1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus:
2 Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and wil-- 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace 8 that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding. 9 And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10 to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment--to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ.
11 In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, 12 in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. 13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession--to the praise of his glory.
Hope For A New Year
Ephesians 1:1-14
Sermon
by King Duncan
We live in a crazy world. There was an article sometime back in The Smithsonian magazine about Barbie Dolls. How many of you have ever owned a
Barbie Doll? What? None of our men?
Ever since Barbie made her debut on toy store shelves, she has been accused of creating self-esteem problems in teenage girls. You might remember one cynic's estimate that if Barbie were a real woman, she'd have to walk on all fours due to her proportions.
The male equivalent of the Barbie Doll, according to some people, is the gun-toting G.I. Joe action figure. Notice that it is an "action figure" and not a doll. Boys don't play with dolls, do they? Now for the craziness.
In 1993, a mischievous group called the Barbie Liberation Organization decided to take revenge on these influential dolls. They bought hundreds of talking Barbie Dolls and hundreds of talking G.I. Joes. Then, the group extracted the voice chips the things that make them talk from all of the Barbie Dolls and they placed them in the G.I. Joes, and vice versa. Then they repackaged the figures, and replaced them in stores.
Can you imagine the chaos that resulted. Can you see young girls' reactions when their Barbie Dolls announced in a rough voice, "Eat lead, Cobra!" Or when young boys heard their G.I. Joes squeal, "Ken is such a dream." (1)
This is a crazy world. It's also a very stressful world.
Astronaut Susan J. Helms spent almost six months on the International Space Station, where she became acclimated to a different way of living. In an interview after her return to earth, Helms claimed that she missed the peacefulness of living in space. There were no phones, no Internet connections, no televisions on the International Space Station. There were no problems with information overload. The lack of stress helped her to sleep "like a baby," she says. (2)
Well, Susan, welcome back to the real world the world of 24 hour news and unceasing stress. Whether it is war in the Middle East, terrorism, corporate malfeasance, little girls abducted from their homes, snipers, West Nile virus, or whatever it may be, there is plenty in this world to keep you awake.
If you lost money in your pension fund last year in the slump of the stock market, you were probably furious at the actions of many corporate CEOs. It was bad enough that our economy took so many hits with the collapse of more banks than we would like to count. Why is all this so grievous? It is because of whatcareless or overconfidentexecutives did to their employees and stockholders. Do the people at the top of great corporations care at all about people at the bottom?
A new term entered our vocabulary a few years back downsizing. It means "trimming back" primarily at the expense of employees. In a long article in the Wall Street Journal, Susan Faludi recounted the toll just one downsizing exacted from 63,000 employees when Safeway supermarkets decided to get lean and mean.
Faludi recounts suicides, attempted suicides, divorces, broken families, whole towns devastated economically, children who had to drop out of college, and thousands of people left without jobs, or the hope of finding another one. On the other hand, the few executives at the top of the company shared a personal gain of $800 million after four years. (3)
No wonder some of us have trouble sleeping at night. There's a lot going on in this world to keep you awake. There's a lot to both sadden us and infuriate us. And then, just when we think there is no hope for this world . . . into this world comes God. That's the good news for this first Sunday in a new year. Just when humanity was on the verge of giving up and giving in, here comes God.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it . . . The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God . . . the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a Father's only Son, full of grace and truth." (NRSV)
An Upbeat Word for a Downbeat World. That's our theme for the months of January and February. If you and I want to wallow in despair and gloom we will have to do it somewhere else. In C. S. Lewis' words, we live in a God-invaded world. And where God is, there is hope.
This is not to ignore the realities of our world. This is not a perfect world. Far from it. For example, there is a moral and ethical crisis in our land that cannot be glossed over. It permeates our society from the corporate boardroom all the way down to the community grade school.
In December 2001, teacher Christine Pelton of Piper High School in Kansas discovered that almost one-fourth of her students in a sophom*ore biology class cheated on a major biology project. Armed with proof of the widespread cheating, Pelton flunked all the participating students.
Within days, the parents of the cheating students had protested, and the school board ordered Christine Pelton to change the students' failing grades. It was as if the teacher were guilty and not the cheating students. An isolated case? Hardly.
A Rutgers University study found that over 75% of college students cheat. And studies of college faculty show that the professors are often aware of the cheating and do nothing about it. In fact, faculty at Columbia University and Syracuse University two of our finest schools have published essays suggesting that students shouldn't be held accountable for their cheating because it would hurt the student-professor relationship. (4)
Hello! Where do these schools find professors like these. There has never been a better time to crack down on student cheating. Not because we wish these students any ill will, but because these young people need to understand what it means to be responsible members of society. There is a moral and ethical crisis in our land. We would never deny such an obvious reality. But be careful of wringing your hands and declaring that the world is going to the dogs.
Consider another perspective on today's young people. Did you know that according to a survey in Time magazine compared to teens twenty years ago, today's young people are less likely to get pregnant, less likely to get an abortion, less likely to drink alcohol, less likely to commit a violent crime, and more likely to do volunteer work. (5)
I know I'm proud of the young people in our church. We live in a God-invaded world. We should never give in to despair and feelings of doom. "The Word has become flesh and dwelt among us . . ." This does not mean we live in a perfect world, but it does mean that our world is never beyond hope. Where God is, there is the possibility of renewal. But where is hope to be found? Why, it is to be found right here in this faith community.
Hope is found in the body of Christ. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Why? In order to bring into being a new community of people the people of the Way the people of the cross.
St. Paul writes in our lesson from Ephesians: "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, just as he chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world to be holy and blameless before him in love . . ."
In other words, the reason Christ came into the world was to form us into his people, his bride, his body that we might do his work in the world. Where there are people who bow at the name of Jesus, there is hope for the world.
This is not to say that church people are always aware of their calling, of course. Some churches operate more like social clubs than organizations devoted to changing the world.
Author Leonard Sweet was looking for a good place to have lunch in the community of Cannon Beach, Oregon. He approached a quaint cafe and pulled on the door. It was locked. On the door was a sign: "Out to lunch. Be back at 1:30." During the noon hour, the owner of the cafe had gone out to lunch. Somehow, he didn't get the fact that it was important for his business, a cafe, to also be serving lunch. So it was no surprise that under the "Out to lunch" sign was another sign reading "Store for sale." (6)
There are many churches today that are "out to lunch" when it comes to reaching out to change the world. But fortunately, there are many other churches and many church members who are seeking the best they are able, to make a difference in the world. Let me give you one example of a follower of Christ who gives us a reason to believe in the future.
His name is Burl Cain and he is the warden at The Louisiana State Penitentiary, commonly known as Angola. This institution used to be one of the nation's bloodiest and most brutal prisons. Then, in the early '80s, Burl Cain became the new warden at Angola. Cain is a devout Christian; he put his beliefs into action in reforming the prison. He established literacy classes throughout the prison, even on Death Row. He increased the number of prison chaplains. He also allowed a local seminary to teach Bible studies at Angola. He also insisted that the guards treat inmates with respect. Consequently, incidents of violence have plummeted, and more prisoners are enrolling in education courses.
Warden Cain was particularly instrumental in the life of one inmate, Antonio James. James was a convicted killer who spent about sixteen years on Death Row. The night before his execution, Antonio James asked Cain to eat his last meal with him. Cain had counseled James in the past and introduced him to Christ. Now James wanted to know what it would be like to die. Cain assured him that angels would come to take him to heaven. As Antonio James prepared for his lethal injection, Burl Cain held his hand and spoke to him about God. James' last words to Cain were, "Bless you." (7)
As long as there are disciples of Christ like Burl Cain, there is hope for the world. The question you and I need to ask ourselves is, are we doing our part? This is a crazy world, but it is also a God-invaded world. "The Word has become flesh and dwelt among us . . ." Christ has redeemed us that we might work in his behalf to redeem the world.
An upbeat Word for a downbeat world.
1. "Macho in Miniature" by Ed Liebowitz, Smithsonian, August 2002, p. 28.
2. Interview with astronaut Susan J. Helms by Michelle Burford, O, The Oprah Magazine, July 2002, p. 157.
3. 16 May 1990, pp. A1, A8, A9. Cited in The New Doublespeak by William Lutz (HarperCollins Publishers).
4. "That's Outrageous!" by Tucker Carlson, Reader's Digest, July 2002, pp. 39-42.
5. "Who's In Charge Here?" by Nancy Gibbs, Time, Aug. 6, 2001.
6. "Out to Lunch" by Leonard Sweet, Rev. magazine, Jul./ Aug. 2002 p. 17.
7. Martin Fletcher, Almost Heaven (London: Little, Brown and Company, 1998), pp. 133-142.
Dynamic Preaching, Collected Sermons, by King Duncan
Overview: The letter opens in typical fashion: Paul, an “apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God,” writes to God’s people in Ephesus and surrounding cities. The recipients are identified as “saints” (simply another word for “Christians” in the New Testament). Paul then greets his readers with “grace and peace” from the Lord.
Most of Paul’s letters begin with thanksgiving and a prayer, but Ephesians explodes in adoration and praise. We praise God for choosing us in Christ (1:4–6), for redeeming us and giving us wisdom to understand his plan (1:7–12), and for sealing us with the Holy Spirit (1:13–14). In other words, the Father came up with a plan to rescue people from sin and Satan, the Son carried out the plan through his life, death, and resurrection, and the Holy Spirit now makes the p…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus:
2 Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and wil-- 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace 8 that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding. 9 And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10 to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment--to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ.
11 In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, 12 in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. 13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession--to the praise of his glory.
1:1–2 · Opening and Greetings: The author identifies himself by name and calling and greets his readers in the manner typical in the Pauline Epistles, but without the usual companions. Whether the addressees live specifically in Ephesus is unclear.
Re-creating the Human Family: What God Has Done (1:3–3:21)
1:3–14 · This opening section, setting the agenda for the rest of the letter, is itself opened in verses 3–6. God, who in Jesus Christ originated the solution to the dilemma of our sin, is praised (blessed) for blessing us in Christ with every spiritual blessing (1:3). The word “bless” carries here two different senses, depending on whether God or a human being is the one who blesses. “In the heavenly realms” implies that God’s blessings are secured in the very character of God and are not subject to the uncertainties of earthly life. This is repeatedly confirmed in this section by emphasis on God’s decision, will, and purpose.
God made his choice before the creation of the world: we, the human race, were created to be holy and blameless before him (1:4). Because he loved us and simply because it pleased him to do so, he predestined us to be his own adopted family (1:5), perhaps from among all other creatures. The purpose of this sovereignly independent choice was that we might praise the glorious grace God has freely given us (1:6). He is no egotistical God, but one who knows better than we do that if his creatures concentrate their praise and attention on him, all their creaturely potential will be realized.
This predestination applies to all humanity, not to some elect portion. It does not refer to Christians only but to the entire race. It was God’s plan for creation that we humans would be his special delight, able to commune with him and praise him forever. It is this original design, marred and corrupted by human rebellion, which God has now restored in Christ Jesus. The concept of predestination (or election) emphasizes God’s initiative, God’s choice in creating—and now in re-creating. There is no hint here of his choosing some people and rejecting others. Threaded throughout this tone-setting passage is the key to the entire argument of the letter: all this is done for us “through Jesus Christ,” “in the One he loves,” “in Christ,” “in him” (1:3–6). The solution to the human dilemma resides in Christ the Lord, whose Father is none other than the blessed God.
In Christ three spiritual blessings are ours: redemption, adoption, and sealing with the Spirit (1:7, 11, 13). Together they amount to a whole new God-determined existence. Paul begins with redemption, made available to us through the payment of a price—the blood, or death, of Christ (1:7). It consists in the forgiveness of sins, the necessary first step toward the re-creation of a truly holy, blameless family. God’s blessing us with redemption implies that his original intentions (1:4–6) have been momentarily frustrated; sin has spoiled creation. Redemption then is the foundation of God’s re-creative work on behalf of humanity. Without redemption, nothing else could be done.
We have this redemption, this new standing with our Creator, not because of our own worthiness, but simply according to the wealth of his grace—another assurance of the security of God’s provision (1:7–8). He has heaped grace on us beyond measure (according to his own wise understanding), having made known to us what he wanted to do all along, something that gives him pleasure, something that he decided to accomplish at the proper time in Christ, namely, the “mystery of his will” (1:9). This mystery, hidden in God’s will but now revealed to us, is nothing less than that everything in creation, heavenly and earthly, human and nonhuman, will be gathered and united in Christ (1:10).
The first blessing’s negative orientation is balanced by the second blessing’s positive orientation. In Christ we have been appointed to participate (1:11). The purpose is that we may praise God’s glory and so be enabled to fulfill our proper destiny as those who belong to a holy God (1:12). The place we have been allotted was hinted at already in verses 5 and 10. It is a place in God’s new family, whose head is Christ. Again, God himself is the author, decider, planner, and accomplisher of this; he has desired it when we did not. And desiring it, he can and will do it. Indeed, he has already done it.
Up to this point, Paul has been speaking in the first person plural, meaning that he includes his readers—or possibly, contrasting them instead with some other group to which he himself belongs. This other group he has called “we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ” (1:12). Now he draws the readers into the picture by centering the third blessing on them. They have heard the “message of truth,” the true message, the gospel that brought them, too, into God’s salvation once they believed it (1:13). This gospel is the proclamation that Jesus of Nazareth, the Jewish messiah, has been declared king of all creation by his resurrection from the dead (Rom. 1:2–6), with the implication that all humanity, not just Israel, belongs to him.
Thus these Gentiles, too, are “in Christ” and in him have received the third blessing—the “seal, the promised Holy Spirit” (1:13). This at least portrays the Spirit as a down payment, a “deposit guaranteeing our inheritance” (1:14; the word translated “inheritance” is related to the word translated “chosen” in 1:11) while we await the full redemption of God’s possession. As will be seen in 3:14–19, however, the presence of the Spirit implies far more than a passive guarantee; it also means the power necessary to live out now in this doomed age the ethic of the new age to come, which in Christ has already entered the scene. This new ethic, good for us and for everyone else, is rooted in the praise of the glorious Creator.
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
The Opening Greeting
1:1 Except for the omission of Timothy, the opening of this greeting is quite similar to Colossians 1:1. The letter claims to be from Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus. This term was one that Paul used frequently to indicate that he was “one who was sent” (apostellō, “to send”) as a missionary or special envoy of God. It is used of the twelve disciples as well as for others who fulfill an apostolic function, such as Andronicus and Junias (Rom. 16:7). At times, it is applied to Christians who have a very vivid experience of Christ (Acts 1:21, 22; 1 Cor. 9:1). By the time Ephesians was written, it was used primarily for those who were the founders of the Christian church (2:20).
The statement that Paul’s apostleship is by the will of God repeats a theme that Paul emphasizes throughout his epistles: At his commissioning, he and Barnabas are set apart to do the work to which God has called them (Acts 13:2); to the Romans he writes “called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God” (1:1); to the Galatians he states in no uncertain terms that his call did not come from “men nor by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father” (1:1; cf. also 1:13–16); and though Paul may at times feel unworthy of his calling (1 Cor. 15:9), he affirms that God’s grace has made him what he is (1 Cor. 15:10). This awareness of God’s initiative in his call kept Paul from boasting about his position; it also legitimized his office as an apostle on occasions when his authority was questioned (cf. Galatians and Corinthians).
The readers are identified, first of all, as saints. As such, they are people who are consecrated to God by being separated from sin. Second, they are the faithful in Christ Jesus, i.e., those who are being faithful or trustworthy. The footnote in the NIV text indicates that the Greek pistois (faithful) could also be taken to mean “believers.” Thus the greeting would read “to the saints and believers who are …” Both meanings, however, are expressed within the body of the letter: God’s people are those who have put their faith in Christ (the indicative) and who live out that faith in obedience to the Lord (the imperative).
The text indicates that the letter is addressed to God’s people who live in Ephesus, although the NIV footnote indicates that there is a textual question concerning the inclusion of the phrase in Ephesus. Most likely the destination was not present in the original manuscript because the epistle was intended to be a universal letter to be circulated among a number of churches (see Introduction).
1:2 The greeting ends with Paul’s usual mention of grace and peace (cf. Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:3; Phil. 1:2; Col. 1:2; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:2; 1 Tim. 1:2; 2 Tim. 1:2; and Titus 1:4 include grace, mercy, and peace). Chairein (“Greetings”) was a common word for greeting in the Greek world (Acts 15:23; 23:26; James 1:1). Paul uses charis (“grace”), which to believers has come to mean God’s free and unmerited goodness upon humankind.
The Hebrews greeted each other with šalôm, a common term for “peace” as well as fullness or wholeness of life. The apostle, likewise, is doing more than just greeting his readers with these terms, because grace and peace are gifts of God given through Christ. By bringing these two gifts together, he is urging that his readers enjoy life because of the favor that God freely has bestowed upon them. Both concepts form an important part of the letter (peace: 2:14, 15, 17; 4:3; 6:15; grace: 2:5, 7, 8; 3:2, 7; 4:7).
One cannot help but notice the significant role attached to Christ in these opening verses. Paul is designated as an apostle of Christ Jesus; the believers live their life in Christ Jesus; and together with God the Father, the Lord Jesus Christ bestows the divine gifts of grace and peace upon his people.
In the following discussion it will be noted that Ephesians has a number of stylistic features similar to Colossians. First, Ephesians follows the pattern of praise, thanksgiving, and prayer. In Colossians, Paul began by thanking God for his readers (1:3–8) and then praying that God would accomplish certain things in their lives. In Ephesians, there is a similar structure: The epistle begins with a great hymn of praise or thanksgiving to God (1:3–14) and follows up with a long prayer (1:15–2:20) in which the apostle expresses the concern that his readers understand how God has blessed them through Christ.
A second similarity relates to the hymn and its place in the epistle. In Colossians, the ideas of the Christ hymn (1:15–20) were applied again and again throughout the letter. Much the same could be said of Ephesians, for this opening eulogy serves as an excellent preface to the remaining doctrinal section. The idea of redemption is prominent in the phrases dealing with the exaltation of Christ (1:15–22), salvation by faith (2:1–10), the unity between Jew and Gentile (2:11–22), and the revelation of the mystery of Christ (3:1–12).
Third, Ephesians may be divided conveniently into a doctrinal and a practical section, since we find the author providing a theological base (chapters 1–3) and then applying these truths to the Christian life (chapters 4–6). Such divisions, however, should not be taken too rigidly, for one finds ethical exhortations in the midst of doctrinal discussion (e.g., 1:4; 2:10) and doctrinal teaching continues throughout the last chapters (4:4–16; 5:21–6:9).
A Hymn of Praise
Many elevated words and phrases have been used to describe the beauty of this opening hymn that praises God for the spiritual blessings he has bestowed upon the believer in Christ. Stott, in his commentary (p. 32), quotes a number of authors who use such phrases as “a magnificent gateway,” “a golden chain of links,” “a kaleidoscope of dazzling lights and shifting colors,” a “rhapsodic adoration,” a “paean of praise.”
Unfortunately, the English translations do not retain the hymnic nature and rhythmic pattern that is discernible in the original language. In the Greek, for example, the entire section of twelve verses is one long sentence. This helps one to appreciate how the author’s thoughts keep moving to new heights. Having to divide the section into sentences (RSV and NIV, eight; NEB, eight; GNB, fifteen) destroys the continuity of both style and thought.
A number of proposals have been offered with respect to the origin of the hymn. Those who take the Ephesian letter to be genuinely Pauline naturally attribute these verses to the great apostle. Scholars who question Pauline authorship suggest that an author writing in Paul’s name borrowed terms and phrases from Paul’s other epistles and composed a hymn that resembles something that Paul would have written.
The search for origins and models has moved in a number of directions. J. Kirby believes that this passage is modeled after a Jewish berakah (“blessing”) in which God is praised for his goodness. Others have noted the strong liturgical nature of the passage and have suggested that it belongs to the worshiping community. As such, either it could have a prior and independent existence apart from Ephesians or it could have been written by the author to provide a liturgical piece to be used for church worship and instruction (Mitton, pp. 22–24).
A number of scholars who have tried to explain the origin of Ephesians from a baptismal context have focused their attention on this particular hymnic section. In the hymn, the author utilizes baptismal terms and concepts such as sonship (1:5), redemption (1:7), and sealing (1:13). The most likely explanation for this is that the writer is drawing upon baptismal theology to thank God for all the blessings of redemption that he has provided through Christ to those who have believed. Since the passage is a hymn, it is quite possible to regard it as a baptismal hymn that may have been part of the worshiping tradition in the early church and that the author took over and incorporated into his redemptive doxology. The baptismal motifs in this hymn have been so convincing to some scholars that they have concluded that the entire epistle was written as a baptismal tract or at least connected with the celebration of baptism in the church.
From the baptismal nature of this opening hymn, however, it does not necessarily follow that the occasion of this epistle is to instruct the readers on the meaning of their baptism. If this were the purpose, one might expect baptism to be mentioned more explicitly, for as it stands, the word “baptism” occurs only once (4:5). Rather, the author finds the baptismal motifs and language appropriate to describe to his readers all the blessings that God has bestowed in Christ. The early church understood baptism to be the act in which the believer appropriates in faith the blessings of redemption in Christ. Thus it was sufficient for him to allude to baptism but not to define its meaning directly.
Another noticeable feature of the hymn is the place that it gives to all three members of the Trinity. In a broad sense, the work of the Father is described in verses 3–6; the Son, in verses 7–12; and the Holy Spirit, in verses 13–14. But all three persons permeate the entire passage. God is the source of all the spiritual blessings mentioned in the hymn; Christ is the agent in whom these blessings are realized for the believer. The name “Christ”—or some form of that name, or the personal pronoun “in him”—occurs thirteen times in this passage. All that God has purposed for the believer is fulfilled in Christ. The Holy Spirit is mentioned as the one who seals or marks the believer as belonging to Christ. And, since the blessings that are enumerated in this passage are “spiritual,” they are given by the “Spirit.”
1:3 Praise be: The Greek word is eulogētos, which carries the meaning of speaking (legō) well or kindly (eu) of someone. In this context, the phrase could be expressed as “thanks be,” “blessed be,” as well as praise be to God. In the NT, the word is used exclusively for God, since he alone is worthy to be blessed; he is blessed because he is the author of all the blessings that he bestows upon the believer in Christ. Since such forms of blessings were common among the Jews, this passage may have a Jewish antecedent.
Praise is given to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (cf. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:3; 1 Pet. 1:3). Grammatically, the phrase could read, “God who is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” As such, it indicates the unique relationship that God and Christ have to each other. In the context of the NT, believers call God “Father” because of the sonship that is received through Christ (cf. 1:5; Rom. 8:14–17; Gal. 4:6, 7).
Who has blessed us: It is important to note that this is in the past (Greek aorist) tense, meaning that the author is envisioning a time when God acted to provide these blessings rather than anticipating that God will do something in the future. These blessings became a reality for the believers in Christ—that is, in baptism.
The nature or essence of the blessing is spiritual. Although the word is singular (every spiritual blessing), it needs to be understood as a comprehensive phrase: God’s blessings are unlimited, and he does not withhold anything from his people. The sphere of these blessings is the heavenly realms. Thus, the reference is not to material, physical, or temporal blessings: They are not part of one’s treasure “where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal” (Matt. 6:19). As spiritual gifts in the heavenly world, they are imperishable and belong to the eternal order “where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal” (Matt. 6:20).
The phrase in the heavenly realms is a translation of the Greek “in the heavenlies” (en tois epouraniois). Since it is an adjective without a noun, English translations supply such terms as “world” (GNB), “places” (RSV), or realms (NIV). This clarification, however, should not lead one to conclude that Paul has a geographical place or cosmic location in mind somewhere in the universe above the earth. Heavenlies is a term signifying the spiritual world, that is, the unseen world of spiritual reality and activity. This is the sphere in which the believers are blessed. The other four occurrences of “heavenly realms” in the epistle (1:20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12) help to express this idea more clearly.
In the ancient world, it was believed that there was a great cosmic struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil. Generally, the heavens were considered to be the place where this battle between the evil rulers, principalities, powers, and ruling spirits of the universe (stoicheia tou kosmou) was being waged. A significant part of the message in Colossians is that these spiritual forces are inferior to Christ in the order of creation (Col. 1:16) as well as subject to Christ through his victory on the cross, where Christ “having disarmed the powers and authorities, … made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross” (Col. 2:15). Ephesians continues these ideas by teaching that, because of Christ’s victory over these evil powers, he is exalted to God’s right hand “far above all rule and authority, powers and dominion” (1:20, 21). Furthermore, these powers are learning of God’s wisdom through the witness of the church (3:10).
Ephesians teaches that believers are involved in a similar battle: “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms” (6:12). But by virtue of their union with Christ, they share in Christ’s victory and likewise rule with Christ in the heavenly world (2:6). In fact, all the blessings that are enumerated in this passage are either fulfilled in union with Christ or are mediated through the agency of Christ.
1:4 The first specific blessing mentioned is what is known in theological circles as election or predestination. Basically, this doctrine affirms that God has taken the initiative in the “electing” or “choosing” process. In the OT, God chooses Israel from among all the nations of the earth to be his covenant people (Deut. 4:37; 7:6, 7; Isa. 44:1, 2); in the NT, God chooses people to become members of the new covenant, the church (John 15:16; Rom. 8:29; 9:11; Eph. 1:4, 5; 2 Thess. 2:13; 2 Tim. 1:9; 1 Pet. 1:2); and individuals such as Jeremiah (1:5) and Paul (1 Cor. 15:9–11) believed that even their vocation was destined by God.
Unfortunately, the Christian church has become polarized into theological camps over this doctrine. Some (namely, the Calvinists) have placed all the emphasis upon the sovereign grace of God in matters of salvation; others (namely, the Arminians) have emphasized human free will in the salvation process. Since the Bible does not attempt to harmonize this apparent paradox, it continues to remain one of the more divisive and speculative “mysteries” of the Christian faith.
When dealing with this issue, one should avoid the extremes in theory and practice that so often characterize adherents of one view or another. Election to salvation does not imply that God, therefore, predestines the rest of humanity to damnation; nor should election lead to spiritual pride among the elect. Election simply affirms that personal faith rests upon the prior work (grace) of God, so that, with respect to salvation, God has taken the initiative to claim a people for himself. An individual is free to choose God only because God has already decided for such a person from eternity. Likewise, election should not lead to spiritual complacency; it is a privilege and responsibility that is unto holiness of life and for good works (1:4; 2:10).
The author indicates that God’s intention for the salvation of humanity precedes the creation of the world and the historical process (for he chose us in him before the creation of the world). When Paul, a member of the church and a chosen apostle to the Gentiles, reflects upon the doctrine of election, he may be reasoning in the following way: “How did I, a Pharisee and a former persecutor of Christians, get to be what I am? How is it that the Jews—and now the Gentiles—have become part of God’s family? Surely it is not because of some national merit or personal attainment through faith or good works! This had to be God’s doing. He knew from eternity how he would work in me and in the world; it was not a last-minute decision that the Gentiles were to become heirs of salvation” (3:6). When the apostle writes to the Corinthians about their new existence in Christ, for example, he states: “All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ” (2 Cor. 5:17–19).
Stott makes a helpful comment by drawing attention to the relationship of the three pronouns in the phrase he chose us in him. God chose us, even before we were created, to be redeemed through the work of Christ that had not yet taken place (Stott, p. 36). Such, however, is the marvel of God’s elective grace toward the human race.
The goal of election is that the believer be holy and blameless before God. This phrase is similar to Colossians 1:2 and may be part of the OT sacrificial language that the NT uses on other occasions (cf. 5:27; Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19; Jude 24). In some cases, the doctrine of predestination has led to moral license rather than personal holiness. Not a few believers have reasoned that since they are “eternally secure,” their ethical life is no longer of concern to God or to other people. This reasoning, however, is unfortunate, because the believers’ standing before God and election (the indicative) are demonstrated by the kind of life that they live ethically (the imperative).
1:5 It is difficult to know what to do with the phrase in love. The NIV (as RSV, GNB) takes it to go with verse 5, thereby indicating that God’s choosing was motivated by his love. On the basis of this love, God predestined us to be adopted as his sons and daughters through Jesus Christ. But the phrase could be taken with the action described in verse 4, as humanity’s love to God rather than God’s love for humanity. Thus the meaning would be that believers should be holy and without fault before him in love (en agapē). Agapē is used elsewhere in Ephesians for Christian love (3:17; 4:2, 15, 16; 5:2). Still, it is fitting to mention God’s love so early in the epistle, and that this is what motivated him to decide (lit., “foreordain”) to redeem humanity: adopted as his sons and daughters … in accordance with his pleasure and will.
Sonship—referring to being a child of God (i.e., eligible to inherit his promises)—is the second blessing listed in this passage, and this, too, is a gift mediated through Jesus Christ. Paul uses this term in Romans 8:15, 23, 29, and Galatians 4:5 to indicate the special relationship that believers have to God. Here sonship is tied in with God’s elective purpose for humanity.
The language of this passage is similar to that in the accounts of Jesus’ baptism (Matt. 3:13–17; Mark 1:9–11; Luke 3:21, 22) and transfiguration (Matt. 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). In these Gospel accounts of Christ’s baptism, as in Ephesians 1:5 and 6, baptism and sonship are closely related and Christ is given the title “beloved” or the One he loves (1:6). This similarity of language and ideas (sonship, huiothesia; good pleasure, eudokia; and beloved, agapētos) leads one to infer that this reference to the election and sonship of the Christian may have some connection with the baptism of Jesus. Thus one could say that as Jesus was proclaimed Son at his baptism, baptism is the event whereby believers obtain their sonship. This thought is quite explicit in the baptismal passage in Galatians 3:26–27 that states that “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.”
1:6 Theology is doxology! In other words, sonship (the indicative) is a summons to praise God for his glorious grace. Literally, from the Greek, the phrase reads, “to the praise of the glory of the grace of him of which he graced us in the beloved.” This reading helps one to see how much emphasis the writer puts upon grace (cf. 1:2). He seems so enraptured by the thought of God’s grace that he does not want to let it go. Also, it is a fitting way to end a section devoted to the work of the Father (1:3–6). That almost identical phrases are used in 1:12 and 1:14 (“the praise of his glory”) confirms the hymnic nature of this entire section.
1:7 There is a definite parallel here to Colossians 1:14, where redemption and the forgiveness of sins are closely connected. But in Ephesians, the means of redemption is amplified by the phrase through his blood, the forgiveness of sins. The emphasis here is upon forgiveness, which in turn is followed by the resounding response concerning the greatness of God’s grace. Since sonship takes place through baptism, and since sonship and forgiveness are so closely linked in this passage, one wonders if the author still has the baptismal event in mind when he speaks of the forgiveness of sins.
1:8 The magnitude of God’s grace is amplified in this opening phrase, that he lavished on us (eperisseusen). The poetic nature of the Greek makes it difficult to know whether to attach the following words (with all wisdom and understanding) with verse 8 or verse 9. Is it God’s wisdom and insight (GNB, RSV) or is it wisdom and insight that God, through his grace, has lavished upon believers so that they could understand God’s will (NIV, NEB)? Given the parallel with Colossians 1:9 and the meaning of verse 9, it seems better to take wisdom and insight as coming from God’s grace.
The two terms, wisdom (sophia) and understanding (phronēsis), though not consistently distinguished in Scripture, generally refer to the knowledge of something, followed by the ability to apply that knowledge or wisdom to a right course of action. God has provided the knowledge and ability to know and to do his will.
1:9 God’s gift of wisdom and insight enables the believer to understand the mystery of his will (cf. GNB: “secret plan”). In Colossians, that mystery meant that the Gentiles were recipients of the gospel and heirs of salvation (1:26, 27; 2:2; 4:3). Though this thought appears also in Ephesians (cf. 3:3–6), this epistle carries the concept somewhat further with its emphasis upon the church and the unity of mankind. The revelation is part of God’s eternal plan (his good pleasure which he purposed) and is something that will be accomplished in Christ. As in verse 5, God’s purpose includes his good pleasure as well (cf. eudokia in Luke 2:14; Gal. 1:15). It pleased God to make his plan or will known and to complete that plan in his Son.
1:10 God’s “good pleasure” is put into effect or administered by Christ (for the use of oikonomia as “management,” “stewardship,” or “administration,” cf. Luke 16:2–4; 1 Cor. 9:17; 1 Pet. 4:10). He is the steward through whom God is working out his plan for the world—a plan that is in process and that will be culminated when the times will have reached their fulfillment (lit., “in the fullness of time”).
God’s ultimate plan is to unify all of creation under the headship of Christ. Elsewhere in the epistle, the author talks about bringing the Jews and Gentiles together into one body (2:11, 12; 3:6); here, however, he envisions a global unity. In many ways the words are reminiscent of the Christ hymn in Colossians, in which all things on earth and in heaven are reconciled in Christ (1:20).
It is difficult to know how far one should push this language or attempt to comprehend the scope of the author’s ideas. Are all things (ta panta) and heaven and earth just metaphors for universality, or does he mean the unity of heavenly beings (i.e., angels, principalities, powers, spirits, etc.) with human beings? Is he thinking of a cosmic and earthly renewal characteristic of the end times (Matt. 19:28; Rom. 8:18–25; 2 Pet. 3:10–13)? Although one cannot be sure of the details, it is clear that this hymn praises God that ultimately all things will find their place and unity in Christ.
The difficult word anakephalaiōsasthai is translated appropriately in the NIV to bring … together under one head, even Christ. In secular terms, the word is used for the summation of things, such as adding up numbers in mathematics or concluding an argument in a debate. In today’s language, people speak of “the bottom line” in much the same way. Paul uses the term in Romans 13:9 when he indicates that all of the commandments are being “summed up” in the one command of love.
In Ephesians, however, “addition” or “summation” does not quite express the author’s thought adequately. To bring everything together under one head, even Christ suggests that all things (human beings, history, and the entire universe) find their focus in Christ. This, essentially, is the content of God’s secret plan!
1:11–12 Up to this point in the hymn (vv. 3–10), the personal pronouns “we” and “us” refer to all Christians, irrespective of ethnic origin. But an important change takes place in the concluding verses of the hymn, where a distinction is made between Jewish and Gentile Christians: In verses 11–12, the “us” with whom the author identifies himself is the Jewish Christians; in verse 13, the “you” definitely refers to the Gentile believers; then the “we” in verse 14 refers to all of God’s people—both Jewish and Gentile believers. The distinctions mentioned here will receive further attention in chapter 2 of the epistle, where it is shown how Jews and Gentiles were brought together into one body in Christ.
When the author describes God’s action upon the Jewish believers, he repeats many of his earlier words and ideas: having been predestined (1:4) according to the plan (cf. 1:5, 9) of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will (1:5). With respect to the Jewish Christians, he wants to emphasize that what has happened to them was not by chance or by human merit but is due entirely to the eternal and elective purposes of God in Christ. All is of God!
The NIV In him we were also chosen does not quite capture the essence of the Greek eklērōthēmen. The verb klēroō means “to choose,” “to appoint by lot.” The noun (klēros), therefore, would be “the lot,” “share,” or “portion” that was obtained by lot. The Greek word for “inheritance,” “possession,” or “property” is the cognate word klēronomia (cf 1:14).
Behind this language is the OT concept that Israel was God’s “lot” or “chosen people” (Deut. 4:20; 9:29; 32:9; 1 Kings 8:51; Ps. 106:40; Jer. 10:16; Zech. 2:12). Given the context of verse 11 within a hymn that is celebrating God’s elective purpose, it seems likely that the author is referring to the Jewish Christians as those whom God has chosen as his own people. Now, however, that possession is claimed by virtue of their union with Christ (in him).
While being God’s people may result in praising God through prayer, worship, etc., the phrase in order that we … might be for the praise of his glory suggests that one’s very being or existence is involved. These new people of God are summoned to be a praise to God in the same manner that Israel was called as a nation to declare God’s glory in their life, witness, and worship (Isa. 43:21; Jer. 13:11).
Who are those who were the first to hope in Christ? Some commentators, by virtue of the Greek article with Christ, take the reference to be to the Jewish nation and their expectation of “the Christ,” that is, the coming Messiah; others see the comment applying to those Jews who believed in Christ and became the first Christians. In priority of time, they preceded the Gentiles with their hope (and faith) in Christ. This latter view appears to fit this context where the contrast between Jewish (1:11–12) and Gentile believers (1:13) is being discussed.
1:13 Here the author turns to the Gentiles and affirms that they, too, were included in Christ. He then proceeds to outline the steps that were involved in their coming to Christ:
First, they heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. On some occasion these readers heard the message of the gospel, which resulted in their salvation. In this context, salvation probably signifies inner renewal and all the blessings and privileges available to believers because of their status in Christ (cf. 2:1ff.) rather than preservation from the wrath of God (cf. Rom. 5:9).
The phraseology of this opening statement is similar to Colossians 1:5 and to the ideas in Romans 10:14 and 17, which show that the proclamation of the gospel precedes faith in the gospel. A similar sequence takes place during Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost when he summons those who heard the gospel to repent and be baptized (Acts 2:37ff.).
Second, they believed in Christ, literally, “in whom also having believed.” Although the content of belief is not mentioned, it definitely must include the person of Christ (“If you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved,” Rom. 10:9) or the gospel that bears witness to him.
Third, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit. The imagery behind this phrase comes from the ancient custom of sealing (sphragizō), in which personal possessions (e.g., animals, household goods, slaves) received a mark or stamp of ownership in much the same way that things are branded or identified today. This act also confirmed or authenticated something as genuine. A seal on a letter or document, for example, declared that it was legally valid. People belonging to religious cults often were sealed with marks that bore the image of their god(s). The Book of Revelation talks about those who have or do not have “the seal of God on their foreheads” (Rev. 9:4; cf. also 7:2–8; 22:4; 2 Tim. 2:19).
In the NT, there are a number of references that indicate that the Holy Spirit is the Christian’s seal: In Romans, Paul relates the inner witness of the Spirit to the believer’s sonship (8:15, 16; cf. Gal. 4:6), thus affirming that the presence of the Holy Spirit in the believer is a sign that he or she belongs to God. The apostle is even more explicit in 2 Corinthians 1:22, “[God] set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.” Ephesians 1:13 confirms this by assuring the believer that the seal is the possession of the Holy Spirit. It is a visible attestation that one belongs to Christ.
Although Paul connects the giving of the Holy Spirit to the acts of “hearing” the gospel and “believing” in Christ, there are credible reasons to believe that verse 13 has the baptismal event in mind, even though the term is not mentioned explicitly. First, there is an inseparable connection between faith and baptism in the NT. Baptism is believers’ baptism, and those who believed in Christ expressed their faith almost immediately in baptism (Acts 2:38, 41; 8:12, 35–38; 9:18; 10:47, 48; 19:5). Faith and baptism went so closely together that they were regarded as one act rather than two. Peter, for example, instructs his hearers to repent, that is, to have faith, believe, and to be baptized for the forgiveness of sins (2:38). When Paul becomes a Christian, he is told to “Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name” (Acts 22:16). Within the framework of the NT, one was not baptized unless one believed; nor did one believe without being baptized.
Second, the NT connects baptism with the reception of the Holy Spirit. Peter summons his audience to be baptized and receive “the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). Paul associates baptism and the Holy Spirit on several occasions in his letters (1 Cor. 6:11; 12:13; Titus 3:5). And when Luke describes some of the major epochs in the life of the early Christian church, he includes faith, baptism, and the reception of the Holy Spirit as essential parts of becoming a Christian, that is, of Christian initiation (Acts 2:38ff.; 8:12–17; 19:1–6; cf. 10:44–48). There is no need for a “Spirit baptism” or a rite of confirmation apart from the reception of the Holy Spirit at the time of water baptism.
On the basis of these observations it appears legitimate to interpret 1:13 within the context of baptism. The aorist participles “having heard” (akousantes) and “having believed” (pisteusantes), followed by the aorist passive (“you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise”), are reminiscent of the faith, baptism, Holy Spirit pattern noted above. The author does not envision a sequence of events separated by a long period of time.
Although the Holy Spirit is the seal (1:13; 4:30; 2 Cor. 1:22), and 1:13 is a strong allusion to baptism, it is by no means certain that sealing is used as a technical term for baptism in Ephesians. The first definite reference to the “seal of baptism” occurs in the second century (ca. A.D. 150) in the Second Letter of Clement (7.6; 8.6). From this time onward, sphragis is the seal received by all Christians at baptism and thus becomes a term for baptism itself.
The effect of the Holy Spirit is to mark the believer with a seal. As a seal, the Spirit marks one out as belonging to Christ. It is interesting to note that this is virtually the same effect that baptism “into Christ” has. To be baptized into the name or person of Christ is to become Christ’s possession, to be placed under the Lord’s authority and protection.
1:14 In addition to ownership, the Holy Spirit is a deposit guaranteeing that believers will receive God’s promises. Most commentators suggest that the idea of guarantee (arrabōn) came into the Greek world from the Phoenicians who, in matters of trade, often would make a deposit or an installment as earnest money with the balance to be paid in full at some later date. This act obliged both buyer and seller to complete the transaction. But “the deal” included a sense of “quality” as well, for the person receiving the down payment looked forward to receiving full payment with goods of the same quality (Mitton, pp. 62–63). In the Christian life, the Holy Spirit is a pledge that God will complete his promise to deliver our inheritance. The statement in 2 Corinthians 5:5 is more specific about this idea: “God … has given us the Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.” One’s present life in the Spirit is a foretaste of one’s future and eternal life with the Spirit!
Beyond guaranteeing one’s inheritance, the Holy Spirit assures believers of the redemption of those who are God’s possession. Included in this translation are the two important theological concepts of redemption (apolytrōsis) and possession (peripoiēsis). Some commentators (cf. Abbott, p. 24) believe that the context (our inheritance) requires that possession likewise be “our possession.” Thus, believers are redeemed, but await a future time when they will take full possession of their redemption. This view has led to the ambiguous and inadequate translation in the RSV, “which is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.”
Most commentators—and as a result most English translations, like the NIV—think the verse is stressing that God is the agent of redemption and that believers are God’s possession (NIV, NASB), “his own” (NEB), or “those who are his” (GNB). Although redemption is a present gift, the Holy Spirit assures the believer that ultimately God will redeem completely those who are his; he is a guarantee until the complete freedom (redemption) of God’s own people (cf. 1 Pet. 2:9).
These thoughts recall the “already” and the “not yet” aspect of the Christian life. Believers have been given the Holy Spirit, enjoy new life in Christ, have been redeemed, but still await the fulfillment of these blessings at the second Advent. The sealing of the Holy Spirit has an eschatological function that points toward the final day, when their bodies will completely be freed (redeemed) from all the effects of sin. Ephesians 4:30 expands this concept more fully when it refers to “the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.” A similar thought concerning redemption is expressed in Romans 8:23, where Paul discusses the future glory of God’s people and God’s creation: “We ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.”
This great hymn of praise (vv. 3–14) ends with a note that has been sounded several times before with respect to God’s elective purpose for humanity. Hence, election and sonship are to the praise of his glorious grace (v. 6); redemption, and all of its benefits (vv. 7–11), are to culminate in a life of praise (that we … might be for the praise of his glory—v. 12); finally, the pledge of the Holy Spirit is presented in relation to the unfolding plan of God. This, also, is to the praise of his glory (v. 14).
Additional Notes
On 1:3–14 cf. J. T. Sanders “Hymnic Elements in Ephesians 1–3,” ZNW 56 (1965), pp. 214–32. Other specialized studies include V. A. Bartling, “The Church of God’s Eternal Plan: A Study of Ephesians 1:1–14,” Concordia Theological Monthly 36 (1965), pp. 198–204; J. Coutts, “Ephesians 1:3–14 and 1 Peter 1:3–12,” pp. 115–27; N. H. Keathley, “To the Praise of His Glory: Ephesians I,” RevExp 76 (1979), pp. 485–93; P. T. O’Brien, “Ephesians I: An Unusual Introduction to a New Testament Letter,” NTS 25 (1979), pp. 504–16. O’Brien notes that vv. 3–14 have a “didactic intent,” a “paraenetic aim,” and an “epistolary function.”
The following phrases from vv. 3–14 in the NIV indicate the many variations of the “in Christ” statements:
in Christ (v. 3)
in him (en autō, i.e., Christ, v. 4)
through Jesus Christ (v. 5)
in the One he loves (v. 6)
in Christ (v. 9)
under one head, even Christ (v. 10)
in him (v. 11)
in Christ (v. 12)
in Christ (v. 13)
in him (v. 13)
1:3 Some helpful material on “heavenlies” includes Caragounis, The Ephesian Mysterion, pp. 146–52; Robinson, Ephesians, pp. 20–22; A. T. Lincoln, “Re-Examination of ‘The Heavenlies’ in Ephesians,” NTS 19 (1973), pp. 468–83. Lincoln gives a good history of interpretation as well as an examination of H. Odeburg’s The View of the Universe in the Epistle to the Ephesians (Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1934). He differs with Odeburg by concluding that 3:10 and 6:12 have a “local” rather than a “spiritual” meaning: “In Ephesians then it would not be surprising if en tois epouraniois were to have a reference to heaven as a distinct part of the created universe but one which retains its concealing relation to the spiritual world and to God himself, and thus also its aspect of incomprehensibility” (p. 480). See also Lincoln’s Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role of the Heavenly Dimension in Paul’s Thought with Special Reference to His Eschatology, SNTSMS 43 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), esp. pp. 135–68.
1:7 For the association between baptism and the forgiveness of sins in the NT, cf. Acts 2:38; 22:16; 1 Cor. 6:11; Titus 3:5; 1 Pet. 3:18–21 and the disc. on Col. 2:11–15.
1:10 The ideas in this verse should not be used to promote a doctrine of “universalism” that teaches that all humanity ultimately will be saved (see Stott, God’s New Society, pp. 42–45; Caragounis, The Ephesian Mysterion, pp. 143ff.; Hanson, on anakephalaiosis, in his The Unity of the Church in the New Testament, pp. 123–25).
1:11–12 On “we” and “you,” see D. Jayne, “‘We’ and ‘You’ in Ephesians,” ExpT 85 (1974), pp. 151–52; R. A. Wilson, “‘We’ and ‘You’ in the Epistle to the Ephesians,” Studia Evangelica 2 (1964), pp. 676–80.
1:13 G. Fitzer, “sphragis,” TDNT, vol. 8, pp. 939–53; P. W. Evans, “Sealing as a Term for Baptism,” The Baptist Quarterly 16 (1955–56), pp. 171–75; J. Ysebaret, Greek Baptismal Terminology (Nijmegen: Dekker & Van de Vegt, 1962), pp. 182ff.
On water and Spirit baptism, see G. R. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament (London: Macmillan, 1962); J. D. G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit (London: SCM, 1970).
1:14 On the “already” and the “not yet” in Paul’s theology, cf. J. D. Hester, Paul’s Concept of Inheritance. Scottish Journal of Theology Occasional Papers No. 14 (Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1968), esp. pp. 90–104; D. R. Denton, “Inheritance in Paul and Ephesians,” EQ 54 (1982), pp. 157–62; P. L. Hammer, “Comparison of klēronomia in Paul and in Ephesians,” JBL 79 (1960), pp. 267–72.
Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by Arthur G. Patzia, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
The voluntary process of granting the rights, privileges, responsibilities, and status of child or heir to an individual or group that was not originally born to the adopter. While birth occurs naturally, adoption occurs only through the exertion of will. Two significant figures in the OT were adopted, Moses (Exod. 2:10) and Esther (Esther 2:7).
Although adoption is fairly uncommon in the OT, God’s adoption of Israel is of the utmost importance. It demonstrates God’s willingness to initiate relationship with humankind, a truth that later culminated in Jesus Christ. God chooses to adopt the nation of Israel as his child (Deut. 7:6; Isa. 1:2; Hos. 11:1) and more significantly as his firstborn son (Exod. 4:22; Jer. 31:9).
The concept of adoption is more prevalent in the NT, primarily in the apostle Paul’s writings. Based on the belief that Israel’s exclusive position as the adopted firstborn son of God the Father is no longer deserved, the NT includes those who believe in Jesus Christ as adopted children of God’s eternal family (John 1:12; 11:52; Gal. 4:5; Eph. 1:5; Phil. 2:15; 1John 3:1). The adopted children of God enjoy all the rights of a natural-born child, including the opportunity to call God “Father,” as Jesus did (e.g., Matt. 5:16; Luke 12:32). Paul in particular uses adoption to describe the Christian’s new relationship with God through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Rom. 8:15 16, 21–23; 9:25–26).
The physical defect on a sacrificial animal that makes it an unacceptable offering to the Lord (Lev. 22:1725), or the physical defect on a priest that disqualifies him from performing certain priestly functions (Lev. 21:17–24). In the NT, Christ is the once-for-all sacrificial lamb without blemish or defect. In Christ, Christians are presented to God as holy and without blemish (Eph. 5:27; Col. 1:22; Heb. 9:14; 1Pet. 1:19).
The word for “blood” in the Bible is used both literally and metaphorically. “Blood” is a significant biblical term for understanding purity boundaries and theological concepts. Blood is a dominant ritual symbol in biblical literature. Blood was used in sacrifices and purification rites, and it was inherently connected to menstruation, animal slaughter, and legal culpability. Among the physical properties of blood are the ability to coagulate, the liquid state of the substance (Rev. 16:34), and the ability to stain (Rev. 19:13). Blood can symbolize moral order in terms of cult, law, and power.
The usage of blood in the OT is predominantly negative. The first direct mention of blood in the biblical text involves a homicide (Gen. 4:10). Henceforward, the shedding of human blood is a main concern (Gen. 9:6). Other concerns pertaining to blood include dietary prohibitions of blood (Lev. 17:10–12), purity issues such as the flow of blood as in menstrual blood (Lev. 15:19–24), and blood as a part of religious rites such as circumcision (Gen. 17:10–11; Exod. 4:24–26).
Leviticus 17:11 contains a central statement in the OT concerning the significant role of blood in the sacrificial system: “The life of a creature is in the blood.” Blood was collected from all animal sacrifices, and blood was poured onto the altar (Lev. 1:5).
The covenant with Abraham was sealed with a covenantal ritual (Gen. 15:10–21). Moses sealed the covenant between the Israelites and God with a blood ritual during which young Israelite men offered young bulls among other sacrifices as fellowship offerings (Exod. 24:5). Moses read the words of the Book of the Covenant and sprinkled the blood of the bulls on the people, saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words” (Exod. 24:7–8).
During the Passover observance at the time of the exodus, blood was placed on the sides and tops of the doorframes of the Hebrews (Exod. 12:7). Not only altars were sprinkled and thus consecrated with blood, but priests were as well. Aaron and his sons were consecrated by the application of blood to their right earlobe, thumb, and big toe, and the sprinkling of blood and oil on their garments (Exod. 29:20). On the Day of Atonement, the high priest entered the holy of holies and sprinkled blood on the mercy seat to seek atonement for the sins of the people (Lev. 16:15).
Many events in the passion of Christ include references to blood. During the Last Supper, Jesus redefined the last Passover cup: “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:28). Judas betrayed “innocent blood” (Matt. 27:4), and the money he received for his betrayal was referred to as “blood money” (Matt. 27:6). At Jesus’ trial, Pilate washed his hands and declared, “I am innocent of this man’s blood” (Matt. 27:24).
The apostle Paul wrote that believers are justified by the blood of Christ (Rom. 5:9). This justification or righteous standing with God was effected through Christ’s blood sacrifice (Rom. 3:25–26; 5:8). The writer of Hebrews stressed the instrumental role of blood in bringing about forgiveness (Heb. 9:22). In the picture of the ideal community of Christ, the martyrs in the book of Revelation are situated closest to the throne of God because “they triumphed over him [Satan] by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death” (Rev. 12:11). The blood of the Lamb, Christ, is the effective agent here and throughout the NT, bringing about the indirect contact between sinner and God.
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).
The foundational story in all of the OT is the story of creation, found in Gen. 12. Throughout the history of interpretation there have been many approaches to understanding these chapters. In the modern world, discoveries from both science and archaeology have challenged some traditional convictions, and debates continue to rage. Still, what Gen. 1–2 communicates is generally clear: (1)it establishes Yahweh, the God of Israel, as the God by whose word all exists; (2)it presents for ancient readers a compelling argument for why they should worship Israel’s God and not other gods of the ancient world.
Israel shared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. This worldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon the primeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having four rims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rims were sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters. God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth and shaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:1213).
Israel’s promised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen. 13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing, fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orienting points for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise, “flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27). Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity and judgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationship with God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; this could ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits” people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).
For Israel, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen. 15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithful obedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1Kings 2:1–4). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen. 18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was the supreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance” to give (1Sam. 26:19; 2Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). The Levites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did the other tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20; Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter and to occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3). Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when they accused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing with milk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however, no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance” (Josh. 13:1).
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.
Biblically speaking, to forgive is less about changing feelings (emotions) and more about an actual restoration of a relationship. It is about making a wrong right, a process that usually is both costly and painful. To capture the biblical sense, the English word “pardon” may prove more helpful.
Forgiveness expresses the character of the merciful God, who eagerly pardons sinners who confess their sins, repent of their transgressions, and express this through proper actions. Forgiveness is never a matter of a human right; it is exclusively a gracious expression of God’s loving care. Human need for forgiveness stems from actions arising from their fallen nature. These actions (or nonactions), whether done deliberately or coincidentally, destroy people’s relationship with God and can be restored only by God’s forgiving mercy (Eph. 2:1).
Under the Mosaic covenant, sin placed offenders under God’s wrath among the ungodly. Rescue from this fate could be obtained by God’s forgiveness alone, which was attained through repentance and sacrifice. Although sacrifice was necessary to express true repentance, it is a mistake to consider it a payment that could purchase God’s forgiveness (1Sam. 15:22; Prov. 21:3; Eccles. 5:1; Hos. 6:6). The forgiveness of God remains his free, undeserved gift.
Although the sacrificial system is done away with, or rather completed, through Christ (Heb. 10:12), NT teaching continues to recognize conditions for forgiveness. Since forgiveness restores relationship, the offender remains involved and must desire the restoration (Luke 13:3; 24:47; Acts 2:38). God does not grant his forgiveness without consideration of the offending party.
Jesus expresses this most clearly in the parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15:1124). The son rebels against his father, squanders his wealth, and violates their relationship. The gracious and loving father remains willing to restore the relationship, but the reunion does not occur until the prodigal replaces rebellion with repentance; then, before he can even utter his sorrow, the eager father welcomes him back to a restored relationship. God remains free to forgive or not forgive, but, because of God’s nature and mercy, sinners can rest assured of God’s relationship-restoring forgiveness when they seek it in repentance. The forgiveness that God grants is full and restores things to an “as before” situation (cf. Ps. 103:12; Jer. 31:34), a point that the older son in the parable (Luke 15:25–32), who exemplifies religious self-righteousness, did not comprehend.
The various Hebrew and Greek words that express the idea of fulfillment occur hundreds of times in the Bible, and the concept often is present even when the specific word is not. At the basic level, fulfillment indicates a relationship between two (or more) things in which the second is said to “fill up” the significance of the first. Frequently this takes the form of a specific promise that is said to be fulfilled when the person, object, or event referred to comes to pass. There are countless examples of this type of fulfillment, some of which even quote the specific promise that is being fulfilled. The seventy years of Babylonian captivity prophesied by Jeremiah (Jer. 29:10) are said to be fulfilled when Cyrus permits the Jews to return to the land (Ezra 1:14). Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem (Matt. 2:1–6) fulfills the promise of a ruler who will shepherd Israel (Mic. 5:2).
But the concept of fulfillment goes beyond specific promises that are then said to be fulfilled in a particular person, object, or event. In the broadest sense of the term, one can say that the NT fulfills what the OT promises. After his resurrection, Jesus reminds his disciples, “Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44). He then provides a summary of the entire OT message: “The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24:46–47).
This expression appears in Gal. 4:4; Eph. 1:10 NRSV (although with variation in the Greek: chronos in the former, kairos in the latter). In Gal. 4 the context suggests that God sent Christ at the most opportune time. In Eph. 1 the expression is more apocalyptic and looks forward to the occasion when this fullness takes place. There it designates the entirety of the era from the coming of Christ to the final culmination of all things. In Ephesians the fullness is both already present and awaiting its ultimate arrival when Christ returns and finalizes his rule.
The tangible presence of God, experienced as overwhelming power and splendor. The main Hebrew word referring to glory, kabod, has the root meaning “heavy” (1Sam. 4:18), which in other contexts can mean “intense” (Exod. 9:3; NIV: “terrible”), “wealthy” (i.e., “heavy in possessions” [Gen. 13:2]), and “high reputation” (Gen. 34:19; NIV: “most honored”). When used of God, it refers to his person and his works. God reveals his glory to Israel and to Egypt at the crossing of the sea (Exod. 14:4, 1719). He carefully reveals his glory to Moses after Israel’s sin with the golden calf in order to assure him that he will not abandon them (33:12–23).
In the NT the glory of God is made real in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14; Heb. 1:3). He is, after all, the very presence of God. When he returns on the clouds, he will fully reveal God’s glory (Matt. 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27).
The English word “gospel” translates the Greek word euangelion, which is very important in the NT, being used seventy-six times. The word euangelion (eu= “good,” angelion= “announcement”), in its contemporary use in the Hellenistic world, was not the title of a book but rather a declaration of good news. Euangelion was used in the Roman Empire with reference to significant events in the life of the emperor, who was thought of as a savior with divine status. These events included declarations at the time of his birth, his coming of age, and his accession to the throne. The NT usage of the term can also be traced to the OT (e.g., Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1), which looked forward to the coming of the Messiah, who would bring a time of salvation. This good news, which is declared in the NT, is that Jesus has fulfilled God’s promises to Israel, and now the way of salvation is open to all.
Grace is the nucleus, the critical core element, of the redemptive and sanctifying work of the triune God detailed throughout the entire canon of Scripture. The variegated expressions of grace are rooted in the person and work of God, so that his graciousness and favor effectively demonstrated in every aspect of the created realm glorify him as they are shared and enjoyed with one another.
The biblical terminology informing an understanding of grace defines it as a gift or a favorable reaction or disposition toward someone. Grace is generosity, thanks, and good will between humans and from God to humans. Divine expressions of grace are loving, merciful, and effective. The biblical texts provide a context for a more robust understanding of divine gift. The overall redemptive-historical context of grace is the desire of the eternal God to bring glory to himself through a grace-based relationship with his creation. The Creator-Redeemer gives grace, and the recipients of grace give him glory.
The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2Cor. 12:24, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.
Although God is present everywhere, God is also present in a special way in “heaven.” During Jesus’ earthly ministry, the Father is sometimes described as speaking in “a voice from heaven” (Matt. 3:17). Similarly, Jesus instructs us to address our prayers to “Our Father in heaven” (6:9). Even the specific request in the Lord’s Prayer that “your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (6:10) reminds us that heaven is a place already under God’s full jurisdiction, where his will is presently being done completely and perfectly. Jesus also warns of the dangers of despising “one of these little ones,” because “their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven” (18:10). Jesus “came down from heaven” (John 6:51) for his earthly ministry, and after his death and resurrection, he ascended back “into heaven,” from where he “will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).
Given this strong connection between heaven and God’s presence, there is a natural connection in Scripture between heaven and the ultimate hope of believers. Believers are promised a reward in heaven (“Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven” [Matt. 5:12]), and even now believers can “store up for [themselves] treasures in heaven” (6:20). Even in this present life, “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20), and our hope at death is to “depart and be with Christ, which is better by far” (1:23). Since Christ is currently in heaven, deceased believers are already present with Christ in heaven awaiting his return, when “God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him” (1Thess. 4:14).
Holiness is an attribute of God and of all that is fit for association with him. God alone is intrinsically holy (Rev. 15:4). God the Father is holy (John 17:11), as is the Son (Acts 3:14), while “Holy” is the characteristic designation of God’s Spirit (Ps. 51:11; Matt. 1:18). God’s name is holy (Luke 1:49), as are his arm (Ps. 98:1), ways (Ps. 77:13), and words (Ps. 105:42).
With reference to God himself, holiness may indicate something like his uniqueness, and it is associated with attributes such as his glory (Isa. 6:3), righteousness (Isa. 5:16), and jealousy—that is, his proper concern for his reputation (Josh. 24:19).
God’s dwelling place is in heaven (Ps. 20:6), and “holy” functions in some contexts as a virtual equivalent for heavenly (11:4). God’s throne is holy (47:8), and the angels who surround it are “holy ones” (89:5; cf. Mark 8:38).
A corollary of God’s holiness is that he must be treated as holy (Lev. 22:32)—that is, honored (Lev. 10:3), worshiped (Ps. 96:9), and feared (Isa. 8:13).
While “holy” is sometimes said to mean “set apart,” this does not appear to be its core meaning, though it is an associated notion (Lev. 20:26; Heb. 7:26). Holiness, as applied to people and things, is a relational concept. They are (explicitly or implicitly) holy “to the Lord” (Exod. 28:36), never “from” something.
The symbolic representation of God’s heavenly palace, the tabernacle (Exod. 40:9), and later the temple (1Chron. 29:3), and everything associated with them, are holy and the means whereby God’s people in the OT may symbolically be brought near to God. For God to share his presence with anything or anyone else, these too must be holy (Lev. 11:4445; Heb. 12:14).
The OT system of worship involved the distinction between unclean and clean, and between common and holy, and the means of effecting a transition to a state of cleanness or holiness (Lev. 10:10). People, places, and items may be made holy by a process of consecration or sanctification, whether simply by God’s purifying presence (Exod. 3:5) or by ritual acts (Exod. 19:10; 29:36).
God’s faithful people are described as holy (Exod. 19:6; 1Pet. 2:9). In the OT, this is true of the whole people of God at one level, and of particular individuals at another. Thus, kings (Ps. 16:10), prophets (2Kings 4:9), and in particular priests (Lev. 21:7) are declared to be holy. While the OT witnesses to some tension between the collective holiness of Israel and the particular holiness of its designated leaders (Num. 16:3), the latter were intended to act as models and facilitators of Israel’s holiness.
For Christians, God is the creator of the cosmos and the redeemer of humanity. He has revealed himself in historical acts—namely, in creation, in the history of Israel, and especially in the person and work of Jesus Christ. There is only one God (Deut. 6:4); “there is no other” (Isa. 45:5). Because “God is spirit” (John 4:24), he must reveal himself through various images and metaphors.
The OT refers to God by many names. One of the general terms used for God, ’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 (“God Almighty”), and ’el ro’i (“the God who sees me” or “God of my seeing”). These descriptive names reveal important attributes of God and usually were derived from the personal experiences of the people of God in real-life settings; thus, they do not describe an abstract concept of God.
The most prominent personal name of God is yahweh (YHWH), which is translated as “the Lord” in most English Bibles. At the burning bush in the wilderness of Horeb, God first revealed to Moses his personal name in sentence form: “I am who I am” (Exod. 3:1315). 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 God who was with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Jesus’ testimony, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” is identified as the God “of the living” (Matt. 22:32). Hence, the name “Yahweh” is closely tied to God’s self-revelation as the God of presence and life.
Many of God’s attributes are summarized in Exod. 34:6–7: “The Lord, 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 leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”
The Christian God of the Bible is the triune God. God is one but exists in 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 Spirit is one with God (2Sam. 23:2–3). All three share the same divine 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 of creation (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 times simply indicating a wish (2Cor. 11:1), in the Bible the word “hope” most often designates a disposition of soul, the grounds for one’s hope, or the outcome for which one hopes. At its core, biblical hope is hope in God, rooted in God’s covenant faithfulness (Ps. 62:58; Jer. 14:8; 17:13; Rom. 4:18; 5:1–5). Hope trusts God in the present and lives even now on the strength of God’s future accomplishments (Gal. 5:5; Heb. 11:1).
In the NT, hope is closely associated with Christ and his saving work. Christians now live by hope in Christ (Eph. 1:12; 1Pet. 1:3; 3:15); indeed, he is “Christ Jesus our hope” (1Tim. 1:1), and his future appearing is “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). Thus, hope refers to eschatological glory (2Cor. 3:11–12; Eph. 1:18). It is “the hope of the resurrection” (Acts 23:6; cf. 24:15; 26:6–9), our transformation into Christ’s likeness (1John 3:1–3). That expectation stimulates various hopes for God’s plans to be realized in one’s own or others’ lives (1Cor. 9:10, 13; Phil. 2:19, 23; 2Tim. 2:25; 2John 12). So hope is named repeatedly as an essential Christian attribute (Rom. 12:12; 15:4, 13; 1Cor. 13:13).
Family. In the ancient world every culture had customs for the passing of wealth and possessions from one generation to the next. In ancient Israel special provisions were made for inheriting land upon the death of the father. The firstborn son received a double portion; the rest was divided equally among the remaining sons. If a man lacked sons, priority went to the following in order: daughters, brothers, father’s brothers, next of kin (Num. 27:111). The OT provides guidance for additional circ*mstances (Gen. 38:8–9; Num. 36:6; Lev. 25:23–24; Deut. 21:15–17; 25:5–10; Ruth 2:20; 3:9–13; 4:1–12), with an overriding concern for the stability of the family and the retention of the land within a tribe. Under Roman law during the NT period, an heir had legal standing even while the father was still alive; his status was based on birth or adoption rather than the father’s death.
Old Testament. Even more prominent than family inheritance is the assertion that God gave the land of Canaan to Abraham and his descendants as an inheritance (Gen. 12:7; 15:18–21; 17:8; Num. 34:1–29; Deut. 12:10). This inheritance is God’s gracious gift, not something that Israel earned by its righteousness (Deut. 9:4–7). Descriptions of the land (“flowing with milk and honey”) and its fertility portray this gift as a new Eden, where God will dwell with his people (Exod. 3:8, 17; Lev. 20:24; Num. 16:13–14; Deut. 11:9–12). In some texts the language of inheritance moves beyond the land of Canaan to an international scope. In Ps. 2:8 the anointed king recounts God saying to him, “Ask me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession.” This expansion of inheritance from the land of Canaan to the ends of the earth prepares the way for a similar expansion in the NT (see Rom. 4:13).
God’s relationship with Israel is also described in terms of inheritance. On the one hand, Israel is described as God’s inheritance (Deut. 32:9; 1Sam. 10:1; 1Kings 8:51–53); on the other hand, God is Israel’s inheritance (Pss. 16:5; 73:26; Jer. 10:16; 51:19). This mutuality expresses the intimacy of God’s relationship with Israel.
New Testament. Inheritance language is taken up in the NT and expanded in a variety of ways. First and foremost, Jesus Christ is the “heir of all things,” the Son to whom the Father has given all authority in heaven and on earth (Matt. 28:18–20; Heb. 1:2–5). Through their union with Christ, believers share in Christ’s inheritance (Rom. 8:17), having been qualified by the Father to share in that inheritance (Col. 1:12). What believers inherit is described in various ways: the earth (Matt. 5:5), eternal life (Luke 10:25), the kingdom (1Cor. 6:9–10; James 2:5), salvation (Heb. 1:14), blessing (Heb. 12:17; 1Pet. 3:9). This inheritance was enacted by the death of Christ and sealed by his blood (Heb. 9:15–28). Believers experience the benefits of this inheritance through the Spirit now (Eph. 1:14, 18), but its fullness is reserved in heaven and awaits the consummation (1Pet. 1:4–6).
A mystery entails knowledge that is disclosed to some but withheld from others. Nothing is mysterious to God (Heb. 4:13), and he alone understands the full purpose of his will (Job 38:140:24; Isa. 46:10), but he also condescends to reveal portions of his will to those whom he chooses (John 16:15).
Jesus’ parables make known the character and future of God’s coming kingdom to his chosen servants, while also concealing it from those outside the circle (Matt. 13:18–23). Paul, by contrast, used “mystery” to refer to the disclosure of God’s plan for the redemption of humanity—namely, the inclusion of Gentiles within “Israel” (Rom. 11:25). This plan, foreshadowed in the OT but nevertheless hidden in essentials, had only recently been fully revealed in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (Rom. 16:25; Eph. 1:9; 1Tim. 3:16; cf. 1Pet. 1:10–12). The gospel message is therefore the revelation of this mystery, the proclamation of the truth about Jesus Christ, now made public to the world (Eph. 3:3–9).
A Pharisee commissioned by Jesus Christ to preach the gospel to Gentiles. His Jewish name was “Saul” (Acts 9:4; 13:9), but he preferred using his Roman name, especially when he signed his letters.
By our best estimates, Paul spent about thirty years preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ (AD 3467)—a ministry that can be divided roughly into three decades. The first decade of his ministry (AD 34–46) has been called the “silent years,” as we have few details from Acts or the Pauline Epistles about his activities. For example, we know that he preached in Damascus for a while and spent some time in Arabia (a total of three years [Gal. 1:17–18]). He made a quick trip to Jerusalem to meet Peter and James the brother of Jesus. Then he returned home to Tarsus, evidently preaching there for several years, until Barnabas brought him to Antioch in Syria to help with the ministry of this mixed congregation of Jews and Gentiles (Acts 9:26–30; 11:25–26). In the second decade of his ministry (AD 46–59), Paul spent most of his life on the road, an itinerant ministry of preaching the gospel and planting churches from Cyprus to Corinth. For most of the third decade (AD 59–67), Paul ministered the gospel from prison, spending over two years imprisoned in Caesarea, another two to three years in a Roman prison (Acts ends here), released for a brief time (two years?) before his final arrest and imprisonment in Rome, where, according to church tradition, he was executed.
During his itinerant ministry, Paul traveled Roman roads that led him to free cities (Ephesus, Thessalonica, Athens) and Roman colonies (Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe, Troas, Philippi, Corinth). Founding churches in urban centers afforded Paul more opportunities for ministry and for his work of making and repairing tents. Traveling within the borders of the Roman Empire also provided a better chance of protection as a citizen. At first, Paul and Barnabas covered familiar territory: Cyprus (Barnabas’s home region) and Anatolia (Paul’s home region). Then, with successive journeys Paul and other missionary companions branched out to Asia Minor, Macedonia, and Achaia. Some of the towns that Paul visited were small and provincial (Derbe, Lystra); others were major cities of great economic and intellectual commerce (Ephesus, Corinth, Athens). In the midst of such cultural diversity, Paul found receptive ears among a variety of ethnic groups: Gauls, Phrygians and Lycaonians, Greeks, Romans, and Jews. Previously, Paul’s Gentile converts had worshiped many gods (local, ethnic, and imperial), offered sacrifices at many shrines and temples, and joined in all the religious festivals (often involving immoral and ungodly practices). After believing the gospel, Paul’s predominantly Gentile churches turned from their idolatrous ways to serve “the living and true God” (1Thess. 1:9). Their exclusive devotion to one God quickly led to economic and political problems, for both Paul’s converts and the cities of their residence. No more offerings for patron gods, no more support for local synagogues or the imperial cult—Paul’s converts were often persecuted for their newly found faith by local religious guilds (idol makers!) and civic leaders courting Roman favor (Acts 17:6–9; 19:23–41; Phil. 1:27–30; 1Thess. 2:14–16). Indeed, Paul often was run out of town as a troublemaker who preached a message that threatened both the Jewish and the Roman ways of life (Acts 16:19–24; Phil. 3:17–4:1). It is no wonder that Paul’s activities eventually landed him in a Roman prison. It was only a matter of time before his reputation as a “lawbreaker” caught up with him (Acts 21:21). But that did not stop Paul. Whether as a prisoner or a free man, Paul proclaimed the gospel of Jesus Christ until the day he died.
Paul was a tentmaker, a missionary, a writer, a preacher, a teacher, a theologian, an evangelist, a mentor, a prophet, a miracle worker, a prisoner, and a martyr. His life story reads like the tale of three different men: a devout Pharisee, a tireless traveler, an ambitious writer. He knew the Scriptures better than did most people. He saw more of the world than did most merchants. He wrote some of the longest letters known at that time. To his converts, he was a faithful friend. To his opponents, he was an irrepressible troublemaker. But, according to Paul, he was nothing more or less than the man whom God had called through Jesus Christ to take the gospel to the ends of the earth.
A technical term for “promise” does not appear in the OT, but its concept is present throughout Scripture. God unfolds the history of redemption by employing the idea of promises. The writers of the NT repeatedly assert that Jesus Christ has fulfilled God’s promises in the OT (e.g., Luke 24:4448; 1Cor. 15:3–8).
Most remarkable is the promise that God made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Gen. 12:1–3; 13:14–17; 17:4–8; 22:17–18; 26:1–5; 28:13–15). God called Abraham in order to give him three specific blessings: the land, descendants, and the channel of blessing among the nations. As a sign of his promise, God made a covenant of circumcision with Abraham and his descendants (17:10–14). With Isaac (26:1–5) and Jacob (28:13–15), God repeatedly reconfirmed the promise made to Abraham. At the time of the exodus and later the settlement in Canaan, God’s promise to Abraham was partially fulfilled by multiplying his descendants into millions and by giving them the promised land.
The central message of the NT is that God’s promises in the OT are fulfilled with the coming of Jesus Christ. Matthew’s numerous citation formulas are evidence of this theme. In Luke 4:16–21 Jesus pronounces the fulfillment of Isaiah’s promise (about the Messiah’s ministry [Isa. 61:1–3]) in his own life. The book of Acts specifically states that Jesus’ suffering and resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit are the fulfillment of the OT promises (2:29–31; 13:32–34). Jesus’ identity both as the descendant of David (Acts 13:23) and as the prophet like Moses (Acts 3:21–26; cf. Deut. 18:15–18) is also regarded as the fulfillment of the OT.
Paul’s view of God’s promises is summarized in this statement: “For no matter how many promises God has made, they are ‘Yes’ in Christ” (2Cor. 1:20). According to Rom. 1:2–3, Paul regards the gospel as the message that God “promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding his Son.” In Rom. 4 Abraham’s faith is described in terms of his trust in God’s promises, which leads to his righteousness. He is presented as our model of faith in God’s promises. The famous phrase “according to the Scriptures” in 1Cor. 15:3–4 is, in a sense, understood by Paul as the fulfillment of God’s promises regarding Christ’s death and resurrection.
In the NT, God makes new promises based on the work of Christ, including the final resurrection and the second coming of Christ (John 5:29; 11:25–26; 1Cor. 15:48–57; 2Cor. 4:14; 1Thess. 4:13–18). Furthermore, the message of the gospel is presented as multiple promises, including eternal life, the fullness of life in Christ, the forgiveness of sins, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the peace of God, the knowledge of God, and the joy of God (Matt. 28:18–20; John 3:16; 10:10; 14:16, 27; 16:20–24; 17:25–26; Phil. 4:4–9; 1John 1:9).
More than a simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the grace of the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classical texts use the Greek word apolytrōsis (“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given to release a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. The group of words based on the Greek term lytron (“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. The corresponding Hebrew word padah is a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.
The experience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religious significance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included the dedication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:1213). Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), was redeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up to describe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continued to broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance from all Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included the whole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or the new age to come).
The NT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). When Jesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slavery of sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many (Matt. 20:28// Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the cross accentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17; 7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christian idea of ransom followed the accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death (Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with a ransom (Col. 1:13–14).
Although redemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future (Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1Cor. 15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions of redemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expects redemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption is universal; it restores the relationship between creation and the Creator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).
“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.
In the biblical world, documents were sealed with clay or wax (1Kings 21:8; Job 38:14; Neh. 9:38; Jer. 32:10; Rev. 5:1). The integrity of the seal was assured by impressing an image into the soft substance, which would then harden and retain the unique image of the sender’s seal. The archaeological record attests this practice in the form of bullae (the impressions themselves, which survive long after the documents have disintegrated) as well as a large number of seals, which often were carved (Exod. 28:11; 39:6; Sir. 38:27; 45:11) into semiprecious stones or stone cylinders.
A person’s unique seal was closely identified with the owner and could be worn as a ring or pendant (see Gen. 38:18; Esther 8:8; Song 8:6). Besides documents, we have rec-ords of the sealing of caves (Matt. 27:66; cf. Dan. 6:17; 2Macc. 2:5) and bags (Job 14:17; Tob. 9:5). In apocalyptic literature, seals are used to conceal prophecies of the future (Dan. 12:4) and to mark humans as belonging to God (Rev. 7:38).
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.
The accomplishment of God’s purposes. This was most clearly expressed by Jesus’ prayer, “Not my will, but yours be done” (Luke 22:42). Jesus stipulated in the Gospel of John that he was pursuing not his own will but that of God (5:19, 30; 6:38). God’s will is revealed in creation (Rev. 4:11), Scripture (2Pet. 1:2021), his standards (Ezra 10:11; Rom. 12:1–2; 1Thess. 4:3), his calling (1Cor. 1:1), and his purpose (Isa. 46:10).
In the OT, wisdom is a characteristic of someone who attains a high degree of knowledge, technical skill, and experience in a particular domain. It refers to the ability that certain individuals have to use good judgment in running the affairs of state (Joseph in Gen. 41:33; David in 2Sam. 14:20; Solomon in 1Kings 3:9, 12, 28). It can also refer to the navigational skills that sailors use in maneuvering a ship through difficult waters (Ps. 107:27). Furthermore, wisdom includes the particular skills of an artisan (Exod. 31:6; 35:35; 1Chron. 22:15 16). In all these cases, wisdom involves the expertise that a person acquires to accomplish a particular task. In these instances “wisdom” is an ethically neutral term, or at least that dimension is not emphasized. The wise are those who have mastered a certain skill set in their field of expertise.
The uniqueness of the OT wisdom literature (Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, etc.) is that it highlights the moral dimension of wisdom. Here “wisdom” refers to developing expertise in negotiating the complexities of life and managing those complexities in a morally responsible way that honors God and benefits both the community and the individual. Although it is difficult to pin down a concise definition, one can gain a better understanding of wisdom by investigating two important dimensions: wisdom as a worldview, and the traits of a person who is considered to be wise.
Who is wise? First, the wise are those involved in a lifelong process of character development. They manifest the virtues of righteousness, justice, and equity (Prov. 1:3; 2:9). The embodiment of these virtues culminates in the description of the woman of noble character at the conclusion of Proverbs (31:10–31). She exhibits self-control, patience, care, diligence, discipline, humility, generosity, honesty, and fear of the Lord (cf. James 3:13–18). She is the epitome of wisdom in its maturity and the model that all should emulate.
Second, the wise know the value of words and how to use them. They know when to speak, what to say, and how to say it (Job 29:21–22; Prov. 15:23; 25:11; Eccles. 3:7; 12:9–10). Wisdom and the wise place a premium on the power of words.
Third, the wise place great importance on relationships and on interaction with others. The wise person is the one who is open to the give-and-take of relationships (Prov. 27:5–6, 17, 19). Such a person develops the humility necessary to receive correction and criticism from others. Hearing criticism and changing wrong behavior are integral to wisdom (3:1–11). The wise appreciate insightful criticism because it helps them live life more productively (15:12). Wisdom is, ultimately, relational.
Fourth, the wise person develops the art of discernment (Prov. 1:2, 4–6). The sage is equipped with the ability to think critically. The very quality of wisdom itself invites the re-forming and rethinking of ideas. Sages are not interested in pat answers (26:4–5). Proverbs 16:1–9 throws a wrench in the conventional cogs of wisdom, claiming that although humans make their plans, God has the final say. Both Job and Ecclesiastes go head to head with conventional beliefs, probing more deeply into the complexities of life and the relationship between human and divine. No easy answers exist here. In contrast, fools do not use their mental faculties. They view wisdom as a commodity, a matter of learning some techniques, accepting certain beliefs, and memorizing a few proverbs (17:16). The wise, however, know that wisdom involves the art of critical thinking and interacting with others.
Fifth, and most fundamental, the wise person takes a God-centered focus toward life. Wisdom literature affirms, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Prov. 9:10; cf. Prov. 1:7; Job 28:28; Eccles. 12:13). That this is the beginning step in the process of gaining wisdom means that one who misses this step can proceed no further along the path to wisdom. The fear of the Lord is to wisdom as the letters of the alphabet are to forming words. The wise gain wisdom by being in relationship with the Lord (Prov. 3:5–8). The fear of the Lord is the beginning as well as the culmination of wisdom.
Wisdom is a highly prized quality, superior to might and power (Prov. 25:15; Eccles. 9:13–16), and one must diligently seek it (Prov. 2:1–5). Yet in the end, wisdom is a gift that only God can give (Prov. 2:6–8; 1Kings 3:9).
“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:1617; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).
The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.
The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).
The Bible has much to say about works, and an understanding of the topic is important because works play a role in most religions. In the most generic sense, “works” refers to the products or activities of human moral agents in the context of religious discussion. God’s works are frequently mentioned in Scripture, and they are always good. His works include creation (Gen. 2:23; Isa. 40:28; 42:5), sustenance of the earth (Ps. 104; Heb. 1:3), and redemption (Exod. 6:6; Ps. 111:9; Rom. 8:23). Human works, therefore, should be in alignment with God’s works, though obviously of a different sort. Works in the Bible usually reflect a moral polarity: good or evil, righteous or unrighteous, just or unjust. The context of the passage often determines the moral character of the works (e.g., Isa. 3:10–11; 2Cor. 11:15).
Important questions follow from the existence of works and their moral quality. Do good works merit God’s favor or please him? Can good works save at the time of God’s judgment? When people asked Jesus, “What must we do to do the works God requires?” he answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent” (John 6:28–29). Without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). The people from the OT commended in Heb. 11 did their works in the precondition of faith. Explicitly in the NT and often implicitly in the OT, faith is the condition for truly good works. God elects out of his mercy, not out of human works (Rom. 9:12, 16; Titus 3:5; cf. Rom. 11:2). Works not done in faith, even if considered “good” by human standards, are not commendable to God, since all humankind is under sin (Rom. 3:9) and no person is righteous or does good (Rom. 3:10–18; cf. Isa. 64:6). Works cannot save; salvation is a gift to be received by faith (Eph. 2:8–9; 2Tim. 1:9; cf. Rom. 4:2–6). Even works of the Mosaic law are not salvific (Rom. 3:20, 27–28; Gal. 2:16; 3:2; 5:4). Good works follow from faith (2Cor. 9:8; Eph. 2:10; 1Thess. 1:3; James 2:18, 22; cf. Acts 26:20). The works of those who have faith will be judged, but this judgment appears to be related to rewards, not salvation (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 2Cor. 5:10; cf. Rom. 14:10; 1Cor. 3:13–15).
Direct Matches
The voluntary process of granting the rights, privileges,responsibilities, and status of child or heir to an individual orgroup that was not originally born to the adopter. While birth occursnaturally, adoption occurs only through the exertion of will.
Atleast two significant figures in the OT were adopted. After Moses’birth mother kept him alive despite Pharaoh’s command to drownevery newborn Hebrew boy in the Nile (Exod. 1:22), Moses was,ironically, adopted by Pharaoh’s daughter (2:10). Esther, orHadassah, was adopted by her uncle (or cousin) Mordecai upon thedeath of her parents (Esther 2:7)—this adoption plays animportant part in Esther’s ability to prevent the Jewishextermination intended by Haman.
Althoughadoption is fairly uncommon in the OT, God’s adoption of Israelis of the utmost importance. It demonstrates God’s willingnessto initiate relationship with humankind, a truth that laterculminated in Jesus Christ. God chooses to adopt the nation of Israelas his child (Deut. 7:6; Isa. 1:2; Hos. 11:1) and more significantlyas his firstborn son (Exod. 4:22; Jer. 31:9). Thus God singles outIsrael among the nations of the earth, bestowing the highest possiblehonor.
Theconcept of adoption is more prevalent in the NT, primarily in theapostle Paul’s writings. Based on the belief that Israel’sexclusive position as the adopted firstborn son of God the Father isno longer deserved, the NT includes those who believe in Jesus Christas adopted children of God’s eternal family (John 1:12; 11:52;Gal. 4:5; Eph. 1:5; Phil. 2:15; 1 John 3:1). The adoptedchildren of God enjoy all the rights of a natural-born child,including the opportunity to call God “Father,” as Jesusdid (e.g., Matt. 5:16; Luke 12:32). Paul in particular uses adoptionto describe the Christian’s new relationship with God throughthe atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Rom. 8:15–16, 21–23;9:25–26).
A title designating members of the group of twelve disciples(Matt. 10:2–4; Mark 3:16–19; Luke 6:13–16) whor*ceived Jesus’ teaching (Luke 17:5) and to whom he grantedauthority (Mark 6:7, 30; Luke 9:1, 10). Matthias later replaced JudasIscariot (Acts 1:24). These apostles provided leadership to the earlychurch in Jerusalem (Acts 15:6), performed miracles (Acts 2:43;2 Cor. 12:12), and faced persecution (Acts 5:18) as theytestified to Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 4:33; 5:32). Broaderusage of the term includes witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection(1 Cor. 15:7), James the brother of Jesus (Gal. 1:19), Barnabasand Paul (Acts 14:14), and possibly Silas (1 Thess. 2:6) andAndronicus and Junias/Junia (Rom. 16:7). Paul regularly speaks of hiscalling in apostolic terms (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor.1:1; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1;Titus 1:1), while Peter similarly self-identifies (1 Pet. 1:1;2 Pet. 1:1). The word is once used of Jesus himself (Heb. 3:1).
(1)Thedregs or residue, used metaphorically to speak of people’sremaining impurities (Ezek. 24:6, 11–12). (2)An amount of money or other valuable entrusted to another (Matt.25:27; Luke 19:23; 2 Tim. 1:14) or used as a down payment. In threeinstances in the NT the Greek word arrabōn is used to refer tothe Holy Spirit as the deposit that guarantees what is still to come(2Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph. 1:13–14). The last of thesepassages notes that the deposit of the Spirit in view is theredemption of God’s people, their future inheritance.
Terminology
The KJV uses “dispensation” to translate some occurrences of the Greek word oikonomia, meaning “stewardship” or “administration of a household.” The Greek noun oikonomos, meaning “steward, manager, trustee, treasurer,” usually refers to an appointed individual responsible for the management of business affairs or an estate, and the related verb oikonomeō refers to acting in such a capacity.
The nuance of oikonomia in four instances (Eph. 1:10; 3:2, 9; Col. 1:25) reflects divine government and the outworking of God’s overarching plan on earth for humankind. God accomplishes this plan by assigning specific responsibilities and duties that people are obligated to fulfill. Covenant infidelity may endanger the viability of the arrangement or alter the terms significantly. Despite disobedience, humankind is responsible for any previous revelation as well as for the new body of truth, underscoring the progressive nature of divine revelation as a series of agreements undergoing the expansion process that culminates in the NT. Each dispensation involves a distinct body of revelation from God that governs his relationship with humankind. Biblical scholars who embrace this hermeneutical model see each dispensation as chronologically successive and, in the case of progressive dispensationalism, as reflecting progressive stages in salvation history. Consequently, each dispensation, although distinguishable from the others in content and character, builds upon the previous revelation to form a unified corpus of truth.
Three Theories on Dispensationalism
Wide disagreement exists among scholars concerning the hermeneutical implications of the term “dispensation” and how to interpret the biblical text based on that framework. The three major divisions of those who hold to some form of dispensations are covenant theologians, classical dispensationalists, and revised or progressive dispensationalists.
Covenant theology. Covenant theology presumes three covenants or dispensations. All Scripture may be categorized under two of those dispensations: a covenant of works and a covenant of grace. Through disobedience, humankind immediately violated the covenant of works, initiated by God in Gen. 2. Consequently, Gen. 3 introduces the covenant of grace, which supersedes the previous covenant and governs the remaining scriptural history. Genesis 12–17 expands the stipulations of the covenant of grace, and all subsequent covenants elaborate or reinforce the covenant of grace. A third covenant, the covenant of redemption, reflects an internal and timeless agreement within the persons of the Godhead concerning the plan and process of unfolding redemption for humankind.
In addition, covenant theology argues that the NT church comprises the new Israel, and that all the promises made to literal Israel in the OT have been transferred and reapplied to the church. This view finds root in the NT citations of OT texts describing historic Israel, which are then understood to represent a spiritual reality in the church.
Classical dispensationalism. According to the classical dispensational model, which originated with J.N. Darby (1880) and became more popularized with the advent of the Scofield Reference Bible (1909), the inauguration of a new dispensation occurs when God gives a further revelation that changes or adds to his governmental relationship with humankind. Each of the seven dispensations covering the extent of scriptural redemptive history represents an agreement between God and humankind characterized by a new divine revelation, followed by a test, disobedience, judgment, and restoration by means of a new revelation. These time periods are distinguished by an alteration of God’s method of dealing with humankind’s sinfulness and culpability. The seven dispensations are innocence, conscience, human government, promise, law, grace, and the millennium.
Classical dispensationalists broadly distinguish two distinctive plans for Israel and the church, recognizing each as a separate entity with promises specific to each group. They affirm clear delineations between the principles of law and grace: law requires humankind’s obedience to God, while grace enables believers to fulfill that righteousness through salvation effected by the sacrifice of Christ.
Relying on a consistently literal interpretation of prophecy, dispensationalists find no mention of the NT church in the OT, affirming Paul’s contention that the church was a “mystery” (Eph. 3:5–6) unforeseen by the earliest biblical writers. These believers understand the church as a parenthesis in the program of God for Israel, since the church is raptured out of the world on the advent of the great tribulation (1Thess. 4:13–17). Promises of Israel’s restoration and return have been temporarily suspended during the dispensation of grace; however, God’s promises to Israel will realize fulfillment during the millennial kingdom.
Revised or progressive dispensationalism. Revised dispensationalism removes the distinction between Israel, as God’s earthly people, and the church, as God’s heavenly people, following the millennial kingdom, since both entities share eternal life through salvation in the new Jerusalem. Jews and Gentiles maintain separate identities under the auspices of redeemed believers.
Those who support this view maintain a threefold concept of the kingdom of God: a universal reign over all things, a spiritual kingdom identical to the present church age, and an eventual political and national Davidic kingdom on earth during the millennium.
Progressive dispensationalism understands the separate dispensations as a unified series of arrangements whereby the manifestation of God’s grace increases with the passing of each dispensation. The dispensations reflect the comprehensive plan through which redemptive history is carried out. Those who support this view of dispensations advocate the partial fulfillment of OT prophecy in the church, with complete fulfillment realized with the culmination of God’s program during the millennial kingdom.
Progressive dispensationalists differ from covenant theologians in their acknowledgment of Israel and the church as distinct entities that coexist as God’s redemptive people. Classical dispensationalists believe that the dispensations reflect differing economies of divine administration aimed at manifesting the glory of God, while progressives argue that redemptive history provides the unifying principle of each dispensation. Both classical and progressive dispensationalists affirm the systematic and progressive unfolding of God’s revelation chronologically through successive dispensations or economies, and each group reinforces separate identities for Israel and the church as two groups subsumed under one people of God. Specific promises made to Israel by God will realize fruition during the millennial reign of Christ.
(1)Thedregs or residue, used metaphorically to speak of people’sremaining impurities (Ezek. 24:6, 11–12). (2)An amount of money or other valuable entrusted to another (Matt.25:27; Luke 19:23; 2 Tim. 1:14) or used as a down payment. In threeinstances in the NT the Greek word arrabōn is used to refer tothe Holy Spirit as the deposit that guarantees what is still to come(2Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph. 1:13–14). The last of thesepassages notes that the deposit of the Spirit in view is theredemption of God’s people, their future inheritance.
This expression appears in Gal. 4:4; Eph. 1:10 NRSV (althoughwith variation in the Greek: chronos in the former, kairos in thelatter). In Gal. 4 the context suggests that God sent Christ at themost opportune time. In Eph. 1 the expression is more apocalyptic andlooks forward to the occasion when this fullness takes place. Thereit designates the entirety of the era from the coming of Christ tothe final culmination of all things. In Ephesians the fullness isboth already present and awaiting its ultimate arrival when Christreturns and finalizes his rule.
Twofactors appear to have especially made the time of the incarnation ofChrist and the subsequent commissioning of the church to proclaim thegospel “to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8) the mostopportune time in history. First was the Roman conquest of theMediterranean world and the subsequent establishment of the PaxRomana (“peace of Rome”). As a result, travel was bothvery accessible and relatively safe. Second was the establishment ofGreek as the common tongue. In fact, Greek-speaking Jews resided innearly every major city of the Roman world. These two factors madethe Roman world of the first century one of the most opportune placesin human history for travelers such as Paul and Silas to traverse theMediterranean region and proclaim the gospel.
Otherfactors further contributed to the ripeness of the era. Among themwas the heavy cloud of anticipation among Jews in Palestine, awaitinga messianic deliverer who would free them from Roman oppression.
The English word “gospel” translates the Greekword euangelion, which is very important in the NT, being usedseventy-six times. The word euangelion (eu= “good,”angelion= “announcement”), in its contemporary usein the Hellenistic world, was not the title of a book but rather adeclaration of good news. Euangelion was used in the Roman Empirewith reference to significant events in the life of the emperor, whowas thought of as a savior with divine status. These events includeddeclarations at the time of his birth, his coming of age, and hisaccession to the throne. The NT usage of the term can also be tracedto the OT (e.g., Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1), which looked forward to thecoming of the Messiah, who would bring a time of salvation. This goodnews, which is declared in the NT, is that Jesus has fulfilled God’spromises to Israel, and now the way of salvation is open to all.
TheGospel Message
Theapostle Paul recognizes that the gospel is centered on the death,burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1Cor. 15:1–5). Hestates that this gospel is the power of God for the salvation ofeveryone who believes (Rom. 1:16), a sacred trust (1Tim. 1:11),the word of truth (Eph. 1:13), and an authoritative pronouncementthat requires a response (Rom. 10:16; 2Cor. 11:4; 2Thess.1:8). The declaration of this good news is found on the lips of Jesusin the Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 11:5; Luke 4:18), who calls people torespond in repentance and belief (Mark 1:15). The good news is alsoin the early apostolic preaching, where it is associated with theproclamation of Christ (Acts 5:42; 8:35; 11:20).
Therecords of apostolic preaching in Acts are records of the earliestpublic declaration of this gospel. The apostle Peter gives three suchspeeches (Acts 2:14–41; 3:11–4:4; 10:34–43), whosecontent can be summarized as follows. The age of fulfillment hasdawned through the birth, life, ministry, and resurrection of JesusChrist (2:22–31), which has ushered in the “latter days”foretold by the prophets (3:18–26). Jesus, by his resurrection,has been exalted to the right hand of God as the head of the newIsrael (2:32–36), and the Holy Spirit has been given to thechurch as the sign of Christ’s present power and exaltation(10:44–48). This age will reach its consummation at the returnof Christ (3:20–21), and in response to this gospel an appealis made for repentance, with the offer of forgiveness, the HolySpirit, and salvation (2:37–41).
Thisdeclaration of the gospel is concerned primarily with what waspreached rather than what was written. Itinerant preachers of thisgospel were known as “evangelists,” which in Greek isclosely related to the term euangelion (Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; 2Tim.4:5). Some scholars believe that during the stage of oraltransmission, the gospel accounts developed a certain form throughrepetition, which helps explain some similarities between laterwritten accounts of the gospel.
FromOral to Written Gospel
Later,this “oral” gospel was written down, for several reasons.With the rapid spread of Christianity, as recorded in the book ofActs, a need arose for a more efficient dissemination of the messageof Jesus than was available by oral means. Furthermore, there was aneed to keep the message alive because some of the apostles had died(e.g., James in Acts 12:2) and many churches were facing oppositionand persecution. The written Gospels would facilitate catecheticaland liturgical needs and encourage persecuted Christians to continuefollowing Jesus by telling the story of his faithfulness throughgreat suffering. These written Gospels would also contain examples ofthose who persevered in following Jesus and of those who denied himand betrayed him. These accounts about Jesus and those who followedhim became foundational documents for the early church.
Itshould be noted that the gospel was not written down in order to giveit greater authority. The first-century context was largely an oralculture, in which storytelling and the rehearsal of facts wasintegral. Papias, a leader of the church in Hierapolis in Asia Minorwho died around AD 130, states his preference for oral traditionrather than written information about Jesus: “For I did notthink that information from books would help me as much as the wordof a living and surviving voice” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl.3.39.4). There is, however, a traceable trajectory from the gospelpreached by the apostles to the written accounts that bear the namesof Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It is generally held that theauthors/editors of the four canonical Gospels were using oral and/orwritten sources (Luke 1:1–4), and that their respective Gospelswere written in the second half of the first century.
Themajority of biblical scholars hold that Mark was the first Gospel tobe written (c. AD 66). According to tradition, its editor/author wasJohn Mark, a close friend of the apostle Peter (1Pet. 5:13) anda part-time companion of the apostle Paul (Acts 12:12; Col. 4:10;2Tim. 4:11). This tradition is not without basis. Papias says,“Mark, who had indeed been Peter’s interpreter,accurately wrote as much as he remembered, yet not in order, aboutthat which was either said or done by the Lord” (Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 3.39.15). This tradition is also outlined by Clement ofAlexandria, who, around AD 200, wrote, “When Peter had publiclypreached the word at Rome, and by the Spirit had proclaimed thegospel, then those present, who were many, exhorted Mark, as one whohad followed him for a long time and remembered what had been spoken,to make a record of what he said; and that he did this, anddistributed the Gospel among those that asked him” (Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 6.14.5–7; cf. 2.15.1–2).
Itis widely held that Matthew and Luke used Mark as one of theirsources: of the material in Mark, over 97percent is repeated inMatthew and over 88percent in Luke. Matthew and Luke alsocontain material that appears to come from a common written sourcethat is not found in Mark. Scholars have named this source as “Q”(from the German Quelle= “source”), although thismay be a collection of sources rather than a single document.
Furthermore,the association of the Fourth Gospel with the apostle John goes backto Irenaeus (c. AD 180), who states, “John, the disciple of theLord, who leaned on his breast, also published the gospel whileliving at Ephesus in Asia” (Haer. 3.1.1, as cited in Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 5.8.4). By the second century, the term “gospel”is used for the written accounts of the life, death, and resurrectionof Jesus (e.g., Did. 11.3; 15.4). Justin Martyr (c. AD 140) refers tothe “memoirs of the apostles” (1Apol. 67) andIrenaeus (c. AD 180) mentions the four canonical Gospels by name(Haer. 3.11.7).
ThePurpose and Genre of the Gospels
Purpose.The Gospels were written to convey theology and to create and confirmfaith. They do not give an objectively neutral account of the life ofJesus; they enthusiastically endorse their protagonist and condemnthose who oppose him. They differ from traditional biographies inthat they give little information about the chronology of Jesus’life. Only two of the Gospels, Matthew and Luke, tell of the eventssurrounding Jesus’ birth. Luke alone tells of an event inJesus’ childhood (Luke 2:41–52). It is virtuallyincidental that Jesus worked as a carpenter and had brothers andsisters (Mark 6:3). A large percentage of each of the four canonicalGospels is devoted to the last week of Jesus’ life; of thesixteen chapters of Mark’s Gospel, six are devoted to the oneweek from Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem until his resurrection.
Theprimary intentions of the authors/editors of the written Gospels werenot to give biographical details but rather to lead the reader to anacknowledgment of the identity of Jesus and a belief in the purposeof his mission (Luke 1:4; John 20:31). Their theological purposes,however, do not necessarily compromise their commitment to historicalaccuracy. Jesus is presented as a real, historical figure who livedwithin a specific historical time frame. Luke appears to be moreconcerned than the other evangelists with historical details, givinga rough date for Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1–2) and a morespecific time for Jesus’ baptism (3:1–2).
Genre.The discerning reader of the Gospels is forced to ask questionsconcerning the literary genre(s) of these texts. Such a discussion isimperative, as the interpretation of a section of any piece ofliterature will largely be determined by the function of the textwithin a certain literary genre. Prior to the 1970s, most NT scholarsbelieved that the Gospels formed a unique literary genre and weretherefore distinct from other first-century literary forms. Thisconclusion was based on the belief that the written Gospels werecollections of smaller sections sewn together by the evangelists, andthat the documents as a whole lacked coherence. Since then, thispresupposition has been challenged, largely because scholars haveseen that the Gospel writers were real editors and authors who werenot just collecting primitive source material but were using thatmaterial to write a larger story about Jesus. The written Gospelstherefore have overall coherence and purpose; they were written insuch a way as to bring about a desired response in the reader. Suchan overall intention may have stronger similarities with differentgenres in the Greco-Roman world of theNT.
TheGospels have been associated with several genres. They bear someresemblance to aretalogies, which were narratives about divinepersons in antiquity from which flowed moral instructions. Thesestories often involved miraculous events at the subject’s birthor death or during life, and they included the presence of bothdisciples and opponents. Within these aretalogies, the narrative wassecondary to the morality. An association with aretalogies,therefore, would encourage the reader to give greater attention tomoral teaching than to events in which this teaching is embedded.Similarly, others have seen the Gospels as essentially a collectionof wisdom sayings set in a historicized narrative; this view againgives priority to sayings and is doubtful of the historicity of thenarrative. Such views that downplay the narrative, and particularlythe miracles in Jesus’ life, have led others to argue theopposite extreme, which sees the Gospels, and Luke-Acts inparticular, as examples of ancient novels, with their focus onmiracle stories. Many scholars have rejected the emphasis on eithersayings or narrative, arguing that the literary genre that theGospels most closely resemble is ancient biographies (bioi). Thesecontained praise for the protagonist, rhetoric, moral philosophy, anda concern for character.
Althoughthe Gospels use different literary motifs that are reflective ofdifferent genres of the Greco-Roman world, they do not exactlyreplicate a known genre. They contain material not found in otherHellenistic literature of the time—for example, the fulfillmentof OT expectations and their desire to address particular issuesfaced by the early church, such as opposition; the Gentile mission;the need to redefine Israel in the light of Jesus’ life, death,and resurrection; and the nature of Christian discipleship. Unlikeother literature of the time, they do not name their authors, andwith the exception of Luke, they lack traditional literary devicessuch as prefaces. They are therefore to be seen as unique, or atleast as a distinct subgenre of ancient biographies.
Canonicaland Noncanonical Gospels
Theprogression from the events of Jesus’ life to the oralpreaching of this gospel to the first-century writing of the storyled to the acceptance of the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark,Luke, and John into the NT canon. There is also a significant body ofliterature that is normally referred to as the noncanonical gospels.These later documents were neither widely accepted nor viewed asauthoritative, but they provide useful insights into the nature ofearly Christianity. A significant noncanonical gospel is the Gospelof Thomas, which is part of a large collection of works discovered atNag Hammadi (Egypt) in 1945. The Gospel of Thomas does not contain aresurrection account and is primarily a collection of sayings.
Thecanonical Gospels are not more authoritative than other sections ofScripture, but because they focus on Jesus’ ministry, withparticular attention to his death and resurrection, they draw theattention of the reader to the fulfillment of God’s purpose inthe life and work of Jesus, the Messiah. They are therefore of greatimportance within Scripture.
Grace is the nucleus, the critical core element, of theredemptive and sanctifying work of the triune God detailed throughoutthe entire canon of Scripture. The variegated expressions of graceare rooted in the person and work of God, so that his graciousnessand favor effectively demonstrated in every aspect of the createdrealm glorify him as they are shared and enjoyed with one another.
Thebiblical terminology informing an understanding of grace defines itas a gift or a favorable reaction or disposition toward someone.Grace is generosity, thanks, and goodwill between humans and from Godto humans. Divine expressions of grace are loving, merciful, andeffective. The biblical texts provide a context for a more robustunderstanding of divine gift. The overall redemptive-historicalcontext of grace is the desire of the eternal God to bring glory tohimself through a grace-based relationship with his creation. TheCreator-Redeemer gives grace, and the recipients of grace give himglory.
OldTestament
Genesis.The grace of the creation narratives is summarized with the repeateduse of the term “good” (Gen. 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25,31). God is good, and he made a good creation with abundant gifts forAdam and Eve to enjoy. When Adam and Eve rebelled against God, herighteously judged and graciously provided for an ongoingrelationship. God clothed the naked Adam and Eve (3:21) and announcedthat the seed of the woman would yield a redeemer (3:15).
Gracein the postcreation narratives (Gen. 4–6) is focused onindividuals. God looked with favor on Abel and his offering (4:4),and Noah found grace in God’s eyes (6:8). God looked at and hadregard for the offering of Abel (Gen. 4). Jacob confessed to Esauthat God graced him with descendants and with possessions (33:5).
Graceand graciousness also characterize interaction between individuals.The Jacob and Esau exchange uses grace vocabulary for the gift andthe disposition of grace. Jacob invited Esau to accept his gift if hehad a favorable disposition toward him (Gen. 33:11). The covenant sonJoseph received favorable treatment from the prison warden because ofhis disposition toward him (39:21).
Exodus.The exodus narrative recounts how the seed of Abraham multiplies, isredeemed, and then is given the law, which defines the relationshipof God to Israel. All these events are tied to the gracious promisesthat God made to Abraham and his descendants (Gen. 12; 15; 17; seealso Gen. 21; 27).
Thegrace associated with the redemption of Israel from Egypt iscelebrated in the song of Exod. 15. God’s victory over theEgyptian army and his covenant fidelity to the patriarchs are thesong’s themes. Moses and the Israelites sing because God heardIsrael’s groaning; he remembered his covenant with Abraham andlooked on Israel with concern (2:24). God made Egypt favorablydisposed toward Israel (3:21) and parted the sea for Israel to escape(11:3; 12:36). The confession “He is my God ... myfather’s God” ties together major sections of redemptivehistory and affirms the constancy of God’s grace throughout theperiods (15:2). God’s tenacious covenant loyalty (khesed) tothe nation and his covenant grace (15:13) to Israel cannot bemerited.
Thegiving of the law in Exod. 20 is prefaced by a gracious and powerfulpresentation of God to the nation in Exod. 19. In the organizationand development of Exod. 19–20, grace themes emerge. The graceassociated with redemption and covenant life is marked in Exod. 19.God took Israel from Egyptian bondage, redeemed it, and brought thenation to himself (19:4). Through this action, the nation will becomea special treasure, a holy nation, a kingdom of priests (19:5–6).In sum, Israel exists because God created, loved, and redeemed it.
Second,the Decalogue of Exod. 20 follows upon the redemption effected byGod, defining how Israel will relate to its God. In this sense, lawis viewed as a gift that expresses the divine will. When compared andcontrasted with ancient Near Eastern laws, Torah reflects the graceof God’s character and his genuine concern for the poor,slaves, aliens, and widows. In addition, there is a grace ethic thatmotivates obedience to the law. The motivational statements in theDecalogue in Exod. 20 relate to the grace of redemption (v.2),the righteousness of God (vv. 4–7), the creation work of God(vv. 8–11), and long life (v.12).
Exodus32–34 is a key passage that links the covenant with graceterminology. This section begins with the story of the golden calf(chap. 32) and ends with the account of Moses’ radiant face(34:29–35). The grace terminology is observed in 33:19; 34:6–7.The context of 33:19 involves Moses meeting with God face-to-face.According to 33:12–17, Moses wanted to know who would be leftafter the purge of 33:5. He acknowledged God’s favor in hislife and wondered who else might enjoy it. Moses reminded God thatthe nation was his people (33:13). The grace of this account is God’sassurance of his presence with Israel and the unmerited purposefulexpression of his grace.
Exodus34:6–7 employs a series of adjectives in a grace confessionalstatement. This statement arises out of God’s instructions toMoses to cut two new tablets of stone like the first ones (34:1; seealso 24:12), which were broken after the incident of the golden calf(32:19). God descended in a cloud, stood with Moses, and proclaimedhis name to him (34:5). The rhetoric of the passage emphasizes thespeech of God, who defines himself in connection with covenantmaking. God is merciful and gracious, long-suffering, anddistinguished by steadfast love.
Graceand covenant loyalty.These key passages are foundational for understanding the grace andsteadfast loyalty of God expressed in the subsequent events ofcovenant history. Grace and khesed are expressed in connection withcovenant curse implementation (Num. 14:18; Hos. 4:1; 6:4, 6), in theoverall structure of Deuteronomy (5:10; 7:9, 12), in the Davidiccovenant (2Sam. 7:15; 1Chron. 17:13), in the future hopeof Israel (Isa. 54:8), in restoration (Jer. 32:18), in the newcovenant (Jer. 31:31), and in exile (Dan. 9:4).
Toround out the OT discussion, we may note that covenant siblings wereto be gracious and loyal in their ongoing relationships with oneanother. The book of Ruth illustrates covenant grace in action (2:2,10, 13). In addition, grace is to be expressed toward the poor (Prov.28:8), the young and the old (Deut. 28:50), and those who suffer (Job19:21).
NewTestament
TheNT focus of grace is developed in keeping with the foundation laid inthe OT. The triune God is the center and source of grace: it is thegrace of God (Rom. 1:7), the Spirit of grace (Heb. 10:29), and thegrace of Christ (John 1:17). The grace of God revealed in the OT isunveiled uniquely in the person and work of Christ.
TheGospel of John.The canonical development of the grace theme between the Testamentsis explained in the opening chapter of John’s Gospel. JesusChrist is the Word, who was with God, who is God, and who created theworld (John 1:1–3). Christ then became flesh and dwelled amongus (1:14). In doing so, he made known the glory of God to us. At thispoint in the development of chapter 1, John connects Christ (theWord) with the adjectives describing God in Exod. 34:6 to affirm thatChrist has the very same virtues that God has. The assertion in John1:17 that Jesus is full of grace and truth parallels the statement inExod. 34:6 of God’s steadfast love and faithfulness. In Christwe are able to see the glory that Moses hoped to see in God (John1:18). Christ is both the message and the messenger of grace andtruth.
TheEpistles and Acts.The NT Epistles develop the “full of grace and truth”statement about Christ (John 1:14) in several ways. The grace andtruth found in Christ are given to his servants (1Cor. 1:4) andare a reason for praise (2Cor. 8:9; Gal. 1:6, 15; Eph. 4:7;1Tim. 1:2; 2Tim. 2:1). This grace from Christ iseffective in bringing about redemption and sustaining a life ofgodliness. Ephesians 2:8–9 is the classic statement affirmingthat God’s favor is the source of salvation. Paul makes thispoint by repeating “it is by grace” in 2:5, 8 andclarifying the grace of salvation with the “it is the gift ofGod” statement in 2:8. This design of salvation celebrates theincomparable riches of Christ’s grace and the expression of hiskindness to us (cf. Eph. 1:7). Salvation is devoid of human merit,gifts, or favor (2:8). Keeping the law as a means of entrance into arelationship with God and as a means of gaining favor with God isantithetical to the nature of grace. God’s favor expressed topeople in salvation is an expression of his sovereign will.
Romans5 declares many of the same themes found in Eph. 2. In Rom. 5 Paulcontrasts the action and result of Adam’s transgression withthe obedience of Christ. Salvation is God’s grace and giftbrought by the grace of one man, Jesus Christ (v.15). The giftand grace of Christ brought about justification.
Theeffective operation of God’s grace in salvation is illustratedin the historical narratives of Acts. The men involved in the heateddebate of the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:2) affirmed the salvation ofthe Gentiles by grace after hearing the report of Barnabas and Paul(15:12). Those in Achaia (18:27) are another illustration of aneffective operation of grace.
Thegrace of God that saves is also the grace that sanctifies. Titus 2:11declares that redemptive grace instructs the redeemed to say no to alife of ungodliness. The instructional nature of grace is highlightedin the development of the Titus 2 context. The teacher in 2:1–10,15 is Titus, who is to nurture godly people. There is a change ofinstructors in 2:11, with grace now teaching. Redemptive grace worksin harmony with sanctifying grace to provide for godly living.
Accordingto Titus 3:8, those who trust in the generosity of God’s graceshould devote themselves to doing what is good. By God’s grace,justified sinners will find their delight and satisfaction in thepromises of God for a life of persevering godliness.
Gracealso functions as an enablement for life and ministry. Paul oftenrehearses this feature of grace in his letters. In Rom. 1:5 Paultestifies about the grace associated with a commission to be anapostle. When reflecting on his role in the church, he affirms thatby God’s grace he has been able to lay a foundation (1Cor.3:10). Paul’s testimony in 1Cor. 15:10 demonstrates theessential role of grace in making him who he is and effectivelyenabling what he does. Giving is also viewed as an exercise of grace(2Cor. 8:7) reflecting the grace received by individualbelievers. This gift of grace for life and ministry is somehowrecognizable. Peter, James, and John recognized it in Paul (Gal.2:9). It was upon the apostles (Acts 4:33), and it was seen in thechurch of Antioch (11:23).
Giventhe source and the effective nature of grace, one can understand theappropriateness of appealing to grace in greetings and salutations(Rom. 1:7; 16:20; Gal. 1:3; 6:18).
Commongrace.Finally, grace does operate beyond the context of the elect and thework of salvation and sanctification. Theologians define this as“common grace.” God’s sending rain and givingcreatures intellectual and artistic abilities are expressions ofcommon grace.
(1)Thedregs or residue, used metaphorically to speak of people’sremaining impurities (Ezek. 24:6, 11–12). (2)An amount of money or other valuable entrusted to another (Matt.25:27; Luke 19:23; 2 Tim. 1:14) or used as a down payment. In threeinstances in the NT the Greek word arrabōn is used to refer tothe Holy Spirit as the deposit that guarantees what is still to come(2Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph. 1:13–14). The last of thesepassages notes that the deposit of the Spirit in view is theredemption of God’s people, their future inheritance.
In Christian theology, the Third Person of the Trinity. Theusage derives from the NT, in which the divine Spirit is treated asan independent person who is instrumental in salvation and is worthyof the praise accorded to both the Father and the Son (John 14:16–23;Rom. 8:26–27; 1Pet. 1:2).
OldTestament
Thescarcity of the phrase “Holy Spirit” in the OT (only inPs. 51:11; Isa. 63:10–11) does not imply lack of interest orimportance. While it should be recognized that in the OT the personof the Holy Spirit receives nothing like the systematic reflectionfound in the NT, when one includes correlative terms, such as “Spiritof God,” “my Spirit,” “wind,” or“breath,” it is apparent that OT writers attributed greatsignificance to God’s Spirit. Thus, the Spirit was at work inthe beginning of creation (Gen. 1:2). Adam and Eve are uniquely givenlife by the breath of God (Gen. 2:7). The Spirit enables the buildingof the tabernacle (Exod. 31:3), gives voice to the message of theprophets (Num. 11:29; cf. 2Pet. 1:21), empowers Israel’sleaders (1Sam. 16:13), and provides access to God’spresence (Ps. 51:11). Yet in all this, the work of the Spirit in theOT is sporadic, occasional, and localized. Thus, the prophets longfor a new age when God’s people will more perfectly enjoy theSpirit’s presence (Isa. 32:15; 44:3; 61:1; Joel 2:28).
NewTestament
TheSpirit in the ministry of Christ.The NT views the OT prophetic hope for the Spirit as fulfilled in andthrough Jesus Christ (Luke 4:18–21). The unique relationshipbetween God’s Holy Spirit and the person and work of Jesusexplains the systemic reflection that the Holy Spirit receives in theNT. This is signaled at the very beginning of Jesus’ life, whenthe Holy Spirit “comes upon” Mary, overshadowing her with“the power of the Most High” (1:35). Similarly, at thestart of Jesus’ public ministry, the Holy Spirit “descendedon him” at baptism (3:22). This anointing by the Spiritinitiates and empowers Jesus’ public ministry, from hispreaching, to his miraculous works, to his perfect obedience (Luke4:14–18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38). Even his sacrificial death isaccomplished by the power of the Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14).
Significantly,just as the Holy Spirit empowered the life and death of Jesus, so toois the Spirit responsible for his resurrection and characteristic ofhis glorious reign. Death is not a defeat for Jesus: he is“vindicated by the Spirit” (1Tim. 3:16), “appointedthe Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead”(Rom. 1:4; cf. 1Pet. 3:18). Furthermore, at his resurrection,Jesus comes into a new phase of full and perfect possession of theeternal Spirit as the reward for his obedience. So complete is thisunion that Paul at one point claims that “the Lord is theSpirit” (2Cor. 3:17).
TheSpirit in the church and the believer.The church and its members are the immediate beneficiaries ofChrist’s spiritual fullness. Since Jesus is now a “life-givingspirit” through his resurrection and ascension (1Cor.15:45), he is able to fulfill the promise of Spirit baptism (Luke3:16). This baptism takes place in the outpouring of the Spirit atPentecost, which marks the birth of the NT church. The apostles,illuminated by the Holy Spirit, provide true and powerful testimonyabout Jesus (John 16:4–15), testimony that serves as thechurch’s foundation and principal tradition (Eph. 2:20). Thework of the Spirit continues within the church in the postapostolicage, uniting its members in Christ for God’s holy purpose (Eph.2:22).
Thissame outpouring of the Holy Spirit is the salvation of individualbelievers. Believers receive the Spirit by faith (Gal. 3:14). TheSpirit in turn unites them to Christ and all his benefits (Gal. 3:2;Eph. 1:3), including his life (Heb. 4:15–16), suffering (Phil.1:29; 1Pet. 4:14), death (Rom. 6:3), resurrection (Rom. 6:5),justification (Rom. 4:25), and glorious reign in heaven (Phil. 3:20).These benefits, though undoubtedly perfected and consummated only atChrist’s return (Phil. 1:6), are characteristic of believers’present experience, enjoyed now because the Spirit dwells within themas the “firstfruits” of the harvest to come (Rom. 8:23;cf. Gal. 2:19–20). This indwelling of the Spirit results in newbirth and new creation (2Cor. 5:17), a newness identified withthe life that Christ received in his resurrection (Rom. 8:11).
Forthis reason, believers are urged to further the work of the Spirit intheir lives until the bodily resurrection of all God’s people.They are to cultivate the “fruit of the Spirit” (Gal.5:22), and they are correspondingly warned not to “grieve theHoly Spirit” (Eph. 4:30). Furthermore, since new life isinitiated by the Spirit (John 3:6–8), Christians are to remainin that Spirit, not turning aside in reliance on vain and uselessprinciples (Gal. 3:1–5). Conversely, they are to be “filledwith the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18), putting off the old person andputting on the new (4:22). This filling grounds every aspect of thebeliever’s life, from obedience, to worship, to the hope ofresurrection. The Spirit, in uniting believers to all the riches ofChrist and his resurrection, is therefore central in the work ofsalvation. See also Spirit.
Scopeand Uses of the Word “Hope”
Attimes simply indicating a wish (2Cor. 11:1), in the Bible theword “hope” most often designates a disposition of soul,the grounds for one’s hope, or the outcome for which one hopes.
Thosewhom God has helped and delivered expect to see God’s poweragain when future needs arise, knowing that in God there are reasonsfor hope. Mere optimism assumes that bad circ*mstances will improvewith the passing of time. In contrast, hope assumes that God isfaithful and is convinced that he is able to bring about his goodpurpose (Isa. 44:1–8). So at its core, biblical hope is hope inGod, rooted in God’s covenant faithfulness (Ps. 62:5–8;Jer. 14:8; 17:13; Rom. 4:18; 5:1–5). Hope trusts God in thepresent and lives even now on the strength of God’s futureaccomplishments (Gal. 5:5; Heb. 11:1).
Bothof the main OT words for “hope” (Heb. roots qwh and ykhl)are at times translated “wait.” By definition, hope meansthat God’s promised outcome has not arrived, and that some timewill pass before it does. But that time is filled with a sense ofwaiting on God, often with a deep ache of longing for God to act (seePss. 25:16–21; 39:4–7; Isa. 40:28–31; Lam.3:19–24).
Theinner disposition of hope may be seriously threatened by injusticeand other devastating life experiences, as reflected in Job 6:8–13;14:19; 19:10. The refrain of Pss. 42:5–6, 11; 43:5 is apsalmist’s self-exhortation to hope amid oppressive anddepressing circ*mstances: “Why, my soul, are you downcast? Whyso disturbed within me? Put your hope in God, for I will yet praisehim, my Savior and my God.” Words for “hope”function similarly in other psalms of lament (Pss. 9:18; 31:24; 71:5,14; cf. Mic. 7:7).
TheOT usually locates individual hope within the horizon and limits ofthis world. One hopes for outcomes that may be realized in one’sown lifetime; indeed, when life ends, hope ends (Prov. 11:7; 24:20;Eccles. 9:4; Isa. 38:18). Proverbs that mention hope regardingsomeone’s character development show an underlying concern thatGod’s purposes be vindicated in one’s life (e.g., Prov.19:18; 26:12). When used in conjunction with Israel as a whole, hopelooks to a more distant future and coming generations.
Inthe NT, hope is closely associated with Christ and his saving work.Christians now live by hope in Christ (Eph. 1:12; 1Pet. 1:3;3:15); indeed, he is “Christ Jesus our hope” (1Tim.1:1), and his future appearing is “the blessed hope”(Titus 2:13). Thus, hope refers to eschatological glory (2Cor.3:11–12; Eph. 1:18). It is “the hope of the resurrection”(Acts 23:6; cf. 24:15; 26:6–9), our transformation intoChrist’s likeness (1John 3:1–3). That expectationstimulates various hopes for God’s plans to be realized inone’s own or others’ lives (1Cor. 9:10, 13; Phil.2:19, 23; 2Tim. 2:25; 2John 12). So hope is namedrepeatedly as an essential Christian attribute (Rom. 12:12; 15:4, 13;1Cor. 13:13).
Hopeas a Biblical Theme
Withthe God of hope as its covenant Lord, hope is a defining reality forIsrael and a persistent theme in the historical books (e.g., 2Sam.23:1–7; 2Kings 25:27–30). Psalmists find hopeeither in continuity with present structures (Ps. 37) or in drasticchange (Pss. 33; 82), such as personal or corporate restoration.
Judgmentdominates the message of the preexilic prophets, although expressionsof hope are also found. But Judah’s downfall in 587/586 BCmarks a turning point in prophetic hope. While preexilic prophecybases its indictment, appeal, and warning in the exodus and thecovenant, Jeremiah and Ezekiel tend to redirect hope and expectationto a new work of salvation that God will accomplish through and afterthe judgment of exile (e.g., Jer. 31:31–34; Ezek. 11:16–21;cf. Isa. 43:18–19). In the wake of Judah’s destruction,these prophets grasp a remarkable new vision of grace and promise.Restoration will be personal as well as national; forgiveness of sinwill enable obedience to God’s law, now to be found written ontheir hearts.
Duringthe exile, collection of Israel’s sacred texts enabled theshattered community to sustain identity and hope. Postexilic prophecyis often “text prophecy” that arises from reflection uponand reapplication of written prophecies, psalms, and other scripturaltexts. For example, the book of Zechariah (especially chaps. 9–14)alludes to many earlier writings and also moves toward apocalypticl*terature, contributing dramatic new imagery of God’s conquestof evil to establish his cosmic reign and fulfill his covenant.Messianic hopes rose throughout this period, fueled by earlierprophecies (e.g., Isa. 9; 11; 65:17; Jer. 23:5; Mic. 5:2).
Ifthe OT gives occasional hints of an afterlife, this hope becomesmanifest in the NT (2Tim. 1:10). Jesus promises the thief onthe cross fellowship after death (Luke 23:43). For Paul, “todepart and be with Christ” is such a vivid hope that “todie is gain” (Phil. 1:21–24). Such texts imply that deathushers the believer into Christ’s presence. Yet thisintermediate state is not the whole picture. We are saved in hope ofthe redemption of our bodies (Rom. 8:23–25)—ourresurrection from the dead and entry into a new glorified, bodilyexistence (1Cor. 15; Phil. 3:20–21).
Christis judge as well as savior (Matt. 16:27; 25:31–46; Acts 17:31;Rom. 2:16), and the NT anticipates final judgment of all persons andpowers arrayed against God, including sin and death (1Cor.15:24–26; 2Thess. 1:5–10). Christian hope involvesnothing less than the return and full revelation of Jesus Christ, theresurrection of the dead, and the renewal of all creation (1Thess.4:13–18; Rev. 21–22)—the complete vindication ofGod’s rule, secured already in Christ. Then God’sredeemed people will see his face and live in his presence forever(Matt. 5:8; Jude 24; Rev. 22:4). A vision of this future enables usto press on with hope, stretching toward what is to come (Phil.3:13–14).
Inheritance is an important concept that the Bible uses inseveral ways.
Family.In the ancient world every culture had customs for the passing ofwealth and possessions from one generation to the next. In ancientIsrael special provisions were made for inheriting land upon thedeath of the father. The firstborn son received a double portion; therest was divided equally among the remaining sons. If a man lackedsons, priority went to the following in order: daughters, brothers,father’s brothers, next of kin (Num. 27:1–11). The OTprovides guidance for additional circ*mstances (Gen. 38:8–9;Num. 36:6; Lev. 25:23–24; Deut. 21:15–17; 25:5–10;Ruth 2:20; 3:9–13; 4:1–12), with an overriding concernfor the stability of the family and the retention of the land withina tribe. Under Roman law during the NT period, an heir had legalstanding even while the father was still alive; his status was basedon birth or adoption rather than the father’s death.
OldTestament.Even more prominent than family inheritance is the assertion that Godgave the land of Canaan to Abraham and his descendants as aninheritance (Gen. 12:7; 15:18–21; 17:8; Num. 34:1–29;Deut. 12:10). This inheritance is God’s gracious gift, notsomething that Israel earned by its righteousness (Deut. 9:4–7).Descriptions of the land (“flowing with milk and honey”)and its fertility portray this gift as a new Eden, where God willdwell with his people (Exod. 3:8, 17; Lev. 20:24; Num. 16:13–14;Deut. 11:9–12). In some texts the language of inheritance movesbeyond the land of Canaan to an international scope. In Ps. 2:8 theanointed king recounts God saying to him, “Ask me, and I willmake the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth yourpossession.” This expansion of inheritance from the land ofCanaan to the ends of the earth prepares the way for a similarexpansion in the NT (see Rom. 4:13).
God’srelationship with Israel is also described in terms of inheritance.On the one hand, Israel is described as God’s inheritance(Deut. 32:9; 1Sam. 10:1; 1Kings 8:51–53); on theother hand, God is Israel’s inheritance (Pss. 16:5; 73:26; Jer.10:16; 51:19). This mutuality expresses the intimacy of God’srelationship with Israel.
NewTestament. Inheritancelanguage is taken up in the NT and expanded in a variety of ways.First and foremost, Jesus Christ is the “heir of all things,”the Son to whom the Father has given all authority in heaven and onearth (Matt. 28:18–20; Heb. 1:2–5). Through their unionwith Christ, believers share in Christ’s inheritance (Rom.8:17), having been qualified by the Father to share in thatinheritance (Col. 1:12). What believers inherit is described invarious ways: the earth (Matt. 5:5), eternal life (Luke 10:25), thekingdom (1Cor. 6:9–10; James 2:5), salvation (Heb. 1:14),blessing (Heb. 12:17; 1Pet. 3:9). This inheritance was enactedby the death of Christ and sealed by his blood (Heb. 9:15–28).Believers experience the benefits of this inheritance through theSpirit now (Eph. 1:14, 18), but its fullness is reserved in heavenand awaits the consummation (1Pet. 1:4–6).
Theconnection between the believer’s inheritance and the Spirit isespecially prominent in Paul. In Gal. 4:1–7 Paul uses acombination of exodus and legal imagery to explain the gospel. BeforeChrist came, God’s people were heirs under the care ofguardians and trustees. But once Christ came and redeemed them fromunder the law, they received their full inheritance as adopted sonsand daughters. Central to that inheritance is the gift of the Spirit,who cries out, “Abba, Father.” It is this gift of theSpirit that definitively marks believers as sons and daughters ratherthan slaves. Because believers possess the Spirit as an inheritancein fulfillment of the promise to Abraham (Gal. 3:14; cf. Isa.44:3–5), they have moved from bondage under the law to freedomin Christ (Gal. 5:1).
Inheritance is an important concept that the Bible uses inseveral ways.
Family.In the ancient world every culture had customs for the passing ofwealth and possessions from one generation to the next. In ancientIsrael special provisions were made for inheriting land upon thedeath of the father. The firstborn son received a double portion; therest was divided equally among the remaining sons. If a man lackedsons, priority went to the following in order: daughters, brothers,father’s brothers, next of kin (Num. 27:1–11). The OTprovides guidance for additional circ*mstances (Gen. 38:8–9;Num. 36:6; Lev. 25:23–24; Deut. 21:15–17; 25:5–10;Ruth 2:20; 3:9–13; 4:1–12), with an overriding concernfor the stability of the family and the retention of the land withina tribe. Under Roman law during the NT period, an heir had legalstanding even while the father was still alive; his status was basedon birth or adoption rather than the father’s death.
OldTestament.Even more prominent than family inheritance is the assertion that Godgave the land of Canaan to Abraham and his descendants as aninheritance (Gen. 12:7; 15:18–21; 17:8; Num. 34:1–29;Deut. 12:10). This inheritance is God’s gracious gift, notsomething that Israel earned by its righteousness (Deut. 9:4–7).Descriptions of the land (“flowing with milk and honey”)and its fertility portray this gift as a new Eden, where God willdwell with his people (Exod. 3:8, 17; Lev. 20:24; Num. 16:13–14;Deut. 11:9–12). In some texts the language of inheritance movesbeyond the land of Canaan to an international scope. In Ps. 2:8 theanointed king recounts God saying to him, “Ask me, and I willmake the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth yourpossession.” This expansion of inheritance from the land ofCanaan to the ends of the earth prepares the way for a similarexpansion in the NT (see Rom. 4:13).
God’srelationship with Israel is also described in terms of inheritance.On the one hand, Israel is described as God’s inheritance(Deut. 32:9; 1Sam. 10:1; 1Kings 8:51–53); on theother hand, God is Israel’s inheritance (Pss. 16:5; 73:26; Jer.10:16; 51:19). This mutuality expresses the intimacy of God’srelationship with Israel.
NewTestament. Inheritancelanguage is taken up in the NT and expanded in a variety of ways.First and foremost, Jesus Christ is the “heir of all things,”the Son to whom the Father has given all authority in heaven and onearth (Matt. 28:18–20; Heb. 1:2–5). Through their unionwith Christ, believers share in Christ’s inheritance (Rom.8:17), having been qualified by the Father to share in thatinheritance (Col. 1:12). What believers inherit is described invarious ways: the earth (Matt. 5:5), eternal life (Luke 10:25), thekingdom (1Cor. 6:9–10; James 2:5), salvation (Heb. 1:14),blessing (Heb. 12:17; 1Pet. 3:9). This inheritance was enactedby the death of Christ and sealed by his blood (Heb. 9:15–28).Believers experience the benefits of this inheritance through theSpirit now (Eph. 1:14, 18), but its fullness is reserved in heavenand awaits the consummation (1Pet. 1:4–6).
Theconnection between the believer’s inheritance and the Spirit isespecially prominent in Paul. In Gal. 4:1–7 Paul uses acombination of exodus and legal imagery to explain the gospel. BeforeChrist came, God’s people were heirs under the care ofguardians and trustees. But once Christ came and redeemed them fromunder the law, they received their full inheritance as adopted sonsand daughters. Central to that inheritance is the gift of the Spirit,who cries out, “Abba, Father.” It is this gift of theSpirit that definitively marks believers as sons and daughters ratherthan slaves. Because believers possess the Spirit as an inheritancein fulfillment of the promise to Abraham (Gal. 3:14; cf. Isa.44:3–5), they have moved from bondage under the law to freedomin Christ (Gal. 5:1).
A mystery entails knowledge that is disclosed to some butwithheld from others. Nothing is mysterious to God (Heb. 4:13), andhe alone understands the full purpose of his will (Job 38:1–40:24;Isa. 46:10), but he also condescends to reveal portions of his willto those whom he chooses (John 16:15).
Oneway that God reveals such mysteries in the OT is through dreams andtheir interpretation. This is the dynamic at work in Dan. 2, whereGod reveals secrets to King Nebuchadnezzar through cryptic imagery.The meaning of this imagery remains hidden, however, until the“mystery was revealed to Daniel in a vision” (v.19).Once revealed, the dreams detail God’s plans for the future ofhis kingdom.
Similarly,Jesus’ parables make known the character and future of God’scoming kingdom to his chosen servants, while also concealing it fromthose outside the circle (Matt. 13:18–23). Paul, by contrast,used “mystery” to refer to the disclosure of God’splan for the redemption of humanity, namely the inclusion of Gentileswithin “Israel” (Rom. 11:25). This plan, foreshadowed inthe OT but nevertheless hidden in essentials, had only recently beenfully revealed in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (Rom.16:25; Eph. 1:9; 1Tim. 3:16; cf. 1Pet. 1:10–12).The gospel message is therefore the revelation of this mystery, theproclamation of the truth about Jesus Christ, now made public to theworld (Eph. 3:3–9).
Theterm “predestination” means “to determine or decidesomething beforehand.” Some form of the Greek verb proorizō(“to determine beforehand”)occurs six times in the NT (Acts 4:28; Rom. 8:29, 30; 1Cor.2:7; Eph. 1:5, 11). It is practically synonymous with the concept offoreordination and is closely related to divine foreknowledge (Acts2:23; Rom. 8:29; 1Pet. 1:1–2, 20). Various Scripturesindicate that God the Father is the one who predestines (John17:6–10; Rom. 8:29; Eph. 1:3–5; 1Pet. 1:2).
Thespecific objects of predestination are humans, angels, and theMessiah. These divine predeterminations occurred before the creationof the world and were motivated by the love of God (Eph. 1:4–5).In regard to humans, this means that in eternity past, God determinedthat some individuals would be the recipients of his salvation.However, this determination does not rule out the necessity of humanchoice, responsibility, and faith. The decision to predestine someindividuals for salvation was based not upon anything good or bad inthe recipients, but solely on God’s good pleasure and accordingto his holy, wise, and eternal purpose (Isa. 46:10; Acts 13:48; Rom.11:33).
Predestinationas Part of God’s Larger Plan
Thescope of God’s plan. Predestinationis a part of God’s all-encompassing eternal plan (Isa.40:13–14; Rom. 11:34; Eph. 1:11). Several terms express God’splan. Among these are his “decree” (Ps. 2:7), “eternalpurpose” (Eph. 3:11), “foreknowledge” (Acts 2:23),and “will” (Eph. 1:9, 11). God’s plan involves allthings that come to pass, including major and insignificant events,direct and indirect causes, things appointed and things permitted. Ittherefore encompasses both good and evil (Ps. 139:16; Prov. 16:4;Isa. 14:24–27; 22:11; 37:26–27; 46:9–10; Acts 2:23;4:27–28; Eph. 1:11; 2:10).
Theinclusion of evil in the plan of God does not mean that he condones,authorizes, or commits moral evil. The apostle John stresses that Godis light and that there is no darkness in him at all (1John1:5). He is absolutely holy and cannot be charged with the commissionof sin (Hab. 1:13). When addressing the topic of God’s plan andpurpose, the biblical authors are careful to distinguish betweendivine causation and human responsibility. Both fall under thepurview of God’s plan. There is divine certainty about whatwill happen, but moral agents are never under compulsion to commitevil (see Acts 4:28; Rom. 9:11; 1Cor. 2:7; 11:2; Heb. 2:5,10–16; 1Pet. 1:2, 20; 2Pet. 3:17). For example,when Luke refers to the greatest miscarriage of justice in thehistory of the world, the crucifixion of Christ, he indicates that itwas predestined by God, but the moral turpitude of the act isattributed to “wicked men” (Acts 2:23). The dual natureof such events is aptly reflected in Joseph’s statement to hisbrothers who sold him into slavery: “You meant evil against me,but God meant it for good” (Gen. 50:20 NASB).
Whereasthe all-encompassing plan of God relates to his sovereign controlover all things, predestination appears to be restricted primarily tocertain divine decisions affecting humans, angels, and the Messiah(Isa. 42:1–7; Acts 2:23; 1Tim. 5:21; 1Pet. 1:20;2:4). With reference to humans, Paul states, “In him we werealso chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him whoworks out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will”(Eph. 1:11). Some scholars limit predestination to those things “inhim,” thus linking this work of God to his purpose insalvation. Others argue that the following phrase, “who worksout everything in conformity with the purpose of his will,”demonstrates that all things fall under the purview of God’scontrolling and guiding purpose (Eph. 1:11). It seems best to see thephrase “in him” as indicating the sphere in whichbelievers are chosen and the term “predestinated” as onecrucial aspect of the greater plan of God.
Divineforeknowledge and election. Sometheologians argue that election and predestination are merely basedupon God’s foreknowledge of those who will believe in him.Although God surely knows all those who will believe, the term“foreknowledge” connotes much more than simply knowingahead of time who will come to faith. It means that God hassovereignly chosen to know some individuals in such an intimate waythat it moved him to predestine them to eternal life (Rom. 8:29).Whereas the term “election” refers to God’ssovereign choice of those individuals, “predestination”looks forward toward the goal of that selection. Both predestinationand election occur in eternity past (Eph. 1:4–5).
Thepurpose of predestination. Whereaselection refers to God’s choice of individuals, predestinationlooks toward the purpose and goal of that choice. NT believers aredesignated as chosen by God and appointed to eternal life (Acts13:48; Eph. 1:4). The express purpose is that they be adopted as hischildren (Eph. 1:5) and, as beloved children, become “conformedto the image of his Son” (Rom. 8:29). The idea is that thosewhom God has chosen are predestined in view of the purpose that hedesires to fulfill in them, that of becoming his children who areconformed to the image of his Son. The ultimate purpose behind thisplan is to bring glory to God (Eph. 1:5–6, 11–12).
Predestinationand Reprobation
Inhis plan, God has chosen some individuals, nations, groups, andangels to fulfill special purposes, implying that other individuals,nations, groups, and angels have not been selected for those samepurposes (2Thess. 2:13; 2Tim. 2:10; 1Pet. 1:2).With regard to God’s choice in salvation, this has led sometheologians to argue that those not chosen for salvation are bydefault chosen for eternal damnation. They maintain thatpredestination applies not only to individuals whom God plans tosave, but also to those whom he does not plan to save (Prov. 16:4;Matt. 26:23–24; Rom. 9:10–13, 17–18, 21–22;2Tim. 2:20; 1Pet. 2:8; 2Pet. 2:3, 9; Jude 4; Rev.13:8; 20:15). This is sometimes called “reprobation.” Thebelief in the combined concepts of election and reprobation has beencalled “double predestination.”
Whilesome scholars in the history of the church have argued that God isjust as active in determining the reprobate as he is the elect,others have pointed out that God’s condemnation of the nonelectis based solely upon their sin and unbelief. A real distinctionexists in the level of divine involvement with regard to the destinyof one class as compared with the other. God does not appear to havethe same relationship to every event or thing in his creation. Thedegree of divine causation in each case differs. Scripture recognizesa difference between God’s direct working and his permissivewill. In this view, God directly chooses some to be saved; however,he does not choose the others to be damned but rather passes them by,allowing them to continue on their own way and eventually suffer thejust punishment that their sins deserve.
Whicheverview one takes, it seems that the Scripture does not teachreprobation in the same way it teaches predestination leading toeternal life. Whereas the assignment to eternal death is a judicialact taking into account a person’s sin, predestination untoeternal life is purely an act of God’s sovereign grace andmercy not taking into account any actions by those chosen. Carryingthe teaching of reprobation to the extreme threatens to view God ascapricious, which clearly is not scriptural (1John 1:5).
Predestinationand Human Responsibility
Godwas in no way obligated or morally impelled to choose or predestineanyone to eternal life. His determination not to choose everyone inno way impinges upon his holy and righteous character (Rom. 9:13). Onthe contrary, justice would demand that all receive the punishmentthat they have rightly earned for their sins (Rom. 3:23; 6:23).Therefore, the predestination of some to become like his Son requiredthat God exercise grace and mercy in providing for the cleansing oftheir sin, which he accomplished through the sacrifice of his belovedSon, Jesus Christ (Acts 2:23).
God’spredetermined plan does not force individuals to respond inpredetermined ways, either to accept him or to reject him. In the onecase, the sinner is drawn by God to himself but must also choose toplace trust in Christ (John 6:37, 44). Even in the radicalintervention of God in the life of Saul on the road to Damascus,where the divine call was indeed overpowering, Saul was givenopportunity to respond either positively or negatively. In the caseof those who are headed for eternal judgment, God’s working isnot fatalistic or mechanistic in the sense that a person may want tochoose God but God’s predetermined plan will not allow such aresponse. To the contrary, all are invited to come to Christ (Matt.11:28; John 3:16). The apostle John clarifies, “Whoever comesto me I will never drive away” (John 6:37 [cf. Matt. 11:28]).Those who do not come to God refuse to do so by their own volition(Matt. 23:37; John 5:40). They are not merely unable to come to Godbut unwilling to do so (John 5:40; 6:65; Rom. 3:11). The NT teachesthat Christ died for their sins (John 3:16), pleadingly warns them torepent, and cites their transgressions as the reason for theircondemnation (1Pet. 2:8; 2Pet. 2:21–22; Jude 8–16).When all aspects of the issue are considered, there is indeed amystery that lies outside the boundaries of our comprehensionregarding God’s sovereign working and human choice.
The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More thana simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the graceof the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classicaltexts use the Greek word apolytrōsis(“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given torelease a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. Thegroup of words based on the Greek term lytron(“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. Thecorresponding Hebrew word padahis a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.
OldTestament
Theexperience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religioussignificance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included thededication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13).Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), wasredeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up todescribe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continuedto broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance fromall Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included thewhole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or thenew age to come).
AnotherHebrew term, ga’al,generally relates to the kinsman-redeemer. In the case of a personwho had sold property due to poverty or even gone into slavery to paya debt, a kinsman could become a redeemer by buying back the property(Lev. 25:25–28) and/or purchasing freedom from slavery(25:47–49). The book of Ruth describes this, detailing therelationship between the impoverished Ruth and Boaz, thekinsman-redeemer. The prophets and the psalms apply thisunderstanding to how God redeems Israel (Isa. 43:1–3; Ps.19:14; cf. Job 19:25). God, however, does not pay ransom to anyone(Isa. 52:3–4); rather, he causes redemption by his power(45:13).
Theawaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’sultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’scontinued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant,God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon.Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was ifGod would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. Thislonging for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As thepersecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamentalperiod (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT andthe NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianichope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people fromGreek and Roman oppression.
NewTestament
TheNT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). WhenJesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slaveryof sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many(Matt. 20:28// Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the crossaccentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17;7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christianidea of ransom followedthe accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death(Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with aransom (Col. 1:13–14). The predominance of apolytrōsis inthe NT, compared to common Greek literature of that period,underscores its significance for early Christian conceptualization.
Withoutreflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made anissue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlightJesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12;cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need oftheredeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of theredemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from onesphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another.Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted ofmonetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1Pet.3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of thosehe redeemed (antilytron hyper [1Tim. 2:6]). God still did notpay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.
TheOT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in thepresent, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills theNT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’stheological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from theslavery of sin (1Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matterof ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already butnot yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption isevidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).
Althoughredemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future(Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1Cor.15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions ofredemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expectsredemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption isuniversal; it restores the relationship between creation and theCreator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).
The term “salvation” is the broadest one used torefer to God’s actions to solve the plight brought about byhumankind’s sinful rebellion and its consequences. It is one ofthe central themes of the entire Bible, running from Genesis throughRevelation.
OldTestament
Inmany places in the OT, salvation refers to being rescued fromphysical rather than spiritual trouble. Fearing the possibility ofretribution from his brother Esau, Jacob prays, “Save me, Ipray, from the hand of my brother Esau” (Gen. 32:11). Theactions of Joseph in Egypt saved many from famine (45:5–7;47:25; 50:20). Frequently in the psalms, individuals pray forsalvation from enemies that threaten one’s safety or life (Pss.17:14; 18:3; 70:1–3; 71:1–4; 91:1–3).
Relatedto this usage are places where the nation of Israel and/or its kingwere saved from enemies. The defining example of this is the exodus,whereby God delivered his people from their enslavement to theEgyptians, culminating in the destruction of Pharaoh and his army(Exod. 14:1–23). From that point forward in the history ofIsrael, God repeatedly saved Israel from its enemies, whether througha judge (e.g., Judg. 2:16; 3:9), a king (2Kings 14:27), or evena shepherd boy (1Sam. 17:1–58).
Butthese examples of national deliverance had a profound spiritualcomponent as well. God did not save his people from physical dangeras an end in itself; it was the necessary means for his plan to savethem from their sins. The OT recognizes the need for salvation fromsin (Pss. 39:8; 51:14; 120:2) but, as the NT makes evident, does notprovide a final solution (Heb. 9:1–10:18). One of the clearestplaces that physical and spiritual salvation come together is Isa.40–55, where Judah’s exile from the land and prophesiedreturn are seen as the physical manifestation of the much morefundamental spiritual exile that resulted from sin. To address thatfar greater reality, God announces the day when the Suffering Servantwould once and for all take away the sins of his people (Isa.52:13–53:12).
NewTestament
Asin the OT, the NT has places where salvation refers to being rescuedfrom physical difficulty. Paul, for example, speaks of being savedfrom various physical dangers, including execution (2Cor.1:8–10; Phil. 1:19; 2Tim. 4:17). In the midst of a fiercestorm, Jesus’ disciplescry out, “Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!”(Matt. 8:25). But far more prominent are the places in the Gospelsand Acts where physical healings are described with the verb sōzō,used to speak of salvation from sin. The healing of the woman withthe hemorrhage (Mark 5:25–34), the blind man along the road(Luke 18:35–43), and even the man possessed by a demon (Luke8:26–39), just to name a few, are described with the verb sōzō.The same verb, however, is also used to refer to Jesus forgivingsomeone’ssins (Luke 7:36–50) and to his mission to save the lost fromtheir sins (Luke 19:10). Such overlap is a foretaste of the holisticsalvation (physical and spiritual) that will be completed in the newheaven and earth (Rev. 21–22). The NT Epistles give extensivedescriptions of how the work of Jesus Christ saves his people fromtheir sins (see below).
Components
Inseveral passages (e.g., Rom. 5:1–11; Eph. 2:1–10; Titus3:4–7) “salvation” is clearly a summary term forthe totality of what God has done for his people in and throughChrist. Salvation is such a rich and multifaceted work of God that ittakes a variety of terms to bring out its fullness. “Regeneration”refers to the new life that God imparts, bringing a person fromspiritual death to spiritual life (John 3:3–8; Eph. 2:4–7;Titus 3:4–7). “Justification” speaks of Goddeclaring a person not guilty in his court of law on the basis ofChrist’s sacrificial death and life of perfect obedience (Rom.3:21–5:12; Gal. 2:14–21). “Atonement”describes Christ’s payment for sin and resulting forgiveness(Rom. 3:21–26; Heb. 2:17). “Redemption” capturesthe reality of God paying the price to bring his people out of theirslavery to sin and into the freedom of the Spirit (Gal. 4:1–7;5:1). “Reconciliation” refers to God turning hardenedrebels and enemies into his friends (Rom. 5:10–11; 2Cor.5:18–21; Col. 1:20–22). “Adoption” extendsthat reality into the astonishing truth that God makes those whom hereconciles not just his friends but his sons and daughters (Rom.8:14–25; Gal. 4:1–7). In “sanctification” Godsets his people apart for his special purposes and progressivelychanges them into the image of Christ (1Cor. 1:30 ESV, NRSV,NASB; cf. Rom. 8:29). The final component is “glorification,”when God brings to completion the work of salvation by granting hispeople resurrection bodies, removing every last stain of sin, death,and the curse and placing them in a new heaven and earth (Rom. 8:30;1Cor. 15:35–57; Rev. 21–22).
Prepositionsof Salvation
Anotherway that the Bible fills out the nature of salvation is through thevarious prepositions connected to it. The prepositions in thefollowing list are among the more significant.
From.Since the basic idea of salvation is rescue from danger, it is notsurprising that Scripture describes that from which believers aresaved. David cries out to God, “Save me from all mytransgressions” (Ps. 39:8). Salvation from sin is possible onlythrough Jesus, for it is he who “will save his people fromtheir sins” (Matt. 1:21). Reflecting on the work of Jesus onthe cross, Paul claims that because of the sacrificial death ofChrist believers are saved from God’s wrath (Rom. 5:9–10).At the same time, the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus savedpeople from their slavery to sin (Rom. 6:1–11). As a result ofthese and other things from which Christ has saved people, on the dayof Pentecost Peter exhorts his audience to be saved “from thiscorrupt generation” (Acts 2:40). Thus, the unanimous testimonyof Scripture is that believers have been saved from their sin and itsconsequences.
To/into.Believers are saved not merely from something; they are saved to/intocertain states or conditions. Whereas they were once slaves,believers have now been saved “into the freedom and glory ofthe children of God” (Rom. 8:21 [cf. Gal. 5:1]). Through thecross God “has rescued us from the dominion of darkness andbrought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves” (Col. 1:13).Another way of stating this reality is to speak of the peace intowhich believers now have been brought as a result of Christ’swork on their behalf (John 14:27).
By.Scripture frequently uses the preposition “by” to expressthe instrument of salvation. Stated negatively, “It is not bysword or spear that the Lord saves” (1Sam. 17:47). In thebroadest sense, believers are saved from their sins by the gospel(1Cor. 15:1–2). More specifically, salvation is by thegrace of God (Eph. 2:5, 8). The preposition “by” can alsoexpress the agent of salvation. A distinguishing feature of Israelwas that it was saved from its enemies by God (Deut. 33:29; Isa.45:17). The same thing is meant when Scripture speaks of God savinghis people by his right hand (Ps. 17:7) or his name (Ps. 54:1).
Through.The consistent testimony of the Bible is that salvation comes throughfaith (e.g., Eph. 2:8–9). Through faith, believers have beenjustified (Rom. 3:22; 5:1–2) and made children of God (Gal.3:26). It is not righteousness based on the law that matters, “butthat which is through faith in Christ” (Phil. 3:9). Theremarkable actions of God’s people throughout history have beenaccomplished through faith (Heb. 11:1–40).
In.Especially in Paul’s writings the various components ofsalvation (see above) are modified with the phrase “in Christ”or “in him.” Believers are chosen (Eph. 1:4), redeemed(Eph. 1:7), justified (Gal. 2:17), and sanctified (1Cor. 1:2)in Christ. Indeed, God has blessed believers “in the heavenlyrealms with every spiritual blessing in Christ” (Eph. 1:3).
With.Many of the components of salvation that believers experience aresaid to happen “with Christ.” Believers are united withChrist in his death, burial, and resurrection (Rom. 6:4–11;Gal. 2:20). With Christ, believers have been made alive, raised up,and seated in the heavenly realms (Eph. 2:4–6; Col. 2:13).Because of their union with Christ, believers share in hisinheritance (Rom. 8:16–17; Gal. 3:29; 1Pet. 1:4). Eventhe very life of the believer is said to be currently “hiddenwith Christ in God” (Col. 3:3).
Tensesof Salvation
TheBible speaks of salvation in the past, present, and future tenses.Pointing to a definitive experience in the past, Paul tells believersthat “in this hope we were saved” (Rom. 8:24). Yet he canalso speak of himself and other believers as those “who arebeing saved” (1Cor. 1:18; 2Cor. 2:15), pointing toa process that is ongoing. Just a few sentences after assuringbelievers that they have been justified already (Rom. 5:1–2),he can still say that believers will “be saved from God’swrath” through Christ (Rom. 5:9–10).
Theuse of these three tenses reflects the “already and not yet”dynamic of salvation. Through the obedience, death, resurrection, andascension of Jesus, God has rescued his people from their sins. Butthe final and complete realization of all the benefits of salvationmust still await the return of Christ and the establishment of a newheaven and earth (Rev. 19–22).
Conclusion
Withouta proper understanding of humankind’s plight as a result of itsrebellion, the Bible’s repeated emphasis on salvation makeslittle sense. Because sin is humanity’s greatest problem,salvation is humanity’s greatest need. Given the breadth,width, and depth of what God has done to save his people from theirsins through Jesus Christ, it is no wonder that the author of Hebrewsasks, “How shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation?”(2:3).
While a modern understanding of the word “truth”suggests a direct correspondence to fact or reality, Scripturepresents truth in broader terms.
OldTestament.The OT not only portrays truth as an honest factual account but alsoplaces it within a relationship characterized by faithfulness andreliability. The Hebrew word translated as “truth,”’emet, also is translated as “faithfulness,”“security,” “reliability.” The word oftenappears juxtaposed to words that involve a relationship, including“love” (Ps. 26:3), “kindness” (Gen. 24:27),“mercy” (Ps. 40:11), “justice” (Isa.59:14–15), and “righteousness” (Isa. 48:1). Truthis attributed primarily not to external facts, but rather to a personor community in faithfulness.
Oftendescribed as something that belongs to God (Ps. 25:5), truth isassociated with his love (26:3). Yahweh is the God of truth (31:5)and is near to all who call on him in truth (145:18). God’struth protects (140:11) and guides (43:3). Following God meanswalking in his truth (26:3). God speaks the truth (Isa. 45:19) andvalues truth (Prov. 12:22), and he expects his people to do the same(Prov. 23:23).
Ofteninvolving speech, truth is a crucial element for justice in acommunity, especially in a court setting. A truthful witness gives anhonest testimony and brings healing, but a false witness tells liesand brings destruction (Prov. 12:17–18). Yet only the truthwill endure (12:19). Truth is needed to make sound judgments (Zech.8:16). The absence of truth in Israel’s society is denounced bythe prophets, who declare truth to have stumbled (Isa. 59:14) andeven to have perished (Jer. 7:28). In Jer. 5:1 it is said that Godwill forgive the entire city of Jerusalem if one person is found whodeals honestly and seeks the truth (cf. Gen. 18:26–32). No suchperson is found. Nevertheless, it is God’s vision for Jerusalemto be called the “City of Truth” (Zech. 8:3 NASB, NKJV).
SeveralOT narratives display how truth may not be evident in everyrelationship. In 1Kings 22:16 (//2Chron. 18:15)King Ahab makes the prophet Micaiah repeatedly swear to be tellingGod’s truth because he (rightly) suspects the prophet of lying.As an Egyptian ruler, Joseph requires his brothers to prove the truthof their words (Gen. 42:16), perhaps keeping in mind the history ofhis ancestor Abraham’s dealings with the Egyptian king(12:10–20). Sometimes the truth of one relationship holdspriority over duties involved in another relationship. For example,in Exod. 1:15–21 the Hebrew midwives have a truthfulrelationship with (Hebrew) babies and with God even as they lie tothe king of Egypt.
NewTestament.In the NT, truth signifies the gospel (Eph. 1:13) as well as Jesushimself (John 14:6). Whereas Pilate asks, “What is truth?”(John 18:38), the NT answers, “Jesus!” The topic of truthis predominant in the Gospel of John. Jesus is full of grace andtruth (John 1:14), tells the truth he heard from God (8:44), and infact is the truth (5:33). Truth involves action. Whoever lives by thetruth comes out of darkness into the light (3:21). Worship of Godmust be done in spirit and in truth (4:23–24). It is the truththat will set people free (8:32). Jesus calls the Holy Spirit the“Spirit of truth” (15:26), whose role is to guide thefollowers of Jesus in all truth, speaking what he hears from theFather (John 15–16).
Althoughthe topic of truth is seldom mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels, thephrase “I tell you the truth” is attributed to Jesusseventy-eight times (e.g., Matt. 5:18; 6:2; Mark 8:12; 9:41; Luke9:27; 23:43; John 1:51; 13:21 NCV), showing it to be a major theme.The apostle Paul reminds the church at Corinth that love rejoiceswith the truth (1Cor. 13:6). Truth describes not only knowledgeof reality (Acts 24:8) but also the knowledge of Christ (2Cor.11:10) as well as the type of life that a follower of Christ shouldexhibit (Gal. 2:14; Titus 1:1). Truth can be distorted (Acts 20:30),suppressed (Rom. 1:18), and rejected (Rom. 2:8). While truth caninvolve speech (Eph. 4:15), those who belong to the truth show it bytheir love (1John 1:6; 3:18–20).
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
Ephesians 1:1-14
is mentioned in the definition.
The English word “atonement” comes from anAnglo-Saxon word, “onement,” with the preposition “at”;thus “at-onement,” or “at unity.” In someways this word has more in common with the idea of reconciliationthan our modern concept of atonement, which, while having “oneness”as its result, emphasizes rather the idea of how that unity isachieved, by someone “atone-ing” for a wrong or wrongsdone. Atonement, in Christian theology, concerns how Christ achievedthis “onement” between God and sinful humanity.
Theneed for atonement comes from the separation that has come aboutbetween God and humanity because of sin. In both Testaments there isthe understanding that God has distanced himself from his creatureson account of their rebellion. Isaiah tells the people of Judah,“Your iniquities have separated you from your God”(59:2). And Paul talks about how we were “God’s enemies”(Rom. 5:10). So atonement is the means provided by God to effectreconciliation. The atonement is required on account of God’sholiness and justice.
OldTestament
Inthe OT, the sacrificial system was the means by which sins wereatoned for, ritual purity was restored, iniquities were forgiven, andan amicable relationship between God and the offerer of the sacrificewas reestablished. Moses tells the Israelites that God has given themthe blood of the sacrificial animals “to make atonement foryourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement forone’s life” (Lev. 17:11). In essence, this is the basicoperating principle for atonement in the OT—the offering of theblood of a slaughtered animal in place of the life of the offerer.However, there have been significant scholarly debates regardingwhether this accurately portrays the ancient Israelite understandingof atonement.
Themeaning of “to atone.”First, there is disagreement over the precise meaning of the Hebrewword kapar (“to atone”). Among the more popularsuggestions are these: to cover, to remove, to wipe out, to appease,to make amends, to redeem or ransom, to forgive, and to avert/divert.Of late, one very influential theory is that atonement has little ornothing to do with the individual offerer, but serves only to purifythe tabernacle or temple and the furniture within from the impuritiesthat attach to them on account of the community’s sin. Thistheory, though most probably correct in what it affirms,unnecessarily restricts the effects of atonement to the tabernacleand furniture. There are, to be sure, texts that specifically mentionatonement being made for the altar (e.g., Exod. 29:36–37; Lev.8:15). But the repeated affirmation for most of the texts inLeviticus and Numbers is that the atonement is made for the offerer(e.g., Lev. 1:4; 4:20, 26); atonement results in forgiveness of sinfor the one bringing the offering. As far as the precise meaning ofkapar is concerned, it may be that some of the suggested meaningsoverlap and that a particular concept is more prevalent in somepassages, and another one in others.
Therehas also been debate over the significance of the offerer laying ahand on the head of the sacrificial animal (e.g., Lev. 1:4; 3:2).This has traditionally been understood as an identification of theofferer with the sacrifice and a transference of the offerer’ssins to the sacrifice. Recently this has been disputed and theargument made instead that it only signifies that the animal doesindeed belong to the offerer, who therefore has the right to offerit. But again, this is unduly restrictive; it should rather be seenas complementary to what has traditionally been understood by thisgesture. Indeed, in the rite for the Day of Atonement, when thepriest lays his hands on the one goat, confesses Israel’s sinand wickedness, and in doing so is said to be putting them on thegoat’s head (Lev. 16:21), this would seem to affirm thecorrectness of the traditional understanding. The sacrifice is thusbest seen as substitutionary: it takes the place of the offerer; itdies in his stead.
Therelationship between God and the offerer. Second,granted that the word kapar has to do with the forgiveness of sins,the question arises as to the exact effect that it has on therelationship between God and the offerer. The question here iswhether the effect is expiation or propitiation. Does the offeringexpiate the sin—wipe it out, erase it, remove it? Or does itpropitiate the one to whom the sacrifice is offered? That is, does itappease and placate God, so that the threat of God’s wrath isremoved? In one respect, the distinction seems artificial; it seemslogical that expiation naturally results in propitiation. On theother hand, the modern-day tendency to deny that God could possiblybe a God of wrath makes the question relevant. In any case, there arecertainly, in both religious and nonreligious contexts, passageswhere something like “appease” or “pacify”appears to be a proper rendering of kapar (Gen. 32:20; Exod. 32:30;Num. 16:46–47; 25:1–13; 1 Sam. 3:14). The effect ofatonement is that sins are removed and forgiven, and God is appeased.
Inconjunction with this last point, it is also important to note thatthere are a number of places where it is said that God does thekapar, that God is the one who makes atonement. Deuteronomy 21:8calls upon God, literally, to “atone [NIV: “accept thisatonement”] for your people, Israel.” In Deut. 32:43 Godwill “make atonement for his land and people.” Psalm 65:3(ESV) states that God “atone[s] for our transgressions”(ESV). Hezekiah prays in 2 Chron. 30:18, “May the Lord,who is good, pardon [atone for] everyone.” In Ps. 78:38 (ESV),God is said to have “atoned” for Israel’s iniquity.Psalm 79:9 (ESV) asks God to “atone for our sins for yourname’s sake.” In Isa. 43:3 kapar is translated as“ransom,” and God says to Israel that he gave “Egyptfor your ransom.” In Ezek. 16:63 God declares that he will“make atonement” for all the sins that Israel hascommitted. It may be that in most of these passages “atone”is to be understood as a synonym of “forgive.” However,as many commentators have noted, in at least some of these passages,the thought is that God is either being called upon to take or istaking upon himself the role of high priest, atoning for the sins ofthe people. It is important to remember God’s declaration inLev. 17:11 that he has given to the Israelites the blood of thesacrificial animals to make atonement for their sins. Atonement, nomatter how it is conceived of or carried out, is a gift that Godgraciously grants to his covenant people.
Thatleads to a consideration of one particularly relevant passage, Isa.52:13–53:12. In this text a figure referred to as “my[the Lord’s] servant” (52:13) is described as one who“took up our pain and bore our suffering” (53:4). He was“pierced for our transgressions” and “crushed forour iniquities” (53:5). “The Lord has laid on him theiniquity of us all” (53:6). And then we are told, “Yet itwas the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,”and that “the Lord makes his life an offering for sin [NASB:“guilt offering”]” (53:10). There are many issueswith regard to the proper interpretation of this “Servant Song”(as it is often called), one of them being whether the termtranslated “guilt offering” should really be thought ofalong the lines of the guilt offering described in the book ofLeviticus (5:14–6:7; 7:1–10). But if the traditionalChristian understanding of this passage is correct, we have here apicture of God himself assuming the role of priest and atoning forthe sins of his people by placing their iniquities and sins on hisservant, a figure regarded by Jesus and the apostles in the NT to beGod’s very own son, Christ Jesus.
NewTestament
Therelationship between the Testaments.When we come to the NT, four very important initial points should bemade.
First,God’s wrath against sin and sinners is just as much a NTconsideration as an OT one. God still considers those who are sinfuland unrighteous to be his “enemies” (Rom. 5:10; Col.1:21). Wrath and punishment await those who do not confess JesusChrist as Lord (John 3:36; Rom. 2:5; Eph. 2:3). Atonement is themeans of averting this wrath.
Second,salvation is promised to those who come to God by faith in ChristJesus, but there is still the problem of how God can, at the sametime, be “just” himself and yet also be the one who“justifies” sinners and declares them righteous (Rom.3:26). God will not simply declare sinners to be justified unless hisown justness is also upheld. Atonement is the way by which God isboth just and justifier.
Third,as we saw in the OT that, ultimately, God is the one who atones, soalso in the NT God is the one who provides the means for atonement.It is by his gracious initiative that atonement becomes possible. IfJesus’ death is the means by which atonement is achieved, it isGod himself who “presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement”(Rom. 3:25). It was God himself who “so loved the world that hegave his one and only Son” (John 3:16). God himself “senthis Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins” (1 John4:10). God “did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for usall” (Rom. 8:32). Additionally, Christ himself was not anunwilling victim; he was actively involved in the accomplishing ofatonement by his death (Luke 9:31; John 10:15–18; Heb. 9:14).
Fourth,the atoning sacrifice of the Son was necessary because, ultimately,the OT sacrifices could not really have provided the necessaryatonement: “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goatsto take away sins” (Heb. 10:4).
Portrayalsof Christ’s work of atonement.It has become common of late to refer to the different “images”or “metaphors” of atonement that appear in the NT. Thisis understandable on one level, but on another level there issomething misleading about it. So, for example, when the NT authorsspeak of Christ as a sacrifice for sin, it is not at all clear thatthey intend for the reader to take this as imagery. Rather, Christreally is a sacrifice, offered by God the Father, to take away sins,and to bear in his own body the penalty that should have been placedon the sinner. Christ’s sacrifice has an organic connection tothe OT sacrificial system, as the “full, final sacrifice.”The author of Hebrews would not have considered this to be imagery.In fact, a better case could be made that, from his perspective,Christ was the real sacrifice, and all the instances of sacrifice inthe OT were the imagery (Heb. 10:1). So as we look at the differentportrayals of Christ in his work of atonement in the NT, some ofthese may best be categorized as imagery or metaphor, while othersperhaps are better described as a “facet” of, or a“window” on, the atonement. It should also be noted thatthe individual portrayals do not exclude the others, and in somecases they overlap.
• Ransom.Some passages in the NT speak of Christ’s death as a ransompaid to set us free (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; 1 Tim. 2:6; Heb.9:15). The same Greek word translated “ransom” in thesepassages is rendered as “redeem” or “redemption”in other passages (Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14). Other forms of the same wordare also translated “redeem” or “redemption”in Gal. 3:13–14; 4:5; Titus 2:14; Heb. 9:12; 1 Pet.1:18–19; Rev. 14:3. A near synonym of these words is used inRev. 5:9; 14:4, referring to how Christ “purchased”people by his blood. In most of these cases the picture is that ofslaves who have been ransomed, redeemed, or purchased from the slavemarket. Sometimes this is referred to as an “economic”view of atonement, though this label seems a bit crass, for thepurchase is not of a commodity but of human lives at the expense ofChrist’s own life and blood. To ask the question as to whom theransom was paid is probably taking the picture too far. But those whoare ransomed are redeemed from a life of slavery to sin and to thelaw.
• Cursebearer. In Gal. 3:13–14, noted above, there is also the pictureof Christ as one who bore the curse of the law in our place. Thelanguage is especially striking because rather than saying thatChrist bore the curse, Paul says that Christ became “a curse.”This is an especially forceful way of saying that Christ fully tookinto his own person the curse that was meant for us.
• Penaltybearer. Closely related to “curse bearer,” this portrayaldepicts Christ as one who has borne the legal consequences of oursins, consequences that we should have suffered; rather, becauseChrist has borne the penalty, we are now declared to be righteous andno longer subject to condemnation. This idea stands behind much ofthe argumentation that Paul uses in Romans and Galatians, and it alsointersects with the other portrayals. Passages representative of thispicture are Rom. 3:24–26; 4:25; 5:8–21; 8:32–34;Gal. 3:13–14; Eph. 2:15. It is also what should be understoodby Peter’s description of Christ’s death as “thejust for the unjust” in 1 Pet. 3:18 (NASB, NET), as wellas in 2 Cor. 5:21, where Paul states that Christ has become “sinfor us” so that we might become the “righteousness ofGod.”
• Propitiation.There are four passages where the NIV uses “atonement” or“atoning” in the translation to reflect either the Greekverb hilaskomai or related nouns hilastērion or hilasmos. Thisis the word group that the LXX regularly uses to translate the Hebrewverb kapar and related nouns. There has been much debate about theprecise meaning of the word in these four NT texts, in particular, asto whether it means to “expiate” (“remove guilt”)or to “propitiate” (“appease” or “avertwrath”). The better arguments have been advanced in favor of“propitiate”; at the very least, propitiation is impliedin expiation. The wrath that we should have suffered on account ofour sins has been suffered by Jesus Christ instead. Although thespecific word is not used, this is the understanding as well in thosepassages where it is said either that Christ died “for oursins” (1 Cor. 15:3), “gave himself for our sins”(Gal. 1:4), “bore our sins” (1 Pet. 2:24), or thathis blood was poured out “for the forgiveness of sins”(Matt. 26:28; cf. Eph. 1:7).
• Passover.In 1 Cor. 5:7 Paul states that “Christ, our Passover lamb,has been sacrificed.” Although the Passover has nottraditionally been thought of as a sacrifice for sin (though manyscholars would argue that it was), at the very least we shouldrecognize a substitutionary concept at play in Paul’s use ofthe Passover idea. A lamb died so that the firstborn would not. TheGospel of John seems to have the same understanding. Early in theGospel, Jesus is proclaimed as the “Lamb of God, who takes awaythe sin of the world” (John 1:29). And then in his account ofJesus’ passion, John narrates that his crucifixion wasprecisely at the same time as the slaying of the Passover lambs (John19:14).
• Sacrifice.This theme has already been touched on in the other portraits above,but it is important to recognize the significance of this concept inthe NT and especially in the book of Hebrews. There, Christ isportrayed as both sacrifice and the high priest who offers thesacrifice (2:17; 7:27; 9:11–28; 10:10–21; 12:24). Hecame, not as some have argued, to show the uselessness of thesacrificial system, but rather to be the “full, finalsacrifice” within that system, “that he might makeatonement for the sins of the people” (2:17).
Ofcourse, it is not just the death of Christ that secures ourredemption. His entire earthly life, as well as his resurrection andheavenly intercessory work, must also be recognized. But with regardto the work of atonement per se, Christ’s earthly life,his sinless “active obedience,” is what qualifies him tobe the perfect sacrifice. His resurrection is the demonstration ofGod’s acceptance of Christ’s sacrifice (he “wasraised to life for our justification” [Rom. 4:25]). But it wasparticularly his death that provided atonement for our sins.
A call or calling is God’s summons to live one’s life in accordance with his purposes. At creation God instructed Adam to fill the earth and subdue it, and to have dominion over it. God created Eve to be Adam’s lifelong companion and to help him fulfill this task (Gen. 1:28). Thus, in the broader (universal) sense, the notion of calling includes the ordinances that God established at creation: work (Gen. 2:15), marriage (2:18, 24), building a family (1:28), and Sabbath rest (2:2–3).
When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became alienated from God (Gen. 3:6–19). Their fall brought the same plight of alienation from God upon all humanity. However, it did not abolish the human duty to carry out God’s original creation ordinances. Since God showers his blessings on everyone alike (common grace), all human beings possess gifts and are given opportunities to “fill” the earth and “subdue” it. Thus, everyone participates in the universal call (Acts 17:25–26). This has come to be called the “cultural mandate.”
However, God’s original intention was to have communion with human beings. This could not be realized unless he made provision for human beings to be reconciled with him. Against this backdrop, God initiated his plan to redeem people from their plight of spiritual alienation.
The general call. The promise of God to bring deliverance through a future descendant of Eve established the provision for individuals (e.g., Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah) to be “called” back into a relationship of favor with him (Gen. 3:15). The first occasion when this call is made explicit is in God’s call to Abram to leave his country and go to a land that God would show him (11:32–12:1). God promised that Abram would become the father of a nation (12:2–3). In response to God’s call and his promise, Abram believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (15:6). Abram’s call was implicitly twofold. First, it was a general call to acknowledge this God as the true God and yield to his lordship. Second, it entailed a specific call to leave his country and journey toward a new country.
Several generations later, God appointed Moses to lead these descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, where they had lived for four hundred years. God’s act of delivering them from slavery in Egypt also symbolized redemption from sin’s bondage (Exod. 20:2). God had called the people by means of a covenant to be his own special people, to serve him as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (19:5–6). This was a call to set their lives apart for God by living according to his commands. This general call was more than a verbal summons; it was also the means God used to bring his people into existence (Hos. 11:1).
The NT indicates there is a general call to all people to believe in Christ (Matt. 11:28; Acts 17:30) that becomes effective in the ones that God has already chosen (Matt. 22:14; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4–5). The latter, which theologians identify as the “effectual call,” is what Paul refers to when he says, “Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . . And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Thus, this is also a sovereign call.
Particular callings. God has endowed each individual Christian with a particular gift set and calls each one to use those gifts in a variety of ways in service to him (1 Pet. 4:10). These callings include one’s occupation, place of residence, status as married or single, involvement in public life, and service in the local church. In the OT, God gifted Bezalel and “filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills” (Exod. 35:31–32) to beautify the tabernacle. In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that God has made each of us stewards of whatever he has entrusted to us; we are to become skilled in the use of our gifts and to seek opportunities to use them in service to him (Matt. 25:14–30). Desire is an important factor in discerning one’s particular callings (Ps. 37:4). One’s particular calling is progressive, unfolding through the different seasons of one’s life (Eph. 2:10; 1 Cor. 7:20, 24). No particular calling is more “sacred” than another in God’s eyes.
A call or calling is God’s summons to live one’s life in accordance with his purposes. At creation God instructed Adam to fill the earth and subdue it, and to have dominion over it. God created Eve to be Adam’s lifelong companion and to help him fulfill this task (Gen. 1:28). Thus, in the broader (universal) sense, the notion of calling includes the ordinances that God established at creation: work (Gen. 2:15), marriage (2:18, 24), building a family (1:28), and Sabbath rest (2:2–3).
When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became alienated from God (Gen. 3:6–19). Their fall brought the same plight of alienation from God upon all humanity. However, it did not abolish the human duty to carry out God’s original creation ordinances. Since God showers his blessings on everyone alike (common grace), all human beings possess gifts and are given opportunities to “fill” the earth and “subdue” it. Thus, everyone participates in the universal call (Acts 17:25–26). This has come to be called the “cultural mandate.”
However, God’s original intention was to have communion with human beings. This could not be realized unless he made provision for human beings to be reconciled with him. Against this backdrop, God initiated his plan to redeem people from their plight of spiritual alienation.
The general call. The promise of God to bring deliverance through a future descendant of Eve established the provision for individuals (e.g., Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah) to be “called” back into a relationship of favor with him (Gen. 3:15). The first occasion when this call is made explicit is in God’s call to Abram to leave his country and go to a land that God would show him (11:32–12:1). God promised that Abram would become the father of a nation (12:2–3). In response to God’s call and his promise, Abram believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (15:6). Abram’s call was implicitly twofold. First, it was a general call to acknowledge this God as the true God and yield to his lordship. Second, it entailed a specific call to leave his country and journey toward a new country.
Several generations later, God appointed Moses to lead these descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, where they had lived for four hundred years. God’s act of delivering them from slavery in Egypt also symbolized redemption from sin’s bondage (Exod. 20:2). God had called the people by means of a covenant to be his own special people, to serve him as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (19:5–6). This was a call to set their lives apart for God by living according to his commands. This general call was more than a verbal summons; it was also the means God used to bring his people into existence (Hos. 11:1).
The NT indicates there is a general call to all people to believe in Christ (Matt. 11:28; Acts 17:30) that becomes effective in the ones that God has already chosen (Matt. 22:14; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4–5). The latter, which theologians identify as the “effectual call,” is what Paul refers to when he says, “Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . . And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Thus, this is also a sovereign call.
Particular callings. God has endowed each individual Christian with a particular gift set and calls each one to use those gifts in a variety of ways in service to him (1 Pet. 4:10). These callings include one’s occupation, place of residence, status as married or single, involvement in public life, and service in the local church. In the OT, God gifted Bezalel and “filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills” (Exod. 35:31–32) to beautify the tabernacle. In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that God has made each of us stewards of whatever he has entrusted to us; we are to become skilled in the use of our gifts and to seek opportunities to use them in service to him (Matt. 25:14–30). Desire is an important factor in discerning one’s particular callings (Ps. 37:4). One’s particular calling is progressive, unfolding through the different seasons of one’s life (Eph. 2:10; 1 Cor. 7:20, 24). No particular calling is more “sacred” than another in God’s eyes.
A call or calling is God’s summons to live one’s life in accordance with his purposes. At creation God instructed Adam to fill the earth and subdue it, and to have dominion over it. God created Eve to be Adam’s lifelong companion and to help him fulfill this task (Gen. 1:28). Thus, in the broader (universal) sense, the notion of calling includes the ordinances that God established at creation: work (Gen. 2:15), marriage (2:18, 24), building a family (1:28), and Sabbath rest (2:2–3).
When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became alienated from God (Gen. 3:6–19). Their fall brought the same plight of alienation from God upon all humanity. However, it did not abolish the human duty to carry out God’s original creation ordinances. Since God showers his blessings on everyone alike (common grace), all human beings possess gifts and are given opportunities to “fill” the earth and “subdue” it. Thus, everyone participates in the universal call (Acts 17:25–26). This has come to be called the “cultural mandate.”
However, God’s original intention was to have communion with human beings. This could not be realized unless he made provision for human beings to be reconciled with him. Against this backdrop, God initiated his plan to redeem people from their plight of spiritual alienation.
The general call. The promise of God to bring deliverance through a future descendant of Eve established the provision for individuals (e.g., Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah) to be “called” back into a relationship of favor with him (Gen. 3:15). The first occasion when this call is made explicit is in God’s call to Abram to leave his country and go to a land that God would show him (11:32–12:1). God promised that Abram would become the father of a nation (12:2–3). In response to God’s call and his promise, Abram believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (15:6). Abram’s call was implicitly twofold. First, it was a general call to acknowledge this God as the true God and yield to his lordship. Second, it entailed a specific call to leave his country and journey toward a new country.
Several generations later, God appointed Moses to lead these descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, where they had lived for four hundred years. God’s act of delivering them from slavery in Egypt also symbolized redemption from sin’s bondage (Exod. 20:2). God had called the people by means of a covenant to be his own special people, to serve him as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (19:5–6). This was a call to set their lives apart for God by living according to his commands. This general call was more than a verbal summons; it was also the means God used to bring his people into existence (Hos. 11:1).
The NT indicates there is a general call to all people to believe in Christ (Matt. 11:28; Acts 17:30) that becomes effective in the ones that God has already chosen (Matt. 22:14; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4–5). The latter, which theologians identify as the “effectual call,” is what Paul refers to when he says, “Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . . And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Thus, this is also a sovereign call.
Particular callings. God has endowed each individual Christian with a particular gift set and calls each one to use those gifts in a variety of ways in service to him (1 Pet. 4:10). These callings include one’s occupation, place of residence, status as married or single, involvement in public life, and service in the local church. In the OT, God gifted Bezalel and “filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills” (Exod. 35:31–32) to beautify the tabernacle. In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that God has made each of us stewards of whatever he has entrusted to us; we are to become skilled in the use of our gifts and to seek opportunities to use them in service to him (Matt. 25:14–30). Desire is an important factor in discerning one’s particular callings (Ps. 37:4). One’s particular calling is progressive, unfolding through the different seasons of one’s life (Eph. 2:10; 1 Cor. 7:20, 24). No particular calling is more “sacred” than another in God’s eyes.
Terminology
TheNT word for “church” is ekklēsia, which means“gathering, assembly, congregation.” In classical Greekthe term was used almost exclusively for political gatherings. Inparticular, in Athens the word signified the assembling of thecitizens for the purpose of conducting the affairs of the city.Moreover, ekklēsia referred only to the actual meeting, not tothe citizens themselves. When the people were not assembled, theywere not considered to be the ekklēsia. The NT records threeinstances of this secular usage of the term (Acts 19:32, 39, 41).
Themost important background for the Christian use of the term is theLXX (Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, dated c. 250BC), which uses the word in a religious sense about one hundredtimes, almost always as a translation of the Hebrew word qahal. Whileqahal does not indicate a secular gathering (in contrast to ’edah,the typical Hebrew word for Israel’s religious gathering,translated by Greek synagōgē), it does denote Israel’ssacred meetings. This is especially the case in Deuteronomy, whereqahal is linked with the covenant.
Inthe NT, ekklēsia is used to refer to the community of God’speople 109 times (out of 114 occurrences of the term). Although theword occurs in only two Gospel passages (Matt. 16:18; 18:17), it isof special importance in Acts (23 times) and the Pauline writings (46times). It is found 20 times in Revelation and in isolated instancesin James and Hebrews. Three general conclusions can be drawn fromthis usage. First, ekklēsia (in both the singular and theplural) applies predominantly to a local assembly of those whoprofess faith in and allegiance to Christ. Second, ekklēsiadesignates the universal church (Acts 8:3; 9:31; 1 Cor. 12:28;15:9; especially in the later Pauline letters: Eph. 1:22–23;Col. 1:18). Third, the ekklēsia is God’s congregation(1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1).
TheNature of the Church
Thenature of the church is too broad to be exhausted in the meaning ofone word. To capture its significance, the NT authors utilize a richarray of metaphorical descriptions. Nevertheless, there are thosemetaphors that seem to dominate the biblical pictures of the church,five of which call for comment: the people of God, the kingdom ofGod, the eschatological temple of God, the bride of Christ, and thebody of Christ.
Thepeople of God.Essentially, the concept of the people of God can be summed up in thecovenantal phrase: “I will be their God, and they will be mypeople” (see Exod. 6:6–7; 19:5; Lev. 26:9–14; Jer.7:23; 30:22; 32:37–40; Ezek. 11:19–20; 36:22–28;Acts 15:14; 2 Cor. 6:16; Heb. 8:10–12; Rev. 21:3). Thus,the people of God are those in both the OT and the NT eras whor*sponded to God by faith and whose spiritual origin restsexclusively in God’s grace.
Tospeak of the one people of God transcending the eras of the OT andthe NT necessarily raises the question of the relationship betweenthe church and Israel. Modern interpreters prefer not to polarize thematter into an either/or issue. Rather, they talk about the churchand Israel in terms of there being both continuity and discontinuitybetween them.
Continuitybetween the church and Israel. Two ideas establish the fact that thechurch and Israel are portrayed in the Bible as being in a continuousrelationship. First, in the OT the church was present in Israel insome sense. Acts 7:38 suggests this connection when, alluding toDeut. 9:10, it speaks of the church (ekklēsia) in thewilderness. The same idea is probably to be inferred from theintimate association noted earlier existing between the wordsekklēsia and qahal, especially when the latter is qualified bythe phrase “of God.” Furthermore, if the church is viewedin some NT passages as preexistent, then one finds therein theprototype of the creation of Israel (see Exod. 25:40; Acts 7:44; Gal.4:26; Heb. 12:22; Rev. 21:11; cf. Eph. 1:3–14).
Second,Israel in some sense is present in the church in the NT. The many OTnames for Israel applied to the church in the NT establish that fact.Some of those are “Israel” (Gal. 6:15–16; Eph.2:12; Heb. 8:8–10; Rev. 2:14), “a chosen people”(1 Pet. 2:9), “the circumcision” (Rom. 2:28–29;Phil. 3:3; Col. 2:11), “Abraham’s seed” (Rom. 4:16;Gal. 3:29), “the remnant” (Rom. 9:27; 11:5–7), “theelect” (Rom. 11:28; Eph. 1:4), “the flock” (Acts20:28; Heb. 13:20; 1 Pet. 5:2), and “priesthood”(1 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 1:6; 5:10).
Discontinuitybetween the church and Israel. The church, however, is not totallyidentical with Israel; discontinuity also characterizes therelationship. The church, according to the NT, is the eschatological(end-time) Israel incorporated in Jesus Christ and, as such, is aprogression beyond historical Israel (1 Cor. 10:11; 2 Cor.5:14–21). Indeed, significant discontinuity is introduced bythe fact that the church includes Gentiles as members of Israel,without requiring them to convert to Judaism first. Gentiles enter asGentiles. However, a caveat must be issued at this point. Althoughthe church is a progression beyond Israel, it does not seem to be thepermanent replacement of Israel (see Rom. 9–11, esp. 11:25–27).
Thekingdom of God.Many scholars have maintained that the life, death, and resurrectionof Jesus inaugurated the kingdom of God, producing the overlapping ofthe two ages. The kingdom has already dawned but is not yet complete.The first aspect pertains to Jesus’ first coming, and thesecond aspect relates to his second coming. In other words, the ageto come has broken into this age, and now the two existsimultaneously. This background is crucial in ascertaining therelationship between the church and the kingdom of God, because thechurch also exists in the tension that results from the overlappingof the two ages. Accordingly, one may define the church as theforeshadowing of the kingdom. Two ideas flow from this definition:first, the church is related to the kingdom of God; second, thechurch is not equal to the kingdom of God.
Thechurch and the kingdom of God are related. Not until after theresurrection of Jesus does the NT speak with regularity about thechurch. However, there are early signs of the church in the teachingand ministry of Jesus, in both general and specific ways. In general,Jesus anticipated the later official formation of the church in thathe gathered to himself the twelve disciples, who constituted thebeginnings of eschatological Israel—in effect, the remnant.More specifically, Jesus explicitly referred to the church in twopassages: Matt. 16:18–19; 18:17. In the first passage Jesuspromised that he would build his church despite satanic opposition,thus assuring the ultimate success of his mission. The notion of thechurch overcoming the forces of evil coincides with the idea that thekingdom of God will prevail over its enemies and bespeaks theintimate association between the church and the kingdom. The secondpassage relates to the future organization of the church, not unlikethe Jewish synagogue practices of Jesus’ day.
Thechurch and the kingdom of God are not identical. As intimatelyrelated as the church and the kingdom of God are, the NT does notequate the two, as is evident in the fact that the early Christianspreached the kingdom, not the church (Acts 8:12; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23,31). The NT identifies the church as the people of the kingdom (e.g.,Rev. 5:10), not the kingdom itself. Moreover, the church is theinstrument of the kingdom. This is especially clear from Matt.16:18–19, where the preaching of Peter and the church becomethe keys to opening up the kingdom of God to all who would enter.
Theeschatological temple of God.Both the OT and Judaism anticipated the rebuilding of the temple inthe future kingdom of God (e.g., Ezek. 40–48; Hag. 2:1–9;1 En. 90:29; 91:3; Jub. 1:17, 29). Jesus hinted that he wasgoing to build such a structure (Matt. 16:18; Mark 14:58; John2:19–22). Pentecost witnessed to the beginning of thefulfillment of that dream in that when the Spirit inhabited thechurch, the eschatological temple was formed (Acts 2:16–36).Other NT writers also perceived that the presence of the Spirit inthe Christian community constituted the new temple of God (1 Cor.3:16–17; 2 Cor. 6:14–7:1; Eph. 2:19–22; seealso Gal. 4:21–31; 1 Pet. 2:4–10). However,that the eschatological temple is not yet complete is evident in thepreceding passages, especially in their emphasis on the need for thechurch to grow toward maturity in Christ, which will be fullyaccomplished only at the parousia (second coming of Christ). In themeantime, Christians, as priests of God, are to perform theirsacrificial service to the glory of God (Rom. 12:1–2; Heb.13:15; 1 Pet. 2:4–10).
Thebride of Christ.The image of marriage is applied to God and Israel in the OT (seeIsa. 54:5–6; 62:5; Hos. 2:7). Similar imagery is applied toChrist and the church in the NT. Christ, the bridegroom, hassacrificially and lovingly chosen the church to be his bride (Eph.5:25–27). Her responsibility during the betrothal period is tobe faithful to him (2 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:24). At the parousia theofficial wedding ceremony will take place, and with it the eternalunion of Christ and his wife will be actualized (Rev. 19:7–9;21:1–2).
Thebody of Christ.The body of Christ as a metaphor for the church is unique to thePauline literature and constitutes one of the most significantconcepts therein (Rom. 12:4–5; 1 Cor. 12:12–27; Eph.4:7–16; Col. 1:18). The primary purpose of the metaphor is todemonstrate the interrelatedness of diversity and unity within thechurch, especially with reference to spiritual gifts. The body ofChrist is the last Adam (1 Cor. 15:45), the new humanity of theend time that has appeared in history. However, Paul’s usage ofthe image, like the metaphor of the new temple, indicates that thechurch, as the body of Christ, still has a long way to gospiritually. It is not yet complete.
Sacraments
Atthe heart of the expression of the church’s faith are thesacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The formersymbolizes entrance into the church, while the latter providesspiritual sustenance for the church.
Baptism.Baptism symbolizes the sinner’s entrance into the church. Threeobservations emerge from the biblical treatment of this sacrament.First, the OT intimated baptism, especially in its association ofrepentance of sin with ablutions (Num.19:18–22; Ps. 51:7; Ezek.36:25; cf. John 3:5). Second, the baptism of John anticipatedChristian baptism. John administered a baptism of repentance inexpectation of the baptism of the Spirit and fire that the Messiahwould exercise (Matt. 3:11 // Luke 3:16). Those who accept Jesusas Messiah experience the baptism of fire and judgment (which may bean allusion to undergoing the great tribulation/messianic woes thatlead into the messianic kingdom). Third, the early church practicedbaptism in imitation of the Lord Jesus (Matt. 3:13–17 //Mark 1:9–11 // Luke 3:21–22; see also John 1:32–34;cf. Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38; 8:16; Rom. 6:3–6; 1 Cor.1:13–15; Gal. 3:27; Titus 3:5; 1 Pet. 3:21). Thesepassages demonstrate some further truths about baptism: baptism isintimately related to faith in God; baptism identifies the personwith the death and resurrection of Jesus; baptism incorporates theperson into the community of believers.
Lord’sSupper.The other biblical sacrament is the Lord’s Supper. This ritesymbolizes Christ’s spiritual nourishment of his church as itcelebrates the sacred meal. Two basic points emerge from the biblicaldata concerning the Lord’s Supper. First, it was instituted byChrist (Matt. 26:26–29; Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:15–20;1 Cor. 11:23–25), probably as an adaptation of thePassover meal. If that is the case, then, Jesus will have introducedtwo changes into the Passover seder: he replaced the unleavened breadwith a reference to his body being given for us on the cross; hereplaced the cup of redemption with a reference to his shed blood onthe cross, the basis of the new covenant. Second, the early churchpracticed the Lord’s Supper probably weekly, in conjunctionwith the love feast (see 1 Cor. 11:18–22; cf. Jude 12). Atwofold meaning is attached to the Lord’s Supper by the NTauthors. First, it involves participation in Christ’s salvation(Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24–25), and in two ways:participating in the Lord’s Supper looks back to the death ofJesus, in which the believer now shares; participating in the Lord’sSupper looks forward to Christ’s return, the culmination pointof the believer’s salvation. Second, the Lord’s Supperinvolves identification with the body of Christ, the community offaith (1 Cor. 10:16–17; 11:27–33).
Worship
Theultimate purpose of the church is to worship God through Christ andin the power of the Holy Spirit (see, e.g., Rev. 4–5). Theearly church first worshiped in the Jerusalem temple (Acts 2:46; 3:1;5:42) as well as in the synagogue (Acts 22:19; cf. John 9:22; James2:2). At the same time, and into the near future, believers met inhomes for worship (Acts 1:13; 2:46; 5:42; cf. Rom. 16:15; Col. 4:15;Philem. 2; 2 John 10; 3 John 1, 6). Although many JewishChristians no doubt continued to worship God on the Sabbath, theestablished time for the church’s worship came to be Sunday,the day of Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 20:7; Rev. 1:10). Theearly church most probably patterned its order of worship after thesynagogue service: praise in prayer (Acts 2:42, 47; 3:1; 1 Thess.1:2; 5:17) and in song (1 Cor. 14:26; Phil. 2:6–11; Col.1:15–20), the expounding of Scripture (Acts 2:42; 6:4; Col.4:16; 1 Thess. 2:13; 1 Tim. 4:13), and almsgiving to theneedy (Acts 2:44–45; 1 Cor. 16:1–2; 2 Cor. 8–9;James 2:15–17).
Serviceand Organization
Fiveobservations emerge from the NT regarding the service andorganization of the early church. First, the ministry of the churchcenters on its usage of spiritual gifts, which are given to believersby God’s grace and for his glory as well as for the good ofothers (Rom. 12:3; Eph. 4:7–16). Second, every believerpossesses a gift of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:7; Eph. 4:7). Third,it is through the diversity of the gifts that the body of Christmatures and is unified (Rom. 12:4; 1 Cor. 12:12–31; Eph.4:17–18). Fourth, although there was organized leadership inthe NT church, including elders (1 Tim. 3:1–7 [also called“pastors” and “bishops”; see Acts 20:17, 28;1 Pet. 5:1–4]) and deacons (1 Tim. 3:8–13),there does not seem to have been a gap between the “clergy”and the “laity” in the church of the first century;rather, those with the gift of leadership are called to equip all thesaints for the work of the ministry (Eph. 4:7–16). Fifth,spiritual gifts are to be exercised in love (1 Cor. 13).
The NIV renders the Greek word mesotoichonin Eph. 2:14 as “dividing wall” (KJV: “middlewall”). Within the temple infrastructure stood a wall of oneand a half meters. This temple balustrade separated the court of theGentiles from the inner courts and the sanctuary in the Jerusalemtemple. Because the wall is a powerful symbol of the separation ofGentiles from Jews, the NT declaration that this wall has been brokendown is rhetorically significant (Eph. 2:14; cf. 1Macc. 9:54).Christ has (symbolically) broken down this dividing wall through hisdeath. Jews and Gentiles now stand as one as they approach God.
Adifficulty in this interpretation of Eph. 2:14, however, is that the“dividing wall” in the temple was still standing untilthe destruction of the temple in AD 70. It seems preferable to seethe reference to the “dividing wall” as an adhocformulation coherent to the context of Eph. 2:14. The writercontinues with the partitioned house/temple theme in 2:19 and refersto the “holy temple” in 2:21. It was the purposeful andexclusive attitudes of the Jews that separated Jew from Gentile andcreated a barrier between them. This social barrier would have beenclosely associated with some of the boundary markers used by Jews toseparate themselves from Gentiles.
The English word “gospel” translates the Greekword euangelion, which is very important in the NT, being usedseventy-six times. The word euangelion (eu= “good,”angelion= “announcement”), in its contemporary usein the Hellenistic world, was not the title of a book but rather adeclaration of good news. Euangelion was used in the Roman Empirewith reference to significant events in the life of the emperor, whowas thought of as a savior with divine status. These events includeddeclarations at the time of his birth, his coming of age, and hisaccession to the throne. The NT usage of the term can also be tracedto the OT (e.g., Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1), which looked forward to thecoming of the Messiah, who would bring a time of salvation. This goodnews, which is declared in the NT, is that Jesus has fulfilled God’spromises to Israel, and now the way of salvation is open to all.
TheGospel Message
Theapostle Paul recognizes that the gospel is centered on the death,burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1Cor. 15:1–5). Hestates that this gospel is the power of God for the salvation ofeveryone who believes (Rom. 1:16), a sacred trust (1Tim. 1:11),the word of truth (Eph. 1:13), and an authoritative pronouncementthat requires a response (Rom. 10:16; 2Cor. 11:4; 2Thess.1:8). The declaration of this good news is found on the lips of Jesusin the Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 11:5; Luke 4:18), who calls people torespond in repentance and belief (Mark 1:15). The good news is alsoin the early apostolic preaching, where it is associated with theproclamation of Christ (Acts 5:42; 8:35; 11:20).
Therecords of apostolic preaching in Acts are records of the earliestpublic declaration of this gospel. The apostle Peter gives three suchspeeches (Acts 2:14–41; 3:11–4:4; 10:34–43), whosecontent can be summarized as follows. The age of fulfillment hasdawned through the birth, life, ministry, and resurrection of JesusChrist (2:22–31), which has ushered in the “latter days”foretold by the prophets (3:18–26). Jesus, by his resurrection,has been exalted to the right hand of God as the head of the newIsrael (2:32–36), and the Holy Spirit has been given to thechurch as the sign of Christ’s present power and exaltation(10:44–48). This age will reach its consummation at the returnof Christ (3:20–21), and in response to this gospel an appealis made for repentance, with the offer of forgiveness, the HolySpirit, and salvation (2:37–41).
Thisdeclaration of the gospel is concerned primarily with what waspreached rather than what was written. Itinerant preachers of thisgospel were known as “evangelists,” which in Greek isclosely related to the term euangelion (Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; 2Tim.4:5). Some scholars believe that during the stage of oraltransmission, the gospel accounts developed a certain form throughrepetition, which helps explain some similarities between laterwritten accounts of the gospel.
FromOral to Written Gospel
Later,this “oral” gospel was written down, for several reasons.With the rapid spread of Christianity, as recorded in the book ofActs, a need arose for a more efficient dissemination of the messageof Jesus than was available by oral means. Furthermore, there was aneed to keep the message alive because some of the apostles had died(e.g., James in Acts 12:2) and many churches were facing oppositionand persecution. The written Gospels would facilitate catecheticaland liturgical needs and encourage persecuted Christians to continuefollowing Jesus by telling the story of his faithfulness throughgreat suffering. These written Gospels would also contain examples ofthose who persevered in following Jesus and of those who denied himand betrayed him. These accounts about Jesus and those who followedhim became foundational documents for the early church.
Itshould be noted that the gospel was not written down in order to giveit greater authority. The first-century context was largely an oralculture, in which storytelling and the rehearsal of facts wasintegral. Papias, a leader of the church in Hierapolis in Asia Minorwho died around AD 130, states his preference for oral traditionrather than written information about Jesus: “For I did notthink that information from books would help me as much as the wordof a living and surviving voice” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl.3.39.4). There is, however, a traceable trajectory from the gospelpreached by the apostles to the written accounts that bear the namesof Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It is generally held that theauthors/editors of the four canonical Gospels were using oral and/orwritten sources (Luke 1:1–4), and that their respective Gospelswere written in the second half of the first century.
Themajority of biblical scholars hold that Mark was the first Gospel tobe written (c. AD 66). According to tradition, its editor/author wasJohn Mark, a close friend of the apostle Peter (1Pet. 5:13) anda part-time companion of the apostle Paul (Acts 12:12; Col. 4:10;2Tim. 4:11). This tradition is not without basis. Papias says,“Mark, who had indeed been Peter’s interpreter,accurately wrote as much as he remembered, yet not in order, aboutthat which was either said or done by the Lord” (Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 3.39.15). This tradition is also outlined by Clement ofAlexandria, who, around AD 200, wrote, “When Peter had publiclypreached the word at Rome, and by the Spirit had proclaimed thegospel, then those present, who were many, exhorted Mark, as one whohad followed him for a long time and remembered what had been spoken,to make a record of what he said; and that he did this, anddistributed the Gospel among those that asked him” (Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 6.14.5–7; cf. 2.15.1–2).
Itis widely held that Matthew and Luke used Mark as one of theirsources: of the material in Mark, over 97percent is repeated inMatthew and over 88percent in Luke. Matthew and Luke alsocontain material that appears to come from a common written sourcethat is not found in Mark. Scholars have named this source as “Q”(from the German Quelle= “source”), although thismay be a collection of sources rather than a single document.
Furthermore,the association of the Fourth Gospel with the apostle John goes backto Irenaeus (c. AD 180), who states, “John, the disciple of theLord, who leaned on his breast, also published the gospel whileliving at Ephesus in Asia” (Haer. 3.1.1, as cited in Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 5.8.4). By the second century, the term “gospel”is used for the written accounts of the life, death, and resurrectionof Jesus (e.g., Did. 11.3; 15.4). Justin Martyr (c. AD 140) refers tothe “memoirs of the apostles” (1Apol. 67) andIrenaeus (c. AD 180) mentions the four canonical Gospels by name(Haer. 3.11.7).
ThePurpose and Genre of the Gospels
Purpose.The Gospels were written to convey theology and to create and confirmfaith. They do not give an objectively neutral account of the life ofJesus; they enthusiastically endorse their protagonist and condemnthose who oppose him. They differ from traditional biographies inthat they give little information about the chronology of Jesus’life. Only two of the Gospels, Matthew and Luke, tell of the eventssurrounding Jesus’ birth. Luke alone tells of an event inJesus’ childhood (Luke 2:41–52). It is virtuallyincidental that Jesus worked as a carpenter and had brothers andsisters (Mark 6:3). A large percentage of each of the four canonicalGospels is devoted to the last week of Jesus’ life; of thesixteen chapters of Mark’s Gospel, six are devoted to the oneweek from Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem until his resurrection.
Theprimary intentions of the authors/editors of the written Gospels werenot to give biographical details but rather to lead the reader to anacknowledgment of the identity of Jesus and a belief in the purposeof his mission (Luke 1:4; John 20:31). Their theological purposes,however, do not necessarily compromise their commitment to historicalaccuracy. Jesus is presented as a real, historical figure who livedwithin a specific historical time frame. Luke appears to be moreconcerned than the other evangelists with historical details, givinga rough date for Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1–2) and a morespecific time for Jesus’ baptism (3:1–2).
Genre.The discerning reader of the Gospels is forced to ask questionsconcerning the literary genre(s) of these texts. Such a discussion isimperative, as the interpretation of a section of any piece ofliterature will largely be determined by the function of the textwithin a certain literary genre. Prior to the 1970s, most NT scholarsbelieved that the Gospels formed a unique literary genre and weretherefore distinct from other first-century literary forms. Thisconclusion was based on the belief that the written Gospels werecollections of smaller sections sewn together by the evangelists, andthat the documents as a whole lacked coherence. Since then, thispresupposition has been challenged, largely because scholars haveseen that the Gospel writers were real editors and authors who werenot just collecting primitive source material but were using thatmaterial to write a larger story about Jesus. The written Gospelstherefore have overall coherence and purpose; they were written insuch a way as to bring about a desired response in the reader. Suchan overall intention may have stronger similarities with differentgenres in the Greco-Roman world of theNT.
TheGospels have been associated with several genres. They bear someresemblance to aretalogies, which were narratives about divinepersons in antiquity from which flowed moral instructions. Thesestories often involved miraculous events at the subject’s birthor death or during life, and they included the presence of bothdisciples and opponents. Within these aretalogies, the narrative wassecondary to the morality. An association with aretalogies,therefore, would encourage the reader to give greater attention tomoral teaching than to events in which this teaching is embedded.Similarly, others have seen the Gospels as essentially a collectionof wisdom sayings set in a historicized narrative; this view againgives priority to sayings and is doubtful of the historicity of thenarrative. Such views that downplay the narrative, and particularlythe miracles in Jesus’ life, have led others to argue theopposite extreme, which sees the Gospels, and Luke-Acts inparticular, as examples of ancient novels, with their focus onmiracle stories. Many scholars have rejected the emphasis on eithersayings or narrative, arguing that the literary genre that theGospels most closely resemble is ancient biographies (bioi). Thesecontained praise for the protagonist, rhetoric, moral philosophy, anda concern for character.
Althoughthe Gospels use different literary motifs that are reflective ofdifferent genres of the Greco-Roman world, they do not exactlyreplicate a known genre. They contain material not found in otherHellenistic literature of the time—for example, the fulfillmentof OT expectations and their desire to address particular issuesfaced by the early church, such as opposition; the Gentile mission;the need to redefine Israel in the light of Jesus’ life, death,and resurrection; and the nature of Christian discipleship. Unlikeother literature of the time, they do not name their authors, andwith the exception of Luke, they lack traditional literary devicessuch as prefaces. They are therefore to be seen as unique, or atleast as a distinct subgenre of ancient biographies.
Canonicaland Noncanonical Gospels
Theprogression from the events of Jesus’ life to the oralpreaching of this gospel to the first-century writing of the storyled to the acceptance of the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark,Luke, and John into the NT canon. There is also a significant body ofliterature that is normally referred to as the noncanonical gospels.These later documents were neither widely accepted nor viewed asauthoritative, but they provide useful insights into the nature ofearly Christianity. A significant noncanonical gospel is the Gospelof Thomas, which is part of a large collection of works discovered atNag Hammadi (Egypt) in 1945. The Gospel of Thomas does not contain aresurrection account and is primarily a collection of sayings.
Thecanonical Gospels are not more authoritative than other sections ofScripture, but because they focus on Jesus’ ministry, withparticular attention to his death and resurrection, they draw theattention of the reader to the fulfillment of God’s purpose inthe life and work of Jesus, the Messiah. They are therefore of greatimportance within Scripture.
Inheritance is an important concept that the Bible uses inseveral ways.
Family.In the ancient world every culture had customs for the passing ofwealth and possessions from one generation to the next. In ancientIsrael special provisions were made for inheriting land upon thedeath of the father. The firstborn son received a double portion; therest was divided equally among the remaining sons. If a man lackedsons, priority went to the following in order: daughters, brothers,father’s brothers, next of kin (Num. 27:1–11). The OTprovides guidance for additional circ*mstances (Gen. 38:8–9;Num. 36:6; Lev. 25:23–24; Deut. 21:15–17; 25:5–10;Ruth 2:20; 3:9–13; 4:1–12), with an overriding concernfor the stability of the family and the retention of the land withina tribe. Under Roman law during the NT period, an heir had legalstanding even while the father was still alive; his status was basedon birth or adoption rather than the father’s death.
OldTestament.Even more prominent than family inheritance is the assertion that Godgave the land of Canaan to Abraham and his descendants as aninheritance (Gen. 12:7; 15:18–21; 17:8; Num. 34:1–29;Deut. 12:10). This inheritance is God’s gracious gift, notsomething that Israel earned by its righteousness (Deut. 9:4–7).Descriptions of the land (“flowing with milk and honey”)and its fertility portray this gift as a new Eden, where God willdwell with his people (Exod. 3:8, 17; Lev. 20:24; Num. 16:13–14;Deut. 11:9–12). In some texts the language of inheritance movesbeyond the land of Canaan to an international scope. In Ps. 2:8 theanointed king recounts God saying to him, “Ask me, and I willmake the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth yourpossession.” This expansion of inheritance from the land ofCanaan to the ends of the earth prepares the way for a similarexpansion in the NT (see Rom. 4:13).
God’srelationship with Israel is also described in terms of inheritance.On the one hand, Israel is described as God’s inheritance(Deut. 32:9; 1Sam. 10:1; 1Kings 8:51–53); on theother hand, God is Israel’s inheritance (Pss. 16:5; 73:26; Jer.10:16; 51:19). This mutuality expresses the intimacy of God’srelationship with Israel.
NewTestament. Inheritancelanguage is taken up in the NT and expanded in a variety of ways.First and foremost, Jesus Christ is the “heir of all things,”the Son to whom the Father has given all authority in heaven and onearth (Matt. 28:18–20; Heb. 1:2–5). Through their unionwith Christ, believers share in Christ’s inheritance (Rom.8:17), having been qualified by the Father to share in thatinheritance (Col. 1:12). What believers inherit is described invarious ways: the earth (Matt. 5:5), eternal life (Luke 10:25), thekingdom (1Cor. 6:9–10; James 2:5), salvation (Heb. 1:14),blessing (Heb. 12:17; 1Pet. 3:9). This inheritance was enactedby the death of Christ and sealed by his blood (Heb. 9:15–28).Believers experience the benefits of this inheritance through theSpirit now (Eph. 1:14, 18), but its fullness is reserved in heavenand awaits the consummation (1Pet. 1:4–6).
Theconnection between the believer’s inheritance and the Spirit isespecially prominent in Paul. In Gal. 4:1–7 Paul uses acombination of exodus and legal imagery to explain the gospel. BeforeChrist came, God’s people were heirs under the care ofguardians and trustees. But once Christ came and redeemed them fromunder the law, they received their full inheritance as adopted sonsand daughters. Central to that inheritance is the gift of the Spirit,who cries out, “Abba, Father.” It is this gift of theSpirit that definitively marks believers as sons and daughters ratherthan slaves. Because believers possess the Spirit as an inheritancein fulfillment of the promise to Abraham (Gal. 3:14; cf. Isa.44:3–5), they have moved from bondage under the law to freedomin Christ (Gal. 5:1).
Origins,Composition, and Constitution
Origins.The Bible is not unique in offering an account of human origins.Interesting accounts are found in Sumerian (Enki and Ninmah, Hymn toE-engurra), Akkadian (Atrahasis Epic, Enuma Elish), and Egyptiantexts (Pyramid Texts, Instruction of Merikare). These texts provide ahelpful window into the biblical world and show the common concern toexplain the origin and role of humanity in the world.
Onedistinct feature of ancient Near Eastern texts is that they generallyspeak of human origins in a collective sense. Specialists refer tothis phenomenon as polygenesis. Such a collective creation betterserves the purpose of the gods, who have made the human race as alabor force. In the Bible, however, the book of Genesis describes anoriginal human pair who are the progenitors of the human race. Thisphenomenon is referred to as monogenesis. Humanity is not merelycreated to serve and do the work of the gods. Instead, it is aspecial creation of God, intended to bear his image.
Composition.The composition of humanity is described in Gen. 2:7: “The LordGod formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into hisnostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”Humanity is not distinct from animals in having the breath of life(1:30). Indeed, the description of the composition of humanity isalso quite, well, human. Genesis describes humans as made from thedust. Dust is not fertile, nor is it pliable. It refers to the earthand that which is dead. The wordplay between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah) appears tobe a major focus of the text (2:7) and suggests that the majorconnection being established concerns the first humans as archetypes.
Constitution.Certain passages of Scripture have led interpreters to posit atrichotomous nature of humanity (i.e., mind, body, soul; cf. 2Cor.4:16; 5:1–9; 1Thess. 5:23). Likewise, even though theGreek language can bifurcate the soul (psychē) and the body(sōma), a kind of dualism should not be inferred from this (cf.Matt. 6:25; 27:50; Luke 10:27; 2Cor. 4:11). Either approach isforeign to the unified biblical mind-set. The only dualism in theanthropological perspective of the NT is in the nature of humanity inrelation to Christ’s new creative work.
Formand Function
Form:male and female.Just as God created man (’ish), he also created woman (’ishah)(Gen. 1:26–27). Although woman is initially created as a“suitable helper” (2:18), it should be noted that theunderlying Hebrew term (’ezer) is used almost exclusively inreference to God elsewhere. This suggests that “suitablehelper” does not indicate a difference of essence, value, orstatus.
TheBible describes woman as coming from the “side” of man,probably communicating something about their equality (Gen. 2:21–22).Thus, it should be understood that just as all humanity shares aconnection to the ground, so also a man shares an intimate connectionwith a woman. Although the phrase “one flesh” often istaken as a euphemism, it probably is a remarkably descriptivestatement of the archetypal nature of Adam and Eve (cf. 2:24).
Function:image of God.The distinction between humanity and the other animals created by Godis that humans are created in God’s image. The concept of theimage of God, however, is not unique to the biblical text (Gen.1:26–27; cf. Instruction of Merikare). Throughout the ancientNear East, kings were thought to actually be the image of a god. Inthe Christian understanding, only Christ is the image of God (2Cor.4:4), whereas humanity is created in the image of God. Although thismay imply a kingly role with regard to humanity’s function overthe rest of creation, the main parallel should be seen in how imagesare meant to represent a god’s presence.
Humanityin Pauline Thought
Paul’sconception of humanity is thoroughly eschatological insomuch as hisvision of Christ as the image of God is identified with Christ as“risen Lord.” Christ as the image of God is the finaldestiny of the humanity that is “in Christ” (1Cor.15:23–28; 44–49; Eph. 1:9–10). Because of theeffects of sin, creation has been subjected to futility (Rom.8:19–22), and humanity to death (Rom. 5:12–14; 1Cor.15:21–22). Yet Paul’s outburst of “new creation”(Gal. 6:15; cf. 2Cor. 5:17) indicates his understanding of thecosmological, and therefore anthropological, effects of being unitedwith Christ. Indeed, if God is making the “former things”into “new things” (2Cor. 5:17; cf. Isa. 65:17–19),this new creative act certainly impacts humanity. That reality isalready partially realized in the elimination of distinctions in thispresent “evil age” (Gal. 1:4), for in Christ “thereis neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there maleand female, for you are all one” (Gal. 3:28; cf. 1Cor.12:12–13; Gen. 17). Until the end, the Christian lives in thetension of already beginning to experience the act of new creationand not yet completely disinheriting the effects of sin (Rom.8:18–30; 2Cor. 12:5–10).
Origins,Composition, and Constitution
Origins.The Bible is not unique in offering an account of human origins.Interesting accounts are found in Sumerian (Enki and Ninmah, Hymn toE-engurra), Akkadian (Atrahasis Epic, Enuma Elish), and Egyptiantexts (Pyramid Texts, Instruction of Merikare). These texts provide ahelpful window into the biblical world and show the common concern toexplain the origin and role of humanity in the world.
Onedistinct feature of ancient Near Eastern texts is that they generallyspeak of human origins in a collective sense. Specialists refer tothis phenomenon as polygenesis. Such a collective creation betterserves the purpose of the gods, who have made the human race as alabor force. In the Bible, however, the book of Genesis describes anoriginal human pair who are the progenitors of the human race. Thisphenomenon is referred to as monogenesis. Humanity is not merelycreated to serve and do the work of the gods. Instead, it is aspecial creation of God, intended to bear his image.
Composition.The composition of humanity is described in Gen. 2:7: “The LordGod formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into hisnostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”Humanity is not distinct from animals in having the breath of life(1:30). Indeed, the description of the composition of humanity isalso quite, well, human. Genesis describes humans as made from thedust. Dust is not fertile, nor is it pliable. It refers to the earthand that which is dead. The wordplay between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah) appears tobe a major focus of the text (2:7) and suggests that the majorconnection being established concerns the first humans as archetypes.
Constitution.Certain passages of Scripture have led interpreters to posit atrichotomous nature of humanity (i.e., mind, body, soul; cf. 2Cor.4:16; 5:1–9; 1Thess. 5:23). Likewise, even though theGreek language can bifurcate the soul (psychē) and the body(sōma), a kind of dualism should not be inferred from this (cf.Matt. 6:25; 27:50; Luke 10:27; 2Cor. 4:11). Either approach isforeign to the unified biblical mind-set. The only dualism in theanthropological perspective of the NT is in the nature of humanity inrelation to Christ’s new creative work.
Formand Function
Form:male and female.Just as God created man (’ish), he also created woman (’ishah)(Gen. 1:26–27). Although woman is initially created as a“suitable helper” (2:18), it should be noted that theunderlying Hebrew term (’ezer) is used almost exclusively inreference to God elsewhere. This suggests that “suitablehelper” does not indicate a difference of essence, value, orstatus.
TheBible describes woman as coming from the “side” of man,probably communicating something about their equality (Gen. 2:21–22).Thus, it should be understood that just as all humanity shares aconnection to the ground, so also a man shares an intimate connectionwith a woman. Although the phrase “one flesh” often istaken as a euphemism, it probably is a remarkably descriptivestatement of the archetypal nature of Adam and Eve (cf. 2:24).
Function:image of God.The distinction between humanity and the other animals created by Godis that humans are created in God’s image. The concept of theimage of God, however, is not unique to the biblical text (Gen.1:26–27; cf. Instruction of Merikare). Throughout the ancientNear East, kings were thought to actually be the image of a god. Inthe Christian understanding, only Christ is the image of God (2Cor.4:4), whereas humanity is created in the image of God. Although thismay imply a kingly role with regard to humanity’s function overthe rest of creation, the main parallel should be seen in how imagesare meant to represent a god’s presence.
Humanityin Pauline Thought
Paul’sconception of humanity is thoroughly eschatological insomuch as hisvision of Christ as the image of God is identified with Christ as“risen Lord.” Christ as the image of God is the finaldestiny of the humanity that is “in Christ” (1Cor.15:23–28; 44–49; Eph. 1:9–10). Because of theeffects of sin, creation has been subjected to futility (Rom.8:19–22), and humanity to death (Rom. 5:12–14; 1Cor.15:21–22). Yet Paul’s outburst of “new creation”(Gal. 6:15; cf. 2Cor. 5:17) indicates his understanding of thecosmological, and therefore anthropological, effects of being unitedwith Christ. Indeed, if God is making the “former things”into “new things” (2Cor. 5:17; cf. Isa. 65:17–19),this new creative act certainly impacts humanity. That reality isalready partially realized in the elimination of distinctions in thispresent “evil age” (Gal. 1:4), for in Christ “thereis neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there maleand female, for you are all one” (Gal. 3:28; cf. 1Cor.12:12–13; Gen. 17). Until the end, the Christian lives in thetension of already beginning to experience the act of new creationand not yet completely disinheriting the effects of sin (Rom.8:18–30; 2Cor. 12:5–10).
The NIV renders the Greek word mesotoichonin Eph. 2:14 as “dividing wall” (KJV: “middlewall”). Within the temple infrastructure stood a wall of oneand a half meters. This temple balustrade separated the court of theGentiles from the inner courts and the sanctuary in the Jerusalemtemple. Because the wall is a powerful symbol of the separation ofGentiles from Jews, the NT declaration that this wall has been brokendown is rhetorically significant (Eph. 2:14; cf. 1Macc. 9:54).Christ has (symbolically) broken down this dividing wall through hisdeath. Jews and Gentiles now stand as one as they approach God.
Adifficulty in this interpretation of Eph. 2:14, however, is that the“dividing wall” in the temple was still standing untilthe destruction of the temple in AD 70. It seems preferable to seethe reference to the “dividing wall” as an adhocformulation coherent to the context of Eph. 2:14. The writercontinues with the partitioned house/temple theme in 2:19 and refersto the “holy temple” in 2:21. It was the purposeful andexclusive attitudes of the Jews that separated Jew from Gentile andcreated a barrier between them. This social barrier would have beenclosely associated with some of the boundary markers used by Jews toseparate themselves from Gentiles.
The moral course of the world is simultaneously moving in twodirections. The morally innocent state in which God created humankindwas lost at the fall (Gen.3), and since then, sin, death, andcorruption have reigned over all humanity (Rom. 5:12). In Noah’stime the world so declined morally that God had to wipe out nearlythe entire human race (Gen. 6–8), and the Bible predicts thatsin will come to a similar crescendo before Christ’s return(1Tim. 4:1; 2Pet. 3).
Despitethis moral degeneration, the kingdom that Christ inaugurated in hisfirst coming (Mark 1:15) will make continual progress in renewingcreation until the consummation (Matt. 13:31–33). The newheavens and earth have already broken into the present age at theresurrection of Christ, who is now ruling at the right hand of theFather (Acts 2:33). Therefore, the age subject to death is passingaway, but those in Christ are being renewed daily (1Cor. 7:31;2Cor. 4:16). The Holy Spirit represents their down payment onthe riches that await them at the final redemption (Eph. 1:14).
A distinction needs to be made between the variousoccurrences of the words “pray” and “prayer”in most translations of the Bible and the modern connotation of thesame words. In the OT, the main Hebrew words translated as “topray” and “prayer” (palal and tepillah) refer tothe act of bringing a petition or request before God. They do notnormally, if ever, refer to the other elements that we today think ofas being included in the act of praying, such as praise orthanksgiving. The same is the case in the NT, where the main Greekwords translated “topray” and “prayer” (proseuchomai and proseuchē)also specifically denote making a petition or request to God. Butother words and constructions in both Testaments are also translated“to pray” and “prayer,” and this article willdeal with the larger concept,including praise, thanksgiving, petition, and confession, as opposedto the narrower meaning of the particular Hebrew and Greek terms (seealso Praise; Thanksgiving; Worship).
OldTestament
Inthe OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modernways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayerdoes not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer toGod, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray tohumans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction betweenthe sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in theOT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, suchas that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. Theseshould be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, butrather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” inrecognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. Inthe NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.
Manyof the prayers in the OT are explicitly set in a covenantal context.God owes nothing to his creatures, but God has sworn to be faithfulto those with whom he has entered into covenant. Thus, many OTprayers specifically appeal to the covenant as a motivation for boththose praying and God’s answering (1Kings 8:23–25;Neh. 1:5–11; 9:32; Pss. 25:10–11; 44:17–26; 74:20;89:39–49). In postexilic books such as Ezra, Nehemiah, andDaniel, an important feature in the recorded prayers is the use ofprior Scripture, praying God’s words (many times covenantal)back to him (in the NT, see Acts 4:24–30). Also, the closenessengendered by the covenant relationship between God and his peoplewas unique in the ancient Near Eastern context. So Moses can marvel,“What other nation is so great as to have their gods near themthe way the Lord our God is near us whenever we pray to him?”(Deut. 4:7).
Prayermust be made from a heart that is right toward God. There is noguarantee that God will hear every prayer (Ps. 66:18; Prov. 1:28;Isa. 1:15; 59:2). For the most part, the “rightness” thatGod requires in prayer is “a broken and contrite heart”(Ps. 51:17; cf. Isa. 66:2).
Althoughseveral passages talk about prayer in the context of sacrifice (e.g.,Gen. 13:4), there is surprisingly little emphasis on prayer in thelegal texts about sacrifice in the Pentateuch, no prescriptions forthe kinds of prayer or the words that are to be said in connectionwith the sacrifices. Interestingly, however, in later, perhapspostexilic contexts, where there is no temple and therefore nosacrifice, we find texts such as Ps. 141:2, where the petitioner asksGod to accept prayer as if it were an offering of incense and theevening sacrifice (cf. Prov. 15:8; in the NT, see Rev. 5:8).
Apresupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and mayindeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is notprimarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of theone praying, but rather about God changing the circ*mstances of theone praying.
Thereis a striking honesty, some would even say brashness, evident in manyOT prayers. Jeremiah laments that God has deceived both the people(Jer. 4:10) and Jeremiah himself (20:7) and complains about God’sjustice (12:1–4). Job stands, as it were, in God’s faceand demands that the Almighty answer his questions (Job 31:35–37).The psalmist accuses God of having broken his covenant promises (Ps.89:39). While it is true that God does, to some extent, rebukeJeremiah and Job (Jer. 12:5; Job 38–42), he does not ignorethem or cast them aside. This would seem, ultimately, to encouragesuch honesty and boldness on the part of those who pray.
Literarily,accounts of prayers in narratives serve to provide characterizationsof the ones praying. The recorded prayers of people such as Abraham,Moses, Hannah, Ezra, and Nehemiah demonstrate their true piety andhumility before God. By contrast, the prayer of Jonah recorded inJon. 2, in its narrative context, betrays a certain hypocrisy on thepart of the reluctant prophet.
NewTestament
Thedepiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of theOT, but there are important developments.
Jesustells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt.6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Although recent scholarship hasdemonstrated that “Abba” is not the equivalent of our“daddy,” it expresses a certain intimacy that goes beyondwhat was prevalent at the time, but retains an element of reverenceas well. God is not just “Father,” but “our Fatherin heaven” (Matt. 6:9). Even Jesus addresses God as “HolyFather” (John 17:11), “Righteous Father” (John17:25), and “Father, Lord of heaven and earth” (Matt.11:25). And Paul, as mentioned earlier, uses a buffer zone, rarely inhis epistles using the word “Father” by itself, butinstead referring to “God our Father” (e.g., Rom. 1:7)and frequently using the phrase “the God and Father of our LordJesus Christ” (Rom. 15:6; 2Cor. 1:3; 11:31; Eph. 1:3; cf.Eph. 1:17; Col. 1:3). God is our Father, but still he is a Fatherbefore whom one reverently kneels (Eph. 3:14).
Prayerto God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:19–20;John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26). While there is some debate as tothe exact nuance of this idea, it seems clear that, at the veryleast, prayers in Jesus’ name need to be ones that Jesus wouldaffirm and are in accordance with his holy character and expressedwill. It is, in essence, saying to God that the prayer being offeredis one that Jesus would approve.
Prayercan also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him inthe early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. Theinstances of this in the NT are rare, however, and generally eitherexclamatory or rhetorical (Acts 7:59; 1Cor. 16:22; Rev. 22:20).The norm would still seem to be that prayer is to be made to theFather, through Jesus’ name.
Unlikeanything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for theirenemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke23:34; Acts 7:60).
TheHoly Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we areable to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6).The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is tobe done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1Cor.14:15).
Jesusencourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).
Jesusbecomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions(Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points(Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offersprayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers thatare (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and notgive up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overlyliteralized “pray without ceasing” in 1Thess. 5:17NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb.5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and evennow, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, ourintercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb.4:14–16).
A distinction needs to be made between the variousoccurrences of the words “pray” and “prayer”in most translations of the Bible and the modern connotation of thesame words. In the OT, the main Hebrew words translated as “topray” and “prayer” (palal and tepillah) refer tothe act of bringing a petition or request before God. They do notnormally, if ever, refer to the other elements that we today think ofas being included in the act of praying, such as praise orthanksgiving. The same is the case in the NT, where the main Greekwords translated “topray” and “prayer” (proseuchomai and proseuchē)also specifically denote making a petition or request to God. Butother words and constructions in both Testaments are also translated“to pray” and “prayer,” and this article willdeal with the larger concept,including praise, thanksgiving, petition, and confession, as opposedto the narrower meaning of the particular Hebrew and Greek terms (seealso Praise; Thanksgiving; Worship).
OldTestament
Inthe OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modernways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayerdoes not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer toGod, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray tohumans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction betweenthe sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in theOT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, suchas that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. Theseshould be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, butrather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” inrecognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. Inthe NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.
Manyof the prayers in the OT are explicitly set in a covenantal context.God owes nothing to his creatures, but God has sworn to be faithfulto those with whom he has entered into covenant. Thus, many OTprayers specifically appeal to the covenant as a motivation for boththose praying and God’s answering (1Kings 8:23–25;Neh. 1:5–11; 9:32; Pss. 25:10–11; 44:17–26; 74:20;89:39–49). In postexilic books such as Ezra, Nehemiah, andDaniel, an important feature in the recorded prayers is the use ofprior Scripture, praying God’s words (many times covenantal)back to him (in the NT, see Acts 4:24–30). Also, the closenessengendered by the covenant relationship between God and his peoplewas unique in the ancient Near Eastern context. So Moses can marvel,“What other nation is so great as to have their gods near themthe way the Lord our God is near us whenever we pray to him?”(Deut. 4:7).
Prayermust be made from a heart that is right toward God. There is noguarantee that God will hear every prayer (Ps. 66:18; Prov. 1:28;Isa. 1:15; 59:2). For the most part, the “rightness” thatGod requires in prayer is “a broken and contrite heart”(Ps. 51:17; cf. Isa. 66:2).
Althoughseveral passages talk about prayer in the context of sacrifice (e.g.,Gen. 13:4), there is surprisingly little emphasis on prayer in thelegal texts about sacrifice in the Pentateuch, no prescriptions forthe kinds of prayer or the words that are to be said in connectionwith the sacrifices. Interestingly, however, in later, perhapspostexilic contexts, where there is no temple and therefore nosacrifice, we find texts such as Ps. 141:2, where the petitioner asksGod to accept prayer as if it were an offering of incense and theevening sacrifice (cf. Prov. 15:8; in the NT, see Rev. 5:8).
Apresupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and mayindeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is notprimarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of theone praying, but rather about God changing the circ*mstances of theone praying.
Thereis a striking honesty, some would even say brashness, evident in manyOT prayers. Jeremiah laments that God has deceived both the people(Jer. 4:10) and Jeremiah himself (20:7) and complains about God’sjustice (12:1–4). Job stands, as it were, in God’s faceand demands that the Almighty answer his questions (Job 31:35–37).The psalmist accuses God of having broken his covenant promises (Ps.89:39). While it is true that God does, to some extent, rebukeJeremiah and Job (Jer. 12:5; Job 38–42), he does not ignorethem or cast them aside. This would seem, ultimately, to encouragesuch honesty and boldness on the part of those who pray.
Literarily,accounts of prayers in narratives serve to provide characterizationsof the ones praying. The recorded prayers of people such as Abraham,Moses, Hannah, Ezra, and Nehemiah demonstrate their true piety andhumility before God. By contrast, the prayer of Jonah recorded inJon. 2, in its narrative context, betrays a certain hypocrisy on thepart of the reluctant prophet.
NewTestament
Thedepiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of theOT, but there are important developments.
Jesustells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt.6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Although recent scholarship hasdemonstrated that “Abba” is not the equivalent of our“daddy,” it expresses a certain intimacy that goes beyondwhat was prevalent at the time, but retains an element of reverenceas well. God is not just “Father,” but “our Fatherin heaven” (Matt. 6:9). Even Jesus addresses God as “HolyFather” (John 17:11), “Righteous Father” (John17:25), and “Father, Lord of heaven and earth” (Matt.11:25). And Paul, as mentioned earlier, uses a buffer zone, rarely inhis epistles using the word “Father” by itself, butinstead referring to “God our Father” (e.g., Rom. 1:7)and frequently using the phrase “the God and Father of our LordJesus Christ” (Rom. 15:6; 2Cor. 1:3; 11:31; Eph. 1:3; cf.Eph. 1:17; Col. 1:3). God is our Father, but still he is a Fatherbefore whom one reverently kneels (Eph. 3:14).
Prayerto God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:19–20;John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26). While there is some debate as tothe exact nuance of this idea, it seems clear that, at the veryleast, prayers in Jesus’ name need to be ones that Jesus wouldaffirm and are in accordance with his holy character and expressedwill. It is, in essence, saying to God that the prayer being offeredis one that Jesus would approve.
Prayercan also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him inthe early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. Theinstances of this in the NT are rare, however, and generally eitherexclamatory or rhetorical (Acts 7:59; 1Cor. 16:22; Rev. 22:20).The norm would still seem to be that prayer is to be made to theFather, through Jesus’ name.
Unlikeanything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for theirenemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke23:34; Acts 7:60).
TheHoly Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we areable to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6).The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is tobe done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1Cor.14:15).
Jesusencourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).
Jesusbecomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions(Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points(Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offersprayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers thatare (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and notgive up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overlyliteralized “pray without ceasing” in 1Thess. 5:17NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb.5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and evennow, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, ourintercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb.4:14–16).
A distinction needs to be made between the variousoccurrences of the words “pray” and “prayer”in most translations of the Bible and the modern connotation of thesame words. In the OT, the main Hebrew words translated as “topray” and “prayer” (palal and tepillah) refer tothe act of bringing a petition or request before God. They do notnormally, if ever, refer to the other elements that we today think ofas being included in the act of praying, such as praise orthanksgiving. The same is the case in the NT, where the main Greekwords translated “topray” and “prayer” (proseuchomai and proseuchē)also specifically denote making a petition or request to God. Butother words and constructions in both Testaments are also translated“to pray” and “prayer,” and this article willdeal with the larger concept,including praise, thanksgiving, petition, and confession, as opposedto the narrower meaning of the particular Hebrew and Greek terms (seealso Praise; Thanksgiving; Worship).
OldTestament
Inthe OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modernways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayerdoes not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer toGod, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray tohumans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction betweenthe sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in theOT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, suchas that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. Theseshould be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, butrather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” inrecognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. Inthe NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.
Manyof the prayers in the OT are explicitly set in a covenantal context.God owes nothing to his creatures, but God has sworn to be faithfulto those with whom he has entered into covenant. Thus, many OTprayers specifically appeal to the covenant as a motivation for boththose praying and God’s answering (1Kings 8:23–25;Neh. 1:5–11; 9:32; Pss. 25:10–11; 44:17–26; 74:20;89:39–49). In postexilic books such as Ezra, Nehemiah, andDaniel, an important feature in the recorded prayers is the use ofprior Scripture, praying God’s words (many times covenantal)back to him (in the NT, see Acts 4:24–30). Also, the closenessengendered by the covenant relationship between God and his peoplewas unique in the ancient Near Eastern context. So Moses can marvel,“What other nation is so great as to have their gods near themthe way the Lord our God is near us whenever we pray to him?”(Deut. 4:7).
Prayermust be made from a heart that is right toward God. There is noguarantee that God will hear every prayer (Ps. 66:18; Prov. 1:28;Isa. 1:15; 59:2). For the most part, the “rightness” thatGod requires in prayer is “a broken and contrite heart”(Ps. 51:17; cf. Isa. 66:2).
Althoughseveral passages talk about prayer in the context of sacrifice (e.g.,Gen. 13:4), there is surprisingly little emphasis on prayer in thelegal texts about sacrifice in the Pentateuch, no prescriptions forthe kinds of prayer or the words that are to be said in connectionwith the sacrifices. Interestingly, however, in later, perhapspostexilic contexts, where there is no temple and therefore nosacrifice, we find texts such as Ps. 141:2, where the petitioner asksGod to accept prayer as if it were an offering of incense and theevening sacrifice (cf. Prov. 15:8; in the NT, see Rev. 5:8).
Apresupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and mayindeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is notprimarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of theone praying, but rather about God changing the circ*mstances of theone praying.
Thereis a striking honesty, some would even say brashness, evident in manyOT prayers. Jeremiah laments that God has deceived both the people(Jer. 4:10) and Jeremiah himself (20:7) and complains about God’sjustice (12:1–4). Job stands, as it were, in God’s faceand demands that the Almighty answer his questions (Job 31:35–37).The psalmist accuses God of having broken his covenant promises (Ps.89:39). While it is true that God does, to some extent, rebukeJeremiah and Job (Jer. 12:5; Job 38–42), he does not ignorethem or cast them aside. This would seem, ultimately, to encouragesuch honesty and boldness on the part of those who pray.
Literarily,accounts of prayers in narratives serve to provide characterizationsof the ones praying. The recorded prayers of people such as Abraham,Moses, Hannah, Ezra, and Nehemiah demonstrate their true piety andhumility before God. By contrast, the prayer of Jonah recorded inJon. 2, in its narrative context, betrays a certain hypocrisy on thepart of the reluctant prophet.
NewTestament
Thedepiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of theOT, but there are important developments.
Jesustells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt.6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Although recent scholarship hasdemonstrated that “Abba” is not the equivalent of our“daddy,” it expresses a certain intimacy that goes beyondwhat was prevalent at the time, but retains an element of reverenceas well. God is not just “Father,” but “our Fatherin heaven” (Matt. 6:9). Even Jesus addresses God as “HolyFather” (John 17:11), “Righteous Father” (John17:25), and “Father, Lord of heaven and earth” (Matt.11:25). And Paul, as mentioned earlier, uses a buffer zone, rarely inhis epistles using the word “Father” by itself, butinstead referring to “God our Father” (e.g., Rom. 1:7)and frequently using the phrase “the God and Father of our LordJesus Christ” (Rom. 15:6; 2Cor. 1:3; 11:31; Eph. 1:3; cf.Eph. 1:17; Col. 1:3). God is our Father, but still he is a Fatherbefore whom one reverently kneels (Eph. 3:14).
Prayerto God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:19–20;John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26). While there is some debate as tothe exact nuance of this idea, it seems clear that, at the veryleast, prayers in Jesus’ name need to be ones that Jesus wouldaffirm and are in accordance with his holy character and expressedwill. It is, in essence, saying to God that the prayer being offeredis one that Jesus would approve.
Prayercan also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him inthe early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. Theinstances of this in the NT are rare, however, and generally eitherexclamatory or rhetorical (Acts 7:59; 1Cor. 16:22; Rev. 22:20).The norm would still seem to be that prayer is to be made to theFather, through Jesus’ name.
Unlikeanything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for theirenemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke23:34; Acts 7:60).
TheHoly Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we areable to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6).The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is tobe done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1Cor.14:15).
Jesusencourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).
Jesusbecomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions(Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points(Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offersprayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers thatare (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and notgive up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overlyliteralized “pray without ceasing” in 1Thess. 5:17NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb.5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and evennow, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, ourintercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb.4:14–16).
Inheritance is an important concept that the Bible uses inseveral ways.
Family.In the ancient world every culture had customs for the passing ofwealth and possessions from one generation to the next. In ancientIsrael special provisions were made for inheriting land upon thedeath of the father. The firstborn son received a double portion; therest was divided equally among the remaining sons. If a man lackedsons, priority went to the following in order: daughters, brothers,father’s brothers, next of kin (Num. 27:1–11). The OTprovides guidance for additional circ*mstances (Gen. 38:8–9;Num. 36:6; Lev. 25:23–24; Deut. 21:15–17; 25:5–10;Ruth 2:20; 3:9–13; 4:1–12), with an overriding concernfor the stability of the family and the retention of the land withina tribe. Under Roman law during the NT period, an heir had legalstanding even while the father was still alive; his status was basedon birth or adoption rather than the father’s death.
OldTestament.Even more prominent than family inheritance is the assertion that Godgave the land of Canaan to Abraham and his descendants as aninheritance (Gen. 12:7; 15:18–21; 17:8; Num. 34:1–29;Deut. 12:10). This inheritance is God’s gracious gift, notsomething that Israel earned by its righteousness (Deut. 9:4–7).Descriptions of the land (“flowing with milk and honey”)and its fertility portray this gift as a new Eden, where God willdwell with his people (Exod. 3:8, 17; Lev. 20:24; Num. 16:13–14;Deut. 11:9–12). In some texts the language of inheritance movesbeyond the land of Canaan to an international scope. In Ps. 2:8 theanointed king recounts God saying to him, “Ask me, and I willmake the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth yourpossession.” This expansion of inheritance from the land ofCanaan to the ends of the earth prepares the way for a similarexpansion in the NT (see Rom. 4:13).
God’srelationship with Israel is also described in terms of inheritance.On the one hand, Israel is described as God’s inheritance(Deut. 32:9; 1Sam. 10:1; 1Kings 8:51–53); on theother hand, God is Israel’s inheritance (Pss. 16:5; 73:26; Jer.10:16; 51:19). This mutuality expresses the intimacy of God’srelationship with Israel.
NewTestament. Inheritancelanguage is taken up in the NT and expanded in a variety of ways.First and foremost, Jesus Christ is the “heir of all things,”the Son to whom the Father has given all authority in heaven and onearth (Matt. 28:18–20; Heb. 1:2–5). Through their unionwith Christ, believers share in Christ’s inheritance (Rom.8:17), having been qualified by the Father to share in thatinheritance (Col. 1:12). What believers inherit is described invarious ways: the earth (Matt. 5:5), eternal life (Luke 10:25), thekingdom (1Cor. 6:9–10; James 2:5), salvation (Heb. 1:14),blessing (Heb. 12:17; 1Pet. 3:9). This inheritance was enactedby the death of Christ and sealed by his blood (Heb. 9:15–28).Believers experience the benefits of this inheritance through theSpirit now (Eph. 1:14, 18), but its fullness is reserved in heavenand awaits the consummation (1Pet. 1:4–6).
Theconnection between the believer’s inheritance and the Spirit isespecially prominent in Paul. In Gal. 4:1–7 Paul uses acombination of exodus and legal imagery to explain the gospel. BeforeChrist came, God’s people were heirs under the care ofguardians and trustees. But once Christ came and redeemed them fromunder the law, they received their full inheritance as adopted sonsand daughters. Central to that inheritance is the gift of the Spirit,who cries out, “Abba, Father.” It is this gift of theSpirit that definitively marks believers as sons and daughters ratherthan slaves. Because believers possess the Spirit as an inheritancein fulfillment of the promise to Abraham (Gal. 3:14; cf. Isa.44:3–5), they have moved from bondage under the law to freedomin Christ (Gal. 5:1).
The word “providence” comes from the Latin wordprovidentia, which means “foresight.” However, the moderntheological use of the term refers not to foresight or foreknowl-edgeperse but rather to how God continues to sustain and guide hiscreation. There is no single term in either the OT or the NT thattranslates as “providence.” The one time the word occursin the NIV (Job 10:12), the Hebrew word (peqqudah) is one that theNIV in other places usually translates with words such as “care,”“charge,” or “oversight.” The concept ofdivine providence comes not from any one word but rather fromnumerous statements in the Bible that speak of God’s continuingsupervision of his world. The biblical data can perhaps best beorganized under four headings: created order, world history,salvation history, and individual history. These headings are,however, not discrete; they continually intersect.
CreatedOrder
Scripturetestifies in numerous places to God’s ongoing supervision ofhis creation. The psalms play a special role here. As one commentatorhas remarked, there are no nature lyrics in the psalms, onlyadmiration and awe at how God runs his world. God actively cares forthe land and waters it, causes grass to grow, plants trees, and makessure that they are well watered (Pss. 65:9; 104:14, 16). God bringsdarkness on the land and tells the sun when to set and when to rise(Ps. 104:19–20). God is the zookeeper who makes sure all theanimals are fed (Ps. 104:27). Every birth of every living creature isregarded as a new creative work of God, and he constantly renews theface of the earth (Ps. 104:30).
Godblankets the earth with snow and lays down a sheet of frost (Ps.147:16). When the snow and frost melt, it is because God commanded itby his word and sent breezes to make the melting waters flow (Ps.147:18). Hail, snow, clouds, and stormy winds do their Master’sbidding (Ps. 148:8). God commands the morning to dawn and keeps thesnow and hail in storehouses, ready to be deployed on the day ofbattle (Job 38:12, 22–23). The sea waves roar because God stirsthem up (Jer. 31:35). God even speaks of being in a covenantrelationship with his creation (Jer. 33:20, 25).
Inthe NT, we find that Jesus Christ himself sustains “all thingsby his powerful word” (Heb. 1:3). In him “all things holdtogether” (Col. 1:17).
WorldHistory
Whathappens on the world scene is under God’s sovereign control. Ifthe nations are scattered over the world and speak differentlanguages, it is because God made it so (Gen. 11:1–9). Goddetermines whether the nations are blessed or cursed (Gen. 12:3). Godis the one who has apportioned each nation’s inher-i-tance andhas established their boundaries (Deut. 32:8). Yahweh is the God ofIsrael, which is his special possession, but he has also appointeddeities for the other nations to worship (Deut. 4:19 [evidently falsegods, but still under Yahweh’s sovereignty]). He judges theworld and carries out justice for the peoples, foils the plans of thenations, forms the hearts of all people, reigns over the nations andguides them (Pss. 9:8; 33:10, 15; 47:8; 67:4).
Itis by God’s sanction that kings reign, and a king’s heartis like a watercourse, which God can redirect at will (Prov. 8:15;21:1). God “does as he pleases with the powers of heaven andthe peoples of the earth” (Dan. 4:35). All thrones, powers,rulers, and authorities “were created through him and for him”(Col. 1:16). God is actively working to bring the whole universe andall peoples and nations under one head, his Son, Christ Jesus (Eph.1:10).
SalvationHistory
Withinworld history, God has also worked through one particular people, theIsraelites, to accomplish his redemptive purposes. When Joseph toldhis brothers that what they had intended to do to him for evil, Godhad intended for good, for “the saving of many lives”(Gen. 50:20), he may not have fully realized how much his words werein accord with, and could even be said to summarize, redemptivehistory. God took the harm that Joseph’s brothers intended andused it to fulfill the promises that he had made years earlier toAbraham with regard to what would happen to his descendants (Gen.12:1–3). In the early chapters of Exodus, God’ssovereignty over the “forces of nature” intersects withhis deliverance of the Israelites in the plagues that he brings onthe Egyptians. Of course, God had raised up Pharaoh for the verypurpose of displaying his own glory in victory over Pharaoh and “allthe gods of Egypt” (Exod. 9:16; 12:12; cf. Rom. 9:17).
Throughoutthe ensuing Israelite history, God demonstrates his providential carefor the Israelites. The Jews return from their Babylonian captivitybecause God raised up Cyrus, even though Cyrus did not acknowledgehim (Isa. 44:28–45:13), for the very purpose of issuing thedecree that allowed them to return. Even in narratives in which God’sname is not mentioned, such as the book of Esther, we are tounderstand that God is directing the action, and certainly thenarrator wants us to connect the account ofthe origin of thefestival of Purim (“lots”) with the idea that “thelot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord”(Prov. 16:33).
Inthe NT the act that secures our redemption, the crucifixion of Jesus,is not an unforeseen occurrence that God makes the best of; rather,the death of Jesus is that which he himself would “accomplish”(Luke 9:31 NRSV [NIV: “bring to fulfillment”]). No onetakes Jesus’ life from him; he lays it down of his own accord(John 10:18). Jesus even gives Judas Iscariot directions on the nightof his betrayal (John 13:27). What happens in the crucifixion is inaccord with “God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge”(Acts 2:23) and with what his “power and will had decidedbeforehand should happen” (4:28).
IndividualHistory
Jesuspromises that for those who seek the kingdom of God, “all thesethings will be given to you as well” (Matt. 6:33). If God feedsthe birds of the air and clothes the grass of the field, much morewill he take care to feed and clothe us (Matt. 6:26, 30). Indeed, “inall things God works for the good of those who love him, who havebeen called according to his purpose” (Rom. 8:28).
A literary device whereby an author writes under a name otherthan his or her own (a pseu-donym) or a book is deliberately assignedto a fictitious author (pseudepigraphy). In the case of ancientJewish practice, the name borrowed was usually that of some famousworthy of the past (e.g., Enoch, Ezra), with the aim of bolsteringthe credentials of the book to which the name was attached. This is acommon phenomenon in the Apocrypha (e.g., 2Esdras, Baruch,Epistle of Jeremiah). It is even more common in the large collectionof Second Temple texts now known as the Pseudepigrapha (e.g.,1Enoch, Odes of Solomon, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs).(See also Pseudepigrapha.)
Scholarscontinue to debate the morality of pseudonymity and whether it isproper for a pseudonymous book to be placed within the canon ofScripture. Some excuse pseudonymity as a mere stylistic device orexplain it as a culturally accepted convention. Others put a positivespin on the phenomenon, and so, for example, claim that in thePastoral Epistles literate disciples of Paul sought to apply hisideas to newly developing situations in the years following hisdeath. Some argue that such deception for a good cause is legitimatebecause it helped to gain a hearing for orthodox teaching. Otherstotally reject pseudepigraphy, viewing it as little better thandeception and forgery and thus unworthy of literature viewed asinspired by God. The last approach seems to be most consistent with ahigh view of Scripture.
Overthe last two hundred years a number of biblical books have beenidentified by some scholars as pseudonymous, notably Daniel in theOT, and in the NT six letters in the Pauline corpus—Ephesians,Colossians, 2Thessalonians, and the Pastoral Epistles (1–2Timothy, Titus)—together with 2Peter and Jude.
OldTestament
Certainlyone mark of Jewish apocalyptic works is pseudonymity, and the book ofDaniel is often viewed by critical scholars as no exception to thisrule. It is difficult, however, to see how the name “Daniel”would have served to give the OT book named after him the desiredauthority, which is a major motivation for attaching a pseudonym.
Apartfrom the book itself, we essentially know nothing about this Daniel,whom it describes as living in Babylonia during the exile. In thebook of Ezekiel we have two references to a Daniel (Ezek. 14:14, 20).In this passage the prophet says that when the land sins against God,“even if these three men—Noah, Daniel and Job—werein it, they could save only themselves by their righteousness.”There is, in addition, the further reference in Ezek. 14:16 to “thesethree men,” obviously referring to the same three men. Ezekielspeaks of these three men as embodiments of righteousness, but thefact that this Daniel figure is placed between two ancients (Noah andJob) suggests that he too is a figure of antiquity, not acontemporary of Ezekiel.
Ezekiel28:3 taunts the king of Tyre: “Are you wiser than Daniel? Is nosecret hidden from you?” Here “Daniel” (the Hebrewtext at Ezek. 28:3 actually reads “Danel”) obviously is aproverbial figure of wisdom, and this implies that he may have beenwell known in Tyre and therefore could well have beenSyro-Phoenician. There is in fact a “Danel” figurementioned in Ugaritic literature (before 1200 BC). On the other hand,the Daniel of the book of Daniel is not a patriarch like Enoch, Noah,and Job, nor is he a famous figure like Ezra or the assistant to aprophet, as Baruch was to Jeremiah. Daniel is known only through thebook that bears his name. In other words, the usual motivationexplaining the use of a pseudonym does not apply to the canonicalbook of Daniel.
Also,the closing up and sealing of the book (Dan. 8:26; 12:4) is no meredevice necessitated by using as a pseudonym the name of a mansupposedly living in the time of Cyrus. Rather, the sealing signifiesthat much of the content of the later chapters of the book will beunderstood only when the predicted events begin to take place at afuture time, with the book placing Daniel (its presumed author) inthe sixth century BC.
NewTestament
ThePastoral Epistles.With regard to the Pastoral Epistles, all three letters claim to beauthored by the apostle Paul (1Tim. 1:1; 2Tim. 1:1; Titus1:1). In seeking to determine the time of composition within achronology of Paul’s ministry, they must be dated toward theend of his life (in the case of 2Timothy, perhaps only shortlybefore his death) and after the close of the book of Acts, whichconcludes with the apostle’s arrival in Rome (Acts 28). In hisletter to the Romans, Paul anticipates a future mission to Spain(Rom. 15:23–29), but the Pastoral Epistles imply that hereturned to the east. Ephesus and Crete are the presumed locations ofhis coworkers Timothy and Titus (see 1Tim. 1:3; Titus 1:5). Onthis supposition, these letters arise from a further mission thereand a second (and final) imprisonment. The fact that Acts saysnothing about this is no evidence against the supposition.
Itis not necessary to view the mundane ecclesiastical arrangements ofthe Pastoral Epistles as inconsistent with a charismatic model ofleadership in other Pauline letters (note the address to “overseersand deacons” in Phil. 1:1). We know from Acts 14:23; 20:17–38that Paul appointed elders in the churches that he founded. Thetheological differences between the Pastoral Epistles and earlierPauline compositions should not be overemphasized. The stress laidupon “the faith” and “sound teaching” isexactly what might be expected if Paul anticipated his imminentremoval from the scene.
Theother alternative is the theory that after Paul’s death,members of a Pauline school (Timothy? Luke? Onesimus?) continued tosupply letters under his name, addressing contemporary church issuesin the guise of Paul, hoping to guarantee the legacy of the greatapostle. Some scholars go as far as to assert that an admirer of Paulcombined genuine Pauline fragments within a fictitious framework. Theearliest listing of Paul’s letters is that of Marcion (c. AD140), and he fails to mention the Pastoral Epistles. That omissionmay be explained in various ways. There is no evidence, however, thatanyone in the early church (orthodox or heterodox) who knew of theletters doubted their authenticity.
Ephesiansand Colossians.There is some textual uncertainty with regard to the words “inEphesus” in Eph. 1:1, making it possible that the letter wasoriginally a circular letter written by Paul to more than one church.The letter mentions no one by name except Tychicus (Eph. 6:21), whocarried the letter (perhaps to different churches in turn). This isenough to explain its more general orientation than some otherPauline letters, and any supposed theological “development”is not beyond the likely boundaries of Paul’s expansive mind(e.g., his teaching on the church). The use of the “in Christ”formula in Ephesians is not substantially different from how Paulhandles it elsewhere. The letter’s twofold structure ofdoctrinal exposition followed by practical instruction fits a commonPauline epistolary pattern. Indeed, F.F. Bruce refers to thisletter as “the quintessence of Paulinism.”
Ina number of ways Colossians and Ephesians share a common outlook. TheJewish Christian proto-gnostic false teaching combated in Colossiansis not referred to in other Pauline letters, but it may have been alocal Colossian variant. The letter is explicitly attributed to Paul,at both the beginning and the end (Col. 1:1; 4:18). Arguments aboutauthorship based on style and unusual vocabulary are notoriouslyslippery and inconclusive. The high Christology of cosmic dimensionsin Col. 1:15–20; 2:9–10, 15 is also present in undisputedPauline letters (cf. Phil. 2:9–11). The obvious relationship ofColossians to the little letter to Philemon (e.g., Col. 4:9, 17; cf.Philem. 2, 12) is one of the strongest arguments in favor of thePauline authorship of the former. Any theory of pseudepigraphy turnsCol. 4:7–17, with its many names, into fanciful and freeinvention with little real purpose. Also, we might wonder why a laterauthor chose to write under the name of Paul to a church that Paulhimself did not found.
SecondThessalonians.Some view the futuristic timetable provided in 2Thess. 2:1–12as moving beyond Paul, with the world’s end not yet in sight,for the writer teaches that certain things have to happen before thereturn of Christ, whereas in 1Thess. 4:13–5:11 Paul has anearer end in view. In both letters, however, the apostle is seekingto dampen the wrong kind of apocalyptic excitement. In2Thessalonians, it is clear that Paul knows a tradition ofJesus’ teaching about the future, such as also found in Mark13, so that there is nothing unreasonably “late” in theviews expressed.
Thesubstantial overlap in material between 1Thessalonians and2Thessalonians is not evidence of the labors of a laterdisciple and imitator of Paul. It is highly ironic that some scholarssuggest 2Thessalonians is not a genuine letter of Paul: theletter itself condemns a fake letter supposedly from him that claimsthat the day of the Lord is already past (2Thess. 2:2), and theoriginal letter included a final greeting written in Paul’s ownhand (2Thess. 3:17).
SecondPeter and Jude.As for 2Peter, it was not as well known in the early church as1Peter, and some (according to Origen) were hesitant to acceptit. Its author claims to be a witness to the transfiguration (2Pet.1:16–18). Such personal allusions need not be attributed to alater writer who was trying too hard to show that he was Simon Peter.The obvious connection of 2Pet. 1:14 to what is recorded inJohn 21 does not prove that the writer was dependent on that chapter.
Theremarkable parallels between 2Peter and Jude show that one isdependent upon the other, though scholars are not unanimous aboutwhich letter was prior. We cannot rule out that Peter would use andadapt the writings of a less prominent leader such as Jude. Judemakes use of apocryphal books, but neither in Jude nor in 2Peterdo arguments against the particular brand of false teaching require asecond-century (postapostolic) dating.
A literary device whereby an author writes under a name otherthan his or her own (a pseu-donym) or a book is deliberately assignedto a fictitious author (pseudepigraphy). In the case of ancientJewish practice, the name borrowed was usually that of some famousworthy of the past (e.g., Enoch, Ezra), with the aim of bolsteringthe credentials of the book to which the name was attached. This is acommon phenomenon in the Apocrypha (e.g., 2Esdras, Baruch,Epistle of Jeremiah). It is even more common in the large collectionof Second Temple texts now known as the Pseudepigrapha (e.g.,1Enoch, Odes of Solomon, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs).(See also Pseudepigrapha.)
Scholarscontinue to debate the morality of pseudonymity and whether it isproper for a pseudonymous book to be placed within the canon ofScripture. Some excuse pseudonymity as a mere stylistic device orexplain it as a culturally accepted convention. Others put a positivespin on the phenomenon, and so, for example, claim that in thePastoral Epistles literate disciples of Paul sought to apply hisideas to newly developing situations in the years following hisdeath. Some argue that such deception for a good cause is legitimatebecause it helped to gain a hearing for orthodox teaching. Otherstotally reject pseudepigraphy, viewing it as little better thandeception and forgery and thus unworthy of literature viewed asinspired by God. The last approach seems to be most consistent with ahigh view of Scripture.
Overthe last two hundred years a number of biblical books have beenidentified by some scholars as pseudonymous, notably Daniel in theOT, and in the NT six letters in the Pauline corpus—Ephesians,Colossians, 2Thessalonians, and the Pastoral Epistles (1–2Timothy, Titus)—together with 2Peter and Jude.
OldTestament
Certainlyone mark of Jewish apocalyptic works is pseudonymity, and the book ofDaniel is often viewed by critical scholars as no exception to thisrule. It is difficult, however, to see how the name “Daniel”would have served to give the OT book named after him the desiredauthority, which is a major motivation for attaching a pseudonym.
Apartfrom the book itself, we essentially know nothing about this Daniel,whom it describes as living in Babylonia during the exile. In thebook of Ezekiel we have two references to a Daniel (Ezek. 14:14, 20).In this passage the prophet says that when the land sins against God,“even if these three men—Noah, Daniel and Job—werein it, they could save only themselves by their righteousness.”There is, in addition, the further reference in Ezek. 14:16 to “thesethree men,” obviously referring to the same three men. Ezekielspeaks of these three men as embodiments of righteousness, but thefact that this Daniel figure is placed between two ancients (Noah andJob) suggests that he too is a figure of antiquity, not acontemporary of Ezekiel.
Ezekiel28:3 taunts the king of Tyre: “Are you wiser than Daniel? Is nosecret hidden from you?” Here “Daniel” (the Hebrewtext at Ezek. 28:3 actually reads “Danel”) obviously is aproverbial figure of wisdom, and this implies that he may have beenwell known in Tyre and therefore could well have beenSyro-Phoenician. There is in fact a “Danel” figurementioned in Ugaritic literature (before 1200 BC). On the other hand,the Daniel of the book of Daniel is not a patriarch like Enoch, Noah,and Job, nor is he a famous figure like Ezra or the assistant to aprophet, as Baruch was to Jeremiah. Daniel is known only through thebook that bears his name. In other words, the usual motivationexplaining the use of a pseudonym does not apply to the canonicalbook of Daniel.
Also,the closing up and sealing of the book (Dan. 8:26; 12:4) is no meredevice necessitated by using as a pseudonym the name of a mansupposedly living in the time of Cyrus. Rather, the sealing signifiesthat much of the content of the later chapters of the book will beunderstood only when the predicted events begin to take place at afuture time, with the book placing Daniel (its presumed author) inthe sixth century BC.
NewTestament
ThePastoral Epistles.With regard to the Pastoral Epistles, all three letters claim to beauthored by the apostle Paul (1Tim. 1:1; 2Tim. 1:1; Titus1:1). In seeking to determine the time of composition within achronology of Paul’s ministry, they must be dated toward theend of his life (in the case of 2Timothy, perhaps only shortlybefore his death) and after the close of the book of Acts, whichconcludes with the apostle’s arrival in Rome (Acts 28). In hisletter to the Romans, Paul anticipates a future mission to Spain(Rom. 15:23–29), but the Pastoral Epistles imply that hereturned to the east. Ephesus and Crete are the presumed locations ofhis coworkers Timothy and Titus (see 1Tim. 1:3; Titus 1:5). Onthis supposition, these letters arise from a further mission thereand a second (and final) imprisonment. The fact that Acts saysnothing about this is no evidence against the supposition.
Itis not necessary to view the mundane ecclesiastical arrangements ofthe Pastoral Epistles as inconsistent with a charismatic model ofleadership in other Pauline letters (note the address to “overseersand deacons” in Phil. 1:1). We know from Acts 14:23; 20:17–38that Paul appointed elders in the churches that he founded. Thetheological differences between the Pastoral Epistles and earlierPauline compositions should not be overemphasized. The stress laidupon “the faith” and “sound teaching” isexactly what might be expected if Paul anticipated his imminentremoval from the scene.
Theother alternative is the theory that after Paul’s death,members of a Pauline school (Timothy? Luke? Onesimus?) continued tosupply letters under his name, addressing contemporary church issuesin the guise of Paul, hoping to guarantee the legacy of the greatapostle. Some scholars go as far as to assert that an admirer of Paulcombined genuine Pauline fragments within a fictitious framework. Theearliest listing of Paul’s letters is that of Marcion (c. AD140), and he fails to mention the Pastoral Epistles. That omissionmay be explained in various ways. There is no evidence, however, thatanyone in the early church (orthodox or heterodox) who knew of theletters doubted their authenticity.
Ephesiansand Colossians.There is some textual uncertainty with regard to the words “inEphesus” in Eph. 1:1, making it possible that the letter wasoriginally a circular letter written by Paul to more than one church.The letter mentions no one by name except Tychicus (Eph. 6:21), whocarried the letter (perhaps to different churches in turn). This isenough to explain its more general orientation than some otherPauline letters, and any supposed theological “development”is not beyond the likely boundaries of Paul’s expansive mind(e.g., his teaching on the church). The use of the “in Christ”formula in Ephesians is not substantially different from how Paulhandles it elsewhere. The letter’s twofold structure ofdoctrinal exposition followed by practical instruction fits a commonPauline epistolary pattern. Indeed, F.F. Bruce refers to thisletter as “the quintessence of Paulinism.”
Ina number of ways Colossians and Ephesians share a common outlook. TheJewish Christian proto-gnostic false teaching combated in Colossiansis not referred to in other Pauline letters, but it may have been alocal Colossian variant. The letter is explicitly attributed to Paul,at both the beginning and the end (Col. 1:1; 4:18). Arguments aboutauthorship based on style and unusual vocabulary are notoriouslyslippery and inconclusive. The high Christology of cosmic dimensionsin Col. 1:15–20; 2:9–10, 15 is also present in undisputedPauline letters (cf. Phil. 2:9–11). The obvious relationship ofColossians to the little letter to Philemon (e.g., Col. 4:9, 17; cf.Philem. 2, 12) is one of the strongest arguments in favor of thePauline authorship of the former. Any theory of pseudepigraphy turnsCol. 4:7–17, with its many names, into fanciful and freeinvention with little real purpose. Also, we might wonder why a laterauthor chose to write under the name of Paul to a church that Paulhimself did not found.
SecondThessalonians.Some view the futuristic timetable provided in 2Thess. 2:1–12as moving beyond Paul, with the world’s end not yet in sight,for the writer teaches that certain things have to happen before thereturn of Christ, whereas in 1Thess. 4:13–5:11 Paul has anearer end in view. In both letters, however, the apostle is seekingto dampen the wrong kind of apocalyptic excitement. In2Thessalonians, it is clear that Paul knows a tradition ofJesus’ teaching about the future, such as also found in Mark13, so that there is nothing unreasonably “late” in theviews expressed.
Thesubstantial overlap in material between 1Thessalonians and2Thessalonians is not evidence of the labors of a laterdisciple and imitator of Paul. It is highly ironic that some scholarssuggest 2Thessalonians is not a genuine letter of Paul: theletter itself condemns a fake letter supposedly from him that claimsthat the day of the Lord is already past (2Thess. 2:2), and theoriginal letter included a final greeting written in Paul’s ownhand (2Thess. 3:17).
SecondPeter and Jude.As for 2Peter, it was not as well known in the early church as1Peter, and some (according to Origen) were hesitant to acceptit. Its author claims to be a witness to the transfiguration (2Pet.1:16–18). Such personal allusions need not be attributed to alater writer who was trying too hard to show that he was Simon Peter.The obvious connection of 2Pet. 1:14 to what is recorded inJohn 21 does not prove that the writer was dependent on that chapter.
Theremarkable parallels between 2Peter and Jude show that one isdependent upon the other, though scholars are not unanimous aboutwhich letter was prior. We cannot rule out that Peter would use andadapt the writings of a less prominent leader such as Jude. Judemakes use of apocryphal books, but neither in Jude nor in 2Peterdo arguments against the particular brand of false teaching require asecond-century (postapostolic) dating.
The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More thana simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the graceof the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classicaltexts use the Greek word apolytrōsis(“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given torelease a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. Thegroup of words based on the Greek term lytron(“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. Thecorresponding Hebrew word padahis a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.
OldTestament
Theexperience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religioussignificance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included thededication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13).Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), wasredeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up todescribe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continuedto broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance fromall Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included thewhole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or thenew age to come).
AnotherHebrew term, ga’al,generally relates to the kinsman-redeemer. In the case of a personwho had sold property due to poverty or even gone into slavery to paya debt, a kinsman could become a redeemer by buying back the property(Lev. 25:25–28) and/or purchasing freedom from slavery(25:47–49). The book of Ruth describes this, detailing therelationship between the impoverished Ruth and Boaz, thekinsman-redeemer. The prophets and the psalms apply thisunderstanding to how God redeems Israel (Isa. 43:1–3; Ps.19:14; cf. Job 19:25). God, however, does not pay ransom to anyone(Isa. 52:3–4); rather, he causes redemption by his power(45:13).
Theawaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’sultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’scontinued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant,God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon.Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was ifGod would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. Thislonging for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As thepersecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamentalperiod (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT andthe NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianichope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people fromGreek and Roman oppression.
NewTestament
TheNT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). WhenJesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slaveryof sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many(Matt. 20:28// Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the crossaccentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17;7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christianidea of ransom followedthe accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death(Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with aransom (Col. 1:13–14). The predominance of apolytrōsis inthe NT, compared to common Greek literature of that period,underscores its significance for early Christian conceptualization.
Withoutreflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made anissue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlightJesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12;cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need oftheredeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of theredemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from onesphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another.Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted ofmonetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1Pet.3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of thosehe redeemed (antilytron hyper [1Tim. 2:6]). God still did notpay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.
TheOT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in thepresent, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills theNT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’stheological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from theslavery of sin (1Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matterof ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already butnot yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption isevidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).
Althoughredemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future(Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1Cor.15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions ofredemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expectsredemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption isuniversal; it restores the relationship between creation and theCreator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).
The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More thana simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the graceof the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classicaltexts use the Greek word apolytrōsis(“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given torelease a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. Thegroup of words based on the Greek term lytron(“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. Thecorresponding Hebrew word padahis a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.
OldTestament
Theexperience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religioussignificance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included thededication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13).Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), wasredeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up todescribe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continuedto broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance fromall Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included thewhole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or thenew age to come).
AnotherHebrew term, ga’al,generally relates to the kinsman-redeemer. In the case of a personwho had sold property due to poverty or even gone into slavery to paya debt, a kinsman could become a redeemer by buying back the property(Lev. 25:25–28) and/or purchasing freedom from slavery(25:47–49). The book of Ruth describes this, detailing therelationship between the impoverished Ruth and Boaz, thekinsman-redeemer. The prophets and the psalms apply thisunderstanding to how God redeems Israel (Isa. 43:1–3; Ps.19:14; cf. Job 19:25). God, however, does not pay ransom to anyone(Isa. 52:3–4); rather, he causes redemption by his power(45:13).
Theawaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’sultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’scontinued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant,God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon.Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was ifGod would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. Thislonging for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As thepersecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamentalperiod (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT andthe NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianichope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people fromGreek and Roman oppression.
NewTestament
TheNT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). WhenJesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slaveryof sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many(Matt. 20:28// Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the crossaccentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17;7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christianidea of ransom followedthe accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death(Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with aransom (Col. 1:13–14). The predominance of apolytrōsis inthe NT, compared to common Greek literature of that period,underscores its significance for early Christian conceptualization.
Withoutreflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made anissue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlightJesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12;cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need oftheredeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of theredemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from onesphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another.Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted ofmonetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1Pet.3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of thosehe redeemed (antilytron hyper [1Tim. 2:6]). God still did notpay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.
TheOT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in thepresent, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills theNT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’stheological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from theslavery of sin (1Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matterof ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already butnot yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption isevidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).
Althoughredemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future(Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1Cor.15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions ofredemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expectsredemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption isuniversal; it restores the relationship between creation and theCreator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).
The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More thana simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the graceof the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classicaltexts use the Greek word apolytrōsis(“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given torelease a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. Thegroup of words based on the Greek term lytron(“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. Thecorresponding Hebrew word padahis a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.
OldTestament
Theexperience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religioussignificance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included thededication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13).Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), wasredeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up todescribe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continuedto broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance fromall Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included thewhole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or thenew age to come).
AnotherHebrew term, ga’al,generally relates to the kinsman-redeemer. In the case of a personwho had sold property due to poverty or even gone into slavery to paya debt, a kinsman could become a redeemer by buying back the property(Lev. 25:25–28) and/or purchasing freedom from slavery(25:47–49). The book of Ruth describes this, detailing therelationship between the impoverished Ruth and Boaz, thekinsman-redeemer. The prophets and the psalms apply thisunderstanding to how God redeems Israel (Isa. 43:1–3; Ps.19:14; cf. Job 19:25). God, however, does not pay ransom to anyone(Isa. 52:3–4); rather, he causes redemption by his power(45:13).
Theawaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’sultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’scontinued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant,God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon.Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was ifGod would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. Thislonging for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As thepersecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamentalperiod (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT andthe NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianichope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people fromGreek and Roman oppression.
NewTestament
TheNT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). WhenJesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slaveryof sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many(Matt. 20:28// Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the crossaccentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17;7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christianidea of ransom followedthe accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death(Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with aransom (Col. 1:13–14). The predominance of apolytrōsis inthe NT, compared to common Greek literature of that period,underscores its significance for early Christian conceptualization.
Withoutreflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made anissue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlightJesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12;cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need oftheredeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of theredemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from onesphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another.Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted ofmonetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1Pet.3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of thosehe redeemed (antilytron hyper [1Tim. 2:6]). God still did notpay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.
TheOT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in thepresent, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills theNT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’stheological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from theslavery of sin (1Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matterof ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already butnot yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption isevidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).
Althoughredemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future(Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1Cor.15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions ofredemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expectsredemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption isuniversal; it restores the relationship between creation and theCreator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).
Many of the letters, or epistles, in the Bible includesalutations consisting of expressions of goodwill from the sender tothe recipient. Salutations can be found at the beginning and end ofthe NT Epistles. While the salutation itself was not the invention ofthe authors of the NT Epistles, the form has been adapted in thisliterature to express explicitly Christian theological content.
Thesimplest form of salutation found in the NT is simply “Greetings,”which appears in James 1:1, as well as in the letter sent fromJerusalem to Antioch (Acts 15:23) and the letter of Claudius Lysiasto Felix (Acts 23:26). See also the examples of secularcorrespondence in Ezra 4:17; 7:12; Dan. 4:1.
Mostof the letters bearing the name of Paul begin with the greeting“Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the LordJesus Christ” (Rom. 1:7) or a slight variation thereof (1Cor.1:3; 2Cor. 1:2; Eph. 1:2; Phil. 1:2; Col. 1:2; 1Thess.1:1; 2Thess. 1:2; Titus 1:4; Philem. 3). The salutation in Gal.1:3–5 is a theological expansion of Paul’s standardsalutation. The salutations in 1Tim. 1:2 and 2Tim. 1:2include “Grace, mercy, and peace.”
Thesalutation of the Petrine letters is “Grace and peace be yoursin abundance” (1Pet. 1:2; 2Pet. 1:2). Salutationsare also found in 2John 3; Jude 2; Rev. 1:4–5. Hebrews,1John, and 3John do not begin with salutations.
Ina number of cases, salutatory remarks function to close the letternear its end, often in connection with individual greetings. See Rom.16:20; 1Cor. 16:21–24; 2Cor. 13:14; Gal. 6:18; Eph.6:23–24; Phil. 4:23; Col. 4:18; 1Thess. 5:28; 2Thess.3:16–18; 1Tim. 6:21; 2Tim. 4:22; Titus 3:15;Philem. 25; 1Pet. 5:14.
The safety and endurance of a Christian’s salvation.Theologians over the centuries have debated whether salvation can belost, but several lines of argument taken from Scripture support theteaching that salvation by its very nature is eternal.
Electionand Grace
Passageson divine election reveal that those who come to faith do so notmerely out of personal choice, but ultimately because they have beenchosen by God (Eph. 1:4). God draws those whom he chooses, and theyrespond to his call (John 6:37, 44, 65). If genuine believers couldlose their salvation, it would imply that God’s purpose andplan in election had been ineffective, an idea that contradictsScripture (John 6:39).
Theapostle Paul maintains that salvation is bestowed by God as a gift ofhis grace (Rom. 3:24; 6:23; Eph. 1:7; 2:8–9). This free giftcannot be merited or earned. It is not granted or withheld on thebasis of a person’s moral character, no matter how noble orwicked, and it is never merited or forfeited through anything aperson does, no matter how good or evil. Rather, it is granted due tosomething that lies within the nature of God—his graciouscharacter, his purpose, and his free choice. Salvation endures due tothe same perfections in God that cannot change (Mal. 3:6; James1:17). Although salvation is bestowed as a matter of God’sgrace, faith is the means by which it is received (Rom. 3:21–25).Yet faith is not a work and is never said to earn God’s grace(Eph. 2:8). Good works are the evidence of a life that hasexperienced the grace of God.
Rebirthand Eternal Life
Scripturereveals that salvation is imparted through regeneration or rebirth.Jesus describes it as being “born again” (John 3:3, 7).Paul uses a related concept when he writes that we are saved “throughthe washing of rebirth” (Titus 3:5). Peter teaches essentiallythe same thing: “He has given us new birth” (1Pet.1:3). The life that is imparted is “eternal” (John 3:16;10:28; 17:2; Rom. 6:23). Paul maintains that God’s gifts andcall are irrevocable (Rom. 11:29). Thus, there is no notion in theScriptures that a regenerated follower of Christ ever becomesunregenerate, nor does eternal life ever morph into somethingtemporal. In praying to the Father, Jesus notes that believers are agift from the Father to the Son, and that none of them would be lost(John 17:2, 12). Judas Iscariot’s perdition clearly was part ofGod’s sovereign plan (John 17:12; Acts 1:16).
Protectionof the Believer
TheHoly Spirit is said to seal or be the seal of believers. Paul writes,“When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, thepromised Holy Spirit” (Eph. 1:13). This refers to the divineownership and protection granted to the believer, who has been given“the Spirit as a deposit,” guaranteeing that God willfinish the work that he began (2Cor. 5:5; Phil. 1:6). Jesustaught the same truth regarding the believer’s security: “Noone will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them tome, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’shand” (John 10:28–29). Peter maintained this sameconfidence when he wrote that the believer is shielded through faith“by God’s power” (1Pet. 1:5). One of thestrongest arguments for the security of the believer is found in Rom.8:38–39: “Neither death nor life, neither angels nordemons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neitherheight nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able toseparate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”Something greater than God would be needed to wrestle salvation fromthose to whom he has granted it.
Notall Christians believe that the Bible teaches eternal security,citing passages that seem to imply that a saved individual can againbecome lost and suffer eternal judgment, most likely referring to thesevere yet temporal discipline of God directed toward his erringchildren or toward those who depart from the faith because they weremerely professing believers (Matt. 13:20–21, 24–30; John15:6; 1Cor. 11:30–32; 2Cor. 11:13–15; 2Tim.4:10, 14; Heb. 6:4–9; 10:26–31; 2Pet. 2:1, 22;1John 2:19; 5:16; 2John 9; Rev. 2:5, 16). But those whodefend the doctrine believe these passages do not contradict thisteaching; they merely reveal that God purposes to accomplish thiswork with the cooperation of the believer (1John 5:4; Rev. 2:7,11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21).
Thewriter to the Hebrews, who lays down some of the most severe warningsin the NT, nevertheless maintains that God is “able for alltime to save,” and that his readers did not belong to those who“shrink back and so are lost” (Heb. 7:25; 10:39 NRSV).Jude asserts that God is able to present the believer “withoutfault” before his presence (Jude 24). Essentially, this is whatJesus says in John 10:28–29: “They shall never perish”(cf. 17:12). The loss of one sheep would impugn the power andcharacter of God, who not only saves by grace but also keeps us byhis grace and in his grace (Rom. 5:2).
A title designating members of the group of twelve disciples(Matt. 10:2–4; Mark 3:16–19; Luke 6:13–16) whor*ceived Jesus’ teaching (Luke 17:5) and to whom he grantedauthority (Mark 6:7, 30; Luke 9:1, 10). Matthias later replaced JudasIscariot (Acts 1:24). These apostles provided leadership to the earlychurch in Jerusalem (Acts 15:6), performed miracles (Acts 2:43;2 Cor. 12:12), and faced persecution (Acts 5:18) as theytestified to Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 4:33; 5:32). Broaderusage of the term includes witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection(1 Cor. 15:7), James the brother of Jesus (Gal. 1:19), Barnabasand Paul (Acts 14:14), and possibly Silas (1 Thess. 2:6) andAndronicus and Junias/Junia (Rom. 16:7). Paul regularly speaks of hiscalling in apostolic terms (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor.1:1; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1;Titus 1:1), while Peter similarly self-identifies (1 Pet. 1:1;2 Pet. 1:1). The word is once used of Jesus himself (Heb. 3:1).
The biblical writers proclaim that only one God exists, yetthey also refer to three persons as “God.” The Father,the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all God. Furthermore, these threepersons relate to one another as self-conscious individuals. Jesusprays to the Father (John 17). The Father speaks from heavenconcerning the Son (Matt. 3:17; Luke 3:22). Jesus vows to send theSpirit as “Advocate” after his ascension, and he will dowhat Jesus himself did while he was among us (John 16:7–8). Thechallenge of Christian theology, therefore, is to formulate adoctrine of God that captures all these elements, each of whichsurfaces in both Testaments.
OldTestament
Inthe OT, evidence for the Trinity appears mostly at the implicitlevel. Yahweh is called “Father” in Isaiah (63:16; 64:8),Jeremiah (3:4, 19; 31:9), and Malachi (2:10). Isaiah declares, “Butyou are our Father, though Abraham does not know us or Israelacknowledge us; you, Lord, are our Father, our Redeemer from of oldis your name” (Isa. 63:16). Yahweh identifies himself as“Father” implicitly when he claims Israel as his “son”(Hos. 11:1), and the same principle applies to Ps. 2:7, where Goddeclares to his anointed, “You are my son; today I have becomeyour father.” These cases do not compare in numbers with the NTevidence, but a person thought of as “God the Father”certainly appears in the OT.
Messianictexts of the OT introduce us to God the Son. In Isa. 9:6 a “childis born” who will be called “Wonderful Counselor, MightyGod, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” The day of“Immanuel,” or “God with us,” is foreshadowedin Isa. 7:14 (cf. Matt. 1:22), while Isa. 40:3–5 anticipatesthe appearance of the Lord “in the wilderness” (cf. Matt.3:3). Daniel sees “one like a son of man, coming with theclouds of heaven” being given “authority, glory andsovereign power” (Dan. 7:13–14). In Ps. 110:1 Yahweh saysto David’s “Lord,” “Sit at my right handuntil I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”
Similarly,the OT seems to distinguish the Spirit of God from Yahweh whileimplying the Spirit’s own personality. Genesis 1:2 makes thatcase, as does Exod. 31:3, where Yahweh fills Bezalel with the “Spiritof God” (cf. Exod. 35:31; Num. 11:29). In 1Sam. 16:14 acontrast is made between the “Spirit of the Lord” thatleaves Saul and an “evil spirit from the Lord” thattorments him; also we find a repentant David pleading that God wouldnot take away his “Holy Spirit” (Ps. 51:11). The Spiritcan be put on persons by God, with the result that they prophesy(Isa. 61:1; Joel 2:28–29) and do what pleases him (Ezek.36:26–27). In the OT, therefore, we see two persons (the Sonand the Holy Spirit) who are both God and also distinguishable fromone to whom they answer and by whom they are sent.
NewTestament
TheNT contains abundant evidence for “God the Father,” oftenbecause of Jesus’ teaching. The “Father” appearsseveral times in the Sermon on the Mount (e.g., Matt. 5:16; 6:6–9,14, 18, 26, 32; 7:11). Matthew 7:21 stands out because of Jesus’reference to “my Father who is in heaven,” by which heidentifies himself as the Son (see also Matt. 15:13; 16:17; 18:10;and Luke 24:49). Paul’s greetings normally come from God theFather and the Lord Jesus Christ, as seen in Rom. 1:7: “Graceand peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ”(also 1Cor. 1:3; 2Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:1–3; 1Tim.1:2; 2Tim. 1:2). Paul introduces the Father and the Son in1Cor. 8:6: “For us there is but one God, the Father, fromwhom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord,Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live”(see also 1Cor. 15:24; 2Cor. 11:31; Eph. 1:3; Phil.2:22). Other significant texts include Heb. 1:5; 1Pet. 1:2–3;in the latter, the scattered believers are those “who have beenchosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through thesanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ andsprinkled with his blood.... Praise be to the Godand Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!” The NT evidence for “Godthe Father” is clear.
Biblicaltexts that point to the deity of Christ supply evidence for thesecond claim: the Son is God. Some of the texts listed above say asmuch, but one can take this case further. In context, John’sprologue refers to Jesus as the “Word” and proclaims thathe was “with God” and “was God” (John 1:1).Jesus also relates to the Father in ways that imply his own deity, ashe declares in John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.”After significant doubting, Thomas confesses the deity of Christ inJohn 20:28: “My Lord and my God!” NT passages thatidentify Jesus as the “Son of God” point to his deity, asPeter does in Matt. 16:16: “You are the Messiah, the Son of theliving God.” Even demons identify Jesus as the Son. They callout, “What do you want with us, Son of God? ...Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?”(Matt. 8:29; cf. Mark 5:7). The so-called Christ Hymn of Phil. 2:6–11puts Jesus on the level with God, saying that he did not consider“equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.”The author of Hebrews declares that Jesus is “the radiance ofGod’s glory and the exact representation of his being”(1:3). Colossians 1:15–16 says that Jesus is the “imageof the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation” and theone by whom “all things were created,” and Col. 1:19states that “God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell inhim.” According to Titus 2:13, Jesus is “our great Godand Savior.” The entire sequence of Rev. 4–5 highlightsthe deity of Christ, culminating in the praise “To him who sitson the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory andpower, for ever and ever!” as both the Enthroned One and theLamb are worshiped as God (5:13–14).
TheNT writers underscore both the deity and the distinctive personalityof the Holy Spirit. Jesus is conceived in Mary’s womb by theSpirit’s power (Matt. 1:18–20), and when Jesus isbaptized, the Spirit descends upon him as a dove (Matt. 3:16; Mark1:10). Jesus drives out demons by the Spirit, and one dare not speakagainst the Spirit when he does so (Matt. 12:28–32). Luke’sGospel puts added emphasis on the ministry of the Spirit, as we alsosee in Acts. He empowers various people to praise and prophesy (Luke1:41, 67) and to be witnesses for Christ (Acts 1:8; 2:4, 17–18,38). Sinners can lie to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3, 9), and the HolySpirit bears witness along with the apostles to the risen Christ(5:32). In John’s Gospel, the Spirit becomes the counselor andteacher of the disciples, reminding them of their Lord’sinstructions (John 14:26; 16:13). The Spirit brings assurance ofsonship (Rom. 8:16) and helps disciples when they pray (8:26). Thisperson even knows the very thoughts of God (1Cor. 2:11).Accordingly, the Great Commission requires baptism in the name of theFather, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19). All three membersof the Trinity have a part in the advancement of the kingdom, theSpirit no less than the Father and the Son.
Relationshipsbetween Father, Son, and Spirit
Theevidence considered thus far demonstrates that three persons arecalled “God” in Scripture: the Father, the Son, and theHoly Spirit. But the Scriptures also point to a chain of command intheir relationship to one another. The Son obeys the Father, and theSpirit proceeds from the Father and the Son to apply the work of thecross to the church. This “functional subordination” ofthe Son to the Father, some might argue, would follow simply from theanalogy chosen by God to reveal himself to us. The “Son”would obey his “Father,” not vice versa, though theyshare a common dignity as God, just as a human father and son share acommon humanity. But the NT writers expressly tell us that theyrelate to each other in this way. In Matt. 11:27 (cf. Luke 10:22)Jesus announces, “All things have been committed to me by myFather” (cf. John 3:35; 5:22). The latter transfers authorityto the former as his subordinate. The Father even (for a season)knows more than the Son regarding the last days: “About thatday or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,but only the Father” (Matt. 24:36), though he also dignifiesthe Son: “For the Father loves the Son and shows him all hedoes” (John 5:20). The Son’s commitment to please hisheavenly Father is a prominent theme of the NT, as Jesus declares inJohn 5:19: “The Son can do nothing by himself; he can do onlywhat he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does theSon also does.” No text brings out this dependence of the Sonupon the Father more clearly than Heb. 5:7–8, where the Son issaid to have “offered up prayers and petitions with ferventcries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he washeard because of his reverent submission. Son though he was, helearned obedience from what he suffered.” It is debated bytheologians whether this functional subordination relates only to theperiod of the Son’s earthly ministry, or whether it is aneternal subordination.
TheSpirit, though equal in personality and dignity with the Father andthe Son, proceeds from them to apply the work of the cross andempower the church for ministry. In John 14:26 Jesus says, “TheAdvocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, willteach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said toyou.” In John 15:26 Jesus announces that he also sends theSpirit out: “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to youfrom the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from theFather—he will testify about me.” The Spirit only conveyswhat he has received: “He will not speak on his own; he willspeak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come”(John 16:13). The same “chain of command” appears in John16:15, where Jesus says, “All that belongs to the Father ismine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what he willmake known to you.”
TrinitarianHeresies
TheFather, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are God, while beingdistinguishable persons. The Son obeys the Father; and these twopersons of the Trinity send out the Holy Spirit to implement ourdeliverance from sin. A defensible explanation of the Trinity willrespect all these dynamics, taking special care not to illustratethem with misleading images or simply lapse into various forms ofpolytheism. One of the earliest heresies of the church came fromMarcion, a second-century theologian who distinguished the Father ofJesus from the supposedly vindictive God of the OT, which leaves uswith more than one God. Later came the heresies of modalism andsubordinationism (or Arianism). Modalists claimed that the persons ofthe Trinity are no more than guises worn by the one person of God.One minute God is the Father, the next he is the Son or the HolySpirit. Subordinationists such as Arius (died AD 336) went beyond thefunctionality of the NT’s chain of command, arguing that theSon and the Holy Spirit are not themselves God but are essentiallysubordinate to him. Jehovah’s Witnesses have fallen into thislatter error, suggesting that Jesus is “a god” but notthe Creator God.
Theseearly heresies pressed the church to refine its understanding of theTrinity. In his response to Marcion’s error, Tertullian coinedprecise language to describe the persons of the Godhead, so thatGod’s “threeness” and “oneness” arepreserved. He used the Latin term trinitas to describe the ChristianGod and argued that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit sharethe same “substance.” The Son (also, then, the HolySpirit) is not simply of “like substance” (Gk.hom*oiousios) with God the Father, but rather is “consubstantial”(Gk. hom*oousios) with him: the Son is God, and so is the Holy Spirit.The Nicene Creed of AD 325 incorporated this explanation and, in sodoing, also set aside the idea that either the Son or the Holy Spiritwas created by God, as the Arian heresy requires. Nicaea alsorejected adoptionism, which regards Jesus as a man whom God promotedby endowing him with supernatural powers.
Eachof these heresies—plus, say, the strict monotheism ofIslam—attempts to relieve the tension seen among the claimsthat constitute the Trinity; however, orthodox Christians willremember that tensions and paradoxes are not automaticcontradictions. No philosopher or theologian has ever expresslydemonstrated that the Trinity entails logical nonsense, andChristianity’s detractors carry the burden of proof in thiscase. It is one thing to allege that an idea is contradictory, andquite another thing to show with an argument that it is so. On thepositive side, the Trinity must remain a central doctrine of thechurch because it affects all the others, especially the entire workof redemption. If God is not triune, then Jesus is not God; and if heis not God, then he cannot save us, nor can we worship him as ourLord. The sacrifice that he offers for our sin would not, in thatcase, be supremely valuable. Consider also the application to us ofwhat Christ has done. If the Holy Spirit is not God, then he cannotspeak for God as one who knows perfectly his thoughts and gives usthe word of God, our Bible. Scripture indicates that God is triune,and sinners need him to be so.
A call or calling is God’s summons to live one’s life in accordance with his purposes. At creation God instructed Adam to fill the earth and subdue it, and to have dominion over it. God created Eve to be Adam’s lifelong companion and to help him fulfill this task (Gen. 1:28). Thus, in the broader (universal) sense, the notion of calling includes the ordinances that God established at creation: work (Gen. 2:15), marriage (2:18, 24), building a family (1:28), and Sabbath rest (2:2–3).
When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became alienated from God (Gen. 3:6–19). Their fall brought the same plight of alienation from God upon all humanity. However, it did not abolish the human duty to carry out God’s original creation ordinances. Since God showers his blessings on everyone alike (common grace), all human beings possess gifts and are given opportunities to “fill” the earth and “subdue” it. Thus, everyone participates in the universal call (Acts 17:25–26). This has come to be called the “cultural mandate.”
However, God’s original intention was to have communion with human beings. This could not be realized unless he made provision for human beings to be reconciled with him. Against this backdrop, God initiated his plan to redeem people from their plight of spiritual alienation.
The general call. The promise of God to bring deliverance through a future descendant of Eve established the provision for individuals (e.g., Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah) to be “called” back into a relationship of favor with him (Gen. 3:15). The first occasion when this call is made explicit is in God’s call to Abram to leave his country and go to a land that God would show him (11:32–12:1). God promised that Abram would become the father of a nation (12:2–3). In response to God’s call and his promise, Abram believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (15:6). Abram’s call was implicitly twofold. First, it was a general call to acknowledge this God as the true God and yield to his lordship. Second, it entailed a specific call to leave his country and journey toward a new country.
Several generations later, God appointed Moses to lead these descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, where they had lived for four hundred years. God’s act of delivering them from slavery in Egypt also symbolized redemption from sin’s bondage (Exod. 20:2). God had called the people by means of a covenant to be his own special people, to serve him as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (19:5–6). This was a call to set their lives apart for God by living according to his commands. This general call was more than a verbal summons; it was also the means God used to bring his people into existence (Hos. 11:1).
The NT indicates there is a general call to all people to believe in Christ (Matt. 11:28; Acts 17:30) that becomes effective in the ones that God has already chosen (Matt. 22:14; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4–5). The latter, which theologians identify as the “effectual call,” is what Paul refers to when he says, “Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . . And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Thus, this is also a sovereign call.
Particular callings. God has endowed each individual Christian with a particular gift set and calls each one to use those gifts in a variety of ways in service to him (1 Pet. 4:10). These callings include one’s occupation, place of residence, status as married or single, involvement in public life, and service in the local church. In the OT, God gifted Bezalel and “filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills” (Exod. 35:31–32) to beautify the tabernacle. In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that God has made each of us stewards of whatever he has entrusted to us; we are to become skilled in the use of our gifts and to seek opportunities to use them in service to him (Matt. 25:14–30). Desire is an important factor in discerning one’s particular callings (Ps. 37:4). One’s particular calling is progressive, unfolding through the different seasons of one’s life (Eph. 2:10; 1 Cor. 7:20, 24). No particular calling is more “sacred” than another in God’s eyes.
Showing
1
to
50
of1206
results
1. Taking Grace Seriously
Illustration
John R. Steward
There was a king who held court every day. He would sit on his throne wearing his robe and crown as the people of his country would come to him stating their needs and requests. Each day, in addition to all the people who would come to the throne, there was also a holy man dressed in a beggar's robe who would come to the king. The holy man would hand the king a piece of fruit which the king would receive and then hand over to one of his assistants. Then the holy man would leave without ever saying a word to the king. This went on for many months and even years. Then one day something happened that no one expected. No one knew that a monkey had gotten loose in the palace. When the holy man presented his gift of fruit to the king, the monkey jumped up on the stage and grabbed the fruit out of the hand of the king. Then the monkey took a bite out of the fruit and all were amazed at what they saw, because precious jewels fell out of the fruit. The king quickly turned and asked his assistant what he had been doing with the fruit. The assistant said that they had been throwing the fruit through the window of a locked room. When they opened the door of that room they found among the rotten and decaying fruit a fortune in jewels.
We fail to take the grace of God seriously. Perhaps because it is a free gift that comes to us in the form of a cross. It does not seem very valuable. Let us pray that God will give us a new understanding of his grace and mercy in Jesus Christ.
Adapted from William A. Miller, Make Friends with Your Shadow (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House), p. 128. Used by permission.
2. God's Children
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
A Sunday school superintendent had two new boys in her Sunday school. In order to register them she had to ask their ages and birthdays. The bolder of the two said, "We're both seven. My birthday is April 8, 1976, and my brother’s is April 20, 1976." "But that's impossible!" answered the superintendent. "No, it's not," answered the quieter brother. "One of us is adopted." "Which one?" asked the superintendent before she could curb her tongue. The boys looked at each other and smiled, and the bolder one said to the superintendent, "We asked Dad awhile ago, but he just said he loved us both, and he couldn't remember any more which one was adopted."
In Romans 8:17, Paul writes: "Now if we are [God's] children, then we are heirs—heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ . .." (NIV) Paul's comparison is to adoption. By our faith in Christ we become his adopted brothers and sisters—adopted sons and daughters of God. As fully adopted and accepted children, we share the same inheritance as the begotten Son, Jesus. No wonder all creation waits eagerly for the full revealing and adoption to happen!
3. Blasphemy Against the Spirit
Illustration
Staff
This statement (Matt 12:32, par Mk. 3:29, Luke 12:10) has been the subject of much questioning. Obviously the reference here is not to the naming of the Holy Spirit in a blasphemous utterance, for in Matt. 12:32 even blasphemy against the Son of man can be forgiven. Among the many attempts at exegesis, the most convincing is the suggestion that the man who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit is he who has recognized that God is working through the Holy Spirit in the actions of Jesus, and who quite consciously "misrepresent faith in God as faith in the devil. This saying is an extremely serious warning against the demonic and scarcely conceivable potential in man: To declare war on God. This is not done in weakness and doubt, but by one who has been overcome by the Holy Spirit and who knows very well on whom he is declaring war" (E. Schweizer, The Good News according to Mark, 1971, 87; cf. H.W. Beyer, TDNT I:624; O.E. Evans, "The Unforgivable Sin", ExpT 68, 1956-57, 240-44). This is the blasphemer who does it deliberately, after encounter with the God of grace, as the context shows. For Jesus has just been accused of casting out demons by Beelzebul, the prince of demons. "Therefore he who blasphemes the Spirit is no longer speaking against a God who is distant, about whom he entertains mere foolish thoughts, but against the one who makes evident to him his gracious work, and confirms it with his manifest, divine seal. He is a man who ought to give thanks, not to blaspheme" (A. Schlatter, on Matt. 12:32).
W.L. Lane draws attention to Sifre on Deut. 32:38 (end): "The Holy One, blessed be he, pardons everything else, but on profanation of the Name [i.e. blasphemy] he takes vengeance immediately" (The Gospel of Mark, NLC, 1974, 145) Lane goes on to comment: "This is the danger to which the scribes exposed themselves when they attributed to the agency of Satan the redemption brought by Jesus. The expulsion of demons was a sign of the intrusion of the Kingdom of God. Yet the scribal accusations against Jesus amount to a denial of the power and greatness of the Spirit of God. By assigning the action of Jesus to a demonic origin the scribes betray a perversion of spirit which, in defiance of the truth, chooses to call light darkness. In this historical context, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit denotes the conscious and deliberate rejection of the saving power and grace of God released through Jesus' work and act" (ibid). Thus blasphemy here is much more serious than the taking of the divine name in vain which a believer may have done before coming to repentance and faith.
It may be said to those who have been tormented by fear that they have committed the unforgivable sin that their concern is itself a sign that they have not committed the sin envisaged in Jesus' teaching here. Lane's interpretation also helps to explain the distinction drawn between blasphemy against the Son of man and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The distinction suggests that "while an attack on Jesus' own person, as son of Man and therefore 'hidden', is pardonable, any speaking against the power by which he works (i.e. the divine endowment for his messianic ministry) will not be pardoned" (D. Hill, The Gospel of Matthew, New Century Bible, 1972, 318). For such an action would be deliberately to attribute to Satan the action of God himself. (NIDNTT, v. 3, pp. 343-344)
What is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? Though many suggestions have been offered, I think the answer lies in the context here (Luke 12:7-12) and in the context of redemptive history. Remember that the Holy Spirit had not yet been poured out, and it is the Spirit who causes men to recognize who Jesus is. Hebrews 6 and 10 contain discussions of unforgivable sins, but the distinction between blasphemy against Christ and the Spirit has disappeared. Jesus seemed to be saying this: Because the Holy spirit has not yet been poured out in fullness, the Jews will be forgiven for blaspheming the Son of Man. They will be given a second chance to repent, as we see in the book of Acts. If, however, they continue to blaspheme after the Spirit has come, they will not be forgiven. But what is the sin, specifically? Since it is blasphemy, we must see it essentially as a verbal sin. In context it is the sin of saying that Jesus Christ is of the devil. Jesus was willing to excuse this blasphemy before Pentecost; but, in the new covenant era it is not longer excusable. If a person curses Jesus, but does not really know who Jesus is, that sin is forgivable. But if the Holy Spirit has borne witness to a person that Jesus is indeed the Son of God, and that person curses Him, it cannot be forgiven.
4. Athanasian Creed
Illustration
Brett Blair
Athanasian Creed:Athanasius, known as Athanasius of Alexandria, was the 20th bishop of Alexandria. His intermittent episcopacy spanned 45 years, of which over 17 encompassed five exiles. He istraditionally thought to be the author of the thisCreed named after him.It was createdto guardNicene Christianity from the heresy of Arianism. It is widely accepted as orthodox and some abbreviated versions of it are still in usetoday. And yes, the intro and outro are actually part of the original text.
Whoever desires to be saved should above all hold to the catholic faith.
Anyone who does not keep it whole and unbroken will doubtless perish eternally.
Now this is the catholic faith:
That we worship one God in trinity and the trinity in unity,
neither blending their persons
nor dividing their essence.
For the person of the Father is a distinct person,
the person of the Son is another,
and that of the Holy Spirit still another.
But the divinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one,
their glory equal, their majesty coeternal.
What quality the Father has, the Son has, and the Holy Spirit has.
The Father is uncreated,
the Son is uncreated,
the Holy Spirit is uncreated.
The Father is immeasurable,
the Son is immeasurable,
the Holy Spirit is immeasurable.
The Father is eternal,
the Son is eternal,
the Holy Spirit is eternal.
And yet there are not three eternal beings;
there is but one eternal being.
So too there are not three uncreated or immeasurable beings;
there is but one uncreated and immeasurable being.
Similarly, the Father is almighty,
the Son is almighty,
the Holy Spirit is almighty.
Yet there are not three almighty beings;
there is but one almighty being.
Thus the Father is God,
the Son is God,
the Holy Spirit is God.
Yet there are not three gods;
there is but one God.
Thus the Father is Lord,
the Son is Lord,
the Holy Spirit is Lord.
Yet there are not three lords;
there is but one Lord.
Just as Christian truth compels us
to confess each person individually
as both God and Lord,
so catholic religion forbids us
to say that there are three gods or lords.
The Father was neither made nor created nor begotten from anyone.
The Son was neither made nor created;
he was begotten from the Father alone.
The Holy Spirit was neither made nor created nor begotten;
he proceeds from the Father and the Son.
Accordingly there is one Father, not three fathers;
there is one Son, not three sons;
there is one Holy Spirit, not three holy spirits.
Nothing in this trinity is before or after,
nothing is greater or smaller;
in their entirety the three persons
are coeternal and coequal with each other.
So in everything, as was said earlier,
we must worship their trinity in their unity
and their unity in their trinity.
Anyone then who desires to be saved
should think thus about the trinity.
But it is necessary for eternal salvation
that one also believe in the incarnation
of our Lord Jesus Christ faithfully.
Now this is the true faith:
That we believe and confess
that our Lord Jesus Christ, God's Son,
is both God and human, equally.
He is God from the essence of the Father,
begotten before time;
and he is human from the essence of his mother,
born in time;
completely God, completely human,
with a rational soul and human flesh;
equal to the Father as regards divinity,
less than the Father as regards humanity.
Although he is God and human,
yet Christ is not two, but one.
He is one, however,
not by his divinity being turned into flesh,
but by God's taking humanity to himself.
He is one,
certainly not by the blending of his essence,
but by the unity of his person.
For just as one human is both rational soul and flesh,
so too the one Christ is both God and human.
He suffered for our salvation;
he descended to hell;
he arose from the dead;
he ascended to heaven;
he is seated at the Father's right hand;
from there he will come to judge the living and the dead.
At his coming all people will arise bodily
and give an accounting of their own deeds.
Those who have done good will enter eternal life,
and those who have done evil will enter eternal fire.
This is the catholic faith:
one cannot be saved without believing it firmly and faithfully.
This ecumenical creed(428 A.D.) is probably unknown to most Christians because it is seldom, if ever, used in worship services. It is probably not used because of its length. The Nicene Creed has eighteen printed lines, whereas the Athanasian has 69. It is difficult for congregations to use because of the creed's intricate and complex terms.
Though the creed carries the name of Athanasius, he did not write it. It was the product of the church of his time. The creed was named after him to honor him for his brave and forceful defense of the Trinity. Athanasius (289-373) was a bishop in Alexandria, Egypt.
The creed deals primarily with the Trinity and Jesus as the Son of God. At this time, the heresy of Arius was prominent. He taught that Jesus was not fully human or divine and that the Holy Spirit was not God but only a divine influence. The Athanasian Creed denounced these false teachings and upheld the doctrine of the Trinity. Luther's high regard for this creed was expressed: "I doubt, since the days of the Apostles, anything more important and more glorious has ever been written in the church of the New Testament."
5. Faith and Expectation
Illustration
Larry Powell
Acts1:4-14 contains certain encouragements to the followers of Christ to be an "expectant" fellowship. With this in mind, let us consider some specific instances where expectancy is implied.
1. Acts 1:5: "For John baptized with water but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit." What is the difference between John’s water baptism and the baptism of the Holy Spirit?
a. John’s baptism. Water baptism was commonly practiced by the Jews long before the appearance of John. It symbolized religious purification, and in a more specialized use it was applied when new converts entered into Judaism (proselyte baptism). John, however, baptized both Jews and Gentiles as a rote of moral purification for the approaching Kingdom of God. Although John’s baptism would enable those who submitted to it to meet the "Day of the Lord," it was to be distinguished as different from a future baptism, administered by one who "will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire."
b. Baptism of the Holy Spirit. This baptism consists not in symbolic gestures of initiation, but in the receiving of "power." It does not ordain anybody for, or against, the future but rather manifests itself in a spiritual experience in the present. An initiatory baptism is symbolically accomplished once, whereas the baptism of the Holy Spirit may occur quite unrehearsed many times over. The element of expectation is contained in the selected scripture by the phrase, "But before many days, you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit."
2. Acts 1:7-8: "It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father had fixed by his own authority. But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you." The disciples have just asked Jesus a legitimate question regarding the nature of his mission. A simple "yes" or "no" answer would not have been sufficient inasmuch as if he replied, "Yes (I have come to restore the Kingdom of Israel)," it would have been a lie, and if he had replied "No," they would have become disillusioned with him in the beginning. Instead, he informs them that it is not for them to know all the mysteries of God - but there is a consolation: "You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you." Perhaps it is like saying to someone, "You cannot adequately define love, but nonetheless you can experience it." Here, the power of the Holy Spirit is promised, and they are encouraged to expect it in their own experience.
3. Acts 1:11: "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven?" I suppose the most logical answer would have been, "Because we are bewildered!" It would have been extremely difficult to have acted otherwise while witnessing their Lord being lifted up into heaven on a cloud. If that were not enough, two men in white robes suddenly appeared to stand by them and question their amazement. In all probability, at least one of the inferences here is that rather than gazing into heaven, it would be more proper to get on with the business of the Kingdom, teaching and preaching, and doing "whatsoever I have commanded you." However, they should pursue their tasks of soul-winning with an attitude of expectancy because "this Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way."
4. Acts 1:14. "All those with one accord devoted themselves to prayer." And we may be sure that their prayers contained expectancy. Expectancy for what? For the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the return of the risen Lord.
6. Pentecost, The Exciting Birth of a Church
Illustration
Carlyle Fielding Stewart
It was one of the most wonderful and exciting moments in the history of the Christian faith. The Holy Spirit had fallen fresh on the lives of believers. People were filled with the passion and fires of the Holy Ghost. They were shouting joy from all directions. They were gathered from every persuasion and city, every nation and province, all glorifying God, speaking in foreign tongues but understanding each other, expressing different voices but still in one accord. This was the time of Pentecost, when God saw fit to pour out the spirit which spawned the birth of the Christian Church.
Today we need the fervor, fire, tongues, passion, and Spirit of Pentecost. Today the Christian Church needs a rebirth of the spirit, where souls are on fire with the love of Christ, where barriers are broken down and superficial divisions which sequester and divide people are bridged through a unity of the Spirit. Today more than ever the church needs to recapture the fires of Pentecost so that souls can break free from bondage, and healing, deliverance, and the full power of God's anointing can be experienced in every medium and every idiom by people filled with Holy Ghost madness.
Too many churches today are devoid of the Spirit of Pentecost because they are dry, stale, and discordant, where parishioners are in a somnambulist stupor; where worship services are vapid, staid, and wooden; where the preaching is dull, flat, and insipid; where the singing is Geritol-tired and without the vim, verve, and verse which speaks of a crucified, died and risen Lord; where if anyone taps his foot and says, "Amen," he is stared into silence, and if anyone shouts, "Thank you, Jesus," or "Help me, Holy Ghost," parishioners call EMS, the DS or 911! Too many churches have become mausoleums for the dead rather than coliseums of praise for a living God. They have lost the spirit of Pentecost! They have lost their enthusiasm. They have lost their joy for Jesus and find themselves suffering from what William Willimon calls "Institutional and Spiritual Dry Rot." Pentecost marks the beginning of a new spiritual movement in Christ; a movement birthed through the fires of the Holy Spirit; a movement steeped in the spirit of hope, renewal, and spiritual transformation. It is a movement where souls are on fire with the passion of the Holy Spirit and the Church today more than ever needs to recapture that spirit. If the Church is to survive the next millennium it must recapture some of the praise and enthusiasm it had two millennia ago. The spiritual energy and vitality of Pentecost has sustained the Church through two millennia.
7. HOW TO KNOW THE WILL OF GOD
Illustration
John H. Krahn
How often has each of us struggled over an important decision? We considered the variety of alternatives; often we discussed the decision with our family and friends. Sometimes we prayed over it and sought God’s direction. "What would God want me to do?" we asked ourselves.
Unfortunately, there is much confusion about the subject of the will of God. The words, "It is the will of God," are used too freely. A catastrophe happens and people say glibly, "It’s his will." We sometimes do inappropriate things and pass them off by saying God willed that we did it. Many talk about searching for the will of God as if it were somehow lost and needed to be found.
First and foremost in God’s will is that all people be saved. The Bible tells us that God wills all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. Throughout Scripture we find God desiring that everyone have the joy of Jesus as their Lord and Savior. To not have Jesus is to be firmly in sin’s control ... to have faith in the Son of God is to be alive to our full creative potential as he controls our lives. Through a cross and a vacant grave our salvation has been secured. Jesus, unlike any of the gods in other religions, is a personal God, and those who know him personally will be well on their way to know the Father’s will. To have said, "I believe in Jesus Christ as my Savior" is to have taken the first step.
Our second step in knowing the will of God is to be Spirit-filled. In Ephesians 5:17 we read, "Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is." To not be willing to understand the will of the Lord is to be foolish. Now what is the will? We continue to read in verse 18, "And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery; but be filled with the Spirit." Now most of us are at least qualified to discuss what it’s like to be filled with wine or some other spirited liquid. To be drunk is to be controlled by the agent within. We act differently when we have the spirit within us. Likewise to be filled with the Holy Spirit is to be controlled also by an agent within. We have no more control over ourselves than we would have if we were drunk with alcohol. To be filled in the Spirit is to be dominated and controlled by the Spirit.
The third and final step in discovering the will of God for our lives you’re really going to like; you’ll eat it up. It is to do whatever you want to do. That’s right. Do what you want when you have a decision to make. In the Book of Psalms we read, "Delight in the Lord, and he will give you the desires of your heart." Notice that it says the desires of our hearts are given to us by God when we delight in him. God puts the desire in our hearts so that what we want is really what God wants. His will becomes our will, and conversely, our will is his will. The third step is possible when we have taken the first step of believing and the second of being filled by the Holy Spirit. Having taken the first two steps and having become well-versed in Scripture, we follow our desires (really God’s) and live according to his will. We set out in life without fear, and as we make our way, he provides us with the necessary corrections along the course.
8. Sermon Opener - New Wine
Illustration
Barbara Brokhoff
On the Day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit fell upon the waiting disciples, there were a number of extraordinary events occurring: there was the sound of a rushing wind, cloven tongues of fire appeared, and they all began to speak in other languages and the Holy Spirit gave them ability. The Jews who were visiting Jerusalem, from all nations, hearing them speak in their own tongues, were amazed at this startling phenomenon. They came to the hasty, false conclusion that the disciples must be drunk, and accused them, saying, "They have had too much wine!" "Not so!" said Peter. "It is only nine in the morning -- far too early to be fixed. They are not drunk, but rather filled with the new wine of the Spirit. This is what Joel the prophet foretold many years ago."
In other words, the Holy Spirit is New Wine and it cannot make you drunk. The Spirit will not cloud your mind, it won't cause you to talk stupidly, it won't make you an unsafe driver, and it won't give you a hangover. The disciples were not inebriated, but rather filled with God the Holy Spirit. They had not imbibed on the fruit of the vine, nor had they drunk the nectar of the gods, but they had been filled with the Divine Nectar, the New Wine from heaven. This Spirit will be a wine for all occasions, for all people.
Before his Ascension, Jesus had wanted his followers to know that the same Lord who had called them and ministered to them in his physical presence would now, through the Holy Spirit, always be with them. They must realize that the crucified, resurrected, and now ascended Lord would return. The same Spirit which dwelt in him would now dwell in them.
On this anniversary of the Day of Pentecost, when the Christian Church was born, let us be deeply grateful that the Spirit of Christ, in the power of the Holy Spirit, has come to us. Without the Holy Spirit, Christian discipleship would be impossible. We would have no understanding of spiritual things without the Spirit of Truth. We would never enjoy Christian fellowship with one another without the unity of the Spirit. We could never be effective Christian witnesses without the Spirit's power. In fact, we would have no life without the life-giving Spirit. Just as the body without breath is a corpse, so a church without the Holy Spirit is dead!
The rest of the sermon follows this outline:
1. They Waited And Prayed
2. The Specifics Of The Spirit's Coming
3. This New Wine Makes A Difference
9. Life's Little Fragments
Illustration
Max Lucado
Once there was an old man who lived in a tiny village. Although poor, he was envied by all, for he owned a beautiful white horse. Even the king coveted his treasure. A horse like this had never been seen before such was its splendor, its majesty, its strength.
People offered fabulous prices for the steed, but the old man always refused. "This horse is not a horse to me," he would tell them. "It is a person. How could you sell a person? He is a friend, not a possession. How could you sell a friend?" The man was poor, and the temptation was great. But he never sold the horse.
One morning he found that the horse was not in the stable. All the village came to see him. "You old fool," they scoffed, "we told you that someone would steal your horse. We warned you that you would be robbed. You are so poor. How could you ever hope to protect such a valuable animal? It would have been better to have sold him. You could have gotten whatever price you wanted. No amount would have been too high. Now the horse is gone, and you've been cursed with misfortune."
The old man responded, "Don't speak too quickly. Say only that the horse is not in the stable. That is all we know; the rest is judgment. If I've been cursed or not, how can you know? How can you judge?"
The people contested, "Don't make us out to be fools! We may not be philosophers, but great philosophy is not needed. The simple fact is that your horse is gone, and you are cursed."
The old man spoke again. "All I know is that the stable is empty, and the horse is gone. The rest I don't know. Whether it be a curse or a blessing, I can't say. All we can see is a fragment. Who can say what will come next?"
The people of the village laughed. They thought that the man was crazy. They had always thought he was a fool; if he wasn't, he would have sold the horse and lived off the money. But instead, he was a poor woodcutter, an old man still cutting firewood and dragging it out of the forest and selling it. he lived hand to mouth in the misery of poverty. Now he had proven that he was, indeed, a fool.
After fifteen days, the horse returned. He hadn't been stolen; he had run away into the forest. Not only had he returned, he had brought a dozen wild horses with him. Once again the village people gathered around the woodcutter and spoke. "Old man, you were right, and we were wrong. What we thought was a curse was a blessing. Please forgive us."
The man responded, "Once again, you go too far. Say only that the horse is back. State only that a dozen horses returned with him, but don't judge. How do you know if this is a blessing or not? You see only a fragment. Unless you know the whole story, how can you judge? You read only one page of a book. Can you judge the whole book? You read only one word of a phrase. Can you understand the entire phrase?
"Life is so vast, yet you judge all of life with one page or one word. All you have is a fragment! Don't say that this is a blessing. No one knows. I am content with what I know. I am not perturbed by what I don't."
"Maybe the old man is right," they said to one another. So they said little. But down deep, they knew he was wrong. They knew it was a blessing. Twelve wild horses had returned with one horse. With a little bit of work, the animals could be broken and trained and sold for much money.
The old man had a son, an only son. The young man began to break the wild horses. After a few days, he fell from one of the horses and broke both legs. Once again the villagers gathered around the old man and cast their judgments.
"You were right," they said. "You proved you were right. The dozen horses were not a blessing. They were a curse. Your only son has broken his legs, and now in your old age you have no one to help you. Now you are poorer than ever."
The old man spoke again. "You people are obsessed with judging. Don't go so far. Say only that my son broke his legs. Who knows if it is a blessing or a curse? No one knows. We only have a fragment. Life comes in fragments."
It so happened that a few weeks later, the country engaged in war against a neighboring country. All the young men of the village were required to join the army. Only the son of the old man was excluded, because he was injured. Once again the people gathered around the old man, crying and screaming, because their sons had been taken. There was little chance that they would return. The enemy was strong, and the war would be a losing struggle. They would never see their sons again.
"You were right, old man," they wept. "God knows you were right. This proves it. Your son's accident was a blessing. His legs may be broken, but at least he is with you. Our sons are gone forever."
The old man spoke again. "It is impossible to talk with you. You always draw conclusions. No one knows. Say only this: Your sons had to go to war, and mine did not. No one knows if it is a blessing or a curse. No one is wise enough to know. Only God knows."
10. Do You Want To Be More Spiritual?
Illustration
Clement E. Lewis
In his letter to the Philippians, Paul advised, "Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus." To the Romans he wrote, "To set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace." In order to be more spiritual, the mind needs to be fixed on abiding by the rules of spirituality. Our attitude toward God and Jesus Christ in spiritual matters, and in secular conduct has much to do with how we qualify spiritually. Our devotional, intentionally creative and conscientious participation help to enrich our spiritual manifestations.
The first requirement is to overcome the feelings of distance and strangeness in our relation to God. There are those who feel that God is aloof, or far from them, in spite of our being taught that God is everywhere. Someone asked, "When you feel far from God, who moved?" We need a working and conversational relationship with God, at least daily. Someone also asked, "Do you treat God like your doctor, only consulting with him when you have a problem?"
Learn to use prayer as an instrument of faith, rather than as a salve for conscience, or a plea in emergencies. We should, instead of praying out of duty, talk with God out of love for him and for the life he has given us. Be willing to be yourself with God, facing the truth as it really is, letting him guide you in knowledge and understanding.
Take stock of yourself, your interests and goals in life, and talk them over with God. You may do well to share them also with a good friend who has a deep reverence for life and for God. Ask yourself if what you think and feel would have the endorsem*nt of Jesus. Are you about to do what you sincerely believe is right under the circ*mstance and proper at the time? Are you putting off what you know ought to be considered because it may require more of you than you want to give of yourself, time, or substance? It is hard to feel spiritual comfort, or to be satisfied within yourself if these matters cannot be rightly dealt with.
We need to take our emotions and our reasoning both into account. Sometimes we are torn between the two. While matters of the heart are necessary to enjoy fulfillment, the mind must be in agreement, or an inner argument can ensue, causing regret for a long time. Spiritual joy dies when conflicts are not properly resolved. Remember, life is very personal, and resolution of feelings and problems are essential to spiritual growth.
Most people discover that when they have done the right thing, and have done their best in the interest of spiritual development and religious growth, inner peace comes to their lives. It is then that they come to full appreciation of the words, "To be spiritually minded is life and peace." Total commitment to God through Christ is the best means of finding that life and peace.
When we are truly spiritual persons we often find that we have considerable influence on others. These lines may well serve as our prayer.
May every soul that touches mine,
Be it the slightest contact, get therefrom some good,
Some little grace, one kindly thought,
One aspiration yet unfelt, one bit of courage
For the darkening sky, one gleam of faith
To brave the thickening ills of life;
One glimpse of brighter sky beyond the gathering mist,
to make this life worthwhile
And heaven a surer heritage. Amen.
A Closing Hymn: "Spirit Of The Living God"
11. Have You Got a Prayer? – Sermon Opener
Illustration
Mark Trotter
In the season of Epiphany we look at those special events in Jesus' life where his presence was especially manifested with power. Jesus' baptism is one of those epiphanies. You heard Luke's version read this morning. The Holy Spirit descended upon him in bodily form as a dove, and a voice came from heaven,"Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased." In newer translations, which are thought to be more accurate, the adjective "beloved" is made a separate phrase to emphasize the intensity of the personal nature of this experience. "You are my Son. My beloved. In thee I am well pleased."
That is Luke's version. All four gospels portray this scene. But Luke's version is a little different than the others. In each version, though, the Spirit descends"like a dove." The Holy Spirit is not a bird. Luke and the other apostles use the dove as a metaphor for the Spirit's coming into our lives. It is a beautiful metaphor. Have you ever seen a dove descend and land? It is graceful, gentle, and quiet. That's the point being made. That is the way the Holy Spirit will enter into our lives. The Holy Spirit came to Jesus gently, quietly, and in Luke's version, privately.
That is why Luke is different than the other three gospels. The other writers imply that the Spirit descended upon Jesus at his baptism, apparently when he was still in the water. That is the way this scene is often portrayed in religious art, especially those beautiful paintings out of the Middle Ages. Jesus, standing waist deep in water. John the Baptist standing next to him, pointing at Jesus, as if to say, "This is the one!" or, in the words of the Gospel of John, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world!" Above Jesus' head in these scenes is the Spirit, as a dove, descending. It is like the symbol that is in the baptismal font here, a nimbus around the Holy Spirit as he hovers above Jesus' head.
That's the way all the other gospels picture it. But Luke is different. He says,"Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the Holy Spirit descended upon him." Which means that the Epiphany, this special presence of God in this event, came to Jesus when he was by himself, praying. In other words, it wasn't a public event. It was a personal and private experience. No one else saw it. Noone else heard that voice from heaven. He came out of the water, went off by himself, and prayed. That is when it happened.
Luke, more than any other gospel, emphasizes that Jesus prayed…
12. A Mother’s Faith
Illustration
King Duncan
Augustine's mother, Monica, was a fervent believer who prayed constantly for her son's salvation. She devoted her whole life to praying for Augustine's conversion. At one point, when Augustine was becoming devoted to the Manichaean philosophy, Monica begged a holy man to speak to Augustine, and show him why their beliefs were not true. The holy man refused because Augustine was known to have a great intellect, and would likely try to savage the holy man's arguments. The holy man assured Monica that he, too, had once been a Manichaean, and that Augustine was too smart to deceive himself much longer. At this, Monica began to cry. The holy man sent her away, saying, "Go, go! Leave me alone. Live on as you are living. It is not possible that the son of such tears should be lost."
The holy man was right. After many years and a fierce inner struggle, Augustine was touched by a revelation in Scripture, and became a Christian. When Monica learned of her son's salvation, she remarked that she had nothing left to live for, for the greatest desire of her heart had been fulfilled. Nine days later, Monica died. And the son she had spent her life praying for, went on to affect the whole world.
Monica never quit asking. "Live on as you are living," said the holy man. "It is not possible that the son of such tears should be lost." Are you concerned about someone you love? Keep on asking God for help. Don't let your tears quench the flame of your faith in God. It may seem like God is ignoring you, but I assure you that is not the case. Don't give up. Keep asking. And keep on trusting.
13. The Apostles' Creed
Illustration
Staff
The earliest known mention of the expression "Apostles' Creed" occurs in a letter of AD 390 from a synod in Milan. The most traditional version of the creed is as follows:
I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit
and born of the virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to hell.
The third day he rose again from the dead.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.
From there he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic* church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.
*that is, the true Christian church of all times and all places
The Old RomanSymbol (Latin: vetus symbolum romanum), or Old Roman Creed, is an earlier and shorter version of the Apostles’ Creed. It was based on the 2nd-century Rule of Faith and the interrogatory declaration of faith for those receiving Baptism.It is said that this earlier and first adopted version wasbased on the Trinitarian formula found in The Great Commission in Matthew 28:19. It was widely accepted in the 4th century, that, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, each of the Twelve Apostles contributed an article to the twelve articles of thiscreed:
I believe in God the Father almighty;
and in Christ Jesus His only Son, our Lord,
Who was born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary,
Who under Pontius Pilate was crucified and buried,
on the third day rose again from the dead,
ascended to heaven,
sits at the right hand of the Father,
whence He will come to judge the living and the dead;
and in the Holy Spirit,
the holy Church,
the remission of sins,
the resurrection of the flesh
(the life everlasting)
The Apostles' Creed (100 A.D.) is the oldest and shortest creed with only 109 words in the traditional version. Only the New Testament creed, "Jesus is Lord," is older. It is also the most often used -- practically every Sunday, except for festivals and seasons when the Nicene Creed is confessed. Undoubtedly, it is the most universal statement of the Christian faith.
By 100 A.D. the Apostles' Creed became the basic statement of faith for the church. In the first century, it was the rule of faith for baptismal candidates. In 390 it became known as the Apostles' Creed, even though it was not written by the apostles but contained the beliefs of the apostles. An ancient legend has it that after Pentecost the apostles agreed on a summary of what they were going to preach. The summary was the Apostles' Creed. Yet, the creed did not reach its final form until the sixth or seventh century. Martin Luther held this creed in such high regard that he used it in his Small Catechism to teach families what a Christian believes. To this day the Small Catechism is used as the basis for youth and adult preparation for church membership in Lutheran churches.
14. The Wild Goose
Illustration
Mickey Anders
Celtic Christians chose, not the dove, but the wild goose as a symbol representing the Holy Spirit. It sounds strange to us, but it has a long tradition in Ireland.
While the Roman Church imagined the Holy Spirit in the form of a peaceful, graceful dove, the Ancient Celts understood the Holy Spirit to be like a wild goose. When you hear of the Spirit descending like a heavenly dove on you, you hear harps and strings softly playing and get a peaceful feeling. The image of the Holy Spirit as dove has become so familiar and domesticated an image we pay little attention.
The image of a wild goose descending upon you is a different matter altogether. A wild goose is one noisy, bothersome bird. I like this image of the Holy Spirit as a wild goose because it jars us out of our complacency. We need such an image to correct our overly safe and overly sweet image of the Spirit. One preacher friend asked, "How many times can you sing 'There's a Sweet, Sweet Spirit in This Place' without your blood sugar reaching diabetic levels?"
When the Spirit comes in the Bible, it never seems to be sweet or safe. God's Spirit called the prophets to speak to Israel in words that were bold and sometimes dangerous. Ezekiel saw a vision of God's Spirit blowing through a valley of dry bones and bringing them to life. John the Baptist dressed in camel's hair and eating wild locusts proclaimed, "I baptize you with water but he who comes after me will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire." Paul gave this advice to young Timothy, "For this reason I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you through the laying on of my hands; for God did not give us a spirit of cowardice, but rather a spirit of power and of love and of self-discipline" (2 Timothy 1:6-7).
Neither safe nor tame, the Spirit inspired Paul to proclaim, "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28).
It was this wild Goose that Jesus referred to when he preached his first sermon and quoted Isaiah, saying, "For the Spirit of the Lord is upon me for he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor, to proclaim release to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of God's favor" (Luke 4:18).
15. The Covenants of the Scripture
Illustration
Merrill F. Unger
Scripture'scovenants and their significance:
Eternal covenant, Hebrews 13:20 :The redemptive covenant before time began, between the Father and the Son. By this covenant we have eternal redemption, an eternal peace from the 'God of peace', through the death and resurrection of the Son.
Edenic covenant, Genesis 1:26-28: The creative covenant between the Triune God, as the first party (Genesis 1:26), and newly created man, as the second party, governing man's creation and life in Edenic innocence. It regulated man's dominion and subjugation of the earth, and presented a simple test of obedience. The penalty was death.
Adamic covenant, Genesis 3:14-19: The covenant conditioning fallen man's life on the earth. Satan's tool (the serpent) was cursed (Gen 3:14); the first promise of the Redeemer was given (3:15); women's status was altered (3:16); the earth was cursed (3:17-19); physical and spiritual death resulted (3:19).
Noahic covenant, Genesis 8:20-9:6: The covenant of human government. Man is to govern his fellowmen for God, indicated by the institution of capital punishment as the supreme judicial power of the state (Genesis 9:5-6). Other features included the promise of redemption through the line of Shem (Genesis 9:26).
Abrahamic covenant, Genesis 12:1-3; confirmed 13:14-17; 15:1-7; 17:1-8: The covenant of promise. Abraham's posterity was to be made a great nation. In him (through Christ) all the families of the earth were to be blessed (Galations 3:16; John 8:56-58).
Mosaic covenant, Exodus 20:1-31:18: The legal covenant, given solely to Israel. It consisted of the commandments (Exodus 20:1-26); the judgments (social) - (Exodus 21:1; 24:11) and the ordinances (religious); (Exodus 24:12-31:18); also called the law. It was a conditional covenant of works, a ministry of 'condemnation' and 'death' (2 Corinthians 3:7-9), designed to lead the transgressor (convicted thereby as a sinner) to Christ.
Palestinian covenant, Deut 30:1-10: The covenant regulating Israel's tenure of the land of Canaan. Its prophetic features include dispersion of disobedience (Deuteronomy 30:1), future repentance while in dispersion (30:2), the Lord's return (30:3), the restoration (30:4-5, national conversion (3:6), judgment of Israel's foes (30:7), national prosperity (30:9). Its blessings are conditioned upon obedience (30:8,10), but fulfillment is guaranteed by the new covenant.
Davidic covenant, 2 Samuel 7:4-17, 1 Chr 17:4-15: The kingdom covenant regulating the temporal and eternal rule of David's posterity. It secures in perpetuity a Davidic 'house' or line, a throne, and a kingdom. It was confirmed by divine oath in Psalm 89:30-37 and renewed to Mary in Luke 1:31-33. It is fulfilled in Christ as the World's Saviour and Israel's coming King (Acts 1:6; Rev 19:16; 20:4-6).
New covenant, Jeremiah 31:31-33; Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; Hebrew 8:8-12: The covenant of unconditional blessing based upon the finished redemption of Christ. It secures blessing for the church, flowing from the Abrahamic covenant (Galations 3:13-20), and secures all covenant blessings to converted Israel, including those of the Abrahamic, Palestinian, and Davidic covenants. This covenant is unconditional, final and irreversible.
16. Holy Because They Belong
Illustration
Michael P. Green
What do we mean when we say a thing is holy? Look at your Bible and it says, “Holy Bible.” What makes it holy? The land of Israel is called “The Holy Land,” and the city of Jerusalem is called “The Holy City.” Why? There is a quality about all three that they share in common. They all belong to God. The Bible is God’s book; Israel is God’s land; Jerusalem is God’s city. They are all God’s property! That is why they are holy; they belong to God.
17. !!!
Illustration
John H. Krahn
With the coming of the Holy Spirit an exclamation point was added to the Christian witness. Excitement had arrived. Power was present. Unbelief vanished. Fear fled. God, full throttle, was busy putting punch into preaching - cracking walls of unbelief, and giving the apostles a spiritual trip that they had never imagined possible.
At Pentecost the church is born. It had ceased to be an expectant enclave and now becomes a witnessing community. What emerged that day was a congregation filled with the power, excited over the message of salvation through Jesus Christ, alive at worship, consumed with love for one another, and devoted to the Lord. Their ministry was so positive that Luke tells us that the whole city was favorable to them.
We all get excited over the early success of the Christian Church, for everyone likes to hear a success story. In recent history, there have been fewer success stories in the church. In contemporary America, a congregation merely holding its own is seen as doing exceptionally well. The church has developed a failure mentality. At times even its leadership and its pastors speak in terms of its lessening influence and its ineffective witness. Disgraceful! All hell rejoices over such negatives.
When I recite the Creed every Sunday at our services, I believe what I say. "I believe in the Holy Ghost, the holy Christian Church." I really do. And I know you do also. I not only believe the church will remain, but I also believe it will flourish. The promises of God and the powerful Spirit are still with us!
There is no dream inspired by God and having the blessing of his Spirit that is unattainable for us. As a salesman member of our parish put it to me, "We have the greatest product there is, Jesus Christ." To which I might add, "We have a great area to market it. We all live in communities stocked with thousands of potential customers. In most cases only forty percent of them are worshiping regularly." I have only the highest hopes for the church’s future.
"I believe in the Holy Spirit." Pentecost continues to happen! The Spirit’s power is ours! We must seize the moment and become a dynamic church in every way to the glory of God until the Lord comes again!
18. Trifling with the Trinity
Illustration
Brett Blair
There's a trend on social media to cancel peoples livelihood for even the slightest offenses that the person attacking them doesn't like. It's been billed the "cancel culture."It's an evil behavior often by anonymous sources. But it's not new. More prevalent but not new. And it certainly has been in the church for a long time. Let's use the acrostic CCC: Christian Cancel Culture.
A religious weight loss program called Weigh Down created in 1992 by a woman named Gwen Shamblin grew from a small business conducted out of a home garage to a multimillion-dollar Nashville corporation with over 30,000 churches and organizations participating. But last year the whole movement was threatened and her business placed in jeopardy when Shamblin, on August 10th made comments regarding her beliefs in the Trinity. Here is what she said, "As a ministry, we believe in God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. However, the Bible does not use the word "trinity," and our feeling is that the word "trinity" implies equality in leadership, or shared Lordship. It is clear that the scriptures teach that Jesus is the Son of God and that God sends the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit does not send God anywhere. God is clearly the Head."
Her comments sent shockwaves through her community of followers and business partners. She was removed from the Women of Faith Web site, influential evangelical churches dropped her program, even some key employees left. Thomas Nelson, her publisher, quickly canceled the publication of her book that was then scheduled for release in one month. All of this because she trifled with the Trinity.
If you are confused as to why her words got her into so much trouble, that is quite understandable. The church has struggled to explain how God can be both One God and three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Where Mrs. Shamblin went wrong was in her statement that God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit were not equal in leadership. In an interview, she agreed that Jesus was both Lord and God but she maintained that Jesus held only a secondary and unequal relationship to the Father.
If you are still confused, let me ask you this: What is the conclusion of such a statement? It is this: Jesus is not fully God. This cuts at the heart of the church's historic teaching that Jesus Christ, in his very nature, was both fully God and fully man. It's a mystery which we accept through faith. Yet Shamblin tries to argue her point by saying that Christians grieve Jesus if they adhere to doctrines not found in Scripture. She says, "If God wanted us to refer to Himself, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit as the 'trinity,' He would not have left this word completely out of the Bible."
We must tread carefully when these kinds of claims are made. Just because a word is not in the bible doesn't mean that it is unbiblical. There are a lot of words that we use in the church that are not found in the Bible. In fact, the word Bible is not in the Bible.
Now we find ourselves this morning, on Trinity Sunday, struggling with this ancient doctrine. What are the essentials of our faith and why is the Trinity one of them? And how can we safeguard our pursuit of truth?
19. The Supreme Blessing
Illustration
Martin Luther
The supreme blessing in which one can truly know the goodness of God is not temporal possessions, but the eternal blessing that God has called us to His holy gospel. In this gospel we hear that God will be gracious to us for the sake of His Son, will forgive and eternally save us, and will protect us in this life against the tyranny of the Devil and the world. To someone who properly appreciates this blessing, everything else is a trifle.
Though he is poor, sick, despised, and burdened with adversities, he sees that he keeps more than he has lost. If he has no money and goods, he knows nevertheless that he has a gracious God; if his body is sick, he knows that he is called to eternal life. His heart has this constant consolation: Only a short time, and everything will be better.
20. The Meaning of All Religion
Illustration
Staff
What do we see in the image the gospel writer presents? We are told "they saw Jesus walking on the sea and coming near the boat". Certainly there is the man, Jesus, exercising a power no human has; there is the storm that presents such peril to those in the boat; there is the location distant from shore.
But what is behind what is told? What truth is present in the relation of the events?
Karl Barth expresses well what it is in "Der Romerbrief." We all "are encountered" by God.
"That we have found the Christ in Jesus of Nazareth is confirmed because all the manifestations of God's faithfulness are indications or prophecies of what has encountered us in Jesus. The hidden power of the law and the prophets is the Christ who encounters us in Jesus. The meaning of all religion is the redemption, the turn of the age, the resurrection, the invisibility of God that constrains us to silence in Jesus. The substance of all human happenings is the forgiveness under which they stand as it is proclaimed and embodied precisely in Jesus. No one need object that this power, this meaning, this substance is to be found not only in Jesus but elsewhere. For we ourselves affirm this very thing; indeed, precisely we can affirm it. What is known and found in Jesus is that God is found everywhere, that before and after Jesus mankind has been found by God; in him we have the criterion by which all finding and being found by God may be known as such and by which we can conceive this finding and being found as a truth of the eternal order. Many walk in the light of redemption, forgiveness, resurrection; but that we see them walk, that we have eyes for them, we owe to one. In his light we see light.
And that it is the Christ we have found in Jesus is confirmed because Jesus is the final word, which clarifies all the others and brings them to sharpest expression, of the faithfulness of God to which the law and the prophets bear witness."
21. Law and Gospel
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
Martin Luther asserted that the true theologian was the one who could rightly distinguish between law and gospel. When Lutherans, including this Lutheran, work at theology we almost always work within the parameters of law and gospel. Protestant theology in general talks about three uses of the law. The first use of law is usually termed the political or civil use of law. The second use of the law, the spiritual or theological use, is the law as a mirror in which we see our lives; the law as revealer of our sins. The third use of the law is law as a guide for Christian living. There is much debate even among Lutherans whether Luther taught the third use of the law. I do not believe that he did.
The function of the civil use of law is to help humankind create a civil society. Since all people bear the law within their being, all people can work to make society a more civil place to live. Preaching on the civil use of the law would call upon people to make use of their rational intelligence in making ethical decisions in life and in working toward a civil society. There is nothing particularly Christian about the civil use of the law. It need not, therefore, occupy too much of our preaching energy. The dialogical nature of the classroom is much better suited for the important discussions of the nature of the way we might best work for an improved civil order.
The theological or spiritual use of the law was for Luther the proper use of the law. The law, that is, reveals to us our sinfulness. "What then should we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet, if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin .... Apart from the law sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died, and the very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me (Romans 7:7, 8-10)."
The law always kills! That was Luther's dictum about the spiritual use of the law. The law always leaves me helpless, consigned to wrath, doomed to death. This is the proper use of the law and is therefore the proper use of the law in preaching. To preach the law is to render people helpless in their relationship to God. The law kills us and leaves us dead in the eyes of God.
The third use of the law is the law as a guide to Christian living. For Calvin this was the proper use of the law. This marks a radical breach among protestants. Some protestants see the law as God's revealed law for life. Clearly such a law should be preached so that people know how to live! I have already stated my conviction that Martin Luther did not teach the third use of the law in this manner. He did not believe that God revealed the law either to Israel or to Christians as a guide to living! The most radical instance of this is Luther's comments on the law as given to Moses. Luther said, "I keep the commandments which Moses has given, not because Moses gave commandments, but because they have been implanted in me by nature, and Moses agrees exactly with nature etc."1
Luther believed that the law was natural to every person alive. That's the first use of the law! For Luther, therefore, the law does not need to be revealed. If that is the case then we will need spend little time preaching the law as a guide to life. Here, too, it may be better to deal with such ethical questions about life in discussion forums under the assumption that each person brings unique resources, resources given them by God the Creator, to the discussion.
Preach the law. Preach the costly law. Preach the law that costs sinners their life and brings them to the point that they cry out for a Savior.
22. A Higher Value than Freedom
Illustration
Johnny Dean
If there's one thing we Americans value above everything else, it is freedom. We cherish, guard and exercise our freedom, and woe be unto those who threaten it in any way. We're even willing to go to war to defend freedom, whether it's ours or someone else's. We are the world's self-appointed watchdogs of freedom.
But Jesus says there's a higher value than freedom. The first words the writer of the Gospel of Matthew has Jesus speak are not about freedom, but about obedience to the will of God. That's what righteousness is all about, according to the gospel writer. Matthew uses the word righteousness seven times in his story of the life of Jesus, always connecting righteousness with being obedient to the will of God.
When Jesus comes to John the Baptist to be baptized in the Jordan, John protests. "It really should be the other way around here. You should be baptizing me. Why are you doing this?" And Jesus replies, "Just do it, John; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness."
23. Preaching on Prayers
Illustration
Staff
How important is faithfulness in prayer? Dr. Wilbur Chapman often told of his experience when, as a young man, he went to become pastor of a church in Philadelphia. After his first sermon, an old gentleman said to him, "You're pretty young to be pastor of this church. But you preach the Gospel, and I'm going to help you all I can."
Dr. Chapman thought, "Here's a crank." But the man continued: "I'm going to pray for you that you may have the Holy Spirit's power upon you. Two others have covenanted to join with me in prayer for you."
Dr. Chapman said, "I didn't feel so bad when I learned he was going to pray for me. The 3 became 10, the 10 became 20, and 20 became 50, the 50 became 200 who met before every service to pray that the Holy Spirit might come upon me. I always went into my pulpit feeling that I would have the anointing in answer to the prayers of those who had faithfully prayed for me. It was a joy to preach! The result was that we received 1,100 into our church by conversion in three years, 600 of whom were men. It was the fruit of the Holy spirit in answer to prayer!"
24. America: Fight For Your Country
Illustration
William J. Bennett
This is a snapshot and abbreviation of William J. Bennett's assessment of American culture in the 90's, looking back through the 20th century. Compare this "voice in the wilderness" to today's issues:
Last year I compiled the Index of Leading Cultural Indicators, a statistical portrait of American behavioral trends of the past three decades. Among the findings: Since 1960, while the gross domestic product has nearly tripled, violent crime has increased at least 560%. Divorces have more than doubled. The percentage of children in single-parent homes had tripled. And by the end of the decade 40% of all American births and 80% of minority births will occur out of wedlock. These are not good things to get used to.
In 1940 teachers identified the top problems in America's schools as: Talking out of turn, chewing gum, making noise and running in the hall. In 1990, teachers listed drugs, alcohol, pregnancy, suicide, rape and assault. These are not good things to get used to, either.
There is a coarseness, a callousness and a cynicism to our era. The worst of it has to do with our children. Our culture seems almost dedicated to the corruption of the young. We have become inured to the cultural rot that is setting in. People are losing their capacity for shock, disgust and outrage...
The ancients called our problem acedia, an aversion to spiritual things and an undue concern for the external and the worldly. Acedia also is the seventh capital sin sloth but it does not mean mere laziness. The slothful heart is stepped in the worldly and carnal, hates the spiritual and wants to be free of its demands.
When the novelist Walker Percy was asked what concerned him most about America's future, he answered, "Probably the fear of seeing America, with all its great strength and beauty and freedom...gradually subside into decay through default and be defeated, not by the communist movement, but from within, from weariness, boredom, cynicism, greed and in the end helplessness before its great problems."
I realize this is a tough indictment. If my diagnosis is wrong, then why, amid our economic prosperity and military security, do almost 70% of the public say we are off track? I submit that only when we turn to the right things enduring, noble, spiritual things will life get better.
Most important, we must return religion to its proper place. Religion provides us with moral bearings, and the solution to our chief problem of spiritual impoverishment depends on spiritual renewal. The surrendering of strong beliefs, in our private and public lives, has demoralized society.
Today, much of society ridicules and mocks those who are serious about their faith. America's only respectable form of bigotry is bigotry against religious people. And the only reason for hatred of religion is that it forces us to confront matters many would prefer to ignore.
Today we must carry on a new struggle for the country we love. We must push hard against an age that is pushing hard against us. If we have full employment and greater economic growth if we have cities of gold and alabaster but our children have not learned how to walk in goodness, justice and mercy, then the American experiment, no matter how gilded, will have failed.
Do not surrender. Get mad. Get in the fight.
Note: from "Excerpts from What Really Ails America," condensed from a speech by William J. Bennett, delivered December 7, 1993 at the Heritage Foundation, Washington, D.C., reprinted in Reader's Digest, April, 1994.
25. Oh, How The Mighty Have Fallen! - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
I am holding in my hands a copy of one of the world’s most revolutionary documents. In it are found these immortal words: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. . .” Of course, that document, the Declaration of Independence, is the charter of the American Revolution. Though we have not yet lived up to it, it has been the vision that inspires us.
The only document I know that is more revolutionary is in our Bible. It is called the Magnificat and is found in Luke, chapter 1, verses 39 through 56.
Back before India won its independence, it was under British rule. Bishop William Temple of the Anglican Church warned his missionaries to India not to read the Magnificat in public. He feared that it would be so inflammatory that it might start a revolution!
The document is all the more remarkable when one remembers that it came from the lips of a simple, teenaged girl named Mary. She grew up in the obscure village of Nazareth in what is now northern Israel. The angel Gabriel appeared to Mary and announced that she had been chosen to be the mother of the long-awaited Messiah. Gabriel told Mary that her aunt Elizabeth, well past the child-bearing age, had become pregnant. Immediately Mary went to visit Elizabeth. Under the influence of the Holy Spirit, both women sensed that God has chosen them for special tasks and would do great things through their children.
Mary was then given by the Holy Spirit insights far too profound for a simple teenager to originate. She declared the impact that her son would have upon the world. She announced three distinct revolutions, which Jesus would instigate and activate. She spoke of these revolutions in the past tense, as if they had already happened. The world has been reeling ever since under the influence of our revolutionary Lord.
A world shaping revolution is in place. Just this past week many wrongs in the mid East were set on the path of being righted: the proud have been scattered, the mighty have fallen, and the humble He has lifted. With these events in view let us turn not to the UN, not to any world leader, but to a young peasant girl named Mary, for it is HER words that are illustrated by these world events. Let’s consider that it was SHE that gave birth to the Revolution that is the pattern for all others.
1. The first nature of the revolution is spiritual.
2. The second nature of the revolution is social.
3. The third nature of the revolution is economic.
26. Faith in Jesus Christ
Illustration
Will Willimon
Princeton preacher James F. Kay puts it this way, "If the Gospel is good news, it is not because it predicts a bright, shiny future based on our morality or piety. The Gospel is neither a cocoon that insulates us from the sufferings of this present age nor a pair of ear plugs that shuts out the groaning of creation....The Gospel is Good News, not because it predicts a future based on our good behavior or other present trends; the Gospel is Good News because it promises a future based on God's faithfulness to Jesus Christ." (The Seasons of Grace, Eerdmann, 1995, p. 7).
27. Tongues: A Gift from God
Illustration
Merrill F. Unger
There are two aspects in the manifestation of tongues: first, the sign of tongues in Acts 2, 10, 19 (and probably in Ch 8); second, the gift of tongues in the early apostolic church. The gift under the second aspect evidently was not permanent (1 Cor 13:9-13), nor given to every believer. It required the concomitant gift of interpretation (1 Cor 12:10; 14:1-40). This sign gift with interpretation was meant to instruct the church before the completed NT Scriptures were given. Under the first aspect tongues were a means by which the Holy Spirit witnessed to Israel on the day of Pentecost (2:4-13). They were a sign of the truth that Jesus was the Messiah and an indication of the new age of the Spirit. The Jews were again challenged by the Samaritans' receiving the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:14-17), and, although this is not specifically mentioned, they may have been given the evidence that the despised Samaritans had actually received the same gift as the Jews, by the sign of their supernatural utterances (cf. 11:17).
This is the use of tongues in the introduction of the gift of the Holy Spirit to Gentiles (Acts 10:44-47). Nothing could have been more convincing to skeptical, unbelieving Peter and his Jewish colleagues than the fact that Cornelius and the other Gentiles spoke in supernatural languages just as the Jews at Pentecost.
The disciples of John the Baptist who received the Holy Spirit and spoke in languages they had never learned (Acts 19:6-10) were a similar witness to the strong Jewish community at Ephesus. For the disciples of John the Baptist, whom the Jews generally accepted as a God-sent prophet, to be blessed by the Holy Spirit after being baptized in the name of the rejected Messiah, was of the deepest significance. 'But some of them [the Jews] became obstinate; they refused to believe' as Isaiah (Isa 28:11-12) had predicted (1 Cor 14:22).
28. How The Mighty Have Fallen!
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
"How the mighty have fallen." King David of old once spoke those words concerning the death of King Saul. "How the mighty have fallen." These words have transcended the Bible and become the language of popular culture. A newspaper report a few years ago on some pastors who had fallen from grace used this biblical passage as its headline. The article was about two well-known television preachers -- Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker -- whose sins had been publicly exposed. "How the mighty have fallen" the newspaper headline gloated! Jimmy Swaggart is an interesting case in point.
Newsweek magazine once carried an article that featured this highly talented preacher. The article quoted one man as saying that Jimmy Swaggart was one of the most entertaining people on television in any field. The man didn't believe what Swaggart preached but he was dazzled by his entertainment and communication skills. "How the mighty have fallen!" Swaggart's sin seemed to be his fascination with p*rnography. One who knew him well over the years said: "His weakness for p*rnography finally beat him. He's fasted and prayed many times to overcome this weakness." Swaggart's weakness for p*rnography often led him to Louisiana brothels. It doesn't appear to be the case that Swaggart had sex with these women. He just asked them to pose for him in some suggestive ways. One night as he was leaving a brothel, however, someone who was out to expose him took some pictures. The pictures undid him. Scandal raged. Swaggart faced his congregation with tears running down his cheeks and remorse in his heart.
The response to Swaggart's fall was highly judgmental. People judged Swaggart harshly because he had been so judgmental in his preaching. In his judgments he came down on all sorts and varieties of people, including Christian people. Of the ministry of Jim Bakker, for example, Swaggart had said: "He's a cancer on the body of Christ that needs to be excised." Swaggart's preaching was judgmental indeed.
Swaggart was also judged harshly because of the peculiar nature of his message. Swaggart's message went beyond the proclamation of Jesus Christ to be a message fundamentally about the holiness work of the Holy Spirit. He proclaimed over and over again that through the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives we can overcome all sin. Thus he judged sinners. He invited sinners to be filled with the Holy Spirit in order to overcome all sin. Victory over sin would belong to all those who did business with the Holy Spirit.
What are we to think of this promise in light of Swaggart's own dark side? It's no wonder that some people relished the chance to defrock Swaggart in public. The mighty had fallen indeed. Hopefully he learned something from his trials. A hint of wisdom is evident in some of the things he says. For example, he said reflecting on his experiences: "I have seen that the gospel is perfect but its messengers are not." Jimmy Swaggart could now identify with Peter, who began his ministry with these words: "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord." Ministry always begins in confession!"
29. Humble Servanthood
Illustration
Scott Hoezee
Nothing succeeds in America like success, they say. We like winners and brush aside losers. Let me throw out some names for you: Alfred Landon, James Cox, John Davis, Charles Hughes, Alton Parker. Sound familiar? Probably not. Yet every one of them was so important and well thought of that at some point in the twentieth century each was a nominee for President of the United States. Millions voted for them, for a while their names were plastered all over the place. But then each one lost, of course, and in America, that's that.
We are a people in love with power and success, and this surely is one area among many that the gospel needs to address in our particular cultural context. Not unlike the people in Jesus' own day, we are swift to seize on anything that looks powerful and dazzling. The bigger the congregation, the more faithful we assume. We equate success, as the world defines it, with the work of the Holy Spirit because we can scarcely wrap our minds around the possibility that there could ever be an outwardly "successful" church that might actually work against the fundamentals of the gospel. "They must be doing something right," we say to each other about successful restaurants, enterprising entrepreneurs, and also church leaders who sell millions of books and draw large throngs of people.
And sometimes they are doing something right in the best sense. There are lots of people who are both faithful to Christ and who are successful in generating enthusiasm for the gospel through books that sell well, congregations that attract many members, and so on. Still, Jesus' desire to keep things quiet until the cross reminds us that whether or not we prove to be wildly popular, it is always a quiet and careful and humble apprehension of the gospel that is key. Jesus' own example of humble servanthood comes as a critique of our own overweening tendency to be enamored with all that is glitzy and eye-popping. We should be wary if the Jesus we worship fits too snugly into any cultural context on this earth.
30. Called Together
Illustration
Martin Luther
In his Large Catechism Martin Luther describes the church: "There is on earth a little holy flock or community of pure saints under one head, Christ. It is called together by the Holy Spirit in one faith. I was brought to it by the Holy Spirit and incorporated into it through the fact that I have heard and still hear God’s Word. In this Christian church we have the forgiveness of sins, which is granted through the holy sacraments and…the Gospel"
31. The Holy Spirit Doesn't Have A Copy Machine
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
The wind of the Spirit blew through St. Mary's Parish but it did not seem to touch the life of Maria Sanchez. Maria had been a faithful member of St. Mary's Parish all of her life. She was baptized there, confirmed there, married there. And yet, when the Spirit blew new life into the lives of so many in the parish, Maria felt excluded.
Some called this blowing of God the "charismatic movement." Whatever it was called it certainly touched the lives of some of the members of St. Mary's in very special ways. Some spoke in tongues for the first time in their lives. Others spoke words of prophecy while others interpreted prophetic words and still others experienced the power of healing.
Maria Sanchez knew these people whose lives had been touched by God in new ways. She was excited for them. She joined them in some of their special prayer meetings. Maria's friends knew of the depth of her faith. This was not in question, at least not in the beginning. Maria was welcomed into their fellowship. She was excited to be there. She experienced the gifts of the Spirit as others exercised them. None of these new gifts were manifested in her life, however. That's where the problem arose.
Maria's newly "spirit-filled" friends wanted to pray for her with the laying on of hands so that she might also be filled with the Spirit and experience the work of God's Spirit in her life in new ways. Maria was more than willing to be prayed for. So the prayer fellowship prayed for Maria.
They prayed -- but nothing happened. No new gifts of the Spirit, that is, became manifest in Maria's life. They prayed for Maria at the next meeting as well. And the next and the next and the next! But -- nothing! It seemed 29to Maria that the matter got focused on the gift of speaking in tongues. "Everyone ought to have this gift," the others told her as they prayed and prayed for her. "Speaking in tongues is a sign of increased holiness," they told Maria.
The prayers did not seem to work, however. Maria Sanchez did not speak in tongues. She did not prophesy nor interpret prophetic utterances nor acquire new and greater faith nor experience new healing power. All the prayers seemed to be in vain. Maria Sanchez experienced all of this as a source of great guilt. What was the matter with her? What was wrong with her faith life? Why couldn't she speak in tongues? In the company of her "spirit-filled" friends she could only see herself as a spiritual failure.
One day Maria's aunt came to visit her. Maria knew her Aunt Carmen to be a woman of great faith. Maria told her aunt of her experiences with her spiritual friends and of her own despair over God's lack of presence in her life. Aunt Carmen heard Maria's story of pain and replied in great wisdom. "The Holy Spirit has been at work in your life ever since you were baptized," Aunt Carmen began. "It is the Spirit that has taught you to have faith in Jesus. It is the Spirit that has given you your many gifts for the common good of God's people. The Holy Spirit doesn't have a copy machine. Only you have been given the gifts that you have. The Spirit doesn't want you to be like anyone else. The Spirit gives each one of us a different assortment of gifts. Our spiritual task is to use the gifts the Spirit gives us for the common good.""
32. Automatic Faith
Illustration
Bob Shaw
There was a business consultant who decided to landscape his grounds. He hired a woman with a doctorate in horticulture who was extremely knowledgeable.Because the business consultant was very busy and traveled a lot, he kept emphasizing to her the need to create his garden in a way that would require little or no maintenance on his part.He insisted on automatic sprinklers and other labor-saving devices.
Finally she stopped and said, "There's one thing you need to deal with before we go any further. If there's no gardener, then there is no garden!"
There are no labor-saving devices for growing a garden of spiritual virtue. Becoming a person of spiritual fruitfulness requires time, attention and care. How many of us are like that business consultant? We're very busy during the week and get caught up in work and social activities and don't spend the time we need to work on our spiritual growth?Then we come into church on Sunday for an automatic sprinkling of holy water, feeding off the energy of those around us. How many times during the week are you running really low on your spiritual food by Wednesday or Thursday and do nothing about it?
33. Knowing the Secret Right from the Start
Illustration
Thomas Long
In Princeton, New Jersey, there is a legendary tale about the eminent scientist Albert Einstein walking in front of a local inn and being mistaken for a bellboy by a dowager who had just arrived in a luxury sedan. She orders him to carry her luggage into the hotel, and, according to the story, Einstein does so, receives a small tip, and then continues on to his office to ponder the mysteries of the universe. True or not, the story is delightful, precisely because we savor from the beginning a secret the dowager does not know: the strange-looking, ruffled little man is the most celebrated intellect of our time. Some stories gain their power from our knowing the story's secret from the start.
The Gospel of Mark is just such a story. The secret of Mark's Gospel is the identity of Jesus Christ. In the very first sentence of the Gospel story, Mark lifts the veil and lets us know the secret when he says that this is "...the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God." Jesus is the Son of God, that's the secret, and lest we miss it, this hidden truth is confirmed in the story's opening episode, when Jesus, coming up out of the waters of baptism, sees the Holy Spirit descending upon him like a dove from the heavens, which have been torn open like a piece of cloth, and hears the very voice of God telling the secret: "Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased" (Mark 1:11). Only Jesus sees the Spirit; only Jesus hears the voice. This is, in the words of one commentator, "a secret epiphany."
34. A Higher Value than Freedom
Illustration
Johnny Dean
If there’s one thing we Americans value above everything else, it is freedom. We cherish, guard and exercise our freedom, and woe be unto those who threaten it in any way. We’re even willing to go to war to defend freedom, whether it’s ours or someone else’s. We are the world’s self-appointed watchdogs of freedom.
But Jesus says there’s a higher value than freedom. The first words the writer of the Gospel of Matthew has Jesus speak are not about freedom, but about obedience to the will of God. That’s what righteousness is all about, according to the gospel writer. Matthew uses the word righteousness seven times in his story of the life of Jesus, always connecting righteousness with being obedient to the will of God.
When Jesus comes to John the Baptist to be baptized in the Jordan, John protests. "It really should be the other way around here. You should be baptizing me. Why are you doing this?" And Jesus replies, "Just do it, John; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness."
35. Daring Words
Illustration
Larry Powell
The Gospel according to Mark, commonly accepted to be the earliest of the synoptics, relates that Jesus began his Galilean ministry by 1. making an announcement, 2. extending an invitation, and 3. issuing a command. It would be pressing the matter entirely too far to even remotely suggest that the sequence of events was intentional, yet there is a certain familiarity about the sequence itself. As a matter of fact, the three ingredients, broadly categorized above, probably bear a striking resemblance to the sermon you will likely hear in your particular church on any given Sunday: a. the announcement of a Gospel truth; b. the exhortation, with some degree of urgency, to accomplish something in the name of Christ, and c. the invitation to respond. Intentional or not, Jesus began his ministry with a format exceptionally accommodating to Gospel preachers. However, let us take up the sequence as described by Mark.
1. The announcement. The arrest of John the baptizer apparently served as the catalyst for Jesus to reveal the messianic secret. For thirty years, he had maintained a low profile, preparing himself, shaping his perspectives, waiting - waiting for the proper time to thrust himself prominently into the midst of human affairs. At last, the moment had arrived: "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel" (1:15). Daring words! He had made bold as a young man sometime earlier in his hometown synagogue to proclaim that the Scriptures had been fulfilled at his reading. The Nazarenes responded by chasing him from the community. He knew full well that there would be a more general uprising against him now by both civil and religious authorities. But there was no choice. The groundwork had been laid, preparations had been completed, John was in prison, and the alarm must continue to be sounded: "The kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel."
2. The invitation. He would need help. Passing along the Sea of Galilee he saw two brothers, Simon and Andrew. Without the slightest qualification, he said to them, "Follow me and I will make you fishers of men." Take notice that no questions were asked, no excuses offered, no "process planning" nor introspective "objective-setting" dialogue transpired. Mark says, "And immediately they left their nets and followed him." Going a little farther, two other brothers, James and John heard a similar, abrupt invitation to respond in like manner. How do you account for the fact that these four individuals, secure in employment, having obligations and immediate responsibilities, walked away from it all to follow one who had come upon them from behind, no questions asked? Perhaps a part of the answer is found in 1:22 where Jesus is referred to as one who spoke with "authority," and not as the scribes. This particular reflection upon the scribes, implying a certain insipidness, interests us. They possessed authority by virtue of their position. Why did they not speak with authority? Conjecture is risky business, but we have a notion that their recitations were mechanical, unfeeling, and sing-song. Devotion may have been reduced to formalized vocation, and the sharp edge of adeptness dulled by neglect. Figureheads occupy space but command little respect, whether they be scribes, ministers, bishops, church-school teachers, or members of a church staff. One must be more than simply a "figure-head." Perhaps we should each take counsel with ourselves regarding the phrase, "for he taught as one having authority, not as the scribes."
3. The command. Jesus rebuked an unclean spirit and commanded it to come out of a man in the synagogue, "and the unclean spirit ... came out of him" (1:26). Let us note the response: "They were all amazed and said ‘With authority he commands even the unclean spirits’ " (1:27).
Jesus began his public ministry with an announcement, an invitation, and a command, but most of all with authority.
36. The Poverty in the Christmas Story
Illustration
Edward F. Markquart
The gospel story for today could be entitled, "The Original Christmas Pageant." In both the first two chapters of Luke and in the rest of the gospel, we hear of God's special concern for the poor. Both in the whole gospel of Luke and in the first two chapters of prelude, there is a preoccupation with those who live in poverty. I would like to suggest to you that the forgotten element of Luke's original Christmas pageant is the theme of poverty and poor people themselves. The poverty of the Christmas story is often the forgotten element.
Dr. Walter Pilgrim's book about the gospel of Luke is entitled, GOOD NEWS FOR THE POOR. This professor, who is from Pacific Lutheran University and often teaches at our congregation, reminds us that ALL of the characters from Luke's original Christmas pageant were poor people. ALL of them! The story about the three wise men with their gold, frankincense and myrrh is not a story from the gospel of Luke but from the book of Matthew. For Luke, ALL the characters in his Christmas play are poor people.
37. PRIEST
Illustration
Stephen Stewart
Deuteronomy 26:4 - "Then the priest shall take the basket from your hand, and set it down before the altar of the Lord your God."
Among the nomadic tribes there was no developed priesthood. Religion partook of the general simplicity of desert life; apart from the private worship of household gods, the ritual observances were mainly visits to the tribal sanctuary to salute the god. with a gift of the first-fruits. These acts required no priestly aid; each man slew his own victim and divided the sacrifice in his own family circle; the share of the god was the blood which was smeared upon or poured out beside the stone set up as an altar. In the beginning, therefore, we find no trace of a sacrifical priesthood.
With the beginning of nationality, however, starting with the Exodus and developing into the Conquest, there was developed a unity of worship. However, even then, this unity was still not expressed in fixed institutions; the first-fruits were still a free gift, and every household represented and consumed them with his own family circle in a sacrificial meal without preistly aid.
In fact, rather than being just an officiator at sacrifice, the priest was the organ of revelation and he gave guidance in the ordinary affairs of life, the word for priest as adopted by the Hebrews from a Canaanite word, means "soothsayer," or "revealer." So, then, the function of the early priests was to reveal the word of God, either by reference to a legal code which contained the revealed will of God and the accumulated experience of the past.
Even after the people settled and sancturies were built, the role of the priest continued to be more of a judge than the person we think of as offering sacrifice. However, as more and more sanctuaries appeared and the Hebrews absorbed more of the ways of their neighbors, and, ultimately, with the establishment of the monarchy, a more and more elaborate ritual developed that required a professional priesthood.
There were regular public offerings maintained by the king and offered by the priests; private sacrifices required priestly aid; their judicial functions also brought them profit, since fines were exacted for certain offenses and paid to them. The greater priestly offices were therefore in every respect very important places, and the priests of the royal sanctuaries were among the grandees of the realm, but there is no indication of a hierarchy existing by divine right.
It was in post-exilic Israel that the priesthood as we usually think of it came into existence, although the reform by Josiah in 621 B.C. gave the prerogative of sacrifice to the priests alone. Already in the time of Josiah, altar service and not the judicial or "teaching" function had become the essential thing, but by the time of Ezekiel it had mainly to do with ritual, with the distinction between holy and profane, clean and unclean, with the statutory observances at festivals and the like.
The holiness of Israel centered in the sanctuary, and round the sanctuary stood the priests, who alone could approach the most holy things without profanation, and who were the guardians of Israel’s sanctity, partly by protecting the one meeting place of God and man from profane contact, and partly as mediators of the continual atoning rites by which breaches of holiness are expiated. In the old kingdom the priests had shared the place of the prophets as the leaders of thought were the psalmists and the scribes, who spoke much more directly to the piety of the nation.
From the foundation of the Hasmonean state to the time of Herod the history of the high priesthood merges into the political history of the nation; from Herod onward the priestly aristocracy of the Sadducees lost its chief hold over the nation and expired in vain controversy with the Pharisees.
Today, aside from the Roman Catholic Church, and the High Episcopal Church, we prefer to use the term "pastor" rather than priest for our spiritual leaders. But we must recognize the influence of the Hebrew priesthood on the thought and organization of Christendom. Two main points were taken over - the doctrine of priestly mediation and the system of priestly hierarchy. We cannot here go into doctrinal matters, but it is enough to say that the concepts of sacrifice which are still retained in the Roman system are the stumbling-block on which Protestant apologists fall. Within the Roman Church the old priestly system still is evident in many ways.
38. BE A DARKNESS DISPELLER
Illustration
John H. Krahn
As you got out of bed this morning, did you feel like you belonged to a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God? And tomorrow morning, as the daily grind begins again, will you be thinking as you brush the old ivories, "What ways am I going to declare God’s wonderful deeds today?" Will any of us plot how we might upset the devil, the prince of terrorists? How many of us will let the light of Christ shine through us and be among the darkness dispellers? Will any of us seek to be the light of Christ in a darkening world?
Reading the Bible, it becomes evident that Christianity is not a solo proposition. Christianity comes to us through Christian community. Without a relation to the community or church, our individual Christianity is weakened and incomplete. The church is Christ’s body on earth today. The light of Christ shines in the world through each of us as we take seriously that we are a chosen people belonging to God.
There is no disembodied Christianity. The Lord calls us to relate to him in the community of the church with all of its warts and imperfections. Christianity is a social faith, a community of fellow believers. Jesus continues to build his church upon our confession of faith that he was the one promised by the Father to die and pay the penalty of our sinfulness and to defeat death and the grave by rising again. No individual makes the church. Saint Paul speaks of members of the body of Christ; members mean absolutely nothing when they are severed from the body. Every functioning, contributing, participating member is important to the good of our witness.
Jesus Christ is the cornerstone of the church. We are each to be a living stone cemented to the cornerstone and to one another. Each of us has a divine destiny and a place in the drama of divine redemption. We have been baptized into a high vocation. We were once nobody’s people, destined to hell. We are now God’s people, called to serve the Lord, on our way to heaven. We have gone from rags to riches, from a pig sty to a royal palace.
We are God’s own people. We belong to God, saved from hell by the sacrifice of Christ. We are, therefore, called to produce - produce the light of Christ in our words and deeds. We are called by Christ to servanthood, to sacrifice, into ministry. Such ministry is fed and coordinated in the local parish. If each Christian took seriously the Lord’s Word, our ministry and effectiveness as darkness dispellers would double, perhaps even triple. With the help of God, let’s turn on our lights ... full strength.
39. Illustrations for Lent Easter Old Testament Texts
Illustration
Jon L. Joyce
1. God destroys as well as preserves [Isaiah 42:14]
Luther says that God is to be both loved and feared. The same God of compassion who is eager to show love to those who turn to him is equally determined to root out and destroy evil. Isaiah is warning us not to be lulled to sleep by thinking only of the kindness of God. He who shows patience toward our waywardness will eventually cease to overlook unatoned sin and will destroy. He holds all the power of the universe in his hands to work his ends. Our eternal destiny is for him to determine. Are we tempting God by clinging to things he opposes? Remember God has said, "I will destroy." The time to repent and make peace with him is now.
2. Christ will restore sight [Isaiah 42:16]
A blind beggar walking down a street on a day in spring carried a sign saying, "It is April, and I am blind." How pitiful that he was blind at any time. But on a spring day it was even worse; he could not see the newly formed leaves on the trees, or the beautiful flowers blooming on every hand. He could not see the earth bathed in sunshine or the glow of a sunset in the western sky. But another blindness is even worse. It can come to those who have retained their physical sight. There is a saying, "None is so blind as he that will not see." When Isaiah talks of the blind he includes everyone who does not have spiritual insight. Children laugh at the phrase, "I see, said the blind man." Yet it is true that the physically blind can see many things which the person with sight overlooks. So God promises to help us in our spiritual blindness. He will show us the path of righteousness, reveal opportunities to serve our fellow man, to improve ourselves, and to see the Christ who is hidden from those who do not believe in Him.
3. Idolators shall be ashamed [Isaiah 42:17]
Idol worship seems like something out of the long past. It brings to mind visions of ignorant people in an earlier age bowing down before a statue which to them is their god. So this verse does not seem to apply to the one who reads it today. Here is where we deceive ourselves. Idolatry is a very subtle thing. It was said of Sampson that he did not know when the Lord had forsaken him, and thought he could go on in strength as he had before. So idolatry creeps upon anyone who is not alert. It is so easy to cater to oneself; to want fame and fortune so badly that we slowly let these desires come between us and God. Beware lest great shame come upon you because idols of today have subtly replaced God in your objectives and desires.
4. God will be praised for his law (Gospel) [Isaiah 42:21]
Our age is one of much disdain for God’s law. The ten commandments are regarded by many as out of date. They are as foolish in disdaining God’s rules and thinking they have outgrown them as was a certain sailor. The captain had pointed out the north star before turning over the wheel to the young seaman. He told the young man to steer constantly toward that star. The captain then took a nap and upon awakening found that the ship was not on course. When he questioned the young sailor what had gone wrong, he was told, "I have sailed past that star, show me another one." No one can sail past the ten commandments. They remain as up-to-date as the day’s news announcements. God has chosen to give honor to his eternal rules, whether they be revealed in the Ten Commandments or in Jesus Christ. The wise will realize the worth of God’s laws and strive to obey and honor them.
40. Proclaim the Gospel
Illustration
Karl Barth
The life of the one holy Universal Church is determined by the fact that it is the fulfillment of the service as ambassador enjoined upon it.
Where the life of the Church is exhausted in self-serving, it smacks of death; the decisive thing has been forgotten, that this whole life is lived only in the exercise of what we called the Church's service as ambassador, proclamation, kerygma. A Church that recognizes its commission will neither desire nor be able to petrify in any of its functions, to be the Church for its own sake. There is the "Christ-believing group"; but this group is sent out: "Go and preach the gospel!" It does not say, "Go and celebrate services!" "Go and edify yourselves with the sermon!" "Go and celebrate the Sacraments!" "Go and present yourselves in a liturgy, which perhaps repeats the heavenly liturgy!" "Go and devise a theology which may gloriously unfold like the Summa of St. Thomas!" Of course, there is nothing to forbid all this; there may exist very good cause to do it all; but nothing, nothing at all for its own sake! In it all the one thing must prevail: "Proclaim the gospel to every creature!" The Church runs like a herald to deliver the message. It is not a snail that carries its little house on its back and is so well off in it that only now and then it sticks out its feelers and then thinks that the "claim of publicity" has been satisfied. No, the Church lives by its commission as herald, it is la compagnie de Dieu.
Where the Church is living, it must ask itself whether it is serving this commission or whether it is a purpose in itself. If the second is the case, then as a rule it begins to smack of the "sacred," to affect piety, to play the priest and to mumble. Anyone with a keen nose will smell it and find it dreadful! Christianity is not "sacred"; rather there breathes in it the fresh air of the Spirit. Otherwise it is not Christianity. For it is an out-and-out "worldly" thing open to all humanity: "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to every creature."
41. Criticism and the Holy Spirit
Illustration
Oswald Chambers
Oswald Chambers, the great Christian writer, noted, "Someone who is constantly criticized becomes good for nothing; the effect of criticism knocks all the gumption and power out of the person. Criticism is deadly in its effect because it divides one's powers and prevents one from being a force for anything. That is never the work of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit alone is in the true position of a critic: He is able to show what is wrong, without wounding or hurting.
"The counsel of Jesus is to abstain from judging. This sounds strange at first, because the characteristic of the Holy Spirit in a Christian is to reveal the things that are wrong; but the strangeness exists only on the surface.
The Holy Spirit does reveal what is wrong in others, but His discernment is never for the purposes of criticism, but for the purposes of intercession."
42. We Ache to Know God’s Blessings
Illustration
Joel D. Kline
In his book, Faith Works, Jim Wallis writes of a personal experience I heard him share in a class several years ago, while I was doing sabbatical study at Harvard Divinity School. Jim Wallis is a leader of the Sojourners community, intentionally located in a poor inner-city neighborhood of Washington, D.C. After living in that neighborhood for more than twenty years, Wallis found himself the victim of a mugging. Preoccupied with an upcoming speaking opportunity, Jim failed to "watch his back" as he turned the corner on a deserted street, and by the time he heard the running feet behind him, it was too late. As he turned around, he was hit by something sharp enough to open a gash over one eye, and he immediately felt the blood running down his face. Several hands pushed him to the ground, and he could hear one of his assailants shout, "Keep him down! Get his wallet! Take his money!"
Popping up quickly to face the muggers, Jim discovered that there were four of them, all young teenagers, no one more than fourteen years of age. The youth circled Jim, and the youngest one, who couldn't have been more than twelve years old, clearly had watched a lot of television, because he began to flail away at Jim with earnest but ineffectual karate kicks. Noting that the youth weren't carrying guns, Jim decided to confront them with what they were doing. "Stop it! Just stop it!" Jim scolded them. "You guys have got to quit terrorizing people like this." The young teens, taken by surprise, dropped their hands, so Jim continued, "I'm a pastor. You boys want to try and beat up a pastor and take his money? Come on ahead. Take your best shot." At that they fled down the street, but the little karate kicker turned back, looking directly in Jim's eyes with a sad expression and saying in a sincere voice, "Pastor, ask God for a blessing for me."
Who among us does not yearn for a blessing from God? Even those we are tempted to write off as too tough, too entrenched in destructive behavior—buried deep beneath the hardened exterior there is a yearning for blessing. Whether a troubled youth, one struggling with addiction, or the "respectable" person fearful of giving voice to his or her own inner struggle—whatever our situation in life, we ache to know God's blessing.
43. Bread from Home
Illustration
Staff
I'm reminded of a true story of a soldier who was severely wounded. When he was out of surgery, the doctors said that there was a good chance for recovery, but as the days progressed hewouldn't eat anything. The nurses and nuns tried everything, but he refused all food-drinking only water and juice.
One of his buddies knew why the soldier wouldn't eat - he was homesick. So his friend offered to bring the young man's father to visit him. The commanding officer approved and the friend went to the parents' home. As the father was about to leave for the hospital, the mother wrapped up a loaf of fresh bread for her son.
The soldierwas very happy to see his father. Then his father said,"Son, this bread was made by your mother, especially for you". The boy brightened and of course he began to eat.
We are alllwounded in the battle of life. Wounded by sin, by trials and pains, by loss and by our forgetfulness of God.
We lose our taste for the food thatstrengthens our souls. Holy Communion gives us life, spiritual life, God's life. It gives us spiritual healing and spiritual strength.
44. Sermon Opener - Connected to God
Illustration
Lee Griess
In his book On a Wild and Windy Mountain, Dean of the Chapel at Duke University William Willimon tells of being in New Haven, Connecticut, as a student in 1970, during the famous Black Panther trial. Perhaps you remember those days -- the 1970s? It was a turbulent time for our country -- a time of strife, discord, and agony that threatened to tear our country apart. Much of the unrest of those days came to a focus during the trial of those Black Panther leaders. It was just at that time that Willimon happened to attend a choral mass at a Catholic church near Yale University. A boy's choir was singing a great Ascension composition called "Deus Ascendit – God Has Gone Up." As he sat there listening to those young voices, Willimon found himself thinking, "How appropriate. God has gone up. Gone up and away. God has left us to our confusion. Abandoned us in the midst of the angry shouts of the mobs, the sound of gunfire and the rhetoric of the revolutionaries." God indeed has abandoned us.
However, as he sat there and continued to listen, Willimon noticed that the boys were not singing "Deus Abscondit," which would mean "God has abandoned us," but rather they sang "Deus Ascendit," God has gone up. And the words of that song led Willimon to understand that God had not given up on us. Rather the Ascension of Jesus signaled that what Jesus had begun on earth would be brought to completion in heaven even after his ascension to heaven. As we say in the Creed each week, "He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father." He ascended not to abandon us but to complete what he began -- through the work of the Holy Spirit, through his church and through his faithful people, Christ still is at work to rule with love and mercy.
Christ has not abandoned us -- but he has ascended into heaven and that's what the focus of our worship today is about. So important is this event that Luke describes it twice -- in the last chapter of his gospel and the first chapter of Acts. The setting is the Mount of Olives. Forty days had passed since the resurrection of Jesus. It was time for him to return to heaven. And so once again, Jesus appears to the disciples. He joins them in worship. He breaks bread with them. He announces to them that they will soon receive the Holy Spirit, and when the Holy Spirit comes to them, they will be his witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria and even to the ends of the earth. And after he has given them this assurance, he is lifted up before them into the heavens until a cloud hid him from their sight. Deus Ascendit. God has gone up.
45. Whispering the Lyrics
Illustration
Thomas Long
There's an interesting story behind Jimmy Reed records. In placing the phonograph needle again and again in the grooves of Jimmy Reed's records, you began to notice something curious. If one listened very carefully, there could sometimes be heard, ever so faintly in the background, a soft woman's voice murmuring in advance the next verse of the song. The story that grew up around this -- and perhaps it is true -- was that Jimmy Reed was so absorbed in the bluesy beat and the throbbing guitar riffs of his music that he simply could not remember the words of his own songs. He needed help with the lyrics, and the woman's voice was none other than that of his wife, devotedly coaching her husband through the recording session by whispering the upcoming stanzas into his ear as he sang.
Whether or not this story is accurate, Christians will surely recognize a parallel experience. Jesus tells his followers that the role of the Holy Spirit is, in effect, to whisper the lyrics of the gospel song in the ears of the faithful. When Jesus was present, he was the one who instilled in them the right words, coached them through the proper verses, taught them the joyful commandments. But now that Jesus approaches his death, now that he draws near to his time of departure, now that the disciples will be on their own without him, that task is to be handed over to the Holy Spirit:
"If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate, to be with you forever. This is the Spirit of truth ..." (John 14:15-17).
The primary task, then, of the Holy Spirit is reminding the faithful of the truth, jogging the memories of the followers of Jesus about all of his commandments so that they can keep them in love, whispering the lyrics of the never-ending hymn of faithful obedience in their ears.
46. A Russian Resurrection
Illustration
Donald Dotterer
An old illustration about Russia with an update. You'll see in the update that Yancey pickedup on a movement that seems to have held:
Columnist Philip Yancey, in an article titled "A Russian Resurrection," writes of his visit in October 1991 to the former Soviet Union. He says that it "would be hard to overstate the chaos that he found when he arrived in the Soviet Union, a nation that was about to shed its historical identity as well as its name." Yancey reports that one day the central bank ran out of money. Several days later the second largest republic withdrew from the union. There was a sense of crisis everywhere.
Doctors announced that the best hospital in Moscow might close its doors for lack of money. Crime was increasing nearly 50 percent a year. No one knew what the country would be like in a year or even six months. Who would be responsible for controlling the nuclear weapons? Who would print the money?
Certainly this once great empire was in confusion and turmoil. And yet Yancey found something else in his visit to Russia in the midst of chaos and financial hardship. An attractive young woman who was in charge of cultural affairs summed up the new attitude in Russia toward Christianity.
This Russian woman said softly but with great emotion: "We have all been raised on one religion: atheism. We were trained to believe in the material world, and not in God. In fact, those who believed in God were frightened. A stone wall separated these people from the rest."
Then she said, "Suddenly we have realized that something was missing. Now religion is open to us, and we see the great eagerness of young people. We must explore religion, which can give us a new life, and a new understanding about life."
There are now Russian language Bibles on display in the Kremlin government building. The church bells are sounding again, and the churches are full of worshipers. Women in babushkas are publicly kneeling in prayer outside the great cathedrals, an act that just a few short years ago would have required great courage.
So it is. Here is a genuine miracle of God in our time. As Philip Yancey concludes, here, in the former Soviet Union, which was officially atheistic until 1990, here in perhaps the least likely of all places, here were the unmistakable signs of an authentic spiritual awakening. Here were the signs of spiritual resurrection.
LATE 2018 UPDATE
In Russia, there is a religious revival happening. Orthodox Christianity is thriving after enduring a 70-year period of atheistic Soviet rule. In 1991, just after the collapse of the USSR, about two-thirds of Russians claimed no religious affiliation. Today, 71 percent of Russians identify as Orthodox. One can now see priests giving sermons on television, encounter religious processions in St. Petersburg, and watch citizens lining up for holy water in Moscow. Even Moscow’s Darwin museum features a Christmas tree during the holidays. President Vladimir Putin has encouraged this revival and he has also benefited from it, both at home and abroad. Last year, he explained that Russia’s intervention in the Syrian civil war was designed to protect Christians from the Islamic State. Not only has the Orthodox Church supported this “holy war” but so have some American evangelicals, who are likewise concerned about Christians in the Middle East and praise Putin’s socially conservative policies.
See:https://religionandpolitics.org/2018/10/16/russias-journey-from-orthodoxy-to-atheism-and-back-again/
47. Spiritual vs Material Thinking
Illustration
Maxie Dunnam
Archbishop William Temple once noted that spiritually minded people differ from materially minded people not in that they think about different things but in that they think about the same things differently.
Now that’s a profound observation. I wonder how many persons these days are even thinking in those terms. All of us should be.
The human being is spiritual. The philosopher was right. There is a God-shaped void within us all. But it’s not just a question about God. How do we love? What gives us meaning? What sort of experience provides joy? To what do we open our eyes widely and exclaim, “Ah-ha!”? These are spiritual questions. To be spiritually minded rather than materially minded is to think about things in the light of a year rather than an hour, to test value, to seek to fill that God-shaped void within us in a way that won’t allow you to wake up tomorrow empty again.
48. Jesus Calls the Common Man
Illustration
Gary Inrig
In May 1855, an eighteen-year-old boy went to the deacons of the church in Boston. He had been raised in a Unitarian church, in almost total ignorance of the gospel, but when he had moved to Boston to make his fortune, he began to attend a Bible-preaching church. Then, in April of 1855, his Sunday school teacher had come into the store where he was working and simply and persuasively shared the Gospel and urged the young man to trust in the Lord Jesus. He did, and now he was applying to join the church. One fact quickly became obvious. This young man was almost totally ignorant of biblical truth. One of the deacons asked him, "Son, what has Christ done for us all - for you -which entitles him to our love?" His response was, "I don't know. I think Christ has done a great deal for us, but I don't think of anything in particular that I know of."
Hardly and impressive start. Years later his Sunday school teacher said of him: "I can truly say that I have seen few persons whose minds were spiritually darker than was his when he came into my Sunday school class. I think the committee of the church seldom met an applicant for membership who seemed more unlikely ever to become a Christian of clear and decided views of gospel truth, still less to fill any space of public or extended usefulness." Nothing happened very quickly to change their minds. The deacons decided to put him on a year-long instruction program to teach him basic Christian truths. Perhaps they wanted to work on some of his other rough spots as well. Not only was he ignorant of spiritual truths, he was only barely literate, and his spoken grammar was atrocious. The year-long probation did not help very much. At his second interview, there was only a minimal improvement in the quality of his answers, but since it was obvious that he was a sincere and committed (if ignorant) Christian, they accepted him as a church member.
Over the nextyears, I am sure that many people looked at that young man and, convinced that God would never use a person like that, they wrote off Dwight L. Moody. But God did not. By God's infinite grace and persevering love, D. L. Moody was transformed into one of the most effective servants of God in church history, a man whose impact is still with us.
49. The Gospel According to You
Illustration
Arthur McPhee
The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
Are read by more than a few,
But the one that is most read and commented on
Is the gospel according to you.
You are writing a gospel, a chapter each day
By the things that you do and the words that you say,
Men read what you write, whether faithless or true,
Say, what is the gospel according to you?
Do men read His truth and His love in your life,
Or has yours been too full of malice and strife?
Does your life speak of evil, or does it ring true?
Say, what is the gospel according to you?
50. First Lesson in Prayer
Illustration
A little boy was sitting next to a grizzled holy man seated beside the Ganghes River. "Will you teach me to pray?" the boy asked. "Are you sure that you want to learn?" the holy man asked? "Yes, of course." With that the holy man grabbed the boy's neck and plunged his head into the water. He held them there while the boy kicked and screamed and tried to get away. Finally, after an interminable period the holy man let the boy out of the water. "What was that?" the boy asked.
"That was your first lesson in prayer. When you long for God the way that you longed to breathe, then you will be able to pray."
Showing
1
to
50
of
1206
results
- 5 things to know about Kamala Harris' pastor
- Nigerian bishop leaves UMC amid hom*osexuality schism; regional body’s future uncertain
- Sen. Mike Lee warns of 'increased hostility' toward Christianity in Washington
- 13-year-old budding preacher who lived for the ‘Glory of God’ killed for camera
- Top 5 nominees for 2024 Gospel Music Association Dove Awards
- Russell Brand slams Olympics opening ceremony 'decadence,' shares favorite Bible verse
- Texas pastor resigns over ‘inappropriate and hurtful’ actions
- 'Satan Cannot Destroy Us': First Baptist Dallas members cling to faith after massive fire
- Biden outlines plan to impose term limits for Supreme Court justices
- Top 4 moments from Senate hearing with FBI, Secret Service over Trump assassination attempt
- Choctaw Bibles Connect Christians with Lost Heritage
- An Assassination Attempt in Brazil Brought Politics into Churches
- In Asian American Churches, Generational Differences Deter Young Leaders
- What Wrestling Taught an Olympic Gold Medalist About God
- O Say Can You See God in These 5 National Anthems?
- Nigerian Church Watches, Prays as Ocean Rises
- New Alliance Aims to Unite Chinese Churches Divided by Geopolitics
- Americans Are Still Inviting People to Church
- ERLC Retracts Announcement Firing President Brent Leatherwood
- Homelessness Hits Record High, Straining Rescue Missions
- 13-year-old budding preacher who lived for the ‘Glory of God’ killed for camera
- Mahesh Bhatt On Giving Daughters Alia And Shaheen Muslim Names: 'My Mother Was Worried...'
- Bride Is Slammed For Wearing See-Through Wedding Dress To Her Church Ceremony
- Texas pastor resigns over ‘inappropriate and hurtful’ actions
- Genius Candace Owens dismantles evolution theory
- 'Persecuted by this Wack Job!' Trump makes frantic claims in rambling Truth Social post
- Israel pulled a trigger with Haniyeh assassination, Turkey says
- Former ‘trad wife’ reveals the ‘ugliness’ behind picture-perfect lifestyle: ‘I wish anybody could help me out of this’
- Arjun Rampal Says Shah Rukh Khan Has 'Made A Tremendous Amount Of Sacrifices' In His Life
- Major Network Anchor Announces Plans To Step Down From Current Gig Following Election
- The Religion of Nationalism
- Trump Says Democrats are 'After Catholics,' Calls Out Harris
- Who are the Druse in the Golan Heights?
- When Will Bishops Stop Taking Culture War Bait? Paris Edition
- Olympics 2024 and Leonardo da Vinci's Last Straw
- Nuns Say Ukraine, Gaza Wars are Making Human Trafficking Worse
- Challenge to CT Religious Vaccine Exemption Ban Largely Dismissed
- Church of the Nazarene Expels Theologian Over LGBT Advocacy
- Hindu Pilgrimage Sparks Anti-Muslim Discrimination in India
- In Asian American Churches, Generational Differences Deter Young Leaders
