1 The Pharisees heard that Jesus was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John, 2 although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples. 3 When the Lord learned of this, he left Judea and went back once more to Galilee. 4 Now he had to go through Samaria. 5 So he came to a town in Samaria called Sychar, near the plot of ground Jacob had given to his son Joseph. 6 Jacob's well was there, and Jesus, tired as he was from the journey, sat down by the well. It was about the sixth hour.
7 When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, "Will you give me a drink?" 8 (His disciples had gone into the town to buy food.)
9 The Samaritan woman said to him, "You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?" (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans. )
10 Jesus answered her, "If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water."
11 "Sir," the woman said, "you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water? 12 Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his flocks and herds?"
13 Jesus answered, "Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14 but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life."
15 The woman said to him, "Sir, give me this water so that I won't get thirsty and have to keep coming here to draw water."
16 He told her, "Go, call your husband and come back."
17 "I have no husband," she replied. 18 Jesus said to her, "You are right when you say you have no husband. The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true."
19 "Sir," the woman said, "I can see that you are a prophet. 20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem."
21 Jesus declared, "Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."
25 The woman said, "I know that Messiah" (called Christ) "is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us."
26 Then Jesus declared, "I who speak to you am he."
A Chance To Drink
John 4:5-29
Sermon
by Billy D. Strayhorn
There was a cartoon I saw sometime back which showed alittle boy kneeling by his bed saying his bedtime prayers. He prayed: "Asyou know, God, Monday is the first day of school. Ihope you won't lose sight of me in the crowd. Amen."
Then he climbs in bed, thinks for a minute, and then crawlsout again and adds to his prayer: "Oh, and by the way God, I'll be the onewearing the red shorts and a Dallas Cowboys T-shirt."
Like this little boy, the woman in the passage for today,needed someone to see her. She had lost sight of her own life and was sure thatGod had, too. She was thirsty beyond measure and needed to drink deeply of whatonly god can offer.
Let's look at her story in John 4:5-29. (NRSV)
[5] So he came to a Samaritan city called Sychar,near the plot of ground that Jacob had given to his son Joseph.
[6] Jacob's well was there, and Jesus, tired out by his journey, was sitting bythe well. It was about noon.
[7] A Samaritan woman came to draw water, and Jesus said to her, "Give mea drink."
[8] (His disciples had gone to the city to buy food.)
[9] The Samaritan woman said to him, "How is it that you, a Jew, ask adrink of me, a woman of Samaria?"(Jews do not share things in common with Samaritans.)
[10] Jesus answered her, "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is thatis saying to you, 'Give me a drink,' you would have asked him, and he wouldhave given you living water."
[11] The woman said to him, "Sir, you have no bucket, and the well isdeep. Where do you get that living water?
[12] Are you greater than our ancestor Jacob, who gaveus the well, and with his sons and his flocks drank from it?"
[13] Jesus said to her, "Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirstyagain,
[14] but those who drink of the water that I will give them will never bethirsty. The water that I will give will become in them a spring of watergushing up to eternal life."
[15] The woman said to him, "Sir, give me this water, so that I may neverbe thirsty or have to keep coming here to draw water."
[16] Jesus said to her, "Go, call your husband, and come back."
[17] The woman answered him, "I have no husband." Jesus said to her,"You are right in saying, 'I have no husband';
[18] for you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not yourhusband. What you have said is true!"
[19] The woman said to him, "Sir, I see that you are a prophet.
[20] Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you say that the place wherepeople must worship is in Jerusalem."
[21] Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when youwill worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem.
[22] You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvationis from the Jews.
[23] But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers willworship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such as these toworship him.
[24] God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit andtruth."
[25] The woman said to him, "I know that Messiah is coming" (who iscalled Christ). "When he comes, he will proclaim all things to us."
[26] Jesus said to her, "I am he, the one who is speaking to you."
[27] Just then his disciples came. They were astonished that he was speakingwith a woman, but no one said, "What do you want?" or, "Why areyou speaking with her?"
[28] Then the woman left her water jar and went backto the city. She said to the people,
[29] "Come and see a man who told me everything I have ever done! Hecannot be the Messiah, can he?"
I. The Chance
This woman at the well had never had a Chance to Help, AChance to Sing, A Chance To Dance or A Chance to See.No one had ever thought she was worth much or even worth enough to invest ineither singing lessons or dance lessons. As a consequence she didn't think muchof herself and went from one bad relationship to another.
And in one sense at least, she was just like blind Bartimaeus, she needed to see. She needed to see what thosechoices had done to her. But I think even more importantly she needed someoneto see her. To see her for who she truly was and whoshe could become by being who God created her to be. She needed someone to seeher and Jesus did.
He not only saw her but he offered her a Chance To Drink. To Drink from the greatfountain of life, the well that gushes up like a spring within our hearts andspirits. The well that will never run dry.
Up until this encounter with Jesus this woman's life was acomplete train wreck. She's was at the well to draw water at noon because no one else, especially none of the otherwomen in town, would be there. Everyone generally came as early as possible. Atnoon she didn't have to put up withtheir stares and snide comments.
Take the train wreck of her life, her trouble maintainingmeaningful relationships, the issue of self-worth and you can see how emptythis woman was. This Interruption On The Journeybecame a Divine Appointment.
II. The Surprise
Recently I read a story about a little boy, Johnny, whosemother, unknown to him, planned a surprise birthday party for him. When he gothome, he went upstairs to his room. While he was in his roomhis teacher, all the kids from his class, some neighbors and friends gatheredin the living room. His mother called up to him but he didn't answer. Soshe called again. Still no answer.
Finally, Mom went up to his room to get him but he was gone.He had climbed down a tree outside his window and was hiding in a nearby park.The rest of the children, along with the adults, went on to enjoy a good time,but Johnny never turned up. When he came in for supper his mother asked wherehe had been; he had missed a wonderful time, planned just for him. He tearfullyconfessed he had heard her call but hid until supper time because he thoughtshe had some chores for him to do! (1)
How sad. He missed his own party because of fear. There isno telling how many surprise parties God had planned for the woman at the wellor how many she had missed. But she didn't miss the one that took place thatday. God kept calling but she wouldn't answer, so God became one of us andpersonally invited her. She finally accepted and her life was filled with therefreshing water only Jesus can offer. Water that satisfies that deep thirst weall have.
How many times have we been invited to the surprise partyGod has planned for us only to miss it because we're too busy or we can't bebothered. Or like the little boy, we hide out of fear because we think God isgoing to smack us up alongside the head for the horrible life we've lived.
When in reality there's a party being prepared. The guestlist is all inclusive. No matter how many parties we have missed before, wedon't have to miss out on this one. The One who is throwing this party is loving, gracious, generous, merciful and forgiving. We'reall invited even though there is nothing in this world we can do to repay ourhost. All that's asked is that we accept the invitation.
From a worldly point of view, there's not much in the way ofrefreshments. There's no cake and ice cream, no BBQ, no hot-dogs andhamburgers. No, there's just a little bread and little wine to remind us ofboth the sacrifice the host made for us and the deep the love which the hosthas for each of us. Oh, yeah, there is plenty of water, too.
And yet, this bread and wine and water are more than enough.You see, those are the only ingredients you need for this All You Can EatBuffet of God's Grace which we find at God's party.
Conclusion
I heard the voice of Jesus invite me to the party. I heardthe voice of Jesus invite me to drink the water He offers, water from the wellthat will never go dry. A part of me was like the woman at the well, dry andthirsty. But I heard Him offer me a drink, and I took it.
That day at the well, Jesus knew all there was to know aboutme, more than I wanted to admit. But he showed me where to drink so that Icould quench the incredible thirst in my life. And when I drank from thosewaters, I knew for a certainty that I was forgiven.
When I drank from that well that never runs dry, I knew Godloves me and because of that I learned what the woman at the well learned, Iwas given the assurance that MY sins HAVE been forgiven. I don't ever have toworry about that again. As Romans 8:16says, "it is that very Spirit bearing witnesswith our spirit that we are children of God."
Not only that, but like the woman at the well, I was alsogiven the assurance that I'd never have to face any aspect of life alone. TheHoly Spirit constantly reminds me of what God said, "I will not leave youor forsake you." And of what Jesus said, "I will not leave youorphaned."
The invitation to the party, the invitation to drink deepfrom the well that never runs dry is there for you, too. Don't run and hide.Don't let the confusion of life hold you back. Don't let the burden of guiltthat you carry stop you from coming, God wants to help you get rid of thatguilt. God even wants to help you get rid of the baggage you carry throughlife.
So, like the woman at the well, come to the water. This isyour Chance To Drink, so drink deep.
CSS Publishing Company, Inc., From the Pulpit, by Billy D. Strayhorn
Overview: Jesus returns north to Galilee and passes through Samaria for a divine appointment (4:1–6). When a Samaritan woman comes to draw water at a well outside of town, Jesus surprises her by asking for a drink. It was extremely unusual for a Jewish teacher to speak with such a woman, but Jesus engages her in a lengthy conversation (4:9). He begins with a spiritual analogy (“living water” in 4:10). She misunderstands him by taking him literally, much like Nicodemus had done earlier (4:11–12, 15). Jesus explains more about “living water” before revealing prophetic insight into the woman’s personal history (4:16–19). When she tries to change the subject from her own life to religion, Jesus explains that true worshipers of God (whether Jew or Samaritan) will worship God “in spirit and trut…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
1 The Pharisees heard that Jesus was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John, 2 although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples. 3 When the Lord learned of this, he left Judea and went back once more to Galilee. 4 Now he had to go through Samaria. 5 So he came to a town in Samaria called Sychar, near the plot of ground Jacob had given to his son Joseph. 6 Jacob's well was there, and Jesus, tired as he was from the journey, sat down by the well. It was about the sixth hour.
7 When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, "Will you give me a drink?" 8 (His disciples had gone into the town to buy food.)
9 The Samaritan woman said to him, "You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?" (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans. )
10 Jesus answered her, "If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water."
11 "Sir," the woman said, "you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water? 12 Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself, as did also his sons and his flocks and herds?"
13 Jesus answered, "Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14 but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life."
15 The woman said to him, "Sir, give me this water so that I won't get thirsty and have to keep coming here to draw water."
16 He told her, "Go, call your husband and come back."
17 "I have no husband," she replied. 18 Jesus said to her, "You are right when you say you have no husband. The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true."
19 "Sir," the woman said, "I can see that you are a prophet. 20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem."
21 Jesus declared, "Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."
25 The woman said, "I know that Messiah" (called Christ) "is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us."
26 Then Jesus declared, "I who speak to you am he."
Jesus’s departure from the Jordan River is prompted by his concern that the Pharisees are viewing him as supplanting John the Baptist’s ministry (4:1; cf. 3:22–36). Would the hostility toward John now be aimed at Jesus? In the Synoptics, it is John’s arrest that brings Jesus into Galilee (Mark 1:14). The same is true in the Fourth Gospel. Jesus avoids incrimination stemming from his association with John. To be sure, Jesus’s ministry was similar to that of John: both men employed baptism (4:1–2). Even in Galilee after the death of John, Herod Antipas will fear that Jesus may be John come back from the dead (Mark 6:14–20).
The usual route from the Jordan River to Galilee traversed the rift valley to Scythopolis (Beth Shan) and then went northwest into the valleys of lower Galilee. Instead, Jesus climbs into the Judean mountains and follows the ridge route north through the tribal territories of Benjamin and Ephraim and on into Samaria (4:5–6). The precise location of the city of Sychar remains uncertain; however, it is probably Shechem (so identified by Jerome and the Syriac) inasmuch as the traditional site for Jacob’s Well is 250 feet from there. Further, Shechem is on the road from Judea to Galilee.
Jesus’s conversation with the woman of Samaria (4:1–42) is striking on several counts. First, the enmity between Jew and Samaritan is well established (see Luke 10:29–37) and stands behind the woman’s words in 4:9. Moreover, few Jewish rabbis would initiate open conversations with women as Jesus does (see 4:27). Nevertheless, Jesus does so, and the ensuing dialogue harmonizes with the theological developments we have seen thus far: Jesus overturns the sanctity of an important religious institution. In this case it is the sacred well of Jacob. At Cana (2:1–11), Jerusalem (3:5), the Jordan (3:22–26), and here, water serves a symbolic role, depicting the older institution that needs the messianic gift of Christ. As water became wine (2:9) and John’s baptism was replaced by that of Jesus (3:30; 4:1), so now well water will be replaced by living water. What is this gift that makes all else obsolete? It is the eschatological Spirit promised by Jesus (3:5). This is what will bring power to John’s baptism. The same is true in Samaria. John’s only other reference to living water is in 7:38–39, where it is defined as the Spirit. The Spirit is explicitly emphasized even as the dialogue develops (4:23–24).
The dialogue with the woman enjoys a literary structure much like that in chapter 3: inquiries by the woman based on a misunderstanding of Jesus’s spiritual intent serve to transport the discussion to deeper levels of thought. But while Nicodemus never reenters the scene to issue his response (suggesting no faith in Jerusalem?), things are different in Samaria. We read a series of improving titles for Jesus (“Sir,” 4:11, 15; “Prophet,” 4:19; “Messiah,” 4:25, 29; “Savior of the world,” 4:42); the woman’s testimony converts many in the village (4:39); and Jesus remains with them for two days before going north into Galilee (4:43).
In verses 7–15 Jesus discusses living water. This section (like the next) introduces an “earthly” subject and through the questions of the woman leads to a spiritual message. Jesus’s request for a drink of water is rebuffed (4:9), but he issues a challenge to the woman: if she knew who Jesus was, she would see that he is the supplier of living water (4:10). A second round (4:11–15) turns on her misunderstanding: Jesus cannot supply water because he has no access to the well. But here at last Jesus’s clarification unfolds his meaning. His water ends all thirst and provides eternal life (4:14). It is the Spirit. (Compare this discourse with that on living bread in John 6:35–59.) Marvelously the woman asks to drink.
In the next section Jesus’s focus is on true worship (4:16–26). When the light enters the darkness of the world, it necessarily brings judgment (3:19–20). Before the gifts of God can be obtained, the soul must be cleansed of sin. Jesus probes the moral life of the woman (4:16–18), but she does not flee—she admits to Jesus’s prophetic powers (4:19). She chooses to remain in the light; yet now she hopes that the religious institutions of her acquaintance will free her from Jesus’s scrutiny. Mount Gerizim (a mountain towering over the well) was the Samaritan holy place; Jesus is obviously a Jew who venerates Jerusalem. But Jesus dismisses these institutions too (as he dismissed the well): again the new dimension that transcends these is the Spirit (4:23–24). This spiritual worship is not worship in the inner aesthetic recesses of a person: it is worship animated by God’s own eschatological Spirit. Jesus’s challenge and offer in each of these scenes is the same. Yet here we move a step further; worship must also be in “truth.” It must affirm the realities of truth (Jesus is the truth, 14:6), be doctrinally informed (cf. 1John 4:1–3), and be directed toward Jesus.
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
The transition begun in 3:22 is continued in 4:1–4. Jesus moves from Jerusalem to the Judean countryside and from there to Galilee by way of Samaria. The intervening material (3:23–36) enables the reader to make sense of this cumbersome introduction to chapter 4. That Jesus was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John (v. 1) has already been intimated in 3:26. That the Pharisees noticed this is suggested by the fact that John’s disciples seem to have been reminded of it by a Jew (3:25). What has not been told is Jesus’ response to these developments. The purpose of verses 1–3 is to explain Jesus’ actions by his knowledge. The parenthetical comment recalls other instances in which the narrator attributes things that Jesus said or did to supernatural knowledge that he possessed (cf., e.g., 2:24–25; 6:6, 64; 13:1, 3, 11; 18:4). In this case, however, the knowledge is gained through normal channels. When Jesus received word that the Pharisees were beginning to perceive him and John as rivals, he decided to leave the area (v. 3).
The writer takes a moment in passing to correct a possible false impression given by 3:22 and 4:1 (as well as 3:26). Jesus was not personally baptizing anyone. Baptisms were taking place in Judea as a result of his ministry and under his jurisdiction, but the actual baptizers were his disciples. The intent is to assure the reader that the Pharisees’ perception was incorrect. Jesus and John were not rivals and could not have been, for their roles were different and they moved in different spheres (cf. 3:27–36). Theologically, the notion that Jesus, who was supposed to baptize in the Holy Spirit (1:33), also baptized in water as John did is surprising and without parallel in the other Gospels. To the writer of this Gospel, it appears to have been a firmly fixed tradition that he felt compelled to acknowledge but to which he added his own qualifying explanation. Almost in spite of himself, he furnishes strong evidence that Jesus did for a time supervise a baptizing ministry in Judea that invited comparison with John’s and appeared, to some at least, to be a rival movement.
The account of Jesus’ itinerary provides a reason for almost every step. If verses 1–3 tell why Jesus returned to Galilee, verse 4 adds that he had to go by way of Samaria, thus introducing the incident of Jesus and the Samaritan woman. The need to go through Samaria was not geographical but theological. There was work to be done. Samaria was a mission field ripe for harvest (v. 35), and Jesus’ intent was to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work (v. 34). Jesus’ movements are dictated not by circ*mstances but by his divine calling.
Jesus’ visit to Samaria has two parts: first, his interview with a Samaritan woman at the well of Jacob (vv. 5–26) and, second, an alternating series of glimpses of Jesus and his disciples on the one hand, and the woman and the Samaritan townspeople on the other (vv. 27–42). Jesus’ conversation with the woman centers on the theme of holy places, specifically a field and a well traditionally associated with Jacob (vv. 5–15), and the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim (vv. 19–26). Jesus promises the woman the Holy Spirit, who transcends these holy places and makes devotion to them obsolete (vv. 13–14, 23–24). Between the discussion of the well and the discussion of the holy mountain comes an abrupt glance at the woman’s personal history (vv. 16–18), which lays a basis for her testimony that Jesus had told her everything I ever did (vv. 29, 39).
How are these segments of Jesus’ interview with the Samaritan woman related to each other? The woman serves to represent three “oppressed groups” in which Jesus, according to the synoptic Gospels, showed a marked interest. Simply the fact that she is a woman elicits surprise from his disciples that he would talk with her (v. 27). Though not a prostitute, she is sexually immoral (v. 18). By race and religion she is from the Jewish standpoint an outsider, a hated Samaritan. Jews and Samaritans, the writer explains, will not even touch the same utensils (v. 9). In reaching out to her, Jesus in this narrative is recognizably the Jesus of the Synoptics (cf., e.g., Mark 7:24–30; Luke 7:36–50; 10:25–37), the one who came to show mercy to tax collectors, prostitutes, and all such outcasts of Jewish society.
The encounter begins surprisingly, not with Jesus granting mercy to the woman, but with him asking mercy from her. He is placed in the curious position of needing help (a drink of water, cf. Mark 9:41) from someone his culture would have him hate. But his thirst provides the occasion for him suddenly to reverse roles and offer living water (v. 10) to the woman. Whether she actually gave Jesus a drink before this turn of events we are not told. But what began with Jesus asking water from her (v. 7) concludes with the woman asking him for the never-ending supply of water he claimed to be able to give (v. 15).
The reversal of roles is made possible by Jesus’ use of water as a metaphor for the Holy Spirit (vv. 10, 13–14). What he promises is nothing less than baptism in the Spirit (cf. 1:33). The identification of the living water as the Spirit is not explicit here, as it is in 7:38–39, but it is valid nonetheless. The “gift of God” (v. 10) is an expression used of the Spirit (in a Samaritan setting) in Acts 8:20 (cf. Acts 2:38; 10:45; 11:17), and the Spirit becomes unmistakably the theme of the latter part of Jesus’ self-disclosure to the woman (vv. 21–24). The only other possibility is that the water represents eternal life (v. 14), but the point of Jesus’ pronouncement is that this water provides or sustains eternal life (just as physical water sustains physical life), not that water is itself the metaphor for life. The Spirit is the one who “gives life” (6:63; cf. 1 Cor. 15:45). Spirit baptism is an impartation of life, the beginning of a new creation (20:22; cf. Gen. 2:7). Jesus’ ministry is more than merely a continuation of John’s. Whatever baptizing activity Jesus may have carried on in Judea is of secondary importance and is now behind him. His real work is not to baptize in water but to do what John had predicted he would do: baptize in the Holy Spirit. The metaphor of water is used here not in the sense of washing or being immersed, but of drinking (cf. Paul in 1 Cor. 12:13: “For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body …, and we were all given the one Spirit to drink”). The Spirit quenches thirst, not in the sense of removing a person’s desire for the presence of God, but in the sense of continually satisfying that desire. The Holy Spirit will be like an eternal self-replenishing spring within the believer “welling up to eternal life” (v. 14).
The Samaritan woman takes the metaphor literally. The only life-giving water she knows is the water in the well, which belongs to her and her people already (vv. 11–12). Jesus’ promise of the Spirit and eternal life means only that she will never have to come back to this well to draw water! (v. 15). This sequence ends in misunderstanding, yet the woman’s remark is curiously apt, for when the Spirit comes, such holy places as the well of Jacob will in fact lose their significance. Religious or ethnic identities based on control of these sites will give way to a new identity in the Spirit (cf. vv. 21, 23).
Jesus’ reply to the woman signals a turn in the narrative. Instead of correcting her misunderstanding, he tells her that she must come back to the well at least once more, with her husband (v. 16). It appears that Jesus’ mission to Samaria will begin with the conversion of a whole family. Such things occur in the book of Acts (16:15, 33–34; 18:8; cf. 11:14) and at the end of this very journey in John’s Gospel when Jesus reaches Galilee (4:53), but in Samaria it is not to be. Perhaps in the hope of receiving the living water immediately, the woman tells Jesus that she has no husband. Jesus ironically commends her for telling the truth (vv. 17, 18) and so exposes her adultery (cf. Mark 10:12). The change of subject is not so abrupt as it appears. The narrative assumes a close connection between baptism in the Spirit and the forgiveness of sins (cf. Mark 1:4–8; Acts 2:38). Jesus, who will baptize in the Spirit, is “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (1:29). When the Spirit is given (20:22), Jesus will say to his disciples, “If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven” (20:23). Sin, to be forgiven, must first be exposed, and it is, but the woman’s adultery is not the center of interest in this chapter. The movement of the narrative is not from the woman to her present husband (or lover) but from the woman directly to the rest of the townspeople (vv. 28–30). Whatever feelings of guilt she may have had go unmentioned.
Instead of guilt, her reaction to Jesus’ supernatural insight into her life is one of amazement (vv. 29, 39). Her immediate conclusion is that he is a prophet (v. 19). Because he is a Jew and a prophet, she seizes the opportunity to start a discussion with him about the respective claims of the Jewish and Samaritan places of worship—the temple mountain in Jerusalem and Mount Gerizim near Shechem (v. 20), the latter probably visible from where they were standing. It is useless to speculate whether or not she was trying to divert attention from her personal morality. To the Gospel writer, at least, her remark is not a diversion but carries forward the main thrust of the story.
Jesus tells her that the crucial question is not where but how to worship God. Soon the alternatives of Jerusalem or Mount Gerizim will lose their significance. The true worshipers (i.e., the Christians) will worship the Father in spirit and truth (v. 23) as a result of the promised baptism. In the words of later Christian writers, they are a “new race” (Epistle to Diognetus 1) or a “third race” (“For what has reference to the Greeks and Jews is old. But we are Christians, who as a third race worship him in a new way”; Preaching to Peter, cited in Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis VI, 5.39–41, translated in Hennecke-Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha, [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1964], vol. 2, p. 100). Playing on the woman’s reference to her fathers, or Samaritan ancestors who worshiped on Gerizim (v. 20), Jesus subtly introduces the title Father in connection with the worship of God (vv. 21, 23), making the point that only in the Spirit (i.e., in the new Christian community) is it possible to worship God as Father (cf. Paul in Rom. 8:15–16; Gal. 4:6). Because he is Father, this is how he wants to be worshiped, and Christians are the kind of worshipers he seeks (v. 23).
Jesus speaks in verse 22 as a Jew, for it is as a Jew that the Samaritan woman has addressed him. Yet he speaks not for Judaism as a whole but for the small community of faith that has formed itself around him (cf. 3:11). When his Jewish opponents in a later confrontation (8:41) claim to know God as Father, Jesus denies their claim (8:42). The only advantage of Jew over Samaritan is that salvation is from the Jews (v. 22b), that is, Jesus himself has come from among the Jews, bringing “grace and truth” and the knowledge of God to the whole world (cf. 1:17–18). This knowledge makes it possible, first for Jesus’ Jewish disciples and then for Samaritans and Gentiles, to know whom they worship (v. 22) or to worship the Father as he really is (vv. 23–24). If God is Spirit (v. 24), then only the coming of the Spirit makes his true character known.
The woman responds to Jesus’ teaching in the only terms she knows, the Samaritan expectation of a Messiah who will come and explain everything to us (v. 25). The Gospel writer has borrowed the Jewish term Messiah (i.e., “Anointed One”) to designate the figure of whom the woman speaks. The Samaritans’ own term was “Taheb” (or “Restorer”). The Taheb, whose functions corresponded generally to those of the Jewish Messiah, was a figure modeled after Moses, in line with the biblical expectation of a prophet like Moses who would come and tell the people everything that God commanded (Deut. 18:18). Such an expectation was alive in Judaism as well (cf. 1:21) but played a larger role among the Samaritans. Significantly, it is here in a Samaritan context, and only here, that Jesus acknowledges his messiahship clearly and without hesitation (v. 26). Six chapters later, the people of Jerusalem will still be asking, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly” (10:24). Yet long before, in a small Samaritan village, the secret is already out! Jesus’ acceptance of this woman’s version of messiahship is probably to be explained by the prophetic or teaching role she assigns to her Messiah. The statement that when he comes, he will explain everything (v. 25) anticipates the language of Jesus’ promise of the Spirit to his disciples in the farewell discourse (cf. 16:13–16). The Spirit’s work is an extension of the work of Jesus. It is a work of revelation, and when the Samaritan woman thinks of revelation she thinks of the Taheb. Reaching beyond her recognition of him as a prophet (v. 19), Jesus finally makes himself known to her as the Prophet-Messiah for whom she and her people have been waiting (v. 26). The basis on which he said a time is coming (v. 21), and quickly added, a time is coming and now has come (v. 23), is made clear. Jesus’ interview with the woman (vv. 5–26) has achieved its purpose. A revelation has taken place, and the woman’s hope has become reality.
The disciples, who have been mentioned only parenthetically in verse 8, come on the scene at this point (v. 27). Surprised that he would even talk with a woman (a Samaritan woman at that!), they seem for the moment too much in awe of Jesus to ask why. Even though the disciples were not present at his self-revelation to the woman, they are left speechless in its wake (cf. their hesitation to ask him questions in 16:5, 19 and 21:12). As soon as the disciples arrive from the town, the woman returns to town, and the narrative divides itself into two scenes centering on two sets of characters: the woman and the townspeople (vv. 28–30, 39–42), and the disciples and Jesus (vv. 31–38).
When the disciples offer Jesus some of the food they have bought in Sychar (see v. 8), Jesus tells them he has food of his own that they know nothing about (v. 32). For the moment, these true worshipers who will one day supersede both Jew and Samaritan are as ignorant as the Samaritan woman (cf. v. 22). They are not yet ready to worship God in the Spirit. The Spirit rests on Jesus, and on him alone (cf. 3:34). The food of which he speaks is obedience to God (cf. Matt. 4:4) and the completion of the task God sent him to do (v. 34).
This task ultimately spans the whole of the fourth Gospel (cf. 17:4; 19:30) but is defined in the immediate setting (with a change of metaphor) as a harvest (i.e., an ingathering of new believers) among the Samaritans. We may contrast the situation with that described in Matt. 9:36–10:6, where the “harvest” includes only “the lost sheep of Israel” and specifically excludes “any town of the Samaritans.” Jesus’ horizons are wider (or at least are widened sooner) in John’s Gospel than in the Synoptics. He who “takes away the sin of the world” (1:29) is about to be acknowledged by an alien people as the world’s Savior (v. 42). It is no ordinary harvest. To show its uniqueness, Jesus makes use of two familiar proverbs (vv. 35, 37):
(1) Four months more and then the harvest. Conventional wisdom dictated four months between planting and reaping (v. 35), but Jesus speaks of messianic abundance like that foreseen by Amos the prophet, in which “the reaper will be overtaken by the plowman and the planter by the one treading grapes” (Amos 9:13; cf. the abundance of wine at the Cana wedding). Verses 35–36 repeat in metaphorical language Jesus’ assurance to the Samaritan woman that a time is coming and has now come (v. 23). A bountiful harvest of eternal life (cf. v. 14) is about to begin. For sower and reaper alike, it is a moment of joy (v. 36).
(2) One sows and another reaps. Jesus transforms a traditional saying on the inequity and futility of human life (cf. Eccles. 2:18–21) into a word of promise to the disciples: They are to benefit from the labor of others for they are sent to reap a harvest they have not planted (v. 38). But in Jesus’ application of these proverbs who is the sower and who is the reaper? And who are the others mentioned in verse 38?
Verse 34 suggests that God is the sower, for Jesus’ task is to finish his work. And in verses 39–42 it is Jesus alone who actually carries out the harvest among the Samaritan townspeople. Yet in verse 35 he summons his disciples to the ripe harvest fields, and they are the ones who in verse 38 are to reap a harvest for which others have worked. The roles in this drama are not fixed. Jesus is not speaking in allegories or riddles but using a simple metaphor capable of several applications. A transition of sorts can be detected at verse 37. If the controlling thought of verses 34–36 was “as the Father sent me,” the controlling thought of verses 37–38 is “I am sending you” (cf. 20:21; also 17:18). But the fact that the disciples play no part whatever in the ensuing mission among the Samaritans suggests that verses 37–38 are intended as a momentary glimpse beyond the immediate situation to the narrator’s own time. Those who proclaim the Christian message, whether to the Samaritans (e.g., Acts 8:4–25) or to the whole world (cf. 20:21) should not be discouraged but remember that Jesus and others (e.g., the woman and the converts of Sychar) have been there already to prepare the way. Even though Samaria may have been off his “beaten track” (cf. Matt. 10:5), Jesus had passed through it on occasion (cf. Luke 9:51–56) and carried on a teaching mission in at least one Samaritan town.
The distinction between sowing and reaping is perhaps echoed in the two stages of the Samaritans’ faith in verses 39–42. Their faith had begun with the hesitant testimony of the woman about what Jesus had told her (vv. 29, 39), but when they met Jesus and heard his message for themselves, many more believed. Their “secondhand” faith (as they regarded it) had given way to a personal knowledge and deep conviction that Jesus was truly the Savior of the world (v. 42). These words make it clear at last that, for the Gospel writer, the Samaritans stand as representatives of all the peoples of the world. In passing, by divine necessity, through one Samaritan town and talking with one sinful woman, Jesus both reaps a harvest and anticipates a greater harvest to come, the church’s mission to the Gentiles.
Additional Notes
4:4 He had to go through Samaria. If the traditional location of Aenon is correct (see note on 3:23), and if Jesus’ baptizing activity was near there, it is all the more clear that the necessity was not a geographical one. Samaria, in fact, would represent a detour if one’s destination were Galilee.
4:5 Sychar: The place is shown on the sixth-century Madeba map as “Sychar which is now Sychora.” This probably corresponds to the present-day Arab village of Askar on the slope of Mount Ebal a mile east of Nablus. Askar has a spring that may correspond to the “spring of Sychar” (En Soker) mentioned in the Mishnah (Menachoth 10.2), but a very deep well fitting the description of the one where Jesus stopped is found one kilometer further south, at the village of Balatah on the site of ancient Shechem (destroyed by the Jewish king John Hyrcanus before 100 B.C.). Some have suggested that Sychar in John 4:5 is a mistake for “Shechem” (two Syriac manuscripts actually read “Shechem”), but it is not even certain that a town existed on the site of Shechem in Jesus’ time.
The movements in the story back and forth between the well and the town make more sense if the distance is one kilometer than if it is only the 250 feet or so that today separate the Well of Jacob (as it is still known) from Tell Balatah (the excavations of Shechem by Ernst Sellin and, later, G. Ernest Wright). The woman may have traveled the extra distance from Sychar to this well either for religious reasons or because her neighbors made her unwelcome at her own town’s spring (see J. Finegan, Archaeology of the New Testament [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969], pp. 36–38).
4:6 Sat down by the well: In Greek the adverb houtōs (“thus”) adds a vivid storyteller’s touch to the account, which is lost in most translations (including NIV): Jesus “sat down like this,” or “sat right down” beside the well. The adverb is used similarly in 13:25.
About the sixth hour: See note on 1:39.
4:9 Jews do not associate with Samaritans. A few ancient manuscripts omit this parenthetical remark, but such explanatory asides are entirely characteristic of the narrator’s style. The words belong in the text, and refer quite specifically to laws of purity: Jews and Samaritans do not drink from the same cup!
4:16 Come back: or “come back here.” The repetition in Greek of the adverb enthade (“here”) in vv. 15 (“coming here to draw water”) and 16 (“come back here”) somewhat lessens the abruptness of Jesus’ request in v. 16 and helps to link two stages of the conversation.
4:23 A time is coming and has now come. The new worship had already begun (among the followers of Jesus) even though the end of temple worship at Jerusalem and on Mt. Gerizim was still future (“a time is coming,” v. 21); for the expression, cf. 5:25, 16:31.
The true worshipers will worship the Father in Spirit and truth. The Holy Spirit is called “the Spirit of truth” in 14:17; 15:26; 16:13. “Spirit” and “truth” are equated in 1 John 5:6, while “truth” (2 John 2; 3 John 12), or “grace and truth” John 1:14, 17) can be used as designations for the Holy Spirit. The relationship to God as Father is a new relationship made possible by the coming of Jesus Christ into the world.
4:26 I … am he: lit., “I am” (Gr.: egō eimi). Formally, these words correspond to the formula by which Jesus later reveals himself as God (8:58). But here they simply identify him as the Messiah (v. 25).
Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by J. Ramsey Michaels, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
The initiatory ritual of Christianity. This rite is of great significance in connecting the individual both to Christ and to the greater community of believers. Baptism carries an equal measure of symbolism and tradition, evoking a connection between OT covenantal circumcision and ritual cleansing and NT regeneration and redemption.
The immediate precursor of Christian baptism was the baptism of John the Baptist (Mark 1:4 pars.), a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins, preparing the hearts of the people for the coming Messiah. But when Jesus himself was baptized by John to “fulfill all righteousness” (Matt. 3:15) and to allow Jesus to identify with sinful humanity, he became the firstfruits of the new covenant. John emphasized that his baptism with water was inferior to the baptism “with the Holy Spirit and fire” that Jesus would bring (Matt. 3:11). Jesus’ disciples continued John’s baptism during his earthly ministry (John 4:12).
Baptism was immediately important in the early church. Jesus commanded the disciples to “make disciples..., baptizing them” (Matt. 28:19). The disciples replaced Judas from among those “who have been with us the whole time ... from John’s baptism” (Acts 1:21–22). Peter’s first sermon proclaims, “Repent and be baptized” (2:38). The apostles baptized new believers in Christ immediately (8:12–13, 38; 9:18; 10:48; 16:15, 33; 18:8; 19:5; 22:16).
For the apostle Paul, baptism represents a participation in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Paul writes, “Don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death” (Rom. 6:3–4); “In him you were ... buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead” (Col. 2:11–12).
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.
Birth and childhood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesus was probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’s death (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of a virginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governor Quirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place in Bethlehem (2:15). Both the census and the governorship at the time of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars. Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to either confirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must be determined on the basis of one’s view regarding the general reliability of the Gospel tradition.
On the eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keeping with the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus” (Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home of his parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel of Luke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth in strength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke also contains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Baptism, temptation, and start of ministry. After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke 3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instant ministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that the temptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Luke identify three specific temptations by the devil, though their order for the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine intervention after jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’s kingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation, quoting Scripture in response.
Matthew and Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum in Galilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13; Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirty years of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity or perhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of the Levites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning of Jesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples and the sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Galilean ministry. The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and around Galilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ first teaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30); the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for his calling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection and suffering.
All the Gospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in his Galilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke 5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioning of the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers is recorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministry is the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke 6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, in particular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synoptics focus on healings and exorcisms.
During Jesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with his identity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority (Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family (3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner of Beelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesus told parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growing kingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humble beginnings (4:1–32).
The Synoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful. No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority or ability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized many demons (5:1–13), raised the dead (5:35–42), fed five thousand (6:30–44), and walked on water (6:48–49).
In the later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew and traveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are not written with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns to Galilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fear resolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee, where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ disciples with lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed the Pharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents (7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demanding a sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, who confessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus did provide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesus withdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician woman requested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans had long resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality that allotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere “crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,” Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-mute man in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’ travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The city was the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judean ministry. Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry as he resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually led to his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem into three phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27). The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of the journey. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, and the demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem (Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45; Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journey toward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvation and judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase of the journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are the main themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Social conflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposte interactions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel (Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomic feathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who had little value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16; Luke 18:15–17).
Passion week, death, and resurrection. Each of the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with the crowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark 11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Luke describes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during which Jesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
In Jerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17). Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “began looking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segment of Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’ authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions (12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation (12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s own destruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, Judas Iscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’ arrest (14:10–11).
At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a new covenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29; Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned the disciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark 14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and later he prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agony and submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42; Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial, crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15; Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18). Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission by making disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8) and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return (Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
People in the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin. Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family was the source of people’s status in the community and provided the primary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.
Marriage and divorce. Marriage in the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between two families, arranged by the bride’s father or a male representative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’s price.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction but also an expression of family honor. Only the rich could afford multiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself was celebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.
The primary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to produce a male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. The concept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs, especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.
Marriage among Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jews sought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev. 18:617). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew. Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainly outside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness. Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romans did practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinship group (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategic alliances between families.
Greek and Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. In Jewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorce proceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release her and repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (in particular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Sira comments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to the father (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictive use of divorce than the OT (Mark 10:1–12).
Children and parenting. Childbearing was considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman and her entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to this blessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, and specifically their husbands.
Children were of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. An estimated 60percent of the children in the first-century Mediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.
Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting style based on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and evil tendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent evil tendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The main concern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty. Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stage children were taught to accept the total authority of the father. The rearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girls were taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so that they could help with household tasks.
Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak of fidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT, the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In their overall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to in familial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod. 4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16; 64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).
The church as the family of God. Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship, the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into the community was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was eventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18). Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the community of his followers, God’s family—the church. See also Adoption.
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).
Renamed “Israel” by God (Gen. 32:28), he was the son of Isaac and Rebekah and was the father of twelve sons, whose descendants became the twelve tribes. Half the book of Genesis (25:1949:33) narrates his story and that of his sons. The middle chapters of Genesis focus on his struggles with his brother, Esau, and with his uncle Laban, and the later chapters focus on his children Dinah, Judah, and particularly Joseph during his time in Egypt.
The central city and capital of ancient Israel. Throughout its history, the city has also been referred to variously as Zion, Jebus, Mount Moriah, and the City of David.
The name “Jerusalem” occurs more than 650 times in the OT, particularly in the history of Israel, and in the NT more than 140 times. The OT prophets used the city as a symbol of God’s dealing with his people and his plan. Jerusalem is viewed collectively as God’s abode, his chosen place, and his sovereignty, while its destruction is also representative of God’s judgment on apostasy among his people (e.g., Jer. 7:115; 26:18–19; Mic. 3:12). The rebuilding of the city represents the hope and grace of God (e.g., Isa. 40:1–2; 52:1, 7–8; 60–62; Jer. 30:18–19; 31:38–39; Ezek. 5:5; Hag. 2:6–8; Zech. 8:3–8). Like the writers of the OT, the NT authors spoke of Jerusalem in metaphorical and eschatological terms. Paul used Jerusalem to contrast the old and the new covenants (Gal. 4:24–26), and the writer of Hebrews used it as the place of the new covenant, sealed through the blood of Jesus (Heb. 12:22–24). In Revelation the concept of a new Jerusalem is related to the future kingdom of God (Rev. 3:12; 21:1–22:5).
Jerusalem is located in the Judean hill country, about 2,700 feet above sea level. It borders the Judean desert to the east. The city expanded and contracted in size over various hills and valleys. There are two major ridges (Eastern and Western Hills) separated by the Tyropoeon Valley. The Eastern Hill contains a saddle, the Ophel Hill, and north of this is the traditional site of Mount Moriah, where later the temple was constructed. The Eastern Hill was always occupied, since the only water source is the Gihon spring, located in the Kidron Valley. Two other ridges were important for the city, as they were used for extramural suburbs, cemeteries, and quarries. To the east is the Mount of Olives, which is separated from the Eastern Hill by the Kidron Valley. To the west of the Western Hill is the Central Ridge Route, separated by the Hinnom Valley.
A common name in first-century Judaism. The Greek name Iōannēs comes from the Hebrew name “Yohanan.” (1)The Baptist or Baptizer, he was the son of the priest Zechariah and Elizabeth. (See John the Baptist.) (2)The son of Zebedee, he was an apostle originally belonging to the inner circle of the twelve main disciples of Jesus. (See John the Apostle.) (3) John Mark, a cousin of Barnabas (Col. 4:10) and the son of Mary (Acts 12:12). (See Mark, John.) (4)The elder. Both 2John and 3John claim authorship by “the elder” (2John 1; 3John 1). Traditionally, all three Johannine Letters, the Gospel of John, and sometimes the Revelation of John have been attributed to John the apostle. However, modern scholarship often attributes 2John and 3John, and sometimes 1John, to “the elder”—John the elder. (5)The seer, the author of the book of Revelation (see 1:1, 4, 9; 22:8). Some scholars ascribe the authorship of Revelation to John the apostle, in line with the view of the church father Irenaeus. Other scholars ascribe the writing of Revelation to a certain John the elder. The book of Revelation does not further identify the author. However, the author is among the prophets, a seer, and his name is “John”—hence, John the seer.
(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).
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.
Five of the important parties in ancient Judaism were the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes, the Zealots, and the Herodians. The first three seem to have first emerged in reaction to the rise of the Hasmonean priest-kings in the mid-second and first centuries BC, and the other two in response to the occupation of Palestine by the Romans and their establishment of the Herods as the rulers of Israel.
Pharisees. In the Synoptic Gospels, the Pharisees were one of the groups that opposed Jesus. It seems that the Pharisees most strongly opposed Jesus on issues related to their received tradition, which they considered to be as binding as the OT law. Two such legal issues were ceremonial washings before meals and working on the Sabbath. All three Synoptic Gospels narrate the Pharisees questioning Jesus concerning his and his disciples’ failure to follow the tradition of the elders by eating with “unclean”—that is, “unwashed”—hands (Matt. 15:1 2; Mark 7:1–5; Luke 11:39–41). Concerning breaking the Sabbath, the Pharisees confronted Jesus on various occasions, such as when Jesus healed on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:9–14; Mark 3:1–5; Luke 6:6–11) and when his disciples picked grain while walking through a field (Matt. 12:1–8; Mark 2:23–28; Luke 6:1–5).
In response to accusations concerning breaking the traditions of the elders, Jesus affirmed the priority of mercy in the face of human need that supersedes laws concerning the Sabbath by saying that the Sabbath was made for humans, not humans for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27), or that the Son of Man (Jesus) was Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8; Mark 2:28; Luke 6:5). He also said that God desires mercy, not sacrifice (Matt. 12:7).
Jesus’ critique of the Pharisees concentrated on their neglecting mercy toward fellow humans for the sake of their tradition. This is especially clear in Matthew, where Jesus’ critique of the Pharisees includes indictments against them for concentrating on the fine points of the law but neglecting justice and mercy (12:7; 23:23).
In the Gospel of John, the Pharisees are again usually depicted as adversaries of Jesus and also in league with other Jewish authorities in plotting to arrest and kill Jesus (7:32; 11:47–57). One passage suggests that they were divided concerning Jesus (9:16). One Pharisee, Nicodemus, came to Jesus by night (John 3), defended Jesus before his peers (7:50), and brought spices to prepare Jesus’ body for burial after his death (19:39).
The Pharisees were not always antagonistic toward Jesus. From time to time, they were on the same side of an issue, such as Jesus’ confrontation with the Sadducees over the resurrection (Luke 20:27–40). Nicodemus, mentioned above, was quite sympathetic toward Jesus. The apostle Paul identifies himself as a Pharisee in regard to keeping the law in Phil. 3:5; Acts 26:5, and in a confrontation with Jerusalem authorities in Acts 23:6. Also, some early Christians were said to be Pharisees (Acts 15:5).
Sadducees. The Sadducees were an elite group of Jews connected with the priesthood. “Sadducee” probably means “Son of Zadok,” a descendant of the high priest Zadok from the time of David. Some members of the Qumran community used the term “Son of Zadok” as a self-designation as well, suggesting some common ancestry, if not direct identification, of the Sadducees and some members of the Qumran community.
The Sadducees are mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels, but not in John, although the “chief priests” who plotted against Jesus with the Pharisees (e.g., John 11:46) probably were Sadducees. All three Synoptic Gospels relate the narrative in which the Sadducees posed the hypothetical question concerning whose wife a woman would be in the resurrection if she outlived seven husbands. Jesus answered that they understood neither the Scriptures nor the power of God, and that God was the God of the living and not the dead (Matt. 22:23–33; Mark 12:18–27; Luke 20:27–40).
The book of Acts confirms that the Sadducees were closely connected to the priesthood 4:1; 5:17), and that they disputed with the Pharisees over the resurrection (23:6–8).
Essenes. Josephus delineates the beliefs of the Essenes as follows: (1)They ascribed every happening to God. (2)They believed in the immortality of the soul.
Zealots. Scholars tend to use “Zealots” as a general term to refer to three different groups mentioned by Josephus: brigands, Sicarii (Assassins), and Zealots. The three groups have different political ideologies and emerged at different times in the first century. They can all be described as revolutionaries.
Herodians. The Herodians are mentioned three times in the Gospels. They are reported to have plotted, along with the Pharisees, to kill Jesus after he healed a man with a withered hand (Mark 3:6). They are also described, along with the Pharisees, as trying to trap Jesus concerning the lawfulness of paying taxes to Caesar (Matt. 22:16; Mark 12:13).
The Herodians were aristocrats who supported the Herodian dynasty and the Romans, whose support made that dynasty possible. There seems to be some overlap between the Herodians and the Sadducees; Mark 8:15 has Jesus warning his disciples concerning the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod (some ancient witnesses read “Herodians”), whereas the parallel in Matt. 16:6, 11 has Jesus warning his disciples concerning the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Their religious beliefs may have been similar to those of the Sadducees. Too little information about them exists to permit drawing strong conclusions. One can safely say, however, that the Herodians were pro-Roman aristocrats who joined forces with the anti-Roman Pharisees in opposing Jesus.
“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.
Samaria was the capital city of the northern kingdom of Israel. After the fall of JeroboamI’s dynasty, and the rules of Baasha, Elah, and Zimri, the ruling center of the northern kingdom moved from Tirzah to Samaria during the rule of Omri (r. 882871 BC), the first king of northern Israel’s third dynasty.
Samaria remained the capital of the northern kingdom of Israel until it fell to the Assyrians under SargonII in 721 BC, when he deported most of the population to other areas of the Assyrian Empire (2Kings 17:6). According to Sargon’s annals, he improved the city and populated it with peoples deported from other countries that he had conquered. The report of the fall of Samaria in 2Kings 17:24 generally agrees with this. The populace of Samaria worshiped its own gods and the God of Israel as well.
Besides being the name of the capital city of the northern kingdom of Israel, “Samaria” was a name for the northern kingdom itself. The northern kingdom was always politically and economically more prosperous than Judah.
In the NT, Samaria is the region between Galilee and Judea through which Jews avoided traveling. By this time, there had been great animosity between the Jews and Samaritans for centuries. Luke lists Samaria as one of the regions to which Jesus’ disciples would be witnesses (Acts 1:8). The archaeological ruins of Samaria lie eight miles northwest of the modern city of Nablus. The town of Sabastia is located there today. See also Samaritans.
According to the Bible, the Samaritans are the descendants of the peoples whom SargonII settled in Samaria after he conquered it and the northern Israelites (see also Samaria). As such, they were not quite Jewish, not quite Gentile.
The NT mentions the Samaritans. The story of the woman at the well in John 4 depicts Jesus ministering to a Samaritan. We learn in this passage (John 4:9) that Jews like Jesus did not eat or drink from the same vessel as a Samaritan since they believed it would render them ritually unclean (see NET: “For Jews use nothing in common with Samaritans”). One of the chief points of contention between Jews and Samaritans is highlighted in this passage: Samaritans believe that Mount Gerizim is God’s chosen worship site, not Zion. Also alluded to here is the Samaritans’ belief in a “returning one” (Aram. taheb), who will guide the Samaritans to repentance and reestablish proper worship. In John 8:48 Jesus’ opponents level a charge against him, asking him if he is not indeed a Samaritan and possessed by a demon.
In the 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.
A town in Samaria where Jesus asked a Samaritan woman for a drink as she drew water from nearby Jacob’s Well (John 4:5). Sychar is commonly identified as the modern village of ’Askar on the shoulder of Mount Ebal and opposite Mount Gerizim. Sychar lies about a mile from ancient Shechem. The region is saturated with underground springs, which make it a convenient stopping place for tired and thirsty travelers (John 4:6). Jacob apparently gave this plot of land to his son Joseph (Gen. 48:22; John 4:5), and eventually it became the most important Samaritan city.
Water is mentioned extensively in the Bible due to its prevalence in creation and its association with life and purity. The cosmic waters of Gen. 1 are held back by the sky (Gen. 1:67; cf. Pss. 104:6, 13; 148:4). God is enthroned on these waters in his cosmic temple (Pss. 29:10; 104:3, 13; cf. Gen. 1:2; Ps. 78:69; Isa. 66:1). These same waters were released in the time of Noah (Gen. 7:10–12; Ps. 104:7–9).
Water is also an agent of life and fertility and is therefore associated with the presence of God. Both God himself and his temple are described as the source of life-giving water (Jer. 2:13; 17:13; Joel 3:18; cf. Isa. 12:2–3). Ezekiel envisions this water flowing from beneath the temple and streaming down into the Dead Sea, where it brings life and fecundity (Ezek. 47:1–12; cf. Zech. 14:8). The book of Revelation, employing the same image, describes “the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb” (22:1). This imagery is also illustrated in archaeological remains associated with temples. Cisterns are attested beneath the Dome of the Rock (presumably the location of the Jerusalem temple) and beneath the Judahite temple at Arad. Other temples, such as the Israelite high place at Tel Dan, are located close to freshwater springs. The Gihon spring in the City of David may also be associated with the Jerusalem temple (Ps. 46:4; cf. Gen. 2:13).
This OT imagery forms the background for Jesus’ teaching regarding eternal life in the writings of the apostle John. Jesus claims to be the source of living water, and he offers it freely to everyone who thirsts (John 4:10–15; 7:37; Rev. 21:6; 22:17; cf. Rev. 7:17). This water, which produces “a spring of water welling up to eternal life” (John 4:14), is the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer (John 7:38–39).
Water is also described in the Bible as an agent of cleansing. It is extensively employed in purification rituals in the OT. In the NT, the ritual of water baptism signifies the purity and new life of the believer (Matt. 3:11, 16; Mark 1:8–10; Luke 3:16; John 1:26, 31–33; 3:23; Acts 1:5; 8:36–39; 10:47; 11:16; 1Pet. 3:20–21; cf. Eph. 5:26; Heb. 10:22).
Finally, the NT also reveals Jesus as the Lord of water. He walks on water (Matt. 14:28–29; John 6:19), turns water into wine (John 2:7–9; 4:46), and controls water creatures (Matt. 17:27; John 21:6). Most important, Jesus commands “the winds and the water, and they obey him” (Luke 8:25; cf. Ps. 29:3).
Unlike a spring, a well allows access to subterranean water through a shaft that has been dug into the ground. Wells typically were deep and lined with stone or baked brick for stability, often capped with heavy stone to prevent exploitation. In an arid environment, wells were invaluable to the community. Here, livestock were watered and conversations were held (Gen. 24:10 27; 29:1–14; John 4:6–8). Figuratively, the well is used of a lover (Song 4:15), an adulteress (Prov. 23:27), and a city (Jer. 6:7). Wells commonly were named (Gen. 21:25–31 [Beersheba, “well of an oath”]) and often fought over (Gen. 21:25–30; 26:18).
Three kinds of “well encounters” can be seen in Scripture: (1)human being with deity (Gen. 16:7–14), (2)clan with clan (26:20), and (3)man with woman (29:1–14). The latter became highly developed as a betrothal-type scene that included standard elements: stranger’s arrival (=otherness), meeting (=bond), paternal announcement (=hospitality), and domestic invitation (=acceptance) (see Rebekah [Gen. 24]; Jacob and Rachel [Gen. 29:1–14]; Moses and Zipporah [Exod. 2:15–22]).
Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman (John 4:1–42) draws on multiple aspects of a well encounter: divine (Jesus) with human (the woman), Jew and Samaritan, a traveler, foreign (i.e., hostile) land, refreshment, announcement, invitation, and so on. However, now Jacob’s well (4:6) hosts Jesus’ presentation of himself as the groom whom she has been seeking (4:26). The patriarch’s well becomes a symbol of salvation, just as water becomes a metaphor for transformation (4:14–15). What could have been another “well of nationality” conflict (John 4:9, 11–12 [cf. Gen. 26:20: “Esek= argument”]) was elevated to a “living water” conversion (John 4:10, 13–15 [cf. Gen. 16:14: “Beer Lahai Roi= well of the Living One who sees me”]). Her plea “Come, see a man” (John 4:29) echoes an earlier “outcast,” Hagar, who exclaimed, “I have now seen the One who sees me” (Gen. 16:13).
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.
Worship of God is a critical dimension of both Testaments. One might argue that it is the very goal for which Israel and the church were formed.
The living God is the sole object of worship. He delights in the satisfying joy that his children find in him. The nature of worship is not about servant entertainment or passive observation; it is an active acknowledgment of God’s worth in a variety of humble ways.
A genuine selfless focus on the person and work of God brings about a humble response that affects one’s posture, generates works of service, and stirs up a healthy attitude of fear and respect. Knowledge of God is the foundational element in worship. God is worshiped for who he is and what he does. He is the Eternal One (Ps. 90:1; 1Tim. 1:17), unique in every way (Isa. 44:8); he is God alone (Deut. 6:4). He is distinguished by his self-existence, the self-reliant quality of his life (Exod. 3:14; Deut. 32:30). The psalmist calls God’s people to shout joyfully to their good, loving, eternal, and faithful Creator (Ps. 100).
God is worshiped as the Creator of all life. This magnificent creative work of God, declared in the opening of Genesis, is a critical focus in worship (Ps. 95:6; Rom. 1:25; Rev. 4:11). Along with this is the companion declaration that God is the redeemer. The redemptive work of God is celebrated in the Song of Moses (Exod. 15:118) and in the Song of the Redeemed (Rev. 14:3).
Worship is also associated with the royal aspects of God’s character. It was the desire of the magi to find Jesus the king and worship him (Matt. 2:1–2). The final scenes of history will be characterized by humble submission to and worship of the King of kings (1Tim. 6:15; Rev. 17:14; 19:16; cf. Rev. 15:3–4). The psalms often draw the reader’s attention to God’s royal character as a basis for worship (Pss. 45:11; 98:6).
Finally, God is worshiped as the Lord of his covenant relationship with the nation of Israel. This covenant theme and metaphor summarize the varied aspects of God’s character and his relationship with Israel. The God who brought Israel into a covenant relationship is to be sincerely and exclusively worshiped (2Kings 17:35, 38; cf. Deut. 31:20). These confessional statements about the character of God are a glorious weight that moves believers to prostrate themselves, to have an attitude of awe and respect, and to obediently serve.
Direct Matches
The quality of being shared by all, such as a “commonspeech” (Gen. 11:1) or the human condition (Ps. 73:5; Eccles.9:2), but also anything outside the sphere of the holy. God requiresIsrael to distinguish common from holy (Lev. 10:10; Ezek. 22:26;42:20). By the first century, many Jews (e.g., the Pharisees)attempted to extend this sphere, which radiated from the temple, totheir homes. They only ate tithed produce, used clean vessels, andshared their table with the ritually clean (Matt. 23:23; Mark 7:3–4;John 2:6; 4:9; Gal. 2:11–21; see m. Demai 1:2–3).Like the prophets (e.g., Isa. 1:16), Jesus emphasizes the quality ofthe heart (Matt. 5:8; Mark 7:14–23) and brings the common intothe sphere of the holy by sharing the indwelling Holy Spirit withthem (Mark 5:25–34). This practice anticipates the inclusion ofnon-Jews in the early church (Acts 10:9–16; 11:1–18; Gal.3:1–9).
The Greek term for “disciple,” mathētēs,means “student.” Like other rabbis and religious figuresof the time, Jesus taught a group of such students (Matt. 9:14;22:16; Mark 2:16; John 1:35; 4:1). The forms of address that Jesus’disciples used for him reflect the nature of the relationship:“rabbi” (Mark 9:5), “teacher” (Mark 9:38),and “master” (Luke 5:5). In addition to receivinginstruction from Jesus, his disciples took care of his physical needs(Matt. 21:1; John 4:8), ate with him (Matt. 9:10; 26:18), performedexorcisms and healings (Matt. 10:1; Luke 10:17), baptized (John 4:2),controlled access to Jesus (Matt. 19:13; John 12:21), and traveledwith him (Luke 8:1; John 2:12). On one occasion Jesus visited thehouse of Peter and healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt. 8:14),which suggests that although the Gospels do not generally depict theprivate lives of Jesus or his disciples apart from their publicministry, the relationship among these men did not prevent thedisciples from maintaining their own homes, families, and, probably,occupations.
Inthe Gospels Jesus is depicted with variously sized groups ofdisciples and followers. A prominent tradition in the Gospelsindicates that there was an inner group of twelve (Matt. 10:1; 26:20;Mark 3:14; 4:10; 6:7; John 6:70), each of whom is known by name. Thisis the group most traditionally understood as “the disciples”of Jesus. As an authority, the group of twelve persisted beyond theascension of Jesus (Acts 6:2). Following the death of Judas Iscariot,Matthias was chosen to take his place among the Twelve (Acts 1:26).Other passages specify a group of seventy or seventy-two (Luke 10:1,16), and often the number of disciples is indeterminate. Severalpassages name disciples beyond the Twelve (Matt. 27:57; Luke 24:18;Acts 9:10; 9:36; 16:1; 21:16), and some later authors attempted tolist the names of the seventy by drawing names from the book of Acts,the Epistles, and other early Christian traditions (e.g., thethirteenth-century Syriac compilation The Book of the Bee). The bookof Acts often refers to any follower of Christ as “disciple,”including those in cities throughout the Roman Empire.
TheGospels tend to present Jesus as a charismatic teacher who couldattract adherents with little overt persuasion. The calling ofseveral disciples is narrated, including that of the brothers SimonPeter and Andrew, the brothers James and John the sons of Zebedee(Mark 1:16–20; John 1:40–41), Philip and Nathanael (John1:44–45), and Matthew/Levi (Mark 2:13–17 pars.). TheGospel of John presents Andrew as a former disciple of John theBaptist.
TheTwelve
Eachof the Synoptic Gospels has a list of the Twelve (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16; cf. the list of eleven inActs 1:13), and the Gospel of John mentions “the Twelve”several times without providing a list. With some slightharmonizations, it is possible to come up with a single list oftwelve disciples based on the three Synoptic lists.
(1)Allthree Synoptic Gospels agree in placing Simon Peter first in thelist. (2)His brother Andrew is second, though Mark has placedAndrew farther down the list and does not identify him as Peter’sbrother. (3)James the son of Zebedee and (4)John thebrother of James are next. Mark adds that the two were also named“Boanerges,” meaning “sons of thunder.” Theplacement of Peter, James, and John at the head of the listcorresponds with the prominence of these three disciples in the storyof Jesus’ arrest at Gethsemane, where these three were present(Matt. 26:37// Mark 14:33). Perhaps the order of Mark’slist reflects the prestige of these three disciples, with Matthew andLuke bringing Andrew to the head of the list not because of anyparticular importance but so that he is listed with his brotherPeter.
Thelists continue with (5)Philip, (6)Bartholomew, and(7)Matthew, further identified in Matt. 10:3 as a “taxcollector.” The calling of Matthew is narrated in Matt. 9:9–13and also in Mark 2:13–17; Luke 5:27–32, where Matthew iscalled “Levi.” (8)Thomas is next (Matt. 10:3 listsThomas before Matthew; in John 20:24 he is also called “Didymus”),followed by (9)James the son of Alphaeus (Mark 2:14 also callsLevi “son of Alphaeus”), so named to avoid confusion withJames the son of Zebedee. (10)Simon the Cananaean (Matt. 10:4;Mark 3:18 NRSV) or Zealot (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13) is so designated toavoid confusion with Simon Peter. The precise meaning of the term“Cananaean” is uncertain (see Cananaean). (11)Thaddaeus(who precedes Simon the Cananaean in Matthew and Mark) probablyshould be identified with the eleventh disciple in Luke’s list,Judas the son of James. The names of Thaddaeus and Judas son of Jamesrepresent the greatest single discrepancy among the three lists, butit may be mitigated somewhat by the fact that some manuscriptsidentify “Thaddaeus” as a surname (though they give thisdisciple’s other name as “Lebbaeus,” not “Judas”).All three lists agree in listing (12)Judas Iscariot as the lastdisciple in the list, and all note that he betrayed Jesus or became atraitor. The fact that Judas Iscariot bears a second name(“Iscariot”) may suggest that there was another Judasamong the Twelve from whom it was necessary to distinguish him, as inthe case of the two Simons and the two Jameses. This observationlends some weight to the notion that Thaddaeus was also named“Judas.”
TheDisciples as Apostles
Atvarious points in his ministry Jesus sent out his disciples to preachand perform miracles, hence they are also referred to as “apostles”(i.e., emissaries). The connection between these two terms is madeclear in Luke 6:13: “When morning came, he called his disciplesto him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles.”In the NT Epistles the title “apostle” is applied toseveral individuals who were not among Jesus’ twelve disciples,most notably Paul. In sum, both “disciple” and “apostle”have narrow and broad meanings in the NT, though there is substantialcontinuity between “the Twelve” disciples or apostles ofJesus and the narrow definition of “apostle” in the earlychapters of Acts.
TheLater Careers of the Disciples
Afterhis resurrection, Jesus told his disciples (“the apostles hehad chosen” [Acts 1:2]) that they would be his witnesses “inJerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of theearth” (Acts 1:8). Stories about the subsequent careers of theTwelve exist in both the NT and other early Christian sources. Thefirst half of Acts largely focuses on the career of Simon Peter,before attention shifts to the career of Paul in the eastern RomanEmpire. Extracanonical books and local legends trace the latercareers of Jesus’ twelve disciples, placing them in Rome(Peter), Scythia (Andrew), Spain (James), Ephesus (John), Phrygia(Philip), Armenia (Bartholomew and Thaddaeus), India (Thomas),Ethiopia (Matthew), and North Africa (Simon the Cananaean). Piouslocal traditions attribute martyrdom to a number of the Twelve,though in the NT we know only of the deaths of Judas Iscariot (Matt.27:3–10; Acts 1:16–20) and James the son of Zebedee (Acts12:1–2).
The giving of gifts in the Bible has several nuances. It can refer to a goodwill gift or a peace offering given to a friend or relative (Prov. 18:16; 21:14). Thus, when Jacob seeks to make peace with his brother Esau, he sends gifts to him before they meet (Gen. 32:13; 33:10). Similarly, when Abigail intercedes with David on behalf of Nabal, she gives David a gift (1Sam. 25:27).
Ezekiel 46:17 illustrates that some gifts are regulated if they came from an inheritance. There are several references in the NT to the gifts of one local church to another (Acts 11:30; 1Cor. 16:3; 2Cor. 8:12, 20; 9:5; Phil. 4:17). The giving of these gifts has a positive effect for both those in need and those who give the gift.
Gifts are a traditional part of bridal arrangements in the Bible. Thus, Shechem requests to know the bride-price and gift when he asks for Dinah as his wife (Gen. 34:11–12). Likewise, Pharaoh gives a captured city as a dowry for his daughter’s marriage to Solomon (1Kings 9:16).
Gifts are integral in honoring another in hospitality and in approaching someone about a service. Israel instructs his sons to take gifts to Pharaoh when they go to purchase food (Gen. 43:11). It is customary to bring a gift to a man of God or prophet when asking for advice or prophetic insight (1Sam. 9:7; 1Kings 13:7; 2Kings 5:15; 8:8–9). People bring Solomon gifts when they seek an audience with him (1Kings 10:25). Additionally, gifts are part of the process of establishing a treaty (1Kings 15:19; 2Kings 16:8; 20:12).
Of course, gifts can be used for ignoble purposes as well. David sends a gift to Uriah in an effort to cover up his own sin (2Sam. 11:8).
Sacrifices of every type are conceived of as a gift to the deity with the intent of seeking favor or making restitution for sin (Lev. 22:18; Num. 31:52). Even mandatory offerings and dedicated land are considered gifts under the notion that God, as the Creator, owns all (Ezek. 45:16; 48:12, 20). This idea of giving a gift to God demonstrates the cost involved in approaching the deity. Interestingly, the priests and Levites who are associated with the sacrifices are described as a gift from God to the rest of the people (Num. 18:6–7).
The intentions behind the gift are important to God. Jesus states that one cannot be giving gifts to God and simultaneously holding on to contention with another in the community of faith (Matt. 5:23–24). Jesus commands that thankfulness to God be followed with the prescribed sacrifice (Matt. 8:4). Yet, an unwillingness to help others should not be hidden behind an ostentatious dedication to giving to God (Matt. 15:5; Mark 7:11). Likewise, Jesus warns against being overly legalistic about gifts and their benefit (Matt. 23:18–19).
On a fundamental level, gift giving has its origin in the gracious nature of God. God is the giver of all good gifts (James 1:17). He gives children to mothers (Gen. 30:20). A good life and reward for work are also gifts from God (Eccles. 3:13; 5:19). Jesus describes himself as a gift of God (John 4:10). Likewise, the Holy Spirit is God’s gift (Acts 1:4; 2:38; 11:17) and cannot be purchased with money (Acts 8:20). This gift of the Holy Spirit is given to Jew and Gentile alike (Acts 10:45).
Both grace and salvation are gifts from God (Rom. 5:15–17; 6:23; Eph. 2:8; 3:7; Heb. 6:4; 1Pet. 3:7). Finally, spiritual gifts are part of God’s good gifts (Rom. 1:11). These gifts are meant to help the church so that nothing needed for ministry is lacking in the body of Christ (Rom. 12:6; 1Cor. 1:7; 7:7; 1Tim. 4:14; 2Tim. 1:6; 1Pet. 4:10). Spiritual gifts are all governed by the greatest gift, that of love (1Cor. 13:2; 14:1).
The giving of gifts in the Bible has several nuances. It can refer to a goodwill gift or a peace offering given to a friend or relative (Prov. 18:16; 21:14). Thus, when Jacob seeks to make peace with his brother Esau, he sends gifts to him before they meet (Gen. 32:13; 33:10). Similarly, when Abigail intercedes with David on behalf of Nabal, she gives David a gift (1Sam. 25:27).
Ezekiel 46:17 illustrates that some gifts are regulated if they came from an inheritance. There are several references in the NT to the gifts of one local church to another (Acts 11:30; 1Cor. 16:3; 2Cor. 8:12, 20; 9:5; Phil. 4:17). The giving of these gifts has a positive effect for both those in need and those who give the gift.
Gifts are a traditional part of bridal arrangements in the Bible. Thus, Shechem requests to know the bride-price and gift when he asks for Dinah as his wife (Gen. 34:11–12). Likewise, Pharaoh gives a captured city as a dowry for his daughter’s marriage to Solomon (1Kings 9:16).
Gifts are integral in honoring another in hospitality and in approaching someone about a service. Israel instructs his sons to take gifts to Pharaoh when they go to purchase food (Gen. 43:11). It is customary to bring a gift to a man of God or prophet when asking for advice or prophetic insight (1Sam. 9:7; 1Kings 13:7; 2Kings 5:15; 8:8–9). People bring Solomon gifts when they seek an audience with him (1Kings 10:25). Additionally, gifts are part of the process of establishing a treaty (1Kings 15:19; 2Kings 16:8; 20:12).
Of course, gifts can be used for ignoble purposes as well. David sends a gift to Uriah in an effort to cover up his own sin (2Sam. 11:8).
Sacrifices of every type are conceived of as a gift to the deity with the intent of seeking favor or making restitution for sin (Lev. 22:18; Num. 31:52). Even mandatory offerings and dedicated land are considered gifts under the notion that God, as the Creator, owns all (Ezek. 45:16; 48:12, 20). This idea of giving a gift to God demonstrates the cost involved in approaching the deity. Interestingly, the priests and Levites who are associated with the sacrifices are described as a gift from God to the rest of the people (Num. 18:6–7).
The intentions behind the gift are important to God. Jesus states that one cannot be giving gifts to God and simultaneously holding on to contention with another in the community of faith (Matt. 5:23–24). Jesus commands that thankfulness to God be followed with the prescribed sacrifice (Matt. 8:4). Yet, an unwillingness to help others should not be hidden behind an ostentatious dedication to giving to God (Matt. 15:5; Mark 7:11). Likewise, Jesus warns against being overly legalistic about gifts and their benefit (Matt. 23:18–19).
On a fundamental level, gift giving has its origin in the gracious nature of God. God is the giver of all good gifts (James 1:17). He gives children to mothers (Gen. 30:20). A good life and reward for work are also gifts from God (Eccles. 3:13; 5:19). Jesus describes himself as a gift of God (John 4:10). Likewise, the Holy Spirit is God’s gift (Acts 1:4; 2:38; 11:17) and cannot be purchased with money (Acts 8:20). This gift of the Holy Spirit is given to Jew and Gentile alike (Acts 10:45).
Both grace and salvation are gifts from God (Rom. 5:15–17; 6:23; Eph. 2:8; 3:7; Heb. 6:4; 1Pet. 3:7). Finally, spiritual gifts are part of God’s good gifts (Rom. 1:11). These gifts are meant to help the church so that nothing needed for ministry is lacking in the body of Christ (Rom. 12:6; 1Cor. 1:7; 7:7; 1Tim. 4:14; 2Tim. 1:6; 1Pet. 4:10). Spiritual gifts are all governed by the greatest gift, that of love (1Cor. 13:2; 14:1).
For Christians, God is the creator of the cosmos and theredeemer of humanity. He has revealed himself in historicalacts—namely, in creation, in the history of Israel, andespecially in the person and work of Jesus Christ. There is only oneGod (Deut. 6:4); “there is no other” (Isa. 45:5). Because“God is spirit” (John 4:24), he must reveal himselfthrough various images and metaphors.
Imageryof God
God’scharacter and attributes are revealed primarily through the use ofimagery, the best and most understandable way to describe themysterious nature of God. Scripture employs many images to describeGod’s being and character. Some examples follow here.
Godis compared to the father who shows compassion and love to hischildren (Ps. 103:13; Rom. 8:15). The father image is also used bythe prophets to reveal God’s creatorship (Isa. 64:8). Jesuspredominantly uses the language of “Father” in referenceto God (Mark 8:38; 13:32; 14:36), revealing his close relationshipwith the Father. God is also identified as the king of Israel evenbefore the Israelites have a human king (1Sam. 10:19).
ThePsalter exalts Yahweh as the king, acknowledging God’ssovereignty and preeminence (Pss. 5:2; 44:4; 47:6–7; 68:24;74:12; 84:3; 95:3; 145:1). God is metaphorically identified as theshepherd who takes care of his sheep, his people, to depict hisnature of provision and protection (Ps. 23:1–4). The image ofthe potter is also employed to describe the nature of God, whocreates his creatures according to his will (Jer. 18:6; Rom.9:20–23). In Hos. 2:4–3:5 God is identified as thelong-suffering husband of the adulterous wife Israel. In the settingof war, God is depicted as the divine warrior who fights against hisenemy (Exod. 15:3).
Godis also referred to as advocate (Isa. 1:18), judge (Gen. 18:25), andlawgiver (Deut. 5:1–22). The image of the farmer is alsofrequently adopted to describe God’s nature of compassionatecare, creation, providence, justice, redemption, sanctification, andmore (e.g., Isa. 5:1–7; John 15:1–12). God is oftenreferred to as the teacher (Exod. 4:15) who teaches what to do, asdoes the Holy Spirit in the NT (John 14:26). The Holy Spirit isidentified as the counselor, the helper, the witness, and the guide(John 14:16, 26; 15:26). God is often metaphorically compared tovarious things in nature, such as rock (Ps. 18:2, 31, 46), light (Ps.27:1), fire (Deut. 4:24; 9:3), lion (Hos. 11:10), and eagle (Deut.32:11–12). In particular, the Davidic psalms employ many imagesin nature—rock, fortress, shield, horn, and stronghold (e.g.,Ps. 18:2)—to describe God’s perfect protection.
Last,anthropomorphism often is employed to describe God’sactivities. Numerous parts of the human body are used to speak ofGod: face (Num. 6:25–26), eyes (2Chron. 16:9), mouth(Deut. 8:3), ears (Neh. 1:6), nostrils (Exod. 15:8), hands (Ezra7:9), arms (Deut. 33:27), fingers (Ps. 8:3), voice (Exod. 15:26),shoulders (Deut. 33:12), feet (Ps. 18:9), and back (Exod. 33:21–22).
Namesand Attributes of God
TheOT refers to God by many names. One of the general terms used forGod, ’el (which probably means “ultimate supremacy”),often appears in a compound form with a qualifying word, as in ’el’elyon (“God Most High”), ’el shadday (“GodAlmighty”), and ’el ro’i (“the God who seesme” or “God of my seeing”). These descriptive namesreveal important attributes of God and usually were derived from thepersonal experiences of the people of God in real-life settings;thus, they do not describe an abstract concept of God.
Themost prominent personal name of God is yahweh (YHWH), which istranslated as “the Lord” in most English Bibles. At theburning bush in the wilderness of Horeb, God first revealed to Moseshis personal name in sentence form: “I am who I am”(Exod. 3:13–15). Though debated, the divine name “YHWH”seems to originate from an abbreviated form of this sentence. Yahweh,who was with Moses and his people at the time of exodus, is the Godwho was with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Jesus’testimony, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the Godof Jacob” is identified as the God “of the living”(Matt. 22:32). Hence, the name “Yahweh” is closely tiedto God’s self-revelation as the God of presence and life. (Seealso Names of God.)
Manyof God’s attributes are summarized in Exod. 34:6–7: “TheLord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger,abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands,and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leavethe guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their childrenfor the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”Below are further explanations of some of the representativeattributes of God.
Holiness.The moral excellence of God is the attribute that underlies all otherattributes. Thus, all God’s attributes can be modified by theadjective holy: holy love, holy justice, holy mercy, holyrighteousness, holy compassion, holy wisdom, and so forth. God is theonly supremely holy one (1Sam. 2:2; Rev. 15:4). God’sname is also holy; those who profane God’s name are condemnedas guilty (Exod. 20:7; Lev. 22:32). God is depicted as the one whohas concern for his holy name, which the Israelites profaned amongthe nations; God actively seeks to restore the holiness of hisdefiled name (Ezek. 36:21–23). God’s holiness is revealedby his righteous action (Isa. 5:16). Not only is God holy, but alsohe expects his people to be holy (Lev. 11:45; 19:2). All thesacrificial codes of Leviticus represent the moral requirements ofholiness for the worshipers. Because of God’s character ofholiness, he cannot tolerate sin in the lives of people, and hebrings judgment to those who do not repent (Hab. 1:13).
Loveand justice.Because “God is love,” no one reaches the true knowledgeof God without having love (1John 4:8). Images of the fatherand the faithful husband are frequently employed to portray God’slove (Deut. 1:31; Jer. 31:32; Hos. 2:14–20; 11:1–4).God’s love was supremely demonstrated by the giving of his onlySon Jesus Christ for his people (John 3:16; Rom. 5:7–8; 1John4:9–10). God expects his people to follow the model of Christ’ssacrificial love (1John 3:16).
God’sjustice is the foundation of his moral law and his ways (Deut. 32:4;Job 34:12; Ps. 9:16; Rev. 15:3). It is also seen in his will (Ps.99:4). God loves justice and acts with justice (Ps. 33:5). God’sjustice is demonstrated in judging people according to theirdeeds—punishing wickedness and rewarding righteousness (Ezek.18:20; Ps. 58:11; Rev. 20:12–13). God establishes justice byupholding the cause of the oppressed (Ps. 103:6) and by vindicatingthose afflicted (1Sam. 25:39). God is completely impartial inimplementing justice (Job 34:18–19). As with holiness, Godrequires his people to reflect his justice (Prov. 21:3).
Godkeeps a perfect balance between the attributes of love and justice.God’s love never infringes upon his justice, and vice versa.The cross of Jesus Christ perfectly shows these two attributes in oneact. Because of his love, God gave his only Son for his people;because of his justice, God punished his Son for the sake of theirsins. The good news is that God’s justice was satisfied by thework of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:25–26).
Righteousnessand mercy.God’s righteousness shows his unique moral perfection. God’snature, actions, and laws display his character of righteousness(Pss. 19:8–9; 119:137; Dan. 9:14). “Righteousness andjustice” are the foundation of God’s throne (Ps. 89:14).God’s righteousness was especially demonstrated in the work ofJesus Christ (Rom. 3:21–22). God’s righteousness willultimately be revealed in his final judgment (Rev. 19:2; 20–22;cf. Ps. 7:11).
TheEnglish word “mercy” renders various words in theoriginal languages: in Hebrew, khesed, khanan, rakham; in Greek,charis, eleos, oiktirmos, splanchnon. English Bibles translate thesevariously as “mercy,” “compassion,” “grace,”“kindness,” or “love.” The word “mercy”is chosen here as a representative concept (cf. Ps. 86:15). God’smercy is most clearly seen in his act of forgiving sinners. In thePsalter, “Have mercy on me” is the most common form ofexpression when the psalmist entreats God’s forgiveness (Pss.41:4, 10; 51:1). God’s mercy is shown abundantly to his chosenpeople (Eph. 2:4–8). Because of his mercy, their sins areforgiven (Mic. 7:18), their punishments are withheld (Ezra 9:13), andeven sinners’ prayers are heard (Ps. 51:1; Luke 18:13–14).God is “the Father of mercies” (2Cor. 1:3 NRSV).
Godkeeps a perfect balance between righteousness and mercy. Hisrighteousness and mercy never infringe upon each other, nor does oneoperate at the expense of the other. God’s abundant mercy isshown to sinners through Jesus Christ, but if they do not repent oftheir sins, his righteous judgment will be brought upon them.
Faithfulness.God’s faithfulness is revealed in keeping the covenant that hemade with his people. God “is the faithful God, keeping hiscovenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him andkeep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). God is faithful to hischaracter, his name, and his word (Neh. 9:8; Ps. 106:8; 2Tim.2:13; Heb. 6:13–18). God’s faithfulness is clearly seenin fulfilling his promise (Josh. 23:14). God showed his faithfulnessby fulfilling all the promises that he made to Abraham (Gen. 12:2–3;Rom. 9:9; Gal. 4:28; Heb. 6:13–15), by having Solomon build thetemple that he promised to David (2Sam. 7:12–13; 1Kings8:17–21), and by sending his people into exile in Babylon andreturning them to their homeland (Jer. 25:8–11; Dan. 9:2–3).God’s faithfulness was ultimately demonstrated by sending JesusChrist, as was promised in the OT (Luke 24:44; Acts 13:32–33;1Cor. 15:3–8).
Goodness.Jesus said, “No one is good—except God alone” (Mark10:18). God demonstrates his goodness in his actions (Ps. 119:68), inhis work of creation (1Tim. 4:4), in his love (Ps. 86:5), andin his promises (Josh. 23:14–15).
Patience.God is “slow to anger” (Exod. 34:6; Num. 14:18), which isa favorite expression for his patience (Neh. 9:17; Pss. 86:15; 103:8;Joel 2:13). God is patient with sinful people for a long time (Acts13:18). Because of his patient character, he delays punishment (Isa.42:14). For instance, God was patient with his disobedient prophetJonah and also with the sinful people of Nineveh (Jon. 3:1–10).The purpose of God’s patience is to lead people towardrepentance (Rom.2:4).
Godof the Trinity
TheChristian God of the Bible is the triune God. God is one but existsin three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt.28:19). The Son is one with the Father (John 10:30); the Holy Spiritis one with God (2Sam. 23:2–3). All three share the samedivine nature; they are all-knowing, holy, glorious, and called“Lord” and “God” (Matt. 11:25; John 1:1;20:28; Acts 3:22; 5:3–4; 10:36; 1Cor. 8:6; 2Cor.3:17–18; 2Pet. 1:1). All three share in the same work ofcreation (Gen. 1:1–3), salvation (1Pet. 1:2), indwelling(John 14:23), and directing the church’s mission (Matt.28:18–20; Acts 16:6–10; 14:27; 13:2–4).
At this site Jesus asked a Samaritan woman for a drink (John4:7). Tradition associates the well with Jacob’s camp nearShechem (Gen. 33:18). Today it is often identified as Bir Ya’qub(“the well of Jacob”), near the site of ancient Shechem.
In the NT, “Jews” (Ioudaioi) is an ethnic andreligious term to describe the people of Judah. In Jesus’ day,Jews were distinguished from Samaritans (John 4:9, 22). Gradually theterm began to be used more in a religious than in an ethnic sense,and it has come to represent the descendants from Abraham as a wholeand religious converts who regard the Mosaic law and customs as theinalienable religious foundation for faith and practices (Mark 7:3;John 2:6).
TheGospels
Inthe Synoptic Gospels the term “Jews” is used largely inthe phrase “the king of the Jews” with reference to Jesus(Matt. 2:2; 27:11, 29; Mark 15:2, 9, 12, 18; Luke 23:3, 37). Born asthe king of the Jews, Jesus claimed to have come to fulfill the lawof Moses instead of abolishing it (Matt. 5:17). He emphasized theimportance of practicing the law in obedience (Matt. 7:24–27),and he rebuked the Pharisees and the scribes for teaching the lawwithout carrying it out (Matt. 23). They opposed him, not onlybecause they rejected his claim to be the Messiah, but also becausethey viewed his teaching and practices as destabilizing theirreligious status quo (Matt. 12:1–8; John 5:10; 11:48).
TheJews are represented in the Gospels by both the upper class (e.g.,Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, chief priests) and the lower classes(the crowds). Usually the religious upper class would not acceptJesus’ teaching and challenged him by asking questions ordenying his authority (Matt. 15:1; 16:1). The crowds generallyaccepted Jesus’ teaching and experienced his power to heal andother benefits. The Synoptic account of the opposition by the upperclass is contrasted with the widespread opposition to Jesus by the“Jews” in general in John’s Gospel. But Matthew andLuke also highlight Jesus’ lament of the unrepentant Jewishcities (Matt. 11:20–24; Luke 10:12–15), indicating thatresistance to Jesus’ teaching was a common phenomenon among theJews.
Jesusresponded to the unbelieving Jews with strong rebuke and condemnation(Matt. 12:30–32; 21:33–46). When Jesus healed a servantof a Roman centurion and marveled at the amazing faith of thisGentile (8:5–13), Jesus predicted that “the subjects ofthe kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness” becauseof unbelief, whereas the Gentiles will come to eat with Abraham inthe kingdom of heaven (8:11–12). In spite of the unbelief ofthe Jews, the privilege to hear the gospel was given to them first.Jesus sent out the twelve disciples, instructing them that theyshould not go anywhere among the Gentiles or enter the towns of theSamaritans, but instead go “to the lost sheep of Israel”(Matt. 10:6 [cf. Rom. 1:16]).
Theterm “Jews” occurs only four times in the Synopticsoutside the phrase “king of the Jews,” but seventy-onetimes in the Gospel of John. John uses the term especially as atechnical one for those Jews who were hostile to Jesus and hisfollowers. Whereas the Synoptics focus on the Jewish leaders’rejection of Jesus’ messianic actions, John focuses on theirrejection of his teaching that he is the Son of God in uniquerelationship with the Father. Jesus in John is not only the “oneand only”(monogenēs) of God (1:18), but also the fulfiller of what thetemple signifies and all the Jewish tradition and customs represent.John thus describes the Jewish opposition to Jesus as much morewidespread and intense than that in the Synoptics, presenting theJews as opposing Jesus’ teaching because of their loyalty toJewish tradition (5:15–18; 6:41; 7:1–2, 13; 8:31–57;9:22; 10:31–33; 19:7–12, 38; 20:19).
Actsand the Pauline Letters
Inthe book of Acts the term “Jews” (eighty-one occurrences)is used especially with reference to the Jewish people who opposePaul’s law-free gospel (9:23; 13:45, 50; 14:2, 4; 17:5; 18:12,14; 20:3; 21:11; 22:30; 23:12; 24:9).
Inhis letters, Paul refers to “Jews” primarily in an ethnicand religious sense without connoting that they have theologicalantagonism against the gospel. The Jews are thus contrasted with theGentiles in that they are “the people of Israel”: “Theirsis the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants,the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises”(Rom. 9:4). While Paul acknowledges the continuity of Jewish identitythrough their lineage from Abraham, he distinguishes true Jews fromfalse Jews in terms of Jesus’ accomplishment of redemption.Paul says, “A person is a Jew who is one inwardly; andcircumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by thewritten code” (2:29). This distinction of true Jews from falseJews resonates with his distinction of true Israel from false Israel(9:6). The redefinition of the group of spiritual Israelites is theresult of Jesus’ death and resurrection according to the OTprophecies. Those who believe in Jesus are reckoned as “childrenof Abraham” according to the gospel announced in Gen. 12:3(Gal. 3:7–8).
Paul’spresentation of spiritual Jews is foreseen in Jesus’ statementthat the Jews who do not believe in him are not Abraham’schildren but rather the children of the devil (John 8:30–44).In 1John the children of God are defined in terms of loverather than ethnic lineage (3:10). According to the book ofRevelation, those “who say they are Jews” are not, butare a “synagogue of Satan” (2:9; 3:9). These passagesshow that salvation is obtained through faith in Jesus rather thanthrough the ethnic lineage of Abraham and observances of the Mosaiclaw (Rom. 3:20–28).
Thesepolemics against the Jews and Jewish law do not necessarily make theNT teachings anti-Semitic or anti-Judaic. What the NT polemicizes isneither the Jewish nation nor Judaism but rather the unbelief of theJews who rejected Jesus, inasmuch as Jesus is the Messiah, who hascome in flesh and fulfilled the prophecies of the OT.
Mountains, both literally and metaphorically, play a highlysignificant role in biblical history, religion, and theology. Peopleare shaped by the geography of the location in which they live, andthis was no less the case with the Israelites. Mountains, aspermanent and immovable, form natural barriers and borders (Josh.15), afford protection from invaders (Judg. 6:2; Ps. 125:2), serve asplaces of refuge (Gen. 14:10; 19:17; 1Sam. 14:22), and providebases from which to launch attacks (Judg. 4:14; 9:36). Often in theBible, mountain imagery is used to describe God as eternal and astrong refuge (Pss. 36:6; 90:2; 121:1–2; 125:2).
Butmountains are also places of mystery. In the religious world of theancient Near East, gods were thought to either live or make theirpresence known on mountains—portals, as it were, between heavenand earth. The garden of Eden is regarded by Ezekiel as having beenlocated on “the holy mount of God” (Ezek. 28:13–14).God mysteriously reveals himself in a flame of fire to Moses at MountHoreb (Exod. 3), and then later from that same mountain God gives thelaw amid thunder, fire, and smoke; the people are not allowed toapproach the mountain lest they die (Exod. 19). Moses has anothertheophany on the same mountain (Exod. 33:17–34:8), and Elijahhas a very Moses-like encounter there with God as well (1Kings19).
Becauseof this association between gods and mountains, it was the norm tobuild temples for deities on mountaintops. Thus, the temple inJerusalem is built on Mount Zion, which is also the place whereAbraham had been ready to sacrifice Isaac (Gen. 22:2; 2Chron.3:1). Thus, this mountain is the “mountain of the Lord”(Gen. 22:14), the mountain of God’s “inheritance”(Exod. 15:17), his “holy mountain” (Ps. 48:1). Even theplans for the tabernacle and temples are given on mountaintops (Exod.25:40; 26:30; 27:8; 2Sam. 24:18–25; 1Chron.21:18–22:1; 28:11–12; Ezek. 40:1–2; Rev. 21:10). Itshould not escape notice that Israel’s legal tradition andliturgical tradition are both associated with mountains, Sinai andZion (Jerusalem).
Itis no wonder, then, that mountains play such a significant role inthe NT and the life of Christ. On top of a high mountain, the deviltempts Jesus to worship him (Matt. 4:8–10). Jesus proclaims thelaw of the kingdom from a mountain (5:1). On a mountain, Jesuschooses to reveal to his disciples his true glory in thetransfiguration (17:1). After his resurrection, Jesus has hisdisciples meet him at a mountain, from which he makes his declarationof authority and gives the Great Commission (28:16–20). ButJesus and the NT authors also “relocate” the place wherepeople meet with God from any particular location, mountain orotherwise, to the human spirit and to the church (John 4:21–24;Heb. 12:22–23).
According to the Bible, the Samaritans are the descendants ofthe peoples whom SargonII settled in Samaria after he conqueredit and the northern Israelites (see also Samaria). As such, they werenot quite Jewish, not quite Gentile. Although there is a Samaritanreligious sect, it is a mistake to equate Samaritans in the Biblewith one of the sectarians in every instance. Samaritans arementioned rarely in the OT; for example, 2Kings 17:29 reportsthat the Samaritans worshiped the gods that they brought from theirhome countries at high places that they made.
TheNT mentions the Samaritans. The story of the woman at the well inJohn 4 depicts Jesus ministering to a Samaritan. We learn in thispassage (John 4:9) that Jews like Jesus did not eat or drink from thesame vessel as a Samaritan since they believed it would render themritually unclean [see NET: “For Jews use nothing in common withSamaritans”]. One of the chief points of contention betweenJews and Samaritans is highlighted in this passage: Samaritansbelieve that Mount Gerizim is God’s chosen worship site, notZion. Also alluded to here is the Samaritans’ belief in a“returning one” (Aram. taheb), who will guide theSamaritans to repentance and reestablish proper worship. In John 8:48Jesus’ opponents level a charge against him, asking him if heis not indeed a Samaritan and possessed by a demon.
Inthe Synoptic Gospels, Samaritans are variously depicted as beingincluded in Jesus’ ministry (Luke 9:52) or excluded from it(Matt. 10:5). In other places in the Gospels, Samaritans are used asa foil by which Jesus indicts his listeners for not following God aswell as they should. His Jewish audience would not have missed thepoint in his parable when the Samaritan proves to be a morecompassionate neighbor than the priest or Levite (Luke 10:25–37),or when Jesus heals ten lepers and only one, a Samaritan, returns topraise God and give thanks (17:16). Given Luke’s emphasis onthe inclusive nature of the Gospel, his mentioning of Samaritans insuch positive ways highlights that emphasis.
Inthe book of Acts, Luke continues to use the Samaritans as an exampleof how the Gospel is for everyone. Peter and John, after confirmingthat Samaria had received and responded to the word, preached in thevillages of the Samaritans (Acts 8:14–25).
Scholarsare not certain when Jews and Samaritans became two differentreligious groups, but most likely this happened when John Hyrcanusdestroyed the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim in 128 BC. Althoughthere were tensions before this, as is evident in Nehemiah and inJosephus, before the destruction of their temple the rift probablywas not complete.
TheSamaritans exist today and have the following basic beliefs:(1)There is only one God. (2)Moses was the last andgreatest prophet. (3)The five books of Moses are the onlyauthoritative Scripture. (4)Mount Gerizim is God’s chosenplace. (5)There will be a day of judgment and recompense.(6)The “returning one,” the Taheb, will appear.
Reconstructingthe beliefs of the Samaritans before the fourth century AD isdifficult because all we have before then are the sparse statementsof outside sources and archaeological remains. Archaeological remainsof a Samaritan synagogue on the Greek island of Delos includededicatory inscriptions dated from the late third to early secondcenturies BC and the second to first centuries BC. These inscriptionsmention those who worship on Mount Gerizim.
In the world of the Bible, a person was viewed as a unity ofbeing with the pervading breath and thus imprint of the loving andholy God. The divine-human relationship consequently is portrayed inthe Bible as predominantly spiritual in nature. God is spirit, andhumankind may communicate with him in the spiritual realm. Theancients believed in an invisible world of spirits that held most, ifnot all, reasons for natural events and human actions in the visibleworld.
OldTestament
TheOT writers used the common Hebrew word ruakh(“wind” or “breath”) to describe force andeven life from the God of the universe. In its most revealing firstinstance, God’s ruakh hovered above the waters of the uncreatedworld (Gen. 1:2). In the next chapter of Genesis a companion word,neshamah (“breath”) is used as God breathed into Adam’snostrils “the breath of life” (2:7). God thus breathedhis own image into the first human being. Humankind’s moralobligations in the remainder of the Bible rest on this breathing actof God.
TheOT authors often employ ruakh simply to denote air in motion orbreath from a person’s mouth. However, special instances of theuse 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), agenerally good disposition (Prov. 11:13; 18:14), the seat ofconversion (Ezek. 18:31; 36:26), and determination given by God(2Chron. 36:22; Hag. 1:14).
Onoccasion in the OT, spirits are labeled “evil” (Judg.9:23 ESV, NRSV, NASB). In the case of an evil spirit tormenting KingSaul, the spirit was identified as “from the Lord”(1Sam. 16:14–15, 23). According to the perspective of theancients, once a person was possessed by a divine spirit, departureof such a spirit meant possession by a different spirit (1Sam.16:14). Such a perspective was common in the ancient Near Eastern andMediterranean worlds and stemmed from the religious fervor of Semiticnomads.
NewTestament
TheNT authors used the Greek term pneumato convey the concept of spirit. In the world of the NT, the humanspirit was understood as the divine part of human reality as distinctfrom the material realm. The spirit appears conscious and capable ofrejoicing (Luke 1:47). Jesus was described by Luke as growing andbecoming “strong in spirit” (1:80). In “spirit”Jesus “knew” what certain teachers of the law werethinking in their hearts (Mark 2:8). Likewise, Jesus “wasdeeply moved in spirit and troubled” at the sickness of a lovedone (John 11:33). At the end of his life, Jesus gave up his spirit(John 19:30).
Accordingto Jesus, the spirit is the place of God’s new covenant work ofconversion and worship (John 3:5; 4:24). He declared the humanspirit’s dependence on God and ascribed great virtue to thosepeople who were “poor in spirit” (Matt. 5:3).
Humanbeings who were possessed by an evil spirit were devalued inMediterranean society. In various places in the Synoptic Gospels andthe book of Acts, either Jesus or the disciples were involved inexorcisms of such spirits (Matt. 8:28–33; Mark 1:21–28;7:24–30; 9:14–29; 5:1–20; 9:17–29; Luke8:26–33; 9:37–42; Acts 5:16).
Theapostle Paul pointed to the spirit as the seat of conversion (Rom.7:6; 1Cor. 5:5). He described believers as facing a strugglebetween flesh and spirit in regard to living a sanctified life (Rom.8:2–17; Gal. 5:16–17). A contradiction seems apparent inPauline thinking as he appears to embrace Greek dualisticunderstanding of body (flesh) and spirit while likewise commandingthat “spirit, soul and body be kept blameless” (1Thess.5:23). However, the Christian struggle between flesh and Spirit (theHoly Spirit) centers around the believer’s body being deadbecause of sin but the spirit being alive because of the crucifiedand resurrected Christ (Rom. 8:10). Believers therefore areencouraged to lead a holistic life, lived in the Spirit.
HolySpirit
God’sSpirit is described in the opening chapters of Genesis as partakingin creation. His Spirit likewise is seen throughout the OT as anagent in establishing God’s people as a nation and a people ofhis own. Leaders of Israel were chosen and possessed by the Spirit toassist in leading the people into God’s will (Deut. 34:9; Judg.6:34; 15:14; 1Sam. 11:6; 16:23). Typically, the moment theSpirit of God descended on a leader, miraculous fortitude, wisdom,and power resulted. The Spirit also provided whatever was needed forGod’s prophets—courage, inspiration, and miracles (Num.11:25; 1Sam. 10:10; Isa. 11:2; Ezek. 2:2; Dan. 4:8; Joel 2:28).The office of prophet included prophesying both in the king’scourt and among the people of the land. As the Spirit came on aprophet of God, the prophet would correct the king’s andothers’ behavior and at times foretell the future or theoutcome of possible decisions.
Inthe Synoptic Gospels, the Holy Spirit functions in much the same wayas in the OT. One such function appears in Luke’s birthnarrative when the angel answers Mary’s question as to how shemight conceive while a virgin (Luke 1:34): “The Holy Spiritwill come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you”(1:35). The Greek verb translated “will overshadow you”is used in the LXX to describe God’s protective nature (Pss.91:4; 140:7). Likewise, the coming of God’s Spirit presentedempowerment (Acts 1:8). Thus, Mary received both divine empowermentand protection. As the birth narrative continues, Luke records howother characters in the story, Elizabeth and Zechariah, were filledwith the Spirit when Mary came to visit while pregnant with Jesus andwhen John the Baptist, the forerunner of the Messiah, was born (1:41,67). The evangelists record the Spirit descending on Jesus at thetime of his baptism (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32–34)and describe him as full ofthe Spirit when he was led by theSpirit into the desert (Luke 4:1). Finally, in John’s Gospelthe Spirit is the promised comforter whom Jesus will give to hisfollowers. He will testify about Christ (John 15:26).
Inthe new covenant the Spirit-possession of the OT gave way tobelievers’ reception of the Spirit at conversion. In Acts theHoly Spirit is presented as instrumental in carrying out the missionof the church, providing power and signs as well as moving andmotivating missionaries. The apostle Paul attributes to the HolySpirit the function of imbuing believers and the church with anassortment of virtues (Gal. 5:22), gifts (Rom. 12:7–8; 1Cor.12:1–11), and ministers (Eph. 4:7–13). He uses the ideaof life in the Spirit as a point of contrast with life in the flesh.In John’s letters the Spirit is described as providingdiscernment of truth (1John 4:6). See also Holy Spirit.
The surface egression of underground water, a good source ofwater. Since water was scarce in the ancient Near East, springlocations determined human activities (cf. Gen. 24:13; Josh. 15:19;Judg. 7:1; Song 1:14). Owing to their perennial gushing, springs arealso called “living waters” (Jer. 2:13 ESV). God appliesthe imagery of a spring’s dependability to himself (Jer.17:13), and Jesus likens a spring’s ceaseless flow to theSpirit’s life-giving indwelling of the believer (John 4:10–14;7:38).
A town in Samaria where Jesus asked a Samaritan woman for adrink as she drew water from nearby Jacob’s Well (John 4:5).Sychar is commonly identified as the modern village of ’Askaron the shoulder of Mount Ebal and opposite Mount Gerizim. Sychar liesabout a mile from ancient Shechem. The region is saturated withunderground springs, which make it a convenient stopping place fortired and thirsty travelers (John 4:6). Jacob apparently gave thisplot of land to his son Joseph (Gen. 48:22; John 4:5), and eventuallyit became the most important Samaritan city.
Water is mentioned extensively in the Bible due to itsprevalence in creation and its association with life and purity. Thecosmic waters of Gen. 1 are held back by the sky (Gen. 1:6–7;cf. Pss. 104:6, 13; 148:4). God is enthroned on these waters in hiscosmic temple (Pss. 29:10; 104:3, 13; cf. Gen. 1:2; Ps. 78:69; Isa.66:1). These same waters were released in the time of Noah (Gen.7:10–12; Ps. 104:7–9).
Wateris also an agent of life and fertility and is therefore associatedwith the presence of God. Both God himself and his temple aredescribed as the source of life-giving water (Jer. 2:13; 17:13; Joel3:18; cf. Isa. 12:2–3). Ezekiel envisions this water flowingfrom beneath the temple and streaming down into the Dead Sea, whereit brings life and fecundity (Ezek. 47:1–12; cf. Zech. 14:8).The book of Revelation, employing the same image, describes “theriver of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from thethrone of God and of the Lamb” (22:1). This imagery is alsoillustrated in archaeological remains associated with temples.Cisterns are attested beneath the Dome of the Rock (presumably thelocation of the Jerusalem temple) and beneath the Judahite temple atArad. Other temples, such as the Israelite high place at Tel Dan, arelocated close to freshwater springs. The Gihon Spring in the City ofDavid may also be associated with the Jerusalem temple (Ps. 46:4; cf.Gen. 2:13).
ThisOT imagery forms the background for Jesus’ teaching regardingeternal life in the writings of the apostle John. Jesus claims to bethe source of living water, and he offers it freely to everyone whothirsts (John 4:10–15; 7:37; Rev. 21:6; 22:17; cf. Rev. 7:17).This water, which produces “a spring of water welling up toeternal life” (John 4:14), is the work of the Holy Spirit inthe believer (John 7:38–39).
Wateris also described in the Bible as an agent of cleansing. It isextensively employed in purification rituals in the OT. In the NT,the ritual of water baptism signifies the purity and new life of thebeliever (Matt. 3:11, 16; Mark 1:8–10; Luke 3:16; John 1:26,31–33; 3:23; Acts 1:5; 8:36–39; 10:47; 11:16; 1Pet.3:20–21; cf. Eph. 5:26; Heb. 10:22).
Finally,the NT also reveals Jesus as the Lord of water. He walks on water(Matt. 14:28–29; John 6:19), turns water into wine (John 2:7–9;4:46), and controls water creatures (Matt. 17:27; John 21:6). Mostimportant, Jesus commands “the winds and the water, and theyobey him” (Luke 8:25; cf. Ps. 29:3).
Unlike a spring, a well allows access to subterranean waterthrough a shaft that has been dug into the ground. Wells typicallywere deep and lined with stone or baked brick for stability, oftencapped with heavy stone to prevent exploitation. In an aridenvironment, wells were invaluable to the community. Here, livestockwere watered and conversations were held (Gen. 24:10–27;29:1–14; John 4:6–8). Figuratively, the well is used of alover (Song 4:15), an adulteress (Prov. 23:27), and a city (Jer.6:7). Wells commonly were named (Gen. 21:25–31 [Beersheba,“well of an oath”]) and often fought over (Gen. 21:25–30;26:18).
Threekinds of “well encounters” can be seen in Scripture:(1)human being with deity (Gen. 16:7–14), (2)clanwith clan (26:20), and (3)man with woman (29:1–14). Thelatter became highly developed as a betrothal-type scene thatincluded standard elements: stranger’s arrival (=otherness),meeting (=bond), paternal announcement (=hospitality),and domestic invitation (=acceptance) (see Rebekah [Gen. 24];Jacob and Rachel [Gen. 29:1–14]; Moses and Zipporah [Exod.2:15–22]).
Jesus’encounter with the Samaritan woman (John 4:1–42) draws onmultiple aspects of a well encounter: divine (Jesus) with human (thewoman), Jew and Samaritan, a traveler, foreign (i.e., hostile) land,refreshment, announcement, invitation, and so on. However, nowJacob’s well (4:6) hosts Jesus’ presentation of himselfas the groom whom she has been seeking (4:26). The patriarch’swell becomes a symbol of salvation, just as water becomes a metaphorfor transformation (4:14–15). What could have been another“well of nationality” conflict (John 4:9, 11–12[cf. Gen. 26:20: “Esek= argument”]) was elevated toa “living water” conversion (John 4:10, 13–15 [cf.Gen. 16:14: “Beer Lahai Roi= well of the Living One whosees me”]). Her plea “Come, see a man” (John 4:29)echoes an earlier “outcast,” Hagar, who exclaimed, “Ihave now seen the One who sees me” (Gen. 16:13).
Worship of God is a critical dimension of both Testaments.One might argue that it is the very goal for which Israel and thechurch were formed.
Terminology
Ourunderstanding of worship is informed by the terms, practices,exhortations, and warnings of Scripture. The worship vocabulary inboth Testaments provides insight into the personal dispositions andposture associated with worship focused on the person of God. Thefirst set of biblical terms concerns the posture of the worshiper.The Hebrew terminology communicates the idea of bowing down andfalling prostrate before the sovereign and worthy God (Ps. 95:6;1Chron. 29:20). NT words bear a similar idea of humbleacknowledgment of God’s authority with a reverent prostrateposition (Matt. 28:9; Rev. 5:14).
Thesecond set of worship terms concerns service. In the OT, the worshipof God includes the idea of serving with a view to bringing honor tohim (Exod. 3:12; Mal. 3:14, 18). In the NT, worship bears the nuanceof serving in the sense of carrying out religious duties (Heb.12:28). This set of terminology has a priestly connotation to it. TheOT priests and the NT believers (1Pet. 2:5) serve God withtheir individual lives and their routines of life as acceptableofferings.
Thefinal set of terms describes the attitude or disposition of worship.This word group includes terms such as “fear,” “awe,”and “dread,” which initially seem out of place in thecontext of worship. However, the terminology serves to inculcate anattitude of genuine respect. Yahweh is the awesome God, who is to befeared (Exod. 3:6; 15:11). Israel is to love and trust who God is andwhat God says in promise or in warning. The fear that one is to havefor God involves a respect for him, a reverence for his divine worth(Col. 3:22; Rev. 11:18).
Godas the Object of Worship
Theworship terminology sets the focus of worship. The living God is thesole object of worship. He delights in the satisfying joy that hischildren find in him. The nature of worship is not about servantentertainment or passive observation; it is an active acknowledgmentof God’s worth in a variety of humble ways.
Agenuine selfless focus on the person and work of God brings about ahumble response that affects one’s posture, generates works ofservice, and stirs up a healthy attitude of fear and respect.Knowledge of God is the foundational element in worship. God isworshiped for who he is and what he does. He is the Eternal One (Ps.90:1; 1Tim. 1:17), unique in every way (Isa. 44:8); he is Godalone (Deut. 6:4). He is distinguished by his self-existence, theself-reliant quality of his life (Exod. 3:14; Deut. 32:30). Thepsalmist calls God’s people to shout joyfully to their good,loving, eternal, and faithful Creator (Ps. 100).
Godis worshiped as the Creator of all life. This magnificent creativework of God, declared in the opening of Genesis, is a critical focusin worship (Ps. 95:6; Rom. 1:25; Rev. 4:11). Along with this is thecompanion declaration that God is the redeemer. The redemptive workof God is celebrated in the Song of Moses (Exod. 15:1–18) andin the Song of the Redeemed (Rev. 14:3).
Worshipis also associated with the royal aspects of God’s character.It was the desire of the magi to find Jesus the king and worship him(Matt. 2:1–2). The final scenes of history will becharacterized by humble submission to and worship of the King ofkings (1Tim. 6:15; Rev. 17:14; 19:16; cf. Rev. 15:3–4).The psalms often draw the reader’s attention to God’sroyal character as a basis for worship (Pss. 45:11; 98:6).
Finally,God is worshiped as the Lord of his covenant relationship with thenation of Israel. This covenant theme and metaphor summarize thevaried aspects of God’s character and his relationship withIsrael. The God who brought Israel into a covenant relationship is tobe sincerely and exclusively worshiped (2Kings 17:35, 38; cf.Deut. 31:20). These confessional statements about the character ofGod are a glorious weight that moves believers to prostratethemselves, to have an attitude of awe and respect, and to obedientlyserve.
TheForm of Worship
Althoughthe form of worship looks different in each Testament, the essentialelements of worship are constant. In the OT, the priests primarilyled the worship of God. In addition, the duties of the king (Deut.17:18–20) and of the prophet (18:14–22) had worshipimplications and responsibilities. Ideally, these threeadministrators were to work together to ensure a healthy quality ofcovenant life for the nation. Worship in both Testaments has bothcorporate and individual aspects.
OTworship was organized around sacred places such as designatedlocations (Gen. 3:8; 12:7), the tabernacle (Exod. 29:42), and thetemple (1Kings 8; cf. Rev. 21–22). In addition, therewere sacred times in the calendar of Israel for celebration of theappointed feasts (Lev. 23). The three main feasts in Israel’scalendar are Unleavened Bread, Weeks, and Tabernacles (Deut. 16:16;cf. Exod. 34:23). The sacred actions of worship for the nationinvolved burnt offerings, meal or tribute offerings, peace offerings,sin offerings, and guilt offerings (Lev. 1–5).
Theregulation and routine of OT worship never were intended to be merelydutiful. The routine of worship was to manifest a love for God andfor the covenant community (Deut. 6:1–5; Mal. 2:10). Theprophets often challenged Israel to have a heart for God and at timescalled upon them to consider the emptiness of their worship routine(Isa. 1:11). The heart of worship was nurtured in psalms of praiseand lament and in the call to remember God (Pss. 42; 77:11).
Theform of NT worship is not distinguished with the same externals as inthe OT. However, similar core beliefs underlie the form and practiceof NT worship. The distinguishing feature in this new era is thefinal and sufficient work of Christ (Heb. 9–10). As withprevious revelation, worship is not anthropocentric; it is joyfullyChristocentric, based on the gospel (1Cor. 15:1–5).Christ and his work replace the OT temple. Jesus is the greatertemple that has come (Matt. 12:6). Sacrifice is no longer limited toany particular geographic location, but instead involves the offeringof oneself (Rom. 12:1–2) along with the presentation ofspiritual sacrifices acceptable to God (1Pet. 2:4–5). NTworship is regulated by the Spirit and truth (John 4:20–24).This type of worship is distinguished by the word of God, the Spirit,preaching, prayer, Spirit-filled service, and mutual edification. NTworship also includes the regular celebration of the ordinances ofbaptism and the Lord’s Supper (Acts 2:42–47) within thecontext of the local church.
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
John 4:1-26
is mentioned in the definition.
The initiatory ritual of Christianity. This rite is of greatsignificance in connecting the individual both to Christ and to thegreater community of believers. Baptism carries an equal measure ofsymbolism and tradition, evoking a connection between OT covenantalcircumcision and ritual cleansing and NT regeneration and redemption.It is the visible response to the gospel, reflecting the internalresponse to the gospel: the climactic moment in the journey ofreconciliation of the believer with God.
Theword “baptism” (Gk. baptisma) carries with it the senseof washing by dipping (Gk. baptizō); the word can also carry thesense of being overtaken or subsumed, or of joining or entering intoa new way of life. In either sense, a distinct change in therecipient is envisioned. Through baptism, Christians both demonstratetheir desire for and symbolize their understanding of being washedclean of sin; they also proclaim their surrender to and subjugationby Christ. All this intellectual underpinning occurs in what can be adeeply emotional ceremony.
Baptismin the Bible
Theimmediate precursor of Christian baptism was the baptism of Johnthe Baptist (Mark 1:4 pars.), a baptism of repentance for theforgiveness of sins, preparing the hearts of the people for thecoming Messiah. But when Jesus himself was baptized by John to“fulfill all righteousness” (Matt. 3:15) and to allowJesus to identify with sinful humanity, he became the firstfruits ofthe new covenant. John emphasized that his baptism with water wasinferior to the baptism “with the Holy Spirit and fire”that Jesus would bring (Matt. 3:11). Jesus’ disciples continuedJohn’s baptism during his earthly ministry (John 4:1–2).
Baptismwas immediately important in the early church. Jesus commanded thedisciples to “make disciples . . . , baptizing them”(Matt. 28:19). The disciples replaced Judas from among those “whohave been with us the whole time . . . from John’sbaptism” (Acts 1:21–22). Peter’s first sermonproclaims, “Repent and be baptized” (2:38). The apostlesbaptized new believers in Christ immediately (8:12–13; 8:38;9:18; 10:48; 16:15, 33; 18:8; 19:5; 22:16).
Forthe apostle Paul, baptism represents a participation in thecrucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Paul writes, “Don’tyou know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus werebaptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him throughbaptism into death” (Rom. 6:3–4); “In him you were. . . buried with him in baptism, in which you were alsoraised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raisedhim from the dead” (Col. 2:11–12).
Thoughthe NT does not explicitly command baptism (the command in Acts 2:38is understood to be directed toward a specific group), it assumesthat all believers will be baptized (Acts 19:2–3). Theexpectation of baptism is as good as a command, and Christians shouldunderstand baptism as a matter of obedience. Accounts of baptism inActs are always preceded by reports of belief, and new believers areimmediately baptized. Baptism also carries the idea of conveyance: noone self-baptizes; rather, believers baptize others as an initiationinto the family of believers.
BaptismalPractices
Historicallyin the church, the manner of baptism involves the application ofwater to the recipient by pouring, sprinkling, or immersion. Thesepractices vary among Christians, but no one practice has a clearbiblical warrant above the others. Paul, however, appeals tosymbolism in his discussions of baptism. He describes those baptized“into Christ Jesus” as being “baptized into hisdeath,” “buried with him through baptism into death”that they might be raised to a new life “just as Christ wasraised from the dead” (Rom. 6:3–4; see also Col. 2:12).Immersion may be the best vehicle to retain this striking symbolismof Paul.
Thetiming of baptism has caused controversy within the church. Somechurches (especially Baptist) believe that baptism is for those whohave made a conscious decision for Christ—believer’sbaptism. Baptism is an expression of both the change in one’slife and one’s devotion. With this act, the person unites withthe church as well as with Jesus himself. This is a deeply movingexperience for the celebrant, one to be remembered forever. Thecelebrant metaphorically is buried with Christ in order to be raisedup with him. Baptism does not of itself convey salvation but ratheris an act of obedience, and obedience indicates active affirmation ofthe gospel.
Somechurches (e.g., Reformed, Presbyterian) practice infant baptism(paedobaptism). Baptism is at least partly a covenant act similar tocircumcision; by this act the child’s parents announce theirown membership in the body of Christ and their desire that the childbe considered a member as well. Baptism does not convey salvation,but it does convey a type of grace. Entering early adulthood, thechild will be given a chance to affirm his or her faith throughconfirmation. Obviously, the child will have no conscious memory ofthe original baptism, but the child will grow from infancy with theknowledge of having been entered conditionally into the church by hisor her parents. Infant baptism is an act of faith by the parents thatthe child must claim later, at which time some church traditions havea ritual of confirmation. The warrant for infant baptism is thepassages where a “household” or other unspecified groupis baptized (see Acts 2:38; 16:15, 31, 34). Also, Paul seems torelate Christian baptism to OT circumcision (Col. 2:11–12), anevent for the child performed at the parents’ request (Lev.12:3). (See also Infant Baptism)
Advocatesof believer’s baptism also see value in the ceremonialincorporation of infants into the church. These churches offer childdedication, a similar ceremony but without the water component.
Anothersource of debate is the concept of rebaptism. Some churches requirethat prospective members who were baptized as infants be baptizedanew as believing adults. It is claimed that the previous baptism isinvalid, since an infant cannot possess the proper faith. For otherchurches, rebaptism is strictly forbidden as unscriptural.
Notably,while most Christian groups see baptism as fundamental to theirfellowship, many groups also make allowances for baptism received inextraordinary ways. For instance, the Catholic Church allows for“baptism by blood” and “baptism by desire,”where in extreme cases baptism is credited though having never beenperformed. Catholic doctrine also allows for “extraordinaryministers” who may not even be Christians to perform baptism,as long as the intended goal is a valid Christian baptism.
TheFunction of Baptism
Baptismshould not be seen as a saving act; Paul tells a jailer, “Believein the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and yourhousehold” (Acts 16:31). It is later, after the jailer haswashed Paul’s and Silas’s wounds, that the family isbaptized. Paul does write to Titus about salvation, saying, “Hesaved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the HolySpirit” (Titus 3:5). But here Paul is invoking OT imageryrather than NT baptism, as he nowhere uses these terms to refer tobaptism. Peter writes, “And this water symbolizes baptism thatnow saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body butthe pledge of a clear conscience toward God” (1 Pet.3:21). It is not the baptism that saves, nor the washing, but ratherthe working of faith in relationship with God.
Itis a shame that baptism has become a source of division in today’schurches. Paul emphasizes that “we were all baptized by oneSpirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slaveor free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink”(1 Cor. 12:13). Having been baptized into Jesus Christ should bea unifying element among Christians, not a source of contention.
Bible Texts and VersionsThe NT and the OT have considerably different but partiallyoverlapping textual histories. For clarity, it is best to begin witha survey of the NT manuscripts and versions.
Greektexts.Although no autographs of the NT books survive, there exist more thanfive thousand Greek texts covering anywhere from a portion of a fewverses up to the complete NT. Traditionally, these texts have beenclassified into five groups: papyri, uncials, minuscules,lectionaries, and quotations in patristic texts. The most importantmanuscripts are listed below.
Theearliest texts of the NT are those written on papyrus. Ninety-eightof these manuscripts have been identified, and they are representedby a “P” with a numerical superscript. The earliest ofthese papyri is P52, which contains parts of four verses in John 18and dates to the early second century. For substantial portions ofthe NT text, the most important papyri are found in the ChesterBeatty and Bodmer collections. P45, P46, and P47, all from theChester Beatty collection, are from the third century and containlarge sections of the four Gospels, eight of the Pauline Epistles,Hebrews, and Revelation. Within the Bodmer collection in Geneva arefour very important codices. P66 dates to around AD 200 and preservesmost of the Gospel of John. P72 dates to the third century andcontains the earliest copies of 1–2 Peter and Jude, which arepreserved in their entirety, as well as Greek translations of Pss.33–34. P74 dates to the seventh century and contains portionsof Acts, James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John, and Jude. Finally,P75, which dates to the early third century, contains most of Lukeand John 1–15. It is the oldest extant copy of Luke. Among theremaining papyri, forty-three have been dated to the early fourthcentury or before.
Thesecond category of manuscripts is the uncials, which usually werewritten on parchment and span the fourth through the tenth centuries.About 270 uncials are known, and they range from a few verses up tocomplete copies of the NT or even the entire Bible. Uncialsoriginally were denoted by capital letters, but when the number ofmanuscripts grew beyond these limits, a new system was employedwhereby each manuscript was given a number always beginning withzero. However, the most important uncials are still usually known bytheir letter. Among the most important uncials are the following fivemanuscripts. Codex Sinaiticus (designated by the Hebrew letter à)dates to the fourth century and is the only uncial that contains theentire NT. It also has almost all of the OT as well as the earlyChristian writings the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd ofHermas. Dating from the fifth century, Codex Alexandrinus (designatedas A) contains the OT, most of the NT—lacking only portions ofMatthew, John, and 2 Corinthians—and 1–2 Clement.Along with Sinaiticus, the most important uncial is Codex Vaticanus(designated as B), which dates to the fourth century. It containsalmost all of the OT and the complete NT, except for substantialportions between Hebrews and Revelation. It has been in the Vatican’slibrary for over five hundred years. The fourth important uncial isCodex Bezae Cantabrigiensis (designated as D), which contains Greekand Latin copies of the four Gospels, most of Acts, and a few versesfrom 3 John. It dates from the late fourth or early fifthcentury. The fifth important uncial is Codex Washingtonianus(designated as W), which dates to the early fifth century andcontains virtually all of the four Gospels.
Thethird category of NT manuscripts is minuscules. These texts date fromthe ninth century and later and comprise approximately 2,800manuscripts, which are denoted by a number not beginning with zero.Among the more important minuscules are Codex 1, Codex 13, and Codex33, which, along with their relatives, are considered reliablewitnesses to early families of texts such as the Caesarean (1) or theAlexandrian (33). Codex 13 and its relatives are noteworthy forhaving the story of the adulterous woman at the end of Luke 21instead of in John 8. The final two groups of NT manuscripts, thelectionaries and quotations in patristic sources, are not manuscriptsin the strict sense of the term, but their use of portions of the NTpresents important witnesses for the practice of textual criticism.
Versions.With the spread of Christianity during the time of the Roman Empire,the NT was translated into the language of the native peoples. Theseversions of the NT are important both for textual criticism of the NTand for the interpretive decisions that are reflected in how the textwas rendered into a new language. Among the most important earlyversions of the NT are the following.
AsLatin began to displace Greek as the dominant language of the empire,there was a need for a Latin version of the Bible. The earliesttranslation, known as the Old Latin or Itala, was made probably inthe late second century, though the oldest manuscript (CodexVercellensis) is from the fourth century. With the proliferation ofLatin texts a standardized Latin translation became desirable, and inAD 382 Jerome was commissioned by Pope Damasus to provide a newtranslation known as the Vulgate.
Anotherfamily of NT versions is the Syriac texts. Around the late secondcentury the four Gospels were translated into a version known as theOld Syriac. It is extant in two incomplete manuscripts that areprobably fifth century. The translation that became the standardSyriac text is the Pesh*tta, which was produced in the early fifthcentury. It does not contain 2 Peter, 2–3 John, Jude, orRevelation because these were not considered canonical among theSyriac churches.
Otherimportant versions of the NT from antiquity are the Coptic, Armenian,Georgian, and Ethiopic translations.
OldTestament
Hebrewtexts.The text that has served as the basis for most modern editions andtranslations of the Hebrew OT is the Masoretic Text (MT), named afterthe Masoretes, the Jewish scribes who transmitted the text and addedvocalization, accentuation, and notes to the consonantal text. Themost important Masoretic manuscripts date from the end of the ninthcentury to the early eleventh century. Notable among these is theLeningrad Codex (AD 1008), denoted as L, which is the earliestMasoretic manuscript of the entire OT. Also important are the AleppoCodex (c. AD 925), denoted as A, which preserves all of the OT exceptfor most of the Pentateuch; the British Museum MS Or. 4445 (c. AD925), denoted as B, which contains most of the Pentateuch; and theCairo Codex (c. AD 896), denoted C, which contains Joshua throughKings and also the Prophets.
Althoughthese manuscripts are much later than the biblical period, theirreliability was largely confirmed with the discovery of the DSSbeginning in 1947. Among the Qumran library are many manuscripts ofbiblical books as well as biblical commentaries, apocrphyal andpseudepigraphal works, and sectarian literature. All the OT books arerepresented among the scrolls that were found except Esther andNehemiah, though the latter is usually presumed to have been at theend of Ezra but has not survived. The books with the most manuscriptsare, in order, Psalms, Deuteronomy, and Isaiah. One of the strikingcharacteristics of these scrolls is that they reflect a diversity oftext types. For example, there is a copy of Jeremiah that is close tothe Masoretic version, but also a manuscript of Jeremiah similar tothe much shorter version found in the Septuagint (the Greektranslation of the OT).
AnotherHebrew text of the OT is that of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which isthe text transmitted by the Samaritans. It is similar to the MT insome respects but also has differences that reflect theologicalinterests. The main manuscripts for the Samaritan Pentateuch are fromthe twelfth century.
Versions.Between the third and first centuries BC, the entire OT wastranslated into Greek. This version, known as the Septuagint(designated by the abbreviation LXX), became the main version of theOT used by the early church. Due to its adoption by the church, theLXX has been preserved in numerous manuscripts, including Sinaiticus,Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus. By the late first century BC or earlyfirst century AD, there were two revisions of the Greek text: theProto-Lucianic version and the Kaige recension. The latter aimed torevise the Greek toward closer conformity with the Hebrew text andderives its name from its peculiar tendency to translate the Hebrewword gam (“also”) with the Greek work kaige. In thesecond century AD three other Greek translations were made by Aquila,Theodotion, and Symmachus, all of which revised the Kaige recensionback toward the MT.
Anotherimportant early version of the OT consists of the Targumim, which areAramaic translations or paraphrases (and sometimes extensiveelaborations) of OT books. The official Targumim for Judaism areTargum Onqelos for the Pentateuch (c. second century AD), which isquite literal, and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan for the Prophets (sometimebefore the fourth century AD), which ranges from being quite literalto somewhat paraphrastic. Unofficial Targumim for the Pentateuchinclude Targum Neofiti and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. There are alsovarious unofficial Targumim for the Writings section of the OT,except for Daniel and Ezra-Nehemiah (which are already written partlyin Aramaic).
Besidesthe Greek and Aramaic translations, there are other importantversions of the OT. Sometime in either the third or fourth centuryAD, the Pesh*tta of the OT was produced, though there is evidencethat there were earlier Syriac translations of some books alreadycirculating. Also important is a group of Latin translations knowncollectively as the Old Latin. These versions were produced sometimeduring the second century AD and were primarily made from alreadyexisting Greek translations rather than Hebrew texts. As with the NT,a later Latin translation was made by Jerome for the Vulgate.
Bible Texts and VersionsThe NT and the OT have considerably different but partiallyoverlapping textual histories. For clarity, it is best to begin witha survey of the NT manuscripts and versions.
Greektexts.Although no autographs of the NT books survive, there exist more thanfive thousand Greek texts covering anywhere from a portion of a fewverses up to the complete NT. Traditionally, these texts have beenclassified into five groups: papyri, uncials, minuscules,lectionaries, and quotations in patristic texts. The most importantmanuscripts are listed below.
Theearliest texts of the NT are those written on papyrus. Ninety-eightof these manuscripts have been identified, and they are representedby a “P” with a numerical superscript. The earliest ofthese papyri is P52, which contains parts of four verses in John 18and dates to the early second century. For substantial portions ofthe NT text, the most important papyri are found in the ChesterBeatty and Bodmer collections. P45, P46, and P47, all from theChester Beatty collection, are from the third century and containlarge sections of the four Gospels, eight of the Pauline Epistles,Hebrews, and Revelation. Within the Bodmer collection in Geneva arefour very important codices. P66 dates to around AD 200 and preservesmost of the Gospel of John. P72 dates to the third century andcontains the earliest copies of 1–2 Peter and Jude, which arepreserved in their entirety, as well as Greek translations of Pss.33–34. P74 dates to the seventh century and contains portionsof Acts, James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John, and Jude. Finally,P75, which dates to the early third century, contains most of Lukeand John 1–15. It is the oldest extant copy of Luke. Among theremaining papyri, forty-three have been dated to the early fourthcentury or before.
Thesecond category of manuscripts is the uncials, which usually werewritten on parchment and span the fourth through the tenth centuries.About 270 uncials are known, and they range from a few verses up tocomplete copies of the NT or even the entire Bible. Uncialsoriginally were denoted by capital letters, but when the number ofmanuscripts grew beyond these limits, a new system was employedwhereby each manuscript was given a number always beginning withzero. However, the most important uncials are still usually known bytheir letter. Among the most important uncials are the following fivemanuscripts. Codex Sinaiticus (designated by the Hebrew letter à)dates to the fourth century and is the only uncial that contains theentire NT. It also has almost all of the OT as well as the earlyChristian writings the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd ofHermas. Dating from the fifth century, Codex Alexandrinus (designatedas A) contains the OT, most of the NT—lacking only portions ofMatthew, John, and 2 Corinthians—and 1–2 Clement.Along with Sinaiticus, the most important uncial is Codex Vaticanus(designated as B), which dates to the fourth century. It containsalmost all of the OT and the complete NT, except for substantialportions between Hebrews and Revelation. It has been in the Vatican’slibrary for over five hundred years. The fourth important uncial isCodex Bezae Cantabrigiensis (designated as D), which contains Greekand Latin copies of the four Gospels, most of Acts, and a few versesfrom 3 John. It dates from the late fourth or early fifthcentury. The fifth important uncial is Codex Washingtonianus(designated as W), which dates to the early fifth century andcontains virtually all of the four Gospels.
Thethird category of NT manuscripts is minuscules. These texts date fromthe ninth century and later and comprise approximately 2,800manuscripts, which are denoted by a number not beginning with zero.Among the more important minuscules are Codex 1, Codex 13, and Codex33, which, along with their relatives, are considered reliablewitnesses to early families of texts such as the Caesarean (1) or theAlexandrian (33). Codex 13 and its relatives are noteworthy forhaving the story of the adulterous woman at the end of Luke 21instead of in John 8. The final two groups of NT manuscripts, thelectionaries and quotations in patristic sources, are not manuscriptsin the strict sense of the term, but their use of portions of the NTpresents important witnesses for the practice of textual criticism.
Versions.With the spread of Christianity during the time of the Roman Empire,the NT was translated into the language of the native peoples. Theseversions of the NT are important both for textual criticism of the NTand for the interpretive decisions that are reflected in how the textwas rendered into a new language. Among the most important earlyversions of the NT are the following.
AsLatin began to displace Greek as the dominant language of the empire,there was a need for a Latin version of the Bible. The earliesttranslation, known as the Old Latin or Itala, was made probably inthe late second century, though the oldest manuscript (CodexVercellensis) is from the fourth century. With the proliferation ofLatin texts a standardized Latin translation became desirable, and inAD 382 Jerome was commissioned by Pope Damasus to provide a newtranslation known as the Vulgate.
Anotherfamily of NT versions is the Syriac texts. Around the late secondcentury the four Gospels were translated into a version known as theOld Syriac. It is extant in two incomplete manuscripts that areprobably fifth century. The translation that became the standardSyriac text is the Pesh*tta, which was produced in the early fifthcentury. It does not contain 2 Peter, 2–3 John, Jude, orRevelation because these were not considered canonical among theSyriac churches.
Otherimportant versions of the NT from antiquity are the Coptic, Armenian,Georgian, and Ethiopic translations.
OldTestament
Hebrewtexts.The text that has served as the basis for most modern editions andtranslations of the Hebrew OT is the Masoretic Text (MT), named afterthe Masoretes, the Jewish scribes who transmitted the text and addedvocalization, accentuation, and notes to the consonantal text. Themost important Masoretic manuscripts date from the end of the ninthcentury to the early eleventh century. Notable among these is theLeningrad Codex (AD 1008), denoted as L, which is the earliestMasoretic manuscript of the entire OT. Also important are the AleppoCodex (c. AD 925), denoted as A, which preserves all of the OT exceptfor most of the Pentateuch; the British Museum MS Or. 4445 (c. AD925), denoted as B, which contains most of the Pentateuch; and theCairo Codex (c. AD 896), denoted C, which contains Joshua throughKings and also the Prophets.
Althoughthese manuscripts are much later than the biblical period, theirreliability was largely confirmed with the discovery of the DSSbeginning in 1947. Among the Qumran library are many manuscripts ofbiblical books as well as biblical commentaries, apocrphyal andpseudepigraphal works, and sectarian literature. All the OT books arerepresented among the scrolls that were found except Esther andNehemiah, though the latter is usually presumed to have been at theend of Ezra but has not survived. The books with the most manuscriptsare, in order, Psalms, Deuteronomy, and Isaiah. One of the strikingcharacteristics of these scrolls is that they reflect a diversity oftext types. For example, there is a copy of Jeremiah that is close tothe Masoretic version, but also a manuscript of Jeremiah similar tothe much shorter version found in the Septuagint (the Greektranslation of the OT).
AnotherHebrew text of the OT is that of the Samaritan Pentateuch, which isthe text transmitted by the Samaritans. It is similar to the MT insome respects but also has differences that reflect theologicalinterests. The main manuscripts for the Samaritan Pentateuch are fromthe twelfth century.
Versions.Between the third and first centuries BC, the entire OT wastranslated into Greek. This version, known as the Septuagint(designated by the abbreviation LXX), became the main version of theOT used by the early church. Due to its adoption by the church, theLXX has been preserved in numerous manuscripts, including Sinaiticus,Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus. By the late first century BC or earlyfirst century AD, there were two revisions of the Greek text: theProto-Lucianic version and the Kaige recension. The latter aimed torevise the Greek toward closer conformity with the Hebrew text andderives its name from its peculiar tendency to translate the Hebrewword gam (“also”) with the Greek work kaige. In thesecond century AD three other Greek translations were made by Aquila,Theodotion, and Symmachus, all of which revised the Kaige recensionback toward the MT.
Anotherimportant early version of the OT consists of the Targumim, which areAramaic translations or paraphrases (and sometimes extensiveelaborations) of OT books. The official Targumim for Judaism areTargum Onqelos for the Pentateuch (c. second century AD), which isquite literal, and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan for the Prophets (sometimebefore the fourth century AD), which ranges from being quite literalto somewhat paraphrastic. Unofficial Targumim for the Pentateuchinclude Targum Neofiti and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. There are alsovarious unofficial Targumim for the Writings section of the OT,except for Daniel and Ezra-Nehemiah (which are already written partlyin Aramaic).
Besidesthe Greek and Aramaic translations, there are other importantversions of the OT. Sometime in either the third or fourth centuryAD, the Pesh*tta of the OT was produced, though there is evidencethat there were earlier Syriac translations of some books alreadycirculating. Also important is a group of Latin translations knowncollectively as the Old Latin. These versions were produced sometimeduring the second century AD and were primarily made from alreadyexisting Greek translations rather than Hebrew texts. As with the NT,a later Latin translation was made by Jerome for the Vulgate.
The human body has its origin in the act of creation by Goddepicted in Gen. 2:7, so that it comes under the heading of the “verygood” evaluation at the close of the six days of creation(1:31). In neither the OT nor the NT is the body viewed as evil, incontrast to the ancient Greek view that saw the human body as aprison of the soul and viewed death as a release from this bondage.This contributes to the Bible’s positive view of humansexuality when properly expressed in a committed marriagerelationship, one notable example being the mutual admiration of theman and the woman who are deeply in love in Song of Songs, where wefind a head-to-toe description of the man’s physique (5:10–16)and a corresponding description of the woman’s body (7:1–8).
OldTestament.In the OT, death is regularly described as a returning of the body tothe dust/ground from which it was made (e.g., Gen. 3:19; Ps. 90:3).The dignity of the human body is signaled by the importance of properburial (Deut. 21:22–23), which is a cultic rather than a healthregulation in the OT. The outrage committed by the Philistines on thebodies of Saul and his sons (1 Sam. 31), the deliberatedesecration of tombs (2 Kings 23:16; Amos 2:1), and leaving anenemy unburied are ways of expressing utter contempt. The ensuring ofproper burial (even of strangers) becomes a mark of Jewish piety, asexemplified in Tob. 2:1–10; 12:11–15.
TheHebrew word nepesh (often translated “soul”) can be usedof a dead body (e.g., Lev. 21:11; Num. 6:6; 19:13; Hag. 2:13), thoughthis word has a wide range of meaning (sometimes it means “throat”).This usage is not to be taken as signifying that the soul/bodydistinction is not recognized. On the contrary, in OT teaching “body”(whatever the Hebrew word used) always refers to the physical body,not to the whole human person that is bipartite (body/soul) within anoverall psychophysical unity. The reference in Mic. 6:7 (NIV: “thefruit of my body”) is really to the “womb” (cf.Deut. 28:4), and the Hebrew word in question, beten, can refer to amale body insofar as it is involved in procreation (Ps. 132:11).
NewTestament.Hebrews insists on the real humanity of Jesus (2:14–18), andthe Gospels portray him as having the normal physical requirements ofdrink, food, and sleep (Mark 4:38; John 4:7–8). To deny thatJesus Christ came “in the flesh” strikes at the heart ofthe gospel and is the spirit of the antichrist (1 John 4:2–3).For atonement to take place, it was required that Jesus offer himselfbody and soul to God through death (Heb. 10:5–10, 20). At theLast Supper, when Jesus said, “This is my body” (Matt.26:26), his meaning was that the bread represented his body, whichwould be offered on the cross as the sacrifice that makes possiblethe inauguration of the new covenant (cf. Exod. 24:1–8).
Thebodily resurrection of Jesus is evidenced by the empty tomb (Mark16:4–6) and the appearance of the risen Christ to his followers(e.g., Luke 24:36–43; see the list of witnesses in 1 Cor.15:5–8). This is a fundamental point of Christian doctrine andgospel proclamation, providing assurance to believers that they toowill be physically raised from the dead (1 Cor. 15:42–52),a belief found already in the OT (Dan. 12:2). Salvation in the Bibleembraces the redemption of the body and the renewal of the physicalcreation. At the time of Christ’s return, believers will beraised from their graves and meet their returning Lord (1 Thess.4:13–18).
Inwhat is acknowledged by all to be a difficult passage (2 Cor.5:1–9), Paul appears to envisage that at the point of death hewill not become a disembodied soul but instead will “be clothedwith [his] heavenly dwelling” (5:4). The expression “awayfrom the body” (5:8) is not to be taken as an indication ofbodiless existence, but rather is explained by “at home withthe Lord” and refers to the believer’s state upon leavingthis earthly life. The nature of the “spiritual body” in1 Cor. 15:35–49 is only hinted at by means of analogies(e.g., the seed) or contrasts (between the “perishable”and the “imperishable”), but its physicality (thoughgloriously transformed) is plain. Perhaps our clearest indication isprovided by what we are told of the resurrection body of Jesus, whichcould pass through grave clothes (Luke 24:12; John 20:5–7),appear and disappear in a closed room (Luke 24:31, 36), and ingestfood and be touched (Luke 24:37–43).
Paulmade use the “body” analogy for the character of thechurch as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor. 12:12–26),viewing it as an organism consisting of different, mutually dependentmembers or organs. This teaching was designed to rebuke and correctthe self-glorifying and self-serving use and abuse of spiritual giftsin the Corinthian church. So too, the reality of the Christiancommunity as a “body” (1 Cor. 10:17; 11:29) showedthat their uncaring attitude toward each other manifested at theirsuppers was totally inappropriate. In the same letter Paul says thatthe believer’s “body” is united to Christ, makingsexual immorality a thing to be shunned (6:12–20). Believersare to glorify God in their bodies. The analogy of the body is used alittle differently in Ephesians (1:23; 2:16) and Colossians (1:18,24), where its point is that Christ is the “head” of thebody (the church), which therefore must submit to his direction andrule. Believers are to present their “bodies” as aliving sacrifice, serving the master who redeemed them (Rom.12:1). The verse that follows gives the other side to theequation: serving God with the mind (12:2). Body and mind togethermake up the complete human being, who is a psychosomatic unity. Seealso Gestures.
In the Bible chaos primarily refers to an opposite conditionto the orderliness of the creation or a mythical force oftenrepresented by the sea or the sea monster(s) (translated as “dragon,”“Leviathan,” or “Rahab”). The two relatedideas are based on the creation accounts recorded in Gen. 1–2and other places.
OldTestament.In Gen. 1:2 chaos is the state of darkness and desolation (note thephrase “formless and empty” [Heb. tohu wabohu], whichprobably refers to the state of desolation of water with nothing init; cf. Isa. 34:11; 45:18). The rest of the chapter describes how Godin his absolute sovereignty and power—only with hiswords—creates order in place of the chaos. God brings light tothe darkness, separates the land from the sea, and provides the landwith abundance. The portrayal of the garden of Eden (2:4–14)further describes God’s provision of orderliness, fertility,eternal life, and harmony in the original creation.
Althoughthe Genesis account does not directly mention any mythical elements(i.e., the primordial combat between the sea and the prime god),other passages describe creation as the event in which God calmed theraging sea and killed the sea monsters (Pss. 74:12–17; 89:9–12;Job 26:7–14). Still, nowhere are the chaotic forces presentedas an independent power that constantly challenges God’ssovereignty. Rather, God always does whatever he pleases with them,lifting up the waves of the sea (Ps. 107:25; Jer. 31:35; cf. Ps.146:6) and uncovering Death and Destruction (Job 26:6). Isaiahalludes to God’s slaying of the chaotic sea creature not onlyas the past event (51:9), but also as the promise to be realized inthe day of the Lord (27:1).
InGenesis, God’s judgment is frequently described by means of thechaos motif, as a precreation condition reversed—forexample, loss of harmony, fruitfulness, and eternal life (Gen.3:15–24), return of the waters over the land (Gen. 7–8),loss of communication (11:7–9), and desolation of the fruitfulland (19:23–28; cf. 13:10).
Thechaos motif also plays an important role in the propheticdescriptions of God’s judgment against his people and againstthe foreign nations. Noteworthy is Jer. 4:23–26, which depictsGod’s judgment upon his people in terms of chaos’sreturn—that is, the condition of “formless and empty,”without light, creatures, or fruitful land (cf. Hos. 4:3). In Isa.34:11 God’s judgment upon Edom is expressed with thecharacteristic phrase in Gen. 1:2: “God will stretch out overEdom the measuring line of chaos [tohu, ‘formless’] andthe plumb line of desolation [bohu, ‘empty’].” Inother places Isaiah frequently employs the imageries of desolation(5:6; 7:23–25; 13:19–22; 24:1–13; 34:8–17),darkness (5:30; 8:22; 13:10), and flood (8:7–8).
NewTestament.The concept of chaos developed in the OT provides an importantbackground for understanding the NT. The Gospel writers use the chaosmotif in describing Jesus’ person and work—for example,as light in the darkness (John 1:4–9; 3:19), as provider ofabundance and eternal life (John 3:16; 4:14; 5:51; 6:1–15), andas the sovereign ruler of the chaotic sea, who walks on the water(Matt. 14:22–36; Mark 6:47–55; John 6:16–21) andcalms the stormy sea with his words (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark4:35–41; Luke 8:22–25). Jesus’ resurrection is hisultimate demonstration of his reign over death (cf. 1 Cor. 15).
Paulfurther uses the chaos motif to describe the life of sinners or thesinful world. The identity of believers is changed from “darkness”to “light” or “children of light,” who nowmust shine the light in the world (Eph. 5:8; cf. Matt. 5:15–16;Phil. 2:15).
Inthe book of Revelation the ultimate restoration of the perfectcreation order is presented, making allusions to the OT mythicaldescriptions of the chaotic forces (e.g., Satan as the dragon[12:15–16], Death and Hades as the underground forces[20:13–14]). Particularly, the new Jerusalem is the place of nosea or darkness or death (21:1, 4, 23–25) but of fruitfulnessand eternal life (22:1–2).
Devotion or service that is improper. Worship, whether falseor true, generally consists of two aspects that are distinct but notnecessarily separate: (1)the performance of certain rituals,including sacrifice, circumcision, baptism, and so forth; (2)theattitudes and activities that reflect devotion to a person or object.The first aspect shows worship as ritual, consisting of formal,regulated elements. The second aspect shows worship as devotion,consisting of a life of piety. False worship occurs when a worshiperfails in one or both of these aspects.
Formsof False Worship
TheBible describes false worship occurring in three different ways:(1)the worshiper demonstrates devotion to anything other thanGod, (2)the worshiper performs a ritual contrary to itsinstructed observance, and (3)the worshiper performs a ritualwhile leading a life of unrepentant disobedience to God.
Themost severe form of false worship is when a worshiper demonstratesdevotion to anything other than God. This type of false worship mayinclude worship as ritual in which a rite or ceremony is performeddirectly for another god. Some rituals are specifically mentioned inthe Bible: passing children through fire (2Kings 16:3; 17:17;21:6), consorting with shrine prostitutes (esp. Hos. 4:14), andoffering sacrifices to idols (esp. Lev. 17:7). This type of falseworship may also include attitudes and actions that demonstrate ahigher degree of devotion to something other than the true God. Thisdevotion may be to another god or object, even material wealth (cf.Col. 3:5, where Paul equates greed with idolatry).
Thesecond form of false worship involves performing a ritual contrary toits instructed observance. At Mount Sinai, God gives a code of lawsthat regulate the practice of making sacrifices and offerings,confining them to certain personnel (priests and Levites), certaincirc*mstances (cleanness), certain animals or plants (depending onthe sacrifice and the wealth of the offerer), certain times(Passover, Day of Atonement), and a certain location (tent ofmeeting, later the temple). On occasion, the law requires death asthe penalty for failure to observe the rituals correctly (Exod.30:20–38; Lev. 10:1–3; 16:2). This type of false worshipis basically limited to the OT because of the highly regulated andritualistic nature of Israel’s worship. Although the NTcontains rituals of worship, there is no indication of a censuredmethod of observation, only of an improper attitude (1Cor.11:27–33).
Thethird form of false worship involves performing a ritual while livinga life of unrepentant disobedience to God. The Bible addresses thistype of false worship in several passages (1Sam. 15:22; Isa. 1;Amos 4–5; Mic. 6). They demonstrate that even if the ritual isperformed correctly and toward the true God rather than another god,a sinful lifestyle of the worshiper will invalidate the worship.Worship is not automatically accepted simply because it is performedin the right way by the right official at the right time for theright God; it has ethical demands (esp. Isa. 1:11–23; Jer.14:7–10; Amos 4:4–13; 5:21–27). The prophets makeit clear that God not only rejects worship from wicked, unrepentantworshipers but also abhors it (esp. Isa. 1:11–23; Amos5:21–27).
Ritualand Ethical Aspects of False Worship
Regardlessof the form of false worship, God takes it seriously. Ritual andethical aspects of worship are both important. The deaths of Nadaband Abihu provide a good example of the importance of the ritualaspects of worship; they died because they performed a ritualcontrary to its prescribed manner (Lev. 10:1). The text does notconnect their death to some ethical failing but rather states thatthey profaned God by their ritual disobedience (cf. 10:1–3).
Onother occasions, the lack of proper ritual observance accompaniesserious ethical failings. For instance, Hophni and Phinehas committedtwo great transgressions. First, they performed the sacrificescontrary to regulation for their selfish gain, falling short bothritually and ethically. Second, they committed acts of fornication atthe place of worship (1Sam. 2:13–17, 22). The judgmentupon them was a result of both transgressions. Malachi rebukes theIsraelites of his day because the animals that they brought forsacrifice, being diseased or disabled, were unacceptable according toregulation (Mal. 1:7–14). The ritual transgression revealedtheir lack of devotion to God, which was reflected in their ethicalfailings as well (2:8–12).
Onthe other hand, the Bible emphasizes the priority of the ethicalaspects of worship over the ritual. When Saul does not wait forSamuel as Samuel commanded him but instead makes an offering beforeSamuel arrives, Samuel rebukes Saul because of his disobedience toSamuel’s instruction (delivered as a word of the Lord), notbecause of his method for carrying out the ritual (1Sam.15:22). When Jeremiah speaks of the covenant at Mount Sinai, heemphasizes God’s demand for devotion instead of the ritualobservances (Jer. 7:22–23).
Otherpassages show that proper worship is possible even without a ritualelement. Micah defines proper worship without ritual elements, butpurely in ethical terms (Mic. 6:8). When asked about the proper placeof worship, Jesus tells the Samaritan woman that the location isirrelevant, only that worship must occur in spirit and truth (John4:19–24).
Idolatry
Themost serious and most widespread form of false worship is idolatry.In a technical sense, idolatry is creating a physical representationof a deity. In a more general sense, idolatry involves any sign ofdevotion to anything other than the one true God. Idolatry in the OTconsists of both making an image of God and making images of otherdeities. Both practices are forbidden in the Ten Commandments, whichare a succinct presentation of God’s ethical demands. Theincident of the golden calf is a paradigmatic case of idolatry.Israel created a physical representation of the God who brought themup from Egypt (Exod. 32:1–8). Jeroboam followed this example byerecting two golden calves in Israel, again as images of the God whobrought Israel up from Egypt (1Kings 12:25–33). Althoughthese cases involve an image of God, idolatry is usually closelyconnected with the worship of other gods (1Kings 14:9; 2Kings17:7–12; 22:17). Idolatry is one of the main reasons for theexile of both the northern and the southern kingdoms (2Kings17:7–12; Isa. 2:8–22; Jer. 1:14–16).
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 twin peaks of Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal stand aboutforty miles north of Jerusalem in Samaria and flank the entrance tothe Nablus Valley, the location of biblical Shechem. Gerizim, thesouthern mountain, rises 2,889 feet above sea level, and Ebal, thenorthern mountion, 3,083 feet. Together, they form a naturalamphitheater.
Shechemwas of strategic importance in antiquity because it sat on one ofthree major north-south trade routes through Canaan—the RidgeRoute—and provided the only east-west passage in that area tothe mountains of Ephraim. Abram took this route into the promisedland, where the great trees of Moreh at Shechem became his firstrecorded stop. It was there, between Gerizim and Ebal, that he heardthe voice of God and built an altar (Gen. 12:6–7). AlthoughShechem is rich in biblical history (e.g., Gen. 33:18–19;34:2–26; Josh. 24:32; Judg. 8:31–9:57), each of the twomountains has specific individual significance.
Upontheir entry into the promised land, Moses had commanded theIsraelites to proclaim the blessings of obedience to the law on MountGerizim, and the curses of disobedience to the law on Mount Ebal(Deut. 11:29). Moses had further commanded that they build an altarof uncut stones on Ebal to bear the words of the law written inplaster (27:1–8). Moses had also specified that those sixtribes descended from Jacob’s wives stand on Gerizim, and thefive tribes descended from the maidservants plus Reuben (Gen. 49:4)stand on Ebal (Deut. 27:11–14). After the conquest of Jerichoand Ai, Joshua led a covenant renewal at the twin peaks, therebyfulfilling the Mosaic requirements (Josh. 8:30–35).
Thefinal explicit mention in the OT of Mount Gerizim occurs in Judges.There, Jotham son of Gideon challenged the Shechemites for theirloyalty to his half brother, the treacherous Abimelek (Judg. 9:7–21).A ledge about halfway up the mountain is popularly called “Jotham’sPulpit.”
Thecharacter of Mount Gerizim changed after the exile, when theSamaritans emerged as a separate people group at enmity with theJews. The Samaritan Pentateuch substitutes Gerizim for Ebal in Deut.27:4, so the Samaritans constructed their own temple there in thefourth century BC, during the reign of Alexander the Great (it laterwas destroyed by John Hyrcanus in 128 BC). During her conversationwith Jesus, the woman at Jacob’s Well in Sychar, near Shechem,brought up the topic of ancestral worship on Mount Gerizim (John4:4–38, esp. v.20). See also Ebal.
The nonphysical or spiritual aspect of reality. God is animmaterial (nonphysical) spirit being (John 1:18; 4:24; Acts 17:24;2Cor. 3:17) who created other nonphysical beings (i.e., angelsand demons) but made humans as creatures with both physical andnonphysical aspects (Matt. 10:28; Luke 12:4–5; 2Cor.5:1–10; Phil. 1:21–24). Jesus is the ultimate combinationof immaterial and material (John 1:14; Col. 1:15–20).
To seek guidance from God. In the OT, this usually was donethrough an intermediary such as a prophet, priest, or seer (Exod.18:15; Judg. 18:5; 1Sam. 9:9; 22:15; 2Kings 8:8; 22:18;Jer. 37:7). The priests could also inquire of God through the use ofthe ephod and the Urim and Thummim, which were God-ordained lots(Num. 27:21; 1Sam. 23:9–13; 28:6). Warfare, health, andgovernance were primary concerns for inquiries to God but were by nomeans the only issues (1Sam. 23:2; 2Sam. 5:23; 2Kings3:11; 2Chron. 18:4, 6–7). Of course, inquiring of God didnot guarantee a favorable answer or any answer at all (Ezek. 20:3).Only certain avenues of inquiry were acceptable to God. For example,the Israelites were prohibited from consulting wizards, mediums, andnecromancers (Deut. 18:10–11; 1Sam. 28:3, 7). Naturally,the Israelites were forbidden to inquire of other deities, such asBaal-Zebub, and doing so had harmful consequences (2Kings1:2–6). Although people were dependent on God’sself-revelation, God did not need to wait on them to inquire. Hecould communicate in dreams, visions, by sending a prophet or anangel, or more directly (Gen. 20:3; Exod.3:2).
Theavenues to inquiring of God changed with the advent of Jesus and theloss of the second temple. This change was foreshadowed in Jesus’conversation with the Samaritan woman in John 4. Previously, accessto God involved seeking him at the proper place. With no temple,access to God was severely limited. As a result, in rabbinic Judaism,Torah study and interpretation became the primary means for inquiringof God. In the NT, when Christ’s death tore in half thetemple’s curtain, and when the Spirit came, access to Godbecame open to all who were believers (Matt. 27:51; Acts 1:5, 8;2:33; Heb. 6:19–20). Thus, for the disciple of Jesus, toinquire of God is as simple as asking (John 11:22; James 1:5).
In the NT, “Jews” (Ioudaioi) is an ethnic andreligious term to describe the people of Judah. In Jesus’ day,Jews were distinguished from Samaritans (John 4:9, 22). Gradually theterm began to be used more in a religious than in an ethnic sense,and it has come to represent the descendants from Abraham as a wholeand religious converts who regard the Mosaic law and customs as theinalienable religious foundation for faith and practices (Mark 7:3;John 2:6).
TheGospels
Inthe Synoptic Gospels the term “Jews” is used largely inthe phrase “the king of the Jews” with reference to Jesus(Matt. 2:2; 27:11, 29; Mark 15:2, 9, 12, 18; Luke 23:3, 37). Born asthe king of the Jews, Jesus claimed to have come to fulfill the lawof Moses instead of abolishing it (Matt. 5:17). He emphasized theimportance of practicing the law in obedience (Matt. 7:24–27),and he rebuked the Pharisees and the scribes for teaching the lawwithout carrying it out (Matt. 23). They opposed him, not onlybecause they rejected his claim to be the Messiah, but also becausethey viewed his teaching and practices as destabilizing theirreligious status quo (Matt. 12:1–8; John 5:10; 11:48).
TheJews are represented in the Gospels by both the upper class (e.g.,Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, chief priests) and the lower classes(the crowds). Usually the religious upper class would not acceptJesus’ teaching and challenged him by asking questions ordenying his authority (Matt. 15:1; 16:1). The crowds generallyaccepted Jesus’ teaching and experienced his power to heal andother benefits. The Synoptic account of the opposition by the upperclass is contrasted with the widespread opposition to Jesus by the“Jews” in general in John’s Gospel. But Matthew andLuke also highlight Jesus’ lament of the unrepentant Jewishcities (Matt. 11:20–24; Luke 10:12–15), indicating thatresistance to Jesus’ teaching was a common phenomenon among theJews.
Jesusresponded to the unbelieving Jews with strong rebuke and condemnation(Matt. 12:30–32; 21:33–46). When Jesus healed a servantof a Roman centurion and marveled at the amazing faith of thisGentile (8:5–13), Jesus predicted that “the subjects ofthe kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness” becauseof unbelief, whereas the Gentiles will come to eat with Abraham inthe kingdom of heaven (8:11–12). In spite of the unbelief ofthe Jews, the privilege to hear the gospel was given to them first.Jesus sent out the twelve disciples, instructing them that theyshould not go anywhere among the Gentiles or enter the towns of theSamaritans, but instead go “to the lost sheep of Israel”(Matt. 10:6 [cf. Rom. 1:16]).
Theterm “Jews” occurs only four times in the Synopticsoutside the phrase “king of the Jews,” but seventy-onetimes in the Gospel of John. John uses the term especially as atechnical one for those Jews who were hostile to Jesus and hisfollowers. Whereas the Synoptics focus on the Jewish leaders’rejection of Jesus’ messianic actions, John focuses on theirrejection of his teaching that he is the Son of God in uniquerelationship with the Father. Jesus in John is not only the “oneand only”(monogenēs) of God (1:18), but also the fulfiller of what thetemple signifies and all the Jewish tradition and customs represent.John thus describes the Jewish opposition to Jesus as much morewidespread and intense than that in the Synoptics, presenting theJews as opposing Jesus’ teaching because of their loyalty toJewish tradition (5:15–18; 6:41; 7:1–2, 13; 8:31–57;9:22; 10:31–33; 19:7–12, 38; 20:19).
Actsand the Pauline Letters
Inthe book of Acts the term “Jews” (eighty-one occurrences)is used especially with reference to the Jewish people who opposePaul’s law-free gospel (9:23; 13:45, 50; 14:2, 4; 17:5; 18:12,14; 20:3; 21:11; 22:30; 23:12; 24:9).
Inhis letters, Paul refers to “Jews” primarily in an ethnicand religious sense without connoting that they have theologicalantagonism against the gospel. The Jews are thus contrasted with theGentiles in that they are “the people of Israel”: “Theirsis the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants,the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises”(Rom. 9:4). While Paul acknowledges the continuity of Jewish identitythrough their lineage from Abraham, he distinguishes true Jews fromfalse Jews in terms of Jesus’ accomplishment of redemption.Paul says, “A person is a Jew who is one inwardly; andcircumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by thewritten code” (2:29). This distinction of true Jews from falseJews resonates with his distinction of true Israel from false Israel(9:6). The redefinition of the group of spiritual Israelites is theresult of Jesus’ death and resurrection according to the OTprophecies. Those who believe in Jesus are reckoned as “childrenof Abraham” according to the gospel announced in Gen. 12:3(Gal. 3:7–8).
Paul’spresentation of spiritual Jews is foreseen in Jesus’ statementthat the Jews who do not believe in him are not Abraham’schildren but rather the children of the devil (John 8:30–44).In 1John the children of God are defined in terms of loverather than ethnic lineage (3:10). According to the book ofRevelation, those “who say they are Jews” are not, butare a “synagogue of Satan” (2:9; 3:9). These passagesshow that salvation is obtained through faith in Jesus rather thanthrough the ethnic lineage of Abraham and observances of the Mosaiclaw (Rom. 3:20–28).
Thesepolemics against the Jews and Jewish law do not necessarily make theNT teachings anti-Semitic or anti-Judaic. What the NT polemicizes isneither the Jewish nation nor Judaism but rather the unbelief of theJews who rejected Jesus, inasmuch as Jesus is the Messiah, who hascome in flesh and fulfilled the prophecies of the OT.
In the NT, “Jews” (Ioudaioi) is an ethnic andreligious term to describe the people of Judah. In Jesus’ day,Jews were distinguished from Samaritans (John 4:9, 22). Gradually theterm began to be used more in a religious than in an ethnic sense,and it has come to represent the descendants from Abraham as a wholeand religious converts who regard the Mosaic law and customs as theinalienable religious foundation for faith and practices (Mark 7:3;John 2:6).
TheGospels
Inthe Synoptic Gospels the term “Jews” is used largely inthe phrase “the king of the Jews” with reference to Jesus(Matt. 2:2; 27:11, 29; Mark 15:2, 9, 12, 18; Luke 23:3, 37). Born asthe king of the Jews, Jesus claimed to have come to fulfill the lawof Moses instead of abolishing it (Matt. 5:17). He emphasized theimportance of practicing the law in obedience (Matt. 7:24–27),and he rebuked the Pharisees and the scribes for teaching the lawwithout carrying it out (Matt. 23). They opposed him, not onlybecause they rejected his claim to be the Messiah, but also becausethey viewed his teaching and practices as destabilizing theirreligious status quo (Matt. 12:1–8; John 5:10; 11:48).
TheJews are represented in the Gospels by both the upper class (e.g.,Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, chief priests) and the lower classes(the crowds). Usually the religious upper class would not acceptJesus’ teaching and challenged him by asking questions ordenying his authority (Matt. 15:1; 16:1). The crowds generallyaccepted Jesus’ teaching and experienced his power to heal andother benefits. The Synoptic account of the opposition by the upperclass is contrasted with the widespread opposition to Jesus by the“Jews” in general in John’s Gospel. But Matthew andLuke also highlight Jesus’ lament of the unrepentant Jewishcities (Matt. 11:20–24; Luke 10:12–15), indicating thatresistance to Jesus’ teaching was a common phenomenon among theJews.
Jesusresponded to the unbelieving Jews with strong rebuke and condemnation(Matt. 12:30–32; 21:33–46). When Jesus healed a servantof a Roman centurion and marveled at the amazing faith of thisGentile (8:5–13), Jesus predicted that “the subjects ofthe kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness” becauseof unbelief, whereas the Gentiles will come to eat with Abraham inthe kingdom of heaven (8:11–12). In spite of the unbelief ofthe Jews, the privilege to hear the gospel was given to them first.Jesus sent out the twelve disciples, instructing them that theyshould not go anywhere among the Gentiles or enter the towns of theSamaritans, but instead go “to the lost sheep of Israel”(Matt. 10:6 [cf. Rom. 1:16]).
Theterm “Jews” occurs only four times in the Synopticsoutside the phrase “king of the Jews,” but seventy-onetimes in the Gospel of John. John uses the term especially as atechnical one for those Jews who were hostile to Jesus and hisfollowers. Whereas the Synoptics focus on the Jewish leaders’rejection of Jesus’ messianic actions, John focuses on theirrejection of his teaching that he is the Son of God in uniquerelationship with the Father. Jesus in John is not only the “oneand only”(monogenēs) of God (1:18), but also the fulfiller of what thetemple signifies and all the Jewish tradition and customs represent.John thus describes the Jewish opposition to Jesus as much morewidespread and intense than that in the Synoptics, presenting theJews as opposing Jesus’ teaching because of their loyalty toJewish tradition (5:15–18; 6:41; 7:1–2, 13; 8:31–57;9:22; 10:31–33; 19:7–12, 38; 20:19).
Actsand the Pauline Letters
Inthe book of Acts the term “Jews” (eighty-one occurrences)is used especially with reference to the Jewish people who opposePaul’s law-free gospel (9:23; 13:45, 50; 14:2, 4; 17:5; 18:12,14; 20:3; 21:11; 22:30; 23:12; 24:9).
Inhis letters, Paul refers to “Jews” primarily in an ethnicand religious sense without connoting that they have theologicalantagonism against the gospel. The Jews are thus contrasted with theGentiles in that they are “the people of Israel”: “Theirsis the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants,the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises”(Rom. 9:4). While Paul acknowledges the continuity of Jewish identitythrough their lineage from Abraham, he distinguishes true Jews fromfalse Jews in terms of Jesus’ accomplishment of redemption.Paul says, “A person is a Jew who is one inwardly; andcircumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by thewritten code” (2:29). This distinction of true Jews from falseJews resonates with his distinction of true Israel from false Israel(9:6). The redefinition of the group of spiritual Israelites is theresult of Jesus’ death and resurrection according to the OTprophecies. Those who believe in Jesus are reckoned as “childrenof Abraham” according to the gospel announced in Gen. 12:3(Gal. 3:7–8).
Paul’spresentation of spiritual Jews is foreseen in Jesus’ statementthat the Jews who do not believe in him are not Abraham’schildren but rather the children of the devil (John 8:30–44).In 1John the children of God are defined in terms of loverather than ethnic lineage (3:10). According to the book ofRevelation, those “who say they are Jews” are not, butare a “synagogue of Satan” (2:9; 3:9). These passagesshow that salvation is obtained through faith in Jesus rather thanthrough the ethnic lineage of Abraham and observances of the Mosaiclaw (Rom. 3:20–28).
Thesepolemics against the Jews and Jewish law do not necessarily make theNT teachings anti-Semitic or anti-Judaic. What the NT polemicizes isneither the Jewish nation nor Judaism but rather the unbelief of theJews who rejected Jesus, inasmuch as Jesus is the Messiah, who hascome in flesh and fulfilled the prophecies of the OT.
A Jewish prophet at the time of Jesus, he was the son ofpriestly parents (Zechariah and Elizabeth), executed by HerodAntipas, and identified as “John” (a common Jewish name),often with the title “the Baptist” or “theBaptizer,” the latter possibly being the older title.
Ourprimary sources on John the Baptist are the canonical Gospels,Josephus (Ant. 18.116–19), and Acts. Both Jewish and Christiansources note John’s message of the kingdom, call to baptism,and popularity. Josephus and the Gospels can speak of him withoutintroduction. In the Gospels, only Jesus is a more prominentcharacter. It is possible that the typical peasant was more familiarwith John than with Jesus, at least until after Pentecost.
TheGospels, particularly Luke, parallel the stories of John and Jesus.Both had an annunciation, a miraculous birth accompanied by praise,and a martyr’s death. Both gathered disciples, announced thekingdom, denounced the Jewish leadership, and practiced baptism. Itis easy to see how some on the periphery confused the characters(Mark 8:28).
Ministry
Dressedin a prophet’s garment of camel’s hair (Matt. 3:4; cf.2Kings 1:8; Zech. 13:4), the Baptist is noted for emerging fromthe wilderness and preaching near the Jordan. He called all listenersto repent to prepare Israel for the coming covenant of the Spirit. Heand his message were well known, disconcerting Jerusalem’spowerful elite (Mark 11:32) and enthralling the masses (Matt. 3:5–6).
Johnthe Baptist unwaveringly maintained that he was sent to introduce theSon (or Chosen One) of God, who would baptize with the Holy Spirit(John 1:33–34; cf. Matt. 3:11–12 pars.). This one was notnamed, but the Baptist was told how he would know him: “The manon whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is the one”(John 1:33). Thus, the Baptist could claim, “I myself did notknow him” (John 1:31), more likely meaning that the Baptist didnot know Jesus was the one until the Spirit descended on him (1:32).It is less likely that John meant that he had not met his cousinpreviously (Luke 1:39–45). Jesus accepts (and validates) theBaptist’s proclamation both at the beginning of his ministry(Mark 1:9) and again later (Luke 16:16; John 5:35; 10:41).
Afterhis imprisonment, the Baptist seems less certain of his earlieridentification of Jesus as the coming one (Matt. 11:2–3). Itshould also be noted that John had not disbanded his disciples. Afterhis death, some continued to preach his baptism of repentance as faraway as in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–26; 19:1–7). Similarly,Jesus’ last description of the Baptist is ambiguous. It isguarded but still complimentary (John 5:32–36; 10:41) and evenlofty: “Among those born of women there has not arisen anyonegreater than John the Baptist”; however, Jesus’ nextstatement could be interpreted to mean that the Baptist was not yetpart of the coming kingdom: “Yet whoever is least in thekingdom of heaven is greater than he” (Matt. 11:11). Likeeveryone else, John was confused by Jesus’ preaching ministry.Jesus was not acting like the Messiah they were expecting (Luke7:18–20). The Gospels offer no final verdict on the Baptist.
Message
LikeIsaiah, the Baptist’s message of restoration of the kingdommeant comfort and hope for those preparing for its arrival (Isa. 40;Mark 1:2–6) and judgment for those unprepared (Isa. 41; Matt.3:7–10; Luke 3:7–9). The return of the kingdom was by anew covenant, marked by the Spirit (Mark 1:2–8). Cleansing withwater is connected to replacing the old covenant (etched in stone)with the new (imbedded in hearts with the Spirit) by the prophets(Ezek. 36:24–28; Jer. 31), by the Baptist (John 1:31–33),by Jesus (John 3:5), and by early Christians (2Cor. 3; Heb.9–10). Preparing (Matt. 3:3) meant repenting and living inpiety and justice as a member of the kingdom (Luke 3:10–14).This commitment of renewed faithfulness was marked by one’s own(ethical) cleansing, symbolized in baptism. While ritual lustrationswere somewhat common for initiation or membership in a group, Johnthe Baptist called all who would devote themselves to God to repent,confess their sins, and be baptized (Mark 1:4–5).
TheSynoptic Gospels portray Jesus and John as allies in announcing thekingdom. It has been argued that the Fourth Gospel has ananti-Baptist polemic. Because of historical elements (in Ephesus?),it may be more accurate to say that the Fourth Gospel strives toclarify the Baptist’s place in salvation history. He issubordinate to Jesus by divine design (John 1–5) and by deed(John 10:41). He was the Elijah who was to come before the Christ(Matt. 11:14).
A God-established observance, often given as a remembrancefor generations, a memorial, always a commandment or an edict to becarried out, noted because God’s people are a covenant people,a perpetual statement of how God wants his people to relate to him.
OldTestament
Inthe OT the use of the word “ordinance” to translatecertain Hebrew words varies among English translations. Since“ordinance” relates to the law, it is often mentionedwith commandments and statutes, without a clear distinction ofmeaning (Deut. 7:11).
Inthe OT of the NIV, the word “ordinance” is thetranslation of these Hebrew words: (1)khuqqah (“statute,decree”), at least twenty-three times in Exodus, Leviticus,Numbers, and Ezekiel; (2)khoq (“action, statute,decree”), twice in Exodus; and (3)mishpat (“judgment,justice”), at least five times in the historical books, Psalms,and Ezekiel.
TheHebrew term khuqqah is used in all but one instance with ’olamto note a “lasting ordinance” in the NIV. This termrefers to the Passover and the feast of Unleavened Bread (Exod.12–13). The oil for the perpetual lampstand is referred to as alasting ordinance (Exod. 27:21), as are also the directions for theDay of Atonement (Lev. 23:31) and the ceremonial cleanliness for theman working with the ashes of the red heifer (Num. 19:10). Other,more-specific laws are noted as lasting ordinances. These include,for example, the restriction from wine for the priests (Lev. 10:9),restriction of the Sabbath on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:31), andthe grain offering (Ezek. 46:14).
TheHebrew term khoq is also used in conjunction with ’olam inExod. 12:24; 30:21, translated as “lasting ordinance” bythe NIV. It notes the Passover as a lasting ordinance and the ritualcleansing of the priests as a lasting ordinance.
TheHebrew term mishpat, often translated “judgment,” is alsotranslated in the NIV as “ordinance.” In these instancesit notes edicts such as that of the equal division of spoils (1Sam.30:25) and the edicts of David (2Chron. 8:14). The Levitesstate that Israel has sinned against God’s mishpatim (Neh.9:29), and the priests will judge according to God’s ordinances(Ezek. 44:24).
NewTestament
Inthe NT, the KJV (3x) and NASB (1x) translate dikaiōma(“regulation, requirement”) as “ordinance,”and both also once translate diatagē (“that which iscommanded”) as “ordinance”; additionally, the KJVtranslates paradosis(“tradition”) and ktisis (“human authority”)as “ordinance” once each. The ESV, NRSV, KJV, and NASBtranslate dogma (“ordinance, command”) in Eph. 2:15 as“ordinance.” These terms seem to refer to the edict ofGod for his people, his commandments that are to be obeyed. The NIVdoes not translate any noun as “ordinance” in the NT.
ChristianTheology
InChristian theology the use of the word “ordinance” is notdissimilar. It denotes a God-ordained observance given as a commandfor his people to fulfill as a covenant people.
Protestantsgenerally recognize two ordinances in the NT: baptism and the Lord’sSupper (Communion, Eucharist). The common characteristics identifyingthese relate to their ordination by Christ to picture his work in thelife of believers and the church and their participation in him. (Seealso Sacrament.)
Baptism.The concept of baptism is found in five different Greek words, thenouns baptisma (“plunging, dipping”), baptismos(“washing, cleansing, plunging”), and baptistēs(“baptizer”), and the verbs baptizō (“toplunge, dip, wash”) and baptō (“to dip”). Themeanings of these words have been discussedthroughout church history, but all of them seem to denote an actionof dipping or plunging.
Christianbaptism certainly is rooted in the baptisms of John, Jesus, and theapostles. In the book of Acts the disciples simply continue tobaptize those who repent, as they had done at the inception of Jesus’ministry (John 4:2). There is no surprise expressed by the recipientsof baptism; the expression seems a natural follow-up to theirrepentance. The connection to Judaism, however, is unclear. Judaismwas saturated with rituals of purification with water and washings.These washings were similar to baptisms. While Jewish washings wereperpetual, only the Jewish proselyte baptism was a onetime rite. Itis unclear when proselyte baptism started or how it developed. It mayalready have been in place in the time of Jesus. The Talmud laterspeaks of it, but it is not mentioned in the OT and seems to bemissing from Second Temple literature altogether. Just as there werecleansings in the OT rituals, so too the proselyte baptism was apreparatory cleansing of the proselyte candidate. Yet proselytebaptism before the time of Jesus has little extant evidence.Additionally, John would not seem to look to a ritual for Gentiles.
Othershave proposed that John was in continuity with a practice of Qumran.The two were very similar (though the Qumran rite was perpetual). AtQumran, baptismal cleansing and repentance looks to the Messiah(Qumran was an eschatological community). Yet it may be that this, aswell as the baptisms of John, Jesus, and the apostles, was derivedfrom (common?) sources not now known.
ForJohn, too, baptism is a sign of repentance and cleansing inpreparation. John is the forerunner of the Messiah, and as such hisfocus is also eschatological. John brings an immediate focus on theMessiah, and he draws the Israelite community together to recognize,receive, listen to, and follow the Messiah. With this as thesignificance of John’s baptism, it is surprising to find Jesuscoming to him for baptism. Although Jesus has no need for cleansingand preparation, he is baptized in solidarity with John’smessage and his people. When Jesus is baptized, it apparently marksthe inception of the kingdom as the Spirit comes upon him and theFather affirms him. Thereafter, Jesus notes the kingdom as being “athand” in his presence.
Jesusbaptizes at least some of the disciples (John 3:22), though thedisciples are noted as those who regularly do the baptizing (John4:2). No doubt this baptism referenced cleansing and preparation, asthe Messiah was present. Apparently, the baptism of Jesus’disciples subsided, since there is no further reference to it by thefour evangelists.
Onthe day of Pentecost, repentance and baptism with regard to theMessiah are begun by the apostles postresurrection. This is accordingto the command of Jesus before the ascension to make disciples by wayof baptism and instruction (Matt. 28:19–20). This baptismcommanded by Jesus is to be done “in the name” of thethree persons of the Trinity. The early baptismal creed was “Jesusis Lord,” and it may have included a threefold query of beliefin the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. Postresurrection baptismsymbolizes cleansing; the inundation in the water symbolizes thiscleansing as effected in the death and resurrection of Christ,“buried with him through baptism into death” (Rom. 6:4).
Baptismis always assumed of a believer (Acts 2:38; 22:16; Rom. 6:3–4;1Pet. 3:21). It would have never occurred to the early churchto dichotomize salvation and baptism as is often done today. Theexception can be seen in Paul’s writings, where he emphasizesthe kerygma over the act of baptism (1Cor. 1:17). For Paul, thewatershed is the preaching of the gospel to be received by faith, buthe perpetually appeals to the baptism of his readers.
Somehave overemphasized baptism by seeing it as the salvific entity. Acts10:47 applies for Cornelius and his family the permanent reception ofthe Spirit before baptism. This reception of the Spirit is laterlikened by Peter to the original gift of the Spirit at Pentecost(Acts 11:15). Although it would be unwise to infer doctrine from themere sequence of narrative events, the passage in Acts 10 at leastshows the nonnecessity of the sequence of baptism to come into unionwith Christ. This is enacted by the operation of the Spirit alone.
Inevery case in the NT, the candidates for baptism are those who havecome to repentance, and they are always adults. There is no directreference to infant baptism. Some in the church have assumed infantbaptism in family contexts, thought to be especially effectual indealing with original sin. But overall, the biblical testimony seemsto indicate that baptism is for believers who have repented. Becauseit is usually NT authority figures who administer baptism, a generalconsensus arose that only the bishop of the church should administerbaptism. Ignatius calls for the bishop only to minister bothordinances. The tradition that baptism be administered by an ordainedofficer of the church is largely maintained today, though there is noedict in the Scripture.
Withregard to mode, the Didache calls for immersion in running water asthe preferred method, with still water being the second choice. Ifwater is not available for immersion, then a threefold pouring isallowed. In church history, those who prioritize the symbol ofcleansing use sprinkling as the mode. In any event, when anythingwith regard to mode can be discerned from Scripture, it involvesdipping into water (“he went up out of the water” [Matt.3:16]; “they came up out of the water” [Acts 8:39]). (Seealso Baptism; Infant Baptism.)
TheLord’s Supper.The ordinance of the Lord’s Supper is also referred to as theLord’s Table, Communion, and the Eucharist. The Lord’sSupper is a memorial of the death of Christ. In the partaking of thebread and the cup there is remembrance of the ground of salvationeffected in the sacrifice of the cross. Most evangelical Christiansconsider the bread and the cup to symbolically represent the body andblood of Christ. Other Christian traditions claim that the bread andthe cup are transformed into the real body and blood of Christ(transubstantiation) or that the real body and blood of Christ arepresent alongside the bread and the cup (consubstantiation).
Thenarrative of Jesus’ Last Supper is found in Matt. 26:26–29;Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:15–20; 1Cor. 11:23–26.This meal as recorded in the Gospels is the covenant meal celebratedin view of the ratification of the new covenant that would soon beaccomplished (“this cup is the new covenant in my blood”[Luke 22:20]). Jesus instituted the supper on the night before thecrucifixion. The Last Supper of Jesus with the apostles in the upperroom also looks tothe past redemption effected in the Passoveron that fateful night in Egypt. It looks to the present work ofChrist as the covenant meal. It anticipates the messianic meal in theeschaton. Just as the bread and the cup with Jesus in his Last Supperwere connected with the Passover meal, so in the early church it wasobserved with the love feast. The fellowship of the church containedthe love feast, with the bread given before or after the meal and thecup following the bread. But by the second century, the bread and thecup took on a more liturgical air, being separated from the lovefeast.
Muchof what we know about the Lord’s Supper comes throughdiscussion of problems in the Corinthian church. The very thing thatthe Lord’s Supper was to foster—unity around the cross ofJesus Christ—was denied. The exact abuse in Corinth is unknown,but it probably involved the rich oppressing the poor by exclusion ordenial of food. The response of the apostle is that if they cannoteat in equal moderation with all socioeconomic strata in the body,they are to eat at home (“Don’t you have homes to eat anddrink in?” [1Cor. 11:22]). (See also Last Supper; Lord’sSupper.)
The Greek name for the region east of the Jordan River andSamaria, south of the Decapolis (modern Jordan). In the NT it isreferred to as peran tou Iordanou (“beyond the Jordan” or“the region across the Jordan”) (Matt. 4:25; 19:1; Mark3:8; 10:1). Galilean Jews often detoured through Perea when travelingto Judea in order to avoid Samaria (John 4:3–4, 9). It was partof the kingdom of Herod the Great, apportioned to his son HerodAntipas, who also ruled Galilee as a client king of the Roman Empirein Jesus’ time. Herod’s fortress in Machaerus (southernPerea) is the probable location of John the Baptist’simprisonment and beheading (Mark 6:17–28). Jesus traveledthrough Perea (Matt. 19–20) to arrive in Jerusalem for hisPassion Week.
(1)Adescendant of Manasseh and patriarch of a family (Num. 26:31; Josh.17:2).(2)Thesecond of the four sons of She-mida, from the tribe of Manasseh(1Chron. 7:19). (3)Theson of Hamor the Hivite, who was the head of the town and environs ofShechem (Gen. 34:2; cf. Josh. 24:32; Judg. 9:28). He raped Jacob andLeah’s daughter Dinah, whose brothers killed him, Hamor, andthe men of their town and plundered it in revenge.
(4)Acrucial town in the hill country on the border of the tribalallotment of Ephraim (Josh. 20:7). The site has been identified withTell Balata in a valley between Mount Ebal and Mount Gerizim. Shechemis the first Canaanite town to be mentioned in the book of Genesis(12:6). Abraham camped at the site near the oak tree of Moreh, andGod revealed himself to Abraham there, giving the first indication ofthe importance of the place. In response to God’s revelation,Abraham built an altar at Shechem. Later, Jacob settled in the regionof Shechem and purchased land from Hamor the Hivite (33:18–19).When Hamor’s son Shechem raped Jacob’s daughter Dinah,her brothers Simeon and Levi killed the men of the region, andJacob’s other sons pillaged the town of Shechem. Jacob buriedhis foreign gods at Shechem under the aforementioned oak tree inresponse to the revelation of God (35:1–4). It was in thegeneral region of Shechem that Joseph later would seek his brothersand their flocks (Gen. 37). Israel would bury the bones of Josephthere in accordance with his wishes (50:25; Josh. 24:32).
Dueto the revelation of God and its significance to the patriarchs,Joshua gathered the Israelites to Shechem after the conquest ofCanaan and just prior to his death in order to renew the covenant(Josh. 8:30–35; 24). After the conquest the town was allottedto the Kohathite Levites and was one of the cities of refuge (Josh.20:7; 21:21; 1Chron. 6:67). However, in the period of thejudges Shechem apparently was still under the cultural and religiousinfluence of the Canaanites, as evidenced by the presence of thetemple of Baal-Berith (Judg. 9:4). Abimelek, whose mother was aShechemite, convinced the people of the town to make him their king.After three years, the Shechemites rejected Abimelek, and he killedmany of them and destroyed the town (Judg. 9). It was at Shechem thatthe ten northern tribes made the decision to reject Solomon’sson Rehoboam and make Jeroboam their king. Jeroboam subsequently madeShechem his capital for a period (1Kings12).
Archaeologicalevidence indicates that Shechem suffered major damage during theAssyrian invasion in 724–721 BC. Yet the town continued to beoccupied, and the inhabitants brought offerings to the temple inJerusalem up until its destruction in 586 BC. Shechem became thereligious and civic center for the Samaritans. This put Shechem incompetition with Jerusalem and is the motivation for the Samaritanwoman’s question in John 4:5 (where Shechem is called“Sychar”).
(1)Adescendant of Manasseh and patriarch of a family (Num. 26:31; Josh.17:2).(2)Thesecond of the four sons of She-mida, from the tribe of Manasseh(1Chron. 7:19). (3)Theson of Hamor the Hivite, who was the head of the town and environs ofShechem (Gen. 34:2; cf. Josh. 24:32; Judg. 9:28). He raped Jacob andLeah’s daughter Dinah, whose brothers killed him, Hamor, andthe men of their town and plundered it in revenge.
(4)Acrucial town in the hill country on the border of the tribalallotment of Ephraim (Josh. 20:7). The site has been identified withTell Balata in a valley between Mount Ebal and Mount Gerizim. Shechemis the first Canaanite town to be mentioned in the book of Genesis(12:6). Abraham camped at the site near the oak tree of Moreh, andGod revealed himself to Abraham there, giving the first indication ofthe importance of the place. In response to God’s revelation,Abraham built an altar at Shechem. Later, Jacob settled in the regionof Shechem and purchased land from Hamor the Hivite (33:18–19).When Hamor’s son Shechem raped Jacob’s daughter Dinah,her brothers Simeon and Levi killed the men of the region, andJacob’s other sons pillaged the town of Shechem. Jacob buriedhis foreign gods at Shechem under the aforementioned oak tree inresponse to the revelation of God (35:1–4). It was in thegeneral region of Shechem that Joseph later would seek his brothersand their flocks (Gen. 37). Israel would bury the bones of Josephthere in accordance with his wishes (50:25; Josh. 24:32).
Dueto the revelation of God and its significance to the patriarchs,Joshua gathered the Israelites to Shechem after the conquest ofCanaan and just prior to his death in order to renew the covenant(Josh. 8:30–35; 24). After the conquest the town was allottedto the Kohathite Levites and was one of the cities of refuge (Josh.20:7; 21:21; 1Chron. 6:67). However, in the period of thejudges Shechem apparently was still under the cultural and religiousinfluence of the Canaanites, as evidenced by the presence of thetemple of Baal-Berith (Judg. 9:4). Abimelek, whose mother was aShechemite, convinced the people of the town to make him their king.After three years, the Shechemites rejected Abimelek, and he killedmany of them and destroyed the town (Judg. 9). It was at Shechem thatthe ten northern tribes made the decision to reject Solomon’sson Rehoboam and make Jeroboam their king. Jeroboam subsequently madeShechem his capital for a period (1Kings12).
Archaeologicalevidence indicates that Shechem suffered major damage during theAssyrian invasion in 724–721 BC. Yet the town continued to beoccupied, and the inhabitants brought offerings to the temple inJerusalem up until its destruction in 586 BC. Shechem became thereligious and civic center for the Samaritans. This put Shechem incompetition with Jerusalem and is the motivation for the Samaritanwoman’s question in John 4:5 (where Shechem is called“Sychar”).
(1)Adescendant of Manasseh and patriarch of a family (Num. 26:31; Josh.17:2).(2)Thesecond of the four sons of She-mida, from the tribe of Manasseh(1Chron. 7:19). (3)Theson of Hamor the Hivite, who was the head of the town and environs ofShechem (Gen. 34:2; cf. Josh. 24:32; Judg. 9:28). He raped Jacob andLeah’s daughter Dinah, whose brothers killed him, Hamor, andthe men of their town and plundered it in revenge.
(4)Acrucial town in the hill country on the border of the tribalallotment of Ephraim (Josh. 20:7). The site has been identified withTell Balata in a valley between Mount Ebal and Mount Gerizim. Shechemis the first Canaanite town to be mentioned in the book of Genesis(12:6). Abraham camped at the site near the oak tree of Moreh, andGod revealed himself to Abraham there, giving the first indication ofthe importance of the place. In response to God’s revelation,Abraham built an altar at Shechem. Later, Jacob settled in the regionof Shechem and purchased land from Hamor the Hivite (33:18–19).When Hamor’s son Shechem raped Jacob’s daughter Dinah,her brothers Simeon and Levi killed the men of the region, andJacob’s other sons pillaged the town of Shechem. Jacob buriedhis foreign gods at Shechem under the aforementioned oak tree inresponse to the revelation of God (35:1–4). It was in thegeneral region of Shechem that Joseph later would seek his brothersand their flocks (Gen. 37). Israel would bury the bones of Josephthere in accordance with his wishes (50:25; Josh. 24:32).
Dueto the revelation of God and its significance to the patriarchs,Joshua gathered the Israelites to Shechem after the conquest ofCanaan and just prior to his death in order to renew the covenant(Josh. 8:30–35; 24). After the conquest the town was allottedto the Kohathite Levites and was one of the cities of refuge (Josh.20:7; 21:21; 1Chron. 6:67). However, in the period of thejudges Shechem apparently was still under the cultural and religiousinfluence of the Canaanites, as evidenced by the presence of thetemple of Baal-Berith (Judg. 9:4). Abimelek, whose mother was aShechemite, convinced the people of the town to make him their king.After three years, the Shechemites rejected Abimelek, and he killedmany of them and destroyed the town (Judg. 9). It was at Shechem thatthe ten northern tribes made the decision to reject Solomon’sson Rehoboam and make Jeroboam their king. Jeroboam subsequently madeShechem his capital for a period (1Kings12).
Archaeologicalevidence indicates that Shechem suffered major damage during theAssyrian invasion in 724–721 BC. Yet the town continued to beoccupied, and the inhabitants brought offerings to the temple inJerusalem up until its destruction in 586 BC. Shechem became thereligious and civic center for the Samaritans. This put Shechem incompetition with Jerusalem and is the motivation for the Samaritanwoman’s question in John 4:5 (where Shechem is called“Sychar”).
Showing
1
to
50
of155
results
1. Religious People
Illustration
Thomas Long
Recently, a team of sociologists surveyed a representative group of several hundred "Baby Boomers" who had been raised in a serious and committed church environment. In fact, every person in the sample group had been confirmed in the church as an adolescent. When the research team tracked these people, it found that they still consider themselves "religious" -- over 90 percent of these young adults describe themselves that way -- but they do not bother much to express that religiosity in church -- less than half of them regularly attend worship.
And, not unexpectedly, those who were not raised in a religious environment participate in church even less actively than the sample group, but that doesn't mean they aren't "religious," too; indeed, they are nearly unanimous in their willingness to affirm their devout belief.
2. I Once Was Blind
Illustration
David Belgum
Amazing grace, how sweet the sound,
That saved a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now I'm found;
Was blind, but now I see.
This plaintive spiritual song is a favorite among the elderly and nursing home residents at chapel time, those for whom physical eyesight is waning and for whom spiritual sight is increasingly significant. I think many believe it is a Negro spiritual, maybe because of its haunting melody. Actually it was written by John Newton, who was part of the revival of the Church of England in the late eighteenth century. He was a self-educated man, who had gone to sea and at one time had been the captain of a ship in the African slave trade. After his conversion, he became an ordained minister of the Church of England, finally serving as rector of a church in London. It could well be that this personal testimony referred to his time of blindness to the awful exploitation and forced transport of the wretched slaves. He was indeed a spiritual wretch, just as the slaves were physical wretches in the stinking hold of his ship. Through an amazing grace his eyes were opened and he could see clearly God's will for his life, and it was not to haul slaves.
3. We Don't Actually Do It!
Illustration
Johnny Dean
On an ABC News Special, "In the Name of God," Peter Jennings interviewed the founder of the Vineyard Christian Fellowship, John Wimber. Wimber said that the first time he went to church he expected dramatic things to happen, but they didn't. After attending church for three Sundays, he became frustrated. After the worship service, he approached a man who looked like someone with authority. "When do you do it?" he asked. "When do we do what?" the man replied. "You know, the stuff," Wimber answered. "And what stuff might that be?" the man asked. "The stuff in the Bible," Wimber said, becoming more frustrated by the moment. "I still don't understand," the man replied. "You know," said Wimber, "multiplying loaves and fish, feeding the hungry, healing the sick, giving sight to blind people. That stuff." "Oh," the man said, apologetically, "we don't do that. We BELIEVE in it, and we pray about it. But we don't actually DO it! Nobody does, except for those crazy fundamentalists."
4. We All Have Skepticism
Illustration
George Clark
We all have skepticism in us. Think about these phrases: "Open wide now, this isn't going to hurt a bit." "It is easy to assemble. Just follow the directions." "Please, daddy, I'll walk him. I'll feed him. I'll do everything." "Hi. I'm from the IRS and I'm here to help you." "Mother is only staying for two weeks. You'll hardly know she is in the house." People may come to Jesus with some of that same skepticism. That's OK, as long as we are willing to listen. Because gradually people realize that when Jesus opens His mouth, the only thing that comes out is the truth.
5. Why Always the Bible?
Illustration
Robert Bachelder
The author Hans-Ruedi Weber relates a story which is often told in East Africa. A simple woman always walked around with her bulky Bible. She never was parted from it. So the villagers began to tease her: "Why always the Bible?" they asked. "There are so many other books you could read." Yet the woman kept on living with her Bible, neither disturbed nor angered by all the teasing. But finally one day, she knelt down in the midst of those who laughed at her. She held up the Bible, high above her head, and said with a great smile: "Yes, of course there are many books which I could read. Yet there is only one book which reads me."
I thought of this story as I read of the encounter between Jesus and the Samaritan woman. How improbable a meeting it must have seemed to Jesus' disciples. Jews were contemptuous of Samaritans. Rabbis avoided speaking to women in public. But with his customary disdain for the national and sexual chauvinism of his day, Jesus spoke to this woman, and he graced her.
6. That First Longing
Illustration
Robert Bachelder
Carl Jung, the great psychoanalyst, tried to explain why so many people were fascinated by UFO phenomena. He wrote: "We are all born to believe. The eyes may be wrong, but the psyche is right. We are all looking for a perfect model of ourselves."
C. S. Lewis made the same point when he observed: “Most people, if they had really learned to look into their own hearts, would know that they do want, and want acutely, something that cannot be had in this world. There are all sorts of things in this world that offer to give it to you, but they never quite keep their promise. The longings which arise in us when we first fall in love, or first think of some foreign country, or first take up some subject that excites us, are longings which no marriage, no travel, no learning can really satisfy. I am not now speaking of what would ordinarily be called unsuccessful marriages, or holidays, or learned careers. I am speaking of the best possible ones. There was something we grasped at, in that first moment of longing, which just fades away in reality. I think everyone knows what I mean. The wife may be a good wife, and the hotels and scenery may have been excellent, and chemistry may be a very interesting job, but something has evaded us." (quoted in The Joyful Christian)
7. That First Longing
Illustration
Robert Bachelder
Carl Jung, the great psychoanalyst, tried to explain why so many people were fascinated by UFO phenomena. He wrote: "We are all born to believe. The eyes may be wrong, but the psyche is right. We are all looking for a perfect model of ourselves."
C. S. Lewis made the same point when he observed: "Most people, if they had really learned to look into their own hearts, would know that they do want, and want acutely, something that cannot be had in this world. There are all sorts of things in this world that offer to give it to you, but they never quite keep their promise. The longings which arise in us when we first fall in love, or first think of some foreign country, or first take up some subject that excites us, are longings which no marriage, no travel, no learning can really satisfy. I am not now speaking of what would ordinarily be called unsuccessful marriages, or holidays, or learned careers. I am speaking of the best possible ones. There was something we grasped at, in that first moment of longing, which just fades away in reality. I think everyone knows what I mean. The wife may be a good wife, and the hotels and scenery may have been excellent, and chemistry may be a very interesting job, but something has evaded us." (quoted in The Joyful Christian)
8. God's Waters Never Run Dry
Illustration
Moody’s Stories,D. L. Mody
DL Moody teels the following story: Iremember being in a city where I noticed that the people resorted to a favorite well in one of the parks. I said to a man one day: “Does the well never run dry?”
The man was drinking of the water out of the well; and as he stopped drinking, he smacked his lips, and said: “They have never been able to pump it dry yet. They tried it a few years ago. They put the fire-engines to work, and tried all they could to pump the well dry; but they found there was a river flowing right under the city.”
Thank God, the well of salvation can never run dry either!
9. Lateral Thinking
Illustration
Maxie Dunnam
Edward DeBono is a man who travels all over the world, giving seminars on how to think. He teaches what he calls "lateral thinking," and he illustrates what he means by that from an experience early in his life.
Some thirty years ago he was a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford. One night he attended a party in London. The party lasted late, and he got back to Oxford after the gates were closed. Traditionally in that college the gates were locked at twenty minutes past midnight. So, in order to get to his room, he had to scale the college walls.
There were two walls, and he said, "I got over the first one without too much difficulty and came to the second wall. It was about the same height as the first one. I climbed that, and jumped to the other side only to find myself outside again."
He had climbed in and out across a corner of the wall. He tried again, this time with more careful attention to where that second wall was. He noticed that there was a gate in the wall, and as the gate was lower than the rest of the wall, and provided footholds, he decided to climb over the gate. He did, and as he was sitting astride the top of the gate, it slowly opened. It had never been locked.
He said he learned a lesson from that. No matter how good you are in climbing a wall, you should always pick the right one. And when he applied that to problem-solving, he called it "lateral thinking." Instead of facing problems head-on, instead of trying to climb over them just because they are there, try lateral thinking. And by that he means try solutions that are not obvious. Don't attack the problem head-on. Take detours, moving latterly, or even sometimes moving backwards, until you find the gate that no one knew was open.
10. An Unexpected Evangelist
Illustration
David E. Leininger
He was not too well-educated and his manner wassomewhat rough and crude. He became a Christian and took the Lord's requirement seriously. He kept pestering his pastor to put him to work. Finally, the minister handed him a list of ten names with this explanation: "These are all members of the church, but they seldom attend. Some of them are prominent people in the community. Contact them about being more faithful. Here is some church stationary to write letters. Get them back in church."
The man accepted the challenge with rugged determination and enthusiasm. About three weeks later a letter from a prominent physician whose name had been on the list arrived at the church office. Inside was a large check and a brief note: "Dear Pastor, Enclosed is my check for $1,000 to help make up for my missing church so much, but be assured that I will be present this Lord's Day and each Lord's Day following. I will not by choice miss services again. Sincerely... P.S. Would you please tell your secretary that there is only one `T' in dirty and no `C' in Skunk."
Ah, those unexpected evangelists. To this day, that nameless Samaritan woman, the first unexpected evangelist, is revered in many cultures. In southern Mexico, La Samaritana is remembered on the fourth Friday in Lent, when specially-flavored water is given to commemorate her gift of water to Jesus. The Orthodox know her as St. Photini, or Svetlana in Russian. Her name means "equal to the apostles," and she is honored as apostle and martyr on the Feast of the Samaritan Woman.
Can you do what she did? Invite friends and neighbors? Of course, you can.
11. A New Creation
Illustration
Robert E. Coleman
Once there was a man on a train going across the desert in Arizona. He was the only person in the car who had not pulled down the window shades to keep out the glare of the hot sun on the parched earth. In contrast to the other passengers, he kept looking out his window, and seemed actually to enjoy the dismal scene.
After a while the curious man seated across the aisle, asked, "Sir, what do you see in that wasteland that makes you smile?"
"Oh," he replied," I'm in the irrigation business, and I was thinking if we could only get water to this land that the desert would become a garden."
That's what Jesus is teaching His disciples. He wants us to see the world's people as He sees them. Every one of them is precious in His sight. By divine grace, they can become a new creation, made beautiful in holiness.
12. Before I Build a Wall…
Illustration
J. Howard Olds
Robert Frost was a great poet. One of his best poems is"Mending Wall." It's the story of two New England farmers who go out each spring to mend the rock fences that have fallen down over the winter. They do it every spring, under the belief that "good fences make good neighbors." But this particular spring, one farmer is beginning to question that long held assumption. As they work their respective sides of the fence, wearing their fingers raw with the rocks, he begins to reason. "He is all pine and I am all apple orchard. My apple trees will never get across and eat the cones under his pines. Why is it that we need to build these fences back every spring?" Then he says this:
Before I built a wall, I'd ask to know
What I am walling in or walling out
And to whom I am like to give an offense
For something there is that doesn't love a wall
That wants it down.
Friends come in when the rest of the world is going out. And this day Jesus stopped to befriend the woman at the well. That's the Jesus I want to know. Do you know Him?
13. Mary Magdalene: An Adulteress?
Illustration
David J. McBriar
I don't know if you realize it or not, but lately there's a great preoccupation with Jesus' relationship with women. The Da Vinci Code has sold 80million copies. It's a fast paced thriller that claims Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, and the church knew about this, the novel claims, but suppressed it. And let me ask you, as an aside, whenever you hear the name “Mary Magdalene," what comes to your mind? The woman accused of adultery? The woman history says was a prostitute? If it does, then you've been taken in.
In the year 591, in a sermon, Pope Gregory the Great, identified Mary Magdalene with the adulteress woman. And in 1969, the Vatican said he was wrong. The Vatican moves slowly. 1,378 years is a long time. There's no relationship in the New Testament between the woman taken in adultery and Mary Magdalene. Mel Gibson erroneously identifies her with the adulterous woman in his famous film, The Passion. It's clear that Jesus had a fondness for women. Luke, far more than any of the other gospel writers, points that out. Women were the first evangelizers, the first to tell the good news of Jesus' resurrection to his disciples. Martha and Mary, Lazarus' sisterswere always considered to be his confidants. Their home was a place he could go for refreshment and peace. And it is this "Samaritan" woman who is a bittroubled but nevertheless bringsmany people, a whole village, to believe in Jesus.
14. A Public Affair
Illustration
Dr. Spiros Zodhaites
Living together does not constitute a marriage. The Lord met the woman of Samaria. She had lived with five husbands and the Lord called them husbands. But how about the man she was currently living with? The Lord refused to give him the status of a husband. He said, "And he whom thou now has is not thy husband." (John 4:17,18) The differentiation is very clearly given. Marriage is never a private affair. Two people are not married when in private they commit themselves to each other but when they do so in the presence of witnesses before God. Our Lord and His mother attended the marriage feast at Cana of Galilee. Obviously, there was an event which was given public and official recognition, and all acquaintances then knew that the two people were duly married.
15. Warmth, Warmth, More Warmth
Illustration
John Claypool
Johann Wolfgang Goethe was the last of the so-called universal human beings. I mean by that, he was one of the last of our western civilization to have gained the mastery of every academic discipline. In his long life, he became renowned as a poet, as an artist, as a musician, as a playwright and historian. There was hardly a single facet of human knowledge of which he did not have a tremendous grasp. As he lay dying in 1832, the story is that he suddenly sat up, bolted upright in bed, and cried out with great poignancy, "Light, light, more light." One of his biographers said that this was a fitting climax to this particular individual's life because his whole existence had been dedicated to learning more, to pushing back the parameters of darkness. He died as he lived, wanting to learn more.
Many decades later Miguel Unamuno, the great Spanish philosopher, was reading a biography of Goethe and when he came to the death-bed scene, he allegedly read out loud to his wife what I have just described. Then he closed the book and said very thoughtfully, "You know for all his brilliance, Goethe was mistaken. Instead of crying for light, light, more light, what he should have asked for was warmth, warmth, more warmth, for human beings do not die of the darkness; they die of the cold."
16. Turning Jesus Down
Illustration
John N. Brittain
Many churches have been designed in response to consumer surveys. In several Midwestern suburban areas the surveys have had similar results. People want the church to provide a good community center with an excellent gym and Nautilus-caliber training equipment; they want quality affordable day care and after school care for children; they want a variety of self-help and support groups; and they want sermons dealing with timely issues like money management and enhancing self-esteem. What they do not want are worship services where they are asked to participate or sing hymns; and they do not want sermons dealing with topics like sin, personal ethics, world hunger, or self-sacrifice. In response to such trends, a few years ago one of the larger churches in Evansville discontinued serving communion or baptizing people during regular worship services. They discovered that people didn't want religious rituals that talk about the new birth or the body and blood of Christ; they wanted a fellowship that will basically affirm who they are as good and worthwhile individuals and encourage them to maximize their potential. Maybe it's good for the planners to ask what people want out of a church, but it might not hurt also to ask what God wants out of the church.
There is the control issue again. Does God have any control over the church, or is the church simply an institution designed to meet the articulated desires of its members? The woman at the well felt comfortable turning Jesus down. Sometimes we do too.
17. True Worship
Illustration
Staff
During the tenure of the great orator Henry Ward Beecher, a visiting minister (Beecher's brother) substituted for the popular pastor. A large audience had already assembled to hear Beecher, and when the substitute pastor stepped into the pulpit, several disappointed listeners began to move toward the exits. That's when the minister stood and said loudly, "All who have come here today to worship Henry Ward Beecher may now withdraw from the church. All who have come to worship God keep your seats!"
They returned to their seats.
18. Living Water for a Thirst Soul - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
One of the commencement traditions at Harvard University is Senior Class Chapel. On the morning of their graduation, seniors gather in Memorial Church to hear the minister offer words of solace and encouragement as they leave "the Yard" to take their places in the world.
The 1998 senior class heard the unvarnished truth from the Rev. Peter Gomes, minister at Harvard and the author of several books on the Bible, including The Good Book and Sermons. In his gentle ringing tones, that call to mind a cross between a Shakespearean actor and the TV sitcom character Frasier, the inimitable Doctor Gomes took no prisoners as he began:
"You are going to be sent out of here for good, and most of you aren't ready to go. The president is about to bid you into the fellowship of educated men and women and, (and here he paused and spoke each word slowly for emphasis) you know just - how - dumb - you - really - are."
The senior class cheered in agreement.
"And worse than that," Doctor Gomes continued, "the world - and your parents in particular - are going to expect that you will be among the brightest and best. But you know that you can no longer fool all the people even some of the time. By noontime today, you will be out of here. By tomorrow you will be history. By Saturday, you will be toast. That's a fact - no exceptions, no extensions."
"Nevertheless, there is reason to hope," Doctor Gomes promised. "The future is God's gift to you. God will not let you stumble or fall. God has not brought you this far to this place to abandon you or leave you here alone and afraid. The God of Israel never stumbles, never sleeps, never goes on sabbatical. Thus, my beloved and bewildered young friends, do not be afraid."
What Doctor Gomes did for the senior class at Harvard, Jesus does for the woman at the well.
Before we take a look at the story let me let you in on a fascinating fact. You can go to Israel today and take a journey to Samaria to the town of Sychar. A place the passage of time seems to have forgotten. Not many people live there, about 300, and they still consider themselves Samaritans.
The primary structure in town is a kind of cellar, which houses a well, the only source of water for miles. Archeologists estimate its date upwards of 4,000 years. Weary travelers have quenched their thirst there since the time of Jacob. But even more fascinating than its archeological significance is the fact that this place historically validates for us the precise location where the Samaritan woman had an encounter with the Christ. It's hard to believe but the authenticity of the well is undisputed. Samaritans, Muslims, Christians, Jews all agree that this is the place where the story took place.
It was noonday at Sychar. The disciples went on into the village, we are told, to buy food. Someone has suggested that they were seeking out the stores that gave the clergy discount. Jesus stopped at the well on the outskirts for a brief respite from the sun's blistering rays. When a woman of the village walked up Jesus addressed her: "Woman, give me a drink."
The rest of this sermons answers the following question in three points: How can we find living water for our thirsty souls?
1. She is honest and admits the truth about her life.
2. She is open and accepts the truth about Jesus' life
3. She is enthusiastic and tells others about the truth she has found.
19. How Do You Know It's A Bad Thing?
Illustration
Brett Blair
There is an ancient Chinese legend of an old man and his only son. One night the old man's horse escaped, and the neighbors came to comfort him in his loss. "How do you know this is a bad thing?" he asked them.
Several days later his horse returned with a herd of wild horses. Now his friends came to congratulate the farmer for his good fortune. But the old man said, "How do you know this is a good thing?"
While his son was trying taming one of the wild horses, he is thrown and breaks his leg. Again his friends gathered to bemoan his new misfortune. But the old man asked, "How do you know this is a bad thing?"
Soon a warlord came to recruit able-bodied youth for his army, and the farmer's son escaped conscription because of his broken leg. In true fashion, the farmer's neighbors came and expressed their pleasure over the man's good luck. "How do you know it's a good thing?" he asked. The story can go on forever. Good fortune can quickly turn on you and bad fortune may be a blessing in disguise.
20. The Sobering Effect of Truth
Illustration
Brett Blair
When President Kennedy's assassination took place in 1963, British novelist David Lodge, was in a theater watching the performance of a satirical play he had helped write. In one sketch, a character demonstrated his nonchalance in an interview by holding a transistor radio to his ear. The actor playing the part always tuned in to a real broadcast. Suddenly, filling the theartre was the announcement that President Kennedy had been shot. The actor quickly switched it off, but it was too late. Reality had interrupted the staged comedy. For many believers, worship, prayer, and Scripture are a nonchalant charade. They don't expect anything significant to happen, but suddenly God's reality breaks through, and the realitiesof heavenshakeus.
21. Worship Cannot Be Confined to a Particular Place
Illustration
Brett Blair
In the Muslim religion there are three cities which are considered sacred:
Mecca, Medina and Jerusalem. The Muslims believe that to worship in the city of Jerusalem is as good as performing 1000 acts of worship anywhere else in the world. Mecca and Medina would bring even greater honor. But meaningful worship...worship that is done in spirit and in truth...does not depend upon location. True Worshipers are those who honestly and truthfully respond to the message of the Messiah.
22. We Are the Sinners
Illustration
King Duncan
Rev. Randall D. Bell tells a powerful story about a pastor who stood in court beside a member of his congregation an individual who had been “out with the boys," and had too much to drink. As he was driving home on the rain‑soaked streets and through the dense fog, he turned a corner and heard a sickening clash of metal and breaking glass. Two young people lay dead. They had been thrown from their motorcycle. He was charged with manslaughter and driving under the influence. He sat in court trembling after days of testimony. The judge was about to speak. It could mean years of prison, loss of job, and poverty for his family. The judge spoke: The test for drunkenness had not been properly done; the motorcycle had no proper lights; the jury was ordered to render a not guilty verdict. All that was ominous and foreboding was now gone. He was a free man. The court declared him “not guilty." His family kissed him they could go on with their life, all because he had been declared innocent.
Then Rev. Bell adds these words, “Now maybe this story and the way it ended angers you, because you hurt over those young people who were killed. But know this you and I are that man. His story is our story. We are the sinner who finds himself in the presence of God the Eternal Judge. . . ."
You see, not only are we blinded by our prejudices toward people like the Samaritan woman with her unseemly lifestyle, we are also blinded to the fact that we are the Samaritan woman. We, too, have fallen short of the grace of God, but the hand of grace is reached out to us as well.
23. Some Things Must Be Shared
Illustration
King Duncan
A Mercedes-Benz TV commercial shows one of their cars colliding with a concrete wall during a safety test. Someone then asks a Mercedes engineer why their company does not enforce their patent on their car's energy-absorbing car body. The Mercedes' design has been copied by almost every other car maker in the world in spite of the fact that they have an exclusive patent.
The engineer replies in a clipped German accent, "Because in life, some things are just too important not to share."
Wow! What a great statement. Some things are just too important not to share. As Christians we believe that the good news of Jesus Christ is one of those things that is too important not to share. No, that is an understatement. We believe that Jesus Christ MUST be shared with our friends, our neighbors, the world. The work of sharing the news of Jesus Christ we call evangelism. The Christian faith has been advanced through the ages by people who were willing to take upon themselves the responsibility of being evangelists - those who spread the good news of Christ.
24. Authentic Evangelism
Illustration
George G. Hunter
"Authentic evangelism," writes George G. Hunter, "flows from a mindset that acknowledges the ultimate value of people - forgotten people, lost people, wandering people, up-and-outers, down-and outers - all people. The highest value is to love them, serve them, and reach them."
"Then the woman left her water jar and went back to the city." The woman would be back. The woman who shied away from people because she wanted to avoid their scorn was energized to tell others, the very people who had hurt her, that she had found the Messiah.
25. Searching for Happiness
Illustration
King Duncan
St. Thomas Aquinas told of a man who heard about a very special ox and determined to have it for his own. He traveled all over the world. He spent his entire fortune. He gave his whole life to the search for this ox. At last, just moments before he died, he realized he had been riding on that very special ox all the time.
You are searching for happiness, perhaps? Look no farther. Look no farther than you own heart. Open your heart to God through His Son, Jesus Christ. He will give you living water. You need never thirst again.
26. Leading by Example
Illustration
King Duncan
Bruce Larsen, in his book Ask Me to Dance, includes the story of a member of his congregation who had come from another country. Pastor Larsen said of this person,
"Her faith sparkled and the living water of the spirit flowed out of her soul to all around her." He invited her to go with him to a seminar on the topic of evangelism. The leaders had prepared tables filled with all sorts of pamphlets and strategies and demographic studies, all aimed at reaching the un‑churched in their area. At some point during the program the leaders turned to this woman and asked her to share some of the reasons that made the church so important and so vital in her home country. At first she was a bit intimidated by the crowds, but then she had this to say, "Well, we never gave pamphlets to people because we never had any. We just showed people by our life and example what it is like to be a Christian, and when they can see for themselves, then they want to be a Christian, too."
27. The Messianic Age
Illustration
Adrian Dieleman
The Messianic Age. This is what every Jewish child of God was hoping, praying, and waiting for. It is easy to see why when we hear God's Old Testament promises about the Messianic Age:
- (Isa 2:2) In the last days the mountain of the Lord's temple will be established as chief among the mountains; it will be raised above the hills, and all nations will stream to it.
- (Isa 2:4) They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.
- (Isa 35:5-7) Then will the eyes of the blind be opened and the ears of the deaf unstopped. (6) Then will the lame leap like a deer, and the mute tongue shout for joy. Water will gush forth in the wilderness and streams in the desert. (7) The burning sand will become a pool, the thirsty ground bubbling springs. In the haunts where jackals once lay, grass and reeds and papyrus will grow.
- (Isa 60:3,10-13) Nations will come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your dawn. (13) "Foreigners will rebuild your walls, and their kings will serve you ... (11) Your gates will always stand open, they will never be shut, day or night, so that men may bring you the wealth of the nations their kings led in triumphal procession. (12) For the nation or kingdom that will not serve you will perish; it will be utterly ruined. (13) "The glory of Lebanon will come to you, the pine, the fir and the cypress together, to adorn the place of my sanctuary; and I will glorify the place of my feet.
- (Isa 65:20-21,25) "Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; he who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere youth; he who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed. (21) They will build houses and dwell in them; they will plant vineyards and eat their fruit ... (25) The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox, but dust will be the serpent's food. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain," says the LORD.
What wonderful, beautiful promises. No wonder God's Jewish children could hardly wait for the Messianic Age.
The Old Testament Scriptures clearly state that the beauty and wonder of the Messianic Age will become a reality; but this will be so only with the coming of the Messiah. The Messiah. It is He Who brings about the Messianic Age.
Today, in the story of Jesus' baptism, Matthew tells his Jewish audience that the Messiah has come and that the Messianic Age is about to begin. And, in a departure from Jewish expectations about the Messiah, Matthew tells his Jewish audience that Messiah Jesus has come to take the sinner's place.
28. A Drink of Water to a Thirsty Soul
Illustration
James W. Moore
For those conducting Communion this Sunday this illustration offers some strong tie-ins for a conclusion:
Have you heard the legend of the Fisher King? When the Fisher King was a boy, he was sent out to spend the night alone in the forest, as a test of his courage to be king. During the night, he had a vision of the Holy Grail—the cup used by our Lord at the last supper. He saw it surrounded by great flames of fire, and he immediately became excited by the prospect of the wealth and glory that would be his by possessing such a great prize.
Greedily, he reached into the flames to grab it, but the flames were too hot, and he was severely wounded. As the years went by, the Fisher King became more despondent and alone, and his wound grew deeper. One day, feeling sad and depressed and in pain, he went for a walk in the forest and came upon a court jester.
"Are you all right?" the jester asked. "Is there anything I can do for you?
Anything at all?"
"Well, I am very thirsty," the Fisher King replied. The jester took an old dilapidated cup from his bag, filled it with water from a nearby stream, and gave it to the Fisher King. As he drank, he suddenly felt his wound healing for the first time. And incredibly, the old cup he was drinking from had turned into the Holy Grail.
"What wonderful magic do you possess?" the Fisher King asked the jester. The jester just shrugged and said, "I know no magic. I only gave a drink of water to a thirsty soul."
This oldlegendunderscores a great truth that is written large inthescriptures, namely this… Greed and selfishness bring pain and suffering, but love brings healing and life. We see it here in Mark 5 as Jesus reaches out tothehemorrhaging woman andthedaughterofJairus…love hasthepower to heal.
29. The Messiah Is among You
Illustration
Larry Bethune
You remember the story about the old monastery which was down to just three monks? Years had passed since anyone joined the order. Its time had passed and these three monks figured they would be the last. The abbot in charge shared his sadness with a friend, the neighboring rabbi. The rabbi looked surprised. "Oh no," he said. "Your order will not die. Your monastery will not close. I have had a revelation that the Messiah is among you. So, no, you will not close." The Abbot returned to the other monks scratching his head, and told his two colleagues. They were all astonished. And suddenly, they began to see each other in an entirely new light. They began to take care of each other as never before, as if they were taking care of the Messiah. They listened to each other as they had never listened before, as if they were listening to the Messiah. They blessed one another as they had never blessed one another before, as if they were blessing the Messiah. Visitors to the monastery noticed the quality of the monks care for one another. It was beautiful. And it was contagious. People wanted to experience what they experienced. People wanted to join, and when they did, they were told the secret: "Sh-h-h-h-h! The Messiah is here among us!" And each met the Messiah in the other until all were drawn close in the love of God.
30. Who Is Jesus?
Illustration
John R. Brokhoff
Now, more than ever, we need to face the question, "Who is the real Jesus?" Is the Christ of faith the Jesus of history? What is the truth about Jesus? What can we believe? We turn to the Apostles' Creed which has given the church's answer for 2,000 years.
Different Positions
It is not strange that the most popular question of our time is, "Who is Jesus?" Was this question not answered in Matthew 16:16 when Peter said to Jesus at Caesarea Philippi: "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God"? In Jesus' day, too, there were different opinions about Jesus. When on a retreat with his disciples, he asked them what people were saying about him. The public was divided: Jesus was considered to be John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. What more of an answer do we need than the answer of Peter? Jesus accepted his answer as the truth, for he said, "Blessed are you, Simon, son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven" (Matthew 16:17). Yet, after twenty centuries, we do not believe what Peter said about the identity of Jesus. According to a Gallup poll, 42 percent of Americans agreed with the statement: "Jesus is the Son of God." A recent report from Germany indicated that only one out of every four believe in Jesus Christ. Throughout Christian history down to the present, there are different views of Jesus. Now let us look at some of them.
1. The All-Human Jesus
Human
According to this position, Jesus is 100 percent human. It was held as early as the first centuries of Christianity by the Ebionites. They denied that Jesus was divine. He was only a teacher, prophet, miracle-man, and one with an outstanding character. But he was not divine, the Son of God. Today this view is held by many, including atheists, agnostics, Unitarians, Jews, Moslems, and other non-Christian religions.
2. The All-Divine Jesus
Divine
Opposite the Ebionites, Docetists held that Jesus was entirely divine. He was not at all human. This view was originally taught by Eutychus, a monk in a monastery near Constantinople. In the fourth century, Appolonarius, bishop of Laodicea, popularized the teaching. It was known as Docetism, from the Latin word docere meaning "to seem." It just seemed that Jesus was human. It was based on the idea that the physical and material were inherently evil. The human body therefore was sinful. Jesus therefore was not human, for God could not be identified with sin. Docetists held that Jesus' human nature was swallowed up by the divine. This denied the Incarnation, the biblical teaching that "the Word became flesh."
3. The Half And Half Jesus
Human/Divine
Nestorians took the view that Jesus was half human and half divine. It was taught by Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, in the fifth century. To this day it is a very popular understanding of Jesus. When we see Jesus hungry, thirsty, and tired, we say it was because he was human. When he struggles in prayer and on the cross cries out, "My God, why ...?" we see the human Jesus. On the other hand, Jesus is God when he walks on water, feeds 5,000, raises the dead, heals lepers, and rises from the grave. The problem with this view is that we have a divided Jesus -- two persons in one body.
4. The Adopted Jesus
Divine
Human
This is known as adoptionism. According to this position, Jesus came into the world as a human. Because of his moral excellence, his perfect obedience to God, his wisdom, his compassion for people, and his willing sacrifice of himself on the cross, the Father adopted him as his son at his baptism. This adoption was confirmed by the resurrection and the ascension. Jesus then became a deified man.
5. The Both And Jesus
Human & Divine
The above different positions concerning Jesus caused great concern, for the gospel was at stake. If Jesus were only human, then he was just a martyr on the cross and not the Lamb that took away the sin of the world. If he were only human, the resurrection was a fairy tale. His promises of forgiveness and eternal life were meaningless. His claims to know God and to be one with God would then be the words of a religious fanatic who was deluded into thinking he was the Son of God.
On the other hand, if Jesus were only divine and not human, humanity would be the loser. Because he was human, he became one of us. As a human, he fulfilled the law for us. Through his humanity we could see the nature of God. Above all, he became sin for us so that sin, through him, could go out of the world. As a human Jesus knows our human condition. Like all of us he was tempted and he showed that by the power of God we can overcome temptation to sin.
Consequently, the church had to take a stand on the question of Jesus. Is he only human, only divine, or half and half? In 451 A.D. the church held a council at Chalcedon to decide the issue. The church decided that it was not a matter of Jesus being fully God or fully human, or half and half, but it was a matter of both, both fully human and fully divine. To this day the church holds to this truth stated at Chalcedon:
We confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, perfect in manhood, truly God and truly man, or a rational soul and a body, of one substance with the Father with respect to the Godhead, and of one substance with us in respect of the manhood, like us in everything but sin ...
This is to say that Jesus is fully God and fully man. These two natures are blended into one integrated personality. He is not a split personality, nor does he suffer from schizophrenia. It is like a blender in your kitchen. Suppose you put apples, peaches, and pears in it and pushed the "on" button for a minute. Now what do you have -- apples, peaches, and pears? Yes, you do, but can you tell which is which? They have become one fruit, one substance. Also, it is like hom*ogenized milk. When the raw milk comes from the farm, a dairy runs it through a hom*ogenizer. As the milk runs through the machine, pistons compact the milk so that the cream and skim milk are made one. As a result you cannot take cream off the milk. In the same way, the human and divine natures of Jesus are compacted into one integrated person.
This means that the Father and the Son are one. When Jesus prays, God also prays. When the human Jesus suffers and dies on a cross, God is in Jesus enduring the cross. "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself" (2 Corinthians 5:19). When the human Jesus speaks, it is also God who speaks. When Jesus weeps, God weeps. This truth makes us realize the seriousness of the cross. It was not only a human on the cross, but God was there in Jesus. Good Friday is the day God died in Jesus. Indeed, the murderers did not know what they were doing; they did not know they were killing God! As the spiritual says, "Sometimes it causes me to tremble, tremble, tremble."
31. He Set His Face
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
He had just finished feeding the 5,000 men plus women and children when he asked them the question (Luke 9:10-17). In this context of feeding people (cf. Luke 24:28-35) Jesus asked his disciples, "Who do the crowds say that I am?" (Luke 9:18). We stand here at a turning point in Luke's story of Jesus. In earlier stories of Jesus' baptism, genealogy, temptation and a sabbath in his hometown synagogue Luke has given us all kinds of clues as to the identity of Jesus. After that there comes action. Jesus healed people. He forgave sinners. He called disciples. He challenged sabbath laws and so on. It's time now to return to the question of identity. Do even the disciples understand who this man is? Does anyone really understand?
The disciples answered Jesus question by stating the opinions of some in the crowds. Jesus' then zeroes in on the disciples themselves. "But who do you say that I am?" (Luke 9:20). "The Messiah of God," Peter answered.
And then Jesus did a surprising thing. He acknowledged that Peter had the right answer to his question. But he told the disciples not to tell anyone the truth of his identity. The coming of the Messiah would move Israel from one degree of glory to another. But Jesus was not to be this Messiah of glory. Jesus was to be a Messiah on a cross. Jesus tells it straight in a new revelation of his identity. "The Son of Man must undergo great suffering, and be rejected by the elders, chief priests, and scribes, and be killed and on the third day be raised" (Luke 9:22).
The disciples must have been stunned. They had glory on their minds, too. But, no, the way of this Messiah was to be a way of suffering for him and for the disciples. "If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me" (Luke 9:23). The disciples never could get this through their heads. In the story of the transfiguration which Luke tells next we hear Jesus discussing the departure he would accomplish in Jerusalem. Jesus, that is, was discussing with Moses and Elijah his way to Jerusalem, his way to the cross. And the disciples? They wanted to build booths and live on this mountain of glory and transfiguration forever. They did not know what they were saying, Luke tells us.
This hardness of heart of the disciples appears again when they all come down from the Mount of Transfiguration. A man comes to Jesus in order that Jesus might heal his son who is possessed by a demon. "I begged your disciples to cast it out, but they could not," the father says to Jesus. Jesus proceeds to wonder aloud about the faithless disciples. He tells them again, therefore, of his mission. "Let these words sink into your ears," he tells them, "The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into human hands." Sadly Luke tells us of the disciples that, "... they did not understand this saying; its meaning was concealed from them, so they could not perceive it" (Luke 9:44-45). The disciples prove the truth of this statement by turning to a discussion among themselves about which one of them was the greatest. They're still thinking of glory!
Jesus has revealed that he must go to Jerusalem to suffer, to die and to be raised again. The disciples don't get it at all. With his heart heavy with the suffering that lay ahead, therefore, and with his mind puzzled by disciples who failed to understand, Jesus set his face to go to Jerusalem.
32. God’s Timing Is Perfect
Illustration
Dwight Gunter
Christopher Columbus, discouraged one day, walked by a monastery. He was thirsty, so he went in for a drink of water. An old monk sat with him and listened to how he wanted to go on an expedition to find another land.When the story was over, Christopher Columbus went on, but the old monk was a personal friend of Queen Isabella, and he was the one who convinced her to finance Columbus' expedition. Europe's discovery of America started with a drink of water in a monastery.
Abraham Lincoln was out in the back of his store one day, rummaging through an old barrel. As he finished, he reached down and felt a couple books in his hand. And he pulled them up and saw they were Blackstone's Commentaries. Something happened to Abraham Lincoln as he read those. He became a lawyer, and it totally changed his direction. He got into politics and became the President of the United States and healer of the wound of the Civil War. It all started with him rummaging in a barrel.
John Calvin was going down to Italy. War broke out and the road he was going to take was blockaded, so he went to Geneva.His time in Geneva made a change in his life that has changed many lives since.
George Whitfield was a bartender in England and couldn't get along with his sister-in-law, who owned the bar, so he left.Out of that experience he turned to God, went to Oxford, became part of the Holy Club with John Wesley and helped change England.
What I'm saying is this: God's timing is perfect and purposeful. We can trust Him and make the most of the opportunities He has given to us in His time.
33. Service Keeps Us Alive
Illustration
Unamuno, the Spanish philosopher, tells about the Roman aqueduct at Segovia, in his native Spain. It was built in 109 A.D. For eighteen hundred years, it carried cool water from the mountains to the hot and thirsty city. Nearly sixty generations of men drank from its flow. Then came another generation, a recent one, who said, "This aqueduct is so great a marvel that it ought to be preserved for our children, as a museum piece. We shall relieve it of its centuries-long labor."
They did; they laid modern iron pipes. They gave the ancient bricks and mortar a reverent rest. And what happened to the aqueduct? It beganto fall apart. The sun beating on the dry mortar caused it to crumble. The bricks and stone sagged and threatened to fall. What ages of service could not destroy idleness quickly threatened disintegrated. A campaign was started and it was saved.
Our lives are not fruitfulwithout service to one another. I think James and John knew better than to ask Jesus for military and leadership positions within his coming politicalkingdom but they couldn't help themselves. If they fully understood the kind of Kingdom Jesus was suggesting they never would have made that request. We have the advantage of hindsight, learning from their lessons. Aqueducts crumble when put out of service. Christians too.
34. The Green Thing
Illustration
An oldillustration but still usable in certain settings: Recently, in the line at the store, the cashier told an older woman that she should bring her own grocery bags because plastic bags weren't good for the environment. The woman apologized to him and explained, "We didn't have the green thing back in my day."
The clerk responded, "That's our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment."
He was right our generation didn't have the green thing in its day. Back then, we returned milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled. But we didn't have the green thing back in our day.
We walked up stairs, because we didn't have an escalator in every store and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks. But she was right. We didn't have the green thing in our day.
Back then, we washed the baby's diapers because we didn't have the throw-away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 220 volts wind and solar power really did dry the clothes. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing. But that old lady is right; we didn't have the green thing back in our day.
Back then, we had one TV, or radio, in the house not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of the state of Montana.
In the kitchen, we blended and stirred by hand because we didn't have electric machines to do everything for us.
When we packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, we used a wadded up old newspaper to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap.
Back then, we didn't fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity. But she's right; we didn't have the green thing back then.
We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water. We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull. But we didn't have the green thing back then.
Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service.
We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And we didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest pizza joint.
But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we old folks were just because we didn't have the green thing back then?
35. Make Them Thirsty
Illustration
Bruce Ball
A young salesman was disappointed about losing a big sale, and as he talked with his sales manager he complained, "I guess it just proves you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink." The manager replied, "Your job is not to make him drink. Your job is to make him thirsty." So it is with evangelism. Our lives should be so filled with the passion of Christ that we create a thirst in others for the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
36. Eager for the Journey - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
Many years ago the great explorer, Sir Francis Drake, was attempting to recruit a number of young men for an upcoming exploration. He gathered them around and told the group that if they came with him they would see some of the most marvelous things their eyes could ever behold. Sandy white beaches, juicy fruits, foreign peoples, priceless treasures, and gorgeous landscapes. And he told them that this wild adventure could be theirs if they came with him. Not one of them enlisted for the journey. The next day a different group came out. Drake told them that if they came with him they would encounter storms that would terrify them into tears. Tiger winds would hammer them and blow them off course for months. Water would frequently be scarce. At times they will be so thirsty that their very souls would cry out for simply one drop of water. In short, danger would always be their constant companion. Drake concluded by declaring that if they could handle these things, the joys of exploration would exceed their wildest dreams. Every single one of them in the group joined Sir Francis Drake that day, some did not even go home to say goodbye to their families, they just boarded the boat eager for the journey.
What made the difference in these two groups? Why did the first group turn down the mission and the second jump at the chance? Was the second group different and more adventurous than the first? The answer is: No. It is not the men who had changed; it was the message. The first spoke of rewards; the second spoke of challenges. The first offered comfort; the second promised suffering. The first tempted them with things; the second seduced them with an experience unlike any other.
I like to think that Sir Francis Drake discovered what Jesus knew all to well. And that is this: The paths that are offered to us must promise to shape us, build our character, change our world view, if they are to have any appeal to us at all. If we are presented with a challenge that will change, we will be eager for the journey.
What is it about Jesus' message that made the disciples eager for the journey that was presented to them?
1. Jesus offered them a change.
2. The mission promised to be a challenge.
3. And their lives would never be the same.
37. The Messiah Is Among You
Illustration
William White
There was a famous monastery which had fallen on very hard times. Formerly its many buildings were filled with young monks, and its huge chapel resounded with the singing of the choir. But now it was deserted. People no longer came there to be nourished by prayer. A handful of old monks shuffled through the cloisters and praised God with heavy hearts.
On the edge of the monastery woods, an old rabbi had built a tiny hut. He would come there from time to time to fast and pray. No one ever spoke with him, but whenever he appeared, the word would be passed from monk to monk: "The rabbi walks in the woods." And, for as long as he was there, the monks would feel sustained by his prayerful presence.
One day the abbot decided to visit the rabbi and open his heart to him. So, after the morning Eucharist, he set out through the woods. As he approached the hut, the abbot saw the rabbi standing in the doorway, his arms outstretched in welcome. It was as though he had been waiting there for some time. The two embraced like long-lost brothers. Then they stepped back and just stood there, smiling at one another with smiles their faces could hardly contain.
After a while, the rabbi motioned the abbot to enter. In the middle of the room was a wooden table with the Scriptures open on it. They sat there for a moment, in the presence of the Book. Then the rabbi began to cry. The abbot could not contain himself. He covered his face with his hands and began to cry, too. For the first time in his life, he cried his heart out. The two men sat there like lost children, filling the hut with their sobs and moistening the wood of the table with their tears.
After the tears had ceased to flow and all was quiet again, the rabbi lifted his head. "You and your brothers are serving God with heavy hearts," he said. "You have come to ask a teaching of me. I will give you a teaching, but you can only repeat it once. After that, no one must ever say it aloud again."
The rabbi looked straight at the abbot and said, "The Messiah is among you." For a while, all was silent. Then the rabbi said, "Now you must go." The abbot left without ever looking back.
The next morning, the abbot called his monks together in the chapter room. He told them that he had received a teaching from the rabbi who walks in the woods, and that this teaching was never again to be spoken aloud. Then he looked at each of his brothers and said, "The rabbi said that one of us is the Messiah."
The monks were startled by this saying. "What could it mean?" they asked themselves. "Is brother John the Messiah? No, he's too old and crotchety. Is brother Thomas? No, he's too stubborn and set in his ways. Am I the Messiah? What could this possibly mean?" They were all deeply puzzled by the rabbi's teaching. But no one ever mentioned it again.
As time went by, though, something unusual began to happen at the monastery. The monks began to treat one another with a very special reverence. There was a gentle, wholehearted, human quality about them now which was hard to describe, but easy to notice. They lived with one another as brothers who had finally found something. And yet, they prayed over the Scriptures together as those who were still looking for something. Visitors found themselves deeply moved by the genuine caring and sharing that went on among the brothers. Before long, people were again coming from far and wide to be nourished by the prayer life of these monks. And young men were asking, once again, to become part of the community.
In those days, the rabbi no longer walked in the woods. His hut had fallen into ruins. But somehow or other, the older monks who had taken his teaching to heart still felt sustained by his prayerful presence.
38. Only a Pebble?
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
Some of you remember Aesop's great fable about an old crow who was out in the wilderness and very thirsty. He had not had anything to drink in a long time. He came to a jug that had a little water in the bottom of it. The old crow reached his beak into the jug to get some of that water, but his beak wouldn’t quite touch the water. So, what did he do? He started picking up pebbles one at a time and dropping them into the jug. And as more and more pebbles accumulated in the bottom of the jug the water rose in the bottle until finally the old crow was able to drink all that he desired.
That's a parable of the way God has chosen to work out his plan in our world. Each of us dropping in our own little pebble—teaching that Sunday school class, serving on a committee, providing transportation for the youth, visiting our lonely neighbor. Utilizing the gifts that are ours to serve in the ways we can may not seem all that important at the time, but as the pebbles accumulate in the bottom of the jug, and the water rises, God builds His kingdom and brings his plan to fruition. You are important!
39. Accepting a Human Messiah
Illustration
Brian Stoffregen
In contrast to the theology of the cross and our suffering/dying king. Robert Capon in Hunting the Divine Fox presents a wonderful picture of our typical American Messiah and it doesn't look much like Jesus on the cross.
Almost nobody resists the temptation to jazz up the humanity of Christ. The true paradigm of the ordinary American view of Jesus is Superman: "Faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound. It's Superman! Strange visitor from another planet, who came to earth with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men, and who, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for a great metropolitan newspaper, fights a never-ending battle for truth, justice and the American Way." If that isn't popular christology, I'll eat my hat. Jesus gentle, meek and mild, but with secret, souped-up, more-than-human insides bumbles around for thirty-three years, nearly gets himself done in for good by the Kryptonite Kross, but at the last minute, struggles into the phone booth of the Empty Tomb, changes into his Easter suit and, with a single bound, leaps back up to the planet Heaven.
You think that's funny? Don't laugh. The human race is, was and probably always will be deeply unwilling to accept a human messiah. We don't want to be saved in our humanity; we want to be fished out of it. We crucified Jesus, not because he was God, but because he blasphemed: He claimed to be God and then failed to come up to our standards for assessing the claim. It's not that we weren't looking for the Messiah; it's just that he wasn't what we were looking for. Our kind of Messiah would come down from a cross. He would carry a folding phone booth in his back pocket. He wouldn't do a stupid thing like rising from the dead. He would do a smart thing like never dying." [pp. 90-91; this book has been reprinted, along with two others under the title The Romance of the Word: One Man's Love Affair with Theology]
40. Looking in the Light
Illustration
Billy D. Strayhorn
You've all probably heard the old story about the town drunk who was down on his hands and knees one night underneath the streetlight searching and searching for something. The preacher happened to be walking by and asked him, "Sam, what in the world are you doing out here on your hands and knees?"
Sam looked up and said, "Oh, Hi Preacher, I'm hunting for my keys. I lost my keys."
The preacher, being kind hearted, got down on his hands and knees to help and said, "Show me where you dropped them and I'll help you find them."
Sam pointed off about 50 or 60 feet in the distance and said, "Oh, I lost them way over there in the grass."
That really got to the preacher so he asked, "Well, if you lost them way over there in the grass, why are you looking for them over here on the sidewalk?"
And Sam said, "Because this is where the light is."
As old and as dumb as that joke is, there is a semblance of truth to it. People look for things where there is light. And I have a feeling that a lot of people come to church because somewhere they have lost something.
They're not sure what they've lost; maybe it's themselves or their faith or their belief in life. They're not sure what they've lost or even where they lost it. But, they are convinced that the Church is where the light is.
And we shouldn't be surprised, because this is what we've been telling the folks for years. This is the place of the light. This is the place of Christ, the light of the world. This is the place where people come to find answers. Jesus put it a little more directin today's passage. He spoke about "welcoming our neighbors" and "giving a cup of cold water" to the thirsty.
41. Is There Any Hope?
Illustration
Staff
Thisis a long illustration and a sad story, but a remarkable story worth the read. It can be found here:https://www.ussnautilus.org/the-loss-of-uss-s-4-ss-109.
On 17 December 1927, USS S-4 (SS-109), an eight-year-old S-class submarine, was running submerged just off the coast of Provincetown, MA, conducting speed and maneuverability tests between the two white buoys that marked the beginning and end of a measured nautical mile. Meanwhile, on the surface, the Coast Guard destroyer USCGC PAULDING (CG-17) was headed southeast, making 18 knots as she searched for rumrunners carrying their illegal product across the bay to thirsty buyers in Boston. At 3:37 in the afternoon, as S-4 began to surface, the officer of the deck aboard PAULDING, scanning the surrounding seas through his binoculars, spotted the telltale wake of a periscope close aboard on the port bow. “Hard astern! Full right rudder!” came the order, but not fast enough. PAULDING rammed the sub, a section of her bow telescoping into S-4’s hull and punching two holes, one in a ballast tank and one in the pressure hull. Freezing water flooded into the boat, causing her to heel to port and begin to sink by the bow. PAULDING’s crew immediately marked their position on a chart and radioed their superiors. When the destroyer came to a halt, one of her lifeboats was lowered over the side. All it found was a small oil slick, which the men aboard marked with a buoy.
On the bottom, 110 feet down, S-4’s crew was scrambling to bring the situation under control. Men in the battery compartment stuffed clothing into the two-foot-long gash in the pressure hull, but it was soon clear that the water would not be denied. So the men evacuated the space, joining other survivors in the control room. At this point, the men were probably concerned, but not hopeless: seven years before, the entire crew of USS S-5 (SS-110) had been rescued after their boat sank to a depth of nearly 200 feet and they managed to elevate the stern above water. S-4 was not nearly that deep and still capable of blowing her aft ballast tanks. Better yet, thirty-four of the forty men on board were alive in control, the engine room, and the motor room. Only six men who had been stationed in the torpedo room were unaccounted for.
But the situation deteriorated quickly. The saltwater flooding the battery compartment mixed with battery acid and formed toxic chlorine gas, which quickly filled any space not yet occupied by water. A ventilation duct running between the battery room and control remained open and soon the pressure of the water forced the deadly gas into the compartment full of survivors; the gas was followed by a flood of water. Crewmembers rushed to close the valve that would sever the connection, but to no avail; investigators would later determine that a section of curtain had become wedged in the valve, preventing it from closing. As control filled with thousands of gallons of freezing seawater, the men retreated aft into the engine room and smaller motor room beyond. Soon the water in control shorted out several of the switchboards, plunging the boat into darkness.
As the ocean filled all the spaces it could reach aboard S-4, the sound of rushing water died away and the 34 men crammed into the engine and motor rooms were left in cold, dark silence, wondering if their six comrades in the torpedo room were already dead. It had probably dawned on all of them by this point that when they abandoned control they had also abandoned any chance of getting to the surface on their own—the controls that blew compressed air into the ballast tanks were in that now-flooded space. They could only hope that help from the world above was on its way.
At 8:00 the following morning, the rescue ship USS FALCON (AM-28) arrived in Provincetown to pick up ten Navy divers who had been rushed to Cape Cod to assist with the rescue effort; the vessel arrived on scene at 11:00 AM. Just fifteen minutes before, Boatswain Gracie, the man in charge of the local Coast Guard station, had managed to hook the sunken sub with a grappling hook, providing the critical linkage that needed to be made before divers could go down; he had been at the task, alone in a small boat on rolling seas and in frigid weather, since late the previous afternoon. At 1:45, veteran diver Thomas Eadie splashed into the water. Five minutes later he located the sub and began tapping on the hull, searching for survivors. When he rapped on the torpedo loading hatch he was met with six slow taps in reply, indicating six men were still alive in the space. But as he continued aft, his taps were met with silence. The 34 men in the engine and motor rooms had not survived the night.
After the sub was raised the following year, divers found the aft spaces to be practically dry—it was the air that had killed the men, not the water. According to an article in theNew York Herald Tribunewritten on 19 March 1928, the body of Lieutenant Commander Roy H. Jones, commander of S-4, “was found at the foot of the stairway, indicating he stood alert until overcome.” Divers also “found a spectacle that moved them, hardy and inured as they are to horror, to deep emotion. Near the motors, arms clasped tightly about each other in protecting embrace, were two enlisted men, apparently ‘buddies.’ The divers tried to send them up thus locked together, but the hatch was not wide enough and they had to be separated.” Some of the men had lived long enough to grow hungry—two had half-eaten potatoes in their pockets. Divers also noticed that “the walls were battered and scarred by many heavy blows and one spot indicated that an attempt had been made to cut through with a cold chisel.”
By the time Eadie returned to the surface, 25-year-old Lieutenant (j.g.) Graham Fitch and five enlisted men had been at the bottom of the ocean for nearly 24 hours. All had spent most of that time wrapped in blankets and lying in the bunks set up between torpedoes, barely moving and breathing slowly to conserve oxygen. But the contact with the diver gave them hope, as did the arrival of a sister sub, USS S-8 (SS-113), which used her oscillator to ping a question to the men down below using Morse code.
“Is there any [chlorine] gas down there?”
“No, but the air is very bad. How long will you be?” came the reply.
“How many are you?”
“Six. Please hurry.”
Late in the afternoon on the 18th, a second diver, Fred Michels, went over the side with a hose that would connect the men aboard S-4 to the world above and bring lifesaving fresh air. But the weather and visibility were terrible and at 2045 Michels reported that his own air line was fouled. Eadie, still exhausted from his first dive, went down again to save his friend but could not find the air hose that was supposed to be attached to the sub. With the weather growing worse, FALCON turned for Boston with the nearly-dead Michels within her decompression chamber. He would survive and Eadie would be awarded the Medal of Honor for saving his life.
Lieutenant Fitch and his men were not so fortunate. Late Monday, as the storm raged overhead, he tapped a single word to S-8: “Hurry.”
Later, he asked, “Is there any hope?”
“There is hope. Everything possible is being done,” S-8 replied. But Fitch must have known that time was running out.
On Monday night the men on S-8 began sending out a message that had been relayed to them by the Navy Department: “LIEUTENANT FITCH: YOUR WIFE AND MOTHER CONSTANTLY PRAYING FOR YOU.” They sent it out, over and over again. It wasn’t until 6:20 on Tuesday morning, 63 hours into the ordeal, that a reply was received: three short taps, meaning, “I understand.” It was the last communication received from S-4.
The weather finally let up on Wednesday and a diver was able to take the air line down once more and hook it up to the sub. But when he tapped on the hull he received no answer. On the surface, an officer took a sample when the compressor was reversed and air was sucked back out of the sub. His analysis found a carbon-dioxide level of seven percent, too high for anyone to have survived. On 23 December, the Navy reported that all the men aboard S-4 were presumed dead.
Almost exactly three months after her loss, on 17 March 1928, S-4 returned to the surface on huge pontoons. By that time, divers had already removed 32 bodies; two in the engine room and the six in the torpedo room were the only ones that remained. When the compartment that had sheltered the boat’s last survivors was finally opened, personnel found Lieutenant Fitch “lying under a workbench just abaft the starboard torpedo tubes. Over him were two black spots…. These were breaks in the white-painted surface and undoubtedly…were where he had hammered out the messages for help until the end….” They also found another paint-free section on the underside of the torpedo-loading hatch, where the metal between the men and the world outside was thinnest. The wrench that Fitch had used to tap was hanging nearby, two of its sides flattened by prolonged use. Four of the other men had died in their bunks. “The fifth enlisted man was found at the foot of the stairway, with his left hand tightly grasping the handrail.” One man had had the presence of mind to leave a note in his pocket with the address to which he wanted his body sent. He wrote the message on a piece of cardboard in red crayon, probably assuming that the wax would stand up to any water that might get into the boat after his death.
But the men of S-4 would not die in vain. After the boat was reconditioned and recommissioned, she became a test platform for experiments with submarine rescue. The Navy created a diving bell, known as the McCann rescue chamber, out of a small hangar stripped from another submarine. Taking it and S-4 down to the waters off Key West, Navy personnel practiced docking the chamber with the submarine at depths that ranged from 60 to 300 feet. Using it and a Momsen lung, an emergency-breathing device, divers were able to escape repeatedly from the sunken sub. These innovations were, tragically, too late for Lieutenant Fitch and the other 39 members of S-4’s crew, but they would make life beneath the waves at least a little safer for all the submariners who came after.
42. Yet He…
Illustration
Staff
Gregory of Nazianzuswas the4th-century Archbishop of Constantinople. That's1600 years ago. He wrote this wonderful ironicdescription of Jesus:
- He began His ministry by being hungry, yet He is the Bread of Life.
- Jesus ended His earthly ministry by being thirsty, yet He is the Living Water.
- Jesus was weary, yet He is our rest. Jesus paid tribute, yet He is the King.
- Jesus was accused of having a demon, yet He cast out demons.
- Jesus wept, yet He wipes away our tears.
- Jesus was sold for thirty pieces of silver, yet He redeemed the world.
- Jesus was brought as a lamb to the slaughter, yet He is the Good Shepherd.
- Jesus died, yet by His death He destroyed the power of death.
43. Walking the Walk
Illustration
Carlos Wilton
A Civil War chaplain approached a wounded soldier on the battlefield and asked if he'd like to hear a few verses from the Bible. The wounded man said, "No, I'm so thirsty, I'd rather have some water." The chaplain gave him a drink, and then repeated his question. "No sir, not now – but could you put something under my head?" The chaplain did so, and again repeated his question. "No," said the soldier, "I'm cold. Could you cover me up?" The chaplain took off his inside coat and wrapped the soldier. Afraid to ask, he did not repeat his question. He made to go away, but the soldier called him back. "Look, Chaplain, if there's anything in that book of yours that makes a person do for another what you've done for me, then I want to hear it."
44. Seinfeld's Last Episode
Illustration
Brett Blair
Most of you remember the Seinfeld show and many of you were fans. In its final Episode, which aired at the end of the 1998 TV season, the main characters (Jerry, George, Elaine, and Kramer) receive a one year sentence for failing to help someone who was being robbed.
What happens is this: Jerry has just received a contract from NBC to do a sitcom and the network is flying them all to Paris as a gift. But their plane encounters problems and they are stuck in LakelandMassachusetts. Killing time wondering around on the sidewalks in this quaint New England town, they become innocent bystanders and witnesses of a car jacking.
Being New Yorkers and the kind of people they are they make fun of the guy who is being robbed. Kramer, who has a camcorder in his hands, films the incident as a curiosity. They never lift a hand, never shout out; they are 10 yards away, and could care less. They just stand there and casually watch! The robber speeds off with the car and the police arrive late on the scene. With the excitement over, and the poor victim standing dazed in the street, Jerry turns to his friends and suggest they go get something to eat.
They turn to walk off when the officer stops them and says, "Alright, hold it right there."
Jerry: Wha'?
Officer: You're under arrest.
Jerry: Under arrest, What for?
Officer: Article 223 dash 7 of the Lakeland county penal code.
Elaine: What, we didn't do anything.
Officer: That's exactly right. The law requires you to help or assist anyone in danger as long at its reasonable to do so.
George: I never heard of that.
Officer: It's new, its called the Good Samaritan Law, Let's go.
The series ends with them serving their time. The critics hated it. It was pretty bad but there was a redeeming quality to that last episode. For nine years Seinfeld's characters used, ridiculed, and made fun of everyone they met. The four of them were the Priest and the Levites of our modern world. We climb the ladder of success and FedEx gives you the world on time. This is our attitude. Stopping to help someone crimps our style and requires too much of our time.
Looking back on it I can't help but wonder if the script for that final episode was taken right out of Jesus' story of the Good Samaritan. George says that he never heard of that one. Truth is, the law isn't new. It's as old as the tablets Moses brought down from Mount Sinai. There's nothing NEW about it. The story of the Good Samaritan tells us how we are to treat others: Not just our friends, not just the people in our town or stranded on the road or in need, but the very people we despise or dislike or make fun of. In a word: Our enemies. The story of the Good Samaritan is a lesson on how the Law of Moses is to be understood and lived out.
45. A Revolution in Seven Verses
Illustration
Mickey Anders
Walter Wink, in his book Engaging the Powers, suggests that Jesus' action represented a revolution happening in seven short verses. In this short story, Jesus tries to wake people up to the kind of life God wants for them. He often talks about the Kingdom of God where people have equal worth and all of life has dignity. But in the latter part of his ministry, he begins to act this out. In the midst of a highly patriarchal culture Jesus breaks at least six strict cultural rules:
1. Jesus speaks to the woman. In civilized society, Jewish men did not speak to women. Remember the story in John 4 where Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman at the well. She was shocked because a Jew would speak to a Samaritan. But when the disciples returned, the Scripture records, "They were astonished that he was speaking with a woman?" In speaking to her, Jesus jettisons the male restraints on women's freedom.
2. He calls her to the center of the synagogue. By placing her in the geographic middle, he challenges the notion of a male monopoly on access to knowledge and to God.
3. He touches her, which revokes the holiness code. That is the code which protected men from a woman's uncleanness and from her sinful seductiveness.
4. He calls her "daughter of Abraham," a term not found in any of the prior Jewish literature. This is revolutionary because it was believed that women were saved through their men. To call her a daughter of Abraham is to make her a full-fledged member of the nation of Israel with equal standing before God.
5. He heals on the Sabbath, the holy day. In doing this he demonstrates God's compassion for people over ceremony, and reclaims the Sabbath for the celebration of God's liberal goodness.
6. Last, and not least, he challenges the ancient belief that her illness is a direct punishment from God for sin. He asserts that she is ill, not because God willed it, but because there is evil in the world. (In other words, bad things happen to good people.)
And Jesus did all this in a few seconds.
46. The Messiah Is Back!
Illustration
Thomas Long
According to an account in the New York Times, it was just before Christmas several years ago that David Storch, a music teacher, borrowed a copy of the score of Handel's "Messiah" from the Brooklyn Public Library. Through a clerical error, however, the transaction was not recorded. There were several other requests for the score, and the library staff, unaware that it had been checked out, spent many hours searching in vain for it through the stacks. On the day that Storch returned it, placing it on the circulation desk, he was astonished to hear the librarian spontaneously, joyously, and loudly shout, "The 'Messiah' is here! The 'Messiah' is back!" Every head in the library turned toward the voice, but, alas, as the Times reported, "A few minutes later everyone went back to work."
A wry story, but also a parable of the often dashed expectations of those who wait for God. Someone cries, "Peace, peace," but there is no peace. Another says, "Comfort, comfort," but there is little comfort. "Come, thou long-expected Jesus," goes the prayerful hymn, and heads turn in a moment of curious interest, then, seeing nothing, go back to work. And so, weary of waiting on a God who does not come, we lower our horizons, fold our hands in prayer to more tangible gods to give us purpose, and turn to more immediate and reliable resources for hope. We build shiny sanctuaries of glass and steel where we can celebrate "possibility thinking" and the other human potentials, which we hope will save us from our self-doubt, if not our sins. We fill the silos and the skies with ever more potent weapons of destruction, which we hope will save us from each other. And we summon the elixirs of modern medicine to save us from disease, aging, and finally from death. In short, tired of waiting for the one true God, we create our own, molded in our own image.
47. Who Do You Say He Is?
Illustration
Herb Miller
If I told you to pull out a piece of paper and write on it who you say Jesus is what would you write? We all have some answer; we all have some images of Jesus. Some of them are the images we learned as children in Sunday school which have proved troubling and we don't' have anything to replace them with. Sometimes we dismiss Jesus on the basis of what we knew about Jesus at age six. Some of us have never examined the evidence for ourselves.
One of my main goals in preaching is to gain a fresh hearing for Jesus, especially among those who believe they already understand him. I'm sorry to tell you this, but you probably don't. Because what happens sometimes is that presumed familiarity has led to unfamiliarity. Jesus is sometimes obstructed by clouds of well-intentioned misinformation.
But ultimately, rather than give you my answer to the question I'd rather challenge you to answer the question for yourself because that's the only answer that matters. Is he Messiah? If that's what you think, what does that mean? Jesus clearly didn't' fit into what a Messiah was expected to be. Messiahs were supposed to have power, were supposed to take charge, were supposed to set things right and free the Jews from political expression. But Jesus refused to stiff arm anybody. He refused to dominate or to take up arms.
Is he Savior? OK. But what is he saving us from and what is he saving us to? Some people clearly had no interest in being saved. When Jesus said the poor are precious and the rich are in big trouble, only those on one side of that equation found it intriguing.
Is he Teacher? Surely, but is that all?
Who do you say he is? Messiah, Savior, Lord, shaman, teacher, friend, prophet, prince of peace?
Now, as you try and answer that question, don't be too alarmed if you cant' nail it down. Even those of us who wrestle with the question regularly find it difficult, because Jesus is sometimes downright incomprehensible; he is often enigmatic, ambiguous. From the very beginning, who Jesus was, what he was about, was far from self-evident. There were people who stood face-to-face with Jesus and said, "This is God incarnate." There appear to be many more who said, "This man is nuts." Although I think that for most of us, the biggest issue isn't that we've listened to Jesus and found him incomprehensible; it's that we've listened to him and found him too damned difficult.
48. The Meaning of Fame
Illustration
Maxie Dunnam
Have I told you the story of the three executives who were sitting around trying to define the word "fame" what it meant to arrive?
One of them said "fame is being invited to the White House for a visit with the President. That's got to be the ultimate expression of fame you've arrived."
"No, that's not what fame is", the second one said, "fame is being invited to the White House for a visit with the President, and when the hotline rings, he doesn't even get up to answer it. He just lets it ring! When that happens, you have really arrived."
"No," said the third executive. "That's not it. Fame is being invited to the White House for a visit with the President, and when the hotline rings, he does answer it, but he listens for a moment, and then he says, 'Here, this call is for you.'"
Go back to our scripture lesson. People were full of expectation looking for the Messiah and many of them felt that John the Baptist was the Messiah. Let's read verses 15 and 16 again. "As the people were in expectation, and all men questioned in their hearts concerning John, whether perhaps he were the Christ, John answered them all, "I baptize you with water; but he who is mightier than I is coming, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie; he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire."
Here is one of the most telling pictures of John. He knew who he was. He was not the Messiah he was the forerunner. It's never easy to play that role ,forerunner, or an even lesser role suggested by the expression, "playing second fiddle". You know where that metaphor comes from. It comes from the orchestra. Apart from the conductor, First Violinist is the most important person in the Orchestra. Only one sits in that chair and plays that role. All the rest "play second fiddle".
49. Sermon Opener - To Be Sure!
Illustration
Theodore F. Schneider
I am always impressed with the litany-like phrases Martin Luther uses in The Small Catechism as petition by petition he explains the Lord's Prayer:
To be sure, God's name is holy itself ...To be sure, the kingdom of God comes of itself, without our prayers ...To be sure, the good and gracious will of God is done without our prayer ...To be sure, God provides daily bread, even to the wicked, without our prayer...
To be sure, to be sure, to be sure! God's gifts come to us despite our unfaithfulness and often without our prayers. Paul quotes an ancient Christian hymn in his second letter to Timothy: "If we are faithless, he remains faithful - for he cannot deny himself (2 Timothy 2:13)." Our faithlessness and ingratitude cannot make of God something that he is not. To be sure!
All of which brings us to the heart of today's gospel. Rudolph Bultmann is quite correct when he notes that the emphasis of Luke's story is not the miracle of 10 lepers cleansed, but rather the contrast of gratitude and ingratitude depicted on the same dramatic canvas.
Luke draws the contrast all the more boldly when he notes that the man returning to give thanks was a Samaritan, a "foreigner." Always the master storyteller among the four evangelists, Luke, having already given us the story of the "Good Samaritan," now gives us the story of the "Thankful Samaritan."
50. Advent Love
Illustration
Bill Bouknight
Let me tell you a story about a family whose house burned down. Their little girl in that family was named Victoria. A couple years ago during Thanksgiving their home burned to the ground. Fortunately they were not home, but everything was lost.
Their next-door neighbors have an 8-year-old son named Ian who is a good friend of Victoria. A few days after the fire, Victoria's father returned to the burned house to see if he could find anything useful in the wreckage. He looked up and saw Ian coming in his direction carrying a round Styrofoam cooler in a wheelbarrow. Ian opened the top of the cooler proudly, displaying thousands of pennies that his family had been saving since he was two-years-old. He handed the cooler to Victoria's dad and said, "I want you to use this to buy a Christmas present for Victoria."
At first he thought he must decline the gift, but something in Ian's eyes just wouldn't let him. The boy's expression was so full of love. So he hugged him and said, "Thank you very much."
Thankfully, most of us have not experienced the horror of burned-down houses, but many of us have very definite hurts and longings this Advent season. The Messiah comes to us in the spirit of Ian, offering himself as our gift. How strange it is that when we accept the gift of the Messiah, it matches exactly our hurt and need. When we tie our destiny to this Messiah-King, we can face whatever the future brings, knowing that we are more than conquerors through Christ who loves us.
Showing
1
to
50
of
155
results
- 'An effort to suffocate': Experts warn of emerging threats in America's religious freedom battle
- Hundreds gather, dozens baptized at revival event on Ohio State University campus
- 12-year-old Christian girl forcibly converted by Muslim man who kidnapped her in Pakistan
- Episcopal diocese rejects 'misinformation' amid claims it failed to enforce 'safe church' policies
- Abortions on the rise since Roe reversal thanks to abortion pill spike: report
- 'Christian nationalism' label emerges from ignorance and intimidation, panelists warn
- State gov't attacks on pro-life pregnancy care centers on the rise, legal expert says
- Taliban bans women from speaking, showing bare faces in public
- Unconstitutional: Religious broadcasters, churches file lawsuit against Johnson Amendment
- Christian man sentenced to death over TikTok video sparks outcry
- German Pastor to Pay for Anti-LGBTQ Statements
- Should Christians Across Denominations Be Singing the Same Songs?
- Rwanda Explains Why It Closed Thousands of Churches. Again.
- Activist Lila Rose Under Fire for Suggesting Trump Hasn’t Earned the Pro-Life Vote
- More Christian Colleges Will Close. Can They Finish Well?
- Choose This (Labor) Day Whom You Will Serve
- What to Watch for in ‘Rings of Power’ Season 2
- When to Respond to Slander (and When to Ignore It)
- It Is Not Best for Man to Eat Alone
- David Bentley Hart’s Brain-Breaking Argument for the Supremacy of the Mind
- Mountain selfie costs 23-year-old gymnast her life
- Carmelites find St. Teresa of Ávila's body still incorrupt after opening coffin for study of relics
- 'He's in big trouble': GOP adviser says Trump knows he's losing votes on key issue
- Loony MAGA 'Prophet': Trump's Been President Last Four Years
- I was a Trump hater — until I learned the truth of the media’s ‘very fine’ lies
- Donald Trump chases politics and stabs evangelical supporters in the back
- Amitabh Bachchan Schools KBC 16 Contestant On View Of Unmarried Women As ‘Burden’ & We All Are In For It
- Hillsong Founders Launch ‘Online Church’ And Ask For Money
- The Sovereignty of the Latter-day Saints
- Who Is Dan Bilzerian? The Israel-Obsessed, Jew-Hating Misogynist That Elon Musk Protects
- A Shroud of Evidence
- There Never Was a Pro-Life Case for Trump
- Donald Trump and the Sovereign Rights of God
- How a Church Fought Back Against a Liberal Takeover — And Won
- St. Teresa of Ávila's Body Remains Incorrupt After Almost 5 Centuries
- Faith of My Fathers
- Chinese Christians are the Canary in the Coal Mine
- Mohamad Jebara, 'Reclaimer' of the Quran
- Algerian Man Charged Over Synagogue Arson Attack in France
- Religion is America's Mighty Engine of Charitable Goodness
