that in a palace a feast could be prepared so quickly that there would be no long warning. The foolish believed that it would take a long time to make the necessary preparations and that they would have plenty of time. So they went, the mason to his lime, the potter to his clay, the smith to his furnace, the fuller to his bleaching-ground, and they went on with their work. Then, suddenly, the summons to the feast came without any warning. The wise were ready to sit down, and the king rejoiced over his guest, and they ate and drank. But those who had not arrayed themselves in their wedding garments had to stand outside, sad and hungry. They could only look on at the joy they had lost.

This Rabbinic parable tells of the duty of preparedness for the summons of God, and garments stand for the preparation that must be made.

31. Facing Doubts

Illustration

Donald B. Strobe

One day a student came to see the great Episcopal bishop/preacher Phillips Brooks, and said to him, "Dr. Brooks I would like to share my doubts with you, but I am afraid it might destroy your faith." Brooks could only lean back in his chair and roar with laughter. Any minister who has done any thinking at all, has faced doubts. Just the calling into ministry is a huge crossroads for any human being. You have to overcome a sea of uncertainties to say "Yes" to such a foolish endeavor as ministry. Crushing Doubts? Greater than any student ever imagined!

32. A Tight Garage

Illustration

W.R. Krusell

In Florida, small black bugs called Love Bugs swarm in the summer can be a nuisance to motorists, especially since these bugs are acidic and can damage a paint job. We were about to head north and were grateful for a friend's suggestion that we spread a coating of petroleum jelly on the front of the car to make it easier to flush the bugs off with water. I felt a little foolish but I did it. In a small town in Georgia, we pulled into a service station and asked the attendant to check the oil. He tried to lift the hood, but his hands kept slipping. "What ya got on your car, mister?" he called out. "Vaseline," I said. Before I could explain further, he responded, "Whatza matter? Ya got a tight garage?"

33. Missing God

Illustration

Julian Barnes

“I don’t believe in God,” begins Julian Barnes in his book Nothing to Be Frightened Of, “but I miss him.” Though he admits he never had any faith to lose (a “happy atheist” as an Oxford student, Barnes now considers himself an agnostic), he still finds himself dreading the gradual ebbing of Christianity. He misses the sense of purpose that the Christian narrative affords, the sense of wonder and belief that haunts Christian art and architecture.

“I miss the God that inspired Italian painting and French stained glass, German music and English chapter houses, and those tumbledown heaps of stone on Celtic headlands which were once symbolic beacons in the darkness and the storm.”

Such are the thoughts that surface as Barnes attempts to confront his fears of death and dying in this memoir. He believes Christianity to be a foolish lie, but insists, “[I]t was a beautiful lie.”

34. God's Living House

Illustration

C.S. Lewis

I think that many of us, when Christ has enabled us to overcome one or two sins that were an obvious nuisance, are inclined to feel (though we do not put it into words) that we are now good enough. He has done all we wanted him to do, and we should be obliged if he would leave us alone. But the question is not what we intended ourselves to be, but what he intended us to be when he made us...

Imagine yourself as a living house. God comes in to rebuild that house. At first, perhaps, you can understand what he is doing. He is getting the drains right and stopping the leaks in the roof and so on. You knew that those jobs needed doing and so you are not surprised.

But presently he starts knocking the house about in a way that hurts abominably and does not seem to make sense. What on earth is he up to? The explanation is that he is building quite a different house from the one you thought of throwing out a new wing here, putting on an extra floor there, running up towers, making courtyards.

You thought you were going to be made into a decent little cottage, but he is building a palace. He intends to come and live in it himself.

35. A Wife's Nudge

Illustration

Michael P. Green

Katherine, the wife of Martin Luther, dramatically revived the depressed Reformer’s confidence in God’s providence. This has been versified by F. W. Herzberger:

One day when skies loomed the blackest,
This greatest and bravest of men
Lost heart and in an oversad spirit
Refused to take courage again,

Neither eating or drinking nor speaking
To anxious wife, children or friends,
Till Katherine dons widow garments
And deepest of mourning pretends.

Surprised, Luther asked why she sorrowed.
“Dear Doctor,” his Katie replied,
“I have cause for the saddest of weeping,
For God in His heaven has died!”

Her gentle rebuke did not fail him,
He laughingly kissed his wise spouse,
Took courage, and banished his sorrow,
And joy again reigned in the house.

36. Devouring One Another

Illustration

Peter A. Alwinson

An issue of National Geographic included a photograph of the fossil remains of two saber-tooth cats locked in combat. To quote the article: "One had bitten deep into the leg bone of the other, a thrust that trapped both in a common fate. The cause of the death of the two cats is as clear as the causes of the extinction of their species are obvious. When Christians fight each other, everybody loses. As Paul put it, "if you keep biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other."

37. Second Coming Nonsense

Illustration

Staff

The first perversion of the doctrine of the second coming of Christ is perpetrated by those I'm going to call "prophecy mongers." You know these people. They come with their charts and graphs, with their predictions and projections, claiming to have special insight into the workings of God in the world, so that they're able to cue us in on just where we are in the divine timetable. And somehow, every political event of the past fifty years fits neatly into their scheme of things. But Jesus said that no one not even himself knew the day or the hour of his coming, but only the Father.

But there is another distortion of this doctrine that is equally vitiating although in comes from a completely different direction. Here I refer to those who, far from exaggerating the eschatology of Jesus, want to minimize it because they are embarrassed. They rationalize it or demythologize it or spiritualize it, so that they can embrace Jesus and his teachings without getting all the supernatural trimmings that go with it. The fundamentalist and the rationalist share a common assumption about the second coming. They both assume that this is teaching we can easily understand and exploit and have at our disposal, so that it no longer threatens us, no longer hangs over our heads like Damocles's word, ready to fall upon us and shatter our pretty pretensions into a thousand smithereens. The fundamentalist over explains the second coming, and so takes away its mystery, while the rationalist explains it away, robbing it of its meaning.

Jesus said, "Keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour." It is here at the point of waiting that most of us have our greatest difficulty.

38. Chickens Coming to Roost

Illustration

Editor James S. Hewett

John Smith was a loyal carpenter, working for a very successful building contractor who called him into his office one day and said, "John, I’m putting you in charge of the next house we build. I want you to order all the materials and oversee the whole job from the ground up."

John accepted the assignment with great enthusiasm and excitement. Fourteen days before ground was broken at the building site, John studied the blueprints. He checked every measurement, every specification. Suddenly he had a thought. "If I am really in charge," he said to himself, "why couldn't I cut a few corners, use less expensive materials, and put the extra money in my pocket? Who would know the difference? Once the house is painted, it will look just great."

So John set about his scheme. He ordered second-grade lumber, but his reports indicated that it was top-grade. He ordered inexpensive concrete for the foundation, put in cheap wiring, and cut every corner he could, yet he reported the purchase of much better materials. When the home was completed and fully painted, he asked the contractor to come and see it.

''John," said the contractor, "what a magnificent job you have done! You have been such a good and faithful carpenter all these years that I have decided to show my gratitude by giving you this house you have built, as a gift!"

39. BIG DADDY, J.C., AND THE SPOOK

Illustration

John H. Krahn

Many Christians are hurt by even the slightest criticism of their faith. Yet God often uses attacks and slurs on one’s faith to strengthen it.

Madalyn Murray O’Hair was invited by the Student Christian Association to speak at a certain college in Ohio. Mrs. O’Hair will go down in history as the one who knocked prayer and Bible reading out of the public schools. Over 350 students, faculty, and townspeople gathered to hear Mrs. O’Hair discuss her views in opposition to God and religion.

She lambasted everything sacred. She made fun of pastors, leaders, and church officers. She said the Bible was not infallible, and it did not amount to anything anyway; she harassed the students and professors; she harangued the foolish thinkers who believed what they read. She referred to God as "Big Daddy" and to Jesus Christ as "J.C." and to the Holy Ghost as the "Spook." The audience was stunned by her speech, and as questions were put to Mrs. O’Hair, she further attacked Christianity.

As the meeting was about to break up, a tiny voice of a little college girl came from the back of the auditorium. She spoke quietly and lovingly and her voice was full of compassion. Here is what she said, "Mrs. O’Hair, I am so happy you came to speak to all of us here at our college tonight! We have listened with attention to your tirade on our beliefs. We thank you for showing all of us what an atheist is; we express gratitude on your challenge to our faith; we appreciate your concern for us ... but now we, in turn, must be ever grateful for your visit ... because ... now and forever we have been strengthened in our Christian beliefs. We really feel sorry for you, and we’ll pray each night and day for your conversion to our Christian beliefs, and again we thank you for coming, and I know that you have strengthened my faith in our church, in our religion, and in our Christ! Now I’ll have more faith in ‘Big Daddy,’ in ‘J.C.’, and in the ‘Spook’! Again I say, thank you, and bless your soul!"

The speaker of the evening was flabbergasted. She had no answer. There was a riot of noise. The applause for this response was deafening. The meeting broke up with people experiencing an unbelievable Christian conviction of love for Jesus Christ, the Father, and the Holy Spirit.

The next time someone looks down on your faith, let God use even that person’s negative attitude to draw you closer to him.

40. Rephrasing the Question

Illustration

Tom Long

Homiletics professor and Matthew commentator Tom Long rephrases the Caesar and Tax question to Jesus like this. "In effect," he writes, the opponents of Jesus ask, "Are you a foolish, uncompromising revolutionary whose allegiance to the kingdom of heaven is actually a political revolution in disguise, or are you a smooth-talking street preacher who stirs up people with glib talk of God's majesty but who underneath advocates a get-along-go-along policy with the Roman, Gentile pigs?"

41. Under the Wagon

Illustration

Staff

A farm boy, who wasn't all there, accidentally overturned his wagon of corn in the road. The boy's neighbor who lived nearby came to investigate. "Hey, Willis," he called out, "forget your troubles for a spell and come on in and have dinner with us. Then I'll help you get the wagon up."

"That's mighty nice of you," Willis answered, "But I don't think Pa would like me to."

"Aw, come on, son!" the farmer insisted.

"Well, okay," the boy finally agreed. "But Pa won't like it."

After a hearty dinner, Willis thanked his host. "I feel a lot better now, but I just know Pa is going to be real upset."

"Don't be foolish!" exclaimed the neighbor. "By the way, where is he?"

"Under the wagon."

42. Built around the Cross

Illustration

Mickey Anders

There's a great story about the artist Rodin, who one day saw a huge, carved crucifix beside a road. He immediately loved the artwork and insisted on having it for himself. He purchased the cross and arranged to have it carted back to his house. But, unfortunately, it was too big for the building. So, of all things, he knocked out the walls, raised the roof, and rebuilt his home around the cross (Best Sermons 3, Harper & Row, 1990, p. 115).

When you hear Jesus' call to radical discipleship, I hope you will decide to knock down the walls and rebuild your life around the cross. Remember, Jesus said, "If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me."

43. Drowned For Faithfulness

Illustration

Staff

Margaret Wilson, a Scottish girl of eighteen, was tied to a stake where the tide was due to come in. The water covered her while she was engaged in prayer; but before life was gone, they pulled her up till she recovered the power of speech, when she was asked by Major Windram, who commanded, if she would pray for the king. She replied that "She wished the salvation of all men, and the damnation of none."

"Dear Margaret," said one of the by-standers, deeply affected, "say God save the king."

She answered with great steadiness, "God save him, if he will, for it is his salvation I desire."

"Sir, they cried to the major, "she has said it; she has said it!"

The major, approaching her on hearing this, offered her the abjuration oath, charging her instantly to swear it, otherwise to return to the water. The poor young woman...firmly replied, "I will not; I am one of Christ's children! Let me go." Upon which she was again thrust into the water, and drowned.

44. A Good Not For Sale

Illustration

Staff

After the American Civil War the managers of the infamous Louisiana Lottery, for a time the only legal lottery in the United States, approached Robert E. Lee and asked if he'd let them use his name in their scheme. They promised that if he did he would become rich. Astounded, Lee straightened up, buttoned his gray coat, and shouted, "Gentlemen, I lost my home in the war. I lost my fortune in the war. I lost everything except my name. My name is not for sale, and if you fellows don't get out of here, I'll break this crutch over year heads!"

45. Birth into a New World

Illustration

King Duncan

In his book, Teaching Your Children about God, Rabbi David Wolpe, a professor at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, recalls an ancient Jewish parable about twin unborn children lying together in the womb. One believes that there is a world beyond the womb "where people walk upright, where there are mountains and oceans, a sky filled with stars." The other unborn twin can barely contain his contempt for such foolish ideas. Suddenly the "believer" of the twins is forced through the birth canal leaving behind the only way of life he has known. The remaining unborn twin is saddened, convinced that a great catastrophe has befallen his companion. Outside the womb, however, the parents are rejoicing. For what the remaining brother, left behind, has just witnessed is not death but birth. This, Wolpe reminds us, is a classic view of the life beyond the grave--a birth into a world that we on Earth can only try to imagine.

The Easter message is that we have an older brother who HAS traveled beyond the tomb, down the birth canal of eternity and has returned to assure us that God is love, and that there is a place prepared for any who will accept the Good News. Whether our name is Marie or Mary or Peter or even Judas, Christ came into the world to save sinners. Won't you accept his offer of a new life today?

46. Six Small Seashells

Illustration

King Duncan

Many years ago, missionary Bob Roberts was a guest speaker in a church. In this service he was sharing his burden for hungry children in the Philippines. Afterwards a young boy, about seven years old, came up to him and said, "Jesus spoke to me tonight while you were telling us about the hungry children . . . When you said that for a quarter a day you could feed a child and give him a vitamin, I thought, I've got to help. But I didn't know how I could. That's when Jesus spoke to me." The lad extended his hand and said, "This is my shell collection. I believe Jesus wants me to give these shells to help the children." With those words, he placed the shells in Roberts' hand. Roberts accepted the shells, but he wondered how they could help hungry children.

A few weeks later, Roberts spoke to another congregation. Reaching into his pocket, he pulled out the seashells and told about that boy and his desire to feed hungry children. At the end of the service, a man approached Roberts and said, "I would like to purchase those shells for $100!"

Bob Roberts added this comment, "My freckle-faced friend may never know that his sacrificial offering provided 400 meals for Filipino children. He may not have understood how the Lord would use this small gift to feed the hungry, but he knew God wanted him to give what he had…"

God came to the rich man who had to build bigger barns to hold his goods and said, "You fool!" He was foolish, wasn't he? We all need to learn to live more simply, we need to evaluate our level of giving, and we need to understand that the extent of our giving is the most accurate gauge we have of the authenticity of our faith. Jesus said it best, of course, "For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."

47. The Kite and Its String

Illustration

John Newton

Once on a time a paper kite
Was mounted to a wondrous height,

Where, giddy with its elevation,
It thus express'd self-admiration:

"See how yon crowds of gazing people
Admire my flight above the steeple;

How would they wonder if they knew
All that a kite like me can do!

Were I but free, I'd take a flight,
And pierce the clouds beyond their sight,

But, ah! like a poor pris'ner bound,
My string confines me near the ground;

I'd brave the eagle's towring wing,
Might I but fly without a string."

It tugg'd and pull'd, while thus it spoke,
To break the string at last it broke.

Depriv'd at once of all its stay,
In vain it try'd to soar away;

Unable its own weight to bear,
It flutter'd downward through the air;

Unable its own course to guide,
The winds soon plung'd it in the tide.

Ah! foolish kite, thou hadst no wing,
How could'st thou fly without a string!

My heart reply'd, "O Lord, I see
How much this kite resembles me!

Forgetful that by thee I stand,
Impatient of thy ruling hand;

How oft I've wish'd to break the lines
Thy wisdom for my lot assigns?

How oft indulg'd a vain desire
For something more, or something high'r?

And, but for grace and love divine,
A fall thus dreadful had been mine."

48. With Fire In His Eyes

Illustration

Richard A. Jensen

There was fire in his eyes as Dr. Yacob spoke. Dr. Yacob is from the northernmost part of ancient Ethiopia. This northern area of Ethiopia has recently become a nation of its own, the nation of Eritrea. Dr. Yacob was born and raised in Asmara, the capital of Eritrea. Early on in his life he had a fire in his eyes for the gospel message of Jesus Christ. In his school days he was already an evangelist telling other students about Jesus. He fought with school authorities in order to get a place on the school grounds where the students might meet for Bible study and prayer.

After high school Dr. Yacob attended the Lutheran seminary in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. He was a dilligent student. He eventually received a scholarship to study abroad and received his Ph.D. in Old Testament studies. In 1978 Dr. Yacob was elected to be the general secretary of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Eritrea. These were difficult times. Eritrea was fighting a full scale civil war with Ethiopia. The nation was paralyzed. The resources for life -- things like food, water, firewood, gas and electricity -- were very scarce. People lived on the edge of desperate poverty. People lived on the edge of death.

In the midst of this poverty, war and destruction Dr. Yacob was determined to rebuild many of the church buildings that had been destroyed. The churches were very well attended in these years. "Every Sunday is like Christmas," Dr. Yacob once said. With the help of overseas partners many of the churches in Eritrea were rebuilt in the midst of ruin. Many 37questioned Dr. Yacob's choice of church building in this desperate situation. "Building a building is a sign of hope," he maintained with fire in his eyes. "We trust God to be Lord of Life in the midst of death. The buildings were like miracles for us. Jeremiah bought a field at Anathoth just when he thought the land was to be taken away by destruction. His action was a sign of hope for the future. Our buildings are a sign of hope for our future. All could see that in the midst of death, the church was alive."

Dr. Yacob works in France now in the Department of Ecumenical Research for the Lutheran World Federation. This is a leader tested by life. This is a leader who has lived through the hell of war and poverty. Now he travels the whole world over. In far too many places he sees the same kind of conditions that he once saw in Eritrea. Poverty stalks the earth in a million guises. Poverty has churned up his insides. He has simply seen too much suffering.

Speaking to a group of Lutheran missionaries not long ago Dr. Yacob spoke with the accustomed fire in his eyes. "These conditions around the world must stop," he exploded. "I've talked with Lutheran leaders in churches around the world where poverty reigns. We decry the working of the economic systems of our world today. We decry the economic injustice that we see everywhere. We decry a world where some live in magnificent luxury while the world's billions starve to death. This has to stop! We are ready to propose that world Lutheranism adopt it as a basic confession of being a Christian that economic systems which create injustice and inequity must be rejected." "

49. I Built a Shrine

Illustration

King Duncan

When Jesus told those early disciples to fear not he was not telling them to seek safety and security. Rather he was telling them to move forward, but to always trust him.

Years ago there was a little comic strip that spoke to this quite beautifully. The comic strip "B.C.," set in cavemen days, had its hero, B.C., sitting in his fur loincloth, opening a box. A letter in the box says, "Congratulations! You have just purchased the world's finest fire-starting kit!" The next picture shows him reading on, "The flint is of the finest stone imported from the Orient. Your striker has been handcrafted by Old World craftsmen. The kindling has been carefully selected by screened lumberjacks. Your kit was packaged and inspected by little old grannies working in a dust-free environment, and your fire kit dealer has sworn an oath of devotion to customers."

The next picture shows B.C. rubbing two sticks together in time-honored fashion, trying to start a fire. One of the cave women comes by and says, "What's with the sticks? Where is your new fire starting kit?" B.C. looks up, smiles and says, "I built a shrine around it."

The temptation is great to say, "Oh, yes, I trust Christ," and then sit passively in our little comfort zone, with a shrine surrounding our faith experience. It is another thing to step out of the boat, to attempt to walk on the water, to attempt the thing we have never attempted before in Christ's name.

50. Faith and Power

Illustration

Larry Powell

Mark 4:37-41 is one of the many passages in the Bible which has been set to music. "Master, the tempest is raging! The billows are tossing high! The sky is o’er shadowed with blackness ..." You recognize it. From childhood, we have sung the words to "Peace Be Still" and have loved to lift the refrain which concludes, "they all shall sweetly obey thy will ..." Two primary elements are underscored in both the scripture and the hymn: the power of Christ and faith in Christ.

The Gospel according to Mark characterizes the ministry of Jesus as being a succession of "mighty works," indicative of his Sonship. Actually, the stilling of the storm is only the beginning of a series of incidents portraying the power of Christ. After the storm experience on the Sea of Galilee, Jesus and the disciples came to the other side of the sea into the country of the Gerasenes. Here they encountered a man who lived among the tombs, crying out in travail both day and night, inflicting injury upon himself and striking fear into the hearts of all who chance to see him. Frequently, he had been subdued and bound with chains, but such was his deranged agony that he tore away the fetters and ran about the tombs as a wild man. In a great display of power, Jesus freed the man from his torment (5:13) and "all marveled. Then, crossing to the other side of the sea, Jesus encountered a certain Janus, a ruler of the synagogue, who prevailed upon him to accompany him to his home and heal his daughter" (5:23). On the way to the home of Janus Jesus was "touched" by a desperate woman who had hemorraged for twelve years and, according to Mark 5:29, so great was the power of Jesus that the woman was immediately healed simply by touching his clothing. Not to be minimized here is Jesus’ statement to the woman; "Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace and be healed from your disease" (5:34). Now the word comes that during the interval, Janus’ daughter has died. Reassuring Janus, Jesus said, "Do not fear, only believe." Approaching the house Jesus observed a gathering of people loudly mourning the death of the girl. Everyone was asked to wait outside the house save the little girl’s parents and the disciples who had been selected to accompany Jesus to the house, Peter, James, and John. "Taking her by the hand, he said to her, ‘Talitha cumi’ which means ‘Little girl, I say to you, arise.’ And immediately the girl got up and walked" (5:41-42).

Power! That is the theme of Mark’s section dealing with three successive miracles of Jesus. Read again the refrain of "Peace, Be Still" and see how it applied to each of the three incidents. See also the summons for faith. The disciples were scolded for their lack of faith, the woman with the issue of blood was rewarded because of her faith, and Janus was encouraged to intensify the faith he already had exhibited by falling at the feet of Jesus. Desperation characterizes all three encounters, and all three contain the enacted teaching that the power of Christ is but half of the whole; the other half, which taps this power, is faith. Ironically, it would appear that we, too, learn the lesson best in times of desperation.

Showing 1 to 50 of 132 results