Sermon and Worship Resources (2024)

The English word “messiah” derives from the Hebrew verb mashakh, which means “to anoint.” The Greek counterpart of the Hebrew word for “messiah” (mashiakh) is christos, which in English is “Christ.”

In English translations of the Bible, the word “messiah” (“anointed one”) occurs rarely in the OT. In the OT, kings, prophets, and priests were “anointed” with oil as a means of consecrating or setting them apart for their respective offices. Prophets and priests anointed Israel’s kings (1Sam. 16:1 13; 2Sam. 2:4, 7).

The expectation for a “messiah,” or “anointed one,” arose from the promise given to David in the Davidic covenant (2Sam. 7). David was promised that from his seed God would raise up a king who would reign forever on his throne. Hopes for such an ideal king began with Solomon and developed further during the decline (cf. Isa. 9:1–7) and especially after the collapse of the Davidic kingdom.

The harsh reality of exile prompted Israel to hope that God would rule in such a manner. A number of psalms reflect the desire that an ideal son of David would come and rule, delivering Israel from its current plight of oppression. Hence, in Ps. 2 God declares that his son (v.7), who is the Lord’s anointed one (v.2), will receive “the nations [as] your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession” (v.8). God promises that “you will rule them with an iron scepter; you will dash them to pieces like pottery” (v.9; see NIV footnote). Jesus demonstrates great reticence in using the title “Messiah.” In the Synoptic Gospels he almost never explicitly claims it. The two key Synoptic passages where Jesus accepts the title are themselves enigmatic. In Mark’s version of Peter’s confession (8:29), Jesus does not explicitly affirm Peter’s claim, “You are the Messiah,” but instead goes on to speak of the suffering of the Son of Man. Later, Jesus is asked by the high priest Caiaphas at his trial, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?” (Mark 14:60). In Mark 14:62, Jesus answers explicitly with “I am,” while in Matt. 26:64, he uses the more enigmatic “You have said so.” Jesus then goes on to describe himself as the exalted Son of Man who will sit at Yahweh’s right hand.

Jesus no doubt avoided the title because it risked communicating an inadequate understanding of the kingdom and his messianic role. Although the Messiah was never a purely political figure in Judaism, he was widely expected to destroy Israel’s enemies and secure its physical borders. Psalms of Solomon portrays the coming “son of David” as one who will “destroy the unrighteous rulers” and “purge Jerusalem from Gentiles who trample her to destruction” (Pss. Sol. 17.21–23). To distance himself from such thinking, Jesus never refers to himself as “son of David” and “king of Israel/the Jews” as other characters do in the Gospels (Matt. 12:23; 21:9, 15; Mark 10:47; 15:2; John 1:49; 12:13; 18:33). When Jesus was confronted by a group of Jews who wanted to make him into such a king, he resisted them (John 6:15).

In Mark 12:35–37, Jesus also redefines traditional understandings of the son of David in his short discussion on Ps. 110:1: he is something more than a mere human son of David. Combining Jesus’ implicit affirmation that he is the Messiah in Mark 8:30 with his teaching about the Son of Man in 8:31, we see that Jesus is a Messiah who will “suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the teachers of the law” (8:31) and through whom redemption will come (10:45). Jesus came not to defeat the Roman legions, but to bring victory over Satan, sin, and death.

A fishing town located on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee (Matt. 4:13). The town was on an important trade route and was a center for commerce in Galilee. In Capernaum, Jesus called Levi (Matthew) from his “tax booth,” probably a customs station for goods in transit (Mark 2:1317; Matt. 9:9–13; Luke 5:27–32). There may also have been a military garrison in Capernaum, since the town’s synagogue was built by a certain centurion whose servant Jesus healed (Matt. 8:8–13; Luke 7:1–10).

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

Deliverance provides relief or escape from a detrimental situation or the prospect of adverse circ*mstances. Deliverance may come from God or humans and may be from physical temporal distress or spiritual in nature.

The principal example of deliverance in the OT is the exodus, God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt. The NT continues the exodus theme in that Jesus’ death and resurrection, the foundation for salvation, coincide with the celebration of Passover. This constitutes deliverance in that all humanity is in slavery to the power of sin and subject to the penalty of death. Jesus’ death and resurrection provide the possibility of deliverance, usually called “salvation,” from the power of sin and death (1Cor. 15:5157; Gal. 1:4; Col. 1:13; 1Thess. 1:10).

Throughout the Bible, God provides deliverers and is a deliverer (Judg. 3:15; 2Sam. 22:2; 2Kings 13:5; Ps. 40:17). The NT prefers the term “Savior,” applying it to God the Father and to Jesus Christ.

A prophet raised up by God during the reign of Ahab of Israel (ninth century BC) in order to counter fast-rising idolatry fueled by the king and his foreign-born wife, Jezebel.

False worship at this time focused on Baal, a major Canaanite deity who was the god of fertility, having power over dew, rain, lightning, and thunder. Thus, as people turned to Baal for these life-giving forces, God shut up the heavens so there would be no rain in Israel (1Kings 17:1). God also at this time sent Elijah the Tishbite to confront the king.

Through the performance of miraculous acts, Elijah demonstrated that God was with him. The first such act was multiplying the food supplies of a widow who provided him with food. Even more dramatically, he prayed for the woman’s son when the child died, and the dead boy began to breathe again (1Kings 17:1724).

Elijah’s most dramatic moment came when he confronted Ahab and his many Baal prophets on Mount Carmel (1Kings 18). Yahweh fought Baal on the latter’s terms. The object was whether Yahweh or Baal could throw fire from heaven to light the altar fire. Baal was purportedly a specialist at throwing fire (lightning), and his prophets went first. However, because Baal did not really exist, they failed. When Yahweh’s turn came, Elijah increased the stakes by pouring water on the wood. Yahweh, the one true God, threw fire from heaven, which burned the sacrifice, wood, stones, and dirt, and even dried up the water. Soon thereafter, God opened up the skies so that it rained again. Even so, Ahab and then his son Ahaziah (2Kings 1) continued to worship Baal.

Elijah was a devoted servant of Yahweh. Before Elijah passed from this life, God introduced him to his successor, Elisha. When the end came, he did not die but rather was caught up to heaven (2Kings 2:1–18)—only the second person reported to leave this life without dying (cf. Enoch in Gen. 5:21–24).

Toward the end of the OT period, the prophet Malachi announced the coming day of the Lord (Mal. 4:5–6). As a precursor to that day, God would send the prophet Elijah as a forerunner. Some people thought that Jesus was Elijah (Matt. 16:14; Mark 6:15; 8:28; Luke 9:8, 19), but Jesus is the one who ushers in the kingdom of God. John the Baptist was his forerunner, and so it was he who is rightly associated with Elijah (Matt. 11:13–14). Indeed, his wilderness lifestyle and ministry echoed those of Elijah. At the Mount of Transfiguration, Elijah appeared to Jesus along with Moses; these two wilderness figures represented the prophets and the law (Matt. 17:1–13; Mark 9:2–13; Luke 9:28–36).

Prophet, coworker of and then successor to Elijah. Both men resisted the Baal worship that infected the northern kingdom during the reign of Ahab and his successors (Ahaziah, Jehoram, Jehu, Jehoahaz, and Jehoash) in the latter half of the ninth and first half of the eighth centuries BC.

Elisha began as a disciple of Elijah, whom God had used to confront Ahab and Jezebel’s prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel (1Kings 18). When Elijah was taken to heaven, Elisha succeeded him (2Kings 2:1923). God accredited Elisha as prophet and demonstrated his authority through miracles. Many of the miracles involve water, such as making the bitter water of Jericho drinkable (2Kings 2:19–23) and raising an ax head from the bottom of the Jordan River (6:1–7). These miracles were implicitly directed at Baal and his supporters, since Baal was thought to be a god who specialized in providing and controlling the waters.

Elisha also demonstrated God’s power and compassion with acts such as providing a poor woman with olive oil (2Kings 4:1–7), curing a Syrian general of leprosy (2Kings 5), and even raising a child from the dead (4:8–37).

God also told the prophet to anoint Hazael, king of Syria, and Jehu, a military man who usurped the throne of Israel (2Kings 8:7–15; 9:1–13). God used these men to bring a violent conclusion to those leaders who promoted the worship of Baal.

Elisha’s miracles continued even after his death. Some Israelites threw a dead man’s body in Elisha’s grave, and when it touched Elisha’s bones, the man sprang back to life (2Kings 13:20–21).

The northern region of Israel. Determining the region’s precise boundaries is difficult, but in Jesus’ time it appears to have encompassed an area of about forty-five miles north to south and twenty-five miles east to west, with the Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee forming the eastern border. Josephus divides the region into Upper and Lower Galilee. Upper Galilee contains elevations of up to about four thousand feet and is composed mostly of rugged mountains, while Lower Galilee reaches a maximum height of about two thousand feet and is characterized by numerous fertile valleys. Lower Galilee was the site of most of Jesus’ ministry.

Galilee appears several times in the OT (e.g., Josh. 20:7; 1Kings 9:11; 1Chron. 6:76). It was part of the land given to the twelve tribes (Josh. 19). Since Galilee was distant from Jerusalem, which played the most prominent part in Jewish history, much of its history is not mentioned in the OT. Many of the references that do occur are military references, such as Joshua’s defeat of the kings at the waters of Merom (Josh. 11:19) and the Assyrian removal of the northern kingdom of Israel (Isa. 9:1). However, its great beauty, particularly of mountains such as Carmel, Hermon, and Lebanon, was the source of numerous images and metaphors in the poetic and prophetic literature (e.g., Ps. 133:3; Isa. 33:9; 35:2; Jer. 46:18).

Galilee figures more prominently in the NT. Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and conducted much of his early ministry there. Luke specifically identifies Galilee as the place where Jesus’ ministry began before spreading to Judea (Luke 23:5; Acts 10:37). Galilee is also portrayed as the place where Jesus will reunite with his disciples following the resurrection (Mark 16:7) and where he gives them the Great Commission (Matt. 28:16–20).

Grace is the nucleus, the critical core element, of the redemptive and sanctifying work of the triune God detailed throughout the entire canon of Scripture. The variegated expressions of grace are rooted in the person and work of God, so that his graciousness and favor effectively demonstrated in every aspect of the created realm glorify him as they are shared and enjoyed with one another.

The biblical terminology informing an understanding of grace defines it as a gift or a favorable reaction or disposition toward someone. Grace is generosity, thanks, and good will between humans and from God to humans. Divine expressions of grace are loving, merciful, and effective. The biblical texts provide a context for a more robust understanding of divine gift. The overall redemptive-historical context of grace is the desire of the eternal God to bring glory to himself through a grace-based relationship with his creation. The Creator-Redeemer gives grace, and the recipients of grace give him glory.

The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2Cor. 12:24, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.

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

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

The first of the Major Prophets in the canon, the book of Isaiah is one of the longest books in the Bible. This, coupled with the NT’s frequent use of Isaiah, has contributed to the book’s great importance in Christian tradition. Isaiah contains some of the most memorable passages in Scripture, with its majestic poetry and evocative sermons making it a literary masterpiece.

The authorship of Isaiah has been one of the most debated issues in biblical interpretation. Ancient tradition credited the eighth-century BC prophet Isaiah with the entire sixty-six chapters. However, an early Jewish tradition in the Talmud claims that “the men of Hezekiah” compiled Isaiah, showing their awareness that the book did not come entirely from Isaiah. Most scholars today, including many evangelical scholars, conclude that the book of Isaiah is the end result of a history of composition that began in the eighth century BC (so-called First Isaiah [139]), continued in the sixth century BC during the exile (Second Isaiah, chaps. 40–55), and then was completed after the exile (Third Isaiah, chaps. 56–66).

Isaiah has a literary structure similar to that of Ezekiel, Zephaniah, Joel, and the Greek translation of Jeremiah. The first section is concerned with judgment on Israel (chaps. 1–12), the second with judgment on foreign nations (chaps. 13–23), and the third records prophecies of hope and salvation (chaps. 24–27). This structure purposefully places hopeful oracles of comfort after the judgment oracles. Some view the entire book of Isaiah as following this pattern (chaps. 1–12, judgment on Israel; chaps. 13–35, judgment on other nations; chaps. 40–66, oracles of comfort). However, both of these schemes are somewhat forced, since each section is slightly mixed (there are oracles of salvation in chaps. 1–12, prophecies against Judah in chaps. 13–23, and judgment oracles in chaps. 56–66). However, in broad outline it is helpful to recognize this structure.

Isaiah 1–39

Structure and themes. The structure of chapters 1–39 is quite complex. However, the prophecies and historical narratives concerned with Isaiah’s day are roughly in chronological order (e.g., prophecies and events occurring during the reign of King Ahaz [6:1–8:22] precede those during Hezekiah’s reign [36:1–39:8]). The structure of these chapters alternates between threat and promise (e.g., chap. 1= threat; 2:1–4= promise of hope; 2:5–4:1= threat; 4:2–6= promise of hope). Analogously, the main themes of these chapters alternate between threat and promise.

Holiness. A major theme of Isaiah is God’s holiness, as evidenced in its favorite title for the Lord, “Holy One of Israel.” While the original idea underlying holiness was physical separation and did not have an ethical dimension (e.g., temple prostitutes in the ancient Near East were called “holy women”), a different concept of holiness emerges in chapter 6, the account of Isaiah’s call. Since 6:1–9:7 is the only part in the book with autobiographical narration, these chapters probably come from an original memoir of Isaiah himself. The memoir is surrounded by judgment oracles with a repeated element, “Yet for all this, his anger is not turned away, his hand is still upraised” (5:25; 9:12, 17, 21; 10:4), suggesting that the memoir as a whole was inserted between these oracles to explain God’s anger recorded in 1–12. God’s mandate to Israel was to “be holy, because I am holy” (Lev. 11:44–45), but Israel failed to follow this command. In the presence of the holy God, Isaiah realized his own sinfulness and the sinfulness of his people (6:5), connecting the concepts of holiness and righteousness.

The remnant. Already in the first chapter we see the emergence of two groups within Israel: the wicked, who will be punished, and a remnant, who will be redeemed (1:27–31). This focus on the remnant was one way in which Isaiah saw hope for Israel despite the coming judgment that he predicted. The remnant theme highlights the apparent tension between God as holy and God as redeemer: God’s holiness is upheld through the judgment on Israel, but God’s character as savior is witnessed through the remnant that is redeemed.

A coming messianic king. The section 6:1–9:7 dates from the time of the Syro-Ephraimite war, and it appears that Isaiah wrote it down (8:16) when Ahaz refused his counsel. The memoir emphasizes the rejection of the Davidic king Ahaz and predicts the birth of a royal son who would replace Ahaz and bring freedom from oppression (9:1–7). This dissatisfaction with the reigning Davidic king was the seedbed for messianic expectations and is the background for the messianic trilogy of 7:14–16; 9:2–7; 11:1–9. While some of these passages may have originally referred to Hezekiah, he falls short of these messianic expectations, leaving the community of faith awaiting another anointed one (messiah). Ominously, chapter 39 describes Hezekiah’s entertaining guests from Babylon, perhaps implying an alliance between the two nations. Hezekiah’s actions prompt Isaiah to predict the Babylonian exile (39:6–7), providing a fitting segue to chapters 40–66.

Isaiah 40–55

A message to the exiles. Second Isaiah was written near the end of the exilic period for those who were deported by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon. Although the exiles in Babylon were settled in communities (Ezek. 3:15) and allowed to build houses and farm the land (Jer. 29:5–7), they had no temple for worship, and many of the exiles probably saw the destruction of Jerusalem and their temple as the end of God’s action on their behalf. The gods of Babylon appeared to have won the victory. The exiles’ faith was flagging, and even those who did not abandon worship of Israel’s God simply clung to the past and expected nothing new from him.

Contrary to these expectations, Second Isaiah proclaims that God is doing something new for his people and bringing an end to the exile (40:1; 55:12). The role of Cyrus in this deliverance is highlighted, with explicit and implicit reference made to the Persian king (41:2–3, 25; 44:28; 45:1–4, 13–14). However, amid the oracles of comfort there is also a challenge to Israel, which is somehow resistant to the message. To break down this resistance, the prophecy has a sustained rhetoric against idol worship, with some quite hilarious sections ridiculing idol makers (44:9–20). Israel needed to realize that only Yahweh is God and to trust that he will redeem Israel for his purposes. Chapters 1–39 allude to the redemption of Israel (1:27; 35:9), and chapters 40–66 reveal more of how this redemption will take place: the work of “the servant.”

The servant. Several poems featuring an anonymous “servant” (42:1–9; 49:1–12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12) are often referred to as the Servant Songs. As far back as the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:34), interpreters have struggled with how to identify “the servant.” At times, Israel is explicitly identified as the servant (Isa. 41:8–9; 42:19 [2×]; 43:10), yet the servant clearly also has individual features, suggesting that a person was to fill the role. Some have suggested Cyrus because 42:1 says that the servant “will bring justice to the nations,” and Cyrus is described as conquering nations (41:2, 25; 45:1). However, despite all the talk of Cyrus, the text never explicitly applies the term “servant” to him, which can hardly be by chance. Alternatively, the servant could be the prophet who speaks in these chapters (as the Ethiopian eunuch speculated), since he was destined for his mission before his birth (49:1) and equipped for a mission involving prophetic speech (49:2) and had received divinely revealed knowledge (50:4).

Yet the Servant Songs are also messianic and look forward to a future anointed one who will fulfill the role of the servant fully. In the NT, Jesus is presented as the new Israel (cf. Matt. 2:15 with Hos. 11:1) who truly fulfills the role of the servant (John 12:38, quoting Isa. 53:1; Matt. 8:17, quoting Isa. 53:4). However, Paul appears to hold to a collective interpretation of the songs, as he sees himself as the servant in some instances (Acts 13:47; Rom. 15:21; Gal. 1:15). Both the individual and the collective interpretations are legitimated in the NT, as both Jesus (individual) and the church (collective), which is Christ’s body, fulfill the role of the servant.

Isaiah 56–66

In 539 BC Cyrus allowed the exiles to return home to rebuild Jerusalem and its temple (Ezra 1:1–4). Despite many obstacles, the temple was finished in 515 BC. Even with this success, living in the land was challenging (see Malachi), with factions among the people, economic troubles, hypocritical worship (Isa. 58:1–14), and problems with corrupt leaders (56:9–57:13). It was for this postexilic community that Third Isaiah was written (probably before the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah in 445 BC brought lasting change to the desperate situation).

Unlike in chapters 40–55, where Israel needs to be roused from its despair by the imminent actions of God, in chapters 56–66 the people are pleading with God to help them (59:11; 62:7). In chapter 59 the prophet declares that God’s delay in helping his people is due not to his inability but rather to the sins of the people, which are described, confessed, and lamented.

In many ways, Third Isaiah unites the themes of First Isaiah and Second Isaiah. Second Isaiah emphasizes the inbreaking of a new age that contrasts with the old. The former things are remembered, but the new thing that God was doing—the return from exile—is stressed. However, in Third Isaiah the deliverance from Babylon is seen as merely a foretaste of God’s promise, which is now identified as a new heaven and earth (chaps. 65–66). Third Isaiah looks forward to the new things that are still ahead.

First Isaiah predicts a Davidic messiah who would rule in righteousness (9:1–7; 11:1–9) and a faithful remnant that would respond in trust (10:20; 28:16). Second Isaiah does not continue with these themes, instead turning attention to the “servant” whose suffering and death would atone for Israel (53:4–5). However, Third Isaiah links First Isaiah’s faithful remnant with obedient “servants” who take on the mission of the Suffering Servant in Second Isaiah. This interpretation sets the direction for the NT’s identification of the royal messiah of chapters 1–39 as the servant of chapters 40–55 (Luke 24:26; Acts 8:32). Third Isaiah thus unites and reinterprets the book as a whole.

It is fitting that Jesus read the opening verses of Isa. 61 in the synagogue at the beginning of his ministry. Like Third Isaiah, he united prophecies of both the messianic Davidic ruler of First Isaiah and the Suffering Servant of Second Isaiah, taking on both roles himself. Third Isaiah ends with a glorious future pictured for the Jewish community as they function as priests in the world (61:6). Similarly, Christ’s body, the church, now functions in these same roles in the world (cf. Acts 13:47; Rev. 5:10).

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

Joseph was Jacob’s favorite, and so Jacob “made an ornate robe for him” (37:3). While shepherding with his brothers, Joseph had a dream indicating that he would one day rise to prominence over them. This was too much for his brothers to bear, and so they decided, after some deliberation, to throw him into a cistern and, rather than kill him, sell him to passing Ishmaelite/Midianite merchants (37:2528).

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

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

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

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

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

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 38:1213).

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; 1Kings 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 (1Sam. 26:19; 2Sam. 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).

In the NT the most common word used for “minister” is diakonos (e.g., 2Cor. 3:6), and for “ministry,” diakonia (e.g., 1Cor. 16:15 [NIV: “service”]). These words function as umbrella terms for NT writers to describe the whole range of ministries performed by the church. They can describe either a special ministry performed by an official functionary (1Cor. 3:5) or one performed by any believer (Rev. 2:19). In the early church, ministry was based not on institutional hierarchies but on services performed (1Tim. 3:113).

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

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

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

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

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

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

In the first century, Nazareth was a small village in the extreme southerly part of lower Galilee, midway between the Sea of Galilee and the Mediterranean Sea. It was near Gath Hepher, the birthplace of Jonah the prophet to the Gentiles (2Kings 14:25), and Sepphoris, one of the three largest cities in the region. Not far was the Via Maris, the great highway joining Mesopotamia to Egypt and ultimately the trading network that linked India, China, central Asia, the Near East, and the Mediterranean. The community, whose population may have averaged around five hundred, subsisted from agriculture. Capital resources included almonds, pomegranates, dates, oil, and wine. (Excavations have located vaulted cells for wine and oil storage, as well as wine presses and storage jar vessels.) Nazareth appears to have been uninhabited from the eighth to the second centuries BC, until it was resettled during the reign of John Hyrcanus (134104 BC), probably by a Davidic clan of army veterans. The claim that Jesus’ adoptive father, Joseph, was a descendant of David and a resident of Nazareth is therefore plausible (Matt. 1:20; Luke 2:4–5). Today, Nazareth is the largest Arab city in Israel.

Although Jesus’ ministry was unsuccessful in Nazareth, he and his followers were called “Nazarenes” (Mark 1:24; 10:47; John 18:5, 7; Acts 2:22; 3:6; 24:5). Descendants of Jesus’ family continued to live in the area for centuries. The epithet “Nazarene” probably was intended as a slur. Nathanael is unimpressed by Jesus’ origin in Nazareth (John 1:46). The village is not mentioned in the OT. Some even doubted its existence, until 1962, when the place name “Nazareth” was discovered on a synagogue inscription in Caesarea Maritima.

Taken together “poor,” “orphan,” and “widow” are mentioned in the NIV 280 times, evidence of God’s particular concern for those in need. “Poor” is an umbrella term for those who are physically impoverished or of diminished spirit. In biblical terms, “poor” would include most orphans and widows, though not every poor person was an orphan or widow.

The NT advances the atmosphere of kindness and nonoppression toward the poor and those in need found in the OT. The NT church was marked by such a real and selfless generosity that its members sold their own possessions and gave to “anyone who had need” (Acts 2:45). The poor were to be treated with generosity, and needs were to be addressed whenever they were discovered (Matt. 19:21; Luke 3:11; 11:41; 12:33; 14:13; 19:8; Acts 6:1; 9:36; Rom. 15:26; Gal. 2:10).

Furthermore, because of the incarnation of Christ, in which the almighty God chose to dwell with humanity, distinctions between believers on the basis of material wealth and, more specifically, favoritism toward the rich were expressly forbidden by the NT writers (1Cor. 11:2022; Phil. 2:1–8; James 2:1–4).

Other specific biblical instructions regarding people in need concern those without parents and especially those without a father. Such individuals are referred to as “fatherless.” As with the provisions made for the poor, oppression of orphans or the fatherless was strictly forbidden (Exod. 22:22; Deut. 24:17; 27:19; Isa. 1:17; 10:1–2; Zech. 7:10). Furthermore, God is often referred to as the provider and helper of the orphan or fatherless (Deut. 10:18; Pss. 10:14, 18; 68:5; 146:9; Jer. 49:11). Jesus promised not to leave his followers as “orphans,” implying that he would not leave them unprotected (John 14:18). In one of the clearest statements of how Christian belief is to manifest itself, James states, “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world” (James 1:27).

Since widows are bereft of their husbands and thus similar to orphans in vulnerability and need, they are the beneficiaries of special provisions in both Testaments. Oppression was forbidden (Exod. 22:22), provisions were to be given in similar fashion to that of the poor and orphans (Deut. 24:19–21), and ample warnings were given to those who would deny justice to widows (Deut. 27:19). Jesus raised a widow’s son from death (Luke 7:14–15), a miracle especially needed because she lacked provision after her only son’s death. The apostle Paul gave specific rules to Timothy regarding who should be placed on the list of widows to receive daily food: they must be over sixty years old and must have been faithful to their husbands (1Tim. 5:9). In the book of Revelation, a desolate city without inhabitants is aptly described as a “widow” (18:7).

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

In many places in the OT, salvation refers to being rescued from physical rather than spiritual trouble. Fearing the possibility of retribution from his brother Esau, Jacob prays, “Save me, I pray, from the hand of my brother Esau” (Gen. 32:11). The actions of Joseph in Egypt saved many from famine (45:57; 47:25; 50:20). Frequently in the psalms, individuals pray for salvation from enemies that threaten one’s safety or life (Pss. 17:14; 18:3; 70:1–3; 71:1–4; 91:1–3).

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

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

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

Two ancient city-states of the Phoenicians that have a long and well-documented history predating many of the events in the Bible. Genesis 10:15 notes that Sidon was a son of Canaan, likely hinting at the importance of this city for the Canaanites. Several times in the Bible the term “Sidon” or “Sidonians” serves as an alternate name for the Phoenicians or Canaanites and usually refers to the southern part of this northern neighbor. There was much social and political interaction between Sidon and Tyre and the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, including Solomon’s marriage to several women from Sidon (1Kings 11:1) and the Omride dynasty’s treaties and intermarriage with the Phoenicians (16:31). For much of the tenth through seventh centuries BC, Israel and the Phoenicians were close economic allies, with Israel providing materials for trade, and the cities of Sidon and Tyre offering the transport of those goods in their famed ships. Like Israel, Sidon and Tyre suffered under the expansions of the Assyrians and the Babylonians. Both Sidon and Tyre often were recipients of the OT prophets’ ire. Tyre especially was subject to many prophetic denouncements of which Ezekiel’s is an archetype (Ezek. 26:128:19). Ezekiel prophesied the total destruction of the city. Both cities had special cultic centers that advocated various versions of Baal worship and attempted to propagate their religion, as demonstrated by the actions of Jezebel, the wife of King Ahab and daughter of the king of Sidon.

Tyre and Sidon continued to be significant cities under Roman rule during the NT period. Jesus went to these two locations and condemned Jewish cities by saying that even the pagan Tyre and Sidon would have repented if they had witnessed miracles he had performed around them (Matt. 11:20–23). Paul also traveled to Tyre, staying there for seven days during a missionary journey (Acts 21:3–4).

In the world of the Bible, a person was viewed as a unity of being with the pervading breath and thus imprint of the loving and holy God. The divine-human relationship consequently is portrayed in the Bible as predominantly spiritual in nature. God is spirit, and humankind may communicate with him in the spiritual realm. The ancients believed in an invisible world of spirits that held most, if not all, reasons for natural events and human actions in the visible world.

The OT writers used the common Hebrew word ruakh (“wind” or “breath”) to describe force and even life from the God of the universe. In its most revealing first instance, God’s ruakh hovered above the waters of the uncreated world (Gen. 1:2). In the next chapter of Genesis a companion word, neshamah (“breath”), is used as God breathed into Adam’s nostrils “the breath of life” (2:7). God thus breathed his own image into the first human being. Humankind’s moral obligations in the remainder of the Bible rest on this breathing act of God.

The OT authors often employ ruakh simply to denote air in motion or breath from a person’s mouth. However, special instances of the use of ruakh include references to the very life of a person (Gen. 7:22; Ps. 104:29), an attitude or emotion (Gen. 41:8; Num. 14:24; Ps. 77:3), the negative traits of pride or temper (Ps. 76:12), a generally good disposition (Prov. 11:13; 18:14), the seat of conversion (Ezek. 18:31; 36:26), and determination given by God (2Chron. 36:22; Hag. 1:14).

The NT authors used the Greek term pneuma to convey the concept of spirit. In the world of the NT, the human spirit was understood as the divine part of human reality as distinct from the material realm. The spirit appears conscious and capable of rejoicing (Luke 1:47). Jesus was described by Luke as growing and becoming “strong in spirit” (1:80). In “spirit” Jesus “knew” what certain teachers of the law were thinking in their hearts (Mark 2:8). Likewise, Jesus “was deeply moved in spirit and troubled” at the sickness of a loved one (John 11:33). At the end of his life, Jesus gave up his spirit (John 19:30).

According to Jesus, the spirit is the place of God’s new covenant work of conversion and worship (John 3:5; 4:24). He declared the human spirit’s dependence on God and ascribed great virtue to those people who were “poor in spirit” (Matt. 5:3).

Human beings who were possessed by an evil spirit were devalued in Mediterranean society. In various places in the Synoptic Gospels and the book of Acts, either Jesus or the disciples were involved in exorcisms of such spirits (Matt. 8:2833; Mark 1:21–28; 7:24–30; 9:14–29; 5:1–20; 9:17–29; Luke 8:26–33; 9:37–42; Acts 5:16).

The apostle Paul pointed to the spirit as the seat of conversion (Rom. 7:6; 1Cor. 5:5). He described believers as facing a struggle between flesh and spirit in regard to living a sanctified life (Rom. 8:2–17; Gal. 5:16–17). A contradiction seems apparent in Pauline thinking as he appears to embrace Greek dualistic understanding of body (flesh) and spirit while likewise commanding that “spirit, soul and body be kept blameless” (1Thess. 5:23). However, the Christian struggle between flesh and Spirit (the Holy Spirit) centers around the believer’s body being dead because of sin but the spirit being alive because of the crucified and resurrected Christ (Rom. 8:10). Believers therefore are encouraged to lead a holistic life, lived in the Spirit.

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

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

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

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

The English term “witness” occurs in both Testaments numerous times, with a wide range of meanings. One common meaning relates to someone who gives legal testimony and to the legitimacy of that testimony (Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:1516, 18; Prov. 12:17; Isa. 8:16, 20). Throughout the NT the term occurs primarily in the context of someone bearing witness—especially God—or testifying to something (Rom. 1:9; 2Cor. 1:23; Phil. 1:8; 1Thess. 2:5, 10), though it also has a forensic dimension in regard to one who establishes legal testimony (e.g., Acts 6:13; 7:58; 2Cor. 13:1; 1Tim. 5:19; Heb. 10:28).

Central to the concept of witness is the truthfulness of the witness. This was a vital component of the OT concept of witness. Thus, in legal proceedings a lone witness was insufficient to establish testimony against anyone (Deut. 17:6). This principle carries over into the NT (cf. Matt. 18:16; 2Cor. 13:1). Such truthfulness was so significant that the ninth commandment expressly forbids bearing false witness (Exod. 20:16; Deut. 5:20; cf. Prov. 19:5, 9).

Truth-telling was not something that the people of Israel were called to merely among themselves. They were to be God’s witnesses to the nations (Isa. 43:10; 44:8). As witnesses of God’s existence and holiness, they were called to be separate from the nations (Exod. 19:6) and to be a light to them (Isa. 49:6). Tragically, Israel failed in this responsibility and was deemed “blind” (Isa. 42:19).

The NT continues the concept that the people of God are to be God’s witnesses. John the Baptist is commissioned “to testify concerning that light” (John 1:7). It is in this context that Jesus later declares himself to be “the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5). Jesus himself is the exemplar of a “faithful witness” (Rev. 1:5). And his followers, whom he has designated as “the light of the world” (Matt. 5:14), are then called to bear witness to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:8).

“Witness” is also employed in terms of a legal testimony regarding what one has seen. That the disciples were intent on establishing such legal testimony is evident in their stipulation that the person to replace Judas Iscariot be someone from among those who had been with Jesus from the beginning of his ministry to his ascension, so that “one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection” (Acts 1:22). This forensic aspect of witness appears in the close of the Gospel of John: “This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true” (21:24). Paul demonstrates this forensic concern for witnesses when he references Peter, the Twelve, some five hundred others, and himself as among those who have witnessed the resurrection (1Cor. 15:3–8).

Throughout Revelation there resides a direct link between Christians bearing witness and suffering, and perhaps dying, as a consequence of this witness. This is evident in the mention of Antipas, who was martyred, and is then designated as “my faithful witness” (Rev. 2:13). Also, the two unnamed witnesses in 11:1–12, who explicitly function as witnesses, are the subject of attack and are eventually murdered. Their murder occurs only after they have finished “their testimony” (11:7).

It is this association of persecution and martyrdom that likely leads to the second-century employment of “martyr” as a designation for those who bear witness to Christ to the point of death.

In the Bible, woman is first encountered along with man in Gen. 1:2628. 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” (1Tim. 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 (2Kings 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 whor* 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.

The words “wrath” and “anger” are used in Bible translations for a variety of Hebrew and Greek words that refer to the disposition of someone (including God) toward persons (including oneself [Gen. 45:5]) or situations considered to be seriously displeasing. There may be degrees of anger (Zech. 1:15), and it may be accompanied by other sentiments such as distress (Gen. 45:5), hatred (Job 16:9), jealousy (Rom. 10:19), grief (Mark 3:5), and vengeance (Mic. 5:15).

Anger may be a proper response to sin or a sin-distorted world, as seen in, for example, Moses’ reaction to the golden calf (Exod. 32:19). Paul envisages an anger that does not necessarily involve sin (Eph. 4:26). Jesus is said to display anger at the willful stubbornness of his contemporaries (Mark 3:5), and his response to the mourning for Lazarus (John 11:33) might be rendered as “outrage,” an anger directed not so much at the mourners as at the ugliness of death, the consequence of sin, and with thoughts, perhaps, of his own impending death necessitated by this fallen world.

On the other hand, a display of anger may be the result of distorted perceptions or values (Gen. 4:56). A tendency to anger in oneself needs to be kept in check (James 1:19) and in others needs to be handled prudently (Prov. 15:1). Unchecked, anger may lead to violence and murder (Gen. 49:6). In several NT lists anger is associated with such other sinful behavior as quarreling, jealousy, selfishness, slander, malice, gossip, conceit, strife, idolatry, sorcery, and bitterness (2Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:20; Eph. 4:31; Col. 3:8).

In Ps. 76:10 NLT (cf. ESV, NASB, NRSV) God is said to cause human anger to bring him praise (but see NIV, NET, where it is God’s wrath against human beings that brings him praise). Perhaps an instance of this is seen in Rom. 13:4–5, where the wrath of the civil authority serves to maintain justice under God.

Blindness was a common ailment in the ancient world. Somecauses included old age (Gen. 27:1), trauma, or divine punish­ment(John 9:2). Israel was given special instructions to care for theblind (Lev. 19:14). True love helped the blind (Job 29:15), andmisleading them was a serious violation (Deut. 27:18).

Blindnessconstituted a ritual blemish, but the blind themselves were notrendered “unclean,” though they could not function aspriests (Lev. 21:18). Even blind animals were unfit for sacrifice(Lev. 22:22), a barometer of the people’s hearts that theprophets had to remind them of (Mal. 1:8). According to the TempleScroll, the Qumran sect expanded the biblical qualifications andrefused entrance to any blind person (11Q19 45:12–13). Nowviewed as impurity, blindness in its midst would defile the wholecommunity and dilute the emphasis of the community on “sight”as an eschatological sign (1Q28a 2:3–10; cf. Isa. 29:18; 35:5).Jesus and his disciples’ healing of the blind may have alsobeen a critique against such separatistic practices (cf. Matt.9:27–31; 12:22).

Infigurative language, the Bible frequently describes the spiritualcondition of people in terms of blindness. Isaiah capitalizes on themetaphor of blindness to describe the rebellious and apostate groups:prophets, priests, and rulers who were divinely afflicted withblindness (Isa. 43:8; 56:10; 59:10; cf. Zeph. 1:17). The anthropologyrepresented in the OT posited three “zones” ofinteractive relationship: hands-feet (action), mouth-ears (speech),and heart-eyes (emotion with thought). The zone of heart-eyes relatedto blindness, since the notion of a dark heart emanated through theeyes. This tradition surfaced in Jesus’ teaching (Matt.6:22–23; cf. 1 John 2:9–11).

Jesushighlighted the onset of the messianic age by fulfilling Isaiah’spromise to proclaim “recovery of sight to the blind”(Luke 4:18). Forty-six of fifty-two references to blindness in the NTare Gospel stories of Jesus’ healing. Because Jesus’ministry was one of opening blind eyes (cf. Isa. 42:7, 16, 18),calling the Pharisees “blind guides” was a sharpdescription (Matt. 15:14; 23:16, 24). But on others, Jesus wouldimpose blindness, the very reverse of his mission (John 9:39–41),since he came as the “light of the world” (8:12).Spiritual blindness as applied to unbelievers could be used todescribe the failure or hard-heartedness of some to accept the trueidentity of Jesus Christ. Using similar language, Paul describes thepagan unbelievers: “The god of this age has blinded the mindsof unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel thatdisplays the glory of Christ” (2 Cor. 4:4).

Nearsightednessand blindness can also be used to describe believers who have growndull to the truth (2 Pet. 1:9) or tepid in their faith (Rev.3:17). Believers are blind when they fail to grasp their truespiritual condition.

Blindness was a common ailment in the ancient world. Somecauses included old age (Gen. 27:1), trauma, or divine punish­ment(John 9:2). Israel was given special instructions to care for theblind (Lev. 19:14). True love helped the blind (Job 29:15), andmisleading them was a serious violation (Deut. 27:18).

Blindnessconstituted a ritual blemish, but the blind themselves were notrendered “unclean,” though they could not function aspriests (Lev. 21:18). Even blind animals were unfit for sacrifice(Lev. 22:22), a barometer of the people’s hearts that theprophets had to remind them of (Mal. 1:8). According to the TempleScroll, the Qumran sect expanded the biblical qualifications andrefused entrance to any blind person (11Q19 45:12–13). Nowviewed as impurity, blindness in its midst would defile the wholecommunity and dilute the emphasis of the community on “sight”as an eschatological sign (1Q28a 2:3–10; cf. Isa. 29:18; 35:5).Jesus and his disciples’ healing of the blind may have alsobeen a critique against such separatistic practices (cf. Matt.9:27–31; 12:22).

Infigurative language, the Bible frequently describes the spiritualcondition of people in terms of blindness. Isaiah capitalizes on themetaphor of blindness to describe the rebellious and apostate groups:prophets, priests, and rulers who were divinely afflicted withblindness (Isa. 43:8; 56:10; 59:10; cf. Zeph. 1:17). The anthropologyrepresented in the OT posited three “zones” ofinteractive relationship: hands-feet (action), mouth-ears (speech),and heart-eyes (emotion with thought). The zone of heart-eyes relatedto blindness, since the notion of a dark heart emanated through theeyes. This tradition surfaced in Jesus’ teaching (Matt.6:22–23; cf. 1 John 2:9–11).

Jesushighlighted the onset of the messianic age by fulfilling Isaiah’spromise to proclaim “recovery of sight to the blind”(Luke 4:18). Forty-six of fifty-two references to blindness in the NTare Gospel stories of Jesus’ healing. Because Jesus’ministry was one of opening blind eyes (cf. Isa. 42:7, 16, 18),calling the Pharisees “blind guides” was a sharpdescription (Matt. 15:14; 23:16, 24). But on others, Jesus wouldimpose blindness, the very reverse of his mission (John 9:39–41),since he came as the “light of the world” (8:12).Spiritual blindness as applied to unbelievers could be used todescribe the failure or hard-heartedness of some to accept the trueidentity of Jesus Christ. Using similar language, Paul describes thepagan unbelievers: “The god of this age has blinded the mindsof unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel thatdisplays the glory of Christ” (2 Cor. 4:4).

Nearsightednessand blindness can also be used to describe believers who have growndull to the truth (2 Pet. 1:9) or tepid in their faith (Rev.3:17). Believers are blind when they fail to grasp their truespiritual condition.

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

TheGospel Message

Theapostle Paul recognizes that the gospel is centered on the death,burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1Cor. 15:1–5). Hestates that this gospel is the power of God for the salvation ofeveryone who believes (Rom. 1:16), a sacred trust (1Tim. 1:11),the word of truth (Eph. 1:13), and an authoritative pronouncementthat requires a response (Rom. 10:16; 2Cor. 11:4; 2Thess.1:8). The declaration of this good news is found on the lips of Jesusin the Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 11:5; Luke 4:18), who calls people torespond in repentance and belief (Mark 1:15). The good news is alsoin the early apostolic preaching, where it is associated with theproclamation of Christ (Acts 5:42; 8:35; 11:20).

Therecords of apostolic preaching in Acts are records of the earliestpublic declaration of this gospel. The apostle Peter gives three suchspeeches (Acts 2:14–41; 3:11–4:4; 10:34–43), whosecontent can be summarized as follows. The age of fulfillment hasdawned through the birth, life, ministry, and resurrection of JesusChrist (2:22–31), which has ushered in the “latter days”foretold by the prophets (3:18–26). Jesus, by his resurrection,has been exalted to the right hand of God as the head of the newIsrael (2:32–36), and the Holy Spirit has been given to thechurch as the sign of Christ’s present power and exaltation(10:44–48). This age will reach its consummation at the returnof Christ (3:20–21), and in response to this gospel an appealis made for repentance, with the offer of forgiveness, the HolySpirit, and salvation (2:37–41).

Thisdeclaration of the gospel is concerned primarily with what waspreached rather than what was written. Itinerant preachers of thisgospel were known as “evangelists,” which in Greek isclosely related to the term euangelion (Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; 2Tim.4:5). Some scholars believe that during the stage of oraltransmission, the gospel accounts developed a certain form throughrepetition, which helps explain some similarities between laterwritten accounts of the gospel.

FromOral to Written Gospel

Later,this “oral” gospel was written down, for several reasons.With the rapid spread of Christianity, as recorded in the book ofActs, a need arose for a more efficient dissemination of the messageof Jesus than was available by oral means. Furthermore, there was aneed to keep the message alive because some of the apostles had died(e.g., James in Acts 12:2) and many churches were facing oppositionand persecution. The written Gospels would facilitate catecheticaland liturgical needs and encourage persecuted Christians to continuefollowing Jesus by telling the story of his faithfulness throughgreat suffering. These written Gospels would also contain examples ofthose who persevered in following Jesus and of those who denied himand betrayed him. These accounts about Jesus and those who followedhim became foundational documents for the early church.

Itshould be noted that the gospel was not written down in order to giveit greater authority. The first-century context was largely an oralculture, in which storytelling and the rehearsal of facts wasintegral. Papias, a leader of the church in Hierapolis in Asia Minorwho died around AD 130, states his preference for oral traditionrather than written information about Jesus: “For I did notthink that information from books would help me as much as the wordof a living and surviving voice” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl.3.39.4). There is, however, a traceable trajectory from the gospelpreached by the apostles to the written accounts that bear the namesof Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It is generally held that theauthors/editors of the four canonical Gospels were using oral and/orwritten sources (Luke 1:1–4), and that their respective Gospelswere written in the second half of the first century.

Themajority of biblical scholars hold that Mark was the first Gospel tobe written (c. AD 66). According to tradition, its editor/author wasJohn Mark, a close friend of the apostle Peter (1Pet. 5:13) anda part-time companion of the apostle Paul (Acts 12:12; Col. 4:10;2Tim. 4:11). This tradition is not without basis. Papias says,“Mark, who had indeed been Peter’s interpreter,accurately wrote as much as he remembered, yet not in order, aboutthat which was either said or done by the Lord” (Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 3.39.15). This tradition is also outlined by Clement ofAlexandria, who, around AD 200, wrote, “When Peter had publiclypreached the word at Rome, and by the Spirit had proclaimed thegospel, then those present, who were many, exhorted Mark, as one whohad followed him for a long time and remembered what had been spoken,to make a record of what he said; and that he did this, anddistributed the Gospel among those that asked him” (Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 6.14.5–7; cf. 2.15.1–2).

Itis widely held that Matthew and Luke used Mark as one of theirsources: of the material in Mark, over 97percent is repeated inMatthew and over 88percent in Luke. Matthew and Luke alsocontain material that appears to come from a common written sourcethat is not found in Mark. Scholars have named this source as “Q”(from the German Quelle= “source”), although thismay be a collection of sources rather than a single document.

Furthermore,the association of the Fourth Gospel with the apostle John goes backto Irenaeus (c. AD 180), who states, “John, the disciple of theLord, who leaned on his breast, also published the gospel whileliving at Ephesus in Asia” (Haer. 3.1.1, as cited in Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 5.8.4). By the second century, the term “gospel”is used for the written accounts of the life, death, and resurrectionof Jesus (e.g., Did. 11.3; 15.4). Justin Martyr (c. AD 140) refers tothe “memoirs of the apostles” (1Apol. 67) andIrenaeus (c. AD 180) mentions the four canonical Gospels by name(Haer. 3.11.7).

ThePurpose and Genre of the Gospels

Purpose.The Gospels were written to convey theology and to create and confirmfaith. They do not give an objectively neutral account of the life ofJesus; they enthusiastically endorse their protagonist and condemnthose who oppose him. They differ from traditional biographies inthat they give little information about the chronology of Jesus’life. Only two of the Gospels, Matthew and Luke, tell of the eventssurrounding Jesus’ birth. Luke alone tells of an event inJesus’ childhood (Luke 2:41–52). It is virtuallyincidental that Jesus worked as a carpenter and had brothers andsisters (Mark 6:3). A large percentage of each of the four canonicalGospels is devoted to the last week of Jesus’ life; of thesixteen chapters of Mark’s Gospel, six are devoted to the oneweek from Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem until his resurrection.

Theprimary intentions of the authors/editors of the written Gospels werenot to give biographical details but rather to lead the reader to anacknowledgment of the identity of Jesus and a belief in the purposeof his mission (Luke 1:4; John 20:31). Their theological purposes,however, do not necessarily compromise their commitment to historicalaccuracy. Jesus is presented as a real, historical figure who livedwithin a specific historical time frame. Luke appears to be moreconcerned than the other evangelists with historical details, givinga rough date for Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1–2) and a morespecific time for Jesus’ baptism (3:1–2).

Genre.The discerning reader of the Gospels is forced to ask questionsconcerning the literary genre(s) of these texts. Such a discussion isimperative, as the interpretation of a section of any piece ofliterature will largely be determined by the function of the textwithin a certain literary genre. Prior to the 1970s, most NT scholarsbelieved that the Gospels formed a unique literary genre and weretherefore distinct from other first-century literary forms. Thisconclusion was based on the belief that the written Gospels werecollections of smaller sections sewn together by the evangelists, andthat the documents as a whole lacked coherence. Since then, thispresupposition has been challenged, largely because scholars haveseen that the Gospel writers were real editors and authors who werenot just collecting primitive source material but were using thatmaterial to write a larger story about Jesus. The written Gospelstherefore have overall coherence and purpose; they were written insuch a way as to bring about a desired response in the reader. Suchan overall intention may have stronger similarities with differentgenres in the Greco-Roman world of theNT.

TheGospels have been associated with several genres. They bear someresemblance to aretalogies, which were narratives about divinepersons in antiquity from which flowed moral instructions. Thesestories often involved miraculous events at the subject’s birthor death or during life, and they included the presence of bothdisciples and opponents. Within these aretalogies, the narrative wassecondary to the morality. An association with aretalogies,therefore, would encourage the reader to give greater attention tomoral teaching than to events in which this teaching is embedded.Similarly, others have seen the Gospels as essentially a collectionof wisdom sayings set in a historicized narrative; this view againgives priority to sayings and is doubtful of the historicity of thenarrative. Such views that downplay the narrative, and particularlythe miracles in Jesus’ life, have led others to argue theopposite extreme, which sees the Gospels, and Luke-Acts inparticular, as examples of ancient novels, with their focus onmiracle stories. Many scholars have rejected the emphasis on eithersayings or narrative, arguing that the literary genre that theGospels most closely resemble is ancient biographies (bioi). Thesecontained praise for the protagonist, rhetoric, moral philosophy, anda concern for character.

Althoughthe Gospels use different literary motifs that are reflective ofdifferent genres of the Greco-Roman world, they do not exactlyreplicate a known genre. They contain material not found in otherHellenistic literature of the time—for example, the fulfillmentof OT expectations and their desire to address particular issuesfaced by the early church, such as opposition; the Gentile mission;the need to redefine Israel in the light of Jesus’ life, death,and resurrection; and the nature of Christian discipleship. Unlikeother literature of the time, they do not name their authors, andwith the exception of Luke, they lack traditional literary devicessuch as prefaces. They are therefore to be seen as unique, or atleast as a distinct subgenre of ancient biographies.

Canonicaland Noncanonical Gospels

Theprogression from the events of Jesus’ life to the oralpreaching of this gospel to the first-century writing of the storyled to the acceptance of the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark,Luke, and John into the NT canon. There is also a significant body ofliterature that is normally referred to as the noncanonical gospels.These later documents were neither widely accepted nor viewed asauthoritative, but they provide useful insights into the nature ofearly Christianity. A significant noncanonical gospel is the Gospelof Thomas, which is part of a large collection of works discovered atNag Hammadi (Egypt) in 1945. The Gospel of Thomas does not contain aresurrection account and is primarily a collection of sayings.

Thecanonical Gospels are not more authoritative than other sections ofScripture, but because they focus on Jesus’ ministry, withparticular attention to his death and resurrection, they draw theattention of the reader to the fulfillment of God’s purpose inthe life and work of Jesus, the Messiah. They are therefore of greatimportance within Scripture.

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

TheGospel Message

Theapostle Paul recognizes that the gospel is centered on the death,burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1Cor. 15:1–5). Hestates that this gospel is the power of God for the salvation ofeveryone who believes (Rom. 1:16), a sacred trust (1Tim. 1:11),the word of truth (Eph. 1:13), and an authoritative pronouncementthat requires a response (Rom. 10:16; 2Cor. 11:4; 2Thess.1:8). The declaration of this good news is found on the lips of Jesusin the Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 11:5; Luke 4:18), who calls people torespond in repentance and belief (Mark 1:15). The good news is alsoin the early apostolic preaching, where it is associated with theproclamation of Christ (Acts 5:42; 8:35; 11:20).

Therecords of apostolic preaching in Acts are records of the earliestpublic declaration of this gospel. The apostle Peter gives three suchspeeches (Acts 2:14–41; 3:11–4:4; 10:34–43), whosecontent can be summarized as follows. The age of fulfillment hasdawned through the birth, life, ministry, and resurrection of JesusChrist (2:22–31), which has ushered in the “latter days”foretold by the prophets (3:18–26). Jesus, by his resurrection,has been exalted to the right hand of God as the head of the newIsrael (2:32–36), and the Holy Spirit has been given to thechurch as the sign of Christ’s present power and exaltation(10:44–48). This age will reach its consummation at the returnof Christ (3:20–21), and in response to this gospel an appealis made for repentance, with the offer of forgiveness, the HolySpirit, and salvation (2:37–41).

Thisdeclaration of the gospel is concerned primarily with what waspreached rather than what was written. Itinerant preachers of thisgospel were known as “evangelists,” which in Greek isclosely related to the term euangelion (Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; 2Tim.4:5). Some scholars believe that during the stage of oraltransmission, the gospel accounts developed a certain form throughrepetition, which helps explain some similarities between laterwritten accounts of the gospel.

FromOral to Written Gospel

Later,this “oral” gospel was written down, for several reasons.With the rapid spread of Christianity, as recorded in the book ofActs, a need arose for a more efficient dissemination of the messageof Jesus than was available by oral means. Furthermore, there was aneed to keep the message alive because some of the apostles had died(e.g., James in Acts 12:2) and many churches were facing oppositionand persecution. The written Gospels would facilitate catecheticaland liturgical needs and encourage persecuted Christians to continuefollowing Jesus by telling the story of his faithfulness throughgreat suffering. These written Gospels would also contain examples ofthose who persevered in following Jesus and of those who denied himand betrayed him. These accounts about Jesus and those who followedhim became foundational documents for the early church.

Itshould be noted that the gospel was not written down in order to giveit greater authority. The first-century context was largely an oralculture, in which storytelling and the rehearsal of facts wasintegral. Papias, a leader of the church in Hierapolis in Asia Minorwho died around AD 130, states his preference for oral traditionrather than written information about Jesus: “For I did notthink that information from books would help me as much as the wordof a living and surviving voice” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl.3.39.4). There is, however, a traceable trajectory from the gospelpreached by the apostles to the written accounts that bear the namesof Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It is generally held that theauthors/editors of the four canonical Gospels were using oral and/orwritten sources (Luke 1:1–4), and that their respective Gospelswere written in the second half of the first century.

Themajority of biblical scholars hold that Mark was the first Gospel tobe written (c. AD 66). According to tradition, its editor/author wasJohn Mark, a close friend of the apostle Peter (1Pet. 5:13) anda part-time companion of the apostle Paul (Acts 12:12; Col. 4:10;2Tim. 4:11). This tradition is not without basis. Papias says,“Mark, who had indeed been Peter’s interpreter,accurately wrote as much as he remembered, yet not in order, aboutthat which was either said or done by the Lord” (Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 3.39.15). This tradition is also outlined by Clement ofAlexandria, who, around AD 200, wrote, “When Peter had publiclypreached the word at Rome, and by the Spirit had proclaimed thegospel, then those present, who were many, exhorted Mark, as one whohad followed him for a long time and remembered what had been spoken,to make a record of what he said; and that he did this, anddistributed the Gospel among those that asked him” (Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 6.14.5–7; cf. 2.15.1–2).

Itis widely held that Matthew and Luke used Mark as one of theirsources: of the material in Mark, over 97percent is repeated inMatthew and over 88percent in Luke. Matthew and Luke alsocontain material that appears to come from a common written sourcethat is not found in Mark. Scholars have named this source as “Q”(from the German Quelle= “source”), although thismay be a collection of sources rather than a single document.

Furthermore,the association of the Fourth Gospel with the apostle John goes backto Irenaeus (c. AD 180), who states, “John, the disciple of theLord, who leaned on his breast, also published the gospel whileliving at Ephesus in Asia” (Haer. 3.1.1, as cited in Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 5.8.4). By the second century, the term “gospel”is used for the written accounts of the life, death, and resurrectionof Jesus (e.g., Did. 11.3; 15.4). Justin Martyr (c. AD 140) refers tothe “memoirs of the apostles” (1Apol. 67) andIrenaeus (c. AD 180) mentions the four canonical Gospels by name(Haer. 3.11.7).

ThePurpose and Genre of the Gospels

Purpose.The Gospels were written to convey theology and to create and confirmfaith. They do not give an objectively neutral account of the life ofJesus; they enthusiastically endorse their protagonist and condemnthose who oppose him. They differ from traditional biographies inthat they give little information about the chronology of Jesus’life. Only two of the Gospels, Matthew and Luke, tell of the eventssurrounding Jesus’ birth. Luke alone tells of an event inJesus’ childhood (Luke 2:41–52). It is virtuallyincidental that Jesus worked as a carpenter and had brothers andsisters (Mark 6:3). A large percentage of each of the four canonicalGospels is devoted to the last week of Jesus’ life; of thesixteen chapters of Mark’s Gospel, six are devoted to the oneweek from Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem until his resurrection.

Theprimary intentions of the authors/editors of the written Gospels werenot to give biographical details but rather to lead the reader to anacknowledgment of the identity of Jesus and a belief in the purposeof his mission (Luke 1:4; John 20:31). Their theological purposes,however, do not necessarily compromise their commitment to historicalaccuracy. Jesus is presented as a real, historical figure who livedwithin a specific historical time frame. Luke appears to be moreconcerned than the other evangelists with historical details, givinga rough date for Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1–2) and a morespecific time for Jesus’ baptism (3:1–2).

Genre.The discerning reader of the Gospels is forced to ask questionsconcerning the literary genre(s) of these texts. Such a discussion isimperative, as the interpretation of a section of any piece ofliterature will largely be determined by the function of the textwithin a certain literary genre. Prior to the 1970s, most NT scholarsbelieved that the Gospels formed a unique literary genre and weretherefore distinct from other first-century literary forms. Thisconclusion was based on the belief that the written Gospels werecollections of smaller sections sewn together by the evangelists, andthat the documents as a whole lacked coherence. Since then, thispresupposition has been challenged, largely because scholars haveseen that the Gospel writers were real editors and authors who werenot just collecting primitive source material but were using thatmaterial to write a larger story about Jesus. The written Gospelstherefore have overall coherence and purpose; they were written insuch a way as to bring about a desired response in the reader. Suchan overall intention may have stronger similarities with differentgenres in the Greco-Roman world of theNT.

TheGospels have been associated with several genres. They bear someresemblance to aretalogies, which were narratives about divinepersons in antiquity from which flowed moral instructions. Thesestories often involved miraculous events at the subject’s birthor death or during life, and they included the presence of bothdisciples and opponents. Within these aretalogies, the narrative wassecondary to the morality. An association with aretalogies,therefore, would encourage the reader to give greater attention tomoral teaching than to events in which this teaching is embedded.Similarly, others have seen the Gospels as essentially a collectionof wisdom sayings set in a historicized narrative; this view againgives priority to sayings and is doubtful of the historicity of thenarrative. Such views that downplay the narrative, and particularlythe miracles in Jesus’ life, have led others to argue theopposite extreme, which sees the Gospels, and Luke-Acts inparticular, as examples of ancient novels, with their focus onmiracle stories. Many scholars have rejected the emphasis on eithersayings or narrative, arguing that the literary genre that theGospels most closely resemble is ancient biographies (bioi). Thesecontained praise for the protagonist, rhetoric, moral philosophy, anda concern for character.

Althoughthe Gospels use different literary motifs that are reflective ofdifferent genres of the Greco-Roman world, they do not exactlyreplicate a known genre. They contain material not found in otherHellenistic literature of the time—for example, the fulfillmentof OT expectations and their desire to address particular issuesfaced by the early church, such as opposition; the Gentile mission;the need to redefine Israel in the light of Jesus’ life, death,and resurrection; and the nature of Christian discipleship. Unlikeother literature of the time, they do not name their authors, andwith the exception of Luke, they lack traditional literary devicessuch as prefaces. They are therefore to be seen as unique, or atleast as a distinct subgenre of ancient biographies.

Canonicaland Noncanonical Gospels

Theprogression from the events of Jesus’ life to the oralpreaching of this gospel to the first-century writing of the storyled to the acceptance of the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark,Luke, and John into the NT canon. There is also a significant body ofliterature that is normally referred to as the noncanonical gospels.These later documents were neither widely accepted nor viewed asauthoritative, but they provide useful insights into the nature ofearly Christianity. A significant noncanonical gospel is the Gospelof Thomas, which is part of a large collection of works discovered atNag Hammadi (Egypt) in 1945. The Gospel of Thomas does not contain aresurrection account and is primarily a collection of sayings.

Thecanonical Gospels are not more authoritative than other sections ofScripture, but because they focus on Jesus’ ministry, withparticular attention to his death and resurrection, they draw theattention of the reader to the fulfillment of God’s purpose inthe life and work of Jesus, the Messiah. They are therefore of greatimportance within Scripture.

In Christian theology, the Third Person of the Trinity. Theusage derives from the NT, in which the divine Spirit is treated asan independent person who is instrumental in salvation and is worthyof the praise accorded to both the Father and the Son (John 14:16–23;Rom. 8:26–27; 1Pet. 1:2).

OldTestament

Thescarcity of the phrase “Holy Spirit” in the OT (only inPs. 51:11; Isa. 63:10–11) does not imply lack of interest orimportance. While it should be recognized that in the OT the personof the Holy Spirit receives nothing like the systematic reflectionfound in the NT, when one includes correlative terms, such as “Spiritof God,” “my Spirit,” “wind,” or“breath,” it is apparent that OT writers attributed greatsignificance to God’s Spirit. Thus, the Spirit was at work inthe beginning of creation (Gen. 1:2). Adam and Eve are uniquely givenlife by the breath of God (Gen. 2:7). The Spirit enables the buildingof the tabernacle (Exod. 31:3), gives voice to the message of theprophets (Num. 11:29; cf. 2Pet. 1:21), empowers Israel’sleaders (1Sam. 16:13), and provides access to God’spresence (Ps. 51:11). Yet in all this, the work of the Spirit in theOT is sporadic, occasional, and localized. Thus, the prophets longfor a new age when God’s people will more perfectly enjoy theSpirit’s presence (Isa. 32:15; 44:3; 61:1; Joel 2:28).

NewTestament

TheSpirit in the ministry of Christ.The NT views the OT prophetic hope for the Spirit as fulfilled in andthrough Jesus Christ (Luke 4:18–21). The unique relationshipbetween God’s Holy Spirit and the person and work of Jesusexplains the systemic reflection that the Holy Spirit receives in theNT. This is signaled at the very beginning of Jesus’ life, whenthe Holy Spirit “comes upon” Mary, overshadowing her with“the power of the Most High” (1:35). Similarly, at thestart of Jesus’ public ministry, the Holy Spirit “descendedon him” at baptism (3:22). This anointing by the Spiritinitiates and empowers Jesus’ public ministry, from hispreaching, to his miraculous works, to his perfect obedience (Luke4:14–18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38). Even his sacrificial death isaccomplished by the power of the Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14).

Significantly,just as the Holy Spirit empowered the life and death of Jesus, so toois the Spirit responsible for his resurrection and characteristic ofhis glorious reign. Death is not a defeat for Jesus: he is“vindicated by the Spirit” (1Tim. 3:16), “appointedthe Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead”(Rom. 1:4; cf. 1Pet. 3:18). Furthermore, at his resurrection,Jesus comes into a new phase of full and perfect possession of theeternal Spirit as the reward for his obedience. So complete is thisunion that Paul at one point claims that “the Lord is theSpirit” (2Cor. 3:17).

TheSpirit in the church and the believer.The church and its members are the immediate beneficiaries ofChrist’s spiritual fullness. Since Jesus is now a “life-givingspirit” through his resurrection and ascension (1Cor.15:45), he is able to fulfill the promise of Spirit baptism (Luke3:16). This baptism takes place in the outpouring of the Spirit atPentecost, which marks the birth of the NT church. The apostles,illuminated by the Holy Spirit, provide true and powerful testimonyabout Jesus (John 16:4–15), testimony that serves as thechurch’s foundation and principal tradition (Eph. 2:20). Thework of the Spirit continues within the church in the postapostolicage, uniting its members in Christ for God’s holy purpose (Eph.2:22).

Thissame outpouring of the Holy Spirit is the salvation of individualbelievers. Believers receive the Spirit by faith (Gal. 3:14). TheSpirit in turn unites them to Christ and all his benefits (Gal. 3:2;Eph. 1:3), including his life (Heb. 4:15–16), suffering (Phil.1:29; 1Pet. 4:14), death (Rom. 6:3), resurrection (Rom. 6:5),justification (Rom. 4:25), and glorious reign in heaven (Phil. 3:20).These benefits, though undoubtedly perfected and consummated only atChrist’s return (Phil. 1:6), are characteristic of believers’present experience, enjoyed now because the Spirit dwells within themas the “firstfruits” of the harvest to come (Rom. 8:23;cf. Gal. 2:19–20). This indwelling of the Spirit results in newbirth and new creation (2Cor. 5:17), a newness identified withthe life that Christ received in his resurrection (Rom. 8:11).

Forthis reason, believers are urged to further the work of the Spirit intheir lives until the bodily resurrection of all God’s people.They are to cultivate the “fruit of the Spirit” (Gal.5:22), and they are correspondingly warned not to “grieve theHoly Spirit” (Eph. 4:30). Furthermore, since new life isinitiated by the Spirit (John 3:6–8), Christians are to remainin that Spirit, not turning aside in reliance on vain and uselessprinciples (Gal. 3:1–5). Conversely, they are to be “filledwith the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18), putting off the old person andputting on the new (4:22). This filling grounds every aspect of thebeliever’s life, from obedience, to worship, to the hope ofresurrection. The Spirit, in uniting believers to all the riches ofChrist and his resurrection, is therefore central in the work ofsalvation. See also Spirit.

The land of Israel is strategically located on a land bridgebetween significant geopolitical powers. About the size of NewJersey, it is geographically diverse, ranging from fertile mountainsin northern Galilee to the arid Negev steppe. It was indeed the“testing ground of faith” in which God planted hispeople.

The“Land Between”

TheMediterranean Sea to the west and the great Arabian Desert to theeast confined the flow of military and commercial traffic to thisland bridge. Throughout most of Israel’s history, Egypt and thesuccession of political entities in Mesopotamia were intent onexpanding their empires; Israel was in between. To a lesser extent,this also involved invaders coming from or through Anatolia (modernTurkey).

Thesea and the desert also affect the weather patterns as Israel isdependent on rainfall in the winter months and dew in the summer forits continued agricultural fertility. The promises regarding the“early and latter rains” (autumn and spring) indicateblessing (Deut. 11:14; Jer. 5:24; Joel 2:23). The prospects ofdrought and famine hover over the land. These vulnerabilities toenemy attack and potential lack of rainfall figure prominently inGod’s challenge to faithful obedience (Deut. 11:10–17;28:25).

GeographicalRegions

Thereare four north-south longitudinal zones that help to define thegeography of Israel. From west to east, they are the coastal plain,the hill country, the Jordan Rift Valley, and Trans-jordan. South ofthese zones lies the Negev, a marginal region between Israel properand Sinai.

Coastalplain.The coastal plain extends almost the entire length of Israel, withthe exception of Mount Carmel’s promontory, jutting out intothe Mediterranean Sea. Because of the straight coastline, there areno natural good harbors as there are farther north in Lebanon. Thisregion characteristically was controlled by more cosmopolitan andgenerally hostile non-Israelites, the most notable being thePhilistines in the south. As a result of these factors, theIsraelites generally were not a seafaring people, and in fact theyseemed to view the sea as a place of chaos and danger (e.g., Pss.42:7; 74:13–14; Jon. 2:2–7).

Muchof the coastal plain was swampy in antiquity due to calcifiedsandstone ridges along the coastline that prevented runoff from thehills from flowing unimpeded into the sea. In addition, sand dunesalong the coast were obstacles to travel. Because this region wasrelatively flat and easily traversed along the eastern edge, theInternational Coastal Highway skirted the swamps and dunes andcarried the major traffic through the land. Erosion from the hillcountry to the east brought excellent soil to the plain. Once theswamps were drained in the twentieth century, the plains becamefertile farming areas.

Thecoastal plain has significant subdivisions. To the north of MountCarmel, the Plain of Akko includes a crescent-shaped area around thecity of Akko and extends to Rosh HaNikra, a promontory at theboundary with Lebanon. Immediately south of Mount Carmel is the smallPlain of Dor, generally under the control of foreigners and notsignificant in the biblical text. The Crocodile River separates thePlain of Dor from the Sharon Plain. In the early first century AD,Herod the Great built Caesarea Maritima on the site of Strato’sTower along the coast of the Sharon Plain and constructed an immenseartificial harbor (Josephus, Ant. 15.331–41). It was Herod’sintent for Caesarea to serve as the entry point for Roman cultureinto what he considered to be the backwaters of Palestine. In God’splan, however, the process was reversed: Caesarea became a majorChristian center, and the gospel went out through the entire RomanEmpire.

TheYarqon River, with its source at Aphek, separates the Sharon and thePhilistine plains. Because this created a bottleneck for theInternational Coastal Highway, whoever controlled Aphek had amilitary and commercial advantage. It is significant that thePhilistines were at Aphek when the Israelites took the ark of thecovenant to battle (1Sam. 4). The Philistine Plain extendsfifty miles south to Besor Wadi (dry riverbed) in the western Negev(see below). Its width ranges from about ten miles in the north totwenty-five miles in the south. The five significant Philistinecities were Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Gath, and Ekron.

Hillcountry.A mountainous spine runs from the north to the south, with severalaberrations due to seismic activity in the distant geologic past. Thehill countries of Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, and Manasseh are in thesouthern two-thirds of the country. Because the terrain is rugged,with steep V-shaped valleys, these regions are somewhat more isolatedand protected, especially in Judah and Ephraim. Travel in theinterior is along the north-south ridge, often called the “wayof the patriarchs” because Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob journeyedthis route, stopping at Shechem, Bethel, Salem (Jerusalem), Hebron,and finally Beersheba at the southern end of the mountain range.Agriculture in the hill country is excellent when there is sufficientrainfall. The hard limestone bedrock means that springs are bountifuland the eroded terra rossa soil is productive. The triad of cropsthat appears in the Bible includes grain (“bread”), newwine, and oil (Deut. 11:14; Joel 1:10), noted in the order in whichthey are harvested.

Westof the Judean hill country are lower, rolling foothills known as theShephelah. Cut through by five significant east-west valleys, thisregion was a buffer zone between the people living in the hillcountry and the Philistines or other foreign forces passing throughon the International Coastal Highway. When Israel was particularlyvulnerable, these valleys served as invasion routes into theheartland of Judah. The most famous of these, the Elah Valley, wasthe site of the face-off between David and the Philistine warriorGoliath (1Sam.17).

Onthe eastern side of the hill country, especially in the tribal areasof Judah and Benjamin, lies the wilderness. Because most of theprecipitation falls on the western slopes of the mountain range,rainfall for the regions right around the Dead Sea (in the “rainshadow”) is less than four inches per year. Sparsely inhabited,the wilderness was occasionally a place of refuge, as when David wasfleeing from Saul (1Sam. 23–26). Generally, it was viewedas a place to pass through. When the Israelites conquered the land,they traversed the wilderness to get to the central Benjamin Plateau(Josh. 10:9–10). David fled through the wilderness when Absalomtook over the kingdom (2Sam. 15–16). When Jesus traveledfrom Jericho (below sea level) to Jerusalem, he climbed through thewilderness to an elevation of about twenty-five hundred feet abovesea level. Shepherds grazed their flocks in this area during thewinter wet months and then migrated farther north and west as the dryseason advanced. Some chose to withdraw into the wilderness, mostnotably the Qumran community along the northwestern shore of the DeadSea and the later monastic communities.

Themajor city in the rugged hill country of Ephraim was Shiloh, awell-protected location for the tabernacle and the ark of thecovenant early in Israel’s history (Judg. 18:31; 1Sam.1–4). In fact, the decision to take the ark out to battleagainst the Philistines at Aphek was catastrophic. The tribalterritory of Manasseh, north of Ephraim, was more open to foreigninfluence. The major cities were Shechem, lying between Mount Gerizimand Mount Ebal, locations for the renewal of the covenant (Josh.8:30–35; 24:1), and Samaria, eventually the capital of thenorthern kingdom. When Omri moved the capital west to Samaria(1Kings 16:24), it was a bid for more connection withcosmopolitan coastal communities and particularly with the nation ofPhoenicia to the northwest. Omri’s son Ahab married thePhoenician princess Jezebel, cementing the alliance and bringing Baalworship to Israel with even greater force.

MountCarmel, to the northwest of Samaria, served as the effective boundarybetween Israel and the expanding power of the Phoenicians. It was theperfect stage for the confrontation between Elijah and the prophetsof Baal and Asherah (1Kings 18). Due to its elevation (overseventeen hundred feet at its highest point), it normally receivesabout thirty-two inches of rain per year. At Elijah’s word,however, the rain had ceased for more than three years (1Kings17:1; James 5:17), and the glory of Carmel had withered (cf. Isa.33:9; Amos 1:2; Nah. 1:4). This was a direct challenge to thesupposed powers of Baal, the god of storm and rain. The contestapparently took place near the heights of the promontory overlookingthe Mediterranean Sea (1Kings 18:42–43). There are,however, three sections in the entire twenty-four-mile range, eachseparated from the next by a chalk pass, providing access through themountain range. At the southeastern end of Mount Carmel lies theDothan Valley, location of one of the routes connecting theInternational Coastal Highway with the major Transjordanian highway(see Gen. 37; 2Kings 6:8–23).

TheDothan Valley rests between Mount Carmel and Mount Gilboa to theeast. These two mountains, along with the Jezreel and Harod Valleyson their northern flanks, create a natural barrier between thecentral hill country and Galilee. Because of the strategic importanceof this region, the Israelites fought early defensive battles againstthe forces of Jabin king of Hazor (Judg. 4) and against theMidianites camped in the Jezreel Valley (Judg. 7). Later, thePhilistines swept through this valley, dividing the southern tribesfrom those in the north. Saul and his sons lost their lives on MountGilboa in this confrontation (1Sam. 31). The night before thebattle, Saul was so troubled by God’s silence that he venturedbehind enemy lines on Mount Moreh (directly north of Mount Gilboa) tothe town of Endor and requested a medium to summon the prophet Samuel(1Sam. 28). The city of Megiddo, situated on the edge of theJezreel Valley at the base of Mount Carmel, guarded the mostimportant pass through the mountain and was the site of numerousbattles. It may be the basis for the name “Armageddon,”“Har Megiddo” in Hebrew (Rev. 16).

Northof the Jezreel and Harod Valleys, Galilee can be divided into lowerand upper Galilee. The latter is called “upper” becauseit is both farther north and significantly higher in elevation. UpperGalilee is rugged and relatively isolated. As a result, few biblicalevents unfolded there. In fact, Galilee is seldom mentioned in theOT, with the exception of Isa. 9:1, the passage that Matthew quotesin speaking of the inauguration of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee(Matt. 4:13–16).

Thewestern part of lower Galilee has ridges that run east to west,providing natural conduits for the winds from the Mediterranean Seaas they sweep eastward. This contributes to sudden and strong stormson the Sea of Galilee. The town of Nazareth is nestled near the topof the southernmost ridge, overlooking the Jezreel Valley from thenorth. This would have afforded Jesus a panoramic view of ahistorical stage as he was growing up. Nearby was Gath Hepher,hometown of the prophet Jonah (2Kings 14:25). As Jesus lookedeast, he would have seen Mount Tabor (Judg. 4–5) and MountMoreh (Judg. 7; 1Sam. 31). The “brow of the hill”at Nazareth (Luke 4:29) is a sharp precipice overlooking the JezreelValley. Although not mentioned in the Gospels, the Roman city ofSepphoris was only about three miles northwest of Nazareth, and itmight have been the place where Joseph was employed as a builder.Eastern lower Galilee is characterized by beautiful rolling hills andvalleys that slope down toward the Jordan Valley. Just west of theSea of Galilee are the cliffs of Arbel, past which the InternationalCoastal Highway made its way as it ran from the Jezreel Valley aroundMount Tabor and down into the Jordan Rift Valley.

JordanRift Valley.The Jordan Rift Valley, ranging in width from about four to fourteenmiles, is a remarkable geological cleft in the earth that extendswell beyond the immediate area of Israel. The Arabah, the Dead Sea,the Sea of Galilee, and the Huleh Valley north of the Sea of Galileelie in the Jordan Rift Valley. In modern times, the Arava (Arabah)refers to the wasteland between the Dead Sea and the Gulf of Eilat(Aqaba), but in the OT the term also included the barren desert northof and around the Dead Sea (Josh. 8:14; 11:2; 1Sam. 23:24;2Sam. 2:29; 4:7). The Dead Sea was called the “Sea of theArabah” in texts that indicate its role as a boundary marker(Deut. 3:17; 4:49; Josh. 12:3; 2Kings 14:25).

Inthe Hebrew Bible, the Dead Sea is called the “Sea of Salt.”The mineral content exceeds 30percent, compared to normal seasalinity of 3–5percent. These minerals include calcium,potassium, magnesium, and sodium chlorides. Nevertheless, some algaeand bacteria do survive in the sea. Bitumen (asphalt) also seeps fromthe sea floor, especially when there is more seismic activity in theregion. The salinity varies, depending on the level of the Dead Sea,which does fluctuate with variations in rainfall. The level iscurrently receding rapidly, at a rate of almost three feet per year.One reason for this is the increasing demand for water from theheadwaters of the Jordan River. The north end of the sea, at aboutthirteen hundred feet below sea level, is the lowest place on earth,and the depth of the water at that point is more than one thousandfeet.

TheJordan River Valley north of the Dead Sea is approximately sixty-fivemiles long, and the Jordan River winds for over 120 miles. The name“Jordan” comes from the Hebrew word yarad, which means“to descend.” The Sea of Galilee is 690 feet below sealevel, so there is a significant drop between that point and thenorth end of the Dead Sea.

Keycities in the Jordan Valley include Jericho, just north of the DeadSea, and Beth Shan, at the junction of the Harod and Jordan valleys.The first city to be conquered (Josh. 6), Jericho represented thevulnerable “underbelly” of Canaan and paved the way forthe campaigns that swept first through the south and then the north(Josh. 9–11). Beth Shan was under Philistine control in theearly Israelite period. Later, it became the one Decapolis city westof the Jordan River and was known as Scythopolis.

TheJordan Valley has three sections. The entire expanse is called the“Ghor,” an Arabic name. The river valley itself is calledthe “Zhor,” and it includes the “pride” orthickets of the Jordan, a dense tangle of lush underbrush in whichlions could be found in the biblical period (Jer. 12:5; 49:19; 50:44;Zech. 11:3). In between the Ghor and the Zhor is the Qatarra,lifeless marl terraces. In antiquity, during flood stage the JordanRiver could be a mile wide. The Israelites crossed the Jordan in thespringtime, near Passover, when the river was at flood stage (Josh.3:15; 5:10).

TheJordan River has its headwaters north of the Sea of Galilee at thebase of Mount Hermon. It provides a constant source of freshwatercoming into the seven-by-thirteen-mile body of water. In addition,there are salt springs in the northwestern corner. These contributeto the good fishing in that part of the sea. The Hebrew name is “Yam[Sea of] Kinnereth” (Num. 34:11; Josh. 12:3; 13:27). It wasalso known as the Sea of Tiberias (John 6:1; 21:1) and the Lake ofGennesaret (Luke 5:1). This last name comes from the fertile plainaround the northwestern corner of the lake and the city of Gennesareton that plain.

Theministry of Jesus unfolded around the Sea of Galilee after he movedhis base of operations from Nazareth to Capernaum (Matt. 4:13), atthe northern end of the sea. Nearby were the cities of Bethsaida andChorazin, which, along with Capernaum, Jesus condemned for notbelieving even though he worked miracles in their midst (Matt.11:20–24). The city of Capernaum profited from the industriesof fishing and oil pressing. It was also a likely place for a taxcollector, as it was close to the border between Herod Antipas’sGalilee and Herod Philip’s territories to the east. Across thelake, in non-Jewish territory, was the town of Gergesa, perhaps thesite where Jesus sent the legion of demons into a herd of pigs (Mark5:1–20pars.).

Justnorth of the Sea of Galilee is an elevated sill, formed by a basaltflow across the Golan Heights and over this section of the JordanRift Valley. Hazor, a major site of some two hundred acres, satastride the sill and dominated the northern region in the Late Bronzeand Israelite periods. Hazor is mentioned in texts from both Mari inMesopotamia and El Amarna in Egypt.

TheHuleh Valley, north of the sill, is twenty miles in length andreceives about twenty-four inches of rain per year, making it amarshland swamp in antiquity that was called “LakeSemechonitis.” The International Coastal Highway made its wayalong the western edge of the valley, turned eastward past MountHermon, and continued to Damascus.

Transjordan.On the eastern side of the Jordan Rift Valley, at the very northernextent of Israel, Mount Hermon rises to nine thousand feet. Abundantprecipitation percolating through the limestone results in prolificsprings at its base. These are the headwaters of the Jordan River,the two most important of which are at Dan and Caesarea Philippi.With the abundance of water and lush surroundings, it is notsurprising that Dan was a tempting location for the tribe of Dan toresettle, given their precarious position between the tribe of Judahand the Philistines to the west. The idols set up at that point(Judg. 18:30–31) established a precedent for Jeroboam’schoice to position one of the golden calves there as an alternativeto worship in distant Jerusalem (1Kings 12:29–30).Another name for Caesarea Philippi is “Panias” (modernArabic, “Banias”), in celebration of the god Pan. Therock face from which the spring poured forth is covered with nichesfor pagan gods; Herod the Great also built a temple to Augustus. Inthis context, Peter declared that Jesus was the Christ, the Son ofthe “living” God (Matt. 16:16).

Theregion south of Mount Hermon was Bashan in the OT period. In the NTera it consisted of a number of small provinces. One of those wasGaulanitis, which is recognizable in the modern name “Golan.”With significant annual rainfall (about forty inches per year), thenatural vegetation includes trees and rich pasture that supportslarge herds (cf. the “bulls of Bashan” in Ps. 22:12;Ezek. 39:18).

Separatingthe region of Bashan from Lower Gilead is the Yarmuk River Gorge, asignificant natural boundary. There was an ongoing contest betweenthe northern kingdom of Israel and Syria to the northeast to controlthe key site of Ramoth Gilead (1Kings 22; 2Kings 9).Cutting through the elevated Dome of Gilead is the Jabbok River, thesite of Jacob’s wrestling match with God (Gen. 32).

Thearea to the east and south of the Dead Sea includes the plains ofMoab (Mishor), extending north of the Arnon River Gorge; geopoliticalMoab, between the Arnon and the Zered rivers; and Edom, reaching fromthe Zered down to the northern end of the Gulf of Eilat (Aqaba). Tothe east of the Mishor lay the kingdom of Ammon. According to Gen.19, Moab and Ammon were descendants of Lot by his daughters. Whenthey fled eastward from Sodom and Gomorrah, this was the general areathey settled.

Transjordanwas significant in the OT as the Israelites skirted Edom, conqueredthe cities of the Amorites and the king of Bashan, and encounteredMoab enroute to the promised land (Num. 20–25). Thetribes of Reuben and Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh requested theright to settle in Transjordan after the conquest of the land wascompleted (Num. 32). In the ensuing centuries these tribes sufferedthe ravages of war on the eastern front (Judg. 10:8; 1Sam.11:1; 2Kings 15:29; 1Chron. 5:23–26). In theintertestamental period most of northern and central Transjordan cameunder Hellenistic control. Decapolis cities were located in Bashan,Gilead, and as far south as Philadelphia, at the site of modernAmman.

Negev.To the south of the Judean hill country lies the Negev, whose namemeans both “dry” and “south.” The biblicalNegev is a smaller region shaped somewhat like a bowtie, withBeersheba at the center, Arad in the eastern basin, and Gerarcontrolling the western basin. The south end of the Philistine plainmerges with the western Negev. In the patriarchal period there weretensions over water rights between the herdsmen of Abraham and Isaacand those of the Philistine king Abimelek (Gen. 21:22–34;26:12–33). Although the region only receives eight to twelveinches of rainfall per year, this was sufficient to sustain smallpopulations, especially if they conserved water. The soil of theNegev is loess, a windblown powder from which the water simply runsoff unless catch basins are constructed.

Thebiblical Negev is bounded by the greater Negev to the south, whererugged limestone ridges predominate. An artificial line drawn fromGaza to Eilat, at the northern end of the Gulf of Eilat, defines thesouthwestern boundary of the greater Negev; the Jordan Rift Valley isthe eastern boundary. The Negev was historically a corridor for spicetrade coming from southwestern Arabia and India on the “ship ofthe desert” (the camel) to reach the Mediterranean markets. TheNabateans, Arab commercial nomads who knew the secrets of the desert,flourished in the spice trade from the fourth to the first centuriesBC. Once the Romans co-opted the spice trade, the Nabateans builtcities, developed water conservation techniques, and grew extensivevineyards.

TheTesting Ground of Faith

Becausethe land is marginal in terms of both sufficient rainfall andnational security, God’s covenant people faced the constantchallenge of obedience. The temptations to worship the Canaanite godsfor agricultural fertility and to form alliances with more-powerfulneighbors instead of putting their trust in God were powerful. Oftenthey succumbed and then experienced God’s chastisem*nt thatthey might return to him (Lev. 26). Even the land itself wouldexperience pollution due to the sins of its inhabitants (Lev. 18:25).In sum, the land was much more than living space; it was an integralpart of the Israelites’ identity as God’s covenantpeople. When it was flowing with “milk and honey,” thepeople experienced the shalom of God.

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

Parables in the Bible

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

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

Table 4. Major Parables of Jesus

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

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

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

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

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

Hidden treasure (Matt. 13:44)

Pearl (Matt. 13:45-46)

Net (Matt. 13:47-50)

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

Unmerciful servant (Matt. 18:23-35)

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

Two sons (Matt. 21:28-32)

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

Wedding banquet (Matt. 22:2-14)

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

Ten virgins (Matt. 25:1-13)

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

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

Growing seeds (Mark 4:26-29)

Money lender (Luke 7:41-47)

Good Samritan (Luke 10:30-37)

Friend in need (Luke 11:5-8)

Rich fool (Luke 12:16-21)

Unfruitful fig tree (Luke 13:6-9)

Lowest seat (Luke 14:7-14)

Great banquet (Luke 14:16-24)

Cost of discipleship (Luke 14:28-33)

Lost coin (Luke 15:8-10)

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

Shrewd manager (Luke 16:1-8)

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

Persistent widow (Luke 18:2-8)

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

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

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

Purpose of Jesus’ Teaching in Parables

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

Interpretation of Parables

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

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

Details in the Parable and its Allegorical Equivalent:

The man = Adam

Jerusalem = The heavenly city

Jericho = The moon (a symbol of mortality)

The robbers = The devil

Beating the man = Persuading him to sin

Priest and Levite = The Old Testament priesthood

Samaritan = Christ

Binding of wounds = Restraint of sin

Oil = Comfort of hope

Animal = Incarnation

Inn = Church

Innkeeper = Apostle Paul

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In the early church, preaching often took place in amissionary context (e.g., Acts 10:34–43). An impressive varietyof words is used to describe preaching tounbelievers, including the following: “evangelize”(euangelizomai [Acts 8:4, 12, 25, 35, 40]), “announce”(anangello [Acts 20:20]), “proclaim” (kēryssō[Acts 8:5]), and “persuade” (peithō [Acts 19:8,26]). Preachingto believers also took place, in a worship context. This articlehighlights the latter context.

Influenceson Preaching

Fromits inception, a core component of Christian worship was the publicproclamation of a word from God. What form early Christian preachingtook in the worship assembly is unclear. However, three elements seemmost influential in its development: the practice of prophesying, thepractices of the synagogue, and the tradition of Greco-Romanrhetoric.

Prophesying.The practice of prophesying in the public assembly appears to be anearly form of preaching. Paul makes reference to prophets speaking inthe church in Corinth (1Cor. 11–14). Prophecy was thatform of communication in which a word of God, a revelation, wasshared and the church was edified (1Cor. 11:4–5; 14:1,3–5, 26, 29–31, 39). Others in the worship communitytested the prophetic message to verify its truthfulness (1Cor.14:29; cf. 1Thess. 5:19–22; 1John 4:1–3).

Acouple of indications lead to the conclusion that prophecy was moreclosely related to preachingthan to speaking in tongues. For one, worshipers could comprehend theformer but needed an interpreter for the latter. For another, thefunction of prophecy was exhortation (parakaleō [1Cor.14:4–5]). “Exhortation” (paraklēsis) is Paul’smost comprehensiveterm for public proclamation (e.g., 1Thess. 2:3–4). Thatis why Paul admonishes worshipers not to interrupt one another in theprocess of prophesying (1Cor. 14:29–31). The practice ofprophecy influenced the shape that early Christian preaching took.

Synagogue.Another element influencing early Christian preaching was thesynagogue. It seems quite likely that early Christian preachingflowed out of the practice found in Jewish synagogues. In thesynagogue, the pattern was the reading of Scripture followed bycommentary (Luke 4:14–30; Acts 13:15–41).

Thesetwo components—prophecy and the reading and exposition ofScripture in the synagogue—play the largest role in influencingthe shape of early Christian preaching. How they did so remainsuncertain. The early believers may have merged the two practices inChristian worship. Jewish Christians, who had attended the synagogue,took the practice of reading and interpreting Scripture and adoptedit into the context of worship in house churches, along with theJewish tradition of prophesying. Thus, the practice of prophesyingmerged with the practice of reading and expounding on Scripture tocreate a more systematic form of proclamation.

Theexposition of Scripture may also have assisted in judging thevalidity of a particular prophecy. However, the criteria forverifying the truth of a prophecy were broader than Scripture alone;it was also measured against one’s lifestyle (Matt. 7:15–20,21–23) and how the prophecy aligned with established doctrinesof the church (1Cor. 14:29, 37; 1John 4:1–3).

Greco-Romanrhetoric.A third component influencing early Christian preaching was theclassical rhetoric of the Greeks and the Romans. The teachings ofrhetoric saturatedthe culture and education of the day.However, the degree to which it penetrated first-century Christianculture remains uncertain. Paul’s letters display a familiaritywith Greco-Roman rhetoric, and from that, one can assume that itsinfluence affected the practice of preaching to some extent.

Sermonsand Their Content

TheNT contains no fully developed sermon in the context of a publicworship. Scholars do believe, however, that Paul’s sermon tothe elders in Ephesus is a good representation of his preachingbecause it contains a theology and vocabulary that echo his teachingin his letters to various churches (Acts 20:17–35). Paul’sletters also likely indicate what he preached to believers. Hisletters have an oral quality about them and were read in theassemblies (Col. 4:16; 1Thess. 5:27). Thus, Paul’sletters offer a flavor of early Christian preaching.

Anotherimportant issue related to early Christian preaching involves thecontent of what was preached and whether a sharp distinction shouldbe made between kerygma and didachē. C.H. Dodd hasdefinedearly Christian preaching as proclamation to nonbelievers. The termhe uses to describe it is kerygma. For him, preaching was anevangelistic message about the gospel of God proclaimed tonon-Christians. Teaching, didachē, remained distinct and was anethical admonition (paraklēsis) delivered to Christians.However, Paul’s letters contain no such distinction between thetwo. Paul links his preaching the gospel of God with his appeal(paraklēsis) to the church (cf. 1Thess. 2:2–3 with2Cor. 5:19–20). That is, Paul continues to announce thegood news to the churches along with exhortations to incarnate thatgood news in the lives of the recipients. Both kerygma and didachēembodied the content of early Christian preaching.

In the early church, preaching often took place in amissionary context (e.g., Acts 10:34–43). An impressive varietyof words is used to describe preaching tounbelievers, including the following: “evangelize”(euangelizomai [Acts 8:4, 12, 25, 35, 40]), “announce”(anangello [Acts 20:20]), “proclaim” (kēryssō[Acts 8:5]), and “persuade” (peithō [Acts 19:8,26]). Preachingto believers also took place, in a worship context. This articlehighlights the latter context.

Influenceson Preaching

Fromits inception, a core component of Christian worship was the publicproclamation of a word from God. What form early Christian preachingtook in the worship assembly is unclear. However, three elements seemmost influential in its development: the practice of prophesying, thepractices of the synagogue, and the tradition of Greco-Romanrhetoric.

Prophesying.The practice of prophesying in the public assembly appears to be anearly form of preaching. Paul makes reference to prophets speaking inthe church in Corinth (1Cor. 11–14). Prophecy was thatform of communication in which a word of God, a revelation, wasshared and the church was edified (1Cor. 11:4–5; 14:1,3–5, 26, 29–31, 39). Others in the worship communitytested the prophetic message to verify its truthfulness (1Cor.14:29; cf. 1Thess. 5:19–22; 1John 4:1–3).

Acouple of indications lead to the conclusion that prophecy was moreclosely related to preachingthan to speaking in tongues. For one, worshipers could comprehend theformer but needed an interpreter for the latter. For another, thefunction of prophecy was exhortation (parakaleō [1Cor.14:4–5]). “Exhortation” (paraklēsis) is Paul’smost comprehensiveterm for public proclamation (e.g., 1Thess. 2:3–4). Thatis why Paul admonishes worshipers not to interrupt one another in theprocess of prophesying (1Cor. 14:29–31). The practice ofprophecy influenced the shape that early Christian preaching took.

Synagogue.Another element influencing early Christian preaching was thesynagogue. It seems quite likely that early Christian preachingflowed out of the practice found in Jewish synagogues. In thesynagogue, the pattern was the reading of Scripture followed bycommentary (Luke 4:14–30; Acts 13:15–41).

Thesetwo components—prophecy and the reading and exposition ofScripture in the synagogue—play the largest role in influencingthe shape of early Christian preaching. How they did so remainsuncertain. The early believers may have merged the two practices inChristian worship. Jewish Christians, who had attended the synagogue,took the practice of reading and interpreting Scripture and adoptedit into the context of worship in house churches, along with theJewish tradition of prophesying. Thus, the practice of prophesyingmerged with the practice of reading and expounding on Scripture tocreate a more systematic form of proclamation.

Theexposition of Scripture may also have assisted in judging thevalidity of a particular prophecy. However, the criteria forverifying the truth of a prophecy were broader than Scripture alone;it was also measured against one’s lifestyle (Matt. 7:15–20,21–23) and how the prophecy aligned with established doctrinesof the church (1Cor. 14:29, 37; 1John 4:1–3).

Greco-Romanrhetoric.A third component influencing early Christian preaching was theclassical rhetoric of the Greeks and the Romans. The teachings ofrhetoric saturatedthe culture and education of the day.However, the degree to which it penetrated first-century Christianculture remains uncertain. Paul’s letters display a familiaritywith Greco-Roman rhetoric, and from that, one can assume that itsinfluence affected the practice of preaching to some extent.

Sermonsand Their Content

TheNT contains no fully developed sermon in the context of a publicworship. Scholars do believe, however, that Paul’s sermon tothe elders in Ephesus is a good representation of his preachingbecause it contains a theology and vocabulary that echo his teachingin his letters to various churches (Acts 20:17–35). Paul’sletters also likely indicate what he preached to believers. Hisletters have an oral quality about them and were read in theassemblies (Col. 4:16; 1Thess. 5:27). Thus, Paul’sletters offer a flavor of early Christian preaching.

Anotherimportant issue related to early Christian preaching involves thecontent of what was preached and whether a sharp distinction shouldbe made between kerygma and didachē. C.H. Dodd hasdefinedearly Christian preaching as proclamation to nonbelievers. The termhe uses to describe it is kerygma. For him, preaching was anevangelistic message about the gospel of God proclaimed tonon-Christians. Teaching, didachē, remained distinct and was anethical admonition (paraklēsis) delivered to Christians.However, Paul’s letters contain no such distinction between thetwo. Paul links his preaching the gospel of God with his appeal(paraklēsis) to the church (cf. 1Thess. 2:2–3 with2Cor. 5:19–20). That is, Paul continues to announce thegood news to the churches along with exhortations to incarnate thatgood news in the lives of the recipients. Both kerygma and didachēembodied the content of early Christian preaching.

ThePhenomenon of Prophecy

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

Prophetssuch as Isaiah were privy to what transpires in heaven, wheredecisions were being made that control the course of human history.Micaiah describes how he has seen God in the company of the heavenlyhost deliberating on how to entice Ahab to his death (1Kings22:13–23). All the other “prophets” in Ahab’scourt were false, since they did not have knowledge of the eventsbeyond human ken, as only true prophets can. Only one who hasencountered God in this way can speak as an agent of the heavenlycourt.

Forevery true prophet in Israel, there were many false prophets. Mosesset guidelines for distinguishing them. True prophets prophesy inaccordance with revealed religion. If a prophet contradicts the law,for example, and calls Israel to worship another god, this is not atrue prophet (Deut. 18:20). Also, if a prophet predicts somethingthat does not come to pass, that is also a false prophet (Deut.18:21–22). These criteria are not mechanical and automatic,however. Sometimes a prophet may appear to contradict priorrevelation (Jer. 26:11), and sometimes the predicted judgment isstaved off by national repentance (Jon. 4). Also, sometimes God maytest the people with a false prophet who makes a true prediction(Deut. 13:1–3).

Trueprophets occasionally exhibited bizarre behavior. Saul, whilepursuing David, was suddenly possessed by the Spirit of God and laynaked day and night, prophesying. This caused the people to ask ifSaul was now one of the prophets (1Sam. 19:24). Even in theancient world, prophets were considered a bit crazy (2Kings9:11; Jer. 23:9; 29:26; Hos. 9:7). The phenomenon he experienced isreferred to as “ecstasy.” The practice of tongues in theNT church also seems to have been ecstatic behavior. Paul notes thatobservers would call practitioners “out of your mind”(1Cor. 14:23). At Pentecost, some observers thought that theapostles were drunk. Peter replied that they were not drunk butrather had the Spirit upon them (Acts 2:15–21).

Theword “prophet” refers to one who foretells the future. Ofcourse, many people cannot accept the notion of real prophecy andthus regard all prophecy as an illusion. Either the text was writtenafter the fact, or it was couched in such general terms that it is nomiracle that it came true, or else it was a lucky guess. The textit*elf, however, wants to be read as real prophecy, and Christiansbefore the modern age read it as such. After all, to reject thesupernatural elements in the Bible ultimately leads to rejecting theresurrection of Christ.

However,the modern Christian should not focus on the predictive part of theprophets’ message to such an extent that the “forthtelling”element is neglected. Forthtelling is the prophets’ chiefministry—calling the people to mercy and justice, to obedienceto the law and fidelity to God. Christians who believe the Bibleshould take seriously the predictions about the future, but even moreso the challenges about the present.

TheBooks of Prophecy in the Old Testament

TheOT of Catholic and Protestant Bibles is roughly organized around theGreek translation of the OT, the Septuagint. Thus, Daniel isconsidered a prophetic book, and the prophets are separated from thehistorical books by the poetical books. However, the Hebrew Bible hasa different organization. It has only eight “books” ofprophecy, divided into the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets.The Former Prophets are Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings.Traditionally, Samuel wrote Judges. The books of 1Samuel and2Samuel form one scroll, as do 1Kings and 2Kings.The book of Samuel bears the name of the prophet, and Kings issubstantially about Elijah and Elisha. The four Former Prophetswitness to the outworking of the covenant sanctions, from theIsraelites’ entry into the promised land to their expulsionfrom it.

Usually,when Christians speak of the prophets, they are referring to theLatter Prophets, plus Daniel. In Catholic and Protestant Bibles thereare four Major Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; andtwelve Minor Prophets: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. Manyother prophets ministered in Israel but have no scroll that bearstheir name. Thus, the ones listed above can be called the “writingprophets.”

Isaiah.The book of Isaiah preserves the sermons from the prophet whoministered during the time when Hezekiah was king of Judah, thesouthern kingdom. Isaiah saw Jerusalem surrounded by the Assyrianarmy and assured the king that God would deliver his people. Thatmessage of salvation is the overall theme of the book, a salvationuniversal in scope and focused on the figure of the SufferingServant. Isaiah claims that this servant of God would be wounded and“cut off from the land of the living” (Isa. 53:8) andthrough this would bring healing and salvation to his people. Hewould see this and make many righteous (Isa. 53).

TheNT refers to Isaiah more often than any other prophet, always todemonstrate that the truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ wererevealed in advance by the prophet. For example, Paul cites Isa. 1:9in his argument as to why the Jews had rejected the gospel (Rom.9:29). When Jesus withdrew to the area of Zebulun and Naphtali,Matthew says that this act fulfilled Isa. 9:1–2 (Matt.4:15–16). Jesus himself cites Isa. 53:12, “[he] wasnumbered with the transgressors,” and claims that it waswritten about him (Luke 22:37). He does the same with Isa. 61:1–2(Luke 4:18–21).

Jeremiah.The book of Jeremiah puts in writing the words of the prophetJeremiah, who ministered at the very end of the kingdom of Judah andlived through the destruction of Jerusalem, with its temple and thepeople of God being taken away to forced exile and captivity. He seesthe weakness and powerlessness of the covenant that God had made withhis people to stir up love and fidelity in their hearts to him.According to Jeremiah, what the people chiefly need is a new covenantaltogether, one that is not external and written on tablets of stone,but internal, written on their hearts. They need a change ofpersonality to become a different sort of people altogether. This iswhat Jeremiah predicts will happen in the coming age after their timeof captivity is over (Jer. 31:31–40). The NT identifies thisnew covenant with the gospel of Jesus (Heb. 8:8–12), secured byhis blood (Heb. 10:16–17). This is the new covenant that Jesusannounces to his disciples when he eats the Last Supper with them(Luke 22:20).

Ezekiel.The book of Ezekiel picks up where Jeremiah leaves off and continuesfrom the destruction of Jerusalem into the early years of theBabylonian captivity. Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel sees the failure of theold covenant. He likens Israel to a married woman who violates hermarriage covenant at every turn (Ezek. 16). The prophet also foreseesa future character transformation of God’s people. “Iwill give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will removefrom you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And Iwill put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and becareful to keep my laws” (Ezek. 36:26–27). This isgraphically illustrated in Ezek. 37, where the prophet is told toprophesy to a valley of dry bones, and through the preaching of theword of God the company of the dead come to life and become a vastarmy—not of skeletons, but of vitally alive warriors. This is avision of what will happen when God makes an everlasting covenantwith them and will dwell with them forever (Ezek. 37:26–27).Paul cites this in 2Cor. 6:16 and argues, “We are thetemple of the living God.” The last part of Ezekiel describes agreat, larger-than-life temple that Paul interprets to be the church.Thus, Ezekiel anticipates the preaching of the gospel, bringingspiritual life to a vast company of believers, among whom God himselfwill dwell.

Daniel.The book of Daniel is not a prophetic book by genre, but much of itis devoted to predicting the future, so in Catholic and ProtestantBibles it is placed between Ezekiel and the Minor Prophets. Prophecycalls the people to repentance and threatens judgment on them due totheir sin. Daniel does the opposite: it calls them to persevere assaints, while the evil nations oppress them, until the end of time,when they will be vindicated. Daniel comforts the faithful who aresuffering due to the sins of the nations.

TheTwelve.The twelve Minor Prophets follow a roughly chronological sequence(with some notable exceptions). Hosea, Amos, and Micah date from therise of Assyria as the great power that threatened Israel and Judah.Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah date from near the end of Assyriandominance and the rise of Babylon. The Babylonian exile is skipped,and the last three—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—werewritten after the Jews’ restoration to the land of Judah. Joel,Obadiah, and Jonah are difficult to date with certainty.

Readas one book, the Minor Prophets tell a story of God’s constancyand fidelity even though everything else in the world changes. Theybegin with all twelve tribes intact and enjoying prosperity in theland. In Judah, there is a king on the throne of David. But by theend, most of the tribes are lost, the monarchy is no more, Jerusalemand the temple have been destroyed, and the Jews are under the heelof foreign powers. After all of that, God says to them, almost as themoral of the whole history of the OT, “I the Lord do notchange. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed. Eversince the time of your ancestors you have turned away from my decreesand have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you”(Mal. 3:6–7). Deeply explored in the Minor Prophets is the dayof the Lord, the climax and denouement of history, in which all thewords of the prophets will finally be fulfilled (see Joel andZephaniah). The reader is given, as a picture of this day, a view ofthe repentance of one generation of Ninevites at the preaching ofJonah and of the final judgment to fall on that city as described byNahum.

TheNT cites the Minor Prophets much more often than any book of prophecyexcept Isaiah. Peter draws upon Joel 2:28–32 to explain thepouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17–21).James cites Amos 9:11–12 to demonstrate that salvation wasalways intended for the Gentiles as well as the Jews (Acts 15:16–17).Paul quotes Hab. 2:4 to argue that righteousness before God comesthrough faith (Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11). Jesus says that like Jonah, hewill return to the land of the living after three days (Matt.12:38–41).

Prophecyin the New Testament

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

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

Thus,all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they neverparticipate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. Thegreatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus.John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure,but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection canproclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministryof any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).

ThePhenomenon of Prophecy

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

Prophetssuch as Isaiah were privy to what transpires in heaven, wheredecisions were being made that control the course of human history.Micaiah describes how he has seen God in the company of the heavenlyhost deliberating on how to entice Ahab to his death (1Kings22:13–23). All the other “prophets” in Ahab’scourt were false, since they did not have knowledge of the eventsbeyond human ken, as only true prophets can. Only one who hasencountered God in this way can speak as an agent of the heavenlycourt.

Forevery true prophet in Israel, there were many false prophets. Mosesset guidelines for distinguishing them. True prophets prophesy inaccordance with revealed religion. If a prophet contradicts the law,for example, and calls Israel to worship another god, this is not atrue prophet (Deut. 18:20). Also, if a prophet predicts somethingthat does not come to pass, that is also a false prophet (Deut.18:21–22). These criteria are not mechanical and automatic,however. Sometimes a prophet may appear to contradict priorrevelation (Jer. 26:11), and sometimes the predicted judgment isstaved off by national repentance (Jon. 4). Also, sometimes God maytest the people with a false prophet who makes a true prediction(Deut. 13:1–3).

Trueprophets occasionally exhibited bizarre behavior. Saul, whilepursuing David, was suddenly possessed by the Spirit of God and laynaked day and night, prophesying. This caused the people to ask ifSaul was now one of the prophets (1Sam. 19:24). Even in theancient world, prophets were considered a bit crazy (2Kings9:11; Jer. 23:9; 29:26; Hos. 9:7). The phenomenon he experienced isreferred to as “ecstasy.” The practice of tongues in theNT church also seems to have been ecstatic behavior. Paul notes thatobservers would call practitioners “out of your mind”(1Cor. 14:23). At Pentecost, some observers thought that theapostles were drunk. Peter replied that they were not drunk butrather had the Spirit upon them (Acts 2:15–21).

Theword “prophet” refers to one who foretells the future. Ofcourse, many people cannot accept the notion of real prophecy andthus regard all prophecy as an illusion. Either the text was writtenafter the fact, or it was couched in such general terms that it is nomiracle that it came true, or else it was a lucky guess. The textit*elf, however, wants to be read as real prophecy, and Christiansbefore the modern age read it as such. After all, to reject thesupernatural elements in the Bible ultimately leads to rejecting theresurrection of Christ.

However,the modern Christian should not focus on the predictive part of theprophets’ message to such an extent that the “forthtelling”element is neglected. Forthtelling is the prophets’ chiefministry—calling the people to mercy and justice, to obedienceto the law and fidelity to God. Christians who believe the Bibleshould take seriously the predictions about the future, but even moreso the challenges about the present.

TheBooks of Prophecy in the Old Testament

TheOT of Catholic and Protestant Bibles is roughly organized around theGreek translation of the OT, the Septuagint. Thus, Daniel isconsidered a prophetic book, and the prophets are separated from thehistorical books by the poetical books. However, the Hebrew Bible hasa different organization. It has only eight “books” ofprophecy, divided into the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets.The Former Prophets are Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings.Traditionally, Samuel wrote Judges. The books of 1Samuel and2Samuel form one scroll, as do 1Kings and 2Kings.The book of Samuel bears the name of the prophet, and Kings issubstantially about Elijah and Elisha. The four Former Prophetswitness to the outworking of the covenant sanctions, from theIsraelites’ entry into the promised land to their expulsionfrom it.

Usually,when Christians speak of the prophets, they are referring to theLatter Prophets, plus Daniel. In Catholic and Protestant Bibles thereare four Major Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; andtwelve Minor Prophets: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. Manyother prophets ministered in Israel but have no scroll that bearstheir name. Thus, the ones listed above can be called the “writingprophets.”

Isaiah.The book of Isaiah preserves the sermons from the prophet whoministered during the time when Hezekiah was king of Judah, thesouthern kingdom. Isaiah saw Jerusalem surrounded by the Assyrianarmy and assured the king that God would deliver his people. Thatmessage of salvation is the overall theme of the book, a salvationuniversal in scope and focused on the figure of the SufferingServant. Isaiah claims that this servant of God would be wounded and“cut off from the land of the living” (Isa. 53:8) andthrough this would bring healing and salvation to his people. Hewould see this and make many righteous (Isa. 53).

TheNT refers to Isaiah more often than any other prophet, always todemonstrate that the truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ wererevealed in advance by the prophet. For example, Paul cites Isa. 1:9in his argument as to why the Jews had rejected the gospel (Rom.9:29). When Jesus withdrew to the area of Zebulun and Naphtali,Matthew says that this act fulfilled Isa. 9:1–2 (Matt.4:15–16). Jesus himself cites Isa. 53:12, “[he] wasnumbered with the transgressors,” and claims that it waswritten about him (Luke 22:37). He does the same with Isa. 61:1–2(Luke 4:18–21).

Jeremiah.The book of Jeremiah puts in writing the words of the prophetJeremiah, who ministered at the very end of the kingdom of Judah andlived through the destruction of Jerusalem, with its temple and thepeople of God being taken away to forced exile and captivity. He seesthe weakness and powerlessness of the covenant that God had made withhis people to stir up love and fidelity in their hearts to him.According to Jeremiah, what the people chiefly need is a new covenantaltogether, one that is not external and written on tablets of stone,but internal, written on their hearts. They need a change ofpersonality to become a different sort of people altogether. This iswhat Jeremiah predicts will happen in the coming age after their timeof captivity is over (Jer. 31:31–40). The NT identifies thisnew covenant with the gospel of Jesus (Heb. 8:8–12), secured byhis blood (Heb. 10:16–17). This is the new covenant that Jesusannounces to his disciples when he eats the Last Supper with them(Luke 22:20).

Ezekiel.The book of Ezekiel picks up where Jeremiah leaves off and continuesfrom the destruction of Jerusalem into the early years of theBabylonian captivity. Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel sees the failure of theold covenant. He likens Israel to a married woman who violates hermarriage covenant at every turn (Ezek. 16). The prophet also foreseesa future character transformation of God’s people. “Iwill give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will removefrom you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And Iwill put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and becareful to keep my laws” (Ezek. 36:26–27). This isgraphically illustrated in Ezek. 37, where the prophet is told toprophesy to a valley of dry bones, and through the preaching of theword of God the company of the dead come to life and become a vastarmy—not of skeletons, but of vitally alive warriors. This is avision of what will happen when God makes an everlasting covenantwith them and will dwell with them forever (Ezek. 37:26–27).Paul cites this in 2Cor. 6:16 and argues, “We are thetemple of the living God.” The last part of Ezekiel describes agreat, larger-than-life temple that Paul interprets to be the church.Thus, Ezekiel anticipates the preaching of the gospel, bringingspiritual life to a vast company of believers, among whom God himselfwill dwell.

Daniel.The book of Daniel is not a prophetic book by genre, but much of itis devoted to predicting the future, so in Catholic and ProtestantBibles it is placed between Ezekiel and the Minor Prophets. Prophecycalls the people to repentance and threatens judgment on them due totheir sin. Daniel does the opposite: it calls them to persevere assaints, while the evil nations oppress them, until the end of time,when they will be vindicated. Daniel comforts the faithful who aresuffering due to the sins of the nations.

TheTwelve.The twelve Minor Prophets follow a roughly chronological sequence(with some notable exceptions). Hosea, Amos, and Micah date from therise of Assyria as the great power that threatened Israel and Judah.Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah date from near the end of Assyriandominance and the rise of Babylon. The Babylonian exile is skipped,and the last three—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—werewritten after the Jews’ restoration to the land of Judah. Joel,Obadiah, and Jonah are difficult to date with certainty.

Readas one book, the Minor Prophets tell a story of God’s constancyand fidelity even though everything else in the world changes. Theybegin with all twelve tribes intact and enjoying prosperity in theland. In Judah, there is a king on the throne of David. But by theend, most of the tribes are lost, the monarchy is no more, Jerusalemand the temple have been destroyed, and the Jews are under the heelof foreign powers. After all of that, God says to them, almost as themoral of the whole history of the OT, “I the Lord do notchange. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed. Eversince the time of your ancestors you have turned away from my decreesand have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you”(Mal. 3:6–7). Deeply explored in the Minor Prophets is the dayof the Lord, the climax and denouement of history, in which all thewords of the prophets will finally be fulfilled (see Joel andZephaniah). The reader is given, as a picture of this day, a view ofthe repentance of one generation of Ninevites at the preaching ofJonah and of the final judgment to fall on that city as described byNahum.

TheNT cites the Minor Prophets much more often than any book of prophecyexcept Isaiah. Peter draws upon Joel 2:28–32 to explain thepouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17–21).James cites Amos 9:11–12 to demonstrate that salvation wasalways intended for the Gentiles as well as the Jews (Acts 15:16–17).Paul quotes Hab. 2:4 to argue that righteousness before God comesthrough faith (Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11). Jesus says that like Jonah, hewill return to the land of the living after three days (Matt.12:38–41).

Prophecyin the New Testament

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

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

Thus,all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they neverparticipate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. Thegreatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus.John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure,but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection canproclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministryof any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).

In the OT, heavenly beings or angels are sometimes referredto as “sons of God” (Gen. 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Pss.82:6; 89:6). The more important background for the NT, however, isthe use of the term with reference to the nation Israel and themessianic king from David’s line. Israel was God’s son byvirtue of God’s unique calling, deliverance, and protection.Hosea 11:1 reads, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, andout of Egypt I called my son.” Similar references to God as thefather of his people appear throughout the OT (Exod. 4:22; Num.11:12; Deut. 14:1; 32:5, 19; Isa. 43:6; 45:11; Jer. 3:4, 19; 31:9,20; Hos. 2:1). The king from the line of David is referred to as theson of God by virtue of his special relationship to God and hisrepresentative role among the people. In the Davidic covenant, Godpromises David concerning his descendant, “I will be hisfather, and he will be my son” (2Sam. 7:14; cf. Pss. 2:7;89:26). Later Judaism appears to have taken up these passages andidentified the coming Messiah as the “son of God.”

Inthe Synoptic Gospels, Jesus’ divine sonship is closely linkedto his messiahship. The angel Gabriel connects Jesus’ status as“Son of the Most High” with his reception of the throneof David (Luke 1:32). At Jesus’ baptism (which Luke identifiesas Jesus’ messianic anointing [Luke 3:21; 4:1, 14, 18]), theFather declares Jesus to be “my Son, whom I love” (3:22),an allusion to Ps. 2:7. Satan tempts Jesus as the Son of God toabandon obedience to the Father and claim independent authority(Matt. 4:1–11; Luke 4:1–13). Peter confesses that Jesusis “the Messiah, the Son of the living God” (Matt.16:16), and the high priest questions whether Jesus is “theMessiah, the Son of the Blessed One” (Mark 14:61; Matt. 26:63).In these and other texts “Son of God” is almostsynonymous with “Messiah” (cf. Mark 1:1; Luke 4:41;22:70; John 11:27; 20:31; Acts 9:20, 22). In other contexts, Jesus’divine sonship appears to exceed messianic categories. Jesus prays toGod as his Father (“Abba” [Mark 14:36]) and refers tohimself as the Son, who uniquely knows and reveals the Father. TheFather has committed all things to him. No one knows the Father butthe Son and those to whom the Son reveals him (Matt. 11:25–27;Luke 10:21–22). It is by virtue of Jesus’ unique sonshipthat he invites his disciples to pray to God as their Father (Matt.6:9).

Inthe Fourth Gospel, the status of Jesus as the Son of God isespecially important, indicating both Jesus’ uniquerelationship with the Father and his essential deity. John introducesthe notion of preexistent sonship in which the “Word”from creation is the Son (John 1:1–18; 17:5, 24). God sendsinto the world his Son (3:16), who reflects the glory of the Father(1:14; 14:6–11) and who will soon return (14:28). Jesus affirmsthat “I and the Father are one” (10:30), that “theFather is in me, and I in the Father” (10:38). John’spurpose in writing is to provoke faith “that Jesus is theMessiah, the Son of God” (20:31).

Somescholars reject the royal Jewish background of “the Son of God”when investigating the phrase in the Gospels. Instead, they appeal toHellenistic sources to argue that Jesus as the Son of God is a“divineman” (theios anēr), which accounts for his ability to workmiracles. This line of thinking, however, is fraught with manydifficulties, not least of which is that the epithet is never used todescribe the “divineman” in Greek literature.

InPaul’s thinking, the corporate, Israelite background of “Sonof God” is renewed with reference to the NT people of God. Paulstates that “theirs [the people of Israel] is the adoption tosonship” (Rom. 9:4). Although ethnic Israelites are rightfullycalled “sons of God,” this status is contingent uponbeing people of faith: “So in Jesus Christ you are all childrenof God through faith” (Gal. 3:26); Jesus’ death as theSon effects salvation (Rom. 8:2, 32; Gal. 2:20). The Spirit alsoplays a role in testifying with the spirits of believers that theyare indeed children of God (Rom. 8:15–16), by which they cry,“Abba, Father” (Gal. 4:3–6). The believers’status as God’s children will be completely revealed when theyshare in Christ’s glory (Rom. 8:17).

Ten times the “sons of the prophets” (NIV:“company of the prophets”) are named in connection withElisha (e.g., 2Kings 2:3–7; 5:22; 9:1), and they arereferenced once in 1Kings 20:35. They were a small community offaithful Israelites who lived in the dark years of apostasy underAhab and Jezebel, when worshipers of the true God were persecuted andthe fertility cult of Baal was the state-sponsored religion. Theylived in Bethel, Jericho, Gilgal, and along the Jordan River. Thesons of the prophets knew that God was going to take Elijah away andwere concerned that Elisha knew this as well. They saw Elijah dividethe Jordan; they also observed Elisha repeat the sign later. Theyconcluded, “The spirit of Elijah is resting on Elisha”(2Kings 2:15). After that, they considered Elisha to be theirleader and themselves his servants.

UnlikeElijah, who was a loner, Elisha is presented in 2Kings as a manof the city, comfortable living among them. They turned to Elisha onmatters small and great because he possessed extraordinary powers,and he used them for the betterment of this faithful group ofcovenant keepers. He secured the home of a widow who was the wife ofone of the sons of the prophets (2Kings 4:1–7). Herecovered a submerged ax head when the sons of the prophets wereendeavoring to expand their living space (6:1–7). He evenraised the dead (4:36). In many ways, they were like the disciples ofChrist, and some of the Gospel accounts seem designed to pre-sentChrist as a new Elijah and Elisha (Luke 4:25–27).

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

Origins

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

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

Somebelieve that synagogues were developed during the Babyloniancaptivity as the response of the exile community to the destructionof their temple and sacrificial system. Despite these enormouslosses, the Jews still had the Torah, and from that point forwardworship and prayer based on the reading and studying of theScriptures, which could be done locally, began to gain ascendancy.Critics of this idea, however, point out that while it makes sense,there is no direct evidence to support it.

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

Morerecently, it has been suggested that synagogues were the gradualsuccessors to functions that had previously taken place at citygates. First-century synagogues served a wide range of functions forthe community. Throughout Israel’s prior history, however,these same activities—assembly, legal, social, educational, andreligious—had taken place at the city gate (Deut. 12:15; 2Sam.15:2; 2Kings 23:8; Neh. 8:1–8). The Gamla synagogue sitsagainst the east city wall next to a probable gate, and its locationcould be evidence of the slow development of the synagogue as citygates changed from multipurpose facilities to portals of ingress andegress.

First-CenturySynagogues

First-centurysynagogues served as integrated centers supporting Jewish life.Regular communal reading and exposition of Scripture, includingteaching and discussion of the law and transmission of its complexassociated traditions (Luke 4:16; Acts 13:14–15), occurredthere. Although formal liturgical rites evolved after the destructionof the temple in AD 70, synagogues were places of prayer in the firstcentury (Matt. 6:5). Synagogues also served as courtrooms and placeswhere crimes were punished (Acts 22:19), as well as locations forcommon meals and festivals (see Acts 6:2).

Synagogueswere administered by local community leaders, including a presidentand a board (Acts 13:15). Synagogue leaders named in the NT includeJairus (Mark 5:22; Luke 8:41), Crispus (Acts 18:8), and Sosthenes(Acts 18:17). The role of the leader was to preside over services, torule as the judge in court cases, to represent the community, andoften to act as a patron. The board served in an advisory role andassisted with teaching. A scribe maintained community records andtaught.

Congregationsincluded Pharisees, who advocated strict adherence to the law,although they were chided by Jesus for their false piety (Luke11:42–44). Women participated in the synagogue along with themen, and in some cases they were financial donors (cf. Luke 8:3).God-fearing Gentiles were welcomed (Acts 17:17). In Jerusalem,synagogues included both Hebrews and Jews from the Diaspora (Acts6:1, 9).

Asynagogue could be a designated room in a house or a discretebuilding. Most of the better archaeological evidence is later thanthe first century and reveals more clearly religious intentionalityin design than may have been characteristic earlier. This evidenceincludes the door facing Jerusalem, artistic temple motifs, a nichefor the Torah scrolls, and perimeter bench seating around an opencentral hall.

TheSynagogue in the Bible

Sincesynagogues were institutions with a documented history no earlierthan the third century BC, they are not mentioned in the OT. TheGreek word from which the English one is derived does appearfrequently in the LXX, but always with a general reference to agathering, assembly, or meeting.

Rabbinichistory (but not Scripture) makes reference to the “GreatSynagogue,” meaning a group of men who transmitted traditionsfrom the prophets to the earliest named rabbinic teachers. It isloosely based on Neh. 8–10, which describes the prayers andactions of the Jewish leaders who had returned from exile.

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

Thelast (and, from a twenty-first-century perspective, mostcontroversial) use of the word “synagogue” in Scriptureis the difficult phrase “synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9;3:9), which must be read in its context. This was written in responseto the significant persecution in Asia Minor of the churches atSmyrna and Philadelphia by Jews who were in collusion with the Romanauthorities. They were falsely accusing Jewish and Gentile Christianbelievers, creating unspeakable suffering for them. This phrase,intended to encourage Christian perseverance, implies that thechurches in view represented true Israel, while their accusers werefalse Jews. Similar language was used by the covenant-keepingcommunity in Qumran when, in the DSS, it referred to apostate Jews asa “congregation of Belial” and an “assembly ofhypocrites” (1QHa 10:22; 15:34).

Lacking the provision and protection of a husband, widows areneedy members of society, often grouped with the fatherless. BothTestaments promote special efforts to care for the needs of widows.

God’sconcern for widows is evident in descriptions of his character andhis commands for their protection and benefit. These are complementedby condemnations, punishments, and curses for those who fail to carefor widows and by praise and blessings for those who do. Widowsfigure prominently in several biblical stories.

Godhimself cares for widows and gives them justice (Deut. 10:18; Ps.68:5; Prov. 15:25). He instructs Israel and the church to care forwidows. Negative commands warn of the consequences of mistreatingwidows (Exod. 22:22–24; Deut. 24:17–18). Positivecommands require giving justice to widows (Isa. 1:17; Jer. 22:3),including them in community celebrations (Deut. 16:11–14), andproviding for them. OT provision came in two forms. Every third yeara harvest tithe was deposited in town to provide for the Levites,aliens, orphans, and widows (Deut. 14:27–29; 26:12–13).Additionally, harvesters were instructed to leave harvest remains forthe alien (a displaced person seeking refuge), orphan, and widow(Deut. 24:17–22; cf. Ruth 2). Care for widows was central tothe controversy that led to the appointment of deacons (Acts 6:1–6).Paul instructs Timothy to prioritize caring for widows who are oversixty years of age and without family to care for them (1Tim.5:1–16).

Failureto care for widows draws condemnation (Deut. 27:19; Job 24:2–3;Isa. 1:23; 10:2; Mal. 3:5; Mark 12:40). In contrast, care for widowsis a mark of righteousness that brings blessing (Job 29:12–16;Jer. 7:5–7; Acts 9:39). James includes care for widows andorphans among the essential parts in his summary of true religion(James 1:27).

TheOT included a special custom for the protection of, presumably, youngwidows. If a woman’s husband died and left her childless, herbrother-in-law was to marry her and reckon the first child of theunion as that of his deceased brother (Gen. 38:8; Deut. 25:5–6;Ruth 4:5, 10; Matt. 22:24). This custom lay behind the contentionbetween Judah and Tamar (Gen. 38).

Widowsfigure prominently in several stories. A widow cared for Elijah inZarephath (1Kings 17; cf. Luke 4:25–26). At Elisha’sinstruction, a widow was able to fill multiple containers with oilfrom a single jar (2Kings 4:1–7). Jesus brought the sonof a widow back to life (Luke 7:12–17). He remarked on a widowwho made a small yet significant contribution to the temple treasury(21:1–4). Jesus illustrated persistence in prayer with a storyabout a widow seeking justice (18:1–8). See also Poor, Orphan,Widow.

Architecture is the technology and the art of design andconstruction. The technology of architecture includes anunderstanding of mathematical and engineering principles; the art ofarchitecture focuses attention on interest and beauty in design. Thecreative imagination of the architect is constantly considering howto artfully manage form and function in the design and constructionprocess.

Architectureand the Bible

Theterm “architecture” does not occur in most Englishtranslations of the Bible. There is, however, evidence of andreference to the architectural activity of God’s people. Inaddition, Israel and the church were contextualized in significantarchitectural periods (Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, and Roman), so themajor empires of the biblical period often influenced the design andconstruction of cities, temples, and structures referenced in thebiblical text. Architecture offers biblical studies a way to betterunderstand the historical intentions of the Bible. By means ofarchitectural investigation, the history and the heritage of pastcivilizations are illuminated. As a result, our reading of thebiblical text is enhanced.

Whenwe investigate the biblical text with attention to the technology andart of architecture, two perspectives emerge. First, architecturedraws our attention to the background of the biblical text. Incertain biblical texts we learn about the design and the constructionthat took place in Egypt, Assyria, and Palestine during majorbiblical events. For example, the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsoccurred during times of expansion and development in the Eighteenthto Twentieth Dynasties of Egypt (i.e., New Kingdom, sixteenth toeleventh centuries BC). For these periods, we gain knowledge aboutcapital relocations along with temple and pyramid constructions. Welearn that during the conquest, Israel took over existing Canaanitecities in keeping with the Mosaic policies. The architecture ofPalestine enables us to better understand the form and function ofthese infrastructures.

Second,architecture draws our attention to the theological implications ofthe form and function of structures designed by God. In keeping withthe scope of architecture, we are forced to understand that what Goddesigned for altars, the ark, the tabernacle, and the temples of thepast and the future included more than just the functionalrequirements of a nation’s religious system. The interpreter ofthe biblical text must consider how the design of these structureselicits response and communicates meaning. These structures are alsowindows on the social, political, and economic aspects of theIsraelite nation.

OldTestament

Citiesand fortifications.The biblical rec­ord makes reference to architectural structures,materials, and furnishings. Cities are referenced frequentlythroughout the OT canon. The city is obviously the context forarchitectural expression. The cities of the Bible are not describedin extensive detail. We learn that Cain was a city builder who namedhis work after his son Enoch. The architectural feature of citiesmentioned most often is the city gates (Gen. 19:1; 23:10, 18; Deut.17:5; Josh. 2:5; 7:5; 20:4; Judg. 5:8). This was an important placefor city life and activity (Gen. 23:1; Prov. 31:31). There was alsosinister activity at city gates. Abner, for example, was killed inthe city gate (2 Sam. 3:22–30). In addition, executionsfor covenant violations were carried out at the city gate (Deut.17:5). There was more than one city gate, as we learn from thepostexilic construction activity of Ezra and Nehemiah.

Withinthe city there was a strong tower. The people of Babel usedthoroughly baked bricks instead of stone and tar for mortar in orderto build the city and the tower that was designed to reach to theheavens (Gen. 11:3–4). A city tower functioned as a place ofrefuge for the people within the city limits (Judg. 9:49–51).

Citieswere protected by a wall system (Lev. 25:29) that also provided spacefor housing (Josh. 2:15). The conquest of Jericho recounts thefamiliar defeat of that city by the very unconventional destructionof its walls (Josh. 6:20). A city square is another feature of thecity architecture (Judg. 19:15–17) that served the public needsof the community.

Thebiblical descriptions of Jerusalem offer a measure of insight intoits architecture. During the rebuilding process in the postexilicperiod, Nehemiah comments on both the construction and the buildingmaterials (Neh. 2:8; 13:31; cf. Ezra 6:4) and the spacious nature ofthe city (Neh. 7:4). From another perspective, the psalmist comments,“Jerusalem is built like a city that is closely compactedtogether” (Ps. 122:3).

Beyondthese textual details we learn through the writings of the prophetsthat cities are the subject of God’s wrath for covenantviolation (Jer. 6:6; Hos. 11:6; Mic. 5:11). Despite this, the nationof Israel is not left without the hope of restoration. The prophetsalso anticipated the return of the people along with the restorationof the city infrastructure (Amos 9:14; Mal. 1:4).

Thetemple and sacred structures.Theother architectural features referenced by the writers of Scriptureinclude altars, the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, and the temple.The tent and the tabernacle were also outfitted with unique furnitureitems described in detail and expertly crafted. The constructionprojects of Solomon are detailed in 1 Kings 5–7. Solomon,like David, pursued his architectural ambitions. The book of Ezekielgives extensive architectural detail for the construction of a futuretemple in which God will reign and rule (Ezek. 40–48).

Thetemple and royal residences were made of stone with cedar roofing.The chamber buildings that surrounded the temple were three storieshigh. The interior walls and ceilings were lined with cedar to coverall the stone (1 Kings 6:1–10). In all the constructiondetails for the temple, the text does not elaborate on architecturalstyle. Perhaps the builders were influenced to some degree by thestyles of the major periods.

Whatare the theological implications related to the form and function ofthe sacred structures in the biblical material? The first is that Godis the ultimate designer of Israel’s architecture. God’ssignature work certainly is not the tabernacle or the Solomonictemple, but rather the created realm. The beauty and the complexitiesof the created world continue to draw attention to God’s beautyand intelligence. As the psalmist declares, the creation, which Goddesigned, is a constant source of praise (Ps. 19).

God’sskill and artistic beauty as a master architect are reflected also inthe revelation of his plans for the sacred structures of Israel tothe nation’s artisans. The skill that the artisans manifestedin the construction process was also a gift from God (Exod. 35:35;2 Chron. 2:14).

Thestructures designed by God for construction were primarily for him.This is understandable because the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsincluded long desert pilgrimages and the related tent dwelling.References to homes and houses in the book of Leviticus are not aboutdesign and construction but about function. The domestic home must befree of mildew (Lev. 14:34–41) and thus clean according to thestandards of the law. The construction of Davidic and Solomonic homesis given attention in Scripture (2 Sam. 5:11; 7:1; 1 Kings7:1–12).

Thetabernacle and the temple were divine residences (Exod. 30:6; 40:34;2 Sam. 7:5; 1 Kings 8:11). For this reason, the design andfunction of each structure reflected the glorious worth of God andreminded the nation of its own uncleanness. Beyond the structures oftemple and tabernacle, the city of Jerusalem was privileged to be theresting place of the “Name” (i.e., presence) of the Lord(2 Chron. 6:5–6) and to have David as the chosen ruler(2 Chron. 6:34).

Thehistory of Israel reveals that the sustainability of these sacredstructures was influenced by physical and spiritual factors. Godoccupied the structures or met with Israel at these sacred places aslong as Israel conformed to the terms of the Mosaic covenant (1 Sam.4:21; 1 Kings 9:6–9). During the monarchy, kings whodeparted from Torah would strip the temple to pay tribute to foreignoverlords (2 Kings 24:13) or would modify the function of thestructure to accommodate the worship of foreign gods (see 2 Kings23). Although there were periodic times of rebuilding the sacredstructures, sustainability was short lived. The ideology of thesacred structures anticipates a future time when their originalfunction will be replaced with the opportunity to live in God’spresence forever.

NewTestament

TheNT refers only rarely to architects or architecture. Hebrews 11:10speaks of God as the “architect [technitēs] and builder”of the heavenly Jerusalem. Paul refers to the church as the temple ofGod. Jesus Christ is the foundation, and Christian leaders arebuilding upon that foundation with either gold, silver, and costlystones or wood, hay, and straw (1 Cor. 3:10–17; cf. 6:19;2 Cor. 6:16).

Interms of physical buildings, the church of the NT was a house church.During the time of Christ the significant architectural structureswere the temple and synagogues. Herod the Great was the major builderof the time, whose impressive temple dominated the landscape of theJerusalem area. Although the synagogue was a central structure duringthe life of Christ and the early church, function is emphasized overform in the biblical material. The synagogue was a place for prayer,Scripture study, and the administration of justice (Luke 4:16–30;Acts 13:15; 14:1).

Thefocus of the NT is also on the church’s function instead of itsarchitectural form. The church, however, prospered and grew in thecontext of a significant Hellenistic architectural period (300 BC toAD 300). In this period the Seleucids were responsible forestablishing large Greek cities across western and central Asia. Theprimary construction material continued to be the mud-brick, whichresulted in rapidly decaying buildings. Although cities continued tobe laid out in a grid format, a more dynamic, hilly format was beingintroduced. The homes in these cities often were built withcourtyards like ones in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The temples of theHellenistic period were designed with landscaping and terracing,along with porticoed enclosures and stairways.

Thebook of Revelation closes the canon with extensive detail about thenew city of Jerusalem, which God will design and build (Rev. 21) andwhich will function to serve his sovereign purposes as creator andredeemer.

Binding can mean physically restraining a person or people(Judg. 15:13; 2 Kings 25:7; Job 16:8; Pss. 119:61; 149:8),mending, as with a wound (Isa. 61:1; Ezek. 34:16; Hos. 6:1), ortaking a legally constraining oath (1 Sam. 14:27–30; Neh.10:29; Jer. 50:5). The opposite of binding is loosing or settingfree, which can describe literally being freed from bonds (e.g., Acts16:26) or the release from something that is binding.

Thelaw, a binding covenant between Israel and God, is to be literallybound on one’s forehead as a reminder (Deut. 6:8; 11:18).Non-Israelites who wish to identify with the God of Israel can bindthemselves to his laws (Isa. 56:6). In Num. 30:6, 9, 13, an oathtaken by a young woman still in her father’s house will bebinding only if the father is not against it. If he is against it, itis not binding and she is loosed from it (30:5). This is the same inthe case of a married woman, whose approval has to come from thehusband. However, for widows or divorced women, all pledges they makeare binding since there are no men in their lives to void the pledges(30:9).

Whilecontracts were binding, some had time limits. For example, theseventh year and the fiftieth year (Jubilee) allowed for cancellationof such binding contracts as slavery or land ownership (Lev.25:10–54; 27:24).

Thebinding of Isaac (Gen. 22), traditionally known as the Akedah, hastheological significance for both Christians and Jews. It isinterpreted as a form of resurrection, a coming from the dead forIsaac after Yahweh had instructed his father, Abraham, to sacrificehim (Heb. 11:17–19). God inquires of Job whether he can “bindthe chains of the Pleiades” or “loosen Orion’sbelt” (Job 38:31).

Thebook of Proverbs encourages the wise to metaphorically bind love andfaithfulness around their necks (3:3) and their parents’commands and teachings to the heart (6:21) and the finger (7:3); italso talks of folly being bound up in the heart of a child (22:15),perhaps alluded to by Paul in Rom. 11:32 when he says that God hasbound all people to disobedience that he may have mercy on them.

Introducinghis ministry in Luke 4:18, Jesus quotes Isa. 61:1, which talks ofbinding up the brokenhearted, a reference to his healing ministry.Further, binding and loosing are found in Jesus’ commissioningof his disciples (Matt. 16:19; 18:18; cf. John 20:23), where it maybe referring to the binding of demons and loosing of demoniacs boundor oppressed by demons (cf. Mark 3:14–16; 6:7; Luke 13:6).Since Jesus has the power to bind and loose (John 8:36), he choosesto empower his followers to do the same. Binding Satan is the subjectof the ultimate eschatological battle in Jewish lore (T. Levi18:11–12) and becomes central in Christianity. Jesus encounterssatanic forces embodied in humans and looses such people from thechains of Satan (Mark 5:3; Luke 13:12, 16). Ultimately, Satan is tobe bound for a millennium and loosed only for eternal damnation (Rev.20:1–3).

Paulinvokes Jewish law about marriage by claiming that one is bound inmarriage only as long as one’s partner is alive (Rom. 7:2). Inthis way, Paul explains how Christians are dead to the law, becauseJesus has died on their behalf, thus setting them free from the law(Rom. 7:4–6; cf. Heb. 9:15). To the Corinthians also he talksof the binding nature of marriage but with a caveat: if the marriageis between a believer and a nonbeliever, and if the nonbelieverleaves, then the believer is not bound (1 Cor. 7). But for Paul,being set free from sin (Rom. 8:2) means being bound to God (6:22).

The government-sanctioned killing of a perpetrator of aserious offense. The biblical portrayal of capital punishmentinvolves the concept as a God-ordained institution related to thevalue of humanity and the necessary recompense for the corruption ormurder of that ideal (Gen. 9:6).

Methodsof capital punishment.The methods of capital punishment listed in the Scriptures areseveral. The most common method was stoning (Lev. 24:16; Num.15:32–36; Deut. 13:1–10; 17:2–5), and this requiredthat the primary witnesses for the prosecution be the first to takeup stones against the accused. The burning of a person was rare, butit was commanded for certain sexual crimes (Lev. 20:14). In the storyof Judah and Tamar, before learning the true nature of her pregnancy,Judah ordered his daughter-in-law to be burned to death outside thecity (Gen. 38:24). On occasion, the method of punishment involvedbeing run through by a weapon: Phinehas impaled an Israelite and hisMidianite lover with a spear in order to soothe the wrath of God andstop a plague (Num. 25:7–8); Canaanites under the kherem(divine command of total destruction) were to be put to the sword(Deut. 13:15), and God commanded that anyone who touched Mount Sinaibe shot through with arrows (Exod. 19:13). Beheading seems to havebeen practiced for crimes against royalty, though there are nomandates concerning it (2 Sam. 16:9; 2 Kings 6:31–32).Other forms of capital punishment included impalement or placementupon a wooden stake (Ezra 6:11; Esther 2:23). Although someunderstand this to be a form of hanging, archaeological evidence andunderstandings of the cultures of the time suggest that impalement ismore likely. Finally, the Romans took the punishment of crucifixionthat they had learned from Carthage and applied it with vigor tothose guilty of insurrection (Luke 23:13–33).

Offensesleading to capital punishment.With respect to Israel, the list of offenses deemed worthy of capitalpunishment primarily focused upon human interrelations, though a fewcrimes listed did involve the breaking of covenant stipulationsinvolving one’s direct relationship with God. From this lattergroup, crimes such as witchcraft and divination (Exod. 22:18; Lev.20:27; Deut. 18:20), profaning the Sabbath (Exod. 31:14–17),idolatry (Lev. 20:1–5), and blasphemy (Lev. 24:14–16;Matt. 26:65–66) were included. In these laws one sees theexpression of God’s wrath and jealousy for his position in thelives of those who claim to be his. Mandates demanding death inresponse to some sort of corruption of the human ideal included actssuch as costing another person his or her life, sexual aberrations,and familial relationships. Anyone who committed murder (Exod.21:12), put another’s life at risk by giving false testimony ina trial (Deut. 19:16–21), or enslaved a person wrongfully(Exod. 21:16) could be considered to have cost someone’s life.Sexual aberrations regarded as worthy of death included sexual actsof bestial*ty, incest, and hom*osexuality (Exod. 22:19; Lev.20:11–17), rape (Deut. 22:23–27), adultery (Lev.20:10–12), and sexual relations outside of marriage (Lev. 21:9;Deut. 22:20–24). The final group of familial relationshipsprimarily applies to the crass rebellion of children against theirparents (Deut. 21:18–21).

Attimes, the righteous faced capital punishment for their beliefs. Forexample, at the hands of government faithful saints of God were sawnin two (Heb. 11:37 [a Jewish tradition may indicate that the prophetIsaiah died in such a manner]), stoned (Acts 7:58–59), andbeheaded (Mark 6:27; Acts 12:2). At other times, attempts were madeto inflict such punishment, but God intervened. In these examples,the punishments that God prevented include consumption by lions (Dan.6), burning in a fiery furnace (Dan. 3), being thrown over a cliff(Luke 4:29–30), and stoning (Acts 14:19).

Capitalpunishment today.Severalopinions persist regarding the appropriateness of continuing thepractice of capital punishment in the modern era. For some, passagesexpressing a command concerning such types of punishment are eitherdescriptive of what was going on or fall under the principle of aculture that no longer exists, so their laws are no longer relevant.Indeed, few today would enforce capital punishment for the samecrimes that Israel punished with death. For these individuals, thequestion then becomes whether Scripture, which required capitalpunishment at the time it was written, permits capital punishmenttoday. Those who are consistent will admit that if there is nomandate to require it, it must also be admitted that there is nomandate preventing its use as well.

Onthe other side are those who argue that while one cannot directlyapply the laws of the OT to today’s situation, the principleexpressed, particularly as it pertains to value of humanity, demandsthe continuation of capital punishment at least in response toheinous crimes that cost an individual his or her life, eitherliterally as with murder, or more figuratively (but just as real) aswith rape. For these people, it is significant that the requirementsof capital punishment for murder precede the giving of the law (Gen.9:6). Since the status of humanity in the eyes of God has notaltered, neither has his prescribed method of dealing with thosecrimes been lifted; here the principle requires the practice (Rom.13:4).

Theanswers are not easy, but they are important. The biblical textit*elf regularly balances the expected payment for sins worthy of thedeath penalty with expressions of grace (Gen. 4:15; Josh. 6:22–23).Furthermore, one must account for the perfect knowledge of God andhis execution of his fully justified wrath in contrast to theimperfect knowledge of humanity and the inequalities that sometimesfind expression in modern court settings. Finding the balance betweenholding a biblical worldview that appropriately seeks justice and oneregulated by grace is difficult enough in terms of interpersonalrelationships; when it is moved to the greater scope of society as awhole, the questions are even more significant and even moredifficult to answer. See also Crimes and Punishments.

A holy God wants a holy people. He had described the nationof Israel as holy (cf. Exod. 19:5–6) but also wanted them tolive holy lives and grow increasingly holy. Holiness came, in part,by keeping the law; an important part of the law was the concept ofcleanness.

OldTestament

SinceIsrael could become holy only by being clean, it is no surprise thatthe law’s first mention of prohibited food is accompanied by acommand to be God’s holy people (Exod. 22:31). Nor is itunexpected that when God explains the laws about clean and uncleanfood, he tells the Israelites twice to “be holy, because I amholy” (Lev. 11:44–47).

Cleanness(Heb. tahor) does not refer to good hygiene, nor is it synonymouswith morality, since a person could be unclean and still righteous.Cleanness allowed the OT believer to live a holy life and enabledthat person to be made increasingly holy by “Yahweh, yoursanctifier” (NIV: “the Lord, who makes you holy,”Lev. 20:8; cf. 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; 31:13). Before consideringhow ritual purity led to holiness, we should summarize the puritylaws themselves.

Puritylaws.Impurity traveled along four channels: sexuality (e.g., nocturnalemission, menstruation, childbirth), diet (e.g., eating certain typesof animals), disease (e.g., skin diseases, mildew), and death (i.e.,contact with animal or human corpses). Impurities occurring naturallyand unavoidably in the course of life (e.g., menstruation) weretolerated, representing no danger to the person or community as longas they were promptly addressed. Other impurities had to be avoidedat all costs or else grave consequences would result to the personand community.

Toleratedimpurities.We can further divide tolerated impurities into minor and major.Minor impurities resulted from touching an animal carcass or touchingsomeone with a major impurity. Minor impurities did not make onecontagious and could be addressed simply. Major impurities resultedfrom touching a human corpse, having a skin disease, or experiencinga nocturnal emission or menstruation. With these, one became“contagious,” purification took longer, and a sacrificewas required.

Inorder to become clean, the contaminant must be removed, with removaloccurring in different ways. Tolerated impurities were removed bywashing (bathing, laundering clothes, and sprinkling with water).What could not be washed away must be physically taken away, whetherthrough burial, burning, or removal from the camp (e.g., scapegoat;Lev. 16:20–22).

Cleansingtook time; generally the more serious the impurity, the longer thetime, from one day for those who touch a dead animal, up to eightydays following the birth of a female child. Some tolerated impuritiesrequired sacrifices, with the animal’s blood being sprinkledagainst the side of the altar and poured out at its base (Lev. 5).

Ritualactions might accompany the sacrifices. For example, a person who hadbeen healed of a contagious skin disease was to bring two live, cleanbirds to the priest. One bird was to be killed and its blood mixedwith water, which was then sprinkled on the person. The other birdwas dipped into the blood/water mixture and released, symbolizing theremoval of the uncleanness. In the ritual of the red heifer (Num.19), a combination of water and ashes was used to purify those whohad touched a corpse.

Impuritiesto be avoided.Unlike the tolerated impurities that could not be avoided, certainobjects and actions were completely off-limits to the holy people ofGod. Intentional violation brought more serious consequences, evenbeing “cut off” from the community. Although it isunclear exactly what it meant to be cut off—perhapsexcommunication, capital punishment, vulnerability to an untimelydeath, loss of progeny, or separation from one’s ancestorsafter death—the threat was ominous.

Oneprohibited impurity arose from eating food declared off-limits byGod. All meat had to be thoroughly bled before being eaten (Gen.9:3–4; Lev. 17:10–14; Deut. 12:16, 23). Edible landanimals must both have a completely divided hoof and chew the cud(Lev. 11:3; Deut. 14:6), while water creatures had to have both finsand scales (Lev. 11:9; Deut. 14:9). Most birds were acceptable forfood (exceptions are given in Lev. 11:13–19; Deut. 14:11–18),as were most insects (Lev. 11:20–23; Deut. 14:19–20) andsome crawling animals (Lev. 11:29–31, 41–42).

Otherprohibited impurities included what might be more readily identifiedas sinful acts. Sexual immorality (Lev. 18:6–25), idolatry(20:2–5), consulting mediums (20:6), and murder (Num. 35:33–34)defiled people and land. If such offenses were not “cleansed,”God would judge, whether by natural disaster (Isa. 24:1–13) orexile (Isa. 64:6–7; Mic. 2:10).

Reasonsfor the laws.Why did God declare certain things clean and others unclean? Somesuggest that the distinction is arbitrary; the rules are given as atest of obedience. Others argue that the original audience knew ofreasons now lost to us. Still others believe that God was protectinghis people from disease. It is true that certain kinds of meatimproperly prepared can transmit disease, but not all laws can beexplained this way. Some believe that God identified things as cleanbecause they represented a state of normalcy (e.g., fish normallypropel themselves with fins, so those lacking fins are abnormal andthus unclean). A related view considers things as clean or uncleanbased on what they symbolized. So, for example, God identifiedobjects as unclean if they were associated with death (e.g.,vultures, corpses) because he is for life. Here again, it isdifficult to explain all the laws by appeal to normalcy or symbolism.

Cleannessand holiness.While we may not know for certain why God chose these particularlaws, we can see how they helped his people become holy.

First,these laws made possible access to the sanctuary, where holinesscould be expressed and developed. The law of Moses contains repeatedand stern reminders that those who are unclean may not “go tothe sanctuary” (Lev. 10:10; 12:4; 15:31; Num. 19:13, 20). Onlythe clean could approach a holy God and participate in the ritualsthat demonstrated and developed their holiness.

Second,these rituals also fostered holiness by teaching the Israelites aboutimpurity. Israel’s neighbors associated impurity with demons,but God indicated that it would be an Israelite’s uncleanness,not demonic activity, that kept that person from living a holy life.

Third,these purity laws taught the Israelites about the holy God, whom theywere to imitate. If even innocent and otherwise good experiencesprevented their association with him, God must be very holy indeed.These laws also reinforced God’s authority over every aspect oftheir lives. He determined when they could come to the sanctuary, butalso what they could eat and when they could have sexual intercourse.These laws also reminded Israel that it was this same God who hadprovided a way to be clean and thereby holy. Cleansing was costly andhumbling, but it was possible, coming as a gracious gift from God.

Fourth,a very practical consequence of these laws was to keep the Israelitesseparate from their neighbors. Not only were the Israelites to avoidpagan practices (e.g., rituals associated with mourning the dead;Lev. 19:27), but also they were to limit social contact with theirpagan neighbors. Laws governing what could be eaten and how thoseanimals must be slaughtered would help see to that. God was concernedthat his people not be corrupted by their neighbors (cf. Deut. 7:1–6;14:1–3).

NewTestament

Ceremonialcleansing appears in the opening chapters of the Gospels. Maryunderwent the required purification rituals after Jesus’ birth(Luke 2:22–24), and Jesus “cleansed” people fromleprosy, instructing them to carry out the Mosaic purificationrituals (Matt. 8:2–4; Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–14;17:11–19; cf. Matt. 10:8; 11:5; Luke 4:27; 7:22).

Inone of his confrontations with the Pharisees, Jesus signaled adeparture from how these laws had been practiced. He announced,“Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them.Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them”(Mark 7:15), to which Mark adds an explanation: “In sayingthis, Jesus declared all foods ‘clean’ ”(7:19). Peter’s rooftop vision in Acts 10 reflects this sameperspective, as do the church’s decision regarding Gentileconversion (Acts 15) and Paul’s comments to the church at Rome(Rom. 14:14, 20–21).

TheNT identifies the church as God’s holy people, called to beholy as he is holy (1 Pet. 1:16). Holiness still requiredpurity, now manifested more ethically than physically. That is, onebecame unclean through sinful actions such as lying (1 Thess.2:3) and licentiousness (Eph. 4:19) rather than by, for example,contact with a corpse. In the OT, all Israel was declared holy butwas to live out that holiness in daily life. Purity came throughritual actions such as sacrifice and washing, with the assistance ofa priest. So it is in the NT, though the sacrifice is now theonce-for-all offering of Christ on the cross (Heb. 9:13–14;1 John 1:7) as applied in the waters of baptism (Eph. 5:26;1 Pet. 3:21) and assisted by Jesus the great high priest and bythe priesthood of believers (2 Cor. 7:1; Heb. 4:14; James 4:8;1 Pet. 1:22). Thus purified, believers can go on to live holylives and become increasingly holy. Although the Testaments differ onthe causes and solutions for uncleanness, they agree that a holypeople has always been God’s goal, and that cleanness is ameans to that end.

A holy God wants a holy people. He had described the nationof Israel as holy (cf. Exod. 19:5–6) but also wanted them tolive holy lives and grow increasingly holy. Holiness came, in part,by keeping the law; an important part of the law was the concept ofcleanness.

OldTestament

SinceIsrael could become holy only by being clean, it is no surprise thatthe law’s first mention of prohibited food is accompanied by acommand to be God’s holy people (Exod. 22:31). Nor is itunexpected that when God explains the laws about clean and uncleanfood, he tells the Israelites twice to “be holy, because I amholy” (Lev. 11:44–47).

Cleanness(Heb. tahor) does not refer to good hygiene, nor is it synonymouswith morality, since a person could be unclean and still righteous.Cleanness allowed the OT believer to live a holy life and enabledthat person to be made increasingly holy by “Yahweh, yoursanctifier” (NIV: “the Lord, who makes you holy,”Lev. 20:8; cf. 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; 31:13). Before consideringhow ritual purity led to holiness, we should summarize the puritylaws themselves.

Puritylaws.Impurity traveled along four channels: sexuality (e.g., nocturnalemission, menstruation, childbirth), diet (e.g., eating certain typesof animals), disease (e.g., skin diseases, mildew), and death (i.e.,contact with animal or human corpses). Impurities occurring naturallyand unavoidably in the course of life (e.g., menstruation) weretolerated, representing no danger to the person or community as longas they were promptly addressed. Other impurities had to be avoidedat all costs or else grave consequences would result to the personand community.

Toleratedimpurities.We can further divide tolerated impurities into minor and major.Minor impurities resulted from touching an animal carcass or touchingsomeone with a major impurity. Minor impurities did not make onecontagious and could be addressed simply. Major impurities resultedfrom touching a human corpse, having a skin disease, or experiencinga nocturnal emission or menstruation. With these, one became“contagious,” purification took longer, and a sacrificewas required.

Inorder to become clean, the contaminant must be removed, with removaloccurring in different ways. Tolerated impurities were removed bywashing (bathing, laundering clothes, and sprinkling with water).What could not be washed away must be physically taken away, whetherthrough burial, burning, or removal from the camp (e.g., scapegoat;Lev. 16:20–22).

Cleansingtook time; generally the more serious the impurity, the longer thetime, from one day for those who touch a dead animal, up to eightydays following the birth of a female child. Some tolerated impuritiesrequired sacrifices, with the animal’s blood being sprinkledagainst the side of the altar and poured out at its base (Lev. 5).

Ritualactions might accompany the sacrifices. For example, a person who hadbeen healed of a contagious skin disease was to bring two live, cleanbirds to the priest. One bird was to be killed and its blood mixedwith water, which was then sprinkled on the person. The other birdwas dipped into the blood/water mixture and released, symbolizing theremoval of the uncleanness. In the ritual of the red heifer (Num.19), a combination of water and ashes was used to purify those whohad touched a corpse.

Impuritiesto be avoided.Unlike the tolerated impurities that could not be avoided, certainobjects and actions were completely off-limits to the holy people ofGod. Intentional violation brought more serious consequences, evenbeing “cut off” from the community. Although it isunclear exactly what it meant to be cut off—perhapsexcommunication, capital punishment, vulnerability to an untimelydeath, loss of progeny, or separation from one’s ancestorsafter death—the threat was ominous.

Oneprohibited impurity arose from eating food declared off-limits byGod. All meat had to be thoroughly bled before being eaten (Gen.9:3–4; Lev. 17:10–14; Deut. 12:16, 23). Edible landanimals must both have a completely divided hoof and chew the cud(Lev. 11:3; Deut. 14:6), while water creatures had to have both finsand scales (Lev. 11:9; Deut. 14:9). Most birds were acceptable forfood (exceptions are given in Lev. 11:13–19; Deut. 14:11–18),as were most insects (Lev. 11:20–23; Deut. 14:19–20) andsome crawling animals (Lev. 11:29–31, 41–42).

Otherprohibited impurities included what might be more readily identifiedas sinful acts. Sexual immorality (Lev. 18:6–25), idolatry(20:2–5), consulting mediums (20:6), and murder (Num. 35:33–34)defiled people and land. If such offenses were not “cleansed,”God would judge, whether by natural disaster (Isa. 24:1–13) orexile (Isa. 64:6–7; Mic. 2:10).

Reasonsfor the laws.Why did God declare certain things clean and others unclean? Somesuggest that the distinction is arbitrary; the rules are given as atest of obedience. Others argue that the original audience knew ofreasons now lost to us. Still others believe that God was protectinghis people from disease. It is true that certain kinds of meatimproperly prepared can transmit disease, but not all laws can beexplained this way. Some believe that God identified things as cleanbecause they represented a state of normalcy (e.g., fish normallypropel themselves with fins, so those lacking fins are abnormal andthus unclean). A related view considers things as clean or uncleanbased on what they symbolized. So, for example, God identifiedobjects as unclean if they were associated with death (e.g.,vultures, corpses) because he is for life. Here again, it isdifficult to explain all the laws by appeal to normalcy or symbolism.

Cleannessand holiness.While we may not know for certain why God chose these particularlaws, we can see how they helped his people become holy.

First,these laws made possible access to the sanctuary, where holinesscould be expressed and developed. The law of Moses contains repeatedand stern reminders that those who are unclean may not “go tothe sanctuary” (Lev. 10:10; 12:4; 15:31; Num. 19:13, 20). Onlythe clean could approach a holy God and participate in the ritualsthat demonstrated and developed their holiness.

Second,these rituals also fostered holiness by teaching the Israelites aboutimpurity. Israel’s neighbors associated impurity with demons,but God indicated that it would be an Israelite’s uncleanness,not demonic activity, that kept that person from living a holy life.

Third,these purity laws taught the Israelites about the holy God, whom theywere to imitate. If even innocent and otherwise good experiencesprevented their association with him, God must be very holy indeed.These laws also reinforced God’s authority over every aspect oftheir lives. He determined when they could come to the sanctuary, butalso what they could eat and when they could have sexual intercourse.These laws also reminded Israel that it was this same God who hadprovided a way to be clean and thereby holy. Cleansing was costly andhumbling, but it was possible, coming as a gracious gift from God.

Fourth,a very practical consequence of these laws was to keep the Israelitesseparate from their neighbors. Not only were the Israelites to avoidpagan practices (e.g., rituals associated with mourning the dead;Lev. 19:27), but also they were to limit social contact with theirpagan neighbors. Laws governing what could be eaten and how thoseanimals must be slaughtered would help see to that. God was concernedthat his people not be corrupted by their neighbors (cf. Deut. 7:1–6;14:1–3).

NewTestament

Ceremonialcleansing appears in the opening chapters of the Gospels. Maryunderwent the required purification rituals after Jesus’ birth(Luke 2:22–24), and Jesus “cleansed” people fromleprosy, instructing them to carry out the Mosaic purificationrituals (Matt. 8:2–4; Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–14;17:11–19; cf. Matt. 10:8; 11:5; Luke 4:27; 7:22).

Inone of his confrontations with the Pharisees, Jesus signaled adeparture from how these laws had been practiced. He announced,“Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them.Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them”(Mark 7:15), to which Mark adds an explanation: “In sayingthis, Jesus declared all foods ‘clean’ ”(7:19). Peter’s rooftop vision in Acts 10 reflects this sameperspective, as do the church’s decision regarding Gentileconversion (Acts 15) and Paul’s comments to the church at Rome(Rom. 14:14, 20–21).

TheNT identifies the church as God’s holy people, called to beholy as he is holy (1 Pet. 1:16). Holiness still requiredpurity, now manifested more ethically than physically. That is, onebecame unclean through sinful actions such as lying (1 Thess.2:3) and licentiousness (Eph. 4:19) rather than by, for example,contact with a corpse. In the OT, all Israel was declared holy butwas to live out that holiness in daily life. Purity came throughritual actions such as sacrifice and washing, with the assistance ofa priest. So it is in the NT, though the sacrifice is now theonce-for-all offering of Christ on the cross (Heb. 9:13–14;1 John 1:7) as applied in the waters of baptism (Eph. 5:26;1 Pet. 3:21) and assisted by Jesus the great high priest and bythe priesthood of believers (2 Cor. 7:1; Heb. 4:14; James 4:8;1 Pet. 1:22). Thus purified, believers can go on to live holylives and become increasingly holy. Although the Testaments differ onthe causes and solutions for uncleanness, they agree that a holypeople has always been God’s goal, and that cleanness is ameans to that end.

A holy God wants a holy people. He had described the nationof Israel as holy (cf. Exod. 19:5–6) but also wanted them tolive holy lives and grow increasingly holy. Holiness came, in part,by keeping the law; an important part of the law was the concept ofcleanness.

OldTestament

SinceIsrael could become holy only by being clean, it is no surprise thatthe law’s first mention of prohibited food is accompanied by acommand to be God’s holy people (Exod. 22:31). Nor is itunexpected that when God explains the laws about clean and uncleanfood, he tells the Israelites twice to “be holy, because I amholy” (Lev. 11:44–47).

Cleanness(Heb. tahor) does not refer to good hygiene, nor is it synonymouswith morality, since a person could be unclean and still righteous.Cleanness allowed the OT believer to live a holy life and enabledthat person to be made increasingly holy by “Yahweh, yoursanctifier” (NIV: “the Lord, who makes you holy,”Lev. 20:8; cf. 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; 31:13). Before consideringhow ritual purity led to holiness, we should summarize the puritylaws themselves.

Puritylaws.Impurity traveled along four channels: sexuality (e.g., nocturnalemission, menstruation, childbirth), diet (e.g., eating certain typesof animals), disease (e.g., skin diseases, mildew), and death (i.e.,contact with animal or human corpses). Impurities occurring naturallyand unavoidably in the course of life (e.g., menstruation) weretolerated, representing no danger to the person or community as longas they were promptly addressed. Other impurities had to be avoidedat all costs or else grave consequences would result to the personand community.

Toleratedimpurities.We can further divide tolerated impurities into minor and major.Minor impurities resulted from touching an animal carcass or touchingsomeone with a major impurity. Minor impurities did not make onecontagious and could be addressed simply. Major impurities resultedfrom touching a human corpse, having a skin disease, or experiencinga nocturnal emission or menstruation. With these, one became“contagious,” purification took longer, and a sacrificewas required.

Inorder to become clean, the contaminant must be removed, with removaloccurring in different ways. Tolerated impurities were removed bywashing (bathing, laundering clothes, and sprinkling with water).What could not be washed away must be physically taken away, whetherthrough burial, burning, or removal from the camp (e.g., scapegoat;Lev. 16:20–22).

Cleansingtook time; generally the more serious the impurity, the longer thetime, from one day for those who touch a dead animal, up to eightydays following the birth of a female child. Some tolerated impuritiesrequired sacrifices, with the animal’s blood being sprinkledagainst the side of the altar and poured out at its base (Lev. 5).

Ritualactions might accompany the sacrifices. For example, a person who hadbeen healed of a contagious skin disease was to bring two live, cleanbirds to the priest. One bird was to be killed and its blood mixedwith water, which was then sprinkled on the person. The other birdwas dipped into the blood/water mixture and released, symbolizing theremoval of the uncleanness. In the ritual of the red heifer (Num.19), a combination of water and ashes was used to purify those whohad touched a corpse.

Impuritiesto be avoided.Unlike the tolerated impurities that could not be avoided, certainobjects and actions were completely off-limits to the holy people ofGod. Intentional violation brought more serious consequences, evenbeing “cut off” from the community. Although it isunclear exactly what it meant to be cut off—perhapsexcommunication, capital punishment, vulnerability to an untimelydeath, loss of progeny, or separation from one’s ancestorsafter death—the threat was ominous.

Oneprohibited impurity arose from eating food declared off-limits byGod. All meat had to be thoroughly bled before being eaten (Gen.9:3–4; Lev. 17:10–14; Deut. 12:16, 23). Edible landanimals must both have a completely divided hoof and chew the cud(Lev. 11:3; Deut. 14:6), while water creatures had to have both finsand scales (Lev. 11:9; Deut. 14:9). Most birds were acceptable forfood (exceptions are given in Lev. 11:13–19; Deut. 14:11–18),as were most insects (Lev. 11:20–23; Deut. 14:19–20) andsome crawling animals (Lev. 11:29–31, 41–42).

Otherprohibited impurities included what might be more readily identifiedas sinful acts. Sexual immorality (Lev. 18:6–25), idolatry(20:2–5), consulting mediums (20:6), and murder (Num. 35:33–34)defiled people and land. If such offenses were not “cleansed,”God would judge, whether by natural disaster (Isa. 24:1–13) orexile (Isa. 64:6–7; Mic. 2:10).

Reasonsfor the laws.Why did God declare certain things clean and others unclean? Somesuggest that the distinction is arbitrary; the rules are given as atest of obedience. Others argue that the original audience knew ofreasons now lost to us. Still others believe that God was protectinghis people from disease. It is true that certain kinds of meatimproperly prepared can transmit disease, but not all laws can beexplained this way. Some believe that God identified things as cleanbecause they represented a state of normalcy (e.g., fish normallypropel themselves with fins, so those lacking fins are abnormal andthus unclean). A related view considers things as clean or uncleanbased on what they symbolized. So, for example, God identifiedobjects as unclean if they were associated with death (e.g.,vultures, corpses) because he is for life. Here again, it isdifficult to explain all the laws by appeal to normalcy or symbolism.

Cleannessand holiness.While we may not know for certain why God chose these particularlaws, we can see how they helped his people become holy.

First,these laws made possible access to the sanctuary, where holinesscould be expressed and developed. The law of Moses contains repeatedand stern reminders that those who are unclean may not “go tothe sanctuary” (Lev. 10:10; 12:4; 15:31; Num. 19:13, 20). Onlythe clean could approach a holy God and participate in the ritualsthat demonstrated and developed their holiness.

Second,these rituals also fostered holiness by teaching the Israelites aboutimpurity. Israel’s neighbors associated impurity with demons,but God indicated that it would be an Israelite’s uncleanness,not demonic activity, that kept that person from living a holy life.

Third,these purity laws taught the Israelites about the holy God, whom theywere to imitate. If even innocent and otherwise good experiencesprevented their association with him, God must be very holy indeed.These laws also reinforced God’s authority over every aspect oftheir lives. He determined when they could come to the sanctuary, butalso what they could eat and when they could have sexual intercourse.These laws also reminded Israel that it was this same God who hadprovided a way to be clean and thereby holy. Cleansing was costly andhumbling, but it was possible, coming as a gracious gift from God.

Fourth,a very practical consequence of these laws was to keep the Israelitesseparate from their neighbors. Not only were the Israelites to avoidpagan practices (e.g., rituals associated with mourning the dead;Lev. 19:27), but also they were to limit social contact with theirpagan neighbors. Laws governing what could be eaten and how thoseanimals must be slaughtered would help see to that. God was concernedthat his people not be corrupted by their neighbors (cf. Deut. 7:1–6;14:1–3).

NewTestament

Ceremonialcleansing appears in the opening chapters of the Gospels. Maryunderwent the required purification rituals after Jesus’ birth(Luke 2:22–24), and Jesus “cleansed” people fromleprosy, instructing them to carry out the Mosaic purificationrituals (Matt. 8:2–4; Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–14;17:11–19; cf. Matt. 10:8; 11:5; Luke 4:27; 7:22).

Inone of his confrontations with the Pharisees, Jesus signaled adeparture from how these laws had been practiced. He announced,“Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them.Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them”(Mark 7:15), to which Mark adds an explanation: “In sayingthis, Jesus declared all foods ‘clean’ ”(7:19). Peter’s rooftop vision in Acts 10 reflects this sameperspective, as do the church’s decision regarding Gentileconversion (Acts 15) and Paul’s comments to the church at Rome(Rom. 14:14, 20–21).

TheNT identifies the church as God’s holy people, called to beholy as he is holy (1 Pet. 1:16). Holiness still requiredpurity, now manifested more ethically than physically. That is, onebecame unclean through sinful actions such as lying (1 Thess.2:3) and licentiousness (Eph. 4:19) rather than by, for example,contact with a corpse. In the OT, all Israel was declared holy butwas to live out that holiness in daily life. Purity came throughritual actions such as sacrifice and washing, with the assistance ofa priest. So it is in the NT, though the sacrifice is now theonce-for-all offering of Christ on the cross (Heb. 9:13–14;1 John 1:7) as applied in the waters of baptism (Eph. 5:26;1 Pet. 3:21) and assisted by Jesus the great high priest and bythe priesthood of believers (2 Cor. 7:1; Heb. 4:14; James 4:8;1 Pet. 1:22). Thus purified, believers can go on to live holylives and become increasingly holy. Although the Testaments differ onthe causes and solutions for uncleanness, they agree that a holypeople has always been God’s goal, and that cleanness is ameans to that end.

A holy God wants a holy people. He had described the nationof Israel as holy (cf. Exod. 19:5–6) but also wanted them tolive holy lives and grow increasingly holy. Holiness came, in part,by keeping the law; an important part of the law was the concept ofcleanness.

OldTestament

SinceIsrael could become holy only by being clean, it is no surprise thatthe law’s first mention of prohibited food is accompanied by acommand to be God’s holy people (Exod. 22:31). Nor is itunexpected that when God explains the laws about clean and uncleanfood, he tells the Israelites twice to “be holy, because I amholy” (Lev. 11:44–47).

Cleanness(Heb. tahor) does not refer to good hygiene, nor is it synonymouswith morality, since a person could be unclean and still righteous.Cleanness allowed the OT believer to live a holy life and enabledthat person to be made increasingly holy by “Yahweh, yoursanctifier” (NIV: “the Lord, who makes you holy,”Lev. 20:8; cf. 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; 31:13). Before consideringhow ritual purity led to holiness, we should summarize the puritylaws themselves.

Puritylaws.Impurity traveled along four channels: sexuality (e.g., nocturnalemission, menstruation, childbirth), diet (e.g., eating certain typesof animals), disease (e.g., skin diseases, mildew), and death (i.e.,contact with animal or human corpses). Impurities occurring naturallyand unavoidably in the course of life (e.g., menstruation) weretolerated, representing no danger to the person or community as longas they were promptly addressed. Other impurities had to be avoidedat all costs or else grave consequences would result to the personand community.

Toleratedimpurities.We can further divide tolerated impurities into minor and major.Minor impurities resulted from touching an animal carcass or touchingsomeone with a major impurity. Minor impurities did not make onecontagious and could be addressed simply. Major impurities resultedfrom touching a human corpse, having a skin disease, or experiencinga nocturnal emission or menstruation. With these, one became“contagious,” purification took longer, and a sacrificewas required.

Inorder to become clean, the contaminant must be removed, with removaloccurring in different ways. Tolerated impurities were removed bywashing (bathing, laundering clothes, and sprinkling with water).What could not be washed away must be physically taken away, whetherthrough burial, burning, or removal from the camp (e.g., scapegoat;Lev. 16:20–22).

Cleansingtook time; generally the more serious the impurity, the longer thetime, from one day for those who touch a dead animal, up to eightydays following the birth of a female child. Some tolerated impuritiesrequired sacrifices, with the animal’s blood being sprinkledagainst the side of the altar and poured out at its base (Lev. 5).

Ritualactions might accompany the sacrifices. For example, a person who hadbeen healed of a contagious skin disease was to bring two live, cleanbirds to the priest. One bird was to be killed and its blood mixedwith water, which was then sprinkled on the person. The other birdwas dipped into the blood/water mixture and released, symbolizing theremoval of the uncleanness. In the ritual of the red heifer (Num.19), a combination of water and ashes was used to purify those whohad touched a corpse.

Impuritiesto be avoided.Unlike the tolerated impurities that could not be avoided, certainobjects and actions were completely off-limits to the holy people ofGod. Intentional violation brought more serious consequences, evenbeing “cut off” from the community. Although it isunclear exactly what it meant to be cut off—perhapsexcommunication, capital punishment, vulnerability to an untimelydeath, loss of progeny, or separation from one’s ancestorsafter death—the threat was ominous.

Oneprohibited impurity arose from eating food declared off-limits byGod. All meat had to be thoroughly bled before being eaten (Gen.9:3–4; Lev. 17:10–14; Deut. 12:16, 23). Edible landanimals must both have a completely divided hoof and chew the cud(Lev. 11:3; Deut. 14:6), while water creatures had to have both finsand scales (Lev. 11:9; Deut. 14:9). Most birds were acceptable forfood (exceptions are given in Lev. 11:13–19; Deut. 14:11–18),as were most insects (Lev. 11:20–23; Deut. 14:19–20) andsome crawling animals (Lev. 11:29–31, 41–42).

Otherprohibited impurities included what might be more readily identifiedas sinful acts. Sexual immorality (Lev. 18:6–25), idolatry(20:2–5), consulting mediums (20:6), and murder (Num. 35:33–34)defiled people and land. If such offenses were not “cleansed,”God would judge, whether by natural disaster (Isa. 24:1–13) orexile (Isa. 64:6–7; Mic. 2:10).

Reasonsfor the laws.Why did God declare certain things clean and others unclean? Somesuggest that the distinction is arbitrary; the rules are given as atest of obedience. Others argue that the original audience knew ofreasons now lost to us. Still others believe that God was protectinghis people from disease. It is true that certain kinds of meatimproperly prepared can transmit disease, but not all laws can beexplained this way. Some believe that God identified things as cleanbecause they represented a state of normalcy (e.g., fish normallypropel themselves with fins, so those lacking fins are abnormal andthus unclean). A related view considers things as clean or uncleanbased on what they symbolized. So, for example, God identifiedobjects as unclean if they were associated with death (e.g.,vultures, corpses) because he is for life. Here again, it isdifficult to explain all the laws by appeal to normalcy or symbolism.

Cleannessand holiness.While we may not know for certain why God chose these particularlaws, we can see how they helped his people become holy.

First,these laws made possible access to the sanctuary, where holinesscould be expressed and developed. The law of Moses contains repeatedand stern reminders that those who are unclean may not “go tothe sanctuary” (Lev. 10:10; 12:4; 15:31; Num. 19:13, 20). Onlythe clean could approach a holy God and participate in the ritualsthat demonstrated and developed their holiness.

Second,these rituals also fostered holiness by teaching the Israelites aboutimpurity. Israel’s neighbors associated impurity with demons,but God indicated that it would be an Israelite’s uncleanness,not demonic activity, that kept that person from living a holy life.

Third,these purity laws taught the Israelites about the holy God, whom theywere to imitate. If even innocent and otherwise good experiencesprevented their association with him, God must be very holy indeed.These laws also reinforced God’s authority over every aspect oftheir lives. He determined when they could come to the sanctuary, butalso what they could eat and when they could have sexual intercourse.These laws also reminded Israel that it was this same God who hadprovided a way to be clean and thereby holy. Cleansing was costly andhumbling, but it was possible, coming as a gracious gift from God.

Fourth,a very practical consequence of these laws was to keep the Israelitesseparate from their neighbors. Not only were the Israelites to avoidpagan practices (e.g., rituals associated with mourning the dead;Lev. 19:27), but also they were to limit social contact with theirpagan neighbors. Laws governing what could be eaten and how thoseanimals must be slaughtered would help see to that. God was concernedthat his people not be corrupted by their neighbors (cf. Deut. 7:1–6;14:1–3).

NewTestament

Ceremonialcleansing appears in the opening chapters of the Gospels. Maryunderwent the required purification rituals after Jesus’ birth(Luke 2:22–24), and Jesus “cleansed” people fromleprosy, instructing them to carry out the Mosaic purificationrituals (Matt. 8:2–4; Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–14;17:11–19; cf. Matt. 10:8; 11:5; Luke 4:27; 7:22).

Inone of his confrontations with the Pharisees, Jesus signaled adeparture from how these laws had been practiced. He announced,“Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them.Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them”(Mark 7:15), to which Mark adds an explanation: “In sayingthis, Jesus declared all foods ‘clean’ ”(7:19). Peter’s rooftop vision in Acts 10 reflects this sameperspective, as do the church’s decision regarding Gentileconversion (Acts 15) and Paul’s comments to the church at Rome(Rom. 14:14, 20–21).

TheNT identifies the church as God’s holy people, called to beholy as he is holy (1 Pet. 1:16). Holiness still requiredpurity, now manifested more ethically than physically. That is, onebecame unclean through sinful actions such as lying (1 Thess.2:3) and licentiousness (Eph. 4:19) rather than by, for example,contact with a corpse. In the OT, all Israel was declared holy butwas to live out that holiness in daily life. Purity came throughritual actions such as sacrifice and washing, with the assistance ofa priest. So it is in the NT, though the sacrifice is now theonce-for-all offering of Christ on the cross (Heb. 9:13–14;1 John 1:7) as applied in the waters of baptism (Eph. 5:26;1 Pet. 3:21) and assisted by Jesus the great high priest and bythe priesthood of believers (2 Cor. 7:1; Heb. 4:14; James 4:8;1 Pet. 1:22). Thus purified, believers can go on to live holylives and become increasingly holy. Although the Testaments differ onthe causes and solutions for uncleanness, they agree that a holypeople has always been God’s goal, and that cleanness is ameans to that end.

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

Evangelisticefforts in the New Testament.Numerous figures throughout the NT participated in evangelisticendeavors. John the Baptist’s preaching about the comingMessiah is described as evangelism (Luke 3:18). Evangelism was acharacteristic activity of Jesus’ own ministry (Matt. 4:23;9:35; Mark 1:14; Luke 20:1), which focused on proclaiming the adventof the kingdom of God (Luke 4:43; 8:1) and at times was targetedtoward the poor (Matt. 11:5; Luke 4:18; 7:22). Jesus commanded thosewho follow him to engage in evangelism. He sent out the twelveapostles for evangelistic purposes (Luke 9:2), and he issued theGreat Commission to this end (Matt. 28:18–20).

Themissionary enterprise recorded in Acts demonstrates the efforts ofthe earliest Christians to spread the gospel. The apostles inJerusalem (Acts 5:42) proclaimed the gospel in spite of greatopposition and persecution, and believers who were scattered outsideJerusalem because of persecution spread the gospel in new locales(8:4). Philip evangelized Samaritans and an Ethiopian (8:12, 35). Theministry of Paul and Barnabas is characterized as preaching the goodnews (14:7, 15, 21; 15:35; 16:10; 17:18). Philip, one of the sevenchosen to distribute food (6:5), was given the name “theEvangelist” (21:8). Timothy, additionally, is said to be Paul’sfellow worker in evangelism (1Thess. 3:2; cf. 2Tim. 4:5).

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

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

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

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

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

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

Josephunderstood that God sent him ahead to Egypt to save his family froman international famine (Gen. 45:5–7). For forty years Godtested the Israelites with hunger to rid them of self-reliance (Exod.16:2–8; Deut. 8:2, 16). Moreover, God sent afflictions onIsrael such as famine, drought, mildew, blight, and insects in orderto arouse national repentance (Amos 4:6–12). This meant thatsin and human suffering were tied to the land in interdependence(Lam. 4:3–4). Elijah’s contest with the Canaaniteprophets of Baal vividly shows the theological implications of faithand food: Yahweh would prove that he was in control of nature’sforces (1Kings 18:23–39; cf. Gen. 8:22). Even Elijah,however, required special divine care through this famine (1Kings17:1–6). For Amos, literal hunger funded his description ofdesperate spiritual hunger, “a famine ... ofhearing the words of the Lord” (Amos 8:11).

Jesusrelived Israel’s experience in his own wilderness testing andrejected the bread that he could make for himself (Matt. 4:3–4;Deut. 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger are intendedto develop humility and trust in God, the divine provider (Matt.4:2), something that Israel did not learn very well. Jesus fed asecond manna to five thousand people to draw them to the bread oflife (John 6:35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the foodthan for him (6:26–27). Famines are mentioned in the NT (Luke4:25; Acts 7:11 [historical]; 11:27–30 [contemporary]).

Jesustaught that famines would be a sign of his coming. Yet, withoutignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted the spiritual hunger andthirst of people (Matt. 5:6; John 4:14, 34; 7:37–38). Becauseeating is a powerful part of fellowship, heaven will merely removethe desperation of hunger, not the use of food (Gen. 43:34; Luke22:15–16; Rev. 19:9; cf. 1Cor. 4:11; Rev. 7:16; 21:4).

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., 2Kings 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., 2Kings 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; 2Kings 23:21–23; 2Chron. 30; 35:1–19).

Early Christians associated Jesus’ death with that of the Passover lamb (1Cor. 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. 1Kings 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 (2Chron. 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 1Macc. 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 (1Sam. 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” (Esther9:22).

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. (1Macc. 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.

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., 2Kings 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., 2Kings 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; 2Kings 23:21–23; 2Chron. 30; 35:1–19).

Early Christians associated Jesus’ death with that of the Passover lamb (1Cor. 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. 1Kings 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 (2Chron. 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 1Macc. 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 (1Sam. 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” (Esther9:22).

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. (1Macc. 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.

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., 2Kings 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., 2Kings 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; 2Kings 23:21–23; 2Chron. 30; 35:1–19).

Early Christians associated Jesus’ death with that of the Passover lamb (1Cor. 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. 1Kings 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 (2Chron. 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 1Macc. 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 (1Sam. 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” (Esther9:22).

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. (1Macc. 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.

A holy God wants a holy people. He had described the nationof Israel as holy (cf. Exod. 19:5–6) but also wanted them tolive holy lives and grow increasingly holy. Holiness came, in part,by keeping the law; an important part of the law was the concept ofcleanness.

OldTestament

SinceIsrael could become holy only by being clean, it is no surprise thatthe law’s first mention of prohibited food is accompanied by acommand to be God’s holy people (Exod. 22:31). Nor is itunexpected that when God explains the laws about clean and uncleanfood, he tells the Israelites twice to “be holy, because I amholy” (Lev. 11:44–47).

Cleanness(Heb. tahor) does not refer to good hygiene, nor is it synonymouswith morality, since a person could be unclean and still righteous.Cleanness allowed the OT believer to live a holy life and enabledthat person to be made increasingly holy by “Yahweh, yoursanctifier” (NIV: “the Lord, who makes you holy,”Lev. 20:8; cf. 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; 31:13). Before consideringhow ritual purity led to holiness, we should summarize the puritylaws themselves.

Puritylaws.Impurity traveled along four channels: sexuality (e.g., nocturnalemission, menstruation, childbirth), diet (e.g., eating certain typesof animals), disease (e.g., skin diseases, mildew), and death (i.e.,contact with animal or human corpses). Impurities occurring naturallyand unavoidably in the course of life (e.g., menstruation) weretolerated, representing no danger to the person or community as longas they were promptly addressed. Other impurities had to be avoidedat all costs or else grave consequences would result to the personand community.

Toleratedimpurities.We can further divide tolerated impurities into minor and major.Minor impurities resulted from touching an animal carcass or touchingsomeone with a major impurity. Minor impurities did not make onecontagious and could be addressed simply. Major impurities resultedfrom touching a human corpse, having a skin disease, or experiencinga nocturnal emission or menstruation. With these, one became“contagious,” purification took longer, and a sacrificewas required.

Inorder to become clean, the contaminant must be removed, with removaloccurring in different ways. Tolerated impurities were removed bywashing (bathing, laundering clothes, and sprinkling with water).What could not be washed away must be physically taken away, whetherthrough burial, burning, or removal from the camp (e.g., scapegoat;Lev. 16:20–22).

Cleansingtook time; generally the more serious the impurity, the longer thetime, from one day for those who touch a dead animal, up to eightydays following the birth of a female child. Some tolerated impuritiesrequired sacrifices, with the animal’s blood being sprinkledagainst the side of the altar and poured out at its base (Lev. 5).

Ritualactions might accompany the sacrifices. For example, a person who hadbeen healed of a contagious skin disease was to bring two live, cleanbirds to the priest. One bird was to be killed and its blood mixedwith water, which was then sprinkled on the person. The other birdwas dipped into the blood/water mixture and released, symbolizing theremoval of the uncleanness. In the ritual of the red heifer (Num.19), a combination of water and ashes was used to purify those whohad touched a corpse.

Impuritiesto be avoided.Unlike the tolerated impurities that could not be avoided, certainobjects and actions were completely off-limits to the holy people ofGod. Intentional violation brought more serious consequences, evenbeing “cut off” from the community. Although it isunclear exactly what it meant to be cut off—perhapsexcommunication, capital punishment, vulnerability to an untimelydeath, loss of progeny, or separation from one’s ancestorsafter death—the threat was ominous.

Oneprohibited impurity arose from eating food declared off-limits byGod. All meat had to be thoroughly bled before being eaten (Gen.9:3–4; Lev. 17:10–14; Deut. 12:16, 23). Edible landanimals must both have a completely divided hoof and chew the cud(Lev. 11:3; Deut. 14:6), while water creatures had to have both finsand scales (Lev. 11:9; Deut. 14:9). Most birds were acceptable forfood (exceptions are given in Lev. 11:13–19; Deut. 14:11–18),as were most insects (Lev. 11:20–23; Deut. 14:19–20) andsome crawling animals (Lev. 11:29–31, 41–42).

Otherprohibited impurities included what might be more readily identifiedas sinful acts. Sexual immorality (Lev. 18:6–25), idolatry(20:2–5), consulting mediums (20:6), and murder (Num. 35:33–34)defiled people and land. If such offenses were not “cleansed,”God would judge, whether by natural disaster (Isa. 24:1–13) orexile (Isa. 64:6–7; Mic. 2:10).

Reasonsfor the laws.Why did God declare certain things clean and others unclean? Somesuggest that the distinction is arbitrary; the rules are given as atest of obedience. Others argue that the original audience knew ofreasons now lost to us. Still others believe that God was protectinghis people from disease. It is true that certain kinds of meatimproperly prepared can transmit disease, but not all laws can beexplained this way. Some believe that God identified things as cleanbecause they represented a state of normalcy (e.g., fish normallypropel themselves with fins, so those lacking fins are abnormal andthus unclean). A related view considers things as clean or uncleanbased on what they symbolized. So, for example, God identifiedobjects as unclean if they were associated with death (e.g.,vultures, corpses) because he is for life. Here again, it isdifficult to explain all the laws by appeal to normalcy or symbolism.

Cleannessand holiness.While we may not know for certain why God chose these particularlaws, we can see how they helped his people become holy.

First,these laws made possible access to the sanctuary, where holinesscould be expressed and developed. The law of Moses contains repeatedand stern reminders that those who are unclean may not “go tothe sanctuary” (Lev. 10:10; 12:4; 15:31; Num. 19:13, 20). Onlythe clean could approach a holy God and participate in the ritualsthat demonstrated and developed their holiness.

Second,these rituals also fostered holiness by teaching the Israelites aboutimpurity. Israel’s neighbors associated impurity with demons,but God indicated that it would be an Israelite’s uncleanness,not demonic activity, that kept that person from living a holy life.

Third,these purity laws taught the Israelites about the holy God, whom theywere to imitate. If even innocent and otherwise good experiencesprevented their association with him, God must be very holy indeed.These laws also reinforced God’s authority over every aspect oftheir lives. He determined when they could come to the sanctuary, butalso what they could eat and when they could have sexual intercourse.These laws also reminded Israel that it was this same God who hadprovided a way to be clean and thereby holy. Cleansing was costly andhumbling, but it was possible, coming as a gracious gift from God.

Fourth,a very practical consequence of these laws was to keep the Israelitesseparate from their neighbors. Not only were the Israelites to avoidpagan practices (e.g., rituals associated with mourning the dead;Lev. 19:27), but also they were to limit social contact with theirpagan neighbors. Laws governing what could be eaten and how thoseanimals must be slaughtered would help see to that. God was concernedthat his people not be corrupted by their neighbors (cf. Deut. 7:1–6;14:1–3).

NewTestament

Ceremonialcleansing appears in the opening chapters of the Gospels. Maryunderwent the required purification rituals after Jesus’ birth(Luke 2:22–24), and Jesus “cleansed” people fromleprosy, instructing them to carry out the Mosaic purificationrituals (Matt. 8:2–4; Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–14;17:11–19; cf. Matt. 10:8; 11:5; Luke 4:27; 7:22).

Inone of his confrontations with the Pharisees, Jesus signaled adeparture from how these laws had been practiced. He announced,“Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them.Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them”(Mark 7:15), to which Mark adds an explanation: “In sayingthis, Jesus declared all foods ‘clean’ ”(7:19). Peter’s rooftop vision in Acts 10 reflects this sameperspective, as do the church’s decision regarding Gentileconversion (Acts 15) and Paul’s comments to the church at Rome(Rom. 14:14, 20–21).

TheNT identifies the church as God’s holy people, called to beholy as he is holy (1 Pet. 1:16). Holiness still requiredpurity, now manifested more ethically than physically. That is, onebecame unclean through sinful actions such as lying (1 Thess.2:3) and licentiousness (Eph. 4:19) rather than by, for example,contact with a corpse. In the OT, all Israel was declared holy butwas to live out that holiness in daily life. Purity came throughritual actions such as sacrifice and washing, with the assistance ofa priest. So it is in the NT, though the sacrifice is now theonce-for-all offering of Christ on the cross (Heb. 9:13–14;1 John 1:7) as applied in the waters of baptism (Eph. 5:26;1 Pet. 3:21) and assisted by Jesus the great high priest and bythe priesthood of believers (2 Cor. 7:1; Heb. 4:14; James 4:8;1 Pet. 1:22). Thus purified, believers can go on to live holylives and become increasingly holy. Although the Testaments differ onthe causes and solutions for uncleanness, they agree that a holypeople has always been God’s goal, and that cleanness is ameans to that end.

The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.

Introduction

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

Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.

TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.

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

Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.

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

NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.

Jesus’Life

Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.

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

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

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

Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.

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

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

TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.

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

Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.

AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.

DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. 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 ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).

TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).

Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).

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

Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe 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 journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).

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

PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).

InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof 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 owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).

Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand 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 bymaking 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).

TheIdentity of Jesus Christ

Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).

Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.

Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).

ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).

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

Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.

Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).

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

TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.

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

Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).

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

Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).

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

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

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

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

Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).

ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).

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

Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).

Jesus’Purpose and Community

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

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

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

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

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

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

TheQuests for the Historical Jesus

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

Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.

In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.

Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.

Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.

Jesus’ brothers are mentioned several times in theGospels, Acts, and the Pauline Epistles. In Mark 6:3 (see also Matt.13:55–56) four brothers are named, and sisters are mentioned,though the name or number of sisters is not given. The people ofNazareth are offended by Jesus’ preaching in the synagogue andexpress surprise that Jesus, given the dramatic claims that he hasmade about himself in his sermon there (see Luke 4:16–30), isthe son and brother of local villagers (Mary and her sons James,Joses [named “Joseph” in Matthew], Judas, and Simon). Inthe crucifixion scene in Mark, one of the women present is identifiedas “Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joseph [NIVmg.: “Greek Joses”]” (Mark 15:40). It is unlikely,however, that this is Jesus’ mother and brothers, since itwould be strange to identify Mary as the mother of these twolesser-known siblings rather than of Jesus himself.

InMark 3:32–35 Jesus redefines what it means to be his brother,sister, or mother in the kingdom of God in response to being notifiedthat his earthly mother and brothers, who at this point in time didnot understand his mission (see 3:21), are waiting for him outsidethe house in Capernaum. Although Mary and Jesus’ brothersappear to have traveled around Galilee with him (see John 2:12),John’s Gospel makes explicit the brothers’ unbelief(7:2–10), which is only implicit in Matthew and Mark. Acts 1:14shows the dramatic reversal that has taken place in the response toJesus by his brothers after the resurrection. Mary and Jesus’brothers are gathered together with the entire body of Jesus’disciples in prayer, fellowship, and teaching.

James(apparently Jesus’ oldest sibling) became a key leader in theJerusalem church (Acts 12:17; 21:18) and pronounced the decision atthe Jerusalem council (Acts 15:13). He is also traditionallyidentified as the author of the NT letter that bears his name (James1:1). Another NT letter may also have been penned by a brother ofJesus, since Jude identifies himself as “a brother of James”(Jude 1), a probable reference to this same James.

In1 Cor. 9:5 Paul argues (through a rhetorical question) thatChristian missionaries have the right to take “a believingwife” along with them in their work, just as the other apostlesand Jesus’ brothers had done. Finally, while recounting hisfirst trip to Jerusalem after his conversion, Paul mentions a meetingwith James, “the Lord’s brother” (Gal. 1:19).

Accordingto the Jewish historian Josephus, Jesus’ brother James died amartyr’s death at the hands of the Jewish high priest Ananus(Ant. 20.197–200).

The Jubilee was a year of rest after seven cycles ofSabbatical Years (Lev. 25:8–55). The Israelites were to soundthe ram’s horn on the Day of Atonement and consecrate thefiftieth year, proclaiming liberty throughout the land. The fiftiethyear was to be a “jubilee” (Heb. yobel ).

Twoprinciples were essential to the Jubilee practices. The first wasthat the land belongs to God (Lev. 25:23). The Israelites’socioeconomic system, rooted in the land, was shaped by theirunderstanding that they were to provide for all members of societyfrom God’s land. The second was the familiar redemptionparadigm. God had brought them out of Egypt, delivering them as freepeople so that they might serve him (25:38–45). Thus, they werenot to own land or slaves permanently, since that would reverse theimpact of the exodus and create a perpetual underclass. Instead, theywere to buy them back, just as God had redeemed his people.

Thespecific requirements for the Year of Jubilee involved rest for theland, continuing the Sabbatical Year practices. The people were notto sow or harvest. In the Jubilee Year they were to return land andhouses to the family or clan of original ownership. The price of anyland sold was to be determined by the number of potential crops thatthe buyer had forthcoming until the next Jubilee. If it was a longtime, the price could be set higher. In the interval, if someone hadsold family landholdings due to financial stress, the nearestrelative could redeem them, or the seller could buy them backpersonally. In the end, however, the property reverted to the clanownership in the Jubilee. A house in a walled city could be redeemedfor one year. After that, the new owner could keep it permanentlybecause the urban setting was separate from the land. A house in anunwalled city could be redeemed anytime and had to be returned to theoriginal owner at the next Jubilee, since such a city was consideredopen country. Property of the Levites was always subject toredemption. Any Israelite unable to pay off debts could sell himself,either to a fellow Israelite or to a resident alien. As with theland, the nearest relative or the seller could provide the redemptionpayment prior to the Jubilee. Failing that, in the Jubilee Hebrewhired workers and their children were to be set free.

Thereis no direct evidence in the historical books that the Israelitesactually practiced the Year of Jubilee. There are echoes of it inIsa. 61:1–7 with the allusions to the release of the prisoner(as in Lev. 25:10) and the inheritance. Jesus cited this passage withreference to his own messianic ministry (Luke 4:16–21),suggesting his affirmation and fulfillment of the Jubilee principles.

The concept of justice pervades the Bible, especially, thoughnot exclusively, the OT. The key biblical terms that convey thisconcept include mishpat, tsedeq/tsedaqah, yashar in the OT and thedik- word group in the NT (whose noun and verb forms are translatedrespectively as “righteous” and “justify” ortheir respective cognates). The biblical concept of justice is anembodiment of two contemporary concepts: righteousness and justice.The former designates compliance with the divine norm, while thelatter emphasizes conformity to a societal standard of what is rightand equitable. Focusing exclusively on the latter hinders the correctunderstanding of justice in the biblical sense. Additionally, thebiblical understanding of this concept is encumbered by the use ofdiffering English terms to translate the same Hebrew or Greek terms.

Mishpatand Tsedaqah

Mishpatinherently encompasses the idea of judicial activism consisting inthe provision of standard criteria (legislation, instructions,directives) for conduct and adjudication, and/or the actualarbitration between parties with the goal of ascertaining culpabilityor otherwise and administering the requisite sanctions or acquittal.Tsedaqah, on the other hand, emphasizes the established norm of justorder for right conduct both in the larger society and forindividuals. Whereas mishpat emphasizes the action that seeks toestablish or enforce right patterns of behavior for the common good,tsedaqah stresses the practice (or lack thereof) of such a norm insociety, or between individuals, or an individual’s compliancewith such a norm.

Whenused in combination as a hendiadys (or word pair), these two termssignify an inherent requirement for conformity to an established norm(whether in the religious sphere or in civil society) or therequirement of loyalty or right conduct between individuals. To theperson who stands to benefit from this norm, it approximates a right(i.e., a claim). Conversely, implicit duty is placed upon the personwho ensures the conformity to such an established norm. This fact isbetter appreciated when we reckon with the covenantal nature ofrequirements for justice in the ancient world, in which both partieshave both claim and responsibility. Broadly speaking, this conceptalso implies good governance, which accrues order to life and commonbenefits to all members of the community.

Thisidea is exemplified even in passages that do not use this precisephraseology (mishpat utsedaqah). Judah’s widoweddaughter-in-law, Tamar, had an inherent right to be provided with a(kinsman-redeemer) husband to raise up progeny for her deceasedhusband, while Judah had the incumbent duty of giving her in leviratemarriage to his surviving son. When Judah failed to execute his duty,Tamar entrapped him into an incestuous relationship, from which sheconceived. When condemned to die for adultery in a clannish courtsetting, Tamar revealed the identity of her unborn child’sfather, to which Judah responded by saying, “She is morerighteous 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 thanhe did. In another instance, Yahweh, while challenging the Judeansconcerning their loyalty to him in a covenant lawsuit setting, asks,“A son honors his father, and a slave his master. If I am afather, where is the honor due me? If I am a master, where is therespect due me?” (Mal. 1:6). It is Yahweh’s right asfather and master to receive honor and respect, while it is theirduty to give him both.

Godas the Source and Model of Justice

Tobe just, then, implies conformity to that which is right—yashar(the standard or norm). In Scripture, this standard is the revealeddivine will and character. Compliance to it is often expressed inbiblical narrative as doing what is “right [or good] in theLord’s sight” (Deut. 6:18; 12:28; 1Kings 14:8;22:43), while its antithesis is doing what is “evil in the eyesof the Lord” (Judg. 2:11; 1Kings 11:6; 14:22) or doingwhat 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 essentialcharacter as one who is both just and righteous, whose actions areflawless, perfect, upright, and just (Deut. 32:4; 1Sam. 12:7;2Sam. 22:31; Job 37:23; Ps. 89:14). God is the righteouslawgiver, hence the one who establishes the norm for right conduct(Deut. 4:4–8; Ps. 19:7–9). He requires justice of all hiscreatures (cf. Gen. 9:5–6; Exod. 21:12, 28–29). God alsojudges righteously (Gen. 18:25; 1Kings 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 humancommunity, however, he delegates to its leaders, such as civilmagistrates or political officials, and requires them to execute thisresponsibility with integrity, equity, and impartiality (Deut.1:16–17; 16:18–20; Ps. 82:2–4; Prov. 31:8–9;John 7:24; 1Pet. 2:13–14). God’s requirement ofjustice in the human community is not limited to its leaders only; itis incumbent upon everyone therein (Ps. 15:1–5; Mic. 6:8; Zech.7:9; 8:17; Matt. 23:23).

Executingjustice requires doing all that is essential to bring about thedivine order implicit in creation and explicit in revealed truth, toproduce harmony in all relationships in which humankind is involved(divine-human, human-human, and human-nature). This has the twofoldresult of restraining evil and advancing the benefits of just livingwithin the human society. Thus, the fruits of justice are to be seenin all spheres of human life, such as spirituality (2Cor.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), andeconomic justice (Amos 5:11; 8:4–6; James 5:1–6), as wellas 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 theirblessings with those in need (Deut. 15:1–15; Ps. 112:5–9;Prov. 28:27; Isa. 58:1–11; 2Cor. 8–9). Retributionrelates to the vindication and deliverance of the oppressed andjudgment on the wicked (1Sam. 2:7–10; Job 36:5–10;Ps. 72:4; Luke 4:17–20). This is both attested in biblicalIsrael’s experience (Isa. 1:17–20; 5:1–9; Jer.5:26–29; Mic. 2:1–3) and is being anticipated at thefinal judgment (Isa. 66:24; Dan. 12:1–3; Matt. 25:31–46;2Thess. 1:5–10). The vindicated obtain God’s loveand grace, while the judged receive his justice. Justice and love,therefore, are the two sides of God’s holiness.

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

God’sMercy

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

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

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

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

Noahand his family were saved from the judgment of the flood because ofGod’s special mercy toward them (Gen. 6:8). Immediately afterGod confused the languages of human beings because of their challengeto him (Gen. 11:1–9), God showed mercy on Abram, “awandering Aramean” (Deut. 26:5), and designated him to be thefather of his chosen people (Gen. 12:1–3). Jacob’selection originated solely from God’s mercy, as Paul pointedout by quoting Scripture: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated”(Rom. 9:13). The exodus is also the clearest evidence of God’sdemonstration of mercy toward his chosen people (Exod. 2:23–25).They were saved not by their own righteousness but rather by God’smercy on the covenant people, who suffered under the bondage ofPharaoh’s slavery. God’s mercy reached its climax when hesent his only Son, Jesus Christ, to save sinners (Rom. 5:8). It isbecause of God’s mercy that we are saved, not because of ourrighteousness (Titus 3:5).

Christ’sMercy

JesusChrist lived a life full of mercy. He is, in a sense, the bodilymanifestation of God’s mercy. Jesus expressed deep mercywhenever he saw the sick and the lost. The writers of the Gospelsdescribe Jesus’ demonstrations of mercy when he healed theblind, the lame, the deaf, the leprous, the demon-possessed, and thedead (Matt. 9:36; 14:14; 20:34; Mark 1:41; 5:19; 6:34; 8:2; Luke7:13; John 11:33). Jesus especially had compassion on the crowds, whodid not have a spiritual leader, and he compared them to “sheepwithout a shepherd” (Matt. 9:36).

Jesus’ministry of healing and evangelism was motivated by his deep mercyand compassion toward people in physical and spiritual need (Luke4:16–21; cf. Isa. 61:1–2). Whenever the sick appealed tohis mercy, Jesus never refused to dispense it to them (Matt. 15:22;17:14–18). For example, he healed the two blind men whoentreated his mercy (Matt. 20:30–34). When a leper, kneelingbefore him, entreated his mercy, Jesus touched him (risking his ownuncleanness according to the law) and healed him (Matt. 8:2–3).When a centurion asked for Jesus’ mercy on his sick servant, hewas willing to go and heal the sick man (Matt. 8:5–13). Jesus’mercy was aroused especially when he saw people crying for the dead,and even he shed tears (John 11:33–35). When Jesus saw a widowcrying for her dead son during a funeral procession, he comforted andhad compassion on her and made her son alive (Luke 7:12–15).

Accordingto Heb. 2:17–18, Jesus became “a merciful and faithfulhigh priest” to make atonement for the sins of his people. Heis also compared to the high priest who is able to sympathize withour weaknesses because he “has been tempted in every way, justas we are” (Heb. 4:15). His high priestly work on earth washighlighted in terms of his ministry of mercy toward his people. LikeGod’s mercy, Jesus’ mercy was shown in his actions ofsalvation (Luke 19:10; Eph. 5:2; 1Tim. 1:14–16; Titus3:4–7), of blessing (Mark 10:13–16), and of forgiveness(Mark 2:10; Luke 23:34). Paul’s personal experience led him toconfess, “He saved us, not because of righteous things we haddone, but because of his mercy” (Titus 3:5). Jesus’character of mercy was most vividly manifested on the cross when heprayed for the forgiveness of the crucifying soldiers and the cursingcrowds (Luke 23:33–37).

HumanResponse to God’s Mercy

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

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

Itis by God’s mercy that believers can persevere during the timeof suffering (2Cor. 4:1). Their prayer is the channel throughwhich they draw God’s mercy. Hence, the writer of Hebrewsexhorts believers to “approach God’s throne of grace withconfidence, so that we may receive mercy” (Heb. 4:16).

Rabbinic commentary on the Hebrew Bible, either the text or abiblical event. “Midrash” (pl. “midrashim”)is a noun derived from the verb darash, meaning “to seek”or “to inquire.” “Midrash” can refer to thecommentary on a single passage, such as a midrash on Gen. 1, or to awhole collection of midrashim, such as Genesis Rabbah. It may alsorefer to the process by which ancient rabbis interpreted Scripture.Rabbinic midrash seeks theological and halakic answers tocontemporary concerns; thus, it is concerned with the application ofScripture to various aspects of life.

RabbinicMidrash

Midrashuses Scripture to interpret Scripture and uses the Bible as a whole,unified book. Although context is not ignored altogether, mid-rashjuxtaposes verses from throughout the Hebrew Bible in order toilluminate a given text or illustrate a point. Verses are strungtogether to elucidate a theme that the text suggests eitherimplicitly or explicitly. Within this system of Scriptureinterpreting Scripture, the Pentateuch holds pride of place as thecenter of the biblical witness. In rabbinic midrash, often theProphets and the Writings do not have independent voices separatefrom the Pentateuch but serve a supporting role.

Attimes, the juxtaposition of verses that occur in midrash seemsarbitrary, but this is not the case. A set of midrashic rules,middot, governs how the verses of Scripture are to be used and howargumentation is to be formed. Over time, the rules became moreelaborate, but their earliest statement is attributed to the pre–AD70 rabbi Hillel in the Babylonian Talmud. He lists seven rules:

1.Argument from the less significant to more significant, and viceversa.

2.Argument by analogy when Scripture uses identical expressions.

3.A statement in one verse applies to all topically related verses.

4.Same as the principle in three, but derived from two verses, not justone.

5.Argument from general to particular, and vice versa.

6.Argument from a similar expression found in another passage.

7.Argument from context.

Therabbinic rules of scriptural interpretation are similar to rules forHellenistic rhetoric and Roman legal argument and thus reflectHellenistic and Roman influence.

Rabbinicmidrash can be characterized broadly as halakic (developing rules forSabbath observance, ritual purity, sacrifice, etc.) and haggadic(theological, ethical, and whatever does not fall under halakic).Some bodies of rabbinic midrash explore a book of the Bible more orless verse by verse, and others are topical. Some midrashic works arehomiletical in nature; they preserve sermon material from synagogueservices.

Midrashin the Bible

Althoughthe large compilations of mid-rash are rabbinic and are later thanthe Bible, midrashic material is also found much earlier. Midrash hasits origins in the Bible. The clearest example is Chronicles, whichin many respects is a midrash on Samuel and Kings. At Qumran, we findliterature that can be classified as rewritten Scripture, such as theTemple Scroll, the book of Jubilees, and the Genesis Apocryphon,which have midrashic features. The Qumran Pesharim are alsomidrashic, although of a less sophisticated nature than the laterrabbinic midrash, and seem to employ the middot.

TheNT contains examples of midrashic material. Jesus’ teaching inthe Gospels includes some midrashic material. In Luke 4:16–21,Jesus reads from the scroll of Isaiah and interprets the passage asapplying to himself. Jesus is delivering a petikhah, a shortexposition on a biblical text outside the main synagogue sermon. Whendebating with the Sadducees over the resurrection, Jesus givesmidrashic comment to Exod. 3:6 (Luke 20:27–40). The apostlePaul engages in midrash even more explicitly: for example, he appliesDeut. 25:4, concerning not muzzling an ox while it is threshinggrain, to the idea that a minister is worthy of being paid for work(1Cor. 9:9; 1Tim. 5:18). Paul is arguing from the lesserto the greater in his application of Torah to his contemporarysituation.

Themost extended midrash in the NT isthe book of Hebrews. Forexample, in Heb. 1–2 the writer applies numerous quotationsfrom the Psalter to Jesus in order to show how he is greater than theangels. In Heb. 4 the writer, through an interpretation of Ps. 95:11,does a midrash on entering into God’s rest, by which he appliesGod’s resting from his work (Gen. 2:2) to Christians’entering that rest because of the unbelief of Israel in thewilderness. It appears that the author is forming an argument byanalogy in relating Gen. 2:2 and Ps. 95:11.

Itcan be demonstrated that Jews employed midrashic techniques in theirinterpretation of Scriptures centuries before the earliest rabbinicmidrash compilations were created. We see these techniques in QumranPesharim, Philo’s writings, and in the NT. The rabbis made useof long-established interpretive techniques and made them moresophisticated. The difference between Qumranite, ancient Christian,and rabbinic interpretation of Scripture was one of emphasis. For theQumranites, all Scripture had to speak of their community, which wasthe true, believing community in the end of days. For the Christians,all Scripture had to speak of Jesus and the salvation that hebrought. For the rabbis, all Scripture upheld Torah and obedience tothat Torah as the center of Jewish life.

The word “mission” was coined by the Jesuits inthe sixteenth century to refer to the sending of the Godhead into theworld, reflecting a particular trinitarian formulation. The Jesuitsused the term “mission” to describe the Father, who sendsthe Son, who sends the Holy Spirit, who sends the church into theworld as an agent of redemption and reconciliation. Simply put, theJesuits conceived of missionas sending. That biblical term “send” (e.g., Gk.apostellō) described the fundamental nature of the church asbeing sent by God into the world with a specific purpose, animated bythe Holy Spirit to accomplish*ts task given by God, as a sign and instrument of God’skingdom. Initially, the Jesuits employed the term in the context ofboth the conversion of heathens (those who failed to recognize theGod of the Bible) and the reconversion of Protestants to RomanCatholicism.

Thebiblical notion of mission affirms that God is a sending God (Lat.,missio Dei), who loves the world so much that he sent his Son intothe world to redeem it (e.g., John 3:16), and whose Son then sendsthe Holy Spirit as the Counselor (Gk.paraklētos [e.g., John 16:5–7]) and guide so that thechurch can fulfill its purpose. Mission (sending), therefore,expresses both the heart of God and the nature of the church in theworld.

TheRole of Language and Culture

Functionally,mission is the sharing of the good news of Jesus Christ in word anddeed across cultural and linguistic boundaries, without granting anyparticular language or culture a superior position in the divineeconomy. The Bible tells the story of God’s mission in offeringhuman beings a covenantal relationship with himself. South Africanmission scholar David Bosch suggests that the missionary in the OT isGod himself, whereas the NT presents several significantmissionaries, with Jesus and his disciples being the mostillustrative examples. Indeed, it can be said that the NT is itself amission document, since it was written by people actively involved inmission (e.g., Paul, Luke). Biblically, the Christian mission impliesa certain perspective on language and culture whereby all languagesand cultures are relativized in the light of Christ, with no languageor culture having privileged access to God, for God communicatesthrough every particular language and culture. Thus, for instance,Koreans, Zulus, Cambodians, Quechuas, and Swedes have the same accessto God through their own language and culture, and none of them arerequired to adopt another language or culture, such as Hebrew, Greek,or English, in order to know and worship God.

Theimportance of the parity of languages and cultures worldwide asvehicles of the gospel is exemplified biblically in the account ofthe Jerusalem council, where the apostle Paul confronted JewishChristians who would have made Torah and circumcision the litmus testof authentic faith in Jesus Christ (Acts 15). Paul argued vigorouslyagainst those who sought to require new Christians to adopt Jewishceremonial practices of the OT in order to join the body of Christ.The relativization of language and culture is so crucial to Christianmission that Scripture records Paul rebuking Peter for seeking tomake Gentile Christians follow Jewish customs (Gal. 2:14). Requiringfollowers of Christ to adopt Jewish (or other) ceremonial traditions(e.g., circumcision) would render the grace of Christ useless, makinga mockery of the cross (Gal. 2:21), since Christ liberates humanbeings within their own language and culture. Simply put, people wereto become followers of Jesus Christ on the basis of their ownlanguage and culture (Greek or otherwise) rather than according toany other tradition. According to the biblical account, no languageor culture is too profane to communicate the good news of JesusChrist.

Missionas Sending

Biblically,sending implies a sender, the one sent, and a message. The sender isthe agent who initiates the deliverance of the message. The one senthas been given the authority to deliver in word and deed the messageof the sender. The message refers to the content in word and deedthat is shared by the agent (e.g., missionary) of the sender. Theauthority of the sender is invested in the messenger, so much so thatthe messenger (e.g., the missionary) represents the sender directly.More broadly, the biblical term “sending” appears in bothTestaments, and it occurs in mundane contexts that are not concernedwith God’s mission (missio Dei) as well as in texts that areexplicitly mission related. In the OT, the Hebrew term shalakh, whichoccurs in various forms over eight hundred times, refers to sendingthe intentions of an authority figure, often a king, judge, or otherperson of high status. An example would be God, as a demonstration ofhis authority, sending Adam out of the garden (Gen. 3:23). The act ofsending expresses the intention of the sender. The mission of God aspresented in the OT is communicated clearly in Gen. 12:1–3 (inwhat is known as the Abrahamic covenant), where God tells Abram toleave his country, guided by God, in order to be a blessing to theentire world. Following Israel’s continual disobedience, Godpromises to send them a savior (Isa. 19:20), a statement thatChristians interpret as foreshadowing the birth and ministry of JesusChrist.

Inthe NT, the Greek terms for “send,” and their variations,occur over two hundred times, appearing in texts such as “I amsending you out like sheep among wolves” (Matt. 10:16); “Asthe Father has sent me, I am sending you” (John 20:21); and“Jesus sent two of his disciples” (Mark 11:1). Peopleoften assume that there is one Great Commission text, Matt. 28:18–20,which summarizes the biblical warrant for mission. However, there areseveral “great commissions” in the Gospels, which mightbe better understood as “last commissions.” Each Gospelwriter records his own version of the last commission, reflecting histheological purposes within the particular contexts out of which hewrites his account. The last commissions appear in Matt. 28:16–20;Mark 16:14–20; Luke 24:44–47; John 20:19–23.

Themost responsible interpretive strategy with regard to these passagesis to read them within the larger context of each Gospel narrativerather than as individual texts (i.e., proof texts) disconnected fromtheir wider context. That is to say, a faithful theology of missionin part entails letting the text interpret itself through study ofthe entire Gospel account. Otherwise, one may fail to understand thebiblical notion of mission in its entirety. For instance, Luke 24:47announces that “repentance for the forgiveness of sins will bepreached in his [Christ’s] name to all nations, beginning atJerusalem,” which emphasizes the need for confession,forgiveness, and redemption (vertical aspects of mission). Yet onecould misinterpret Luke’s Gospel were one to understand missionsolely through the words of Luke 24:44–47, the vertical(spiritual) aspect, while overlooking Luke 4:16–30, verses thatannounce Jesus’ mission to liberate captives and give sight tothe blind, reflecting the horizontal (social) nature of mission. InLuke’s Gospel, mission is characterized as equally vertical(i.e., calling for repentance and forgiveness) and horizontal (i.e.,seeking sociopolitical justice). According to Luke’s Gospel,then, both vertical and horizontal aspects must be present inmission.

Missionand Missions

Itis worthwhile to note the difference between the terms “mission”(sg.) and “missions” (pl.). Whereas “mission”refers to the singular act of God, who sends his Son, who sends theHoly Spirit into the world, “missions” refers to thespecific agencies and organizations in history and currently thathave sought to carry out that mission of God. There is only onemission (missio Dei), with several missions aiming to accomplish thatsingular mission through time and space. Generally, missions aredivided into denominational and faith missions. Denominationalmissions, such as those of Roman Catholic, Baptist, Methodist,Lutheran, or Presbyterian churches, send out missionaries financiallysupported by the denomination. Faith missions, such as Wycliffe BibleTranslators, Operation Mobilization, or SIM (Serving in Mission,formally Sudan Interior Mission), require that missionaries serve inmission by faith, either by going where they are called by Godwithout having prior financial support or by raising financialsupport from friends and churches prior to leaving for their intendedregion of service.

Conclusion

Finally,there are two important lessons from the biblical account of mission.First, Paul and the other disciples, while seeking to communicate thegospel of good news to particular people, sought to maintain theunity of the churches in the face of their diverse cultural andlinguistic makeup (e.g., Eph. 4:4–7). This means that abiblical perspective on mission sees culture and language as channelsrather than obstacles to the communication of the gospel. Second,Paul and the disciples never started missions but rather establishedchurches. Since mission implies movement across cultural andlinguistic frontiers, the earlier followers of Christ were on themove, with the conviction that the Holy Spirit would guide, direct,and protect them until Christ returned.

The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.

Introduction

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

Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.

TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.

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

Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.

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

NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.

Jesus’Life

Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.

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

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

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

Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.

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

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

TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.

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

Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.

AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.

DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. 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 ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).

TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).

Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).

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

Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe 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 journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).

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

PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).

InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof 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 owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).

Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand 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 bymaking 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).

TheIdentity of Jesus Christ

Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).

Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.

Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).

ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).

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

Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.

Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).

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

TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.

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

Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).

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

Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).

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

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

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

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

Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).

ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).

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

Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).

Jesus’Purpose and Community

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

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

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

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

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

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

TheQuests for the Historical Jesus

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

Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.

In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.

Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.

Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.

In the early church, preaching often took place in amissionary context (e.g., Acts 10:34–43). An impressive varietyof words is used to describe preaching tounbelievers, including the following: “evangelize”(euangelizomai [Acts 8:4, 12, 25, 35, 40]), “announce”(anangello [Acts 20:20]), “proclaim” (kēryssō[Acts 8:5]), and “persuade” (peithō [Acts 19:8,26]). Preachingto believers also took place, in a worship context. This articlehighlights the latter context.

Influenceson Preaching

Fromits inception, a core component of Christian worship was the publicproclamation of a word from God. What form early Christian preachingtook in the worship assembly is unclear. However, three elements seemmost influential in its development: the practice of prophesying, thepractices of the synagogue, and the tradition of Greco-Romanrhetoric.

Prophesying.The practice of prophesying in the public assembly appears to be anearly form of preaching. Paul makes reference to prophets speaking inthe church in Corinth (1Cor. 11–14). Prophecy was thatform of communication in which a word of God, a revelation, wasshared and the church was edified (1Cor. 11:4–5; 14:1,3–5, 26, 29–31, 39). Others in the worship communitytested the prophetic message to verify its truthfulness (1Cor.14:29; cf. 1Thess. 5:19–22; 1John 4:1–3).

Acouple of indications lead to the conclusion that prophecy was moreclosely related to preachingthan to speaking in tongues. For one, worshipers could comprehend theformer but needed an interpreter for the latter. For another, thefunction of prophecy was exhortation (parakaleō [1Cor.14:4–5]). “Exhortation” (paraklēsis) is Paul’smost comprehensiveterm for public proclamation (e.g., 1Thess. 2:3–4). Thatis why Paul admonishes worshipers not to interrupt one another in theprocess of prophesying (1Cor. 14:29–31). The practice ofprophecy influenced the shape that early Christian preaching took.

Synagogue.Another element influencing early Christian preaching was thesynagogue. It seems quite likely that early Christian preachingflowed out of the practice found in Jewish synagogues. In thesynagogue, the pattern was the reading of Scripture followed bycommentary (Luke 4:14–30; Acts 13:15–41).

Thesetwo components—prophecy and the reading and exposition ofScripture in the synagogue—play the largest role in influencingthe shape of early Christian preaching. How they did so remainsuncertain. The early believers may have merged the two practices inChristian worship. Jewish Christians, who had attended the synagogue,took the practice of reading and interpreting Scripture and adoptedit into the context of worship in house churches, along with theJewish tradition of prophesying. Thus, the practice of prophesyingmerged with the practice of reading and expounding on Scripture tocreate a more systematic form of proclamation.

Theexposition of Scripture may also have assisted in judging thevalidity of a particular prophecy. However, the criteria forverifying the truth of a prophecy were broader than Scripture alone;it was also measured against one’s lifestyle (Matt. 7:15–20,21–23) and how the prophecy aligned with established doctrinesof the church (1Cor. 14:29, 37; 1John 4:1–3).

Greco-Romanrhetoric.A third component influencing early Christian preaching was theclassical rhetoric of the Greeks and the Romans. The teachings ofrhetoric saturatedthe culture and education of the day.However, the degree to which it penetrated first-century Christianculture remains uncertain. Paul’s letters display a familiaritywith Greco-Roman rhetoric, and from that, one can assume that itsinfluence affected the practice of preaching to some extent.

Sermonsand Their Content

TheNT contains no fully developed sermon in the context of a publicworship. Scholars do believe, however, that Paul’s sermon tothe elders in Ephesus is a good representation of his preachingbecause it contains a theology and vocabulary that echo his teachingin his letters to various churches (Acts 20:17–35). Paul’sletters also likely indicate what he preached to believers. Hisletters have an oral quality about them and were read in theassemblies (Col. 4:16; 1Thess. 5:27). Thus, Paul’sletters offer a flavor of early Christian preaching.

Anotherimportant issue related to early Christian preaching involves thecontent of what was preached and whether a sharp distinction shouldbe made between kerygma and didachē. C.H. Dodd hasdefinedearly Christian preaching as proclamation to nonbelievers. The termhe uses to describe it is kerygma. For him, preaching was anevangelistic message about the gospel of God proclaimed tonon-Christians. Teaching, didachē, remained distinct and was anethical admonition (paraklēsis) delivered to Christians.However, Paul’s letters contain no such distinction between thetwo. Paul links his preaching the gospel of God with his appeal(paraklēsis) to the church (cf. 1Thess. 2:2–3 with2Cor. 5:19–20). That is, Paul continues to announce thegood news to the churches along with exhortations to incarnate thatgood news in the lives of the recipients. Both kerygma and didachēembodied the content of early Christian preaching.

In the most basic sense, a priest is mediator between God andhumanity. Although there are hints in Gen. 1–2 that Adam andEve performed a priestly role in the garden, when the OT speaks ofthe priesthood, it most frequently refers to those involved in theservice of the tabernacle or temple under the Mosaic covenant. Butbefore the formal institution of the Mosaic covenant, God commandedMoses to tell the people of Israel, “If you obey me fully andkeep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasuredpossession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me akingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:5–6). Godintends all Israel to be a conduit of his presence to a lost andrebellious world. The rest of the Pentateuch indicates that Israelwas to do this in three ways: (1)practice the law of God as anexample of his holiness; (2)proclaim the mighty deeds of God asa testimony to his power; (3)preserve the word of God as ademonstration of his faithfulness. This, then, was the responsibilityof each Israelite individually and corporately as a people.

Asthe OT unfolds, Israel clearly fails to live up to this loftycalling. But the prophet Isaiah looks forward to a day when God’sredeemed people “will be called priests of the Lord, you willbe named ministers of our God” (Isa. 61:6). This will happen asa result of the Spirit-anointed figure who brings good news to thepoor and the year of God’s favor (Isa. 61:1–4). Jesusclaims that his life, ministry, and death are the fulfillment of thispromise (Luke 4:16–21), which suggests that now is the timethat God’s people can rightly be said to be “priests ofthe Lord.”

Thisconclusion is confirmed in 1Pet. 2:4–10. In the midst ofseveral quotations of and allusions to OT passages, Peter takes upthe language of Exod. 19:6 when he says to believers, “You area chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’sspecial possession, that you may declare the praises of him whocalled you out of darkness into his wonderful light” (v.9).What Israel failed to be because of its persistent rebellion againstGod, believers are. But believers are not a royal priesthood becausethey are somehow better than Israel; they are a royal priesthoodbecause they are united to Jesus Christ. Peter emphasizes this whenearlier in the passage he refers to believers as living stones “beingbuilt into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offeringspiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ”(v.5). Because Jesus is the great high priest who offered hisown blood for the sins of his people (Heb. 9:11–14), believersmust “continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—thefruit of lips that openly profess his name. And do not forget to dogood and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God ispleased” (Heb. 13:15–16).

Thereare at least three practical ramifications of the priesthood ofbelievers. First, each believer is to be a channel through whichGod’s presence and character are made known in this world.Second, everything that the believer does, even down to eating anddrinking, should be done to reflect the character and glory of God(1Cor. 10:31; Col. 3:17). Third, each believer has a role toplay in the advancement of God’s kingdom.

In the most basic sense, a priest is mediator between God andhumanity. Although there are hints in Gen. 1–2 that Adam andEve performed a priestly role in the garden, when the OT speaks ofthe priesthood, it most frequently refers to those involved in theservice of the tabernacle or temple under the Mosaic covenant. Butbefore the formal institution of the Mosaic covenant, God commandedMoses to tell the people of Israel, “If you obey me fully andkeep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasuredpossession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me akingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:5–6). Godintends all Israel to be a conduit of his presence to a lost andrebellious world. The rest of the Pentateuch indicates that Israelwas to do this in three ways: (1)practice the law of God as anexample of his holiness; (2)proclaim the mighty deeds of God asa testimony to his power; (3)preserve the word of God as ademonstration of his faithfulness. This, then, was the responsibilityof each Israelite individually and corporately as a people.

Asthe OT unfolds, Israel clearly fails to live up to this loftycalling. But the prophet Isaiah looks forward to a day when God’sredeemed people “will be called priests of the Lord, you willbe named ministers of our God” (Isa. 61:6). This will happen asa result of the Spirit-anointed figure who brings good news to thepoor and the year of God’s favor (Isa. 61:1–4). Jesusclaims that his life, ministry, and death are the fulfillment of thispromise (Luke 4:16–21), which suggests that now is the timethat God’s people can rightly be said to be “priests ofthe Lord.”

Thisconclusion is confirmed in 1Pet. 2:4–10. In the midst ofseveral quotations of and allusions to OT passages, Peter takes upthe language of Exod. 19:6 when he says to believers, “You area chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’sspecial possession, that you may declare the praises of him whocalled you out of darkness into his wonderful light” (v.9).What Israel failed to be because of its persistent rebellion againstGod, believers are. But believers are not a royal priesthood becausethey are somehow better than Israel; they are a royal priesthoodbecause they are united to Jesus Christ. Peter emphasizes this whenearlier in the passage he refers to believers as living stones “beingbuilt into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offeringspiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ”(v.5). Because Jesus is the great high priest who offered hisown blood for the sins of his people (Heb. 9:11–14), believersmust “continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—thefruit of lips that openly profess his name. And do not forget to dogood and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God ispleased” (Heb. 13:15–16).

Thereare at least three practical ramifications of the priesthood ofbelievers. First, each believer is to be a channel through whichGod’s presence and character are made known in this world.Second, everything that the believer does, even down to eating anddrinking, should be done to reflect the character and glory of God(1Cor. 10:31; Col. 3:17). Third, each believer has a role toplay in the advancement of God’s kingdom.

A technical term for “promise” does not appear inthe OT, but its concept is present throughout Scripture. God unfoldsthe history of redemption by employing the idea of promises. Thewriters of the NT repeatedly assert that Jesus Christ has fulfilledGod’s promises in the OT (e.g., Luke 24:44–48; 1Cor.15:3–8).

OldTestament

Thepromises in the OT are closely related to the history of salvation.At each stage of redemptive history, God delivered a new messageabout redemption, usually in the form of a covenant. Immediatelyafter the fall of humankind, God first revealed his plan ofsalvation: the promise that the seed of the woman would ultimatelycrush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). After the flood, God madea covenant with Noah, promising never again to destroy the earth witha flood (Gen. 8:21–9:17).

Mostremarkable is the promise that God made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob(Gen. 12:1–3; 13:14–17; 17:4–8; 22:17–18;26:1–5; 28:13–15). God called Abraham in order to givehim three specific blessings: the land, descendants, and the channelof blessing among the nations. As a sign of his promise, God made acovenant of circumcision with Abraham and his descendants (17:10–14).With Isaac (26:1–5) and Jacob (28:13–15), God repeatedlyreconfirmed the promise made to Abraham. At the time of the exodusand later the settlement in Canaan, God’s promise to Abrahamwas partially fulfilled by multiplying his descendants into millionsand by giving them the promised land.

AtMount Sinai, God made another covenant with the Israelites. In thiscovenant, God promised that they would be his “treasuredpossession” among the nations if they would obey him and keephis covenant (Exod. 19:5). God’s special blessings werepronounced for them to be “a kingdom of priests and a holynation” (19:6). For this purpose, God gave them the TenCommandments, which became the religious and ethical standard for hiscovenant people (20:1–17). In the book of Deuteronomy,moreover, God’s promises were made in the form of blessings tothe obedient and of curses to the disobedient (Deut. 28). Later thesebecame the criteria by which the kings of Israel were judged todetermine whether they had lived an obedient life.

Accordingto 2 Sam. 7:11–16, God made an eternal covenant with David,promising the permanence of David’s house, kingdom, and throne.In this covenant it was also promised that his offspring would buildthe house of the Lord. The Davidic covenant was partially fulfilledat the time of Solomon, who as king built the house of the Lord, thefirst temple in Jerusalem (1Kings 8:15–25). Later, in theperiod of the classical prophets, when the hope for the Davidicthrone was endangered, the permanence of the Davidic throne andkingdom reappeared in the form of messianic prophecy (Jer. 23:5–8;Ezek. 37:24–28). This promise was ultimately fulfilled by thecoming of Jesus Christ from the line of David (Matt. 1:1–17).

Thehistory of Israel shows that although the nation repeatedly brokeGod’s covenants, he remained faithful to them. According toNum. 23:19, God’s promises are absolutely trustworthy: “Godis not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he shouldchange his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise andnot fulfill?” The trustworthiness of God’s promisesresults from his unchanging character (Ps. 110:4; Mal. 3:6–7).The almighty God has the power to fulfill his promises (Isa. 55:11).When Joshua finished conquering the land of Canaan, he confessed thatGod was faithful in keeping all his promises to his ancestors (Josh.21:45; 23:14–15). Joshua himself witnessed that trusting God’spromises is a life-and-death issue. Those who had not trusted hispromise to give them the land of Canaan perished in the wilderness,but those who had trusted his promise were allowed to enter it (Num.14:1–35).

NewTestament

Thecentral message of the NT is that God’s promises in the OT arefulfilled with the coming of Jesus Christ. Matthew’s numerouscitation formulas are evidence of this theme. In Luke 4:16–21Jesus pronounces the fulfillment of Isaiah’s promise (about theMessiah’s ministry [Isa. 61:1–3]) in his own life. Thebook of Acts specifically states that Jesus’ suffering andresurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit are the fulfillment ofthe OT promises (2:29–31; 13:32–34). Jesus’identity both as the descendant of David (Acts 13:23) and as theprophet like Moses (Acts 3:21–26; cf. Deut. 18:15–18) isalso regarded as the fulfillment of theOT.

Paul’sview of God’s promises is summarized in this statement: “Forno matter how many promises God has made, they are ‘Yes’in Christ” (2Cor. 1:20). According to Rom. 1:2–3,Paul regards the gospel as the message that God “promisedbeforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding hisSon.” In Rom. 4 Abraham’s faith is described in terms ofhis trust in God’s promises, which leads to his righteousness.He is presented as our model of faith in God’s promises. Thefamous phrase “according to the Scriptures” in 1Cor.15:3–4 is, in a sense, understood by Paul as the fulfillment ofGod’s promises regarding Christ’s death and resurrection.

Inthe book of Hebrews, the concept of promise plays an important role.In Heb. 6 Abraham is presented as the exemplary man who trusted inGod’s promise. The author exhorts the Hebrew Christians tofollow Abraham’s model of trust in God’s promise(6:12–20). The author also asserts that Jesus’ newcovenant is superior to the old one because his ministry “isestablished on better promises” (8:6). In Heb. 11 the faith ofthe great OT saints is acclaimed in terms of their faith in God’spromises.

Inthe NT, God makes new promises based on the work of Christ, includingthe final resurrection and the second coming of Christ (John 5:29;11:25–26; 1Cor. 15:48–57; 2Cor. 4:14;1Thess. 4:13–18). Furthermore, the message of the gospelis presented as multiple promises, including eternal life, thefullness of life in Christ, the forgiveness of sins, the indwellingof the Holy Spirit, the peace of God, the knowledge of God, and thejoy of God (Matt. 28:18–20; John 3:16; 10:10; 14:16, 27;16:20–24; 17:25–26; Phil. 4:4–9; 1John 1:9).

HumanPromises

TheScriptures contain many cases of people making promises to otherpeople. For example, Abraham made promises to the king of Sodom andto Abimelek (Gen. 14:22–24; 21:22–24). The Israelitespies made a promise to Rahab (Josh. 2:12–21). People also makepromises to God: Jacob, Jephthah, Hannah, and the returning exiles(Gen. 28:20–21; Judg. 11:29–40; 1Sam. 1:11–20;Neh. 10:28–29). Human promises usually are accompanied by thetaking of an oath (Gen. 14:22; 21:24; Deut. 6:13; Josh. 2:12–14)or the declaration of a curse in case of its breach (Ruth 1:17;1Sam. 14:24; 2Sam. 3:35; 1Kings 2:23). It isimperative to keep the promise that one makes to a human being or toGod (Num. 30:1–2; Ps. 50:14). In Mal. 2:14–16, divorce isregarded as a breaking of the oath between husband and wife. In OTtimes, people were afraid of curses falling upon them when they brokea promise. The Bible warns of the danger of making false promises, asdoing so will bring about sin and judgment (Lev. 19:12; Deut. 23:21;Zech. 8:17). It is an axiom of the wisdom literature that one shouldnot make promises rashly or lightly (Prov. 20:25; Eccles. 5:1–7),and Jesus prohibits the taking of any oath because of the possibilityof its breach (Matt. 5:33–37).

ThePhenomenon of Prophecy

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

Prophetssuch as Isaiah were privy to what transpires in heaven, wheredecisions were being made that control the course of human history.Micaiah describes how he has seen God in the company of the heavenlyhost deliberating on how to entice Ahab to his death (1Kings22:13–23). All the other “prophets” in Ahab’scourt were false, since they did not have knowledge of the eventsbeyond human ken, as only true prophets can. Only one who hasencountered God in this way can speak as an agent of the heavenlycourt.

Forevery true prophet in Israel, there were many false prophets. Mosesset guidelines for distinguishing them. True prophets prophesy inaccordance with revealed religion. If a prophet contradicts the law,for example, and calls Israel to worship another god, this is not atrue prophet (Deut. 18:20). Also, if a prophet predicts somethingthat does not come to pass, that is also a false prophet (Deut.18:21–22). These criteria are not mechanical and automatic,however. Sometimes a prophet may appear to contradict priorrevelation (Jer. 26:11), and sometimes the predicted judgment isstaved off by national repentance (Jon. 4). Also, sometimes God maytest the people with a false prophet who makes a true prediction(Deut. 13:1–3).

Trueprophets occasionally exhibited bizarre behavior. Saul, whilepursuing David, was suddenly possessed by the Spirit of God and laynaked day and night, prophesying. This caused the people to ask ifSaul was now one of the prophets (1Sam. 19:24). Even in theancient world, prophets were considered a bit crazy (2Kings9:11; Jer. 23:9; 29:26; Hos. 9:7). The phenomenon he experienced isreferred to as “ecstasy.” The practice of tongues in theNT church also seems to have been ecstatic behavior. Paul notes thatobservers would call practitioners “out of your mind”(1Cor. 14:23). At Pentecost, some observers thought that theapostles were drunk. Peter replied that they were not drunk butrather had the Spirit upon them (Acts 2:15–21).

Theword “prophet” refers to one who foretells the future. Ofcourse, many people cannot accept the notion of real prophecy andthus regard all prophecy as an illusion. Either the text was writtenafter the fact, or it was couched in such general terms that it is nomiracle that it came true, or else it was a lucky guess. The textit*elf, however, wants to be read as real prophecy, and Christiansbefore the modern age read it as such. After all, to reject thesupernatural elements in the Bible ultimately leads to rejecting theresurrection of Christ.

However,the modern Christian should not focus on the predictive part of theprophets’ message to such an extent that the “forthtelling”element is neglected. Forthtelling is the prophets’ chiefministry—calling the people to mercy and justice, to obedienceto the law and fidelity to God. Christians who believe the Bibleshould take seriously the predictions about the future, but even moreso the challenges about the present.

TheBooks of Prophecy in the Old Testament

TheOT of Catholic and Protestant Bibles is roughly organized around theGreek translation of the OT, the Septuagint. Thus, Daniel isconsidered a prophetic book, and the prophets are separated from thehistorical books by the poetical books. However, the Hebrew Bible hasa different organization. It has only eight “books” ofprophecy, divided into the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets.The Former Prophets are Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings.Traditionally, Samuel wrote Judges. The books of 1Samuel and2Samuel form one scroll, as do 1Kings and 2Kings.The book of Samuel bears the name of the prophet, and Kings issubstantially about Elijah and Elisha. The four Former Prophetswitness to the outworking of the covenant sanctions, from theIsraelites’ entry into the promised land to their expulsionfrom it.

Usually,when Christians speak of the prophets, they are referring to theLatter Prophets, plus Daniel. In Catholic and Protestant Bibles thereare four Major Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; andtwelve Minor Prophets: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. Manyother prophets ministered in Israel but have no scroll that bearstheir name. Thus, the ones listed above can be called the “writingprophets.”

Isaiah.The book of Isaiah preserves the sermons from the prophet whoministered during the time when Hezekiah was king of Judah, thesouthern kingdom. Isaiah saw Jerusalem surrounded by the Assyrianarmy and assured the king that God would deliver his people. Thatmessage of salvation is the overall theme of the book, a salvationuniversal in scope and focused on the figure of the SufferingServant. Isaiah claims that this servant of God would be wounded and“cut off from the land of the living” (Isa. 53:8) andthrough this would bring healing and salvation to his people. Hewould see this and make many righteous (Isa. 53).

TheNT refers to Isaiah more often than any other prophet, always todemonstrate that the truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ wererevealed in advance by the prophet. For example, Paul cites Isa. 1:9in his argument as to why the Jews had rejected the gospel (Rom.9:29). When Jesus withdrew to the area of Zebulun and Naphtali,Matthew says that this act fulfilled Isa. 9:1–2 (Matt.4:15–16). Jesus himself cites Isa. 53:12, “[he] wasnumbered with the transgressors,” and claims that it waswritten about him (Luke 22:37). He does the same with Isa. 61:1–2(Luke 4:18–21).

Jeremiah.The book of Jeremiah puts in writing the words of the prophetJeremiah, who ministered at the very end of the kingdom of Judah andlived through the destruction of Jerusalem, with its temple and thepeople of God being taken away to forced exile and captivity. He seesthe weakness and powerlessness of the covenant that God had made withhis people to stir up love and fidelity in their hearts to him.According to Jeremiah, what the people chiefly need is a new covenantaltogether, one that is not external and written on tablets of stone,but internal, written on their hearts. They need a change ofpersonality to become a different sort of people altogether. This iswhat Jeremiah predicts will happen in the coming age after their timeof captivity is over (Jer. 31:31–40). The NT identifies thisnew covenant with the gospel of Jesus (Heb. 8:8–12), secured byhis blood (Heb. 10:16–17). This is the new covenant that Jesusannounces to his disciples when he eats the Last Supper with them(Luke 22:20).

Ezekiel.The book of Ezekiel picks up where Jeremiah leaves off and continuesfrom the destruction of Jerusalem into the early years of theBabylonian captivity. Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel sees the failure of theold covenant. He likens Israel to a married woman who violates hermarriage covenant at every turn (Ezek. 16). The prophet also foreseesa future character transformation of God’s people. “Iwill give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will removefrom you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And Iwill put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and becareful to keep my laws” (Ezek. 36:26–27). This isgraphically illustrated in Ezek. 37, where the prophet is told toprophesy to a valley of dry bones, and through the preaching of theword of God the company of the dead come to life and become a vastarmy—not of skeletons, but of vitally alive warriors. This is avision of what will happen when God makes an everlasting covenantwith them and will dwell with them forever (Ezek. 37:26–27).Paul cites this in 2Cor. 6:16 and argues, “We are thetemple of the living God.” The last part of Ezekiel describes agreat, larger-than-life temple that Paul interprets to be the church.Thus, Ezekiel anticipates the preaching of the gospel, bringingspiritual life to a vast company of believers, among whom God himselfwill dwell.

Daniel.The book of Daniel is not a prophetic book by genre, but much of itis devoted to predicting the future, so in Catholic and ProtestantBibles it is placed between Ezekiel and the Minor Prophets. Prophecycalls the people to repentance and threatens judgment on them due totheir sin. Daniel does the opposite: it calls them to persevere assaints, while the evil nations oppress them, until the end of time,when they will be vindicated. Daniel comforts the faithful who aresuffering due to the sins of the nations.

TheTwelve.The twelve Minor Prophets follow a roughly chronological sequence(with some notable exceptions). Hosea, Amos, and Micah date from therise of Assyria as the great power that threatened Israel and Judah.Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah date from near the end of Assyriandominance and the rise of Babylon. The Babylonian exile is skipped,and the last three—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—werewritten after the Jews’ restoration to the land of Judah. Joel,Obadiah, and Jonah are difficult to date with certainty.

Readas one book, the Minor Prophets tell a story of God’s constancyand fidelity even though everything else in the world changes. Theybegin with all twelve tribes intact and enjoying prosperity in theland. In Judah, there is a king on the throne of David. But by theend, most of the tribes are lost, the monarchy is no more, Jerusalemand the temple have been destroyed, and the Jews are under the heelof foreign powers. After all of that, God says to them, almost as themoral of the whole history of the OT, “I the Lord do notchange. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed. Eversince the time of your ancestors you have turned away from my decreesand have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you”(Mal. 3:6–7). Deeply explored in the Minor Prophets is the dayof the Lord, the climax and denouement of history, in which all thewords of the prophets will finally be fulfilled (see Joel andZephaniah). The reader is given, as a picture of this day, a view ofthe repentance of one generation of Ninevites at the preaching ofJonah and of the final judgment to fall on that city as described byNahum.

TheNT cites the Minor Prophets much more often than any book of prophecyexcept Isaiah. Peter draws upon Joel 2:28–32 to explain thepouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17–21).James cites Amos 9:11–12 to demonstrate that salvation wasalways intended for the Gentiles as well as the Jews (Acts 15:16–17).Paul quotes Hab. 2:4 to argue that righteousness before God comesthrough faith (Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11). Jesus says that like Jonah, hewill return to the land of the living after three days (Matt.12:38–41).

Prophecyin the New Testament

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

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

Thus,all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they neverparticipate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. Thegreatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus.John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure,but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection canproclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministryof any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).

ThePhenomenon of Prophecy

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

Prophetssuch as Isaiah were privy to what transpires in heaven, wheredecisions were being made that control the course of human history.Micaiah describes how he has seen God in the company of the heavenlyhost deliberating on how to entice Ahab to his death (1Kings22:13–23). All the other “prophets” in Ahab’scourt were false, since they did not have knowledge of the eventsbeyond human ken, as only true prophets can. Only one who hasencountered God in this way can speak as an agent of the heavenlycourt.

Forevery true prophet in Israel, there were many false prophets. Mosesset guidelines for distinguishing them. True prophets prophesy inaccordance with revealed religion. If a prophet contradicts the law,for example, and calls Israel to worship another god, this is not atrue prophet (Deut. 18:20). Also, if a prophet predicts somethingthat does not come to pass, that is also a false prophet (Deut.18:21–22). These criteria are not mechanical and automatic,however. Sometimes a prophet may appear to contradict priorrevelation (Jer. 26:11), and sometimes the predicted judgment isstaved off by national repentance (Jon. 4). Also, sometimes God maytest the people with a false prophet who makes a true prediction(Deut. 13:1–3).

Trueprophets occasionally exhibited bizarre behavior. Saul, whilepursuing David, was suddenly possessed by the Spirit of God and laynaked day and night, prophesying. This caused the people to ask ifSaul was now one of the prophets (1Sam. 19:24). Even in theancient world, prophets were considered a bit crazy (2Kings9:11; Jer. 23:9; 29:26; Hos. 9:7). The phenomenon he experienced isreferred to as “ecstasy.” The practice of tongues in theNT church also seems to have been ecstatic behavior. Paul notes thatobservers would call practitioners “out of your mind”(1Cor. 14:23). At Pentecost, some observers thought that theapostles were drunk. Peter replied that they were not drunk butrather had the Spirit upon them (Acts 2:15–21).

Theword “prophet” refers to one who foretells the future. Ofcourse, many people cannot accept the notion of real prophecy andthus regard all prophecy as an illusion. Either the text was writtenafter the fact, or it was couched in such general terms that it is nomiracle that it came true, or else it was a lucky guess. The textit*elf, however, wants to be read as real prophecy, and Christiansbefore the modern age read it as such. After all, to reject thesupernatural elements in the Bible ultimately leads to rejecting theresurrection of Christ.

However,the modern Christian should not focus on the predictive part of theprophets’ message to such an extent that the “forthtelling”element is neglected. Forthtelling is the prophets’ chiefministry—calling the people to mercy and justice, to obedienceto the law and fidelity to God. Christians who believe the Bibleshould take seriously the predictions about the future, but even moreso the challenges about the present.

TheBooks of Prophecy in the Old Testament

TheOT of Catholic and Protestant Bibles is roughly organized around theGreek translation of the OT, the Septuagint. Thus, Daniel isconsidered a prophetic book, and the prophets are separated from thehistorical books by the poetical books. However, the Hebrew Bible hasa different organization. It has only eight “books” ofprophecy, divided into the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets.The Former Prophets are Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings.Traditionally, Samuel wrote Judges. The books of 1Samuel and2Samuel form one scroll, as do 1Kings and 2Kings.The book of Samuel bears the name of the prophet, and Kings issubstantially about Elijah and Elisha. The four Former Prophetswitness to the outworking of the covenant sanctions, from theIsraelites’ entry into the promised land to their expulsionfrom it.

Usually,when Christians speak of the prophets, they are referring to theLatter Prophets, plus Daniel. In Catholic and Protestant Bibles thereare four Major Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; andtwelve Minor Prophets: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. Manyother prophets ministered in Israel but have no scroll that bearstheir name. Thus, the ones listed above can be called the “writingprophets.”

Isaiah.The book of Isaiah preserves the sermons from the prophet whoministered during the time when Hezekiah was king of Judah, thesouthern kingdom. Isaiah saw Jerusalem surrounded by the Assyrianarmy and assured the king that God would deliver his people. Thatmessage of salvation is the overall theme of the book, a salvationuniversal in scope and focused on the figure of the SufferingServant. Isaiah claims that this servant of God would be wounded and“cut off from the land of the living” (Isa. 53:8) andthrough this would bring healing and salvation to his people. Hewould see this and make many righteous (Isa. 53).

TheNT refers to Isaiah more often than any other prophet, always todemonstrate that the truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ wererevealed in advance by the prophet. For example, Paul cites Isa. 1:9in his argument as to why the Jews had rejected the gospel (Rom.9:29). When Jesus withdrew to the area of Zebulun and Naphtali,Matthew says that this act fulfilled Isa. 9:1–2 (Matt.4:15–16). Jesus himself cites Isa. 53:12, “[he] wasnumbered with the transgressors,” and claims that it waswritten about him (Luke 22:37). He does the same with Isa. 61:1–2(Luke 4:18–21).

Jeremiah.The book of Jeremiah puts in writing the words of the prophetJeremiah, who ministered at the very end of the kingdom of Judah andlived through the destruction of Jerusalem, with its temple and thepeople of God being taken away to forced exile and captivity. He seesthe weakness and powerlessness of the covenant that God had made withhis people to stir up love and fidelity in their hearts to him.According to Jeremiah, what the people chiefly need is a new covenantaltogether, one that is not external and written on tablets of stone,but internal, written on their hearts. They need a change ofpersonality to become a different sort of people altogether. This iswhat Jeremiah predicts will happen in the coming age after their timeof captivity is over (Jer. 31:31–40). The NT identifies thisnew covenant with the gospel of Jesus (Heb. 8:8–12), secured byhis blood (Heb. 10:16–17). This is the new covenant that Jesusannounces to his disciples when he eats the Last Supper with them(Luke 22:20).

Ezekiel.The book of Ezekiel picks up where Jeremiah leaves off and continuesfrom the destruction of Jerusalem into the early years of theBabylonian captivity. Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel sees the failure of theold covenant. He likens Israel to a married woman who violates hermarriage covenant at every turn (Ezek. 16). The prophet also foreseesa future character transformation of God’s people. “Iwill give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will removefrom you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And Iwill put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and becareful to keep my laws” (Ezek. 36:26–27). This isgraphically illustrated in Ezek. 37, where the prophet is told toprophesy to a valley of dry bones, and through the preaching of theword of God the company of the dead come to life and become a vastarmy—not of skeletons, but of vitally alive warriors. This is avision of what will happen when God makes an everlasting covenantwith them and will dwell with them forever (Ezek. 37:26–27).Paul cites this in 2Cor. 6:16 and argues, “We are thetemple of the living God.” The last part of Ezekiel describes agreat, larger-than-life temple that Paul interprets to be the church.Thus, Ezekiel anticipates the preaching of the gospel, bringingspiritual life to a vast company of believers, among whom God himselfwill dwell.

Daniel.The book of Daniel is not a prophetic book by genre, but much of itis devoted to predicting the future, so in Catholic and ProtestantBibles it is placed between Ezekiel and the Minor Prophets. Prophecycalls the people to repentance and threatens judgment on them due totheir sin. Daniel does the opposite: it calls them to persevere assaints, while the evil nations oppress them, until the end of time,when they will be vindicated. Daniel comforts the faithful who aresuffering due to the sins of the nations.

TheTwelve.The twelve Minor Prophets follow a roughly chronological sequence(with some notable exceptions). Hosea, Amos, and Micah date from therise of Assyria as the great power that threatened Israel and Judah.Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah date from near the end of Assyriandominance and the rise of Babylon. The Babylonian exile is skipped,and the last three—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—werewritten after the Jews’ restoration to the land of Judah. Joel,Obadiah, and Jonah are difficult to date with certainty.

Readas one book, the Minor Prophets tell a story of God’s constancyand fidelity even though everything else in the world changes. Theybegin with all twelve tribes intact and enjoying prosperity in theland. In Judah, there is a king on the throne of David. But by theend, most of the tribes are lost, the monarchy is no more, Jerusalemand the temple have been destroyed, and the Jews are under the heelof foreign powers. After all of that, God says to them, almost as themoral of the whole history of the OT, “I the Lord do notchange. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed. Eversince the time of your ancestors you have turned away from my decreesand have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you”(Mal. 3:6–7). Deeply explored in the Minor Prophets is the dayof the Lord, the climax and denouement of history, in which all thewords of the prophets will finally be fulfilled (see Joel andZephaniah). The reader is given, as a picture of this day, a view ofthe repentance of one generation of Ninevites at the preaching ofJonah and of the final judgment to fall on that city as described byNahum.

TheNT cites the Minor Prophets much more often than any book of prophecyexcept Isaiah. Peter draws upon Joel 2:28–32 to explain thepouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17–21).James cites Amos 9:11–12 to demonstrate that salvation wasalways intended for the Gentiles as well as the Jews (Acts 15:16–17).Paul quotes Hab. 2:4 to argue that righteousness before God comesthrough faith (Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11). Jesus says that like Jonah, hewill return to the land of the living after three days (Matt.12:38–41).

Prophecyin the New Testament

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

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

Thus,all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they neverparticipate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. Thegreatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus.John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure,but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection canproclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministryof any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).

The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More thana simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the graceof the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classicaltexts use the Greek word apolytrōsis(“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given torelease a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. Thegroup of words based on the Greek term lytron(“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. Thecorresponding Hebrew word padahis a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.

OldTestament

Theexperience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religioussignificance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included thededication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13).Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), wasredeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up todescribe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continuedto broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance fromall Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included thewhole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or thenew age to come).

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

Theawaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’sultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’scontinued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant,God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon.Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was ifGod would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. Thislonging for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As thepersecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamentalperiod (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT andthe NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianichope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people fromGreek and Roman oppression.

NewTestament

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

Withoutreflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made anissue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlightJesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12;cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need oftheredeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of theredemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from onesphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another.Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted ofmonetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1Pet.3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of thosehe redeemed (antilytron hyper [1Tim. 2:6]). God still did notpay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.

TheOT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in thepresent, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills theNT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’stheological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from theslavery of sin (1Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matterof ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already butnot yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption isevidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).

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

The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More thana simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the graceof the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classicaltexts use the Greek word apolytrōsis(“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given torelease a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. Thegroup of words based on the Greek term lytron(“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. Thecorresponding Hebrew word padahis a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.

OldTestament

Theexperience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religioussignificance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included thededication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13).Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), wasredeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up todescribe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continuedto broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance fromall Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included thewhole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or thenew age to come).

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

Theawaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’sultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’scontinued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant,God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon.Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was ifGod would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. Thislonging for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As thepersecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamentalperiod (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT andthe NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianichope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people fromGreek and Roman oppression.

NewTestament

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

Withoutreflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made anissue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlightJesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12;cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need oftheredeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of theredemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from onesphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another.Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted ofmonetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1Pet.3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of thosehe redeemed (antilytron hyper [1Tim. 2:6]). God still did notpay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.

TheOT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in thepresent, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills theNT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’stheological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from theslavery of sin (1Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matterof ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already butnot yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption isevidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).

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

The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More thana simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the graceof the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classicaltexts use the Greek word apolytrōsis(“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given torelease a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. Thegroup of words based on the Greek term lytron(“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. Thecorresponding Hebrew word padahis a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.

OldTestament

Theexperience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religioussignificance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included thededication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13).Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), wasredeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up todescribe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continuedto broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance fromall Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included thewhole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or thenew age to come).

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

Theawaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’sultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’scontinued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant,God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon.Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was ifGod would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. Thislonging for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As thepersecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamentalperiod (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT andthe NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianichope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people fromGreek and Roman oppression.

NewTestament

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

Withoutreflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made anissue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlightJesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12;cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need oftheredeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of theredemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from onesphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another.Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted ofmonetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1Pet.3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of thosehe redeemed (antilytron hyper [1Tim. 2:6]). God still did notpay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.

TheOT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in thepresent, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills theNT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’stheological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from theslavery of sin (1Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matterof ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already butnot yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption isevidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).

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

The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More thana simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the graceof the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classicaltexts use the Greek word apolytrōsis(“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given torelease a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. Thegroup of words based on the Greek term lytron(“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. Thecorresponding Hebrew word padahis a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.

OldTestament

Theexperience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religioussignificance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included thededication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13).Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), wasredeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up todescribe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continuedto broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance fromall Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included thewhole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or thenew age to come).

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

Theawaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’sultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’scontinued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant,God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon.Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was ifGod would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. Thislonging for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As thepersecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamentalperiod (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT andthe NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianichope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people fromGreek and Roman oppression.

NewTestament

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

Withoutreflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made anissue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlightJesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12;cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need oftheredeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of theredemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from onesphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another.Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted ofmonetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1Pet.3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of thosehe redeemed (antilytron hyper [1Tim. 2:6]). God still did notpay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.

TheOT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in thepresent, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills theNT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’stheological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from theslavery of sin (1Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matterof ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already butnot yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption isevidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).

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

Architecture is the technology and the art of design andconstruction. The technology of architecture includes anunderstanding of mathematical and engineering principles; the art ofarchitecture focuses attention on interest and beauty in design. Thecreative imagination of the architect is constantly considering howto artfully manage form and function in the design and constructionprocess.

Architectureand the Bible

Theterm “architecture” does not occur in most Englishtranslations of the Bible. There is, however, evidence of andreference to the architectural activity of God’s people. Inaddition, Israel and the church were contextualized in significantarchitectural periods (Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, and Roman), so themajor empires of the biblical period often influenced the design andconstruction of cities, temples, and structures referenced in thebiblical text. Architecture offers biblical studies a way to betterunderstand the historical intentions of the Bible. By means ofarchitectural investigation, the history and the heritage of pastcivilizations are illuminated. As a result, our reading of thebiblical text is enhanced.

Whenwe investigate the biblical text with attention to the technology andart of architecture, two perspectives emerge. First, architecturedraws our attention to the background of the biblical text. Incertain biblical texts we learn about the design and the constructionthat took place in Egypt, Assyria, and Palestine during majorbiblical events. For example, the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsoccurred during times of expansion and development in the Eighteenthto Twentieth Dynasties of Egypt (i.e., New Kingdom, sixteenth toeleventh centuries BC). For these periods, we gain knowledge aboutcapital relocations along with temple and pyramid constructions. Welearn that during the conquest, Israel took over existing Canaanitecities in keeping with the Mosaic policies. The architecture ofPalestine enables us to better understand the form and function ofthese infrastructures.

Second,architecture draws our attention to the theological implications ofthe form and function of structures designed by God. In keeping withthe scope of architecture, we are forced to understand that what Goddesigned for altars, the ark, the tabernacle, and the temples of thepast and the future included more than just the functionalrequirements of a nation’s religious system. The interpreter ofthe biblical text must consider how the design of these structureselicits response and communicates meaning. These structures are alsowindows on the social, political, and economic aspects of theIsraelite nation.

OldTestament

Citiesand fortifications.The biblical rec­ord makes reference to architectural structures,materials, and furnishings. Cities are referenced frequentlythroughout the OT canon. The city is obviously the context forarchitectural expression. The cities of the Bible are not describedin extensive detail. We learn that Cain was a city builder who namedhis work after his son Enoch. The architectural feature of citiesmentioned most often is the city gates (Gen. 19:1; 23:10, 18; Deut.17:5; Josh. 2:5; 7:5; 20:4; Judg. 5:8). This was an important placefor city life and activity (Gen. 23:1; Prov. 31:31). There was alsosinister activity at city gates. Abner, for example, was killed inthe city gate (2 Sam. 3:22–30). In addition, executionsfor covenant violations were carried out at the city gate (Deut.17:5). There was more than one city gate, as we learn from thepostexilic construction activity of Ezra and Nehemiah.

Withinthe city there was a strong tower. The people of Babel usedthoroughly baked bricks instead of stone and tar for mortar in orderto build the city and the tower that was designed to reach to theheavens (Gen. 11:3–4). A city tower functioned as a place ofrefuge for the people within the city limits (Judg. 9:49–51).

Citieswere protected by a wall system (Lev. 25:29) that also provided spacefor housing (Josh. 2:15). The conquest of Jericho recounts thefamiliar defeat of that city by the very unconventional destructionof its walls (Josh. 6:20). A city square is another feature of thecity architecture (Judg. 19:15–17) that served the public needsof the community.

Thebiblical descriptions of Jerusalem offer a measure of insight intoits architecture. During the rebuilding process in the postexilicperiod, Nehemiah comments on both the construction and the buildingmaterials (Neh. 2:8; 13:31; cf. Ezra 6:4) and the spacious nature ofthe city (Neh. 7:4). From another perspective, the psalmist comments,“Jerusalem is built like a city that is closely compactedtogether” (Ps. 122:3).

Beyondthese textual details we learn through the writings of the prophetsthat cities are the subject of God’s wrath for covenantviolation (Jer. 6:6; Hos. 11:6; Mic. 5:11). Despite this, the nationof Israel is not left without the hope of restoration. The prophetsalso anticipated the return of the people along with the restorationof the city infrastructure (Amos 9:14; Mal. 1:4).

Thetemple and sacred structures.Theother architectural features referenced by the writers of Scriptureinclude altars, the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, and the temple.The tent and the tabernacle were also outfitted with unique furnitureitems described in detail and expertly crafted. The constructionprojects of Solomon are detailed in 1 Kings 5–7. Solomon,like David, pursued his architectural ambitions. The book of Ezekielgives extensive architectural detail for the construction of a futuretemple in which God will reign and rule (Ezek. 40–48).

Thetemple and royal residences were made of stone with cedar roofing.The chamber buildings that surrounded the temple were three storieshigh. The interior walls and ceilings were lined with cedar to coverall the stone (1 Kings 6:1–10). In all the constructiondetails for the temple, the text does not elaborate on architecturalstyle. Perhaps the builders were influenced to some degree by thestyles of the major periods.

Whatare the theological implications related to the form and function ofthe sacred structures in the biblical material? The first is that Godis the ultimate designer of Israel’s architecture. God’ssignature work certainly is not the tabernacle or the Solomonictemple, but rather the created realm. The beauty and the complexitiesof the created world continue to draw attention to God’s beautyand intelligence. As the psalmist declares, the creation, which Goddesigned, is a constant source of praise (Ps. 19).

God’sskill and artistic beauty as a master architect are reflected also inthe revelation of his plans for the sacred structures of Israel tothe nation’s artisans. The skill that the artisans manifestedin the construction process was also a gift from God (Exod. 35:35;2 Chron. 2:14).

Thestructures designed by God for construction were primarily for him.This is understandable because the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsincluded long desert pilgrimages and the related tent dwelling.References to homes and houses in the book of Leviticus are not aboutdesign and construction but about function. The domestic home must befree of mildew (Lev. 14:34–41) and thus clean according to thestandards of the law. The construction of Davidic and Solomonic homesis given attention in Scripture (2 Sam. 5:11; 7:1; 1 Kings7:1–12).

Thetabernacle and the temple were divine residences (Exod. 30:6; 40:34;2 Sam. 7:5; 1 Kings 8:11). For this reason, the design andfunction of each structure reflected the glorious worth of God andreminded the nation of its own uncleanness. Beyond the structures oftemple and tabernacle, the city of Jerusalem was privileged to be theresting place of the “Name” (i.e., presence) of the Lord(2 Chron. 6:5–6) and to have David as the chosen ruler(2 Chron. 6:34).

Thehistory of Israel reveals that the sustainability of these sacredstructures was influenced by physical and spiritual factors. Godoccupied the structures or met with Israel at these sacred places aslong as Israel conformed to the terms of the Mosaic covenant (1 Sam.4:21; 1 Kings 9:6–9). During the monarchy, kings whodeparted from Torah would strip the temple to pay tribute to foreignoverlords (2 Kings 24:13) or would modify the function of thestructure to accommodate the worship of foreign gods (see 2 Kings23). Although there were periodic times of rebuilding the sacredstructures, sustainability was short lived. The ideology of thesacred structures anticipates a future time when their originalfunction will be replaced with the opportunity to live in God’spresence forever.

NewTestament

TheNT refers only rarely to architects or architecture. Hebrews 11:10speaks of God as the “architect [technitēs] and builder”of the heavenly Jerusalem. Paul refers to the church as the temple ofGod. Jesus Christ is the foundation, and Christian leaders arebuilding upon that foundation with either gold, silver, and costlystones or wood, hay, and straw (1 Cor. 3:10–17; cf. 6:19;2 Cor. 6:16).

Interms of physical buildings, the church of the NT was a house church.During the time of Christ the significant architectural structureswere the temple and synagogues. Herod the Great was the major builderof the time, whose impressive temple dominated the landscape of theJerusalem area. Although the synagogue was a central structure duringthe life of Christ and the early church, function is emphasized overform in the biblical material. The synagogue was a place for prayer,Scripture study, and the administration of justice (Luke 4:16–30;Acts 13:15; 14:1).

Thefocus of the NT is also on the church’s function instead of itsarchitectural form. The church, however, prospered and grew in thecontext of a significant Hellenistic architectural period (300 BC toAD 300). In this period the Seleucids were responsible forestablishing large Greek cities across western and central Asia. Theprimary construction material continued to be the mud-brick, whichresulted in rapidly decaying buildings. Although cities continued tobe laid out in a grid format, a more dynamic, hilly format was beingintroduced. The homes in these cities often were built withcourtyards like ones in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The temples of theHellenistic period were designed with landscaping and terracing,along with porticoed enclosures and stairways.

Thebook of Revelation closes the canon with extensive detail about thenew city of Jerusalem, which God will design and build (Rev. 21) andwhich will function to serve his sovereign purposes as creator andredeemer.

Architecture is the technology and the art of design andconstruction. The technology of architecture includes anunderstanding of mathematical and engineering principles; the art ofarchitecture focuses attention on interest and beauty in design. Thecreative imagination of the architect is constantly considering howto artfully manage form and function in the design and constructionprocess.

Architectureand the Bible

Theterm “architecture” does not occur in most Englishtranslations of the Bible. There is, however, evidence of andreference to the architectural activity of God’s people. Inaddition, Israel and the church were contextualized in significantarchitectural periods (Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, and Roman), so themajor empires of the biblical period often influenced the design andconstruction of cities, temples, and structures referenced in thebiblical text. Architecture offers biblical studies a way to betterunderstand the historical intentions of the Bible. By means ofarchitectural investigation, the history and the heritage of pastcivilizations are illuminated. As a result, our reading of thebiblical text is enhanced.

Whenwe investigate the biblical text with attention to the technology andart of architecture, two perspectives emerge. First, architecturedraws our attention to the background of the biblical text. Incertain biblical texts we learn about the design and the constructionthat took place in Egypt, Assyria, and Palestine during majorbiblical events. For example, the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsoccurred during times of expansion and development in the Eighteenthto Twentieth Dynasties of Egypt (i.e., New Kingdom, sixteenth toeleventh centuries BC). For these periods, we gain knowledge aboutcapital relocations along with temple and pyramid constructions. Welearn that during the conquest, Israel took over existing Canaanitecities in keeping with the Mosaic policies. The architecture ofPalestine enables us to better understand the form and function ofthese infrastructures.

Second,architecture draws our attention to the theological implications ofthe form and function of structures designed by God. In keeping withthe scope of architecture, we are forced to understand that what Goddesigned for altars, the ark, the tabernacle, and the temples of thepast and the future included more than just the functionalrequirements of a nation’s religious system. The interpreter ofthe biblical text must consider how the design of these structureselicits response and communicates meaning. These structures are alsowindows on the social, political, and economic aspects of theIsraelite nation.

OldTestament

Citiesand fortifications.The biblical rec­ord makes reference to architectural structures,materials, and furnishings. Cities are referenced frequentlythroughout the OT canon. The city is obviously the context forarchitectural expression. The cities of the Bible are not describedin extensive detail. We learn that Cain was a city builder who namedhis work after his son Enoch. The architectural feature of citiesmentioned most often is the city gates (Gen. 19:1; 23:10, 18; Deut.17:5; Josh. 2:5; 7:5; 20:4; Judg. 5:8). This was an important placefor city life and activity (Gen. 23:1; Prov. 31:31). There was alsosinister activity at city gates. Abner, for example, was killed inthe city gate (2 Sam. 3:22–30). In addition, executionsfor covenant violations were carried out at the city gate (Deut.17:5). There was more than one city gate, as we learn from thepostexilic construction activity of Ezra and Nehemiah.

Withinthe city there was a strong tower. The people of Babel usedthoroughly baked bricks instead of stone and tar for mortar in orderto build the city and the tower that was designed to reach to theheavens (Gen. 11:3–4). A city tower functioned as a place ofrefuge for the people within the city limits (Judg. 9:49–51).

Citieswere protected by a wall system (Lev. 25:29) that also provided spacefor housing (Josh. 2:15). The conquest of Jericho recounts thefamiliar defeat of that city by the very unconventional destructionof its walls (Josh. 6:20). A city square is another feature of thecity architecture (Judg. 19:15–17) that served the public needsof the community.

Thebiblical descriptions of Jerusalem offer a measure of insight intoits architecture. During the rebuilding process in the postexilicperiod, Nehemiah comments on both the construction and the buildingmaterials (Neh. 2:8; 13:31; cf. Ezra 6:4) and the spacious nature ofthe city (Neh. 7:4). From another perspective, the psalmist comments,“Jerusalem is built like a city that is closely compactedtogether” (Ps. 122:3).

Beyondthese textual details we learn through the writings of the prophetsthat cities are the subject of God’s wrath for covenantviolation (Jer. 6:6; Hos. 11:6; Mic. 5:11). Despite this, the nationof Israel is not left without the hope of restoration. The prophetsalso anticipated the return of the people along with the restorationof the city infrastructure (Amos 9:14; Mal. 1:4).

Thetemple and sacred structures.Theother architectural features referenced by the writers of Scriptureinclude altars, the tabernacle, the tent of meeting, and the temple.The tent and the tabernacle were also outfitted with unique furnitureitems described in detail and expertly crafted. The constructionprojects of Solomon are detailed in 1 Kings 5–7. Solomon,like David, pursued his architectural ambitions. The book of Ezekielgives extensive architectural detail for the construction of a futuretemple in which God will reign and rule (Ezek. 40–48).

Thetemple and royal residences were made of stone with cedar roofing.The chamber buildings that surrounded the temple were three storieshigh. The interior walls and ceilings were lined with cedar to coverall the stone (1 Kings 6:1–10). In all the constructiondetails for the temple, the text does not elaborate on architecturalstyle. Perhaps the builders were influenced to some degree by thestyles of the major periods.

Whatare the theological implications related to the form and function ofthe sacred structures in the biblical material? The first is that Godis the ultimate designer of Israel’s architecture. God’ssignature work certainly is not the tabernacle or the Solomonictemple, but rather the created realm. The beauty and the complexitiesof the created world continue to draw attention to God’s beautyand intelligence. As the psalmist declares, the creation, which Goddesigned, is a constant source of praise (Ps. 19).

God’sskill and artistic beauty as a master architect are reflected also inthe revelation of his plans for the sacred structures of Israel tothe nation’s artisans. The skill that the artisans manifestedin the construction process was also a gift from God (Exod. 35:35;2 Chron. 2:14).

Thestructures designed by God for construction were primarily for him.This is understandable because the patriarchal and Mosaic periodsincluded long desert pilgrimages and the related tent dwelling.References to homes and houses in the book of Leviticus are not aboutdesign and construction but about function. The domestic home must befree of mildew (Lev. 14:34–41) and thus clean according to thestandards of the law. The construction of Davidic and Solomonic homesis given attention in Scripture (2 Sam. 5:11; 7:1; 1 Kings7:1–12).

Thetabernacle and the temple were divine residences (Exod. 30:6; 40:34;2 Sam. 7:5; 1 Kings 8:11). For this reason, the design andfunction of each structure reflected the glorious worth of God andreminded the nation of its own uncleanness. Beyond the structures oftemple and tabernacle, the city of Jerusalem was privileged to be theresting place of the “Name” (i.e., presence) of the Lord(2 Chron. 6:5–6) and to have David as the chosen ruler(2 Chron. 6:34).

Thehistory of Israel reveals that the sustainability of these sacredstructures was influenced by physical and spiritual factors. Godoccupied the structures or met with Israel at these sacred places aslong as Israel conformed to the terms of the Mosaic covenant (1 Sam.4:21; 1 Kings 9:6–9). During the monarchy, kings whodeparted from Torah would strip the temple to pay tribute to foreignoverlords (2 Kings 24:13) or would modify the function of thestructure to accommodate the worship of foreign gods (see 2 Kings23). Although there were periodic times of rebuilding the sacredstructures, sustainability was short lived. The ideology of thesacred structures anticipates a future time when their originalfunction will be replaced with the opportunity to live in God’spresence forever.

NewTestament

TheNT refers only rarely to architects or architecture. Hebrews 11:10speaks of God as the “architect [technitēs] and builder”of the heavenly Jerusalem. Paul refers to the church as the temple ofGod. Jesus Christ is the foundation, and Christian leaders arebuilding upon that foundation with either gold, silver, and costlystones or wood, hay, and straw (1 Cor. 3:10–17; cf. 6:19;2 Cor. 6:16).

Interms of physical buildings, the church of the NT was a house church.During the time of Christ the significant architectural structureswere the temple and synagogues. Herod the Great was the major builderof the time, whose impressive temple dominated the landscape of theJerusalem area. Although the synagogue was a central structure duringthe life of Christ and the early church, function is emphasized overform in the biblical material. The synagogue was a place for prayer,Scripture study, and the administration of justice (Luke 4:16–30;Acts 13:15; 14:1).

Thefocus of the NT is also on the church’s function instead of itsarchitectural form. The church, however, prospered and grew in thecontext of a significant Hellenistic architectural period (300 BC toAD 300). In this period the Seleucids were responsible forestablishing large Greek cities across western and central Asia. Theprimary construction material continued to be the mud-brick, whichresulted in rapidly decaying buildings. Although cities continued tobe laid out in a grid format, a more dynamic, hilly format was beingintroduced. The homes in these cities often were built withcourtyards like ones in Mesopotamia and Egypt. The temples of theHellenistic period were designed with landscaping and terracing,along with porticoed enclosures and stairways.

Thebook of Revelation closes the canon with extensive detail about thenew city of Jerusalem, which God will design and build (Rev. 21) andwhich will function to serve his sovereign purposes as creator andredeemer.

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

Origins

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

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

Somebelieve that synagogues were developed during the Babyloniancaptivity as the response of the exile community to the destructionof their temple and sacrificial system. Despite these enormouslosses, the Jews still had the Torah, and from that point forwardworship and prayer based on the reading and studying of theScriptures, which could be done locally, began to gain ascendancy.Critics of this idea, however, point out that while it makes sense,there is no direct evidence to support it.

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

Morerecently, it has been suggested that synagogues were the gradualsuccessors to functions that had previously taken place at citygates. First-century synagogues served a wide range of functions forthe community. Throughout Israel’s prior history, however,these same activities—assembly, legal, social, educational, andreligious—had taken place at the city gate (Deut. 12:15; 2Sam.15:2; 2Kings 23:8; Neh. 8:1–8). The Gamla synagogue sitsagainst the east city wall next to a probable gate, and its locationcould be evidence of the slow development of the synagogue as citygates changed from multipurpose facilities to portals of ingress andegress.

First-CenturySynagogues

First-centurysynagogues served as integrated centers supporting Jewish life.Regular communal reading and exposition of Scripture, includingteaching and discussion of the law and transmission of its complexassociated traditions (Luke 4:16; Acts 13:14–15), occurredthere. Although formal liturgical rites evolved after the destructionof the temple in AD 70, synagogues were places of prayer in the firstcentury (Matt. 6:5). Synagogues also served as courtrooms and placeswhere crimes were punished (Acts 22:19), as well as locations forcommon meals and festivals (see Acts 6:2).

Synagogueswere administered by local community leaders, including a presidentand a board (Acts 13:15). Synagogue leaders named in the NT includeJairus (Mark 5:22; Luke 8:41), Crispus (Acts 18:8), and Sosthenes(Acts 18:17). The role of the leader was to preside over services, torule as the judge in court cases, to represent the community, andoften to act as a patron. The board served in an advisory role andassisted with teaching. A scribe maintained community records andtaught.

Congregationsincluded Pharisees, who advocated strict adherence to the law,although they were chided by Jesus for their false piety (Luke11:42–44). Women participated in the synagogue along with themen, and in some cases they were financial donors (cf. Luke 8:3).God-fearing Gentiles were welcomed (Acts 17:17). In Jerusalem,synagogues included both Hebrews and Jews from the Diaspora (Acts6:1, 9).

Asynagogue could be a designated room in a house or a discretebuilding. Most of the better archaeological evidence is later thanthe first century and reveals more clearly religious intentionalityin design than may have been characteristic earlier. This evidenceincludes the door facing Jerusalem, artistic temple motifs, a nichefor the Torah scrolls, and perimeter bench seating around an opencentral hall.

TheSynagogue in the Bible

Sincesynagogues were institutions with a documented history no earlierthan the third century BC, they are not mentioned in the OT. TheGreek word from which the English one is derived does appearfrequently in the LXX, but always with a general reference to agathering, assembly, or meeting.

Rabbinichistory (but not Scripture) makes reference to the “GreatSynagogue,” meaning a group of men who transmitted traditionsfrom the prophets to the earliest named rabbinic teachers. It isloosely based on Neh. 8–10, which describes the prayers andactions of the Jewish leaders who had returned from exile.

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

Thelast (and, from a twenty-first-century perspective, mostcontroversial) use of the word “synagogue” in Scriptureis the difficult phrase “synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9;3:9), which must be read in its context. This was written in responseto the significant persecution in Asia Minor of the churches atSmyrna and Philadelphia by Jews who were in collusion with the Romanauthorities. They were falsely accusing Jewish and Gentile Christianbelievers, creating unspeakable suffering for them. This phrase,intended to encourage Christian perseverance, implies that thechurches in view represented true Israel, while their accusers werefalse Jews. Similar language was used by the covenant-keepingcommunity in Qumran when, in the DSS, it referred to apostate Jews asa “congregation of Belial” and an “assembly ofhypocrites” (1QHa 10:22; 15:34).

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., 2Kings 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., 2Kings 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; 2Kings 23:21–23; 2Chron. 30; 35:1–19).

Early Christians associated Jesus’ death with that of the Passover lamb (1Cor. 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. 1Kings 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 (2Chron. 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 1Macc. 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 (1Sam. 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” (Esther9:22).

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. (1Macc. 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.

The Bible has much to say about suffering. While in the OTsuffering is regularly an indication of divine displeasure (Lev.26:16–36; Deut. 28:20–68; Ps. 44:10–12; Isa. 1:25;cf. Heb. 10:26–31), in the NT it becomes the means by whichblessing comes to humanity.

TheBible often shows that sinfulness results in suffering (Gen. 2:17;6:5–7; Exod. 32:33; 2Sam. 12:13–18; Rom. 1:18;1Cor. 11:27–30). Job’s friends mistakenly assumethat he has suffered because of disobedience (Job 4:7–9; 8:3–4,20; 11:6). Job passionately defends himself (12:4; 23:10), and in thefinal chapter of the book God commends Job and condemns his friendsfor their accusations (42:7–8; cf. 1:1, 22; 2:10). The writermakes clear that suffering is not necessarily evidence of sinfulness.Like Job’s friends, Jesus’ disciples assume thatblindness is an indication of sinfulness (John 9:1–2). Jesusrejects this simplistic notion of retributive suffering (John 9:3,6–7; cf. Luke 13:1–5).

Theprayers of suffering people are expressed in the sixteen communal andthirty-seven individual laments in the book of Psalms. Within thelaments the writers describe their problems, express feelings, makerequests, ask questions (“How long, Lord?” [13:1]; “Whyhave you forsaken me?” [22:1]), and lodge complaints againstGod (“My eyes fail, looking for my God [69:3]), enemies (“Youhave made us an object of derision to our neighbors, and our enemiesmock us” [80:6]), and even themselves (“I am a worm andnot a man” [22:6]).

TheNT writers reveal that Jesus’ suffering was prophesied in theOT (Mark 9:12; 14:21; Luke 18:31–32; 24:46; Acts 3:18; 17:3;26:22–23; 1Pet. 1:11; referring to OT texts such as Ps.22; Isa. 52:13–53:12; Zech. 13:7). The Lord Jesus is presentedas the answer to human suffering: (1)Through the incarnation,God’s Son personally experienced human suffering (Phil. 2:6–8;Heb. 2:9; 5:8). (2)Through his suffering, Christ paid the pricefor sin (Rom. 4:25; 3:25–26), so that believers are set freefrom sin (Rom. 6:6, 18, 22) and helped in temptation (Heb. 2:18).(3)Christ Jesus intercedes for his suffering followers (Rom.8:34–35). (4)Christ is the example in suffering (1Pet.2:21; 4:1; cf. Phil. 3:10; 2Cor. 1:5; 4:10; 1Pet. 4:13),and though he died once for sins (Heb. 10:12), he continues to sufferas his church suffers (Acts 9:4–5). (5)Christ provideshope of resurrection (Rom. 6:5; 1Cor. 15:20–26; Phil.3:10–11) and a future life without suffering or death (Rev.21:4).

Thereare many NT examples of suffering believers (John 15:20–21;Acts 4:3; 5:18; 7:57–60; 8:1–3; 12:1–5; 14:19;16:22–24; 18:17; 2Cor. 6:4–5, 8–10; Heb.10:32; 1Pet. 5:9; Rev. 2:10). Suffering is part of God’splan for his people (Acts 9:16; 1Thess. 3:2–4) and ispart of what it means to be a follower of Christ Jesus (Acts 14:22;Rom. 8:17; Phil. 1:29; 1Pet. 2:21; 4:12).

TheNT writers repeatedly mention the benefits of suffering, for it hasbecome part of God’s work of redemption. The suffering ofbelievers accompanies the proclamation and advancement of the gospel(Acts 5:41–42; 9:15–16; 2Cor. 4:10–11;6:2–10; Phil. 1:12, 27–29; 1Thess. 2:14–16;2Tim. 1:8; 4:5) and results in salvation (Matt. 10:22; 2Cor.1:6; 1Thess. 2:16; 2Tim. 2:10; Heb. 10:39), faith (Heb.10:32–34, 38–39; 1Pet. 1:7), the kingdom of God(Acts 14:22), resurrection from the dead (Phil. 3:10–11), andthe crown of life (Rev. 2:10). It is an essential part of thedevelopment toward Christian maturity (Rom. 5:3–4; 2Cor.4:11; Heb. 12:4; James 1:3–4; 1Pet. 1:7; 4:1).

Sufferingis associated with knowing Christ (Phil. 3:10); daily inward renewal(2Cor. 4:16); purity, understanding, patience, kindness,sincere love, truthful speech, the power of God (2Cor. 4:4–10);comfort and endurance (2Cor. 1:6); obedience (Heb. 5:8);blessing (1Pet. 3:14; 4:14); glory (Rom. 8:17; 2Cor.4:17); and joy (Matt. 5:12; Acts 5:41; 2Cor. 6:10; 12:10; James1:2; 1Pet. 1:6; 4:13). Other positive results of Christiansuffering include perseverance (Rom. 5:3; James 1:3), character andhope (Rom. 5:4), strength (2Cor. 12:10), and maturity andcompleteness (James 1:4). Present suffering is light and momentarywhen compared to future glory (Matt. 5:10–12; Acts 14:22; Rom.8:18; 2Cor. 4:17; Heb. 10:34–36; 1Pet. 1:5–7;4:12–13).

Throughoutthe Bible, believers are instructed to help those who suffer. The OTlaw provides principles for assisting the poor, the disadvantaged,and the oppressed (Exod. 20:10; 21:2; 23:11; Lev. 19:13, 34; 25:10,35; Deut. 14:28–29; 15:1–2; 24:19–21). Jesusregularly taught his followers to help the poor (Matt. 5:42; 6:3;19:21; 25:34–36; Luke 4:18; 12:33; 14:13, 21). It is believers’responsibility to show mercy (Matt. 5:7; 9:13), be generous (Rom.12:8; 2Cor. 8:7; 1Tim. 6:18), mourn with mourners (Rom.12:15), carry other’s burdens (Gal. 6:1–2), and visitprisoners (Matt. 25:36, 43). See also Servant of the Lord.

A holy God wants a holy people. He had described the nationof Israel as holy (cf. Exod. 19:5–6) but also wanted them tolive holy lives and grow increasingly holy. Holiness came, in part,by keeping the law; an important part of the law was the concept ofcleanness.

OldTestament

SinceIsrael could become holy only by being clean, it is no surprise thatthe law’s first mention of prohibited food is accompanied by acommand to be God’s holy people (Exod. 22:31). Nor is itunexpected that when God explains the laws about clean and uncleanfood, he tells the Israelites twice to “be holy, because I amholy” (Lev. 11:44–47).

Cleanness(Heb. tahor) does not refer to good hygiene, nor is it synonymouswith morality, since a person could be unclean and still righteous.Cleanness allowed the OT believer to live a holy life and enabledthat person to be made increasingly holy by “Yahweh, yoursanctifier” (NIV: “the Lord, who makes you holy,”Lev. 20:8; cf. 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; 31:13). Before consideringhow ritual purity led to holiness, we should summarize the puritylaws themselves.

Puritylaws.Impurity traveled along four channels: sexuality (e.g., nocturnalemission, menstruation, childbirth), diet (e.g., eating certain typesof animals), disease (e.g., skin diseases, mildew), and death (i.e.,contact with animal or human corpses). Impurities occurring naturallyand unavoidably in the course of life (e.g., menstruation) weretolerated, representing no danger to the person or community as longas they were promptly addressed. Other impurities had to be avoidedat all costs or else grave consequences would result to the personand community.

Toleratedimpurities.We can further divide tolerated impurities into minor and major.Minor impurities resulted from touching an animal carcass or touchingsomeone with a major impurity. Minor impurities did not make onecontagious and could be addressed simply. Major impurities resultedfrom touching a human corpse, having a skin disease, or experiencinga nocturnal emission or menstruation. With these, one became“contagious,” purification took longer, and a sacrificewas required.

Inorder to become clean, the contaminant must be removed, with removaloccurring in different ways. Tolerated impurities were removed bywashing (bathing, laundering clothes, and sprinkling with water).What could not be washed away must be physically taken away, whetherthrough burial, burning, or removal from the camp (e.g., scapegoat;Lev. 16:20–22).

Cleansingtook time; generally the more serious the impurity, the longer thetime, from one day for those who touch a dead animal, up to eightydays following the birth of a female child. Some tolerated impuritiesrequired sacrifices, with the animal’s blood being sprinkledagainst the side of the altar and poured out at its base (Lev. 5).

Ritualactions might accompany the sacrifices. For example, a person who hadbeen healed of a contagious skin disease was to bring two live, cleanbirds to the priest. One bird was to be killed and its blood mixedwith water, which was then sprinkled on the person. The other birdwas dipped into the blood/water mixture and released, symbolizing theremoval of the uncleanness. In the ritual of the red heifer (Num.19), a combination of water and ashes was used to purify those whohad touched a corpse.

Impuritiesto be avoided.Unlike the tolerated impurities that could not be avoided, certainobjects and actions were completely off-limits to the holy people ofGod. Intentional violation brought more serious consequences, evenbeing “cut off” from the community. Although it isunclear exactly what it meant to be cut off—perhapsexcommunication, capital punishment, vulnerability to an untimelydeath, loss of progeny, or separation from one’s ancestorsafter death—the threat was ominous.

Oneprohibited impurity arose from eating food declared off-limits byGod. All meat had to be thoroughly bled before being eaten (Gen.9:3–4; Lev. 17:10–14; Deut. 12:16, 23). Edible landanimals must both have a completely divided hoof and chew the cud(Lev. 11:3; Deut. 14:6), while water creatures had to have both finsand scales (Lev. 11:9; Deut. 14:9). Most birds were acceptable forfood (exceptions are given in Lev. 11:13–19; Deut. 14:11–18),as were most insects (Lev. 11:20–23; Deut. 14:19–20) andsome crawling animals (Lev. 11:29–31, 41–42).

Otherprohibited impurities included what might be more readily identifiedas sinful acts. Sexual immorality (Lev. 18:6–25), idolatry(20:2–5), consulting mediums (20:6), and murder (Num. 35:33–34)defiled people and land. If such offenses were not “cleansed,”God would judge, whether by natural disaster (Isa. 24:1–13) orexile (Isa. 64:6–7; Mic. 2:10).

Reasonsfor the laws.Why did God declare certain things clean and others unclean? Somesuggest that the distinction is arbitrary; the rules are given as atest of obedience. Others argue that the original audience knew ofreasons now lost to us. Still others believe that God was protectinghis people from disease. It is true that certain kinds of meatimproperly prepared can transmit disease, but not all laws can beexplained this way. Some believe that God identified things as cleanbecause they represented a state of normalcy (e.g., fish normallypropel themselves with fins, so those lacking fins are abnormal andthus unclean). A related view considers things as clean or uncleanbased on what they symbolized. So, for example, God identifiedobjects as unclean if they were associated with death (e.g.,vultures, corpses) because he is for life. Here again, it isdifficult to explain all the laws by appeal to normalcy or symbolism.

Cleannessand holiness.While we may not know for certain why God chose these particularlaws, we can see how they helped his people become holy.

First,these laws made possible access to the sanctuary, where holinesscould be expressed and developed. The law of Moses contains repeatedand stern reminders that those who are unclean may not “go tothe sanctuary” (Lev. 10:10; 12:4; 15:31; Num. 19:13, 20). Onlythe clean could approach a holy God and participate in the ritualsthat demonstrated and developed their holiness.

Second,these rituals also fostered holiness by teaching the Israelites aboutimpurity. Israel’s neighbors associated impurity with demons,but God indicated that it would be an Israelite’s uncleanness,not demonic activity, that kept that person from living a holy life.

Third,these purity laws taught the Israelites about the holy God, whom theywere to imitate. If even innocent and otherwise good experiencesprevented their association with him, God must be very holy indeed.These laws also reinforced God’s authority over every aspect oftheir lives. He determined when they could come to the sanctuary, butalso what they could eat and when they could have sexual intercourse.These laws also reminded Israel that it was this same God who hadprovided a way to be clean and thereby holy. Cleansing was costly andhumbling, but it was possible, coming as a gracious gift from God.

Fourth,a very practical consequence of these laws was to keep the Israelitesseparate from their neighbors. Not only were the Israelites to avoidpagan practices (e.g., rituals associated with mourning the dead;Lev. 19:27), but also they were to limit social contact with theirpagan neighbors. Laws governing what could be eaten and how thoseanimals must be slaughtered would help see to that. God was concernedthat his people not be corrupted by their neighbors (cf. Deut. 7:1–6;14:1–3).

NewTestament

Ceremonialcleansing appears in the opening chapters of the Gospels. Maryunderwent the required purification rituals after Jesus’ birth(Luke 2:22–24), and Jesus “cleansed” people fromleprosy, instructing them to carry out the Mosaic purificationrituals (Matt. 8:2–4; Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–14;17:11–19; cf. Matt. 10:8; 11:5; Luke 4:27; 7:22).

Inone of his confrontations with the Pharisees, Jesus signaled adeparture from how these laws had been practiced. He announced,“Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them.Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them”(Mark 7:15), to which Mark adds an explanation: “In sayingthis, Jesus declared all foods ‘clean’ ”(7:19). Peter’s rooftop vision in Acts 10 reflects this sameperspective, as do the church’s decision regarding Gentileconversion (Acts 15) and Paul’s comments to the church at Rome(Rom. 14:14, 20–21).

TheNT identifies the church as God’s holy people, called to beholy as he is holy (1 Pet. 1:16). Holiness still requiredpurity, now manifested more ethically than physically. That is, onebecame unclean through sinful actions such as lying (1 Thess.2:3) and licentiousness (Eph. 4:19) rather than by, for example,contact with a corpse. In the OT, all Israel was declared holy butwas to live out that holiness in daily life. Purity came throughritual actions such as sacrifice and washing, with the assistance ofa priest. So it is in the NT, though the sacrifice is now theonce-for-all offering of Christ on the cross (Heb. 9:13–14;1 John 1:7) as applied in the waters of baptism (Eph. 5:26;1 Pet. 3:21) and assisted by Jesus the great high priest and bythe priesthood of believers (2 Cor. 7:1; Heb. 4:14; James 4:8;1 Pet. 1:22). Thus purified, believers can go on to live holylives and become increasingly holy. Although the Testaments differ onthe causes and solutions for uncleanness, they agree that a holypeople has always been God’s goal, and that cleanness is ameans to that end.

A holy God wants a holy people. He had described the nationof Israel as holy (cf. Exod. 19:5–6) but also wanted them tolive holy lives and grow increasingly holy. Holiness came, in part,by keeping the law; an important part of the law was the concept ofcleanness.

OldTestament

SinceIsrael could become holy only by being clean, it is no surprise thatthe law’s first mention of prohibited food is accompanied by acommand to be God’s holy people (Exod. 22:31). Nor is itunexpected that when God explains the laws about clean and uncleanfood, he tells the Israelites twice to “be holy, because I amholy” (Lev. 11:44–47).

Cleanness(Heb. tahor) does not refer to good hygiene, nor is it synonymouswith morality, since a person could be unclean and still righteous.Cleanness allowed the OT believer to live a holy life and enabledthat person to be made increasingly holy by “Yahweh, yoursanctifier” (NIV: “the Lord, who makes you holy,”Lev. 20:8; cf. 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; 31:13). Before consideringhow ritual purity led to holiness, we should summarize the puritylaws themselves.

Puritylaws.Impurity traveled along four channels: sexuality (e.g., nocturnalemission, menstruation, childbirth), diet (e.g., eating certain typesof animals), disease (e.g., skin diseases, mildew), and death (i.e.,contact with animal or human corpses). Impurities occurring naturallyand unavoidably in the course of life (e.g., menstruation) weretolerated, representing no danger to the person or community as longas they were promptly addressed. Other impurities had to be avoidedat all costs or else grave consequences would result to the personand community.

Toleratedimpurities.We can further divide tolerated impurities into minor and major.Minor impurities resulted from touching an animal carcass or touchingsomeone with a major impurity. Minor impurities did not make onecontagious and could be addressed simply. Major impurities resultedfrom touching a human corpse, having a skin disease, or experiencinga nocturnal emission or menstruation. With these, one became“contagious,” purification took longer, and a sacrificewas required.

Inorder to become clean, the contaminant must be removed, with removaloccurring in different ways. Tolerated impurities were removed bywashing (bathing, laundering clothes, and sprinkling with water).What could not be washed away must be physically taken away, whetherthrough burial, burning, or removal from the camp (e.g., scapegoat;Lev. 16:20–22).

Cleansingtook time; generally the more serious the impurity, the longer thetime, from one day for those who touch a dead animal, up to eightydays following the birth of a female child. Some tolerated impuritiesrequired sacrifices, with the animal’s blood being sprinkledagainst the side of the altar and poured out at its base (Lev. 5).

Ritualactions might accompany the sacrifices. For example, a person who hadbeen healed of a contagious skin disease was to bring two live, cleanbirds to the priest. One bird was to be killed and its blood mixedwith water, which was then sprinkled on the person. The other birdwas dipped into the blood/water mixture and released, symbolizing theremoval of the uncleanness. In the ritual of the red heifer (Num.19), a combination of water and ashes was used to purify those whohad touched a corpse.

Impuritiesto be avoided.Unlike the tolerated impurities that could not be avoided, certainobjects and actions were completely off-limits to the holy people ofGod. Intentional violation brought more serious consequences, evenbeing “cut off” from the community. Although it isunclear exactly what it meant to be cut off—perhapsexcommunication, capital punishment, vulnerability to an untimelydeath, loss of progeny, or separation from one’s ancestorsafter death—the threat was ominous.

Oneprohibited impurity arose from eating food declared off-limits byGod. All meat had to be thoroughly bled before being eaten (Gen.9:3–4; Lev. 17:10–14; Deut. 12:16, 23). Edible landanimals must both have a completely divided hoof and chew the cud(Lev. 11:3; Deut. 14:6), while water creatures had to have both finsand scales (Lev. 11:9; Deut. 14:9). Most birds were acceptable forfood (exceptions are given in Lev. 11:13–19; Deut. 14:11–18),as were most insects (Lev. 11:20–23; Deut. 14:19–20) andsome crawling animals (Lev. 11:29–31, 41–42).

Otherprohibited impurities included what might be more readily identifiedas sinful acts. Sexual immorality (Lev. 18:6–25), idolatry(20:2–5), consulting mediums (20:6), and murder (Num. 35:33–34)defiled people and land. If such offenses were not “cleansed,”God would judge, whether by natural disaster (Isa. 24:1–13) orexile (Isa. 64:6–7; Mic. 2:10).

Reasonsfor the laws.Why did God declare certain things clean and others unclean? Somesuggest that the distinction is arbitrary; the rules are given as atest of obedience. Others argue that the original audience knew ofreasons now lost to us. Still others believe that God was protectinghis people from disease. It is true that certain kinds of meatimproperly prepared can transmit disease, but not all laws can beexplained this way. Some believe that God identified things as cleanbecause they represented a state of normalcy (e.g., fish normallypropel themselves with fins, so those lacking fins are abnormal andthus unclean). A related view considers things as clean or uncleanbased on what they symbolized. So, for example, God identifiedobjects as unclean if they were associated with death (e.g.,vultures, corpses) because he is for life. Here again, it isdifficult to explain all the laws by appeal to normalcy or symbolism.

Cleannessand holiness.While we may not know for certain why God chose these particularlaws, we can see how they helped his people become holy.

First,these laws made possible access to the sanctuary, where holinesscould be expressed and developed. The law of Moses contains repeatedand stern reminders that those who are unclean may not “go tothe sanctuary” (Lev. 10:10; 12:4; 15:31; Num. 19:13, 20). Onlythe clean could approach a holy God and participate in the ritualsthat demonstrated and developed their holiness.

Second,these rituals also fostered holiness by teaching the Israelites aboutimpurity. Israel’s neighbors associated impurity with demons,but God indicated that it would be an Israelite’s uncleanness,not demonic activity, that kept that person from living a holy life.

Third,these purity laws taught the Israelites about the holy God, whom theywere to imitate. If even innocent and otherwise good experiencesprevented their association with him, God must be very holy indeed.These laws also reinforced God’s authority over every aspect oftheir lives. He determined when they could come to the sanctuary, butalso what they could eat and when they could have sexual intercourse.These laws also reminded Israel that it was this same God who hadprovided a way to be clean and thereby holy. Cleansing was costly andhumbling, but it was possible, coming as a gracious gift from God.

Fourth,a very practical consequence of these laws was to keep the Israelitesseparate from their neighbors. Not only were the Israelites to avoidpagan practices (e.g., rituals associated with mourning the dead;Lev. 19:27), but also they were to limit social contact with theirpagan neighbors. Laws governing what could be eaten and how thoseanimals must be slaughtered would help see to that. God was concernedthat his people not be corrupted by their neighbors (cf. Deut. 7:1–6;14:1–3).

NewTestament

Ceremonialcleansing appears in the opening chapters of the Gospels. Maryunderwent the required purification rituals after Jesus’ birth(Luke 2:22–24), and Jesus “cleansed” people fromleprosy, instructing them to carry out the Mosaic purificationrituals (Matt. 8:2–4; Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–14;17:11–19; cf. Matt. 10:8; 11:5; Luke 4:27; 7:22).

Inone of his confrontations with the Pharisees, Jesus signaled adeparture from how these laws had been practiced. He announced,“Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them.Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them”(Mark 7:15), to which Mark adds an explanation: “In sayingthis, Jesus declared all foods ‘clean’ ”(7:19). Peter’s rooftop vision in Acts 10 reflects this sameperspective, as do the church’s decision regarding Gentileconversion (Acts 15) and Paul’s comments to the church at Rome(Rom. 14:14, 20–21).

TheNT identifies the church as God’s holy people, called to beholy as he is holy (1 Pet. 1:16). Holiness still requiredpurity, now manifested more ethically than physically. That is, onebecame unclean through sinful actions such as lying (1 Thess.2:3) and licentiousness (Eph. 4:19) rather than by, for example,contact with a corpse. In the OT, all Israel was declared holy butwas to live out that holiness in daily life. Purity came throughritual actions such as sacrifice and washing, with the assistance ofa priest. So it is in the NT, though the sacrifice is now theonce-for-all offering of Christ on the cross (Heb. 9:13–14;1 John 1:7) as applied in the waters of baptism (Eph. 5:26;1 Pet. 3:21) and assisted by Jesus the great high priest and bythe priesthood of believers (2 Cor. 7:1; Heb. 4:14; James 4:8;1 Pet. 1:22). Thus purified, believers can go on to live holylives and become increasingly holy. Although the Testaments differ onthe causes and solutions for uncleanness, they agree that a holypeople has always been God’s goal, and that cleanness is ameans to that end.

A holy God wants a holy people. He had described the nationof Israel as holy (cf. Exod. 19:5–6) but also wanted them tolive holy lives and grow increasingly holy. Holiness came, in part,by keeping the law; an important part of the law was the concept ofcleanness.

OldTestament

SinceIsrael could become holy only by being clean, it is no surprise thatthe law’s first mention of prohibited food is accompanied by acommand to be God’s holy people (Exod. 22:31). Nor is itunexpected that when God explains the laws about clean and uncleanfood, he tells the Israelites twice to “be holy, because I amholy” (Lev. 11:44–47).

Cleanness(Heb. tahor) does not refer to good hygiene, nor is it synonymouswith morality, since a person could be unclean and still righteous.Cleanness allowed the OT believer to live a holy life and enabledthat person to be made increasingly holy by “Yahweh, yoursanctifier” (NIV: “the Lord, who makes you holy,”Lev. 20:8; cf. 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; 31:13). Before consideringhow ritual purity led to holiness, we should summarize the puritylaws themselves.

Puritylaws.Impurity traveled along four channels: sexuality (e.g., nocturnalemission, menstruation, childbirth), diet (e.g., eating certain typesof animals), disease (e.g., skin diseases, mildew), and death (i.e.,contact with animal or human corpses). Impurities occurring naturallyand unavoidably in the course of life (e.g., menstruation) weretolerated, representing no danger to the person or community as longas they were promptly addressed. Other impurities had to be avoidedat all costs or else grave consequences would result to the personand community.

Toleratedimpurities.We can further divide tolerated impurities into minor and major.Minor impurities resulted from touching an animal carcass or touchingsomeone with a major impurity. Minor impurities did not make onecontagious and could be addressed simply. Major impurities resultedfrom touching a human corpse, having a skin disease, or experiencinga nocturnal emission or menstruation. With these, one became“contagious,” purification took longer, and a sacrificewas required.

Inorder to become clean, the contaminant must be removed, with removaloccurring in different ways. Tolerated impurities were removed bywashing (bathing, laundering clothes, and sprinkling with water).What could not be washed away must be physically taken away, whetherthrough burial, burning, or removal from the camp (e.g., scapegoat;Lev. 16:20–22).

Cleansingtook time; generally the more serious the impurity, the longer thetime, from one day for those who touch a dead animal, up to eightydays following the birth of a female child. Some tolerated impuritiesrequired sacrifices, with the animal’s blood being sprinkledagainst the side of the altar and poured out at its base (Lev. 5).

Ritualactions might accompany the sacrifices. For example, a person who hadbeen healed of a contagious skin disease was to bring two live, cleanbirds to the priest. One bird was to be killed and its blood mixedwith water, which was then sprinkled on the person. The other birdwas dipped into the blood/water mixture and released, symbolizing theremoval of the uncleanness. In the ritual of the red heifer (Num.19), a combination of water and ashes was used to purify those whohad touched a corpse.

Impuritiesto be avoided.Unlike the tolerated impurities that could not be avoided, certainobjects and actions were completely off-limits to the holy people ofGod. Intentional violation brought more serious consequences, evenbeing “cut off” from the community. Although it isunclear exactly what it meant to be cut off—perhapsexcommunication, capital punishment, vulnerability to an untimelydeath, loss of progeny, or separation from one’s ancestorsafter death—the threat was ominous.

Oneprohibited impurity arose from eating food declared off-limits byGod. All meat had to be thoroughly bled before being eaten (Gen.9:3–4; Lev. 17:10–14; Deut. 12:16, 23). Edible landanimals must both have a completely divided hoof and chew the cud(Lev. 11:3; Deut. 14:6), while water creatures had to have both finsand scales (Lev. 11:9; Deut. 14:9). Most birds were acceptable forfood (exceptions are given in Lev. 11:13–19; Deut. 14:11–18),as were most insects (Lev. 11:20–23; Deut. 14:19–20) andsome crawling animals (Lev. 11:29–31, 41–42).

Otherprohibited impurities included what might be more readily identifiedas sinful acts. Sexual immorality (Lev. 18:6–25), idolatry(20:2–5), consulting mediums (20:6), and murder (Num. 35:33–34)defiled people and land. If such offenses were not “cleansed,”God would judge, whether by natural disaster (Isa. 24:1–13) orexile (Isa. 64:6–7; Mic. 2:10).

Reasonsfor the laws.Why did God declare certain things clean and others unclean? Somesuggest that the distinction is arbitrary; the rules are given as atest of obedience. Others argue that the original audience knew ofreasons now lost to us. Still others believe that God was protectinghis people from disease. It is true that certain kinds of meatimproperly prepared can transmit disease, but not all laws can beexplained this way. Some believe that God identified things as cleanbecause they represented a state of normalcy (e.g., fish normallypropel themselves with fins, so those lacking fins are abnormal andthus unclean). A related view considers things as clean or uncleanbased on what they symbolized. So, for example, God identifiedobjects as unclean if they were associated with death (e.g.,vultures, corpses) because he is for life. Here again, it isdifficult to explain all the laws by appeal to normalcy or symbolism.

Cleannessand holiness.While we may not know for certain why God chose these particularlaws, we can see how they helped his people become holy.

First,these laws made possible access to the sanctuary, where holinesscould be expressed and developed. The law of Moses contains repeatedand stern reminders that those who are unclean may not “go tothe sanctuary” (Lev. 10:10; 12:4; 15:31; Num. 19:13, 20). Onlythe clean could approach a holy God and participate in the ritualsthat demonstrated and developed their holiness.

Second,these rituals also fostered holiness by teaching the Israelites aboutimpurity. Israel’s neighbors associated impurity with demons,but God indicated that it would be an Israelite’s uncleanness,not demonic activity, that kept that person from living a holy life.

Third,these purity laws taught the Israelites about the holy God, whom theywere to imitate. If even innocent and otherwise good experiencesprevented their association with him, God must be very holy indeed.These laws also reinforced God’s authority over every aspect oftheir lives. He determined when they could come to the sanctuary, butalso what they could eat and when they could have sexual intercourse.These laws also reminded Israel that it was this same God who hadprovided a way to be clean and thereby holy. Cleansing was costly andhumbling, but it was possible, coming as a gracious gift from God.

Fourth,a very practical consequence of these laws was to keep the Israelitesseparate from their neighbors. Not only were the Israelites to avoidpagan practices (e.g., rituals associated with mourning the dead;Lev. 19:27), but also they were to limit social contact with theirpagan neighbors. Laws governing what could be eaten and how thoseanimals must be slaughtered would help see to that. God was concernedthat his people not be corrupted by their neighbors (cf. Deut. 7:1–6;14:1–3).

NewTestament

Ceremonialcleansing appears in the opening chapters of the Gospels. Maryunderwent the required purification rituals after Jesus’ birth(Luke 2:22–24), and Jesus “cleansed” people fromleprosy, instructing them to carry out the Mosaic purificationrituals (Matt. 8:2–4; Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–14;17:11–19; cf. Matt. 10:8; 11:5; Luke 4:27; 7:22).

Inone of his confrontations with the Pharisees, Jesus signaled adeparture from how these laws had been practiced. He announced,“Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them.Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them”(Mark 7:15), to which Mark adds an explanation: “In sayingthis, Jesus declared all foods ‘clean’ ”(7:19). Peter’s rooftop vision in Acts 10 reflects this sameperspective, as do the church’s decision regarding Gentileconversion (Acts 15) and Paul’s comments to the church at Rome(Rom. 14:14, 20–21).

TheNT identifies the church as God’s holy people, called to beholy as he is holy (1 Pet. 1:16). Holiness still requiredpurity, now manifested more ethically than physically. That is, onebecame unclean through sinful actions such as lying (1 Thess.2:3) and licentiousness (Eph. 4:19) rather than by, for example,contact with a corpse. In the OT, all Israel was declared holy butwas to live out that holiness in daily life. Purity came throughritual actions such as sacrifice and washing, with the assistance ofa priest. So it is in the NT, though the sacrifice is now theonce-for-all offering of Christ on the cross (Heb. 9:13–14;1 John 1:7) as applied in the waters of baptism (Eph. 5:26;1 Pet. 3:21) and assisted by Jesus the great high priest and bythe priesthood of believers (2 Cor. 7:1; Heb. 4:14; James 4:8;1 Pet. 1:22). Thus purified, believers can go on to live holylives and become increasingly holy. Although the Testaments differ onthe causes and solutions for uncleanness, they agree that a holypeople has always been God’s goal, and that cleanness is ameans to that end.

Those who offer themselves freely and willingly, withoutcompulsion or consideration of value in return, to perform a task,make a vow, or serve another. In the OT, volunteers usually serve God(Deut. 23:23; 2Chron. 17:16; Ps. 110:3), Israel (Ezra 7:13;Neh. 11:2), or a leader in Israel (Judg. 5:2, 9; 1Chron.28:21). God himself is the ultimate volunteer, as he freely givesplace, purpose, and a partner to Adam (Gen. 2:15–22);unilaterally covenants with Abram to give him descendants, blessing,and land (Gen. 12:2–3; 15:17–21); liberates Israel frombondage in Egypt (Exod. 6:6–8; Deut. 20:1; Josh. 24:17; Ps.81:10); and remains faithful to Israel despite its repeated failures(Pss. 68:35; 106:44–46).

Inthe NT, God is also the sender of Jesus (Matt. 10:40; Mark 9:37; Luke4:18–21; John 4:34; 5:24, 30, 36–37), who heals of hisown volition (Luke 5:13), gives rest to the weary (Matt. 11:28), andlays down his life of his own accord for our redemption (Mark 10:45;John 10:18; Gal. 3:13–14; Eph. 5:2; Titus 2:14; 1Pet.1:18–19). With Jesus as the standard, the concept of willinglygiving of oneself and one’s possessions runs throughout the NT(Eph. 5:1–2). Christians are called to love and serve oneanother in spiritual and practical ways (Acts 2:44–45; Rom.12:9–21; 1Thess. 5:15–18; Philem. 14). They arealso to love their enemies and pray for their persecutors (Matt.5:44; Luke 6:27, 35). Those who wish to lead must first volunteerthemselves as servants to others (Matt. 20:27; Mark 9:35; Luke22:26). Elders are to shepherd voluntarily (1Pet. 5:2). Paul,who urges Christians to offer their bodies as living sacrifices (Rom.12:1), is himself a model of volunteerism and self-sacrifice (Acts20:34–35; 21:13; 1Cor. 9:19–23; 2Cor. 4:5;11:23–27).

The Jubilee was a year of rest after seven cycles ofSabbatical Years (Lev. 25:8–55). The Israelites were to soundthe ram’s horn on the Day of Atonement and consecrate thefiftieth year, proclaiming liberty throughout the land. The fiftiethyear was to be a “jubilee” (Heb. yobel ).

Twoprinciples were essential to the Jubilee practices. The first wasthat the land belongs to God (Lev. 25:23). The Israelites’socioeconomic system, rooted in the land, was shaped by theirunderstanding that they were to provide for all members of societyfrom God’s land. The second was the familiar redemptionparadigm. God had brought them out of Egypt, delivering them as freepeople so that they might serve him (25:38–45). Thus, they werenot to own land or slaves permanently, since that would reverse theimpact of the exodus and create a perpetual underclass. Instead, theywere to buy them back, just as God had redeemed his people.

Thespecific requirements for the Year of Jubilee involved rest for theland, continuing the Sabbatical Year practices. The people were notto sow or harvest. In the Jubilee Year they were to return land andhouses to the family or clan of original ownership. The price of anyland sold was to be determined by the number of potential crops thatthe buyer had forthcoming until the next Jubilee. If it was a longtime, the price could be set higher. In the interval, if someone hadsold family landholdings due to financial stress, the nearestrelative could redeem them, or the seller could buy them backpersonally. In the end, however, the property reverted to the clanownership in the Jubilee. A house in a walled city could be redeemedfor one year. After that, the new owner could keep it permanentlybecause the urban setting was separate from the land. A house in anunwalled city could be redeemed anytime and had to be returned to theoriginal owner at the next Jubilee, since such a city was consideredopen country. Property of the Levites was always subject toredemption. Any Israelite unable to pay off debts could sell himself,either to a fellow Israelite or to a resident alien. As with theland, the nearest relative or the seller could provide the redemptionpayment prior to the Jubilee. Failing that, in the Jubilee Hebrewhired workers and their children were to be set free.

Thereis no direct evidence in the historical books that the Israelitesactually practiced the Year of Jubilee. There are echoes of it inIsa. 61:1–7 with the allusions to the release of the prisoner(as in Lev. 25:10) and the inheritance. Jesus cited this passage withreference to his own messianic ministry (Luke 4:16–21),suggesting his affirmation and fulfillment of the Jubilee principles.