1 The Lord had said to Abram, "Leave your country, your people and your father's household and go to the land I will show you.
2 I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing.
3 I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.
4 So Abram left, as the Lord had told him; and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he set out from Haran. 5 He took his wife Sarai, his nephew Lot, all the possessions they had accumulated and the people they had acquired in Haran, and they set out for the land of Canaan, and they arrived there.
6 Abram traveled through the land as far as the site of the great tree of Moreh at Shechem. At that time the Canaanites were in the land. 7 The Lord appeared to Abram and said, "To your offspring I will give this land." So he built an altar there to the Lord , who had appeared to him.
8 From there he went on toward the hills east of Bethel and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. There he built an altar to the Lord and called on the name of the Lord. 9 Then Abram set out and continued toward the Negev.
Breaking News: The Middle East
Genesis 12:1-8
Sermon
by James Merritt
We are in a series called “Breaking News.” Pick up your newspaper, go on-line, turn on the TV or the radio, hit a website on the internet and you are likely to hear one of these items talked about frequently if not regularly. There is one region of the world that is guaranteed to be in the news practically every single day. This region is very important to you, and to your family, and to our nation, and to our world primarily for one reason. This region is the number one reason why there will never be a pervasive, permanent peace in the world.
Over a decade ago on September 11, 2001, the world was plunged into what President George W. Bush labeled, “The War on Terror.” I realize the politically correct crowd refrains from using that word, but that is indeed what we were in. I want to make a prediction. This is a war that will never completely end until the world does. I know that because it is a war that has been going on in practicality for well over 4,000 years and the war has its roots in this region.
It is the hot-bed of terrorism, a cauldron of violence, and a rumbling volcano of hatred that constantly erupts in rivers of bloodshed. It is the region known as the “Middle East.” It stretches from Egypt to Iran. It includes countries such as: Israel, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. It is a place where they have six days of unrest and on the seventh day even more unrest.
Don’t be fooled. Even though we are physically and geographically separated by thousands and thousands of miles, this region affects our lives so much that it may as well be next door. The problem centers around one place, two peoples, and three persons. The place is Israel. The peoples are the Jews and the Arabs. The persons are Abraham, Jesus, and Mohammed.
The reason why the Middle-East is so important to us and the reason why there is constant trouble, tribulation, turmoil, and terrorism in that place, and the reason why we now fight a never ending war on terror always wondering, “When will the next shoe bomber get on a plane? When will the next car bomb blow up? What will be the next effort to destroy what is now known in the Arab world as “the great Satan?” all goes back, believe it or not, to a question. It was a question raised by Mark Twain.
Though he was no theologian, he was a very astute observer of culture, society, and breaking news. He wrote these words:
“The Egyptian, the Babylonian and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor then faded to dream-stuff and passed away; The Greek and the Roman followed and made a vast noise and they are gone; Other peoples have sprung up, held their torch high for a time, but it burned out and they sit in twilight now or have vanished.
All things are mortal, but the Jew. All other forces pass, but he remains. What is the secret of his immortality?”
I say this respectfully to my Jewish friends, but Mark Twain asked the true Jewish question, “What is the secret of the immortality of the Jew?” A nation and a people that is at the center of the entire New Testament in basically every book, a nation and a people that history had thought was gone forever is now the third greatest military on earth and the only democracy in the Middle East. That fact alone, leads me to share with you three things that the Middle East should teach us about God, about us, and how this region fits into the future of this planet. When you study the past, the present, and the future of this region the news is actually not discouraging, but encouraging. Here is what the Middle East tells us –
I. God Has a Plan
[Turn to Genesis 12]. We have to go back over 4,000 years ago roughly to the year 2,000 B.C. The flood has come and gone, the Tower of Babel has been built and destroyed and all of a sudden in the biblical narrative we read these words:
“The LORD had said to Abram, ‘Leave your country, your people and your father’s household and go to the land I will show you. I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.’” (Genesis 12:1-3, NIV)
God chooses a man by the name of Abraham (I am going to call him “Abraham” though originally it was Abram) and tells him that from him is going to come a great nation that is going to be his chosen people and will be a blessing to all other nations. We are never told why Abraham was chosen, but he is specifically told the way he is going to be a blessing to the world is through the children he is going to have. Later in Genesis 15, Abraham informs God that he has no children.
He did with God what we all do from time to time – we tell God something we think He doesn’t already know. Of course God knew he didn’t have children, but God also knew he would have children.
For those of you who do not know the story or don’t remember it, when God promised Abraham he would have a son, Abraham at the time was the President of H.A.R.P. (Hebrew Association of Retired People). Abraham was a hundred years old. Sarai was no spring chicken. She was ninety years of age and remember they had never heard of Viagra. When God told them they would conceive a child they did what anybody would have done – they laughed in his face!
Reminds me of a 95 year old man that married 25 year old woman. When they got home from the wedding the young bride looked at her old husband and said, “Would you like to go upstairs and recapture your youth?” He looked at her and said, “I can’t do both!”
Then we read these words in Genesis 21:1-3.
“Now the LORD was gracious to Sarah as he had said, and the LORD did for Sarah what he had promised. Sarah became pregnant and bore a son to Abraham in his old age, at the very time God had promised him. Abraham gave the name Isaac to the son Sarah bore him.” (Genesis 21:1-3, NIV)
Abraham was given a son. We now know that history looks back and sees that through Abraham and from Isaac came forth the nation known today as Israel.
Then in Genesis 22 we are told that Abraham incredibly was asked by God to sacrifice Isaac, the son of promise; the one hope that Abraham’s family would live in future generations. Again, if you have forgotten the story or don’t know it, by faith Abraham did exactly what God told him to do and was about to offer Isaac up as a sacrifice when God stopped him and then made this incredible promise:
“I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies.” (Genesis 22:17, NIV)
That is one of the single greatest promises in all of the Bible. God promised Abraham again that his people would be a blessing to all peoples. From that moment, everything that happens in the Old Testament lines up with fulfilling that promise of God to bless every nation.
There was one other part of God’s part of not only a people, but a place, because a nation has to have a land. Earlier in Genesis 17:8, God had made this promise:
“The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.” (Genesis 17:8, NIV)
God promised Abraham and his heirs they would receive what we now call “The Promised Land” as an “everlasting possession”. Everlasting means “eternal”. It means “forever”. God could not have been more clear. God gave the title-deed to that land to the Nation of Israel and it has never been revoked. But of course therein lies the problem which leads to our second point –
II. God Knows The Problem
The question is “Why didn’t everyone just live happily ever after?” After all, God kept His word. He gave Abraham and Sarai their son. The same problem that got this world into the mess it is in the Garden of Eden reared its ugly head again. Just as Adam and Eve didn’t believe God when God told them not to eat a certain fruit, Abraham and Sarah didn’t believe God when He told them they were going to have a child. So Sarai comes up with Plan B.
“Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. But she had an Egyptian maidservant named Hagar; so she said to Abram, ‘The LORD has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my maidservant; perhaps I can build a family through her.’” (Genesis 16:1-2, NIV)
Now that is a novel idea. Go sleep with the nanny! Abraham, being the submissive husband that he is obeys his wife. Hagar gets pregnant and that is literally when all hell breaks loose.
“He slept with Hagar, and she conceived. When she knew she was pregnant, she began to despise her mistress. Then Sarai said to Abram, “You are responsible for the wrong I am suffering. I put my servant in your arms, and now that she knows she is pregnant, she despises me. May the LORD judge between you and me.” (Genesis 16:4-5, NIV)
Nothing was more shameful to a woman in those days than to be barren and every time Sarah saw that baby-bump in Hagar, she got furious. You’ve got to love what Sarai did. She blames Abraham for an idea that she thought up! Husbands, have you ever had that happen to you? (Don’t answer that question!) What you are about to find out is this is when all the problems in the Middle East began.
Sarai treats Hagar so terribly, she makes Hagar flee out into the desert to die along with her unborn child, but an angel appeared to Hagar and assures her that they will both live, that her descendants will be too many to count, and that she will call the name of the son “Ishmael”.
Then, he says this in verse 12, “He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers.” (Genesis 16:12, NIV)
In other words, Ishmael and his descendants will be like a donkey that you can’t tame; free and roving like a wild donkey in the desert. This is the kind of people they would become.
Then he says, “His hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him.” (Genesis 16:12, NIV)
In other words, his people, not only won’t get along with other people, but they really won’t get along with themselves. What do you see today? We look with amazement as we see Muslim terrorist suicide bombers bombing other Muslims. When you look at the Middle East you’ve got Arabs against Jews, Arabs against Arabs, Arabs against Persians, Muslims against Jews, Muslims against Christians and Muslims against Muslims.
Then he says, “He will live in hostility toward all his brothers.” (Genesis 16:12, NIV)
Wait a minute! There were no brothers yet. Remember, Ishmael was the firstborn. Isaac had not even been born. God was predicting there was going to be conflict between Ishmael and Isaac for the rest of time. There is going to be a seething hostility between the Arab and the Jew for as long as there is a Jew.
Looking back we now know that from Isaac would come the Jewish nation and from Ishmael would come the Arab nation and to this very day the conflict between Isaac and Ishmael is continuing.
The split came in chapter 21. “The child grew and was weaned, and on the day Isaac was weaned Abraham held a great feast. But Sarah saw that the son whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham was mocking, and she said to Abraham, “Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac.” (Genesis 21:8-10, NIV)
Sarai tells Abraham to get rid, once and for all, of Hagar and her son. Abraham doesn’t want to do it, but God amazingly says to him, “Listen to whatever Sarai tells you.” To which Abraham probably replied, “That is what got me into this mess to begin with.” God promises him that He will take care of Ishmael and all his descendants.
Where did Ishmael and all his descendants go? Genesis 25:18 tells us, “His descendants settled in the area from Havilah to Shur, near the border of Egypt, as you go toward Asshur. And they lived in hostility toward all their brothers.” (Genesis 25:18, NIV)
Havilah is modern day Arabia and Shur would be Northern Iraq. This is the region known as “The Arabian Peninsula” which includes: Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Omen, Kuwait, Qatar, The United Arab Emirates, and parts of Jordan and Syria. That is where they have been ever since and at a state of war against the nation of Israel and her people.
Time will not allow me to give you the full story of the other element involved which is Islam, but I will give you the Readers Digest version. You flash-forward 2,600 years later to the year 610 A.D., and an Arab, by the name of Mohammed, befriended some Jews who taught him the Old Testament. He discovered Abraham had two sons. Arabic tradition said that Ishmael eventually migrated to a place called “Mecca.” During the month of Ramadan, Mohammed, while sitting in a cave, claimed to have had a visit from the angel, Gabriel, who told him he wanted him to be God’s prophet to the Arab people. At this time in his mind, there was no conflict between Christianity and Judaism, because they both worshipped one God. All Mohammed originally wanted for his people was to give up their paganism and their idols and to adopt the belief in one single God. Early on as his following began to grow, he had all his followers kneel as they prayed towards Jerusalem.
He originally was not trying to find a new religion. He actually felt like that he had now found the direct link between Abraham and the Arab people through Ishmael. There was really only one religion and one way to the true God. The Jews went through Abraham, the Christians went through Jesus and the Arabs were to go through Mohammed.
Both Jews and Christians rebelled against Mohammed. They did not accept his teachings. In the year 624 he changed his followers from facing Jerusalem when they prayed and asked them to begin to face Mecca and proclaimed to them “We are now the one true religion.” He forms an army and in 630 A.D. marches on Mecca and takes the city and establishes Islam as the religion of the Arabic world. Their rallying cry was, “There is no god, but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet.” There has been enmity ever since. That is how the problem began, that is how the problem persists and God knows the problem. There is one other thing the Middle East tells us and it is the greatest news of all.
III. God Keeps His Promise
When we go back to the very beginning of the story in Genesis 12 you will find that God made three specific promises to Abraham.
“The LORD had said to Abram, ‘Leave your country, your people and your father’s household and go to the land I will show you. I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.” (Genesis 12:1-3, NIV)
First, He promised that He would make Abraham’s name great. We’ve all heard of Abraham. In fact, Abraham may be the most famous human being in the history of the world outside of Jesus Christ. Today, he is considered to be the father of the three great world religions. Judaism, looks to him as their father. Christians look to Abraham as the true father of their faith and so does Islam. Promise #1 kept.
God also promised that all the peoples of the earth would be blessed through his descendants. Have they? Do you realize that since the Nobel Prize began just over a hundred years ago that Jewish people who make up just .02% of the world’s population have received 25% of the Nobel Prize’s awarded?
You don’t go a day in your life that you don’t experience the blessing of the Jewish people.
Have you ever taken an aspirin for a headache? Felix Hoffmann who developed the aspirin and worked for Bayer, was a Jew.
Have you ever been vaccinated for Polio? Jonas Salk who developed this vaccine was a Jew.
Have you ever gone to the dentist and had your gums deaden with Novocain? Alfred Eihhorn, who developed Novocain, was a Jew.
Do you take vitamins? The man who developed vitamins, named Casimir Funk, was a Jew.
Some of you are undergoing chemotherapy to treat cancer. The man who developed and discovered chemotherapy was Alfred Gilman, who was a Jew.
The discovery of streptomycin which was the first drug active against tuberculosis was developed by Dr. Selman Waksman, who was a Jew. He also coined the term “antibiotic”.
Modern day physics operates around the theory of relativity which was discovered by Albert Einstein, a Jew.
I could go on and on, but we have indeed and are indeed experiencing the blessing of the Jewish people.
God also promised them a land as an everlasting possession. After being displaced from that land for almost 2000 years an incredible thing happened. God had prophesied in Ezekiel 11:17,
“Therefore say: ‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will gather you from the nations and bring you back from the countries where you have been scattered, and I will give you back the land of Israel again.’” (Ezekiel 11:17, NIV)
In May of 1948, a nation was born in a day. It is an incredible story.
When Israel was born and recognized by the United Nations there were approximately 650,000 Jewish people living in the land surrounded by 40 million Arabs who vowed and declared they would destroy them and drive them into the sea.
When the United States became the first country to recognize this tiny state, war was immediately declared and Israel was out-numbered in soldiers and out equipped in arms and out classed in vehicles. They were outnumbered 40-to-1 in troops, 100-to-1 in population and 1000-to-1 in military equipment. You couldn’t find anybody to bet on Israel.
Miraculously, she won that war. She won two more wars after that and today with a population of only 6 million people she is the third strongest military power in the world and the only Middle Eastern nation that produces its own tanks, planes, and weapons.
Let’s just recount what has happened just since the beginning of the 20th century. A powerless people, scattered around the globe, victims of the greatest catastrophe in human history known as the “Holocaust” are suddenly recognized by the United Nations as having their own state in their own ancient homeland.
A poorly trained, poorly equipped Jewish army defeats the combined might of the Arab world. Not once, but three times, a nation the size of New Jersey now boasts one of the most powerful armies in the world.
A nation of immigrants from more than 100 countries becomes a democracy that is so pluralistic it is criticized for having too many political parties.
In less than 60 years the Jewish population of Israel has grown by a factor of 12 from a half million to more than 6 million.
In those 60 years a land of desert and malarial swamps is turned into one of the most technologically advanced countries on the globe with vineyards and crops and agricultural production everywhere.[1]
So Mr. Twain, why is the Jew eternal and indestructible? The answer is found in these last two verses.
“And who is like your people Israel—the one nation on earth that God went out to redeem as a people for himself, and to make a name for himself, and to perform great and awesome wonders by driving out nations and their gods from before your people, whom you redeemed from Egypt? You have established your people Israel as your very own forever, and you, O LORD, have become their God.” (2 Samuel 7:23-24, NIV)
The Middle East tells us something. God has a plan. God knows the problem and God keeps His promise. All of history is moving toward that time when one day the King of the Jews, the Jewish Messiah, the Savior of the World, the Lord of the Universe will fulfill that promise and be their King and our King forever and ever and the war on terror will finally be over. Even so, come Lord Jesus.
[1] Michael G. Bard, Will Israel Survive?, pp. 231-232.
ChristianGlobe Networks, Inc., Collected Sermons, by James Merritt
The remainder of the book of Genesis is about God’s Response to Human Sin, i.e., deliverance through the Abrahamic Covenant (12:1–50:26). In Genesis 3–11 the human race has demonstrated its propensity to rebel against God and sin repeatedly. God’s response to human sin is to provide a way of salvation. This story—the story of salvation—begins in Genesis 12 with God’s co…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
1 The Lord had said to Abram, "Leave your country, your people and your father's household and go to the land I will show you.
2 I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing.
3 I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.
4 So Abram left, as the Lord had told him; and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he set out from Haran. 5 He took his wife Sarai, his nephew Lot, all the possessions they had accumulated and the people they had acquired in Haran, and they set out for the land of Canaan, and they arrived there.
6 Abram traveled through the land as far as the site of the great tree of Moreh at Shechem. At that time the Canaanites were in the land. 7 The Lord appeared to Abram and said, "To your offspring I will give this land." So he built an altar there to the Lord , who had appeared to him.
8 From there he went on toward the hills east of Bethel and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. There he built an altar to the Lord and called on the name of the Lord. 9 Then Abram set out and continued toward the Negev.
This next major section of Genesis (12:1–25:18) covers the life of Abraham. Here in chapter 12 God’s first word to Abram is an imperative: leave! The three things he is to leave behind are arranged in ascending order: country, people, father’s household. The imperative is followed by a series of promises relating to progeny, reputation, and blessing. There is quite a contrast between 11:4 (“we may make a name for ourselves”) and 12:2 (“I will make your name great”). The climax of the divine “I wills” is that all peoples on earth (Genesis 10) will be blessed through Abram. Abram is to be not only a recipient of the blessing but also a channel through which this blessing may flow to others.
This all happens when Abram is seventy-five years old. God gets involved for the first time in the life of this septuagenarian. Abram’s response is prompt: “So Abram went” (12:4). First the Lord speaks to Abram (12:1). Then God appears to him (12:7). Now that Abram has moved into Canaan (Shechem, Bethel), God makes a further promise to him: “To your offspring I will give this land.” Abram does not yet have even one child, and here is God talking about offspring. First God speaks (12:1–3), then Abram journeys (12:4–6). Next God appears, then Abram worships (12:7). The paragraph begins with the promise to make for Abram a great “name” and concludes with Abram calling on the Lord’s “name.”
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
This section begins the Abraham narrative (11:27–25:18), which details Abraham’s life from the time he receives God’s call to the time of his death. (See the Introduction for a survey of the Abraham narrative as a unit.) The Abraham narrative opens with a travelog and the family history, or toledoth, of Terah, which begins here, and continues through 25:18. Members of this family set out from their home in Ur of the Chaldeans to go to Canaan (11:31). They stop at Haran, where they decide to settle. Later God commands Abram to go on to Canaan, and Abram obeys. Once there, he moves through the land, making three stops for indefinite periods: at Shechem (12:6), between Bethel and Ai (12:8), and in the Negev (12:9). At the center of this account is Yahweh’s call of Abram and the wonderful promises Yahweh makes to Abram. These promises, God’s program for establishing his kingdom on earth, are the key both to Genesis and to the Pentateuch. Further, they continue to be fulfilled in the lineage of the children of Abraham and in those who follow Christ, who came to make these promises available to all who believe in him.
These verses divide naturally into two sections, Abram’s lineage (11:27–32) and Abram’s call (12:1–9). This second section contains a unit about God’s commands and promises to Abram (vv. 1–3) and another unit about Abram’s journey to Canaan (vv. 4–9). The word “go” ties these two parts together; God commands Abram to “go” (12:1), and in obedience he “went” (12:4).
11:27–28 This is the account (toledoth)of Terah. Even though Terah plays no role in the following episodes, the narrator of Genesis traditionally introduces a major section with the genealogy of the main character, beginning with that person’s father. This account also contains essential information for understanding what follows. The mention of the death of Haran, Lot’s father, prepares the reader to understand why Abram takes Lot under his care (12:4).
11:29–30 Abram’s wife was Sarai. In Hebrew her name means “princess,” and in Akkadian it means “queen,” the name of the moon god’s consort. None of her lineage is given, but in 20:12 we learn that she is Abram’s half-sister, born to Terah by a different mother than Abram’s. Nahor married his niece Milcah, another Akkadian term for “queen” and the title of Ishtar, the moon god’s daughter. These names indicate that this family came from a culture that worshiped the moon god (Josh. 24:2, 15). The note that Sarai was barren will be a major factor in Abram’s journey of faith.
11:31–32 Terah, along with members of his immediate family, set out from Ur of the Chaldeans for Canaan. Abram, Lot, and Sarai accompanied him. It is not stated whether Nahor and Milcah went along at this time or later; they did come to Haran, as 22:20–24 and 24:10 indicate. When these travelers arrived at Haran, an important trading center in upper Mesopotamia located on the Balikh River, which flows into the Euphrates, they decided to settle. At Haran, a center for the Amorites, and Ur, the chief god was the moon god (Akk. Sin). At this point the text reports that Terah died there at the age of 205. A comparison of the dates in the following narratives indicates that he died only two years before Sarah did (23:1). The narrator records his death here since he has no role in the following stories.
Although the text does not state why Terah left Ur, God prompted his movement. Two facts support this idea. First, his initial destination was Canaan. Second, the description of Abram’s departure from Haran and arrival in Canaan (12:5) is expressed in the same way as Terah’s leaving Ur. What Terah began and failed to complete, Abram accomplished. An early credo also traces Israel’s origin to Abram’s leaving Ur (Josh. 24:2–13). In the early church Stephen also interpreted Abram’s move from Ur to Haran in this way (Acts 7:2–5). Having accompanied Terah from Ur, Abram possessed a framework for understanding the directions God was about to give him.
12:1 Yahweh addressed Abram, ordering him to leave his country, his people, and his father’s household. The text offers no description of the manner of Yahweh’s appearing, no superfluous detail to detract from the definiteness of this call. In Hebrew a play on sounds in the command “leave” (lek leka) underscores its urgency (cf. 22:2). God identified precisely what Abram was to leave by using three terms that move from the general to the specific; the threefold repetition stresses that Abram had to separate completely from his family. “Country” is the region around Haran. “People” is the larger ethnic group to which Abram belonged. “His father’s household” was his extended family, identified in the preceding genealogy of Terah. People in the Western world who prize the freedom of moving freely from place to place fail to realize how demanding this call was for Abram. A father’s house was the basis of a person’s identity, livelihood, and security; most ancients never wanted to leave the solidarity of the family. For Abram, however, God’s command demanded that he shift his orientation and security from his lineage and his homeland to God and his promises.
Why did God demand that Abram leave Haran in order to become the bearer of these promises? The answer probably lies in the cultural practices of that day. If Abram had begun to worship only one God in Haran, he would have placed his life in jeopardy. For example, his new devotion would have led to his absence from various celebrations such as the great new year’s festival at which the destinies for the coming year were set. The community would have frowned at his absence on such important occasions. Should they have tolerated Abram’s presence, the citizens would have immediately considered that the gods were angry at them if disaster struck Haran. They would have blamed Abram, and at best they would have banished him. Consequently, for Abram to follow God with singleness of purpose, he needed to leave Haran and wander about in a land under no sovereignty but God’s.
12:2–3 God supported the call with two sets of three promises each. In the first set, God expressed a commitment to Abram. The first promise was that God would make him into a great nation. The term “nation” (goy) for Abram’s offspring indicates that his lineage would become so numerous that one day they would become a nation counted among those listed in the Table of Nations (ch. 10; cf. ch. 17). This promise addressed the future far beyond Abram’s life. In accepting this promise Abram placed the destiny of his descendants above his own welfare. At this time God did not identify the land where Abram’s offspring would develop into a nation. Only after Abram had arrived in the land of promise did God make a specific promise about land (v. 7). God’s second promise was to bless Abram. Blessing, which corresponds to the English word “success,” encompasses the well-being of a person or a people: good health, long life, numerous offspring, fertile fields and flocks, harmony within the clan, and freedom from oppression. Emphasis falls on this word “blessing,” which occurs five times. By its nature a blessing is a process that takes considerable time for its realization. Thus in calling Abram God was looking far into the future. The third promise is that God would make his name great. In this promise God addressed the human search for recognition and respect and thus provided the proper way to fame, in bold contrast to the misguided search for fame that inspired the building of the tower of Babel (11:4). The noblest reputation comes from a life directed by God for the good of others.
Between these two sets of promises, Yahweh exhorted Abram to “become a blessing” (NIV renders the line “you will be a blessing”). That is, Abram was to let this blessing work in him and his family in order that he might become the agent through whom God might bless others.
God then gave the second set of three promises. The first two are a complementary pair, showing how God would affect other nations through Abram and how God would protect Abram among the nations (27:29; Num. 24:9). God would bless those who blessed him. Any person or people who sought or promoted Abram’s welfare would be blessed. Conversely, whoever cursed Abram God would curse. One cursed Abram or his seed by hindering him, inflicting harm on him, or undermining his reputation.
Then God stated the highest goal for Abram’s calling. All peoples on earth will be blessed through him. The verb may be better translated “find or obtain blessing.” God’s primary way of working among the nations is through Abram’s seed. Thus, to experience God’s blessing, the various peoples must interact with Abram’s offspring. Having selected one family, God in a sense shows favoritism, but his design is not parochial. God was and is working through one family for the benefit of all families. Through Abram’s seed he is achieving his goal in creating the earth, namely, people worshiping only him. That this program is just rests in God’s wise sovereignty.
The centrality of these promises is evident in the way they function as a uniting link throughout Genesis. The promise of numerous descendants occurs many times: 13:16; 15:5; 17:5–6; 22:16–17; 26:4; 28:14; 35:11. Their number will be as great as the dust (13:16; 28:14), the stars (15:5; 22:17; 26:4), and the sand on the seashore (22:17). Twice God specifically promises that Sarai will bear a son (17:16; 18:10). The promise that the nations will find blessing through Abram’s seed appears in 22:18; 26:4; 28:14; Acts 3:25; Gal. 3:8 (cf. 27:29). At other times these promises are a part of the flow of the narrative (24:7; 48:3–4). In addition, God directly tells Isaac (26:3–4) and Jacob (28:13–14; 35:11–12) that they are heirs of the promises given to Abram. The promise of land, first given in 12:7, is repeated in 13:14–15, 17; 15:18–21; 17:8; 26:3–4; 28:13–14; 35:12.
12:4–6 Abram acted immediately on God’s word. At the age of seventy-five he left Haran with his wife Sarai and his nephew Lot. We may assume that he invited other relatives to accompany him, but only Lot, whom Abram had reared after his father’s death, accepted. Abram also took along their possessions and the people, presumably servants, they had acquired in Haran. The band set out for Canaan. There is no information about their journey, but they most likely took the main highway to Damascus, then traveled through the Huleh Valley to the Sea of Galilee. Once in Canaan, Abram left the main highway, the Via Maris, across the lush Jezreel Valley, possibly because this road went through a more heavily settled region. Instead he went through the sparsely settled hill country, where there was plenty of open land for his flocks to graze.
Arriving at Shechem, a strategic site in the heart of Canaan, Abram stayed a while at the great tree of Moreh. This tree was either a terebinth or an oak. The name Moreh, meaning “teacher, diviner,” indicates that this place might have been famous for receiving oracles.
A parenthetic note states that the Canaanites were in the land. Abram’s descendants would have to deal with them before they occupied the land.
12:7 After Abram had pitched his tent in Canaan, Yahweh appeared to him in recognition of his obedience in leaving Haran for Canaan. The initiative for this divine appearance rests solely with Yahweh; God did not appear because Abram was in the vicinity of a sacred tree. As in verse 1, there is no mention of any phenomena accompanying Yahweh’s appearance, for the focus is on the new promise: to your offspring (seed) I will give this land. “To your seed” stands at the head of the sentence for emphasis, making it clear that this promise is to be realized by Abram’s descendants. This is the first time God included the gift of the land as a part of the promises. The land was necessary for Abram’s descendants to develop into a great nation (v. 2).
In joyful response to God’s confirming word, Abram built an altar to Yahweh, who had appeared to him. His action indicates that he did not go to an existing shrine or temple but erected a new altar to the God who had called him at Haran. Probably he built the altar by piling up either dirt or stones (Exod. 20:24–25). Building an altar implies that Abram offered up some kind of sacrifice, but the text says nothing about either the type of sacrifice or the ritual. Since Abram was worshiping God spontaneously in a new land, the thrust of this report is Abram’s devotion to God.
12:8–9 Abram continued his journey, moving eastward through the hill country, pitching his tent next at a place identified as Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. “Pitching” suggests that he camped there for a period of time. Again he built an altar to Yahweh and called on the name of Yahweh. He continued to honor God for guiding and protecting his company in their journey. This place, where Jacob is to have a dream when he flees from Esau (ch. 28), does not have a name here. Giving a name is an honor that will become Jacob’s. Afterward Abram continued to travel through Canaan, moving toward the Negev. The Negev, the region south of the hill country, is an expansive, high steppe with little rainfall. Whenever the rainfall is normal or better, sufficient grass grows to provide good grazing for flocks in the spring. Abram had traversed the land of promise from north to south, marking out the land that God was promising his seed.
Additional Notes
11:28 Ur was an important city-state in southern Mesopotamia for several centuries; it was the leading center from around 2100 to 2000 B.C. The phrase “of the Chaldeans” was probably added in the retelling of these patriarchal stories to identify Ur for later generations, for the Chaldeans are not mentioned in Akkadian texts until after the ninth century B.C. (de Vaux, Early History of Israel, pp. 187–88). Because of the great distance between Ur and Haran, about five hundred miles, various scholars have proposed different sites in northern Mesopotamia for this Ur. An identification that goes back to the nineteenth century is Urfa, present-day Edessa, a town some twenty miles northwest of Haran. The journey from there to Haran would have been a normal trip for people of that day. A city to the north of Haran overcomes another difficulty, namely, that Haran was not on the main highway from Ur to Canaan. Also, it helps deal with the problem that if Abram came from southern Mesopotamia his journey was in the opposite direction of the Amorite migration at the end of the third millennium B.C. This alternative view has not won wide acceptance. At present the information from that time is too scarce to decide conclusively which site is the most likely home of Abram.
11:31 In Akk. Haran means “route, journey, caravan.” Haran was an important trading center where Amorite tribes lived at the beginning of the second millennium B.C., and its culture was a blend of Amorite and Hurrian elements (Y. Kobayashi, “Haran,” ABD 3:58). There is no connection between this town and the name of Terah’s son, for in Hb. the two names are spelled differently.
12:2 Usually in the OT Israel is “the people” (’am) or “the children of Israel” (bene yisra’el), and goy refers to the other nations. That “nation” occurs here is significant; it conveys that the number of Abram’s descendants will increase enough to be organized into a nation numbered among the other nations (ch. 10).
12:3 There are two different words for curse in v. 3b. Such a variation is unusual, for the Hebrews like to repeat terms for assonance and emphasis. The first verb, qll, has a wider usage, meaning “disdain, treat with contempt, curse,” but the second term, ’rr, is stronger and more focused, and it denotes God’s release of a harmful force such as a plague to punish those who obstruct the way of or mistreat any of Abram’s descendants. The strength of the term with God shows God’s resolve to protect Abram and his seed from all opposition. This latter word dominates curse formulas such as those found in Deut. 27:15–26.
The best way to render the verb “bless” at the end of v. 3 is debated. It stands in the Niphal, thus having either a middle or a passive sense. Which sense is preferable? The versions, including Vg. and Tg., along with Eng. translations, have favored the passive. But some scholars advocate a reflexive meaning, “bless themselves,” drawing support from restatements of this promise with the Hitpael (22:18; 26:4). Others have argued for a middle sense, i.e., “find or obtain a blessing.” This latter position captures the need of the nations to actively be involved in promoting Abram’s seed as the way to participate in his blessing.
12:6 The precise identification of the tree meant by Hb. ’elon is debated. While many consider it a terebinth, a deciduous tree, a few identify it as an oak, either the Tabor oak or the evergreen oak (M. Zohary, Plants of the Bible [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982], pp. 108–11). The fact that the Hb. terms for these two trees are so similar adds to the confusion. Curiously, accounts about Shechem mention a tree several times (35:4; Josh. 24:25–26; Judg. 9:6, 37).
12:7 “Seed” (often translated “descendant”) is a motif that runs through the Abraham narratives; it is placed in parentheses throughout this commentary so that readers may know when it stands in the Hb. text (13:15, 16; 17:7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 19; 22:17, 18; 24:7; 26:3; 28:13).
Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by John E. Hartley, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
Abram is a well-known biblical character whose life is detailed in Gen. 11:25 25:11. Abram’s name (which means “exalted father”) is changed in Gen. 17:5 to “Abraham,” meaning “father of many nations.”
The narrative account in Genesis details one hundred years of Abraham’s life and moves quickly through the first seventy-five years of events. In just a few verses (11:26–31) we learn that Abram was the son of Terah, the brother of Haran and Nahor, the husband of the barren Sarai (later Sarah), and the uncle of Lot, the son of Haran, who died in Ur of the Chaldees. The plot line marks significant events in Abraham’s life chronologically. He left Harran at the age of 75 (12:4), was 86 when Hagar gave birth to Ishmael (16:16), 99 when the Lord appeared to him (17:17) and when he was circumcised (17:24), 100 when Sarah gave birth to Isaac (21:5), and 175 when he died (25:7). In summary, the biblical narrator paces the reader quickly through the story in such a way as to highlight a twenty-five-year period of Abraham’s life between the ages of 75 and 100.
The NT features Abraham in several significant ways. The intimate connection between God and Abraham is noted in the identification of God as “the God of Abraham” in Acts 7:32 (cf. Exod. 3:6). The NT also celebrates the character of Abraham as a man of faith who received the promise (Gal. 3:9; Heb. 6:15). Abraham is most importantly an example of how one is justified by faith (Rom. 4:1, 12) and an illustration of what it means to walk by faith (James 2:21, 23).
Those who exercise faith in the living God, as did Abraham, are referred to as “children of Abraham” (Gal. 3:7). Regarding the covenant promises made to Abraham in the OT, the NT writers highlight the promises of seed and blessing. According to Paul, the seed of Abraham is ultimately fulfilled in Christ, and those who believe in Christ are the seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:16, 29). In a similar way, those who have Abraham-like faith are blessed (3:9). The blessing imparted to Abraham comes to the Gentiles through the redemption of Christ and is associated with the impartation of the Spirit (3:14).
The Hebrew term behind Ai means “the ruin.” Biblical Ai was situated east of Bethel in the highlands of Ephraim overlooking the Jordan Valley.
In the Bible, Ai first appears as a landmark in Abram’s travels (Gen. 12:8; 13:3). In the book of Joshua, it figures prominently as a lesser city in the initial conquest of Canaan (7:3; 10:2; but see 8:25). Following Israel’s initial defeat (7:4 5), Joshua proscribes Ai according to Yahweh’s instruction (8:2), slaying its inhabi-tants and hanging its king, then reducing the settlement to a ruin (8:25–28). This strikes fear into the neighboring populations (9:3–4; 10:1–2). The disproportionate attention given to its capture sets the conquest within a theological framework: victory depends on obedience to Yahweh.
Altars were places of sacrifice and worship constructed of various materials. They could be either temporary or permanent. Some altars were in the open air; others were set apart in a holy place. They could symbolize either God’s presence and protection or false worship that would lead to God’s judgment.
Bethel’s situation and importance are explained by its copious springs and its location at the intersection of major ancient highways, the north-south mountain road and the east-west road from Jericho to the coastal plain.
The first mention of Bethel in the Bible is in Gen. 12:8, where Abram camped “east of Bethel” on his first entry into the promised land. He camped there again on his return from a stay in Egypt (13:3). On the first occasion Abram erected “an altar to the Lord.” When Abram returned to that spot, he “called on the name of the Lord.”
It was Jacob who gave it the name “Bethel,” meaning “house of God,” due to the dream he received in that location. In the dream he saw a ladder reaching to heaven, and God spoke to him (28:1019). Its former name was Luz. God later appeared in Mesopotamia and spoke to Jacob, identifying himself as “the God of Bethel,” instructing him to return to his native land. The title taken by God implied that God would be faithful to his earlier promise to bring Jacob back to his land (31:13). Later God specifically instructed Jacob to settle in Bethel (35:1–6). Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died in Bethel and was buried there (35:8). God appeared to Jacob a second time in Bethel and spoke to him, reiterating the promise to give him the land of Canaan (35:9–15; cf. 28:13). All God’s dealings with Jacob are connected to the theophanies and divine promises associated with Bethel.
Bethel is mentioned a number of times in the account of Joshua’s capture of Ai, a city that lay to the east of Bethel (Josh. 7). The king of Bethel is listed among the kings defeated by Joshua (12:16). Under Joshua, the city was apportioned to Benjamin (18:13, 22), but the Canaanites repopulated it after the near extinction of the tribe of Benjamin (Judg. 20–21). Bethel was reconquered by the house of Joseph and incorporated into Ephraimite territory (Judg. 1:22–25; 1Chron. 7:28), and later it became a fortress on its southern tribal border. Deborah held court between Ramah and Bethel (Judg. 4:5). Under the judgeship of Samuel, Bethel was one of his regular stops in his yearly circuit (1Sam. 7:16). It continued throughout this period to be a sanctuary where offerings were made (see 1Sam. 10:3).
This long-term cultic association explains the choice of Bethel as one of the two chief sanctuaries of the northern kingdom, the other center being in Dan. JeroboamI built a royal shrine at Bethel to rival Jerusalem and to prevent the Israelites from drifting back to the Davidic dynasty (1Kings 12:26–33). The prophet Ahijah’s criticism of Jeroboam’s actions were not due to Ahijah’s commitment to a central sanctuary at Jerusalem (14:1–16) but rather arose from the use of bull images (golden calves). This was not an innocent move by Jeroboam, returning to pre-Jerusalem and more ancient cultic symbols. This became known as the chief sin of Jeroboam son of Nebat. It tainted the northern kingdom (see 2Kings 10:29) and eventually led to that kingdom’s judgment by God at the hands of the Assyrians (2Kings 17:21–23).
The southern king Abijah captured Bethel from Israel in the latter part of Jeroboam’s reign (2Chron. 13:19), but then it later returned to northern control. The unnamed “man of God” in 1Kings 13 predicted the later destruction of the Bethel altar by King Josiah (1Kings 13:1–3), a prediction subsequently fulfilled (2Kings 23:4, 15–18). Bethel was visited by Elijah before his translation to heaven (2Kings 2:2–4), and a company of prophets dwelt there. Elisha revisited Bethel after his master’s translation and cursed the forty-two youths who insulted him (2Kings 2:23–25).
Hosea condemned the great wickedness of Bethel, presumably because of the false worship that went on there (Hos. 10:15), but more positively, he recalled that this was the location where God had talked with the patriarch Jacob (12:4). Jeremiah also explained the sad fate of Israel to be a result of their trust in Bethel (Jer. 48:13). Amos, in his condemnation of the worship system of the northern kingdom, ironically called to the people, “Go to Bethel and sin” (Amos 4:4). Later he dropped the irony and spoke plainly: “Do not seek Bethel” (5:5), predicting its destruction (5:6; cf. 3:14). It was in Bethel that Amos was criticized by the head priest Amaziah (7:10–17) and was told to no longer prophesy there because it was “the king’s sanctuary.”
The city was destroyed by the Assyrians about the time of their capture of Samaria (722 BC), but the shrine was revived in the form of a syncretistic cult at the close of the Assyrian period by the foreign peoples deported to the area (2Kings 17:24–41). Some descendants of the inhabitants of Bethel were among those who returned from Babylonian exile in the first great caravan (Ezra 2:28; Neh. 7:32), and these Benjamite returnees resettled in their hometown (Neh. 11:31). Bethel prospered in the Hellenistic and Roman periods.
Son of Ham, grandson of Noah, and the father of the families that would become known as the Canaanites (Gen. 10:6, 1519). Oddly, in the account of Ham’s great sin against Noah (seeing his father’s nakedness), Noah cursed his grandson Canaan rather than his son Ham (Gen. 9:18–27). The explanations of such cursing vary, but the passage ultimately establishes the context by which the Bible explains the relationship of the Canaanites to the Israelites in the centuries that followed. The most plausible reasons for why Canaan rather than Ham was cursed center on the irrevocability of God’s blessing of Ham in Gen. 9:1 or that Canaan played some undescribed role in the sinful act. The curse also included a promise of animosity between Canaan and the sons of Japheth (9:27). This element of the curse probably found fulfillment with the entrance of the Philistines (Sea Peoples) into the land at about the same time Israel was entering it under Joshua’s leadership.
The blessings and curses of Scripture are grounded in a worldview that understands the sovereign God to be the ultimate dispenser of each. God is the giver of blessing and ultimately the final judge who determines withdrawal or ban. He is the source of every good gift (James 1:17) and the one who gives power and strength to prosper (Deut. 8:17).
Old Testament. The sovereign God sometimes employs agents of blessing in his creation. The blessing extends to the nations through Abraham (Gen. 12:3), to Jacob through Isaac (Gen. 2627), and to the people through the priests (Num. 6:24–26).
The theme of blessing/curse is used to structure Deut. 27–28 and Lev. 26 (cf. Josh. 8:34) in the overall covenant format of these books. Scholars have observed that the object of this format is not symmetry or logical unity but fullness. From this perspective, the blessing/curse structure functions to enforce obedience for the purpose of ensuring a relationship. The blessing of Deuteronomy also includes the benefits of prosperity, power, and fertility. The curse, on the other hand, is the lack or withdrawal of benefits associated with the relationship.
The creation narratives are marked with the theme and terminology of blessing (Gen. 1:22, 28; 2:3; cf. 5:2; 9:1). The objects of blessing in Gen. 1:22, 28 (cf. 5:2; 9:1) are the living creatures and human beings created in the image of God. As the revelation progresses, the blessing of God is particularized in the lives of Noah (Gen. 6–8), Abraham (Gen. 12–25) and his descendants, and the nation of Israel and its leadership (Gen. 26–50). In these contexts, the blessing is intended to engender offspring and to prosper recipients in material and physical ways (compare a similar NT emphasis in Acts 17:25; cf. Matt. 5:45; 6:25–33; Acts 14:17).
The blessing of God is also extended to inanimate objects that enhance and prosper one’s quality of life. The seventh day of creation is the object of blessing (Gen. 2:7; Exod. 20:11), perhaps giving it a sense of well-being and health. Objects and activities of life such as baskets and kneading troughs (Deut. 28:5), barns (Deut. 28:8), and work (Job 1:10; Ps. 90:17) are blessed.
God promises to bless those who fear him (Ps. 128:1). Blessing is designed for those who, out of a deep sense of awe of God’s character, love and trust him. The God-fearer confidently embraces God’s promises, obediently serves, and takes seriously God’s warnings. The blessings itemized in Ps. 128 are comparable to those detailed in Deut. 28 relating to productivity and fruitfulness (cf. Ps. 128:2 with Deut. 28:12; Ps. 128:3 with Deut. 28:4, 11). The Deuteronomic concept of blessing and curse is questioned when God-fearers undergo a period of suffering or experience God’s apparent absence (e.g., Joseph, Job; cf. Jesus).
New Testament. In the NT, blessings are not exclusively spiritual. God gives both food and joy (Acts 14:17) and provides the necessities of life (Matt. 6:25–33). The NT does connect blessing with Christ, and it focuses attention on the spiritual quality of the gift that originates from Christ himself and its intended benefit for spiritual individuals.
Regarding curse, the NT explains that Christ bore the curse of the law to free us from its deadening effect (Gal. 3:10–13). Revelation 22:3 anticipates a time when the curse associated with sin will be completely removed and the blessing associated with creation will prevail. “Anathema” is a transliteration of a Greek word that means “curse” (see NIV). Paul invokes it for those who pervert or reject the gospel of God’s free grace (1Cor. 16:22; Gal. 1:8–9).
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.
A son of Terah and brother of Abraham. He was the father of Lot as well as of Milkah and Iskah. Haran died in Ur of the Chaldeans, where he was born, before Terah took his family and set out for Canaan (Gen. 11:2632).
A region generally identified with the landmass between ancient Syria and Egypt, including parts of the Sinai Peninsula, Palestine from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean, and southern Phoenicia (modern Lebanon).
In the Bible, the geographical reference “the land of Canaan” finds primary expression in Genesis through Judges. The promise to Abraham that his descendants would inherit the land of the Canaanites (Gen. 15:1821) is the theological focal point of the uses of the term “Canaan” throughout these biblical books. Once that inheritance was achieved and Israel became a viable state, the term’s use seems to serve the double purpose of being both a geographical marker and a reminder of the nature of its former predominant inhabitants. The prophets drew upon the term to remind Israel of the land’s former status, both in its positive (Isa. 19:18) and negative (Isa. 23:11; Zeph. 2:5) connotations. The term is transliterated twice in the NT in the recounting of OT history (Acts 7:11; 13:19). One further connection between Canaan and the perspectives communicated concerning it in the OT is the apparent association of the land with corrupt trade practices. That is, while some believe that the word “Canaan” always meant “merchant” or some similar word, its use in Scripture suggests that the tradesmen of Canaan were of such disrepute in the recollection of ancient Israel that the term became a synonym for “unjust trader” (Job 41:6; Ezek. 16:29; 17:4; Zeph. 1:11; Zech. 14:21).
A broad designation for certain regions in Israel, typically rocky, although also plains, with little rainfall. These areas generally are uninhabited, and most often “wilderness” refers to specific regions surrounding inhabited Israel. A fair amount of Scripture’s focus with respect to the wilderness concerns Israel’s forty-year period of wandering in the wilderness after the exodus (see also Wilderness Wandering).
More specifically, the geographical locations designated “wilderness” fall into four basic categories: the Negev (south), Transjordan (east), Judean (eastern slope of Judean mountains), and Sinai (southwest).
The Negev makes up a fair amount of Israel’s southern kingdom, Judah. It is very rocky and also includes plateaus and wadis, which are dry riverbeds that can bloom after rains. Its most important city is Beersheba (see Gen. 21:14, 22 34), which often designates Israel’s southernmost border, as in the expression “from Dan to Beersheba” (e.g., 2Sam. 17:11).
Transjordan pertains to the area east of the Jordan River, the area through which the Israelites had to pass before crossing the Jordan on their way from Mount Sinai to Canaan. (Israel was denied direct passage to Canaan by the Edomites and Amorites [see Num. 20:14–21; 21:21–26].) Even though this region lay outside the promised land of Canaan, it was settled by the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh after they had fulfilled God’s command to fight alongside the other tribes in conquering Canaan (Num. 32:1–42; Josh. 13:8; 22:1–34).
The Judean Desert is located on the eastern slopes of the Judean mountains, toward the Dead Sea. David fled there for refuge from Saul (1Sam. 21–23). It was also in this area that Jesus was tempted (Luke 4:1–13).
The Sinai Desert is a large peninsula, with the modern-day Gulf of Suez to the west and the Gulf of Aqaba to the east. In the ancient Near Eastern world, both bodies of water often were referred to as the “Red Sea,” which is the larger sea to the south. In addition to the region traditionally believed to contain the location of Mount Sinai (its exact location is unknown), the Sinai Desert is further subdivided into other areas known to readers of the OT: Desert of Zin (northeast, contains Kadesh Barnea), Desert of Shur (northwest, near Egypt), Desert of Paran (central).
Wilderness is commonly mentioned in the Bible, and although it certainly can have neutral connotations (i.e., simply describing a location), the uninhabited places often entail both positive (e.g., as a place of solitude) and negative (e.g., as a place of wrath) connotations, both in their actual geological properties and as metaphors. The very rugged and uninhabited nature of the wilderness easily lent itself to being a place of death (e.g., Deut. 8:15; Ps. 107:4–5; Jer. 2:6). It was also a place associated with Israel’s rebellions and struggles with other nations. Upon leaving Egypt, Israel spent forty years wandering the wilderness before entering Canaan, encountering numerous military conflicts along the way. This forty-year period was occasioned by a mass rebellion (Num. 14), hence casting a necessarily dark cloud over that entire period, and no doubt firming up subsequent negative connotations of “wilderness.” Similarly, “wilderness” connotes notions of exile from Israel, as seen in the ritual of the scapegoat (lit., “goat of removal” [see Lev. 16]). On the Day of Atonement, one goat was sacrificed to atone for the people’s sin, and another was sent off, likewise to atone for sin. The scapegoat was released into the desert, where it would encounter certain death, either by succumbing to the climate or through wild animals.
On the other hand, it is precisely in this uninhabited land that God also showed his faithfulness to his people, despite their prolonged punishment. He miraculously supplied bread (manna) and meat (quail) (Exod. 16; Num. 11), as well as water (Exod. 15:22–27; 17:1–7; Num. 20:1–13; 21:16–20). God’s care for Israel is amply summarized in Deut. 1:30–31: “The Lord your God, who is going before you, will fight for you, as he did for you in Egypt, before your very eyes, and in the wilderness. There you saw how the Lord your God carried you, as a father carries his son, all the way you went until you reached this place.”
The harsh realities of the wilderness also made it an ideal place to seek sanctuary and protection. David fled from Saul to the wilderness, the Desert of Ziph (1Sam. 23:14; 26:2–3; cf. Ps. 55:7). Similarly, Jeremiah sought a retreat in the desert from sinful Israel (Jer. 9:2).
Related somewhat to this last point is Jesus’ own attitude toward the wilderness. It was there that he retreated when he could no longer move about publicly (John 11:54). John the Baptist came from the wilderness announcing Jesus’ ministry (Matt. 3:1–3; Mark 1:2–4; Luke 3:2–6; John 1:23; cf. Isa. 40:3–5). It was also in the desert that Jesus went to be tempted but also overcame that temptation.
(1)The son of Hamor the Hivite, who was the head of the town and environs of Shechem (Gen. 34:2; cf. Josh. 24:32; Judg. 9:28). He raped Jacob and Leah’s daughter Dinah, whose brothers killed him, Hamor, and the men of their town and plundered it in revenge.
(2)A crucial town in the hill country on the border of the tribal allotment of Ephraim (Josh. 20:7). Shechem is the first Canaanite town to be mentioned in the book of Genesis (12:6). Abraham camped at the site near the oak tree of Moreh, and God revealed himself to Abraham there, giving the first indication of the importance of the place. In response to God’s revelation, Abraham built an altar at Shechem. Later, Jacob settled in the region of Shechem and purchased land from Hamor the Hivite (33:1819). When Hamor’s son Shechem raped Jacob’s daughter Dinah, her brothers Simeon and Levi killed the men of the region, and Jacob’s other sons pillaged the town of Shechem. Jacob buried his foreign gods at Shechem under the aforementioned oak tree in response to the revelation of God (35:1–4). It was in the general region of Shechem that Joseph later would seek his brothers and their flocks (Gen. 37). Israel would bury the bones of Joseph there in accordance with his wishes (50:25; Josh. 24:32).
Due to the revelation of God and its significance to the patriarchs, Joshua gathered the Israelites to Shechem after the conquest of Canaan and just prior to his death in order to renew the covenant (Josh. 8:30–35; 24). After the conquest the town was allotted to the Kohathite Levites and was one of the cities of refuge (Josh. 20:7; 21:21; 1Chron. 6:67). However, in the period of the judges Shechem apparently was still under the cultural and religious influence of the Canaanites, as evidenced by the presence of the temple of Baal-Berith (Judg. 9:4). Abimelek, whose mother was a Shechemite, convinced the people of the town to make him their king. After three years, the Shechemites rejected Abimelek, and he killed many of them and destroyed the town (Judg. 9). It was at Shechem that the ten northern tribes made the decision to reject Solomon’s son Rehoboam and make Jeroboam their king. Jeroboam subsequently made Shechem his capital for a period (1Kings 12).
Direct Matches
Abraham’s original name, used in Gen. 11:26–17:4.At Gen. 17:5 Abram is renamed “Abraham” because he willbe a “father of many nations.” “Abram” isformed from the common Hebrew word ’ab, meaning “father,”plus the root that means “exalted,” although note thatScripture does not assign any particular theological significance tothis name. See also Abraham.
The Hebrew term behind Ai means “the ruin.”Biblical Ai was situated east of Bethel in the highlands of Ephraimoverlooking the Jordan Valley. The commonly accepted location iset-Tell, “the heap,” a mound near present-day Deir Dibwan(ten miles north-northeast of Jerusalem). This determination is basedpartly on identification of Bethel with Beitin, which is challengedby some.
Excavationsat et-Tell reveal two periods of habitation: first, during the EarlyBronze Age (c. 3100–2400 BC), followed by an intervening spanof more than a millennium during which et-Tell was uninhabited, thenagain during Iron Age I (c. 1200–1050 BC).
Theearliest settlement was an unwalled village. Artifacts reveal amixture of local and foreign influences, with some early potteryresembling that of nearby Jericho. Later pottery shows traitsconsistent with northern Syria and Anatolia, suggesting migration ofpeoples from these regions. Around 3000 BC the village wasreconfigured to include an acropolis with a temple and palacecomplex, and a wall with four gates.
TheEarly Bronze Age city was destroyed several times, including once byan earthquake (evident from the collapse of the temple wall into arift opened in its foundation). Each time it was rebuilt and itsfortifications strengthened. Beginning c. 2700 BC, et-Tell fell underEgyptian influence, attested by Egyptian building techniques and thepresence of imported alabaster and stone vessels. This lasted untilc. 2550 BC, when the city’s wall was breached and the citadelfortifications burned. The city was sacked and abandoned c. 2400 BC.
Et-Tellwas resettled c. 1200 BC, possibly by persons fleeing the influx ofSea Peoples into the Eastern Mediterranean. The Iron Age Isettlement was considerably smaller than the Early Bronze Age city(three versus twenty-seven acres). Settlers built houses on theacropolis and terraced the mound for farming; however, no attempt wasmade to repair the walls or erect new fortifications. Discovery ofmultiple grain silos indicates a population increase c. 1125 BC. Lackof all but the earliest Iron Age ware suggests that et-Tell wasabandoned c. 1050 BC. Because its houses remained intact, the villageclearly was not destroyed.
Inthe Bible, Ai first appears as a landmark in Abram’s travels(Gen. 12:8; 13:3). In the book of Joshua, it figures prominently as alesser city in the initial conquest of Canaan (7:3; 10:2; but see8:25). Following Israel’s initial defeat (7:4–5), Joshuaproscribes Ai according to Yahweh’s instruction (8:2), slayingits inhabitants and hanging its king, then reducing the settlement toa ruin (8:25–28). This strikes fear into the neighboringpopulations (9:3–4; 10:1–2). The disproportionateattention given to its capture sets the conquest within a theologicalframework: victory depends on obedience to Yahweh. Ai later appearsin regard to those who are returning from exile in Babylon (Ezra2:28; Neh.7:32).
Comparisonof archaeological evidence from et-Tell with the traditional datingof the exodus (fifteenth century BC) reveals that the site wasunoccupied when Ai would have been sacked by Israel. This has ledsome to conclude that the account in Josh. 7–8 is etiological(a story explaining the source of the ruins at et-Tell) and thereforelegendary, or originally pertained to the sacking of another site—forexample, Bethel (8:17). Suggesting that Ai was a temporary strongholdduring the conquest, though possible, contradicts details of thebiblical account (see 8:1, 23, 25).
Evenif a late date for the exodus is proposed (thirteenth century BC),the Iron Age settlement at et-Tell was considerably smaller than thenarrative describes, populated by several hundred persons, notthousands (Josh. 8:25). Further, habitation persisted at et-Tell intothe period of the judges (contrast 8:28). Evidence of this sort leadssome to discount the conquest tradition in favor of a settlement(migration) model of Israel’s entry into the land of Canaan(see Judg. 3:5–6).
Itremains altogether possible that et-Tell has been incorrectlyidentified with biblical Ai, or that the evidence excavated at thesite is incomplete. In either case, further archaeologicalinvestigation may vindicate the biblical account of the conquest ofAi. It is equally possible, though, that the events of the conquestand settlement are more complex than the biblical narrativeindicates.
Altars were places of sacrifice and worship constructed ofvarious materials. They could be either temporary or permanent. Somealtars were in the open air; others were set apart in a holy place.They could symbolize either God’s presense and protection orfalse worship that would lead to God’s judgment.
OldTestament
Noahand the patriarchs. Thefirst reference in the Bible is to an altar built by Noah after theflood (Gen. 8:20). This action suggests the sanctuary character ofthe mountain on which the ark landed, so that theologically the ark’sresting place was a (partial) return to Eden. The purpose of theextra clean animals loaded onto the ark was revealed (cf. 7:2–3).They were offered up as “burnt offerings,” symbolizingself-dedication to God at this point of new beginning for the humanrace.
Abrambuilt altars “to the Lord” at places where God appearedand spoke to him (Gen. 12:7) and where he encamped (12:8; 13:3–4,18). No sacrifice is explicitly mentioned in association with thesealtars. Thus, they may have had the character of monuments ormemorials of significant events. In association with Abram’saltars, he is said to have “called on the name of the Lord”(12:8)—that is, to pray. The elaborate cultic proceduresassociated with later Israelite altars (e.g., the mediation ofpriests) were absent in the patriarchal period. Succeedinggenerations followed the same practices: Isaac (26:25) and Jacob(33:20; 34:1, 3, 7). God’s test of Abraham involved the demandthat he sacrifice his son Isaac as a burnt offering. In obedience,Abraham built an altar for this purpose, but through God’sintervention a reprieve was granted, and a ram was substituted (22:9,13). Moses erected an altar after the defeat of Amalek at Rephidim,to commemorate this God-given victory (Exod. 17:15–16).
Mosesand the tabernacle.In the context of making the covenant with Israel at Sinai, God gaveMoses instructions on how to construct an altar (Exod. 20:24–26;cf. Josh. 8:31). It could be “an altar of earth” (ofsun-dried mud-brick construction?) or else made of loose naturalstones. The Israelites were expressly forbidden to use hewn stones,perhaps for fear of an idolatrous image being carved (making thisprohibition an application of Exod. 20:4; cf. Deut. 27:5–6).Even if the altar was large, it was not to be supplied with steps forthe priest to ascend, lest his nakedness be shown to God. Therequirement that priests wear undergarments reflects the same concern(Exod. 28:42–43). An altar made of twelve stones, the numberrepresenting the number of the tribes of Israel, was built by Mosesfor the covenant-making ceremony (Exod. 24:4), in which half theblood of the sacrifice was sprinkled on the altar (representing God?)and the other half on the people, the action symbolizing the covenantbond created (24:6–8).
Forthe tabernacle, a portable “altar of burnt offering” wasmade (Exod. 27:1–8; 38:1–7). It had wooden framessheathed in bronze and featured a horn at each corner. There was aledge around the altar halfway up its sides, from which was hungbronze grating, and it had four bronze rings into which poles wereslipped for transport. As part of the cultic ritual, blood wassmeared on the horns (29:12). This altar stood in the open air in thecourtyard of the tabernacle, near the entrance to the tabernacle.Included among the tabernacle furnishings was a smaller “altarof incense,” with molding around the top rim (30:1–10;37:25–28). This altar was, however, overlaid with gold, for itstood closer to God’s ritual presence, inside the tabernacle,“in front of the curtain that shields the Ark of the Covenantlaw,” the curtain that separated the most holy place from theholy place. The high priest placed fragrant incense on this altarevery morning and evening. The fact that this was a daily procedureand the description of the positioning of the tabernacle furnishingsin Exod. 40:26–28 (mentioning the altar of incense afterspeaking about the lampstand) might be taken as implying that theincense altar was in the holy place, but 1 Kings 6:22 and Heb.9:4 suggest that it was actually in the most holy place, near theark.
God,through Moses, instructed the people that on entering the PromisedLand they were to destroy all Canaanite altars along with the otherparaphernalia of their pagan worship (Deut. 7:5; 12:3). Bronze Agealtars discovered at Megiddo include horned limestone incense altarsand a large circular altar mounted by a flight of steps. In Josh. 22the crisis caused by the building of “an imposing altar”by the Transjordanian tribes was averted when these tribes explainedto the rest of the Israelites that it was intended as a replica ofthe altar outside the tabernacle and not for the offering ofsacrifices. The worship of all Israel at the one sanctuary bothexpressed and protected the religious unity and purity of the nationat this vital early stage of occupation of the land. In laternarratives, however, Gideon (Judg. 6), Samuel (1 Sam. 7:17),Saul (1 Sam. 14:35), and David (2 Sam. 24) are said tobuild altars for sacrifice and to have done so with impunity, and infact with the apparent approval of the biblical author. Theestablished custom of seeking sanctuary from threat of death in thenation’s shrine is reflected in 1 Kings 1:50–53;2:28–35, where Adonijah and Joab are described as “clingingto the horns of the altar.”
Solomon’stemple and rival worship centers.In the temple built by Solomon, the altar of incense that belonged tothe “inner sanctuary” was overlaid with gold (1 Kings6:20, 22). Solomon’s prayer at the dedication of the temple wasmade before the bronze altar in the courtyard (1 Kings 8:22,54). The altar for sacrifices was much larger than the one that hadbeen in the tabernacle (1 Chron. 4:1 gives its dimensions).
Althoughmany of the psalms may originally have been used in worship in thefirst temple, there are surprisingly few references to the altar inthe Psalter (only Pss. 26:6; 43:4; 51:19; 84:3; 118:27). They expressthe psalmist’s devotion to God and the temple as the placewhere God’s presence is enjoyed as the highest blessing.
Afterthe division of the kingdom, Jeroboam offered sacrifices at the rivalaltar that he set up in Bethel (1 Kings 12:32–33). Anunnamed “man of God” (= prophet) predicted Josiah’sdesecration of this altar, which lay many years in the future(1 Kings 13:1–5). Amos and Hosea, who prophesied in thenorthern kingdom of the eighth century BC, condemned this and theother altars in that kingdom (e.g., Amos 3:14; Hos. 8:11–13).Ahab set up an altar to Baal in Samaria (1 Kings 16:32), and thesuppression of Yahwism by Jezebel included the throwing down of theLord’s altars in Israel (19:10, 14). The competition on MountCarmel between Elijah and the prophets of Baal involved rival altars(1 Kings 18), and Elijah’s twelve-stone altar recalls thatof Exod. 24, for he was calling the nation back to the exclusivemonotheism preached by Moses (1 Kings 18:30–32).
Withregard to the southern kingdom, the spiritual declension in the timeof Ahaz manifested itself in this king making an altar modeled on theAssyrian prototype that he had seen on a visit to Damascus (2 Kings16:10–14). He shifted the Lord’s altar from in front ofthe temple, where it had previously stood. Godly Hezekiah’sreligious reform included the removal of the altars at the highplaces that up to that time had been centers of deviant worship(2 Kings 18:4, 22). The apostasy of King Manasseh showed itselfin his rebuilding the high places that Hezekiah his father haddestroyed and in erecting altars to Baal (2 Kings 21), thusrepeating the sin of Ahab (cf. 1 Kings 16:32). Josiah’sreform included the destruction of all altars outside Jerusalem(2 Kings 23) and the centralizing of worship in the Jerusalemtemple.
InEzekiel’s vision of the new temple of the future, thesacrificial altar is its centerpiece (Ezek. 43:13–17). Thealtar was to be a large structure, with three-stepped stages and ahorn on each corner, and it was to be fitted with steps on itseastern side for the use of the priests.
Thesecond temple.The Israelites’ return from Babylonian exile was with theexpress aim of rebuilding the temple. The first thing that thepriests did was to build “the altar on its foundation”(i.e., its original base; Ezra 3:2–3). The returnees placed thealtar on the precise spot that it had occupied before the Babyloniansdestroyed it along with the temple. They took such care because theywanted to ensure that God would accept their sacrifices and so grantthem protection. At the very end of the OT period, the prophetMalachi condemned the insincerity of Israel’s worship that wasmanifested in substandard sacrifices being offered on God’saltar (Mal. 1:7, 10; 2:13).
NewTestament
Inthe NT, the altar is mentioned in a number of Jesus’ sayings(e.g., Matt. 5:23–24; 23:18–20). In the theology of thebook of Hebrews, which teaches about the priesthood of Jesus Christ(in the order of Melchizedek), the role of the priest is defined asone who “serve[s] at the altar” (7:13), and Christ’saltar (and that of Christ’s followers) is the cross on which heoffered himself as a sacrifice for sin (13:10). Another argument ofHebrews is that since on the most important day in the Jewish ritualcalendar (the Day of Atonement), the flesh of the sacrifice was noteaten (see Lev. 16:27), the eating of Jewish ceremonial foods is notrequired, nor is it of any spiritual value. The altar in the heavenlysanctuary is mentioned a number of times in the book of Revelation(6:9; 8:3, 5; 9:13; 11:1; 14:18; 16:7). It is most likely the altarof incense and is related to the prayers of God’s persecutedpeople, which are answered by the judgments of God upon the people ofthe earth.
The ancient site of Bethel is probably to be identified withthe modern village of Beitin, 10.5 miles north of Jerusalem. Itslocation is described and pinpointed in Gen. 12:8; Judg. 21:19.Bethel’s situation and importance are explained by its copioussprings and its location at the intersection of major ancienthighways, the north-south mountain road and the east-west road fromJericho to the coastal plain.
Fromthe patriarchs to the judges.The first mention of Bethel in the Bible is in Gen. 12:8, where Abramcamped “east of Bethel” on his first entry into thePromised Land. He camped there again on his return from a stay inEgypt (13:3). On the first occasion Abram erected “an altar tothe Lord.” When Abram returned to that spot, he “calledon the name of the Lord.”
Itwas Jacob who gave it the name “Bethel,” meaning “houseof God,” due to the dream he received in that location. In thedream he saw a ladder reaching to heaven, and God spoke to him(28:10–19). Its former name was Luz. God later appeared inMesopotamia and spoke to Jacob, identifying himself as “the Godof Bethel,” instructing him to return to his native land. Thetitle taken by God implied that God would be faithful to his earlierpromise to bring Jacob back to his land (31:13). Later Godspecifically instructed Jacob to settle in Bethel (35:1–6).Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died in Bethel and was buried there(35:8). God appeared to Jacob a second time in Bethel and spoke tohim, reiterating the promise to give him the land of Canaan (35:9–15;cf. 28:13). All God’s dealings with Jacob are connected to thetheophanies and divine promises associated with Bethel.
Bethelis mentioned a number of times in the account of Joshua’scapture of Ai, a city that lay to the east of Bethel (Josh. 7). Theking of Bethel is listed among the kings defeated by Joshua (12:16).Under Joshua, the city was apportioned to Benjamin (18:13, 22), butthe Canaanites repopulated it after the near extinction of the tribeof Benjamin (Judg. 20–21). Bethel was reconquered by the houseof Joseph and incorporated into Ephraimite territory (Judg. 1:22–25;1 Chron. 7:28), and later it became a fortress on its southerntribal border. Deborah held court between Ramah and Bethel (Judg.4:5). Under the judgeship of Samuel, Bethel was one of his regularstops in his yearly circuit (1 Sam. 7:16). It continuedthroughout this period to be a sanctuary where offerings were made(see 1 Sam. 10:3).
Fromthe monarchy to the exile.This long-term cultic association explains the choice of Bethel asone of the two chief sanctuaries of the northern kingdom, the othercenter being in Dan. Jeroboam I built a royal shrine at Bethelto rival Jerusalem and to prevent the Israelites from drifting backto the Davidic dynasty (1 Kings 12:26–33). The prophetAhijah’s criticism of Jeroboam’s actions was not due toAhijah’s commitment to a central sanctuary at Jerusalem(14:1–16) but rather arose from the use of bull images (goldencalves). This was not an innocent move by Jeroboam, returning topre-Jerusalem and more ancient cultic symbols. It is not adequatesimply to view Jeroboam’s calves as a “pedestal”upon which the Lord was believed to be enthroned (as accepted byW. F. Albright), for an explicit link is made with theidolatrous golden calf set up by Aaron in the desert: “Here areyour gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt” (1 Kings12:28 [cf. Exod. 32:8]). This became known as the chief sin ofJeroboam son of Nebat. It tainted the northern kingdom (see 2 Kings10:29) and eventually led to that kingdom’s judgment by God atthe hands of the Assyrians (2 Kings 17:21–23).
Thesouthern king Abijah captured Bethel from Israel in the latter partof Jeroboam’s reign (2 Chron. 13:19), but then it laterreturned to northern control. The unnamed “man of God” in1 Kings 13 predicted the later destruction of the Bethel altarby King Josiah (1 Kings 13:1–3), a prediction subsequentlyfulfilled (2 Kings 23:4, 15–18). Bethel was visited byElijah before his translation to heaven (2 Kings 2:2–4),and a company of prophets dwelt there. Elisha revisited Bethel afterhis master’s translation and cursed the forty-two youths whoinsulted him (2 Kings 2:23–25).
Hoseacondemned the great wickedness of Bethel, presumably because of thefalse worship that went on there (Hos. 10:15), but more positively,he recalled that this was the location where God had talked with thepatriarch Jacob (12:4). Jeremiah also explained the sad fate ofIsrael to be a result of their trust in Bethel (Jer. 48:13). Amos, inhis condemnation of the worship system of the northern kingdom,ironically called to the people, “Go to Bethel and sin”(Amos 4:4). Later he dropped the irony and spoke plainly: “Donot seek Bethel” (5:5), predicting its destruction (5:6; cf.3:14). It was in Bethel that Amos was criticized by the head priestAmaziah (7:10–17) and was told to no longer prophesy therebecause it was “the king’s sanctuary.”
Fromthe exile to the Roman period.The city was destroyed by the Assyrians about the time of theircapture of Samaria (722 BC), but the shrine was revived in the formof a syncretistic cult at the close of the Assyrian period by theforeign peoples deported to the area (2 Kings 17:24–41).Some descendants of the inhabitants of Bethel were among thosewho returned from Babylonian exile in the first great caravan (Ezra2:28; Neh. 7:32), and these Benjamite returnees resettled in theirhometown (Neh. 11:31). Bethel prospered in the Hellenistic and Romanperiods.
The blessings and curses of Scripture are grounded in aworldview that understands the sovereign God to be the ultimatedispenser of each. Blessings and curses are not the outcomes ofmagicians who attempt to manipulate the gods for personal gain orretribution. Rather, God is the giver of blessing and ultimately thefinal judge who determines withdrawal or ban. He is the source ofevery good gift (James 1:17) and the one who gives power and strengthto prosper (Deut. 8:17).
Someview the nature of blessing and curse as simply a gift from God,while others see it as an act in which one party transmits power forlife to another party. Perhaps the common thread between views is theidea of relationship.
Terminology.In the OT, the key Hebrew terms for blessing are the verb barak andthe noun berakah. When the context of their use identifies a personor a living creature as the object of blessing, the basic idea is toprovide someone with special power that will ultimately enhance hisor her life. The blessing theme is also illuminated by means of wordssuch as “grace,” “favor,” “loyalty,”and “happiness.”
Inthe NT, the Greek term eulogeō and its cognates are bestunderstood in terms of the impartation of favor, power, and benefits.The makarios word group describes a state or status of beingfortunate, happy, or privileged.
TheOT curse vocabulary includes the ideas of disgracing, makingcontemptible, and imprecation. The NT curse terminology comprises theideas of curse, slander, or consecrated to destruction.
OldTestament.Thesovereign God sometimes employs agents of blessing in his creation.The blessing extends to the nations through Abraham (Gen. 12:3), toJacob through Isaac (Gen. 26–27), and to the people through thepriests (Num. 6:24–26).
Thetheme of blessing/curse is used to structure Deut. 27–28 andLev. 26 (cf. Josh. 8:34) in the overall covenant format of thesebooks. Scholars have observed that the object of this format is notsymmetry or logical unity but fullness. From this perspective, theblessing/curse structure functions to enforce obedience for thepurpose of ensuring a relationship. The blessing of Deuteronomy alsoincludes the benefits of prosperity, power, and fertility. The curse,on the other hand, is the lack or withdrawal of benefits associatedwith the relationship.
Thecreation narratives are marked with the theme and terminology ofblessing (Gen. 1:22, 28; 2:3; cf. 5:2; 9:1). The objects of blessingin Gen. 1:22, 28 (cf. 5:2; 9:1) are the living creatures and humanbeings created in the image of God. As the revelation progresses, theblessing of God is particularized in the lives of Noah (Gen. 6–8),Abraham (Gen. 12–25) and his descendants, and the nation ofIsrael and its leadership (Gen. 26–50). In these contexts, theblessing is intended to engender offspring and to prosper recipientsin material and physical ways (compare a similar NT emphasis in Acts17:25; cf. Matt. 5:45; 6:25–33; Acts 14:17).
Theblessing of God is also extended to inanimate objects that enhanceand prosper one’s quality of life. The seventh day of creationis the object of blessing (Gen. 2:7; Exod. 20:11), perhaps giving ita sense of well-being and health. Objects and activities of life suchas baskets and kneading troughs (Deut. 28:5), barns (Deut. 28:8), andwork (Job 1:10; Ps. 90:17) are blessed.
Godpromises to bless those who fear him (Ps. 128:1). Blessing isdesigned for those who, out of a deep sense of awe of God’scharacter, love and trust him. The God-fearer confidently embracesGod’s promises, obediently serves, and takes seriously God’swarnings. The blessings itemized in Ps. 128 are comparable to thosedetailed in Deut. 28 relating to productivity and fruitfulness (cf.Ps. 128:2 with Deut. 28:12; Ps. 128:3 with Deut. 28:4, 11). TheDeuteronomic concept of blessing and curse is questioned whenGod-fearers undergo a period of suffering or experience God’sapparent absence (e.g., Joseph, Job; cf. Jesus).
NewTestament.Inthe NT, blessings are not exclusively spiritual. God gives both foodand joy (Acts 14:17) and provides the necessities of life (Matt.6:25–33). The NT does connect blessing with Christ, and itfocuses attention on the spiritual quality of the gift thatoriginates from Christ himself and its intended benefit for spiritualindividuals.
Regardingcurse, the NT explains that Christ bore the curse of the law to freeus from its deadening effect (Gal. 3:10–13). Revelation 22:3anticipates a time when the curse associated with sin will becompletely removed and the blessing associated with creation willprevail.
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.
The Hebrew word ’erets occurs 2,505 times in the OT andis most frequently translated “country” or “land.”“Earth” renders the Greek word gē in the NT. Notsurprisingly, ’erets appears 311 times in Genesis alone, thebook that initiates Israel’s landed covenant (Gen. 15:18). Theprimary uses of ’erets are cosmological (e.g., the earth) andgeographical (e.g., the land of Israel). Other uses of ’eretsinclude physical (e.g., the ground on which one stands) and political(e.g., governed countries) designations. Less frequently, “earth”translates the Hebrew word ’adamah (“country, ground,land, soil”).
Heavenand Earth
Israelshared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. Thisworldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon theprimeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having fourrims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rimswere sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters.God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth andshaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12–13). Similarly,the Akkadian text Hymn to the Sun-God states, “You [Shamash]are holding the ends of the earth suspended from the midst of heaven”(I:22). The earth’s boundaries were set against chaos (Ps.104:7–9; Isa. 40:12). In this way, the Creator and the Saviorcannot be separated because, taken together, God works against chaosin the mission of redemption (Ps. 74:12–17; Isa. 51:9–11).The phrase “heavens and earth” is a merism (two extremesrepresenting the whole) for the entire universe (Gen. 1:1; Ps.102:25). Over the earth arched a firm “vault” (Gen. 1:6).Heaven’s vault rested on the earth’s “pillars,”the mountains (Deut. 32:22; 1Sam. 2:8). Below the heavens isthe sea, part of the earth’s flat surface.
Therewas no term for “world” in the OT. The perception ofworld was basically bipartite (heaven and earth), though sometripartite expressions also occur (e.g., heaven, earth, sea [Exod.20:11; Rev. 5:3, 13]). Though rare, some uses of ’erets mayrefer to the “underworld” or Sheol (Exod. 15:12; Jer.17:13; Jon. 2:6). The earth can be regarded as the realm of the dead(Matt. 12:40; Eph. 4:9). However, the OT is less concerned with theorganic structure of the earth than with what fills the earth:inhabitants (Ps. 33:14; Isa. 24:1), people groups (Gen. 18:18; Deut.28:10), and kingdoms (Deut. 28:25; 2Kings 19:15). The term’erets can be used symbolically to indicate its inhabitants(Gen. 6:11). However, unlike its neighbors, Israel acknowledged nodivine “Mother Earth,” given the cultural associationswith female consorts.
TheTheology of Land
Inbiblical faith, the concept of land combines geography with theology.The modern person values land more as a place to build than for itsproductive capacities. But from the outset, human beings and the“earth” (’erets) functioned in a symbioticrelationship with the Creator (Gen. 1:28). God even gave the landagency to “bring forth living creatures” (Gen. 1:24). The“ground” (’adamah) also provided the raw substanceto make the human being (’adam [Gen. 2:7]). In turn, the humanbeing was charged with developing and protecting the land (Gen. 2:5,15). Showing divine care, the Noahic covenant was “between[God] and the earth” (Gen. 9:13). Thus, land was no mereonlooker; human rebellion had cosmic effects (Gen. 6:7, 17). The landcould be cursed and suffer (Gen. 3:17; cf. 4:11).
Israel’spromised 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 orientingpoints 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 andjudgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationshipwith God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; thiscould ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits”people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).
ForIsrael, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen.15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithfulobedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1Kings 2:1–4).Conditionality and unconditionality coexisted in Israel’srelationship of “sonship” with Yahweh (Exod. 4:22; Hos.11:1). 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 thesupreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev.25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance”to give (1 Sam. 26:19; 2 Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). TheLevites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did theother tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20;Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter andto occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3).Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when theyaccused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing withmilk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however,no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance”(Josh. 13:1).
Landpossession had serious ethical and religious ramifications (Deut.26:1–11). Israel was not chosen to receive a special land;rather, land was the medium of Israel’s relationship with God.Land functioned as a spiritual barometer (Ps. 78:56–64; Lam.1:3–5). The heavens and earth stood as covenant witnesses(Deut. 4:26). Blood, in particular, could physically pollute the land(Num. 35:30–34). National sin could culminate in expulsion(Lev. 26:32–39), and eventually the land was lost (Jer.25:1–11). For this reason, Israel’s exiles prompted aprofound theological crisis.
Inheritance
Thenotion of inheritance connected Israel’s religious worship withpractical stewardship. Land was not owned; it was passed down throughpatrimonial succession. God entrusted each family with an inheritancethat was to be safeguarded (Lev. 25:23–28; Mic. 2:1–2).This highlights the serious crime when Naboth’s vineyard wasforcibly stolen (1Kings 21). It was Israel’s filialsonship with Yahweh and Israel’s land tenure that formedYahweh’s solidarity with the nation. The law helped limitIsrael’s attachment to mere real estate: Yahweh was to beIsrael’s preoccupation (see Jer. 3:6–25). When the nationwas finally exiled, the message of the new covenant transcendedgeographical boundaries (Jer. 32:36–44; Ezek. 36–37; cf.Lev. 26:40–45; Deut. 30:1–10). In postexilic Israel,sanctuary was prioritized (Hag. 1:9–14).
Itwas Israel’s redefinition of land through the exile thatprepared the way for the incorporation of the Gentiles (Ezek.47:22–23), an integration already anticipated (Isa. 56:3–7).The prophets saw a time when the nations would share in theinheritance of God previously guarded by Israel (Isa. 60; Zech. 2:11;cf. Gen. 12:3). Viewed as a political territory, land receives nosubstantial theological treatment in the NT; rather, inheritancesurpasses covenant metaphor. Using the language of sonship andinheritance, Paul develops this new Gentile mission in Galatians (cf.Col. 1:13–14). The OT land motif fully flowers in the NTteaching of adoption (cf. 1Pet. 1:3–5). Both curse andcovenant are resolved eschatologically (Rom. 8:19–22).Inheritance is now found in Christ (Eph. 2:11–22; 1Pet.1:4). In the economy of the new covenant, land tenure has matured infellowship (koinōnia). Koinōnia recalibrates the ethicalsignificance of OT land themes, reapplying them practically throughinclusion, lifestyle, economic responsibility, and social equity.
Beyondcosmological realms, heaven and earth are also theological horizonsstill under God’s ownership. What began as the creation mandateto fill and subdue the earth (Gen. 1:28) culminates in the newcreation with Christ (Rom. 8:4–25). Under the power of Satan,the earth “lags behind” heaven. Christ’s missionbrings what is qualitatively of heaven onto the earthly stage, oftenusing signs of the budding rule of God (Matt. 6:10; Mark 2:10–11;John 3:31–36; Eph. 4:9–13; Heb. 12:25). As Israel was tostand out in a hostile world (Deut. 4:5–8), now those ofAbrahamic faith stand out through Christian love (John 13:34–35;Rom. 4:9–16). According to Heb. 4:1–11, Israel’sinitial rest in the land (see Exod. 33:14; Deut. 12:9) culminates inthe believers’ rest in Christ (Heb. 4:3, 5). The formerinheritance of space gives way to the inheritance of Christ’spresence. The OT theme of land is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus’exhortation to “abide in me” (John 15).
Earthquake–InPalestine there have been about seventeen recorded major earthquakesin the past two millennia. One of the major sources of theseearthquakes is believed to originate from the Jordan Rift Valley. Inantiquity earthquakes were viewed as fearful events because themountains, which represented everlasting durability, were disturbed.The confession of faith is pronounced in association with suchphenomena (“We will not fear, though the earth give way”[Ps. 46:2]). An earthquake must have made a great impact in Amos’sday (“two years before the earthquake” [Amos 1:1; cf.Zech. 14:5]).
Anearthquake has many symbolic meanings. First, the power of God andhis divine presence are manifested through it (Job 9:6; Ps. 68:8;Hag. 2:6). It accompanied theophanic revelation (Exod. 19:18; Isa.6:4; 1Kings 19:11–12) when the glory of the Lord appeared(Ezek. 3:12). His divine presence was especially felt whenearthquakes occurred during the time of the crucifixion and theresurrection of Jesus Christ (Matt. 27:54; 28:2). It led thecenturion to confess of Christ, “Surely he was the Son of God!”(Matt. 27:54). God’s salvation power is represented when anearthquake comes at the appropriate moment, such as when it freedPaul and Silas from prison (Acts 16:26).
Second,it is used in the context of God’s judgment (Isa. 13:13; Amos9:1; Nah. 1:5). It becomes the symbol of God’s anger and wrath(Ps. 18:7). God brought earthquakes upon the people to destroy evilin the world and to punish those who had sinned against him (Num.16:31–33; Isa. 29:6; Ezek. 38:19). Earthquake activity possiblyexplains the background to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen.19:24).
Third,earthquakes are said to precede the end of time (Matt. 24:7; Mark13:8; Luke 21:11). In the apocalyptic book of Revelation, earthquakesare regular occurrences (Rev. 6:12; 11:13, 19; 16:18).
Old Testament. In ancient Israel, and more broadly in the surrounding region, the “father’s house” (i.e., ancestral family) was the basic unit of kinship, more extensive than “brothers” (Gen. 46:31; Judg. 16:31) or the single “household” (Exod. 12:3) but smaller than the clan and tribe (note the contrasts in, e.g., Num. 1:2; Judg. 6:15). In genealogies the “father’s house” is often rendered “family” (e.g., Exod. 6:14; Num. 1:2 and throughout the chapter; 1Chron. 4:38). In some instances, the twelve tribes of Israel are construed as father’s houses (Num. 17:2–6; 1Sam. 2:28). In 2Sam. 19:28 the extent of the “father’s house” is well illustrated: clearly, Mephibosheth refers not to the nuclear family of his biological father but rather to the family of his grandfather Saul. In 1Chron. 23:11, two small families are artificially combined into a single “father’s house,” illustrating that the concept was not strictly biological but instead corresponded to a set of social functions, in this case priestly service.
In addition to censuses and the organization of military service, other functions of the father’s house included the reckoning of collective guilt (2Sam. 14:9; 24:17; Neh. 1:6), delimiting retaliation in kin-based blood feuds (1Sam. 22:16, 22; 2Sam. 3:29; see also Judg. 2:12, 18), and defining a context for endogamous marriage (Gen. 24:38–40). The father’s house played an important role in the life of women, who were identified with their father’s house before marriage and could return to it in the event of widowhood, demonstrating a persistent connection to it (Lev. 22:13; Num. 30:4, 16; Deut. 22:21; Judg. 19:2–3; Esther 4:14; Ps. 45:10; see also the political significance for Abimelek of his mother’s father’s house in Judg. 9:1).
The expression “father’s house” can also refer to a location (Gen. 12:1; 20:13; Judg. 14:19; 1Sam. 18:2), and indeed this local sense may have largely overlapped with the kinship sense, as extended families inhabited large architectural compounds or even entire small villages.
New Testament. On two occasions Jesus referred to the temple in Jerusalem as his “father’s house,” once when he was a young man (Luke 2:49), and once when he drove merchants from the temple (John 2:16). On another occasion, he referred to a “place where I am going” as “my father’s house” (John 14:2–4). In addition, we have two references to the “father’s house” as a kinship unit (Luke 16:27; and possibly Acts 7:20).-
The Hebrew term behind Ai means “the ruin.”Biblical Ai was situated east of Bethel in the highlands of Ephraimoverlooking the Jordan Valley. The commonly accepted location iset-Tell, “the heap,” a mound near present-day Deir Dibwan(ten miles north-northeast of Jerusalem). This determination is basedpartly on identification of Bethel with Beitin, which is challengedby some.
Excavationsat et-Tell reveal two periods of habitation: first, during the EarlyBronze Age (c. 3100–2400 BC), followed by an intervening spanof more than a millennium during which et-Tell was uninhabited, thenagain during Iron Age I (c. 1200–1050 BC).
Theearliest settlement was an unwalled village. Artifacts reveal amixture of local and foreign influences, with some early potteryresembling that of nearby Jericho. Later pottery shows traitsconsistent with northern Syria and Anatolia, suggesting migration ofpeoples from these regions. Around 3000 BC the village wasreconfigured to include an acropolis with a temple and palacecomplex, and a wall with four gates.
TheEarly Bronze Age city was destroyed several times, including once byan earthquake (evident from the collapse of the temple wall into arift opened in its foundation). Each time it was rebuilt and itsfortifications strengthened. Beginning c. 2700 BC, et-Tell fell underEgyptian influence, attested by Egyptian building techniques and thepresence of imported alabaster and stone vessels. This lasted untilc. 2550 BC, when the city’s wall was breached and the citadelfortifications burned. The city was sacked and abandoned c. 2400 BC.
Et-Tellwas resettled c. 1200 BC, possibly by persons fleeing the influx ofSea Peoples into the Eastern Mediterranean. The Iron Age Isettlement was considerably smaller than the Early Bronze Age city(three versus twenty-seven acres). Settlers built houses on theacropolis and terraced the mound for farming; however, no attempt wasmade to repair the walls or erect new fortifications. Discovery ofmultiple grain silos indicates a population increase c. 1125 BC. Lackof all but the earliest Iron Age ware suggests that et-Tell wasabandoned c. 1050 BC. Because its houses remained intact, the villageclearly was not destroyed.
Inthe Bible, Ai first appears as a landmark in Abram’s travels(Gen. 12:8; 13:3). In the book of Joshua, it figures prominently as alesser city in the initial conquest of Canaan (7:3; 10:2; but see8:25). Following Israel’s initial defeat (7:4–5), Joshuaproscribes Ai according to Yahweh’s instruction (8:2), slayingits inhabitants and hanging its king, then reducing the settlement toa ruin (8:25–28). This strikes fear into the neighboringpopulations (9:3–4; 10:1–2). The disproportionateattention given to its capture sets the conquest within a theologicalframework: victory depends on obedience to Yahweh. Ai later appearsin regard to those who are returning from exile in Babylon (Ezra2:28; Neh.7:32).
Comparisonof archaeological evidence from et-Tell with the traditional datingof the exodus (fifteenth century BC) reveals that the site wasunoccupied when Ai would have been sacked by Israel. This has ledsome to conclude that the account in Josh. 7–8 is etiological(a story explaining the source of the ruins at et-Tell) and thereforelegendary, or originally pertained to the sacking of another site—forexample, Bethel (8:17). Suggesting that Ai was a temporary strongholdduring the conquest, though possible, contradicts details of thebiblical account (see 8:1, 23, 25).
Evenif a late date for the exodus is proposed (thirteenth century BC),the Iron Age settlement at et-Tell was considerably smaller than thenarrative describes, populated by several hundred persons, notthousands (Josh. 8:25). Further, habitation persisted at et-Tell intothe period of the judges (contrast 8:28). Evidence of this sort leadssome to discount the conquest tradition in favor of a settlement(migration) model of Israel’s entry into the land of Canaan(see Judg. 3:5–6).
Itremains altogether possible that et-Tell has been incorrectlyidentified with biblical Ai, or that the evidence excavated at thesite is incomplete. In either case, further archaeologicalinvestigation may vindicate the biblical account of the conquest ofAi. It is equally possible, though, that the events of the conquestand settlement are more complex than the biblical narrativeindicates.
The Hebrew word ’erets occurs 2,505 times in the OT andis most frequently translated “country” or “land.”“Earth” renders the Greek word gē in the NT. Notsurprisingly, ’erets appears 311 times in Genesis alone, thebook that initiates Israel’s landed covenant (Gen. 15:18). Theprimary uses of ’erets are cosmological (e.g., the earth) andgeographical (e.g., the land of Israel). Other uses of ’eretsinclude physical (e.g., the ground on which one stands) and political(e.g., governed countries) designations. Less frequently, “earth”translates the Hebrew word ’adamah (“country, ground,land, soil”).
Heavenand Earth
Israelshared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. Thisworldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon theprimeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having fourrims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rimswere sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters.God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth andshaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12–13). Similarly,the Akkadian text Hymn to the Sun-God states, “You [Shamash]are holding the ends of the earth suspended from the midst of heaven”(I:22). The earth’s boundaries were set against chaos (Ps.104:7–9; Isa. 40:12). In this way, the Creator and the Saviorcannot be separated because, taken together, God works against chaosin the mission of redemption (Ps. 74:12–17; Isa. 51:9–11).The phrase “heavens and earth” is a merism (two extremesrepresenting the whole) for the entire universe (Gen. 1:1; Ps.102:25). Over the earth arched a firm “vault” (Gen. 1:6).Heaven’s vault rested on the earth’s “pillars,”the mountains (Deut. 32:22; 1Sam. 2:8). Below the heavens isthe sea, part of the earth’s flat surface.
Therewas no term for “world” in the OT. The perception ofworld was basically bipartite (heaven and earth), though sometripartite expressions also occur (e.g., heaven, earth, sea [Exod.20:11; Rev. 5:3, 13]). Though rare, some uses of ’erets mayrefer to the “underworld” or Sheol (Exod. 15:12; Jer.17:13; Jon. 2:6). The earth can be regarded as the realm of the dead(Matt. 12:40; Eph. 4:9). However, the OT is less concerned with theorganic structure of the earth than with what fills the earth:inhabitants (Ps. 33:14; Isa. 24:1), people groups (Gen. 18:18; Deut.28:10), and kingdoms (Deut. 28:25; 2Kings 19:15). The term’erets can be used symbolically to indicate its inhabitants(Gen. 6:11). However, unlike its neighbors, Israel acknowledged nodivine “Mother Earth,” given the cultural associationswith female consorts.
TheTheology of Land
Inbiblical faith, the concept of land combines geography with theology.The modern person values land more as a place to build than for itsproductive capacities. But from the outset, human beings and the“earth” (’erets) functioned in a symbioticrelationship with the Creator (Gen. 1:28). God even gave the landagency to “bring forth living creatures” (Gen. 1:24). The“ground” (’adamah) also provided the raw substanceto make the human being (’adam [Gen. 2:7]). In turn, the humanbeing was charged with developing and protecting the land (Gen. 2:5,15). Showing divine care, the Noahic covenant was “between[God] and the earth” (Gen. 9:13). Thus, land was no mereonlooker; human rebellion had cosmic effects (Gen. 6:7, 17). The landcould be cursed and suffer (Gen. 3:17; cf. 4:11).
Israel’spromised 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 orientingpoints 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 andjudgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationshipwith God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; thiscould ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits”people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).
ForIsrael, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen.15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithfulobedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1Kings 2:1–4).Conditionality and unconditionality coexisted in Israel’srelationship of “sonship” with Yahweh (Exod. 4:22; Hos.11:1). 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 thesupreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev.25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance”to give (1 Sam. 26:19; 2 Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). TheLevites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did theother tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20;Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter andto occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3).Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when theyaccused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing withmilk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however,no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance”(Josh. 13:1).
Landpossession had serious ethical and religious ramifications (Deut.26:1–11). Israel was not chosen to receive a special land;rather, land was the medium of Israel’s relationship with God.Land functioned as a spiritual barometer (Ps. 78:56–64; Lam.1:3–5). The heavens and earth stood as covenant witnesses(Deut. 4:26). Blood, in particular, could physically pollute the land(Num. 35:30–34). National sin could culminate in expulsion(Lev. 26:32–39), and eventually the land was lost (Jer.25:1–11). For this reason, Israel’s exiles prompted aprofound theological crisis.
Inheritance
Thenotion of inheritance connected Israel’s religious worship withpractical stewardship. Land was not owned; it was passed down throughpatrimonial succession. God entrusted each family with an inheritancethat was to be safeguarded (Lev. 25:23–28; Mic. 2:1–2).This highlights the serious crime when Naboth’s vineyard wasforcibly stolen (1Kings 21). It was Israel’s filialsonship with Yahweh and Israel’s land tenure that formedYahweh’s solidarity with the nation. The law helped limitIsrael’s attachment to mere real estate: Yahweh was to beIsrael’s preoccupation (see Jer. 3:6–25). When the nationwas finally exiled, the message of the new covenant transcendedgeographical boundaries (Jer. 32:36–44; Ezek. 36–37; cf.Lev. 26:40–45; Deut. 30:1–10). In postexilic Israel,sanctuary was prioritized (Hag. 1:9–14).
Itwas Israel’s redefinition of land through the exile thatprepared the way for the incorporation of the Gentiles (Ezek.47:22–23), an integration already anticipated (Isa. 56:3–7).The prophets saw a time when the nations would share in theinheritance of God previously guarded by Israel (Isa. 60; Zech. 2:11;cf. Gen. 12:3). Viewed as a political territory, land receives nosubstantial theological treatment in the NT; rather, inheritancesurpasses covenant metaphor. Using the language of sonship andinheritance, Paul develops this new Gentile mission in Galatians (cf.Col. 1:13–14). The OT land motif fully flowers in the NTteaching of adoption (cf. 1Pet. 1:3–5). Both curse andcovenant are resolved eschatologically (Rom. 8:19–22).Inheritance is now found in Christ (Eph. 2:11–22; 1Pet.1:4). In the economy of the new covenant, land tenure has matured infellowship (koinōnia). Koinōnia recalibrates the ethicalsignificance of OT land themes, reapplying them practically throughinclusion, lifestyle, economic responsibility, and social equity.
Beyondcosmological realms, heaven and earth are also theological horizonsstill under God’s ownership. What began as the creation mandateto fill and subdue the earth (Gen. 1:28) culminates in the newcreation with Christ (Rom. 8:4–25). Under the power of Satan,the earth “lags behind” heaven. Christ’s missionbrings what is qualitatively of heaven onto the earthly stage, oftenusing signs of the budding rule of God (Matt. 6:10; Mark 2:10–11;John 3:31–36; Eph. 4:9–13; Heb. 12:25). As Israel was tostand out in a hostile world (Deut. 4:5–8), now those ofAbrahamic faith stand out through Christian love (John 13:34–35;Rom. 4:9–16). According to Heb. 4:1–11, Israel’sinitial rest in the land (see Exod. 33:14; Deut. 12:9) culminates inthe believers’ rest in Christ (Heb. 4:3, 5). The formerinheritance of space gives way to the inheritance of Christ’spresence. The OT theme of land is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus’exhortation to “abide in me” (John 15).
Earthquake–InPalestine there have been about seventeen recorded major earthquakesin the past two millennia. One of the major sources of theseearthquakes is believed to originate from the Jordan Rift Valley. Inantiquity earthquakes were viewed as fearful events because themountains, which represented everlasting durability, were disturbed.The confession of faith is pronounced in association with suchphenomena (“We will not fear, though the earth give way”[Ps. 46:2]). An earthquake must have made a great impact in Amos’sday (“two years before the earthquake” [Amos 1:1; cf.Zech. 14:5]).
Anearthquake has many symbolic meanings. First, the power of God andhis divine presence are manifested through it (Job 9:6; Ps. 68:8;Hag. 2:6). It accompanied theophanic revelation (Exod. 19:18; Isa.6:4; 1Kings 19:11–12) when the glory of the Lord appeared(Ezek. 3:12). His divine presence was especially felt whenearthquakes occurred during the time of the crucifixion and theresurrection of Jesus Christ (Matt. 27:54; 28:2). It led thecenturion to confess of Christ, “Surely he was the Son of God!”(Matt. 27:54). God’s salvation power is represented when anearthquake comes at the appropriate moment, such as when it freedPaul and Silas from prison (Acts 16:26).
Second,it is used in the context of God’s judgment (Isa. 13:13; Amos9:1; Nah. 1:5). It becomes the symbol of God’s anger and wrath(Ps. 18:7). God brought earthquakes upon the people to destroy evilin the world and to punish those who had sinned against him (Num.16:31–33; Isa. 29:6; Ezek. 38:19). Earthquake activity possiblyexplains the background to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen.19:24).
Third,earthquakes are said to precede the end of time (Matt. 24:7; Mark13:8; Luke 21:11). In the apocalyptic book of Revelation, earthquakesare regular occurrences (Rev. 6:12; 11:13, 19; 16:18).
OldTestament
TheHebrew word for “Lord,” yhwh (usually pronounced“Yahweh”), occurs more than 6,800 times in the OT and isin every book except Ecclesiastes and Esther. “Yahweh” isGod’s personal name and is revealed as such in Exod. 3:13–14.God tells Moses to declare to the Israelites in Egypt, “I amhas sent me to you” (3:14). The Hebrew behind “I am”connotes active being; the Lord is the one who is there for hispeople and, in the book of Exodus, does so through miraculous events(14:13–14). This demonstrates the close association betweenone’s name and one’s character in the ancient world.Yahweh is one who is with his people (Exod. 3:12; 6:2, 4; Isa. 26:4).Although the divine name is used before the exodus (Gen. 12:1; 15:1),it is not until the time of Moses that God reveals its redemptivesignificance. Nonetheless, the divine name is used in Genesis incontexts where the immanence of God is evident. In Gen. 3:8 “theLord God ... was walking in the garden in the cool of theday.” Further, the Lord makes a covenant with Abraham (Gen. 12;15; 17), and the Lord will remain faithful to his covenants for athousand generations (Deut. 7:9). Later in Israel’s history,Micah, in the face of those who worship other gods, reassures thepeople of Israel that Yahweh is distinct from all others, and thatthey will walk in his name because he will one day act to effectjustice for all (Mic. 4:3–5).
Thedivine name also occurs as a form of address in various prayersthroughout the OT (Gen. 15:2, 8; Exod. 5:22; 2Sam. 7:18;2Kings 6:17), most notably in the psalms, where it occurs overtwo hundred times. In the psalms an abbreviated form of the name isoften seen in an exclamation of praise, halleluyah, “praiseYah[weh]” (e.g., Pss. 149:1; 150:1).
Itis interesting to note the origin of the pronunciation of yhwh as“Jehovah.” To avoid breaking the third commandment,against misusing the name of God, pious Jews did not pronounce thedivine name yhwh, substituting the word ’adonay (“mymaster”) in its place. In medieval times Jewish scholars addedvowels to the consonantal text of the Hebrew Bible to aid in correctpronunciation. For yhwh, they used the vowels of ’adonay,which, when pronounced, creates a name unknown to the biblicalauthors, “Jehovah.”
Inthe postexilic period the appellation “Yahweh” occurs farless frequently, being replaced by adonay (Hebrew) or kyrios (Greek).The latter is used for Yahweh over six thousand times in the LXX. InHellenistic literature kyrios is used to describe various gods andgoddesses. The Roman emperors were also called kyrios, often withimplications of deity. Some argue that the early Christians employedthe title polemically to refer to Christ, the true kyrios. A clearexample is found in Phil. 2:11, where it is said that every tonguewill confess that “Jesus Christ is Lord” (cf. 1Cor.8:5–8). Kyrios was also used nonreligiously to refer to a“master” of a slave and as a term of respect to addresssomeone of superior status (“sir”). Peter addresses Jesusas “lord” when he washes Peter’s feet (John 13:6).
NewTestament
Inthe NT, the majority of occurrences of “Lord” (kyrios)appear in Luke-Acts and the writings of Paul, perhaps due to thepredominantly Hellenistic audiences of these texts, who would knowwell its Greco-Roman connotations. As for Paul, the use of “Lord”by Luke may point to the deity of Jesus. In the Lukan birthnarrative, Elizabeth wonders why “the mother of my Lord shouldcome to me?” (Luke 1:43; cf. 7:19; 10:1). In Acts 1:21 the name“Jesus” is preceded by the definite form of “Lord,”reflecting an oft-repeated confessional title in Acts and Paul (Acts15:11; 20:35; 2Cor. 1:2). According to some, if Matthew intendsa divine connotation by his use of the term “Lord,” it ismore oblique. For instance, in Matt. 4:7 Jesus quotes Deut. 6:16,where “the Lord” is Yahweh and not Jesus (cf. Matt.9:38). There are occasions in Mark where “lord,” althoughappearing to function in a nonreligious sense, does seem to point toYahweh. In Mark 2:28 Jesus claims that “the Son of Man is lordeven of the sabbath” (NRSV). Since the Sabbath belongs toYahweh and falls under his sovereign authority (Exod. 20:8–11),it is quite probable that Mark’s readers would now ascribe thatdominion to the Son of Man. This is not unlike his authority toforgive sins (Mark 2:10), which, as the scribes rightfully point out,is something that only Yahweh can do. In light of these usages, onecannot help but think that the use of the term in Mark 11:3, at thetriumphal entry, also carries divine significance. In John, there areexamples of both the nonreligious use of “lord,” as areverent form of address (5:7; 9:36), and the religious, divinesense, particularly after the resurrection (20:28; 21:7).
Itis quite likely that Jewish Christians, even before Paul, regardedJesus as one who shares in Yahweh’s divinity. In his letter tothe Corinthians, a Greek-speaking congregation, Paul uses theexpression maranatha (1Cor. 16:22), a Greektransliteration of an Aramaic phrase that means “Our Lord,come!” This term likely was a part of an early Jewish Christianliturgy. Further, there are places where Paul refers to Jesus simplyas “the Lord,” suggesting a common understanding of theappellation among the early Christians (Rom. 14:6; 1Cor. 3:5).In addition to Phil. 2:11, Paul expresses the divinity of Jesus byalluding to Deut. 6:4, the Shema, in 1Cor. 8:6: “Yet forus there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came andfor whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, throughwhom all things came and through whom we live.” In the book ofRevelation divine status is ascribed to Jesus. While in the vision ofGod in Rev. 4 the title is used of God (4:8, 11), at the conclusionof the book appears the invocation “Come, Lord Jesus”(22:20; cf. 22:21).
ForPaul, a particularly important component of the lordship of Jesus ishis resurrection, through which he becomes “the Lord of boththe dead and the living” (Rom. 14:9; cf. 1:4), and his returnmarks the “day of the Lord,” which in the OT was the dayof Yahweh (1Thess. 5:2; cf. 5:23). Exactly how JewishChristians could attribute such a status to Jesus and yet maintain astrict monotheism remains a matter of considerable debate. Is Christincluded in the identity of the Godhead, or is he an intermediaryfigure (of which Second Temple Judaism had many), possessing aquasi-divine status? If Jesus is an intermediary figure, then hisauthority to do that which only Yahweh can (such as forgiving sinsand fulfilling roles originally referring to God) suggests a veryclose identification between Yahweh and Jesus himself. See also Namesof God; YHWH.
A nephew of Abraham (Gen. 11:27–14:16) and a residentof Sodom (18:16–19:38). When God called Abraham to go to Canaanand leave his family behind, he still took Lot with him. Lot,however, proved to be a burden to his uncle in several aspects.Tensions arose between their herders, so Abraham graciously allowedLot to choose his land first. Lot selected the fertile area nearSodom, just south of the Dead Sea, where he settled. When Lot and hisfamily and property were captured in battle by King Kedorlaomer ofElam and his three allies, Abraham rescued his nephew, defeated thecoalition, and restored Lot’s entire household.
Whenforewarned of God’s intentions to destroy Sodom, Abrahamattempted to convince God not to destroy the city if ten righteouspeople could be found there. Presumably, Abraham’s efforts werebased on his desire to protect Lot, who resided there. Apparently,not even ten righteous people were found in the city, but before thecity was to be destroyed, two angels were sent to warn Lot and hisfamily. When the messengers arrived, Lot would not allow them tospend the night in the town square, to protect them from the men ofSodom. All the men of the city surrounded Lot’s house anddemanded that the guests be brought out so that they could have sexwith them. Instead, Lot offered his two daughters. However, theangels struck the Sodomites outside with blindness, which frustratedtheir efforts, so they left Lot, his guests, and his daughters alone.
Thenext morning, the angels forced Lot and his wife and daughters out ofthe city, and then God rained sulfur and fire from heaven on Sodomand Gomorrah. Lot’s wife refused to heed the angel’swarning, and when she turned back to look, she became a pillar ofsalt. Lot’s two daughters, fearing that they would be unable tomarry, got their father drunk, committed incest, and became pregnant;thus Lot became the father (and grandfather) of Moab and Ben-Ammi,ancestor of the Ammonites (Gen. 19:37–38). Jesus used theexample of Lot, his wife, and the city of Sodom to illustrate how thekingdom of God will come (Luke 17:28–32). Lot’s sinsrelative to his daughters apparently are ignored in 2Pet. 2:7,where he is called “righteous Lot.”
(1)Atree or plain that was a stopping point on Abraham’s journeyfrom Harran (Gen. 12:6). If the Hebrew phrase in question (’elonmoreh) is translated as “tree of Moreh,” the tree wouldbe an oak or terebinth. At this tree, near the city of Shechem,Abraham built an altar to God (Gen. 12:7). Some translations, notablythe KJV (likely following the LXX), translate this geographiclocation as the “plain of Moreh.” In Deut. 11:30 thisgeographic location is a marker to help locate the mountains Ebal andGerizim. There are several other mentions of trees in the OT inproximity to Shechem, including the places where Jacob buried hisidols (Gen. 35:4) and where Joshua set up a marker commemorating thehistory of the Israelites (Josh. 24:26). In Judg. 9 two differenttrees are mentioned in proximity to Shechem. (2)Ahill near where Gideon attacked and defeated the Midianites (Judg.7:1). The exact location of this hill is uncertain.
The word “Gentiles” is often used to translatewords meaning “nations” or “peoples.” It hasa Latin etymology from gens, meaning “clan” or “family”and, eventually, “race” or “people.” TheGreek word genos (“race, kind”) has a close relationship.In the Bible it loosely refers to nations or peoples other thanIsrael. English Bibles often translate it as “nations,”“peoples,” or “races.”
OldTestament
Ingeneral, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. Godchose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:6–8;10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership inthe covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becomingpart of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).
TheOT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessingthrough Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping thelaw, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. Thelaw is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenantthat God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5;20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6;10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss.119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).
Suchlaw/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OTunderstanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel,the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in andthrough Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3;17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specificallyinvolves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]).Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subjectto Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16;14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed byIsrael’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel,serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fearIsrael’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5;60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic.7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages furtherelucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in theGod of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer.12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations“flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentileparticipation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa.2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).
TheServant Songs in Isa. 40–55 also reflect thislaw/Israel-centered nature of salvation for the Gentiles. Theservant, explicitly identified as Israel (41:8, 9; 42:18–19;44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3; 54:17; see also 65:9; 66:14),serves as God’s instrument for reaching the nations (42:1, 6;49:6; 52:15). The OT usually condemns Gentiles who remain separatefrom Israel to some form of judgment, especially Gentiles who haveharmed Israel.
SecondTemple Judaism and Early Christianity
SecondTemple Jewish sources exhibit diverse views about Gentiles, theirnature, their possible relation to God, and their fate at the end.Many reflect something resembling the OT views. Israel as God’speople defined by the law, variously understood and contested amongSecond Temple sources, generally continues to be the locus of God’sultimate blessing activities.
SituatingJesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentilesensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread acrossthe Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God ofIsrael in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentilesexperience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.
SomeChristians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought thatGentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God ofIsrael’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’sopponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from Godand his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13;1Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation,especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin,lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32;Eph. 4:17–19; 1Thess. 4:5; 1Pet. 1:14, 18).
However,various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keepthe law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’sultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, hasreplaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and hisdeath and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ bythe Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true,redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheritingGod’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25;8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7;Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentilesattain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightlybefore God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30;1Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1Thess. 4:3–8).Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles withrespect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.
Debatesabout Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for theseissues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocalsaying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and someother NT writings.
The son of one’s brother or sister. Many modernversions use the term of Lot as Abraham’s nephew (Gen. 12:5;14:12) and in Ezra 8:19 of the nephews of Hashabiah, a descendant ofthe Levite Merari, returnees to Jerusalem. The KJV uses “nephew”in an archaic sense of a descendant, usually referring to grandson(Judg. 12:14; Job 18:19; Isa. 14:22; 1Tim. 5:4).
The wife of Abraham, the father of Israel and God’schosen people. Thus, Sarah is a matriarch (mother) of Israel alongwith Rebekah and Rachel. When first introduced, her name is given as“Sarai,” but God changes it to “Sarah” (atthe same time Abram’s name is changed to “Abraham”[Gen. 17:15–16]). Both names mean “princess.” Thesignificance of the change may be subtle, since “Sarai”is an East Semitic version of West Semitic “Sarah,”indicating her transition from Mesopotamia to the promised land.
Accordingto Gen. 11:29–30, Sarai was married to Abram before theyentered the promised land. The passage also announces that she wasbarren. Since an essential part of the divine promises to Abram isthat he will be father to a great nation, the lack of offspring is aconsiderable problem and propels much of the plot of the narrative(esp. Gen. 12–26).
Inbrief, Sarai’s inability to conceive is an obstacle to thefulfillment of the promise and is a threat to Abram’s faith.Thus, when a famine forces them to go to Egypt to survive, he tellshis wife to lie about her status by saying that she is his sister.Although it is true that she is his half sister, the statement is alie because he hides the most relevant part of his relationship withher and puts the matriarch in danger (Gen. 12:10–20; 20:12).Abraham’s faith (the narrative does not reveal Sarah’sthinking except perhaps in Gen. 18:10–15, when she laughs atthe thought of giving birth in her old age) in God’s ability tofulfill the promise fluctuates, and he certainly has not come to aconsistent position of trust even just before the birth of Isaac(Gen. 20). As a matter of fact, acting on fear and trying to producean heir, Abraham takes a concubine, Hagar, who gives birth toIshmael. Sarah’s relationship with Hagar is troubled (Gen. 16),and Sarah treats her harshly and eventually has Hagar and Ishmaelexpelled from their camp (21:8–21).
Eventually,in advanced old age, Sarah gives birth to Isaac, the child of thepromise (Gen. 21:1–7). Sarah is not mentioned in the story ofthe “binding of Isaac,” the focus again being onAbraham’s faith.
Sarahpredeceases Abraham, and he buys a field from Ephron the Hittite inorder to bury her (Gen. 23), the first part of the promised landowned by the people of promise. This location near Hebron became theburial spot of Abraham and other patriarchs.
LaterOT literature often looks back on Abraham as patriarch, but only Isa.51:2 explicitly mentions Sarah in the role of cofounder of the peopleof God. She is mentioned also in the NT, along with Abraham, as theone through whom God brings the promise of a son to fulfillment (Rom.4:19; 9:9; Heb. 11:11). In 1Pet. 3:6 Sarah is put forward as amodel of wifely submission because she obeys Abraham and refers tohim as her lord (likely a reference to the Greek version of Gen.18:12).
Common and valuable for food, beans were cooked while green in the pods or after being dried. Dry beans were threshed and winnowed like cereals and other grains. Beans are mentioned twice in the NIV (2Sam. 17:28; Ezek. 4:9).
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
Genesis 12:1-8
is mentioned in the definition.
Abram, eventually named “Abraham,” is awell-known biblical character whose life is detailed in Gen.11:25–25:11. The patriarchal name “Abram” is usedexclusively in Genesis, 1 Chron. 1:27, and Neh. 9:7. Abram’sname (which means “exalted father”) is changed in Gen.17:5 to “Abraham,” meaning “father of manynations.” His prominence as a biblical character is evidencedin the 254 references to him documented in both Testaments.
Thehistorical reliability of the account of Abraham is vigorouslydebated by scholars, although the Middle Bronze Age (2200–1550BC) is the generally accepted time period of Abraham’s life.The narrative of his life is a selective account of key events thatserves the theme and purpose of the larger biblical narrative.
Thenarrative account in Genesis details one hundred years of Abraham’slife and moves quickly through the first seventy-five years ofevents. In just a few verses (11:26–31) we learn that Abram wasthe son of Terah, the brother of Haran and Nahor, the husband of thebarren Sarai (later Sarah), and the uncle of Lot, the son of Haran,who died in Ur of the Chaldees. The plot line marks significantevents in Abraham’s life chronologically. He left Harran at theage of 75 (12:4), was 86 when Hagar gave birth to Ishmael (16:16), 99when the Lord appeared to him (17:17) and when he was circumcised(17:24), 100 when Sarah gave birth to Isaac (21:5), and 175 when hedied (25:7). In summary, the biblical narrator paces the readerquickly through the story in such a way as to highlight atwenty-five-year period of Abraham’s life between the ages of75 and 100.
TheAbraham narrative in Genesis is a story intentionally structuredaround the familiar details of life and death, uprooting andresettling, faith and doubt, and dysfunctional relationships. It isdistinguished with illustrations of divine activity in family andpolitical relationships. God is speaking (12:1, 7; 15:5, 7, 9),revealing (12:7; 17:1; 18:1), rescuing, judging, and fulfilling wordsof promise (18:19; 21:1). God’s fingerprint is clearly notedwith the summary statements of the Lord’s blessing (24:1) andwealth (24:35).
Thecovenant that God made with Abraham is a key element in the overallstory and foundational for the theology of both Testaments. Thisdivine arrangement is introduced in Gen. 12:1–3 andprogressively unfolded with increased detail in Gen. 15; 17. It isstructured so that the obligations are borne by the Lord himself. Thecovenant promises land, seed, and blessing to Abraham and hisdescendants. In Gen. 15 the Lord officially cut the covenant withAbraham, thereby guaranteeing his commitment to his word. The halvingof animals and the walking between the cut pieces by God symbolizedby the torch constituted an ancient covenantal ritual affirming God’sresponsibility for the covenant particulars.
TheNT features Abraham in several significant ways. The intimateconnection between God and Abraham is noted in the identification ofGod as “the God of Abraham” in Acts 7:32 (cf. Exod. 3:6).The NT also celebrates the character of Abraham as a man of faith whor*ceived the promise (Gal. 3:9; Heb. 6:15). Abraham is mostimportantly an example of how one is justified by faith (Rom. 4:1,12) and an illustration of what it means to walk by faith (James2:21, 23).
Thosewho exercise faith in the living God, as did Abraham, are referred toas “children of Abraham” (Gal. 3:7). Regarding thecovenant promises made to Abraham in the OT, the NT writers highlightthe promises of seed and blessing. According to Paul, the seed ofAbraham is ultimately fulfilled in Christ, and those who believe inChrist are the seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:16, 29). In a similar way,those who have Abraham-like faith are blessed (3:9). The blessingimparted to Abraham comes to the Gentiles through the redemption ofChrist and is associated with the impartation of the Spirit (3:14).
Thepromise of land made to Abraham is referenced specifically in Acts(7:5, 16) and Hebrews (11:8, 11), where his obedient faith isfeatured and the land is discussed in connection with the historicalcontext of his life. See also Abram.
OldTestament
Preconditionsto love. Accordingto the OT, three preconditions must exist for us to know what itmeans to love.
First,we have the capacity for relationships because we are made in thelikeness of a personal God. God created us to reciprocate love backto him, in a relationship of mutual love.
Second,the true meaning of love depends on a true understanding of God,whose love causes him to pursue human beings even though their heartshave turned away from him for other substitute “loves.”This second point assumes that human beings still love, but they doso in a way distorted by sin. Sin causes human beings to live theirlives as though God did not exist. However, God in his mercy haschosen to intervene through his redemptive acts in history andthrough revelatory speech in order to deliver people from theblindness and corruption of sin. His pursuit of his unfaithful sonsand daughters gives us a picture of what true love looks like.
Third,God’s pursuit of human beings in history was by means ofelection and the establishment of a covenant. God chose to makehimself known to a particular people, those who would descend fromAbraham. God called Abraham to leave his country and go to a newplace that he would inherit as a new homeland, where his descendantswould be blessed (Gen. 12:1–3; 15; 17). God’s promise toAbraham took the form of an everlasting covenant, by which heguaranteed that he would fulfill what he had promised. He would bethe God of Abraham’s descendants, and they would be his people.They would receive the land of Canaan as an inheritance (17:6–8).In response, Abraham’s descendants were to obey God’scovenant by circumcising their male children (17:9–14). Thiscovenant would depend not on human faithfulness but on God’sfaithfulness. God would redeem this people to be his own specialpeople.
Severalgenerations later, God addressed the people through Moses, tellingthem that he chose them for no other reason than that he loved them(Deut. 7:7–8). Through Moses, God freed the people from theirslavery in Egypt and gave them the law. The law told them how to liveholy lives in response to God. It also included the provisions foratonement through the sacrificial system. In short, loving Godinvolved obeying his statutes.
Lovein wisdom books.The OT wisdom books Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes give us furtherinsight into the meaning of love. Proverbs exhorts its readers,“Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flowsfrom it” (4:23). One’s affections are the gateway to theallegiances of one’s heart. Once one’s affections havebeen hijacked by sinful passions, allegiance to God is subjugated toanother “master.” To the degree that sin usurps thethrone of the heart, it will steer the course of one’s actions(i.e., one’s “path”).
Inthe book of Job, Satan is convinced that Job serves God only becauseGod blesses Job, so Satan challenges God to let him afflict Job.Satan insists that if God removes Job’s blessings, Job willcurse God to his face (1:10–12). When God agrees to remove thehedge of protection and allows Job to suffer, the depth of Job’slove for God is vindicated. Although perplexed that God would allowhim to endure such suffering, he endures without forsaking God. Jobloved the giver more than his gifts, so his love did not turn tohatred when the gifts of God were removed.
Inthe book of Ecclesiastes, Qoheleth (the Teacher) reflects honestly onthe many vain pursuits and unexplainable dissonances thatcharacterize life “under the sun.” Only faith-filled lovefor God can enable one to live each moment of life with joy insteadof striving to find meaning in “under the sun” pursuits.This love chooses to trust the inscrutable wisdom of God in the faceof life’s many enigmas, uncertainties, and sufferings. One cando this honestly because of the belief that God’s just ruleover the affairs of the universe will be vindicated at the future dayof judgment (Eccles. 12:14).
Marriagemetaphor.The Bible uses the metaphor of marriage to describe God’scovenant relationship with his people (Isa. 54:5–8). Thismetaphor captures the intimate character of the relationship that Goddesires to have with his people. Marriage is the most intimate humanrelationship in two ways. First, marriage is a relationship in whichknowledge is the most intimate. A spouse can see many of the flawsthat are hidden from others. Thus, each spouse must accept and lovethe other for who that person is, in spite of his or herimperfections. Second, the depth and passion of the expressions oflove are most intimate in marriage. Consequently, there is no greaterpain than that caused by unfaithfulness to this covenant.
Sadly,as the story of the OT unfolds, God’s “wife”betrays him. How so? His people worship idols in their hearts (Ezek.14:1–5). Because God is jealous for the exclusive love of hispeople, idolatry is spiritual unfaithfulness. God wants both theallegiance and the affection of their hearts to be reservedexclusively for him. The people continue the formalities of worship,but their hearts have turned away from God. The book of Hoseaillustrates the sense of betrayal that God feels when his people arespiritually unfaithful. God tells Hosea to marry a woman who will beunfaithful to him. Subsequently, she leaves Hosea for one lover afteranother. This story is intended to give God’s people a vividpicture of how painful their spiritual betrayal of him is. His heartis crushed by the rebellious and idolatrous condition of his people.Hosea’s wife ends up on the market as a prostitute, and Godtells him to buy her back and love her again.
NewTestament
Thestory of God’s love for his people is expanded by what theFather did centuries later when he sent Jesus to pay the ransom forthe sins of his people so that they might be healed of theirrebellion and receive eternal life (John 3:16; 17:24). The death andresurrection of Christ were necessary because sin had to be atonedfor. This love is a free gift that comes to the one who trusts inChrist for forgiveness of sin and a new heart. The new heart inclinesone to please God. The gift of the Spirit enables one to bear the“fruit” of love (Gal. 5:22–23). As Abraham’sengrafted children (Gal. 3:7), believers are called by God to live aspilgrims on their way to a heavenly promised land (Heb. 11:9–10;1Pet. 2:11).
Christmodeled genuine love by serving us (Mark 10:42–45). His loveshould motivate us and enable us to practice sacrificial servicetoward others (Matt. 22:39; 1John 3:16). It should also causeus to practice forbearance, long-suffering, and forgiveness towardthose who wrong us (Matt. 18:21–35). It should cause us torepay evil with good (Rom. 12:14). Our love for truth should motivateus to act in the best interests of others (1Cor. 13:4–8)in the hope that they may become reconciled to God (2Tim.2:24–26).
.A person from whom a person or group has descended in eithera physical or a spiritual sense. For Israel, the concept of one’sancestors and their God was of great significance in determining bothidentity and religious practice. Biblical concepts such as covenantand promise primarily found expression in the OT in terms of theancestral agreements established with God (Deut. 6:10; 9:5; 29:13;30:20; cf. Gen. 12:1–7). The effect of ancestors on one’sspiritual condition could have either positive or negativeimplications (Exod. 3:13; Josh. 24:14–15; 2 Tim. 1:5; Heb.11). The people of Israel are portrayed as suffering judgment bothfor their sins and for those of their ancestors, but also they couldfind repentance and hope because of the same relationships (Zech.1:4–6; Mal. 1:1–5).
Thereare thirteen primary genealogical lists in the OT and two in the NT,although there are numerous passages that include more limitedlineages to identify an individual. Genealogical lists could alsofunction to engender a notion of commonality of relationship outsidesingle family lines, such as when extended family genealogies aregiven (Gen. 10; 25:12–18; 36:1–30). For priests andkings, it was of utmost importance to be able to establish ancestralidentity. This necessity may have played a role in at least twodiscussions of Jesus. His genealogical lists in both Matt. 1 and Luke3 established his claim to the line of David, and his spiritualancestry in the person of Melchizedek in Heb. 7 granted him superiorstatus to the priesthood of Levi.
Worshipof ancestors, or the related but distinct cult of the dead, wascommon in nearly every culture with which Israel interacted and mayhave even found expression in popular practice among Israelites, asevidenced by the apparent leaving of gifts at several tomb locationsthroughout Palestine (cf. Ezek. 43:7–9). However, the biblicalrecord is consistent throughout that such practices were prohibited.Among laws centered on the topic of ancestral worship wererestrictions on consulting the dead at all (Deut. 18:11), givingofferings to the dead (Deut. 26:14), self-laceration for the dead(Deut. 14:1; Jer. 16:6), and seeking ancestors to foretell the future(Isa. 8:19; 65:4–8).
The final book of the Bible is known by its opening line:“The revelation of Jesus Christ” (1:1 ESV, NRSV, KJV).This phrase could indicate a “revelation about Jesus Christ”(the main character), or a “revelation from Jesus Christ”(the primary giver of the message to John; so NIV), or, as manybelieve, some of both.
Inpowerful language and vivid imagery, Revelation presents theconclusion to God’s grand story of salvation, in which hedefeats evil, reverses the curse of sin, restores creation, and livesforever among his people. Although the details are often difficult tounderstand, the main idea of Revelation is clear: God is in controland will successfully accomplish his purposes. In the end, God wins.As a transformative vision, Revelation empowers its readers/listenersto persevere faithfully in a fallen world until their Lord returns.
Genreand Historical Context
Genre.Revelation is best understood in light of its literary genre and itshistorical context. The literary genre of Revelation—letter,prophecy, and apocalyptic literature—explains much of thestrangeness of the book. The entire book is a single letter to sevenchurches in Asia Minor (note the letter greeting in 1:4–5 andthe benediction in 22:21). John is commanded to write what he seesand send it to the seven churches (1:11). A letter to seven churchesis in reality a letter to the whole church, since the number “seven”symbolizes wholeness or completeness in Revelation. NT letters wereintended to be read aloud to the gathering of Christians, and thesame is true of Revelation. The book opens with a blessing on the onewho reads the letter aloud and on those who listen (1:3) and closeswith a stern warning to anyone (reader or listener) who changes thebook (22:18–19). Like other NT letters, Revelation alsoaddresses a specific situation. For this reason, any approach toRevelation that ignores the situation faced by the seven churcheswill fail to grasp its central message. Many say that the message ofRevelation extends beyond the first century, but it certainly doesnot ignore its first audience.
Revelationis also a letter that is prophetic. In both the opening (1:3) and theclosing (22:7, 10, 18–19), the book is described as a“prophecy” (cf. 19:10). In 22:9 the angel identifies Johnas a prophet: “I am a fellow servant with you and with yourfellow prophets.” As a prophetic book in line with OT propheticbooks, Revelation contains both prediction about the future andproclamation about God’s will for the present, with emphasisfalling on the latter.
Finally,Revelation is a prophetic letter that is apocalyptic. In the openingphrase, “the revelation of Jesus Christ,” the term“revelation” is a translation of the Greek termapokalypsis,meaning “to unveil” or “to reveal” what hasbeen hidden. Most believe that apocalyptic literature grew out ofHebrew prophecy. The OT books of Daniel and Zechariah are oftenassociated with apocalyptic literature, and there were many Jewishapocalypses written during the time between the Testaments (e.g.,1–2Enoch, 2–3Baruch, 4Ezra).
Inapocalyptic literature there is a revelation from God to somewell-known human figure through a heavenly intermediary. God promisesto intervene in human history, to defeat evil, and to establish hisrightful rule. Such is the case with Revelation, which assumes asituation where God’s people are threatened by hostile powers.God is portrayed as sovereign, and he promises to intervene soon todestroy evil. Through bizarre visions and imagery common toapocalyptic literature, those who hear Revelation are transported toanother world for much-needed heavenly perspective. As the hearersmove outside their hopeless circ*mstances and see God winning the waragainst evil, their perspective is reshaped, and they are empoweredto persevere faithfully. They are simultaneously called to live holyand blameless lives as they worship the one, true God.
Historicalcontext.Along with understanding the literary genre of Revelation, one mustgrasp its historical context in order to read the book responsibly.Revelation itself describes a historical situation where someChristians are suffering for their faith with the real possibilitythat the suffering could become more intense and widespread. Johnhimself has been exiled to the island of Patmos because of hiswitness for Jesus (1:9). Antipas, a Christian in Pergamum, has beenput to death for his faith (2:13). In his message to the church atSmyrna, Jesus indicates that they should not be surprised by whatthey are about to suffer (2:10). The book also includes severalreferences to pagan powers shedding the blood of God’s people(6:10; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2). Revelation addresses a situation inwhich pagan political power has formed a partnership with falsereligion. Those who claim to follow Christ are facing mountingpressure to conform to this ungodly partnership at the expense ofloyalty to Christ.
Thetwo primary possibilities for the date of Revelation are a timeshortly after the death of Nero (AD 68–69) or a date near theendof Domitian’s reign (AD 95). Although there is solidevidence for both dates, the majority opinion at present favors adate during the reign of Domitian, when persecution threatened tospread across the Roman Empire. The imperial cult (i.e., the worshipof the Roman emperor) was a powerful force to be reckoned withprimarily because it united religious, political, social, andeconomic elements into a single force. As chapters 2–3indicate, not every Christian was remaining faithful in thisdifficult environment. Some were compromising in order to avoidreligious or economic persecution. Revelation has a pointed messagefor those who are standing strong as well as for those who arecompromising, and this central message ties into the overall purposeof the book.
Purposeand Interpretation
Theoverall purpose of Revelation is to comfort those who are facingpersecution and to warn those who are compromising with the worldsystem. During times of oppression, the righteous suffer and thewicked seem to prosper. This raises the question “Who is Lord?”Revelation says that Jesus is Lord in spite of how things appear, andhe will return soon to establish his eternal kingdom. Those facingpersecution find hope through a renewed perspective, and those whoare compromising are warned to repent. Revelation’s goal is totransform the audience to follow Jesus faithfully.
Thereare five main theories about how Revelation should be interpreted:preterist, historicist, futurist, idealist, and eclectic. Thepreterist theory views Revelation as relating only to the time inwhich John lived rather than to any future period. John communicatesto first-century readers how God plans to deliver them from thewickedness of the Roman Empire. The historicist theory argues thatRevelation gives an overview of the major movements of church historyfrom the first century until the return of Christ. The futuristtheory claims that most of Revelation (usually chaps. 4–22)deals with a future time just before the end of history. The idealisttheory maintains that Revelation is a symbolic portrayal of theongoing conflict between good and evil. Revelation offers timelessspiritual truths to encourage Christians of all ages. The eclectictheory combines the strengths of several of the other theories (e.g.,a message to the original audience, a timeless spiritual message, andsome future fulfillment), while avoiding their weaknesses.
Outlineand Structure
Therehave been many attempts to understand how Revelation is organized.Some see a threefold structure based on 1:19:
Whatyou have seen (past) (1:1–20)
Whatis now (present) (2:1–3:21)
Whatwill take place later (future) (4:1–22:21)
Otherssee the book organized around seven dramatic scenes with interludesoccurring throughout:
Prologue(1:1–8)
Act1: Seven Oracles (1:9–3:22)
Act2: Seven Seals (6:1–17)
Act3: Seven Trumpets (8:1–9:21)
Act4: Seven Signs (12:1–14:20)
Act5: Seven Bowls (16:1–21)
Act6: Seven Visions (19:1–20:15)
Act7: Seven Prophecies (21:2–22:17)
Epilogue(22:18–21)
Thefollowing outline provides an overview of Revelation in ten stages:
I.Introduction (1:1–20)
II.Messages to the Seven Churches (2:1–3:22)
III.Vision of the Heavenly Throne Room (4:1–5:14)
IV.Opening of the Seven Seals (6:1–8:1)
V.Sounding of the Seven Trumpets (8:2–11:19)
VI.The People of God versus the Powers of Evil (12:1–14:20)
VII.Pouring Out of the Seven Bowls (15:1–16:21)
VIII.Judgment and Fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5)
IX.God’s Ultimate Victory (19:6–22:5)
X.Conclusion (22:6–21)
I.Introduction (1:1–20).Chapter 1 includes both a prologue (1:1–8) and John’scommission to write what he sees (1:9–20). John’s visionfocuses on the risen, glorified Christ and his continued presenceamong the seven churches.
II.Messages to the seven churches (2:1–3:22).Chapters 2–3 contain messages to seven churches of Asia Minor:Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, andLaodicea. The seven messages follow a similar literary pattern: adescription of Jesus, a commendation, an accusation, an exhortationcoupled with either warning or encouragement, an admonition tolisten, and a promise to those who overcome. These messages reflectthe twin dangers faced by the church: persecution and compromise.
III.Vision of the heavenly throne room (4:1–5:14).In chapters 4–5 the scene shifts to the heavenly throne room,where God reigns in majestic power. All of heaven worships theCreator and the Lion-Lamb (Jesus), who alone is qualified to open thescroll because of his sacrificial death.
IV.Opening of the seven seals (6:1–8:1).The unveiling of God’s ultimate victory formally begins here.This section begins the first of a series of three judgment visions(seals, trumpets, and bowls), with seven elements each. When thesixth seal is opened, the question is asked, “Who can withstandit?” Chapter 7 provides the answer with its two visions ofGod’s people; only those belonging to God can withstand theoutpouring of the Lamb’s wrath.
V.Sounding of the seven trumpets (8:2–11:19).The trumpet judgments, patterned after the plagues of Egypt, revealGod’s judgment upon a wicked world. Again, before the seventhelement in the series, there is an interval with two visions(10:1–11; 11:1–14) that instruct and encourage God’speople.
VI.The people of God versus the powers of evil (12:1–14:20).Chapter12 offers the main reason why God’s people face hostility inthis world. They are caught up in the larger conflict between God andSatan (the dragon). Although Satan was defeated by the death andresurrection of Christ, he continues to oppose the people of God.Chapter 13 introduces Satan’s two agents: the beast from thesea and the beast from the earth. The dragon and the two beastsconstitute an unholy trinity bent on seducing and destroying God’speople. As another interval, chapter 14 offers a glimpse of the finalfuture that God has in store for his people. One day the Lamb and hisfollowers will stand on Mount Zion and sing a new song of redemption.
VII.Pouring out of the seven bowls (15:1–16:21).The seven golden bowls follow the trumpets and seals as the finalseries of seven judgments. As the bowls of God’s wrath arepoured out on an unrepentant world, the plagues are devastatingindicators of God’s anger toward sin and evil. The onlyresponse from the “earth dwellers” (MSG; NIV:“inhabitants of the earth” [17:2, 8]; this is a commonterm in Revelation for unbelievers) is to curse God rather thanrepent (16:9, 11, 21).
VIII.Judgment and fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5). Thissection depicts the death of Babylon, a pagan power said to be “drunkwith the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those whobore testimony to Jesus” (17:6). The funeral laments for thedeceased Babylon of chapter 18 give way to a celebration as God’speople rejoice over Babylon’s downfall (19:1–5).
IX.God’s ultimate victory (19:6–22:5). Thisclimactic section describes God’s ultimate victory over eviland the final reward for the people of God. This scene includes thereturn of Christ for his bride (19:6–16), Christ’s defeatof the two beasts and their allies (19:17–21), the binding ofSatan and the millennial reign (20:1–6), the final defeat ofSatan (20:7–10), and the final judgment and the death of deathitself (20:11–15). Chapter 21 features a description of the newheaven and new earth, where God’s long-standing promise to liveamong his people is fully realized.
X.Conclusion (22:6–21).Revelation closes with final blessings for those who heed the messageof the book and warnings for those who do not. Jesus’ promiseto return soon is met with John’s prayer, “Come, LordJesus” (22:20).
Charactersand Themes
Theforegoing outlines are helpful for understanding Revelation, butperhaps an even better way to grasp the message of the book is tolook closely at its main characters and story line. The followingseven themes capture the overall theological message of this dynamicprophetic-apocalyptic letter.
1.God.Revelation presents God as a central character in the story. He issovereign and firmly in control of history, as his description from1:4–8 suggests: “the Alpha and the Omega” (thebeginning and the end), “the one who is, and who was, and whois to come” (God of the past, the present, and the future), and“the Lord God, ... the Almighty” (ruler overthe universe). The throne room vision of chapters 4–5 alsoclearly asserts God’s sovereign rule. The throne of God itselfstands as a central symbol in the book, representing God’ssovereignty over all things. As a main character, God rightlyreceives worship. He is worshiped because he is the creator (e.g.,4:11; 14:7) and the righteous judge who condemns evil and vindicateshis people (15:3–4; 16:5–7; 19:1–2). Revelationalso describes God as one who desires to be fully and intimatelypresent with his people. God cares for and protects his people (e.g.,7:2–3; 14:1; 21:4). As the book closes, God announces thefulfillment of his long-standing promise to live among his people(21:6–7; cf. Exod. 29:45–46; Lev. 26:11–12). God’schildren have unhindered access to their loving Father as they servehim, see his face, and bear his name—all in his presence(22:1–5).
2.God’s enemies.Although God reigns supreme, he has enemies who oppose him and hispeople. As God’s chief enemy, Satan (also known as the dragon,the devil, the serpent, the accuser) works through worldly systemswith the intent of thwarting God’s plan. Chapter 12 summarizesthis cosmic conflict. In that scene, God defeats the dragon, who thenturns his anger against the woman and the rest of her offspring. Thedragon’s evil partners include the beast fromthe sea(traditionally called the “antichrist”) and the beastfrom the earth (the “false prophet”). The first beastoften has been identified with Rome, the dominant pagan power in thefirst century, although the reference likely extends beyond Rome toany political-economic power that demands absolute allegiance (see13:1–8; 19:19–20; 20:10). The second beast usesmiraculous signs to deceive people into worshiping the first beast.This opponent represents religious power organized in support of thefirst beast (13:11–18; 19:20; 20:10). The dragon, the beastfrom the sea, and the false prophet constitute the unholy trinity.God’s enemies also include people (usually called the“inhabitants of the earth”) who follow the beast (13:8,12), indulge in the ways of this world (17:2), and persecutebelievers (6:10; 11:10).
3.The Lamb of God. Jesus,the Lamb of God, plays a central role in God’s redemptive plan.In Revelation the Lamb is clearly identified as a divine figure whoshares in the authority, glory, and worship reserved for God (5:6,9–14; 7:10, 17; 12:10; 21:22–23; 22:1, 3). Expressionsthat refer to God are also used of Jesus, thereby affirming Jesus’deity (e.g., “Alpha and Omega,” “Lord” [seealso 1:4–5]). Revelation highlights the Lamb’ssacrificial death as the key to his victory over evil, paradoxicalthough it may be (1:5, 18; 5:9). As the slaughtered yet risen Lamb(1:17–18), Jesus is able to identify with his suffering people(1:9; 12:17; 20:4). The Lamb promises to return as the warrior-judgeto defeat God’s enemies and rescue God’s people (1:7;3:11; 16:15; 19:11–21). The famous battle with the forces ofevil is recorded in 19:20: “But the beast was captured, andwith it the false prophet.” The two beasts are then condemnedto the lake of fire, and their followers become the banquet meal forthe birds of prey.
4.God’s people.The people of God figure prominently in the book of Revelation. Johnuses a variety of terms and images to portray God’s people(e.g., church, saints, great multitude, bride of the Lamb, newJerusalem). These people have been redeemed by the Lamb, and theycontinue to rely upon his sacrificial death in spite of opposition(1:5; 5:9; 14:3–4). They are a genuinely multicultural people,as indicated by the seven uses of a fourfold formula: every “tribe,language, people, and nation” (5:9; 7:9; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; cf.17:15). They are also a persecuted people (1:9; 2:9–10; 7:14;11:9–10; 12:10; 13:16–17) and at times even a martyredpeople (6:9–11; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2; 20:4). ThroughoutRevelation, God’s people are characterized as those who obeythe commandments of God (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 14:12; 20:4; 22:9) andwho hold fast to the testimony of Jesus (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 19:10;20:4). They are a tempted people who are warned throughout the bookto endure in faith (13:10; 14:12; 18:4). Like their Savior, theyconquer evil by holding fast to their confession even to the point ofdeath (12:11).
5.God’s judgment.God’s judgment of evil plays a crucial role in the book. Thecentral section of Revelation contains three series of sevenjudgments: the seals (6:1–8:1), the trumpets (8:2–11:19),and the bowls (15:1–16:21). God sends these plagues on hisenemies to demonstrate his power and to vindicate his people. Theseimages of judgment also encourage repentance and remind people thatGod will win the battle against evil. Using two images ofjudgment—the grain harvest (14:14–16) and the winepress(14:17–20)—chapter 14 presents a clear choice: fear andglorify God (14:7) or face God’s inescapable and eternaljudgment (14:11, 19). God’s final judgment on “Babylonthe great, the mother of prostitutes” is reported in 17:1–19:6.Babylon represents the worldly system that has blasphemed God andpersecuted his people. God’s final judgment of the satanictrinity, their followers, and death itself is described in 19:11–21;20:7–15. Evil has been destroyed, preparing the way for therestoration of creation.
6.The paradise of God.The story culminates in God’s ultimate restoration of hispeople and his creation—the paradise of God. What God began todo in Gen. 1–2 he now completes in Rev. 21–22. The riverof life replaces the sea. The tree of life supplies food for all.God’s throne as a symbol of God’s sovereign rule over allreality serves as the source of life. God has kept his promise toconquer his enemies, vindicate his people, and restore his creation.The Abrahamic covenant of Gen. 12, that God would bless “allpeoples on earth” (v.3), is fulfilled as the tree of lifeprovides healing for the nations (Rev. 22:2). The new heaven and newearth is identified primarily as the place where God lives among hispeople (22:4). In the paradise of God there will be no more Satan orsin or death or evil of any kind. God’s people will bask in hisglory and respond in worship.
7.The present struggle.A final theme of Revelation is the believer’s struggle to liveout God’s story in the present. The Lamb’s followers relyupon the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus for their victory,but they continue to live in enemy territory. They long for the newheaven and new earth, but they must wage war in the present againstthe forces of evil. Jesus challenges the seven churches to “overcome”or “conquer,” a requirement for inheriting his promisesof eternal life, provision, justice, victory, and the presence of God(21:7). A voice from heaven summarizes what it means to overcome:“They [Christians] triumphed over him [Satan] by the blood ofthe Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love theirlives so much as to shrink from death” (12:11).
Theytriumph in the same way that Jesus triumphed: victory throughfaithfulness, even if it includes suffering. This calls for rejectingfalse teaching, resisting idolatry, living righteously, and refusingto compromise. Triumphing includes authentic faith that results inobedience to Jesus. Above all, to triumph or overcome means to followthe Lamb.
Theseseven themes of Revelation reveal how the book offers hope to thosewho are suffering for the cause of Christ and warning to those whoare compromising with the world. Revelation presents the finalchapter in God’s grand plan to defeat evil, reverse the curseof sin, transform creation, and live forever among his people. Forfirst-century readers or twenty-first-century readers, Revelationoffers a dramatic and empowering vision of what it means to followJesus.
Common and valuable for food, beans were cooked while green in the pods or after being dried. Dry beans were threshed and winnowed like cereals and other grains. Beans are mentioned twice in the NIV (2Sam. 17:28; Ezek. 4:9).
The spectrum of meaning of “faith” and “faithfulness” may be applied both to God and to human beings. Cognates of “faith” are used interpersonally in human relationships but are used in the Bible specifically to denote the interaction between God and humanity, and human response to God. A question of theological pertinence is the degree to which one must distinguish between faith as an agent of personal belief and faith as an object of personal belief as pertaining to the relationship between God and human being.
In Hebrew the words most often translated “faith” or “faithful” are ’emunah and ’emet. In Greek the word rendered most frequently “faith” or “faithful” is pistis. In terms of their semantic domains, ’emunah and ’emet connote an objective sense of reliability (of persons) and stability (of inanimate objects); pistis conveys more of a subjective sense of placing confidence in a person, trusting in a person, or believing in a person or set of propositions. This subjective sense of pistis is correlated to considering the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence as reliable—“faithful.” Pistis likewise is used to communicate the quality of this person or belief as “committed” and “trustworthy.”
As noted, to some degree the meanings of the Hebrew and Greek terms overlap. However, certain dissimilarities are apparent as well. These observations play out in OT and NT expressions of faith. Martin Buber (1878–1965), a Jewish philosopher known for his academic work in the area of “faith,” distinguished between two types of faith: OT/Judaic faith, typified as tribal, national, and communal trust and fidelity based on the covenant; and NT/Christian faith, characterized as individual persuasion or belief in something.
Old Testament
Faith in the context of the OT rests on a foundation that the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence is reliable. Trust in Yahweh is expressed through loyalty and obedience. The theme of responsive obedience is emphasized in the Torah (Exod. 19:5). In the later history of Israel, faithfulness to the law became the predominant expression of faith (Dan. 1:8; 6:10). OT faith, then, is a moral response rather than abstract intellect or emotion.
Faithfulness as an attribute of God. Yahweh is presented in the OT as faithful to his promises, as faithfulness is a part of his very being. In the Torah the Israelites are reminded, “The Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). Not only is God presented as keeping his covenant, but also the prophet Hosea calls God “the faithful Holy One” (Hos. 11:12). Isaiah likewise pre-sents faithfulness as an attribute of God (Isa. 49:7). The people can rest assured, for God is unchanging and reliable.
The psalmist speaks of Yahweh as the faithful God: “You have redeemed me, O Lord, faithful God” (Ps. 31:5 NRSV); “he remains faithful forever” (Ps. 146:6). The translation “faithful” is warranted in these instances in the psalms. Its connotations are “truth” and “trustworthiness.” Yahweh is ascribed divine honor by his people recognizing and acknowledging his faithfulness and trustworthiness, and by responding to it in obedience as the people of God.
The faith of Abraham. Abraham’s (Abram’s) faith is used in the Bible as an example (Rom. 4:12; Gal. 3:6–9) in the sense that Abraham trusted God’s faithfulness in a way unequaled by other characters in the OT. Abraham lived in Mesopotamia when God spoke to him in a vision and told him that his descendants would be as innumerable as the stars in the sky (Gen. 15:1–5). Abraham trusted that God would be faithful to keep his promise despite insurmountable obstacles. This trust was credited to Abraham as righteousness (15:6). God subsequently initiated a covenant with Abraham (15:7–21).
Abraham’s life was characterized by his obedience to God and by his considering God to be faithful, something well noted by the early church (Heb. 11:8–11, 17–19) and used as an example of faith in the Christian walk (12:1). The three best-known examples of Abraham’s obedience and hence trust in God’s faithfulness are found consecutively in the departure from his homeland, the birth of his son Isaac, and the offering of Isaac as a sacrifice.
When God said to Abraham, “Go from your country, your people and your father’s household to the land I will show you” (Gen. 12:1), Abraham went as commanded (12:4). He obeyed despite his cultural disposition toward staying in the area of his ancestry and kin, and he went without knowledge of an appointed destination. Elderly and childless (12:7, 11–12), Abraham considered offspring to be impossible. However, Abraham trusted that God would be able to raise offspring for him, believing that he would become a great nation (12:2). His offspring Isaac was later reminded of the obedience of Abraham (26:5). Abraham’s greatest challenge of trust in God’s faithful provision came when he was commanded to offer his son Isaac as a burnt offering (22:2). He was commended for fearing God without reservation (22:12).
When the priest and initial leader of the Maccabean revolt, Mattathias, gave his farewell speech to his sons as he faced death in 166 BC, he placed his deeds along the lines of biblical heroes of faith such as Abraham. With likely reference to Abraham offering Isaac, he said, “Was not Abraham found faithful when tested, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness?” (1Macc. 2:52 NRSV). The early church likewise used this test in Abraham’s life as an example of his faithfulness, while at the same time claiming that the source for this faithfulness was found in faith—faith in God’s faithful provision (Heb. 11:17).
Faithfulness to the covenant. Faithfulness embodies the very core of the covenant relationship. God seeks a love relationship with humanity expressed in initiating his covenant. He is described as “abounding in love and faithfulness” (Exod. 34:6). His covenant love (Heb. khesed) is closely correlated to his faithfulness: “He is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love” (Deut. 7:9). Throughout the OT, Yahweh is shown as loyal to his covenant. Yahweh’s righteousness is seen in his faithfulness in keeping the covenant even when his people were disloyal and did not acknowledge his faithfulness. He delivered his people out of Egypt because of his covenant love and righteousness, as the psalmist declared: “But from everlasting to everlasting the Lord’s love is with those who fear him, and his righteousness with their children’s children—with those who keep his covenant and remember to obey his precepts” (Ps. 103:17–18). He delivered them out of their subsequent exile, declaring them righteous because their repentant hearts trusted in his faithfulness and sought to obey his covenant. Yahweh said, “If I have not made my covenant with day and night and established the laws of heaven and earth, then I will reject the descendants of Jacob and David my servant and will not choose one of his sons to rule over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. For I will restore their fortunes and have compassion on them” (Jer. 33:25–26).
God’s people, however, were expected to reciprocate and trust his faithfulness (1Chron. 16:15–16). When God met with Moses on Mount Sinai, he instructed Moses to tell the Israelites to obey the commands fully and to keep the covenant. It was only then that they would be a treasured possession, a holy nation (Exod. 19:5–6). The Israelites were expected to follow in obedience and thus reciprocate God’s faithfulness. The people of Israel often failed, but David and other godly people chose to be faithful to God and walk in his truth (Ps. 119:30; Heb. 11:4–38).
Faith counted as righteousness. Whereas faith is used throughout the OT in reference to God’s faithfulness and loyalty, it is used in Hab. 2:4 as pertaining to the faith of the righteous: “But the righteous will live by his faith” (NASB). In Rom. 1:17 Paul specifies, “For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: ‘The righteous will live by faith.’ ” He notes that God’s righteousness, even as revealed within OT promises, is by faith (“faith to faith,” or “faith, through and through”). By the parameters “from faith to faith,” Paul intends to exclude works of righteousness, a theme that he carries consistently in the first four chapters of Romans. Justification, for Habakkuk’s hearers, meant faithfulness, a single-minded focus on Yahweh to meet life’s essential needs. For Paul, salvation by way of justification meant that reliance upon Christ alone was foundational. In Pauline theology, faith is a thread connecting the old covenant with the new covenant.
New Testament
Faith is a central theological concept in the NT. In relational terms, faith is foremost personalized as the locus of trust and belief in the person of Jesus Christ.
In the Gospels, Jesus is spoken of not as the subject of faith (as believing in God), but as the object of faith. In the Synoptic Gospels, faith is seen most often in connection with the ministry of Jesus. Miracles, in particular healings, are presented as taking place in response to the faith of the one in need of healing or the requester. In the Gospel of John, faith (belief) is presented as something that God requires of his people (6:28–29).
In the book of Acts, “faith/belief” is used to refer to Jews and Gentiles converting to following the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and becoming part of the Christian community. The book correlates faith in Christ closely with repentance (Acts 11:21; 19:18; 20:21; 26:18).
Paul relates faith to righteousness and justification (Rom. 3:22; 5:11; Gal. 3:6). In Ephesians faith is shown as instrumental in salvation: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” (Eph. 2:8).
In Hebrews, faith is described as “being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (11:1). Faith thus is viewed as something that can be accomplished in the life of the believer—a calling of God not yet tangible or seen. To possess faith is to be loyal to God and to the gospel of Jesus Christ despite all obstacles. In the letter of James, genuine works naturally accompany genuine faith. Works, however, are expressed in doing the will of God. The will of God means, for example, caring for the poor (James 2:15–16).
In 1Peter, Christ is depicted as the broker of faith in God (1Pet. 1:21), whereas in 2Peter and Jude faith is presented as received from God (2Pet. 1:1). In the letters of John “to believe” is used as a litmus test for those who possess eternal life: “You who believe in the name of the Son of God, ... you have eternal life” (1John 5:13).
Faith is rarely addressed in the book of Revelation. Rather, faithfulness is the objective. Christ is described as the faithful and true witness (Rev. 1:5; 3:14), the perfect example for believers. One of the believers in Asia Minor, Antipas, is identified as Christ’s witness and faithful one (2:13). Those believers who, like Antipas, are faithful unto death, are called “overcomers” (2:10, 26). The faithless are thrown into the lake of fire, which represents the second death (21:8).
Faith and salvation. The role of faith in salvation is often hotly debated. Views are polarized between Christ as the object of faith and as the subject of faith. These views are designated as an objective genitive (faith in Christ), also known as an anthropological view, and a subjective genitive (the faithfulness of Christ), also known as a christological view. Thus, for example, Rom. 3:22 can be translated as “This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe” (cf. NRSV) or as “This righteousness from God comes through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe” (cf. NET). In the latter translation the faithfulness of Christ is seen as the agent of salvation.
In Eph. 2:8 the phrase “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith,” points to faith as instrumental in salvation. However, the source of that faith is not made clear. Does God provide the faith required to be saved, and thus the event is out of the hands of humanity? Or does salvation require a response from human beings in the form of faith—that is, trust?
In the Letter to the Romans, Paul indicates a correlation between grace and faith (Rom. 4:16; 5:1–2), and he shows that Abraham’s faith, his belief and unwavering hope in God’s faithfulness, was credited to him as righteousness (4:18–22). In the new covenant this righteousness likewise is credited to those who believe in God (4:23–24).
Faith and works. In Eph. 2:8–10 works are described as an outflow of the faith of believers: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.”
Faith and works are also related in the letter of James, where works appear to be a prerequisite of faith, for faith without works is dead (2:26). While at first sight this might appear to contradict a Pauline understanding of faith and works (Rom. 3:19–5:1; Gal. 2:15–3:24), James and Paul use the word “works” differently. Paul uses it in terms of “obedience to the law,” something obsolete as a requirement in the new covenant. James, however, writes with regard to works of charity, not works of obedience to Jewish ritualistic law. Authentic faith, then, shows the evidence of good works—charity, the fruit of the Spirit.
Faith and the Church
Whereas baptism was a public initiation rite into the first-century Christian community, it was faith in Christ Jesus that was understood as establishing one’s membership in the family of God (Gal. 3:26). This membership was available to both Jews and Gentiles. Faith, the shared belief system in and confession of Jesus’ salvific work, became the common denominator in the Christian community. In Ephesians, faith is identified as one of the unifying elements of the church (Eph. 4:5). The prayer of faith heals the sick person in the church, another unifying element of applying faith (James 5:13–15).
Faith as a spiritual gift. According to the apostle Paul, the gift of faith is closely related to the life and functioning of the church (1Cor. 12:9). Mentioned among other gifts, or charismata (12:4), this aspect of faith is that benefit of salvation with which certain members of the church are graced and is used for the common good (12:7). This faith, then, is understood as edifying the Christian community at large rather than just the individual believer.
Faith and the Christian life. Christians are described as living by faith (2Cor. 5:7). Not only does faith lead people to Christ, but also Christ subsequently dwells in believers’ hearts through faith (Eph. 3:17). This Christian faith is subject to testing (James 1:2).
Faith is presented by Paul as present at different levels of growth among believers. Some Christians are weak in faith (Rom. 14:1), whereas others are strong in faith (15:1). Faith can differ in its strength of conviction (4:20–22; 14:5). It is presented as something that can grow (2Cor. 10:15).
Faith is grouped among gifts and virtues. Lifted out together with hope and love, faith is mentioned among gifts that edify believers in the church (1Cor. 13:13). Likewise, faith is mentioned as a Christian virtue among the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).
The spectrum of meaning of “faith” and “faithfulness” may be applied both to God and to human beings. Cognates of “faith” are used interpersonally in human relationships but are used in the Bible specifically to denote the interaction between God and humanity, and human response to God. A question of theological pertinence is the degree to which one must distinguish between faith as an agent of personal belief and faith as an object of personal belief as pertaining to the relationship between God and human being.
In Hebrew the words most often translated “faith” or “faithful” are ’emunah and ’emet. In Greek the word rendered most frequently “faith” or “faithful” is pistis. In terms of their semantic domains, ’emunah and ’emet connote an objective sense of reliability (of persons) and stability (of inanimate objects); pistis conveys more of a subjective sense of placing confidence in a person, trusting in a person, or believing in a person or set of propositions. This subjective sense of pistis is correlated to considering the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence as reliable—“faithful.” Pistis likewise is used to communicate the quality of this person or belief as “committed” and “trustworthy.”
As noted, to some degree the meanings of the Hebrew and Greek terms overlap. However, certain dissimilarities are apparent as well. These observations play out in OT and NT expressions of faith. Martin Buber (1878–1965), a Jewish philosopher known for his academic work in the area of “faith,” distinguished between two types of faith: OT/Judaic faith, typified as tribal, national, and communal trust and fidelity based on the covenant; and NT/Christian faith, characterized as individual persuasion or belief in something.
Old Testament
Faith in the context of the OT rests on a foundation that the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence is reliable. Trust in Yahweh is expressed through loyalty and obedience. The theme of responsive obedience is emphasized in the Torah (Exod. 19:5). In the later history of Israel, faithfulness to the law became the predominant expression of faith (Dan. 1:8; 6:10). OT faith, then, is a moral response rather than abstract intellect or emotion.
Faithfulness as an attribute of God. Yahweh is presented in the OT as faithful to his promises, as faithfulness is a part of his very being. In the Torah the Israelites are reminded, “The Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). Not only is God presented as keeping his covenant, but also the prophet Hosea calls God “the faithful Holy One” (Hos. 11:12). Isaiah likewise pre-sents faithfulness as an attribute of God (Isa. 49:7). The people can rest assured, for God is unchanging and reliable.
The psalmist speaks of Yahweh as the faithful God: “You have redeemed me, O Lord, faithful God” (Ps. 31:5 NRSV); “he remains faithful forever” (Ps. 146:6). The translation “faithful” is warranted in these instances in the psalms. Its connotations are “truth” and “trustworthiness.” Yahweh is ascribed divine honor by his people recognizing and acknowledging his faithfulness and trustworthiness, and by responding to it in obedience as the people of God.
The faith of Abraham. Abraham’s (Abram’s) faith is used in the Bible as an example (Rom. 4:12; Gal. 3:6–9) in the sense that Abraham trusted God’s faithfulness in a way unequaled by other characters in the OT. Abraham lived in Mesopotamia when God spoke to him in a vision and told him that his descendants would be as innumerable as the stars in the sky (Gen. 15:1–5). Abraham trusted that God would be faithful to keep his promise despite insurmountable obstacles. This trust was credited to Abraham as righteousness (15:6). God subsequently initiated a covenant with Abraham (15:7–21).
Abraham’s life was characterized by his obedience to God and by his considering God to be faithful, something well noted by the early church (Heb. 11:8–11, 17–19) and used as an example of faith in the Christian walk (12:1). The three best-known examples of Abraham’s obedience and hence trust in God’s faithfulness are found consecutively in the departure from his homeland, the birth of his son Isaac, and the offering of Isaac as a sacrifice.
When God said to Abraham, “Go from your country, your people and your father’s household to the land I will show you” (Gen. 12:1), Abraham went as commanded (12:4). He obeyed despite his cultural disposition toward staying in the area of his ancestry and kin, and he went without knowledge of an appointed destination. Elderly and childless (12:7, 11–12), Abraham considered offspring to be impossible. However, Abraham trusted that God would be able to raise offspring for him, believing that he would become a great nation (12:2). His offspring Isaac was later reminded of the obedience of Abraham (26:5). Abraham’s greatest challenge of trust in God’s faithful provision came when he was commanded to offer his son Isaac as a burnt offering (22:2). He was commended for fearing God without reservation (22:12).
When the priest and initial leader of the Maccabean revolt, Mattathias, gave his farewell speech to his sons as he faced death in 166 BC, he placed his deeds along the lines of biblical heroes of faith such as Abraham. With likely reference to Abraham offering Isaac, he said, “Was not Abraham found faithful when tested, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness?” (1Macc. 2:52 NRSV). The early church likewise used this test in Abraham’s life as an example of his faithfulness, while at the same time claiming that the source for this faithfulness was found in faith—faith in God’s faithful provision (Heb. 11:17).
Faithfulness to the covenant. Faithfulness embodies the very core of the covenant relationship. God seeks a love relationship with humanity expressed in initiating his covenant. He is described as “abounding in love and faithfulness” (Exod. 34:6). His covenant love (Heb. khesed) is closely correlated to his faithfulness: “He is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love” (Deut. 7:9). Throughout the OT, Yahweh is shown as loyal to his covenant. Yahweh’s righteousness is seen in his faithfulness in keeping the covenant even when his people were disloyal and did not acknowledge his faithfulness. He delivered his people out of Egypt because of his covenant love and righteousness, as the psalmist declared: “But from everlasting to everlasting the Lord’s love is with those who fear him, and his righteousness with their children’s children—with those who keep his covenant and remember to obey his precepts” (Ps. 103:17–18). He delivered them out of their subsequent exile, declaring them righteous because their repentant hearts trusted in his faithfulness and sought to obey his covenant. Yahweh said, “If I have not made my covenant with day and night and established the laws of heaven and earth, then I will reject the descendants of Jacob and David my servant and will not choose one of his sons to rule over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. For I will restore their fortunes and have compassion on them” (Jer. 33:25–26).
God’s people, however, were expected to reciprocate and trust his faithfulness (1Chron. 16:15–16). When God met with Moses on Mount Sinai, he instructed Moses to tell the Israelites to obey the commands fully and to keep the covenant. It was only then that they would be a treasured possession, a holy nation (Exod. 19:5–6). The Israelites were expected to follow in obedience and thus reciprocate God’s faithfulness. The people of Israel often failed, but David and other godly people chose to be faithful to God and walk in his truth (Ps. 119:30; Heb. 11:4–38).
Faith counted as righteousness. Whereas faith is used throughout the OT in reference to God’s faithfulness and loyalty, it is used in Hab. 2:4 as pertaining to the faith of the righteous: “But the righteous will live by his faith” (NASB). In Rom. 1:17 Paul specifies, “For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: ‘The righteous will live by faith.’ ” He notes that God’s righteousness, even as revealed within OT promises, is by faith (“faith to faith,” or “faith, through and through”). By the parameters “from faith to faith,” Paul intends to exclude works of righteousness, a theme that he carries consistently in the first four chapters of Romans. Justification, for Habakkuk’s hearers, meant faithfulness, a single-minded focus on Yahweh to meet life’s essential needs. For Paul, salvation by way of justification meant that reliance upon Christ alone was foundational. In Pauline theology, faith is a thread connecting the old covenant with the new covenant.
New Testament
Faith is a central theological concept in the NT. In relational terms, faith is foremost personalized as the locus of trust and belief in the person of Jesus Christ.
In the Gospels, Jesus is spoken of not as the subject of faith (as believing in God), but as the object of faith. In the Synoptic Gospels, faith is seen most often in connection with the ministry of Jesus. Miracles, in particular healings, are presented as taking place in response to the faith of the one in need of healing or the requester. In the Gospel of John, faith (belief) is presented as something that God requires of his people (6:28–29).
In the book of Acts, “faith/belief” is used to refer to Jews and Gentiles converting to following the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and becoming part of the Christian community. The book correlates faith in Christ closely with repentance (Acts 11:21; 19:18; 20:21; 26:18).
Paul relates faith to righteousness and justification (Rom. 3:22; 5:11; Gal. 3:6). In Ephesians faith is shown as instrumental in salvation: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” (Eph. 2:8).
In Hebrews, faith is described as “being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (11:1). Faith thus is viewed as something that can be accomplished in the life of the believer—a calling of God not yet tangible or seen. To possess faith is to be loyal to God and to the gospel of Jesus Christ despite all obstacles. In the letter of James, genuine works naturally accompany genuine faith. Works, however, are expressed in doing the will of God. The will of God means, for example, caring for the poor (James 2:15–16).
In 1Peter, Christ is depicted as the broker of faith in God (1Pet. 1:21), whereas in 2Peter and Jude faith is presented as received from God (2Pet. 1:1). In the letters of John “to believe” is used as a litmus test for those who possess eternal life: “You who believe in the name of the Son of God, ... you have eternal life” (1John 5:13).
Faith is rarely addressed in the book of Revelation. Rather, faithfulness is the objective. Christ is described as the faithful and true witness (Rev. 1:5; 3:14), the perfect example for believers. One of the believers in Asia Minor, Antipas, is identified as Christ’s witness and faithful one (2:13). Those believers who, like Antipas, are faithful unto death, are called “overcomers” (2:10, 26). The faithless are thrown into the lake of fire, which represents the second death (21:8).
Faith and salvation. The role of faith in salvation is often hotly debated. Views are polarized between Christ as the object of faith and as the subject of faith. These views are designated as an objective genitive (faith in Christ), also known as an anthropological view, and a subjective genitive (the faithfulness of Christ), also known as a christological view. Thus, for example, Rom. 3:22 can be translated as “This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe” (cf. NRSV) or as “This righteousness from God comes through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe” (cf. NET). In the latter translation the faithfulness of Christ is seen as the agent of salvation.
In Eph. 2:8 the phrase “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith,” points to faith as instrumental in salvation. However, the source of that faith is not made clear. Does God provide the faith required to be saved, and thus the event is out of the hands of humanity? Or does salvation require a response from human beings in the form of faith—that is, trust?
In the Letter to the Romans, Paul indicates a correlation between grace and faith (Rom. 4:16; 5:1–2), and he shows that Abraham’s faith, his belief and unwavering hope in God’s faithfulness, was credited to him as righteousness (4:18–22). In the new covenant this righteousness likewise is credited to those who believe in God (4:23–24).
Faith and works. In Eph. 2:8–10 works are described as an outflow of the faith of believers: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.”
Faith and works are also related in the letter of James, where works appear to be a prerequisite of faith, for faith without works is dead (2:26). While at first sight this might appear to contradict a Pauline understanding of faith and works (Rom. 3:19–5:1; Gal. 2:15–3:24), James and Paul use the word “works” differently. Paul uses it in terms of “obedience to the law,” something obsolete as a requirement in the new covenant. James, however, writes with regard to works of charity, not works of obedience to Jewish ritualistic law. Authentic faith, then, shows the evidence of good works—charity, the fruit of the Spirit.
Faith and the Church
Whereas baptism was a public initiation rite into the first-century Christian community, it was faith in Christ Jesus that was understood as establishing one’s membership in the family of God (Gal. 3:26). This membership was available to both Jews and Gentiles. Faith, the shared belief system in and confession of Jesus’ salvific work, became the common denominator in the Christian community. In Ephesians, faith is identified as one of the unifying elements of the church (Eph. 4:5). The prayer of faith heals the sick person in the church, another unifying element of applying faith (James 5:13–15).
Faith as a spiritual gift. According to the apostle Paul, the gift of faith is closely related to the life and functioning of the church (1Cor. 12:9). Mentioned among other gifts, or charismata (12:4), this aspect of faith is that benefit of salvation with which certain members of the church are graced and is used for the common good (12:7). This faith, then, is understood as edifying the Christian community at large rather than just the individual believer.
Faith and the Christian life. Christians are described as living by faith (2Cor. 5:7). Not only does faith lead people to Christ, but also Christ subsequently dwells in believers’ hearts through faith (Eph. 3:17). This Christian faith is subject to testing (James 1:2).
Faith is presented by Paul as present at different levels of growth among believers. Some Christians are weak in faith (Rom. 14:1), whereas others are strong in faith (15:1). Faith can differ in its strength of conviction (4:20–22; 14:5). It is presented as something that can grow (2Cor. 10:15).
Faith is grouped among gifts and virtues. Lifted out together with hope and love, faith is mentioned among gifts that edify believers in the church (1Cor. 13:13). Likewise, faith is mentioned as a Christian virtue among the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).
The book of Exodus (the second book of the OT and of thePentateuch) continues the story begun in Gen. 12 of the election ofAbraham as God’s choice for the beginning of a new people.Abraham’s great-grandson Joseph was taken to Egypt as a slavebut rose to power there. Eventually, his father, Jacob, along withhis brothers and their families, made the trek to Egypt and settledthere. Both Jacob and Joseph died in Egypt, and it is here that thebook of Exodus picks up. In Egypt the Israelites at first found asafe haven, only to be enslaved later by a “new king”(Exod. 1:8). The book of Exodus tells the story of the Israelites’struggles in Egypt, their deliverance through Moses (perhaps thecentral human figure in the OT), their trek to Mount Sinai, and theircontinued movement to Canaan, the promised land.
Authorship,Date, and Historical Issues
Authorshipand date.The authorship of Exodus must be considered together with the largerissue of the authorship of the Pentateuch (see Pentateuch). This isone of the more central issues in the history of modern OTscholarship. Generally, Moses was considered the sole or essentialauthor throughout much of the history of Jewish and Christianinterpretation. This is not to say that careful readers of thePentateuch did not raise thoughtful questions concerning passagesthat were problematic for Mosaic authorship. For example, thefifth-century translator Jerome raised the question of whether Mosescould have recorded the story of his own death (Deut. 34). Seriousquestions concerning Mosaic authorship, however, did not become thedominant trend among scholars until the seventeenth century. Thepresence of numerous post-Mosaic elements as well as repetition insome key stories (e.g., the two creation stories in Gen. 1–2and the repetition in the flood narrative in Gen. 6–9)suggested that the authorship question might be more complicated thantraditionally understood. Some of these earlier discussions were notnecessarily hostile to divine inspiration or to the notion of “basic”or “essential” Mosaic authorship. Nevertheless, thescholarly debates were synthesized in the latter half of thenineteenth century by Julius Wellhausen and his well-knownDocumentary Hypothesis. His theory presented considerable challengesto traditional views of pentateuchal authorship, and the DocumentaryHypothesis soon became widely accepted throughout the scholarlyworld.
Wellhausen’sviews have undergone continual revision and refinement, as well asessential rejection. In contemporary academic dialogue, it is fair tosay that precisely who wrote the Pentateuch that we have and when itwas finalized remain open questions. A commonly accepted position,also among evangelicals, is that the Pentateuch we have today (i.e.,its final form) is not the work of someone living in the middle ofthe second millennium BC (the traditional date for the life ofMoses). The question is not of Moses’ genius and specialpreparation for the task before him, or of his having received thelaw on Mount Sinai and having recorded certain events; rather, thequestion specifically concerns the historical period in which thePentateuch as we know it came to be. And with respect to thisspecific question, contemporary biblical scholars commonly attributethe final form of the Pentateuch to later scribes (in the exilic andpostexilic eras), using older material, both written and oral, atleast some of it going back to Moses himself. Hence, terms such as“essential Mosaic authorship,” although not preciselydefined, have become common designations. References to thePentateuch as the “Law of Moses” or similar phrases donot function as authorial statements in the modern sense of the word(i.e., refer to the one sitting down and doing the writing), butrather reflect the close association between the text and the eventsthat lie behind it. We are perhaps not unwise to allow the questionof the human authorship of the Pentateuch to remain open while alsoconfessing that God is free to bring his word into existence in anyway he sees fit.
Historicity.One reason why Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch has been such afocal point, however, concerns the question of the historicity ofExodus and of the Pentateuch in general. If Moses is not the authorin the usual sense of the word, and if the Pentateuch as we know itwas written by hands much removed from the events themselves, how canwe be assured of its historical reliability? This is a fair question,although it assumes that eyewitnesses (or near eyewitnesses) wouldbetter guarantee historical accuracy than those more removed from theevents. But one could just as easily argue that having somehistorical distance could make one more perceptive about thesignificance of past events. More important, however, such a viewcould appear to be limiting God’s ability to allow thePentateuch to develop through a historical process over a certainlength of time. Since God is the ultimate author, non-Mosaicauthorship does not imply an inability to produce a historicallyreliable text.
Withrespect to Exodus specifically, more serious questions concerninghistoricity have come from archaeological evidence—or better,lack of evidence. First, there are two reigning possibilities for thedate of the exodus. The traditional date is around 1446/1447 BC andis based essentially on a literal reading of 1Kings 6:1, whichputs the exodus 480 years before the fourth year of Solomon’sreign, around 966/967 BC. The alternate date is around 1270/1260 BCand is based on a symbolic reading of 1Kings 6:1 and indirectarchaeological evidence concerning “Pithom and Rameses”(Exod. 1:11) and some conquest sites. Concerning the latter, there isevidence for the destruction of some Canaanite towns, beginningaround 1230–1220 BC, which, according to the biblical record,were destroyed right after Israel’s entrance into Canaan.Hence, if the evidence for the destruction of these towns points toabout 1230–1220 BC, a rough date of 1270/1260 BC for the exodusaccounts for the intervening forty years of wilderness wandering.
However,biblical archaeologists have persistently maintained that there is nopositive archaeological evidence for the existence of Israeliteslaves in Egypt during the time when the exodus would have takenplace. This absence of evidence has been understood in very differentways by people of different camps. For some, the absence of any sortof Israelite material remains in Egypt, not to mention the lack ofany written Egyptian record of Israelite presence, is a fairly clearindication that such events never took place; modern scholarship isreplete with theories to account for the biblical record, fromcomplete fabrication to later legendizing of sparse, ancient records.Others consider the absence of written evidence to indicate Egyptianembarrassment at having been bested by a group of slaves (why wouldthey want to keep a record of that?). The absence of evidence ofspecifically Israelite material culture in Egypt is attributed eitherto Israelite assimilation into Egyptian culture or to similaritieswith other Semitic peoples in Egypt during the second millenniumBC.
Althoughthe question of the historicity of the exodus is very much an opensubject, recent work, particularly by evangelical scholars, has begunmounting arguments for the presence of Semitic peoples insecond-millennium Egypt and therefore for the historical plausibilityof Israelite presence, enslavement, and release from Egyptiancaptivity. From a scholarly point of view, this issue will not besettled in the near future, and much of the debate includes questionsof a more philosophical nature, such as “What does it mean to‘record’ history?” “What did it mean torecord history in the ancient world as opposed to our modern world?”“What type of historical account should we expect from ancientIsraelites?” These and other similar questions broaden thediscussion considerably and ensure that it will be ongoing.
Outline
Inits simplest outline, Exodus may be roughly divided into two parts,which highlight the Israelites’ departure from Egypt and theirsojourn at the foot of Mount Sinai:
I.Departure from Egypt (1–15)
II.Journey to and Arrival at Mount Sinai (16–40)
Asubdivision of sectionII can easily be justified, since twobasic events at Mount Sinai are recounted in chapters 16–40,the giving of the law and the building of the tabernacle:
I.Departure from Egypt (1–15)
II.Mount Sinai: Law (16–24)
III.Mount Sinai: Tabernacle (25–40)
‘
Thisthree-point outline gives the broad contours of Exodus, but a bitmore detail will perhaps provide a more useful presentation of thebook’s contents:
I.Departure from Egypt (1–15)
A.Prelude and call of Moses (1–6)
B.Plagues (7–12)
C.Departure (13–15)
II.Mount Sinai: Law (16–24)
A.Journey to Sinai (16–18)
B.Ten Commandments (19–20)
C.The Book of the Covenant (21–24)
III.Mount Sinai: Tabernacle (25–40)
A.Instructions for the tabernacle (25–31)
B.Rebellion and forgiveness (32–34)
C.Building the tabernacle (35–40)
Whatis immediately striking, even through such a sparse outline, is howmuch space is devoted to the events on Mount Sinai. Exodus is muchmore than a record of historical events, as one might find in amodern textbook of American history. It is, rather, a profoundtheological statement, both in its own right as well as part of thePentateuch as a whole, whose focus is not simply on the Israelites’release from Egypt but also on their arrival at Mount Sinai. Thestructure of the book, in other words, leads us to understandsomething of the book’s theology.
Theology
Creation.Already in the first chapter we see connections to Genesis, whichtell us that we cannot read Exodus in isolation. For example, Exod.1:1 closely parallels Gen. 46:8. The latter speaks of the Israelitesgoing down into Egypt, and the former picks up on this theme, thusreminding us that Israel’s presence in Egypt was not anaccident and that Exodus is a continuation of the story begun inGenesis. Likewise, the use of creation language in Exod. 1:7 (theIsraelites were fruitful, multiplying, becoming numerous, filling theearth; compare to Gen. 1:21, 28; 8:17; 9:1) signals that Israel’simpending drama is somehow connected to creation. That point is madeclearer in the chapters that follow. Perhaps most central is thecrossing of the Red Sea. As in Gen. 1:9, where the dry land appearswhere once there was water, here the dry land (Exod. 14:21) appearsto make a path through the sea.
Thereis, in fact, a fair amount of Exodus that plays on this theologicaltheme of creation and the reversal of creation. In ancient NearEastern conceptions of creation, water represented chaos. The gods’role was to tame the chaos so that the earth could be inhabited.Separating the land from the primordial sea was an important part ofthat, and this is reflected in the biblical account in Gen. 1. Theflood in Gen. 6–9 is a reversal of that creative act, where Godallows the waters of chaos to come crashing down on his creation,thus making it uninhabitable again. Exodus continues this theme, buthere creation is called upon to aid the Israelites in their escape,whereas it is used against the Egyptians. The ten plagues, forexample, are declarations that Israel’s God controls thecosmos, whereas Egypt’s gods stand by helplessly. The plague ofdarkness in particular is a graphic reversal of what God had done inGenesis, the creation of light and the separation of light fromdarkness. Israel’s deliverance from Egypt is, in other words,another act of creation: the same God who brought order to cosmicchaos in Gen. 1 is now unleashing the forces of creation to save hispeople and punish their enemies. And whereas Pharaoh’sEgyptians are able to reproduce the first sign and the first twoplagues, it is only Israel’s God who can end the plagues andrestore order to chaos.
Israelhas been delivered from Egypt for a purpose, and that purpose beginsto become clear in the chapters that follow their departure. Thenewly created people of Israel are not delivered from Egypt so thatthey can be “free” from bondage. The key struggle in theopening chapters of Exodus, indeed, the whole reason for the tenplagues, is to determine to whom Israel belongs, whether to Pharaohor to Yahweh, Israel’s God. The Hebrew word ’abad canmean both “serve” (in the sense of servitude) and“worship.” In a wonderful play on words, the questionbeing asked in the opening chapters is “Whom will Israel ’abad,Pharaoh or Yahweh?” But Yahweh claims his people, not so thatthey can be liberated to go where they please, but rather so thatthey are free to move from serving/worshiping Pharaoh toserving/worshiping Yahweh on Mount Sinai.
Thisis why so much of Exodus concerns the journey to Mount Sinai and whathappens there. Much of the “action” may end by chapter19, but the reason for the action is to get the Israelites to MountSinai so that they can begin their proper life of service to Yahwehand Yahweh alone. And this service involves two things: properbehavior (law) and proper worship (tabernacle). These are the maintopics of the remainder of the book of Exodus. And the fact that somuch text is dedicated to these two topics, which may be ofrelatively little interest to Christian readers, is an indication oftheir central importance to the theology of theOT.
Law.It is important to understand that the law was given to theIsraelites after they had been redeemed from Egypt, not before. Thelaw is a gift to those who have been saved. It is not something to befollowed in order to become saved. Israel is, as we read in Exod.4:22–23, God’s son. This is why Israel was delivered fromEgypt, and this is why Israel was given the gift of the law.
Thepurpose of the law, therefore, was not to prove to God that hispeople were somehow worthy of his covenant with them. The law wasgiven so that Israel would be molded into a new people, one whosehearts were wholly devoted to God and so could be the instrumentthrough which not only Israel but also the nations themselves wouldbe blessed (see Gen. 12:1–3). As Exod. 19:6 puts it, Israel isto become a “kingdom of priests”—that is, the “holynation” that would perform the mediatorial role of blessing thenations. The law, therefore, was not a burden but a delight, a giftfrom God to a redeemed people.
Also,the laws that God gives in Exodus are not necessarily new, as if noone had ever heard of these sorts of things before. Murder andadultery were considered to be wrong long before the Ten Commandmentswere given. Likewise, the laws of Exod. 21–23 (often referredto as the Book of the Covenant) are not new but rather reflect otherancient law codes much older than Israel’s (regardless of whenone dates the exodus). What makes these laws different, however, isthat these are the laws that Yahweh, the true God, gives to hispeople; these are the laws that reflect his character and, if theIsraelites follow them, will ensure that they reflect God’scharacter to one another and the surrounding nations. In other words,the law performs not so much an exclusionary role as a missionalrole. Or perhaps better, the Israelites are being trained to beseparate, and different, from surrounding peoples in order toproperly fulfill their holy, mediating, priestly function.
Tabernacle.The section on the tabernacle begins in chapter 25 and extends to theend of the book, chapter 40. In between is an important episode, therebellion involving the making of the golden calf. Just as the lawrepresents much more than “rules to live by,” thetabernacle is more than just a building for sacrificing animals. Theimportance of the tabernacle can be seen by focusing on some keyelements.
Chapters25–31 provide the list of instructions for the tabernacle. Forcenturies, rabbis and biblical scholars have noticed a pattern inthese chapters. Seven times the phrase is repeated “The Lordsaid to Moses,” and the seventh time is in 31:12 to introducethe topic of Sabbath observance. Just like the creation of the cosmosin Gen. 1, the tabernacle is a product of a six-stage creative act(“And the Lord said”) followed by rest. Some havesuggested that the tabernacle is a microcosm of creation: forexample, cherubim are worked into the curtains, so to look up is tolook at the heavens; the lampstand is a sort of tree of life, as inthe garden of Eden. To be in the tabernacle is to be in touch withcreation as it was meant to be, in the garden apart from the chaos oflife outside.
Chapters35–40 relay how the instructions are carried out. This sectionbegins with reference to the Sabbath (35:1–3), which is how thefirst section ends. In between, we find the episode of the goldencalf (chaps. 32–34), which is about false worship. TheIsraelites nearly succeed in undoing all that God had planned inbringing his people out of Egypt. Still, through Moses’intervention, God’s plan is not thwarted, and so chapter 35does not miss a beat, picking up where chapter 31 leaves off, withthe Sabbath. Some scholars see here a pattern of creation (chaps.25–31), fall (chaps. 32–34), and redemption (chaps.35–40).
Thetabernacle is an important theological entity in Exodus: it is heavenon earth. It is a truly holy space where God communes with his holy(law-keeping) people. This is the ultimate purpose of the exodus: tocreate a people who embody God’s character and who worship himin purity. Then God would be with his people wherever they go(40:36–38).
The book of Ezekiel is widely recognized as one of the mostidiosyncratic of the OT prophetic books. Some rabbis prohibitedanyone under the age of thirty from reading portions of the book(i.e., the visions of God’s glory in chapters 1 and 10 mightlead to dangerous speculations about the mystery of God).
Authorshipand Date
Upuntil the beginning of the twentieth century, most scholars viewedthe unparalleled extensive dating in the book (1:1–2; 8:1;20:1; 24:1; 26:1; 29:1, 17; 30:20; 31:1; 32:1, 17; 33:21; 40:1),along with the symmetry achieved by deliberate thematic repetition(i.e., the “watchman” passages in 3:16–21; 33:1–9;Ezekiel’s message of judgment/hope addressed to the mountainsof Israel respectively in chaps. 6; 36) as indisputable proof thatthe book was the product of a single author. Even during the firstone hundred years or so of historical-critical dominance in OTresearch, historical-critical investigations tended to confirm thetraditional views of the unity, authenticity, and date of the book ofEzekiel, although the opinions of the majority of scholars began toshift early in the twentieth century.
Formuch of the first half of the twentieth century, issues ofauthorship, dating, and provenance of the prophet’s ministrydominated critical research on the book of Ezekiel. The book’speculiarities lent themselves to various suggestions regarding theplace of Ezekiel’s ministry. If, as 1:1–3 records,Ezekiel was called to prophetic ministry among the exilic communityin Babylon, how does one explain Ezekiel’s apparent knowledgeof particular events in Jerusalem, such as the death of Pelatiah(11:13) and the various forms of idolatry taking place in and aroundthe temple complex in chapters 8–11? Furthermore, what is oneto make of Ezekiel’s words to those who remained behind inJerusalem (5:8–17; 11:5–12; 33:23–29)?
Manyof those who sought to defend a straightforward understanding of thebook’s own claims looked to mysticism or psychology to explainEzekiel’s visionary involvement in events occurring some sevenhundred miles away. Explanations for the apparent idiosyncrasies ofhis ministry—including extremely violent and graphic language,his extended period of “muteness,” various strikingsign-acts, and the extended length and emotional intensity of hisvisionary experiences—tended to bleed into the discussion ofhow to understand his visionary experience of being transported toremote locations. Earlier solutions ranged from noting thesimilarities between Ezekiel’s experiences and those of themystics to characterizing Ezekiel as having a “complexpersonality” and as one whose life was more attuned to therealities of the supernatural world.
Geographicalsolutions to account for Ezekiel’s apparent knowledge of eventsin Jerusalem include two suggestions. The first is that Ezekielministered only in Jerusalem. His preaching forms the core ofchapters 1–39, and a later exilic redactor updated thesechapters to address the concerns of an exilic audience and also addedchapters 40–48. The second suggestion is that Ezekielministered in Jerusalem from 593 BC until the fall of Jerusalem, atwhich time he was taken into captivity in Babylon, where he continuedhis ministry among the exiles. The appeal of a dual-ministry approachis that it accounts for the double geographical focus of Ezekielwithout resorting to ecstatic or supernatural flight from one city tothe other or positing extensive secondhand editing of the book.
Onthe other hand, there is evidence from other biblical materials thatecstatic or visionary experiences of this sort were part of theprophetic tradition. Many of Ezekiel’s apparent idiosyncrasiesactually resemble characteristics of the preclassical prophets.Viewing Ezekiel’s ministry as part of an accepted culturaltradition provides a more persuasive explanation for the text as itstands. For example, the evidence of continued contacts between theJerusalem and exilic communities (Jer. 29; Ezek. 33:21) suffices toexplain whatever knowledge Ezekiel possessed of events in Jerusalem.The manner of their presentation in his visions is dictated by thecultural standards and expectations of a prophet operating under theinfluence of the “hand of Yahweh” and by the rhetoricalgoals of his preaching.
Itis entirely plausible to suggest that the author of Ezekiel was anIsraelite who was a rough contemporary of the tragic eventssurrounding the dismantling of the Judahite monarchy by theNeo-Babylonian Empire.
HistoricalBackground
Thebook of Ezekiel itself yields pertinent information about Ezekiel’sworld, which, when supplemented with other biblical texts (2Kings,Jeremiah, Daniel, and Habakkuk), enables us to reconstruct a workingpicture of the social, historical, and theological milieu in whichEzekiel lived and ministered.
In701 BC the kingdom of Judah escaped annihilation by the Assyrians, ashad befallen the northern kingdom in 722 BC, due in large part to theministry of Isaiah and the faith of King Hezekiah (2Kings18:1–20:21; Isa. 36–37), albeit at a crippling financialexpense in the form of heavy tribute to Assyria. After Hezekiah’sdeath in 698 BC, his son Manasseh reversed his father’sreligious reforms, which meant disaster spiritually (2Kings21:1–18; 2Chron. 33:1–11) and survival politically.Judah continued to exist for most of the seventh century BC as avassal kingdom under Assyrian domination. The spiritual decline ofJudah was briefly challenged during the reign of Josiah, who ruled inthe years 640–609 BC. However, Jeremiah’s stronginvectives against empty religious formalism and socialirresponsibility during much of Josiah’s reign suggest thatJosiah’s attempts at religious reforms were only nominallysuccessful and did not penetrate to the populace at large.
WhileJosiah was seeking to institute his reforms, power in theinternational scene was shifting. After the death of Ashurbanipal,the last great Assyrian ruler, the Assyrian Empire began to wane. TheNeo-Babylonian Empire, founded by Nabopolassar (626 BC), dealtAssyria its final blow with the conquest of Nineveh (612 BC),followed by the destruction of Harran a few years later. This,coupled with the untimely death of Josiah in battle against theEgyptians at Megiddo (609 BC), spelled disaster for Judah (2Kings23:29–30; 2Chron. 35:20–24). Nebuchadnezzar assumedleadership of Babylon after the death of his father (605 BC). Laterthat same year, Nebuchadnezzar defeated Egyptian forces at Carchemishand also ordered the deportation of some of the educated young Jewishmen to Babylon (Dan. 1:1–4). This was followed by a seconddeportation in 597 BC, which included King Jehoiachin, Ezekiel, andabout ten thousand Jews (2Kings 24:14). Zedekiah was placed onthe Judean throne as a puppet king. His rebellion against Babylon(588 BC) led to Nebuchadnezzar’s one-and-a-half-year siege ofJerusalem before its final demise in 586BC.
Thepolitical crisis of 597–586 BC led to a crisis of faith. Thepromises of an eternal Davidic kingdom (2Sam. 7:7–16; Ps.89:3–4, 35–37) and Yahweh’s vow to set up his abodeforever in the temple at Jerusalem (Pss. 68:16; 132:13–14)seemed to be failing. At the beginning of Ezekiel’s ministry,the Davidic promise was already under a cloud: Jehoiachin, therightful heir of the line of David, had been taken in captivity toBabylon, and in his place sat the puppet king Zedekiah. In addition,the land of Canaan had played a significant role in shaping theIsraelites’ understanding of themselves as Yahweh’schosen people (Gen. 12:1–3; Deut. 4:37–38; 7:1–11).Because true worship of God was so closely aligned with theIsraelites’ inheritance of the land (Deut. 12), to be outsidethe land immediately raised grave concern about their status beforeGod (1Sam. 26:19). To be outside the promised land would leadin a few short years to a questioning of whether true worship waseven possible any longer (Ps. 137:4). Throughout this period, Ezekiel(and Jeremiah) consistently portrayed Nebuchadnezzar as an unwittingpagan king commissioned by Yahweh to execute the covenant curses onthe recalcitrant southern kingdom.
Farfrom recognizing these events as such, many Israelites in therebellion party, supported by rebellion prophets, asserted theirclaim to divine favor and denied the validity of propheticindictments. They supported their claims with appeals to themiraculous deliverance from the formidable Assyrian army (701 BC),selective use of Scripture’s focus on the inviolability ofJerusalem and the temple, the unconditional promises of an eternalDavidic kingdom (see above), and predictions by rebellion prophets ofa quick return for the exiles (Jer. 28; 29:15–32; Ezek.13).
FromEzekiel’s perspective, the people of Judah were making a liarout of Yahweh. Yahweh had always demanded their exclusive worship. Inlight of their recent history of idolatry, the only appropriateresponse was to execute judgment on them (Ezek. 20:4–44). Bydenying this, the only explanation left to the rebellion party forthe destruction of Jerusalem and exile was that a mighty and wickedkingdom that they intensely hated (Ps. 137:4) had bested Yahweh.
Fromthis historical survey one may distill the overall situation faced byEzekiel into a set of opinions probably shared by the majority ofEzekiel’s fellow exiles. First, there was a widespread beliefthat it was proper to worship other deities in addition to Yahweh.Also, it was generally believed that the people of Judah were in goodstanding with Yahweh and were objects of his favor, and that he wouldshortly bring them deliverance. These beliefs combined to eliminateserious consideration of the possibility that destruction of thekingdom and exile were Yahweh’s intention. Consequently, oncethe kingdom was destroyed and exile had become a reality, Yahweh’spower and/or character became suspect in the minds of many.Furthermore, the perceived link between the land and the presence andblessing of Yahweh cast the exilic experience in an extremelynegative light. For those gripped by these convictions, exile raisedthe specter of hopelessness. The sense of hopelessness wasintensified by its conjunction with the belief that destruction ofthe kingdom and exile were undeserved. There was no way to integratethe outcome of the Babylonian crisis with their previously heldbeliefs about Yahweh and his purposes for Israel.
LiteraryConsiderations
Structureand outline.There are several frameworks that can help the reader understand the“inner logic” of the book.
Tripartitestructure.In chapters 1–24 the theme of God’s impending judgment onthe nation of Israel for violation of the covenant laws isemphatically repeated in both word and sign-act. Chapters 25–32serve a Janus (double) function, connecting with chapters 1–24by continuing the theme of God’s judgment, now directed towardthe foreign nations. The pronouncements of coming judgment in thesechapters anticipate the last part of the book, with the message ofhope for Israel that dominates chapters 33–48. The emphasis ondivine judgment in the first half of the book is not a defactostatement that God is finished with Israel; rather, it is recognitionthat only by means of judgment (both of Israel and their neighbors)is future restoration and reconciliation possible. Many recognize afurther subdivision in the third section, with chapters 33–39focusing on the renewal of the nation and chapters 40–48dealing with Ezekiel’s temple vision.
Thisyields the following outline:
I.God’s Judgment on Israel (1–24)
II.God’s Judgment on the Foreign Nations (25–32)
III.Hope for Israel (33–48)
A.Renewal of the nation (33–39)
B.Ezekiel’s temple vision (40–48)
Visions.Visions open and close the book (chaps. 1–3; 40–48), withtwo additional visions in between: temple idolatry and theincremental departure of God’s glory as judgment is executed(chaps. 8–11), and the valley of dry bones (37:1–14).
Themovement of God’s glory.Ezekiel’s sustained concern for the temple as the place whereGod’s glory dwells provides a unifying structure to the book asEzekiel chronicles God’s glory coming to Babylon in his ominousinaugural vision (chaps. 1–3), the incremental departure ofGod’s glory from the temple and the city (chaps. 8–11),and the return of God’s glory in the vision of the new temple(chaps. 40–48).
Genre.The book of Ezekiel is considered by many to be a literarymasterpiece composed of various genres, including extended visionarynarrative (1–3; 8–11; 37:1–14; 40–48),allegory (16; 23), poetry (19; 26–28), parable (17; 24:3), andpopular sayings (8:12; 9:9; 11:3, 15; 12:22, 27; 18:2; 33:10, 17, 20,24, 30; 37:11). Other prophets quoted popular sayings (Isa. 40:27;Jer. 31:29; Amos 5:14; Hag. 1:2; Mal. 1:2, 6–7, 12–13),but the quotations are far more frequent in Ezekiel and are couchedin uniquely theocentric language. In each case it is God who informsEzekiel what the people are saying. Ezekiel uses popular sayings ofthe people to establish their hostility toward God and to vindicateGod by demonstrating his covenant faithfulness. The unparalleledfrequency of Ezekiel’s use of popular sayings in his oraclesagainst the Israelites and the patently theocentric garb in which hiscounterreplies are clothed serve to anchor both the judgment and thehope of restoration in God alone. Ezekiel’s quotations serve asa foil for a frontal attack on the entire religious enterprise of hiscontemporaries in Jerusalem and Babylon. By citing these popularsayings and refuting them, Ezekiel skillfully reveals both thenecessity and purpose of the exilic crisis. He turns the sayings ofthe people against them, exposing the depths of their opposition toGod and thus furthering the purpose of vindicating God.
TheologicalMessage
Thesovereignty of God.The book emphasizes God’s sovereignty over all as Ezekielchallenged the false theology of his fellow Jewish exiles, which heldthat Yahweh, bound by covenantal oath, could not destroy Jerusalem.The formulaic expression (with variations) “After X occurs,then you/they will know that I am the Lord/I have spoken”occurs over sixty-five times in the book to emphasize God’sintervention in human events, including the exile and restoration(e.g., 7:27; 13:23; 29:16), to uphold the covenant and establish hiskingdom.
Theholiness of God.Israel’s sins had obscured God’s holiness in the sight oftheir neighbors (20:9). God’s holiness required both punishmentof Israel’s sins and the continuation of his covenantalrelationship with his people. God’s purging judgment andrestoration would be a fulfillment of his covenantal obligations andwould display his holiness (20:40–44; 28:25; 36:16–32).
Hopein the midst of judgment.God’s covenantal faithfulness would include restoration afterjudgment (chaps. 33–39). The final temple vision (chaps. 40–48)gives a picture of the restoration using typological images andcultural idioms with which the people were familiar.
NewTestament Connections
Thereare approximately sixty-five quotations and allusions to the book ofEzekiel in the NT. Echoes of Ezekiel are prevalent in John’sGospel (John 10:1–30 [Ezek. 34]; John 15:1–8 [Ezek. 15])and the book of Revelation (Rev. 4:6–9 [Ezek. 1]; Rev. 20–22[Ezek. 40–48]).
The book of Genesis (“Origins”) is well namedbecause it provides the foundation for the rest of the Bible andspeaks of the beginnings of the world, humanity, sin, redemption, thepeople of God, covenant, marriage, Sabbath, work, and much more.Genesis is the first chapter of the Pentateuch, a five-part story ofthe origins of the nation of Israel. Genesis is the preamble to thataccount, leading up to the pivotal moment of the exodus and the movetoward the promised land.
Authorship
Asnoted above, Genesis is the opening to the Pentateuch as a whole, sothe question of the authorship of Genesis is connected to thequestion of the authorship of the Pentateuch as a whole. Genesis (andthe entire Pentateuch) is anonymous, though Moses is said to havewritten down certain traditions that were included in the Pentateuch(Exod. 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:22).
Latertradition speaks of the “law of Moses” (Josh. 1:7–8)or the “Book of Moses” (2Chron. 25:4; Ezra 6:18;Neh. 13:1), though it is not certain whether these refer to theentire Pentateuch or merely to portions of it that were associatedwith Moses. The NT writers, as well as Jesus himself, speak of thePentateuch in connection with Moses (e.g., Matt. 19:7; 22:24; Mark7:10; 12:26; John 1:17; 5:46; 7:23).
Thequestion of Moses’ role in writing the Pentateuch is morecomplicated, however. For instance, there are indications thatGenesis was updated well after the death of Moses. Traditionally,these passages are called “post-Mosaica,” because theycontain information that could be available only after the death ofMoses. For example, Deut. 34 speaks of Moses’ death and burial.Apparently so much time has elapsed since his death that the writercan say, “to this day no one knows where his grave is”(v. 6). The writer then states, “since then, no prophet hasrisen in Israel like Moses” (v. 10), which also presumes aconsiderable length of time has passed. Other examples include Gen.11:31, which refers to Abraham’s hometown as “Ur of theChaldeans.” Although Ur was a very ancient city, the Chaldeanswere an Aramaic-speaking tribe that only occupied Ur long after thetime of Moses. Similarly, in Gen. 14:14 a city by the name of “Dan”is mentioned, but we know from Judg. 18 that this city only receivedthis name during the period of the judges.
Despitethese considerations, some scholars are still comfortable ascribingsome “essential” authorship role to Moses. (For the mainalternative theory for the authorship and date of the writing ofGenesis, see Documentary Hypothesis; Pentateuch.)
Structureand Outline
Genesismay be outlined in more than one way. One method is to follow thetoledot formulas that serve as an organizing structure for the book.The phrase “these are the toledot of X” (where X is thepersonal name of the character whose sons are the subject of thenarrative that follows) is repeated ten times: 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1;11:10, 27; 25:12, 19; 36:1 (cf. 36:9); 37:2 (see also 10:32; 25:13).For instance, Gen. 11:27 begins, “These are the toledot ofTerah” (NIV: “This is the account of Terah’s familyline”), while the account that follows is the story of Terah’sson Abraham. Toledot is best translated as “family history”or “account.” Hence, one can take Genesis as having aprologue (1:1–2:3) followed by ten episodes.
Interms of content and style, the book falls into three main units asfollows:
I.The Primeval History (Gen. 1:1–11:26)
II.The Patriarchal Narrative (Gen. 11:27–36:43)
III.The Joseph Story (Gen. 37–50)
I.The primeval history (Gen. 1:1–11:26).The book opens with an account of creation given in two parts.Genesis 1:1–2:4a provides a creation account that describes thesix days in which God created the heavens and the earth, followed bya seventh day of rest. Genesis 2:4b–25 then provides a secondaccount of creation, this time with a focus on the creation of Adamand Eve. Genesis 3 then narrates the first sin of humanity, whichintroduces sin and death into the world. Genesis 4–11 providesfour additional stories (the murder of Abel by Cain, theintermarrying of the “sons of God” with the “daughtersof men,” the flood, and the tower of Babel). These stories showa creation gone wrong, God’s move to start over again with Noahand his family, and the persistence of sin thereafter. All of thisleads to the story of the patriarchs, where God’s plan to setthings right takes a decisive turn. These stories are connected bygenealogies that mark the march of time as well as providesignificant theological commentary.
II.The patriarchal narrative (Gen. 11:27–36:43).The middle section of the book of Genesis turns its attention to thepatriarchs, so called because they are the fathers of the nation ofIsrael. The style of the book changes at this point, so that ratherthan following the story of all the world and moving at a fast pace,the narrative slows down and focuses on God creating a people to obeyhim and to bring those blessings to the whole world (12:1–3).God now determines to restore the blessing lost at Eden by reachingthe world through the descendants of one individual, Abraham.
Abraham’sfather, Terah, took Abram (as Abraham was then known), Abram’swife Sarai (Sarah), and Terah’s grandson Lot and left Ur tosettle in Harran in northern Mesopotamia. No explanation is givenwhy. While they are settled in Harran, God commands Abraham to leaveUr in Mesopotamia and travel to Canaan. God promises that he willmake him a great nation (implying land and many descendants), andthat he will be blessed and will be a blessing to the nations (Gen.12:1–3). That blessing requires Abraham and Sarah to havechildren, and this sets up much of the drama of his story. OftenAbraham reacts in fear and not faith, but at the end of his story hehas a solid confidence in God’s ability to take care of him andbring all the promises to fulfillment (Gen. 22).
Isaac,not Ishmael (Abraham’s son through Sarah’s maidservantHagar; see Gen. 16), is the conduit of the promises to futuregenerations. Even so, Isaac is not a highly developed character inthe book of Genesis, although his near sacrifice in Gen. 22 iscertainly a matter of great interest. The episode in his life thatreceives the lengthiest attention is the courtship with Rebekah (Gen.24), and there the focus is primarily on her.
Theaccount of Isaac’s life gives way to an account of his sonJacob. Jacob is a complex character. The first episodes of his storyare about how he, the younger, inherits the blessing and becomes theconduit for the promise rather than his older brother, Esau. Jacobbecomes an example of how God uses the foolish things of the world toaccomplish his purposes. That the story of the patriarchs is apreamble to the story of the founding of Israel becomes obvious whenJacob’s name is changed to “Israel” after he fightswith God (Gen. 32:22–32) and his wives give birth to twelvesons, who give their names to the twelve tribes of Israel.
III.The Joseph story (Gen. 37–50).The third section of Genesis focuses on the twelve sons of Jacob, inparticular Joseph. A main theme seems to be God’s providentialpreservation of the family of the promise, in the context of adevastating famine. Joseph himself expresses the theme of thissection at the end of the narrative, after his father dies and hisbrothers now wonder whether he will seek revenge against them. Hereassures them by his statement that although they had meant theiractions to harm him, he knows that God has used these very actionsfor good, for the salvation of the family of God (Gen. 50:19–20).Yes, they had just wanted to get rid of him, but God has used theirjealousy to bring Joseph to Egypt. The wife of his owner had wantedto frame him for rape, but God has used this false accusation inorder to have him thrown into jail, where he meets two of Pharaoh’schief advisers. He had demonstrated to them his ability to interpretdreams, so when the chief cupbearer is restored to a position ofinfluence, he can advise Pharaoh himself to turn to Joseph tointerpret his disturbing dreams. These dreams have allowed Pharaoh,with Joseph’s help, to prepare for the famine. Joseph has risento great prominence in Egypt, so when the famine comes, he is in aposition to help his family, and the promise can continue to the nextgenerations.
Amongother secondary, yet important, themes of the Joseph narrative arethe rising prominence of Judah and the lessening significance ofReuben. Judah at first is pictured as self-serving (Gen. 38), but bythe end of the story he is willing to sacrifice himself for the goodof his father and family (Gen. 44:18–34). This story thusdemonstrates why the descendants of Judah have dominance over thedescendants of the firstborn, Reuben, in later Israelite history.Also, the Joseph story recounts how Israel came to Egypt. This setsup the events of the book of Exodus.
Styleand Genre
Style.Genesis is written in Hebrew prose of a high literary style. Wordsare carefully chosen not only to communicate the message of the bookbut also to attract the reader’s interest and attention.
Genre.Genesis is an account of the origins of the cosmos, humanity, and thepeople of God. Thus, it is proper to refer to the book as a work ofhistory. Of course, there is more than one type of history. Somehistories focus on wars, others on economics or politics. Moreover,Genesis is not history in the modern sense but follows ancientconventions, which do not call for scrupulous accuracy. The centralconcern of Genesis, as with the majority of biblical histories, isthe relationship between God and his people. So, it is appropriate toidentify Genesis as a theological history.
Somereaders misunderstand the nature of the historical information thatthe book provides. For example, Gen. 1–2 communicates to thereader that it is the true God, not a god such as the BabylonianMarduk or the Canaanite Baal, who created the cosmos. The way some ofthe stories are told provides a challenge to rival stories from otherancient religions. One example is how the Bible describes thecreation of Adam from the dust of the ground and the breath of God.This contrasts with the Mesopotamian creation account Enuma Elish, inwhich the god Marduk creates the first humans from the clay of theearth and the blood of a demon god. The biblical flood story also maybe compared to other ancient flood stories, especially the account ofthe flood found in the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh. Genesis clearlyinteracts with such mythological stories to communicate importanttruths about the primeval period.
Message
Therich and complex book of Genesis pre-sents a profound messageconcerning God and his relationship with human beings. This shortarticle cannot do justice to the book’s depth and importance,but it can point to what is perhaps its most important theme: God’sblessing.
Genesis1–2 teaches that God created Adam and Eve and blessed them.They had everything they needed in the garden of Eden. They enjoyed aperfectly harmonious relationship with God and with each other. Theywanted for nothing.
Genesis3 explains how this blessed existence was disrupted. By choosing torebel against God, Adam and Eve ruptured their relationship with Godand, in consequence, with each other as well. They were expelled fromthe garden of Eden.
Evenin the midst of his judgment, however, God began the work ofrestoring the blessing to his human creatures (Gen. 3:15). Thusbegins the relentless work of God to bring restoration to his people.
NewTestament Connections
Genesisis the foundation not just of the Pentateuch, and not just of the OT,but of the entire Bible. The story that begins with creation and fallis followed by the history of redemption, which continues into the NTand which understands Jesus Christ as the one whose death andresurrection serve to restore God’s blessing to his people. Thefull restoration of relationship awaits the consummation of historyand the new Jerusalem, which is described in language telling us thatheaven is a restoration (and more) of the conditions enjoyed by Adamand Eve in the garden of Eden (Rev. 21–22, esp. Rev. 22:2).
Ofthe many allusions to and quotations of Genesis found in the NT, onlya few representative examples may be described here.
Paulpoints to the Abrahamic promise of the seed in Gen. 12:1–3 andproclaims that Jesus is that seed (Gal. 3:15–16). This claim issurprising in light of the OT’s clear understanding that it wasthe multiple descendants of Abraham constituting Israel who fulfilledthis promise (Gen. 15:15). Paul would have known this, but herecognizes that Jesus is the ultimate descendant of Abraham, and thatanyone who belongs to Jesus, Jew or Gentile, is also a participant inthe Abrahamic promise (Gal. 3:29).
Asecond example comes from the way in which the author of Hebrewscites the Melchizedek tradition of Gen. 14:17–20. In Genesis,Melchizedek is a mysterious figure who is introduced as thepriest-king of Salem (Jerusalem), whom Abraham acknowledges as afellow worshiper of the true God. In order to make his argument thatJesus is the ultimate priest, the author of Hebrews connects Jesuswith Melchizedek rather than with Aaron and asserts the superiorityof Melchizedek because Abraham (and thus also Levi, Aaron’sancestor) paid respects to this man (Heb. 7:1–10).
Afinal example comes from the Joseph narrative. Earlier, we observedthat the narrative shows how God used the evil actions of people inorder to save many people. In this, the Joseph narrative anticipatesthe death of Christ, who was nailed to the cross by the hands ofwicked people, but God used this very action to accomplish a muchgreater salvation than he did through Joseph (see Acts 2:22–24).
Jeremiah is the second of the Major Prophets, after Isaiahand before Ezekiel, an order determined by the chronology of thebeginning of their prophetic work. Jeremiah and Ezekiel werebasically contemporaries, but the latter began his ministry afterJeremiah. The book of Jeremiah is the longest of the prophets (21,835words), compared to Ezekiel (18,730 words) and Isaiah (16,932 words).Readers ancient and modern are attracted to the book not only by itsstirring message but also because Jeremiah is the most transparent ofall the prophetic personalities, often referred to as the WeepingProphet.
HistoricalBackground
Authorshipand date.The superscription of the book announces that it contains “thewords of Jeremiah son of Hilkiah, one of the priests at Anathoth inthe territory of Benjamin” (1:1). His prophetic ministry isthen described as taking place between the thirteenth year of KingJosiah and the eleventh year of King Zedekiah, equivalent to 626–586BC, a period of great turbulence (see next section). Chapters 40–44narrate events in the period immediately after the fall of Jerusalem.
Onthe one hand, there is no good reason to question the existence ofthe historical Jeremiah or the attribution to him of the prophecythat bears his name. On the other hand, the text indicates that thebook was not written at one sitting but rather is the product of aprocess. Chapter 36 mentions that the prophet wrote down his sermonsin 605 BC, and when King Jehoiakim burned the scroll, the narratorrelates that Jeremiah again dictated them to Baruch, who wrote themall down, and Jeremiah added many more oracles (36:32). The bookdescribes a close relationship between Jeremiah and his associateBaruch. It is possible that the stories about Jeremiah were writtendown and added by this close friend.
AncientNear Eastern historical context.When Jeremiah started his prophetic work in 626 BC, the world wasundergoing major political change. Assyria had been the dominantsuperpower for the preceding centuries. It had incorporated thenorthern kingdom of Israel into its vast empire in 722 BC, and Judahhad been forced to pay tribute. In 626 BC, however, Babylon began itsrebellion against Assyria. Nabopolassar, a Chaldean chieftain, nowking of Babylon, threw off the yoke of Assyrian bondage, and overwhat was almost two decades he eradicated Assyria and inherited theempire.
In626 BC Josiah was king of Judah. His father, Amon, and hisgrandfather Manasseh had been evil kings, promoting false worship.But Josiah served Yahweh, and soon before Jeremiah began his work,the king began to purify the religious institutions of Judah(2Chron. 34:3b–7). Jeremiah’s early ministry thenoccurred in an environment that would find support from the royalcourt. In 609 BC, however, Josiah tried to block Necho of Egypt fromreinforcing the remnants of Assyria against Babylon and in theprocess lost his life. Although the Egyptians were unsuccessful inhelping Assyria survive, they were able to exercise control overJudah and placed a pro-Egyptian king, Jehoiakim, on the throne. Evenso, by 605 BC Egypt could not stop Babylon under their new king,Nebuchadnezzar, from demanding that Judah be their vassal (Dan.1:1–3). Jehoiakim revolted against Babylon in 597 BC. By thetime the avenging Babylonian army arrived, Jehoiakim was gone,replaced by his son Jehoiachin. The latter was promptly deported toBabylon and replaced by Zedekiah. The book of Jeremiah records thatboth Jehoiakim and Zedekiah were determined opponents of the prophet.In any case, Zedekiah too eventually rebelled against Babylon, andthis time Nebuchadnezzar not only captured and exiled many leadersbut also systematically destroyed the city. He then incorporatedJudah into his empire as a province and appointed a Judean governor,Gedaliah. Jeremiah 40–44 describes how Jewish insurgentsassassinated Gedaliah and killed off the Babylonian garrison troops.Many of the remaining Jewish people then fled to Egypt against God’swill as announced by Jeremiah, who was forced to go with them.
Theseevents provide the background to the prophetic oracles and theactions narrated in the book of Jeremiah. Some of Jeremiah’swords and actions are specifically dated to these events, whileothers are not dated.
Text
Jeremiahis one of the few books of the OT that present a significanttext-critical issue. The main Hebrew text (the MT) is clearlydifferent from the Greek text. The latter is about one-eighth shorterthan the former, lacking about 2,700 words. In addition, the order ofthe book is different. The oracles against the foreign nations arechapters 46–51 in the Hebrew but are found right after 25:13 inthe Greek. The DSS attest to early Hebrew manuscripts that reflectthe Greek tradition, and therefore we cannot attribute the differenceto translation error or intentional rearrangement. A better solutionis to remember that the book of Jeremiah as we know it in the Hebrewis the result of a long history of composition. The Greek text mayreflect an earlier shorter version. The longer Hebrew text thenrepresents the final authoritative edition of the book and is rightlyused for modern translations.
LiteraryTypes
Thebook as a whole is a compendium of prophetic oracles and storiesabout Jeremiah. The following distinct literary types are found inthe book.
Poeticalprophetic oracles of judgment and salvation.Chapters 2–25 are composed primarily of poetic oracles ofjudgment directed toward God’s people. They are God’swords to his people uttered by the prophet. Chapters 46–51 arealso judgment oracles, but these are directed toward foreign nationssuch as Egypt and Babylon. Although salvation oracles are found inthe first part of the book, chapters 30–31 form a strikingcollection of such oracles, the best known of which is theanticipation of the new covenant (31:31–34).
Poeticalconfessions/laments.Jeremiah’s confessions are in the form of laments in which hecomplains about the burdens brought on by his prophetic task. Theselaments have many similarities with laments in the psalms, includingelements such as an invocation, a declaration of innocence, aninvocation against enemies, and divine response. While the lamentshave a certain ritual form, there is no good reason to deny that theyauthentically represent the emotions of the prophet. Theconfessions/laments are found in 11:18–23; 12:1–6;15:15–21; 17:14–18; 18:19–23; 20:7–17.
Proseoracles.Jeremiah’s oracles come in the form of prose as well as poetry.Similarities have been drawn between these oracles (a good example is7:1–8:3) and the theology of the book of Deuteronomy. Some wantto use this similarity to deny a connection with the historicalJeremiah, but there is no good reason to deny that Jeremiah couldreflect the theology of this foundational book.
Prosebiographical material.A significant part of the prose material may be described asbiographical, in that it relates events in Jeremiah’s life(chaps. 26–29; 34–45). These descriptions often carry aprophetic oracle. It is likely that these biographical descriptionswere written by someone other than Jeremiah (Baruch?).
Propheticsign-acts.Perhaps a special category of biographical material is thedescription of events and acts of Jeremiah’s that carryprophetic significance. A good example is 13:1–11, whichnarrates Jeremiah’s trip to the Euphrates River to bury hisdirty underwear.
Outline
I.Introduction and Jeremiah’s Call (1:1–19)
IIThe First Half of Jeremiah’s Ministry (2:1–25:14)
A Sermons, oracles, and sign-acts (2:1–24:10)
B Summary (25:1–14)
III.The Second Half of Jeremiah’s Ministry: Judgment and the Fallof Jerusalem (25:15–51:64)
A.Judgment against the nations (25:15–38)
B.Stories about Jeremiah and reports of oracles (26:1–29:32)
C.The Book of Consolation: Salvation oracles (30:1–33:26)
D.Stories about Jeremiah and oracles of judgment (34:1–38:28)
E.Account of the exile (39:1–44:30)
F.Oracle to Baruch (45:1–5)
G.Oracles against foreign nations (46:1–51:64)
IV.Epilogue (52:1–34)
Structure
Thebook of Jeremiah does not have a clearly delineated structure. Inthis respect, Jeremiah is not unique among the prophets. Nonetheless,we may still make some general observations about the shape of thebook and its large sections, even though we cannot always account forwhy one oracle follows another. When they are given chronologicalindicators, they are not arranged sequentially.
Thereare reasons to think that chapter 25 plays a pivotal role in thebook, though it may be that this was more explicit in an earlier formof the book (when the oracles against the foreign nations followedimmediately after it; cf. the Greek version). Even so, 25:1–14summarizes the message of chapters 2–24, and then 25:15–38announces judgment against the nations. Chapter 1, then, is anintroduction to the book, with its account of the prophet’scommissioning, and chapter 52 is an epilogue describing the fall ofJerusalem.
Withinthese two large sections we can recognize blocks of material. Chapter1 introduces the prophet, recounts his call, and presents two undatedoracles that serve to introduce important themes of the book.
Chapters2–24 follow as a collection of sermons, poetic and proseoracles, and prophetic sign-acts that are undated. Indeed, it isoften difficult to tell when one oracle ends and another begins. Itis likely that these are the oracles that come from the first part ofthe prophet’s ministry, that is, his first scroll, described inchapter 36.
Afterchapter 25 summarizes the first part of the book and turns attentionto the judgment against the nations, a block of prose materialfollows consisting of stories about Jeremiah as well as reports oforacles (chaps. 26–29).
Chapters30–33 are a collection of salvation oracles, a break from theheavy barrage of judgment in the book up to this point.Traditionally, these chapters are known as the Book of Consolation.Chapters 30–31 are poetic oracles, while chapters 32–33are prose.
Chapters34–38 return to prose stories about Jeremiah and oracles ofjudgment. This section culminates with the first account of the fallof Jerusalem.
Thenext section, chapters 39–44, gives the distressing account ofthe exile and the continuing failures on the part of those who stayin the land with Jeremiah. They end up in Egypt because of their lackof confidence in God’s ability to take care of them. Chapter 45is an oracle directed toward Baruch, Jeremiah’s associate.
Thebook ends with a collection of oracles against foreign nations(chaps. 46–51), culminating with a lengthy prophetic statementdirected toward Babylon. The book concludes with a second account ofthe fall of Jerusalem.
TheologicalMessage
Jeremiahis a complex book with many themes. One of the central ideas,however, is covenant. The Bible often uses the idea of a covenant todescribe the relationship between God and his people. A covenant is adivinely initiated and defined agreement. God makes promises andcalls on his people to observe certain requirements. Research hasfound that the biblical covenants are close in form and concept toancient Near Eastern treaties between the kings of superpowers andthose of much less powerful nations (vassal treaties). The powerful,sovereign king announces the law to the vassal, and it is accompaniedby curses and blessings. If the vassal obeys, then the king gives areward, but if the vassal disobeys, then the king issues punishment.
Thereis a series of covenantal relationships between God and his people(Noah [Gen. 9]; Abraham [Gen. 12:1–3; 15; 17]; Moses [Exod.19–24]; David [2Sam. 7]), but most relevant for ourunderstanding of Jeremiah is the covenant with Moses as reaffirmed inDeuteronomy. The Mosaic covenant emphasizes law (see Deut. 5–26)and has an extensive section of curses and blessings (Deut. 27–28).
Jeremiahand many of the other prophets may be styled “lawyers of thecovenant.” God sends them to his people when they disobey thelaw. Their job is to warn the people to change their lives and livein conformity with God’s will or else the curses of thecovenant will come into effect.
Jeremiah’soracles focus on warning the people that they are covenant breakers,particularly in the matter of worshipping false gods (Jer. 10–11).The hope is that the people will repent and thus avoid the mostextreme punishment. But it is not only the judgment oracles that arerelated to the covenant; so too are the salvation oracles. In Jer.31:31–34 the prophet announces that God will replace the oldcovenant with a new one, which will be more internal, more intense,and more intimate.
NewTestament Connections
Jeremiahanticipates the founding of a new and better covenant, and the NTwitnesses tothe fulfillment of this expectation. As he passedthe cup to his disciples, Jesus said, “This cup is thenewcovenant in my blood, which is poured out for you” (Luke 22:20[cf. 1Cor. 11:24–25]). The cup, representing Christ’sdeath, functions as the sign of the new covenant. The point is thatthe new covenant is founded on the death and resurrection of Christ.
Thenew covenant replaces the old. This is the argument of the book ofHebrews, which twice cites the relevant passage in Jeremiah to makethe point (Heb. 8:8–12; 10:15–17; see also 2Cor.3). According to the author of Hebrews, the old covenant failed notbecause of a defect in God or his instrument but because of thepeople (Heb. 8:8). They consistently broke that covenant bydisobeying the law explicated in the covenant with Moses. As aresult, as Jeremiah himself announced, the people would be expelledfrom the land (reversing the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant),bringing to conclusion the monarchy, which is a provision of theDavidic covenant.
The book of Jonah is best known for its “large fish,”commonly and mistakenly called a “whale.” Jonah is thefifth book among the twelve Minor Prophets. The other eleven booksare collections of prophetic oracles, but Jonah is a story about aprophet. In this, it is more like the accounts of Elijah and Elishain the book of Kings than it is like a regular prophetic book. Jonahtells the story of a gracious God, a reluctant and resentful prophet(who represents God’s hard-hearted people Israel), andrepentant sinners.
HistoricalBackground
Thebook of Jonah does not name an author, and so we cannot be certain ofthe date when it was written. We can, however, date the maincharacter of the book, Jonah, to the reign of JeroboamII (r.786–746 BC) because of 2Kings 14:25, where this prophetanticipates the expansion of the northern kingdom.
Duringthis period, Assyria was relatively weak, allowing the northernkingdom to expand. Although we are not sure precisely which Assyrianking is featured in the book, we can be certain that the setting ofthe book precedes the rapid rise of the energeticTiglath-pileserIII, who began his reign in 744 BC.
LiteraryConsiderations
Jonahis not a typical prophetic book. It is an account of a prophet, not acollection of prophetic oracles. The debate over Jonah concernswhether it is a historical account or a parable.
Infavor of the former, 2 Kings 14:25 names Jonah as a prophet duringthe reign of JeroboamII. In addition, the style of the book ofJonah is not different from what we find in the so-called historicalbooks of the OT. A third argument appeals to Jesus’ referenceto Jonah and Nineveh in Matt. 12:39–40; Luke 11:29–30.
Somedoubt the historical nature of Jonah because of the extraordinary(they would say unbelievable) account of the prophet’sthree-day stay in the belly of the large fish. Others are alsoskeptical about the report of Nineveh’s repentance, which isnot recorded in Assyrian historical documents (cf. Jon. 3:6–9).
Inresponse to the first objection, it can be said that God can doanything, even sustain a person’s life in the belly of a fish.One need not appeal to fictional reports of modern-day whalers whosurvive such ordeals. God controls all his creatures, and if he sodesired, Jonah could have been swallowed and come out healthy. Inresponse to the second objection, we must admit that we know preciouslittle about Assyria in the first half of the eighth century BC. Whatwe do know is that central Assyrian authority was weak. Indeed, weshould entertain the possibility that the “king of Nineveh”(Jon. 3:6) was a strong local leader and not the king of a vastempire, therefore making it unsurprising that we have no other recordof the Ninevites’ repentance.
Evenso, besides the reference to Jonah and Nineveh, the world of the bookis presented in an intentionally vague way. For instance, theAssyrian king is not named. Further, the book is a literarytourdeforce. It is highly stylized. Indeed, the argumentmight be made that it is told in a way that would particularly appealto children. Note, for example, how everything is “big”—thecity of Nineveh, the wind and storm, the fish. The message of thestory is a moral, theological lesson and is not tied to a specificredemptive history.
Outline
I.Act I: Jonah Flees from Nineveh (1:1–2:10)
A.Jonah aboard the ship (1:1–16)
B.Jonah aboard the fish (1:17–2:10)
II.Act II: Jonah Goes to Nineveh (3:1–4:11)
A.Jonah preaches to Nineveh (3:1–10)
B.Jonah preaches to God (4:1–11)
Structure
Thebook may be divided into two major acts with two scenes each. Godcommissions the prophet twice, once in 1:1–2 and a second timein 3:1–2. These passages introduce the two acts. In the firstact, the first scene is aboard the ship, and the second is in thebelly of the big fish. The second act is also divided into twoepisodes. In the first, Jonah preaches and Nineveh repents; in thesecond, the setting is now east of Nineveh, where Jonah is in adispute with God over judgment and salvation.
TheologicalMessage
Oneof the interesting features of Jonah is the way it contrasts Gentilesand Jonah, who apparently functions as a representation of Israel.While Jonah resists the will of God, the Gentiles appear spirituallysensitive. While Jonah sleeps during the divinely sent storm, thepagan sailors anxiously determine the divine purpose behind theirtrouble. While Jonah refuses and then reluctantly announces thedestruction of Nineveh, the king of Nineveh leads his people (andeven the animals!) in a ritual of repentance.
Inthis way, the book rebukes Jonah (and Israel) for its lack ofspiritual sensitivity and concern. The book also illustrates God’sgrace toward the nations. After all, Israel’s election was tobe a conduit of blessing to the nations (Gen. 12:1–3; cf. Isa.42:6; 49:6). Although Assyria was a horrible oppressor, God’sgrace is shown to such people.
Ina word, the book of Jonah teaches that God is not just the God ofIsrael. He is the God of Israel, the God of Nineveh, and the God ofthe whole universe.
NewTestament Connections
Inits concern for Gentiles, the book of Jonah anticipates the NTmessage that God is the God of all people and not just Israel (John1:6–14). Jesus compared his ministry to that of Jonah (Matt.12:38–45; Luke 11:24–32). When asked for a miraculoussign, he said that he would be three days and three nights in theearth, just as Jonah spent three days in the belly of the big fish.The three days and nights refer to his crucifixion and hisresurrection. He is “greater than Jonah” (Matt. 12:41).Jonah was a reluctant prophet who involuntarily spent the time in thefish’s belly, while Jesus voluntarily gave up his life to savemany people.
Deuteronomy ends with the death of Moses and the people ofIsrael still on the plains of Moab, to the east of the promised land.Although that book completes the Torah, it anticipates the future,and that future begins with the book of Joshua. Joshua tells thestory of the conquest and settlement of the land.
Dateand Author
Joshuais an anonymous book. The Talmud represents early tradition when itsays that Joshua wrote this book, but this is improbable, at leastregarding the final form of the book. The phrase “to this day,”repeated in the book (e.g., 4:9; 5:9; 6:25), indicates that timeseparates the events and the book’s final composition. Somescholars detect a final editing of the material during the period ofJudah’s exile in Babylon (586–539 BC), where the peopleof God are evaluated according to the laws of Deuteronomy. However,since the book is silent about its authorship, much of this isguesswork.
Genre
Thebook is a theological history of the conquest and settlement. Itintends to tell later generations how God brought Israel intopossession of the land by his powerful hand in fulfillment of theAbrahamic covenant (cf. Gen. 12:1–3). Joshua celebrates thisvictory, so the selection of stories and the book’s emphasisinvolve the victories and achievements of the period. Although Joshuadoes not hide the fact that Israel did not conquer the entire land atthis time, it will be left to the first chapters of Judges tounderline the fact that many Canaanites remained in the land evenafter Joshua’s death.
Outlineand Message
Thebook of Joshua can be divided into two parts:
I.God, the Divine Warrior, Conquers the Land (1:1–12:24)
A.Preparations for war (1:1–5:15)
B.The battle of Jericho (6:1–27)
C.The battle of Ai (7:1–8:29)
D.Covenant renewal at Shechem (8:30–35)
E.The Gibeonite deception (9:1–27)
F.The defeat of the southern coalition (10:1–43)
G.The defeat of the northern coalition (11:1–23)
H.Summary description of the conquest (12:1–24)
II.God Distributes the Land among the Tribes of Israel (13:1–24:33)
A.The distribution of land (13:1–21:45)
B.The Transjordan tribes return home (22:1–34)
C.Joshua’s final words and covenant renewal (23:1–24:33)
Inthe Torah, God revealed himself as a warrior who rescues his peoplefrom their enemies (Exod. 15:3). He even gave them laws governingfuture wars (Deut. 7; 20). Today, these wars are often referred to as“holy wars” or “Yahweh wars,” indicating thatIsrael understood that its victories were due not to its own strengthand wisdom, but rather to God’s presence with it. CertainlyIsrael participated in these battles, but it followed God’sinstructions. When Israel obeyed, it won (Jericho), but when itdisobeyed, it lost (Ai).
Thebook of Joshua narrates that at God’s command, the Israelites,under Joshua’s leadership, entered the promised land at itsmidpoint from the east, just north of the Dead Sea. After undergoinga period of spiritual preparation (1:1–5:12), they defeated thepowerful city of Jericho and, after a devastating setback, the smalltown of Ai. After falling for a ruse, they entered into a treatyrelationship with the Gibeonites. This completed their conquest ofthe middle territory, thus cutting the Canaanite city-states in half.
Thenthe kings of the independent city-states of the southern portion ofthe land gathered together and attacked the Gibeonites, now in treatyrelationship with Israel. Joshua responded by attacking the armies ofthe south now outside their walled cities. God the warrior gave themthe victory, making his presence known through lethal hailstones andby stopping the sun and the moon in their tracks. Consequently, thekings of the north assembled together, and again God fought forIsrael to complete the conquest of the land. Throughout the narrativeof the conquest, the emphasis continues to be on God the warrior, theone true power behind Israel’s military victories.
Fewmodern readers venture into the second part of the book (chaps.13–24), filled as it is with lists of cities and descriptionsof tribal boundaries. Nonetheless, this material has greattheological significance. As Israel took possession of the land, theancient promises to Abraham were beginning to come to realization.God’s promises were being fulfilled. Through the casting oflots, the individual tribes received their specific inheritance. Astheir boundaries were rehearsed and the cities in the territorieslovingly named, the Abrahamic promises were becoming concrete. We areto imagine great joy and celebration among those who saw thefulfillment of the promises.
Thebook of Joshua ends with yet another great covenant reaffirmation(chap. 24). With the impending death of their great leader Joshua insight, the tribes renewed their commitment to follow Yahweh into thenew era.
ContinuingSignificance
Inmany ways, the book of Joshua appears foreign, even embarrassing tothe modern Christian. The description of God as a warrior and Israelas engaging in holy war against the Canaanites seems too close todivinely sanctioned genocide to be compared to the gospel of peace.
Butthe NT understands that God’s people are still at war, indeed amuch more dangerous war. It is a war against the spiritual powers andauthority, against evil itself. As such, God has given his peoplemore-powerful weapons, spiritual weapons such as faith, love, and theword of God (Eph. 6:10–20). Christians can enter this battlebecause Jesus Christ has already assured the final outcome by hisvictory, described in military terms in Col. 2:13–15, on thecross. Indeed, Christians are told to look to the future for thefulfillment of this victory. Revelation and other NT apocalypticpassages describe the end of time as a great final battle, with JesusChrist leading the army against all spiritual and human enemies (Rev.19:11–21).
Thebook of Joshua is harsh, but it is a reminder that the God of theBible will not let evil win the day. God will judge those who oppressand mistreat others.
The final book of the Bible is known by its opening line:“The revelation of Jesus Christ” (1:1 ESV, NRSV, KJV).This phrase could indicate a “revelation about Jesus Christ”(the main character), or a “revelation from Jesus Christ”(the primary giver of the message to John; so NIV), or, as manybelieve, some of both.
Inpowerful language and vivid imagery, Revelation presents theconclusion to God’s grand story of salvation, in which hedefeats evil, reverses the curse of sin, restores creation, and livesforever among his people. Although the details are often difficult tounderstand, the main idea of Revelation is clear: God is in controland will successfully accomplish his purposes. In the end, God wins.As a transformative vision, Revelation empowers its readers/listenersto persevere faithfully in a fallen world until their Lord returns.
Genreand Historical Context
Genre.Revelation is best understood in light of its literary genre and itshistorical context. The literary genre of Revelation—letter,prophecy, and apocalyptic literature—explains much of thestrangeness of the book. The entire book is a single letter to sevenchurches in Asia Minor (note the letter greeting in 1:4–5 andthe benediction in 22:21). John is commanded to write what he seesand send it to the seven churches (1:11). A letter to seven churchesis in reality a letter to the whole church, since the number “seven”symbolizes wholeness or completeness in Revelation. NT letters wereintended to be read aloud to the gathering of Christians, and thesame is true of Revelation. The book opens with a blessing on the onewho reads the letter aloud and on those who listen (1:3) and closeswith a stern warning to anyone (reader or listener) who changes thebook (22:18–19). Like other NT letters, Revelation alsoaddresses a specific situation. For this reason, any approach toRevelation that ignores the situation faced by the seven churcheswill fail to grasp its central message. Many say that the message ofRevelation extends beyond the first century, but it certainly doesnot ignore its first audience.
Revelationis also a letter that is prophetic. In both the opening (1:3) and theclosing (22:7, 10, 18–19), the book is described as a“prophecy” (cf. 19:10). In 22:9 the angel identifies Johnas a prophet: “I am a fellow servant with you and with yourfellow prophets.” As a prophetic book in line with OT propheticbooks, Revelation contains both prediction about the future andproclamation about God’s will for the present, with emphasisfalling on the latter.
Finally,Revelation is a prophetic letter that is apocalyptic. In the openingphrase, “the revelation of Jesus Christ,” the term“revelation” is a translation of the Greek termapokalypsis,meaning “to unveil” or “to reveal” what hasbeen hidden. Most believe that apocalyptic literature grew out ofHebrew prophecy. The OT books of Daniel and Zechariah are oftenassociated with apocalyptic literature, and there were many Jewishapocalypses written during the time between the Testaments (e.g.,1–2Enoch, 2–3Baruch, 4Ezra).
Inapocalyptic literature there is a revelation from God to somewell-known human figure through a heavenly intermediary. God promisesto intervene in human history, to defeat evil, and to establish hisrightful rule. Such is the case with Revelation, which assumes asituation where God’s people are threatened by hostile powers.God is portrayed as sovereign, and he promises to intervene soon todestroy evil. Through bizarre visions and imagery common toapocalyptic literature, those who hear Revelation are transported toanother world for much-needed heavenly perspective. As the hearersmove outside their hopeless circ*mstances and see God winning the waragainst evil, their perspective is reshaped, and they are empoweredto persevere faithfully. They are simultaneously called to live holyand blameless lives as they worship the one, true God.
Historicalcontext.Along with understanding the literary genre of Revelation, one mustgrasp its historical context in order to read the book responsibly.Revelation itself describes a historical situation where someChristians are suffering for their faith with the real possibilitythat the suffering could become more intense and widespread. Johnhimself has been exiled to the island of Patmos because of hiswitness for Jesus (1:9). Antipas, a Christian in Pergamum, has beenput to death for his faith (2:13). In his message to the church atSmyrna, Jesus indicates that they should not be surprised by whatthey are about to suffer (2:10). The book also includes severalreferences to pagan powers shedding the blood of God’s people(6:10; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2). Revelation addresses a situation inwhich pagan political power has formed a partnership with falsereligion. Those who claim to follow Christ are facing mountingpressure to conform to this ungodly partnership at the expense ofloyalty to Christ.
Thetwo primary possibilities for the date of Revelation are a timeshortly after the death of Nero (AD 68–69) or a date near theendof Domitian’s reign (AD 95). Although there is solidevidence for both dates, the majority opinion at present favors adate during the reign of Domitian, when persecution threatened tospread across the Roman Empire. The imperial cult (i.e., the worshipof the Roman emperor) was a powerful force to be reckoned withprimarily because it united religious, political, social, andeconomic elements into a single force. As chapters 2–3indicate, not every Christian was remaining faithful in thisdifficult environment. Some were compromising in order to avoidreligious or economic persecution. Revelation has a pointed messagefor those who are standing strong as well as for those who arecompromising, and this central message ties into the overall purposeof the book.
Purposeand Interpretation
Theoverall purpose of Revelation is to comfort those who are facingpersecution and to warn those who are compromising with the worldsystem. During times of oppression, the righteous suffer and thewicked seem to prosper. This raises the question “Who is Lord?”Revelation says that Jesus is Lord in spite of how things appear, andhe will return soon to establish his eternal kingdom. Those facingpersecution find hope through a renewed perspective, and those whoare compromising are warned to repent. Revelation’s goal is totransform the audience to follow Jesus faithfully.
Thereare five main theories about how Revelation should be interpreted:preterist, historicist, futurist, idealist, and eclectic. Thepreterist theory views Revelation as relating only to the time inwhich John lived rather than to any future period. John communicatesto first-century readers how God plans to deliver them from thewickedness of the Roman Empire. The historicist theory argues thatRevelation gives an overview of the major movements of church historyfrom the first century until the return of Christ. The futuristtheory claims that most of Revelation (usually chaps. 4–22)deals with a future time just before the end of history. The idealisttheory maintains that Revelation is a symbolic portrayal of theongoing conflict between good and evil. Revelation offers timelessspiritual truths to encourage Christians of all ages. The eclectictheory combines the strengths of several of the other theories (e.g.,a message to the original audience, a timeless spiritual message, andsome future fulfillment), while avoiding their weaknesses.
Outlineand Structure
Therehave been many attempts to understand how Revelation is organized.Some see a threefold structure based on 1:19:
Whatyou have seen (past) (1:1–20)
Whatis now (present) (2:1–3:21)
Whatwill take place later (future) (4:1–22:21)
Otherssee the book organized around seven dramatic scenes with interludesoccurring throughout:
Prologue(1:1–8)
Act1: Seven Oracles (1:9–3:22)
Act2: Seven Seals (6:1–17)
Act3: Seven Trumpets (8:1–9:21)
Act4: Seven Signs (12:1–14:20)
Act5: Seven Bowls (16:1–21)
Act6: Seven Visions (19:1–20:15)
Act7: Seven Prophecies (21:2–22:17)
Epilogue(22:18–21)
Thefollowing outline provides an overview of Revelation in ten stages:
I.Introduction (1:1–20)
II.Messages to the Seven Churches (2:1–3:22)
III.Vision of the Heavenly Throne Room (4:1–5:14)
IV.Opening of the Seven Seals (6:1–8:1)
V.Sounding of the Seven Trumpets (8:2–11:19)
VI.The People of God versus the Powers of Evil (12:1–14:20)
VII.Pouring Out of the Seven Bowls (15:1–16:21)
VIII.Judgment and Fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5)
IX.God’s Ultimate Victory (19:6–22:5)
X.Conclusion (22:6–21)
I.Introduction (1:1–20).Chapter 1 includes both a prologue (1:1–8) and John’scommission to write what he sees (1:9–20). John’s visionfocuses on the risen, glorified Christ and his continued presenceamong the seven churches.
II.Messages to the seven churches (2:1–3:22).Chapters 2–3 contain messages to seven churches of Asia Minor:Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, andLaodicea. The seven messages follow a similar literary pattern: adescription of Jesus, a commendation, an accusation, an exhortationcoupled with either warning or encouragement, an admonition tolisten, and a promise to those who overcome. These messages reflectthe twin dangers faced by the church: persecution and compromise.
III.Vision of the heavenly throne room (4:1–5:14).In chapters 4–5 the scene shifts to the heavenly throne room,where God reigns in majestic power. All of heaven worships theCreator and the Lion-Lamb (Jesus), who alone is qualified to open thescroll because of his sacrificial death.
IV.Opening of the seven seals (6:1–8:1).The unveiling of God’s ultimate victory formally begins here.This section begins the first of a series of three judgment visions(seals, trumpets, and bowls), with seven elements each. When thesixth seal is opened, the question is asked, “Who can withstandit?” Chapter 7 provides the answer with its two visions ofGod’s people; only those belonging to God can withstand theoutpouring of the Lamb’s wrath.
V.Sounding of the seven trumpets (8:2–11:19).The trumpet judgments, patterned after the plagues of Egypt, revealGod’s judgment upon a wicked world. Again, before the seventhelement in the series, there is an interval with two visions(10:1–11; 11:1–14) that instruct and encourage God’speople.
VI.The people of God versus the powers of evil (12:1–14:20).Chapter12 offers the main reason why God’s people face hostility inthis world. They are caught up in the larger conflict between God andSatan (the dragon). Although Satan was defeated by the death andresurrection of Christ, he continues to oppose the people of God.Chapter 13 introduces Satan’s two agents: the beast from thesea and the beast from the earth. The dragon and the two beastsconstitute an unholy trinity bent on seducing and destroying God’speople. As another interval, chapter 14 offers a glimpse of the finalfuture that God has in store for his people. One day the Lamb and hisfollowers will stand on Mount Zion and sing a new song of redemption.
VII.Pouring out of the seven bowls (15:1–16:21).The seven golden bowls follow the trumpets and seals as the finalseries of seven judgments. As the bowls of God’s wrath arepoured out on an unrepentant world, the plagues are devastatingindicators of God’s anger toward sin and evil. The onlyresponse from the “earth dwellers” (MSG; NIV:“inhabitants of the earth” [17:2, 8]; this is a commonterm in Revelation for unbelievers) is to curse God rather thanrepent (16:9, 11, 21).
VIII.Judgment and fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5). Thissection depicts the death of Babylon, a pagan power said to be “drunkwith the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those whobore testimony to Jesus” (17:6). The funeral laments for thedeceased Babylon of chapter 18 give way to a celebration as God’speople rejoice over Babylon’s downfall (19:1–5).
IX.God’s ultimate victory (19:6–22:5). Thisclimactic section describes God’s ultimate victory over eviland the final reward for the people of God. This scene includes thereturn of Christ for his bride (19:6–16), Christ’s defeatof the two beasts and their allies (19:17–21), the binding ofSatan and the millennial reign (20:1–6), the final defeat ofSatan (20:7–10), and the final judgment and the death of deathitself (20:11–15). Chapter 21 features a description of the newheaven and new earth, where God’s long-standing promise to liveamong his people is fully realized.
X.Conclusion (22:6–21).Revelation closes with final blessings for those who heed the messageof the book and warnings for those who do not. Jesus’ promiseto return soon is met with John’s prayer, “Come, LordJesus” (22:20).
Charactersand Themes
Theforegoing outlines are helpful for understanding Revelation, butperhaps an even better way to grasp the message of the book is tolook closely at its main characters and story line. The followingseven themes capture the overall theological message of this dynamicprophetic-apocalyptic letter.
1.God.Revelation presents God as a central character in the story. He issovereign and firmly in control of history, as his description from1:4–8 suggests: “the Alpha and the Omega” (thebeginning and the end), “the one who is, and who was, and whois to come” (God of the past, the present, and the future), and“the Lord God, ... the Almighty” (ruler overthe universe). The throne room vision of chapters 4–5 alsoclearly asserts God’s sovereign rule. The throne of God itselfstands as a central symbol in the book, representing God’ssovereignty over all things. As a main character, God rightlyreceives worship. He is worshiped because he is the creator (e.g.,4:11; 14:7) and the righteous judge who condemns evil and vindicateshis people (15:3–4; 16:5–7; 19:1–2). Revelationalso describes God as one who desires to be fully and intimatelypresent with his people. God cares for and protects his people (e.g.,7:2–3; 14:1; 21:4). As the book closes, God announces thefulfillment of his long-standing promise to live among his people(21:6–7; cf. Exod. 29:45–46; Lev. 26:11–12). God’schildren have unhindered access to their loving Father as they servehim, see his face, and bear his name—all in his presence(22:1–5).
2.God’s enemies.Although God reigns supreme, he has enemies who oppose him and hispeople. As God’s chief enemy, Satan (also known as the dragon,the devil, the serpent, the accuser) works through worldly systemswith the intent of thwarting God’s plan. Chapter 12 summarizesthis cosmic conflict. In that scene, God defeats the dragon, who thenturns his anger against the woman and the rest of her offspring. Thedragon’s evil partners include the beast fromthe sea(traditionally called the “antichrist”) and the beastfrom the earth (the “false prophet”). The first beastoften has been identified with Rome, the dominant pagan power in thefirst century, although the reference likely extends beyond Rome toany political-economic power that demands absolute allegiance (see13:1–8; 19:19–20; 20:10). The second beast usesmiraculous signs to deceive people into worshiping the first beast.This opponent represents religious power organized in support of thefirst beast (13:11–18; 19:20; 20:10). The dragon, the beastfrom the sea, and the false prophet constitute the unholy trinity.God’s enemies also include people (usually called the“inhabitants of the earth”) who follow the beast (13:8,12), indulge in the ways of this world (17:2), and persecutebelievers (6:10; 11:10).
3.The Lamb of God. Jesus,the Lamb of God, plays a central role in God’s redemptive plan.In Revelation the Lamb is clearly identified as a divine figure whoshares in the authority, glory, and worship reserved for God (5:6,9–14; 7:10, 17; 12:10; 21:22–23; 22:1, 3). Expressionsthat refer to God are also used of Jesus, thereby affirming Jesus’deity (e.g., “Alpha and Omega,” “Lord” [seealso 1:4–5]). Revelation highlights the Lamb’ssacrificial death as the key to his victory over evil, paradoxicalthough it may be (1:5, 18; 5:9). As the slaughtered yet risen Lamb(1:17–18), Jesus is able to identify with his suffering people(1:9; 12:17; 20:4). The Lamb promises to return as the warrior-judgeto defeat God’s enemies and rescue God’s people (1:7;3:11; 16:15; 19:11–21). The famous battle with the forces ofevil is recorded in 19:20: “But the beast was captured, andwith it the false prophet.” The two beasts are then condemnedto the lake of fire, and their followers become the banquet meal forthe birds of prey.
4.God’s people.The people of God figure prominently in the book of Revelation. Johnuses a variety of terms and images to portray God’s people(e.g., church, saints, great multitude, bride of the Lamb, newJerusalem). These people have been redeemed by the Lamb, and theycontinue to rely upon his sacrificial death in spite of opposition(1:5; 5:9; 14:3–4). They are a genuinely multicultural people,as indicated by the seven uses of a fourfold formula: every “tribe,language, people, and nation” (5:9; 7:9; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; cf.17:15). They are also a persecuted people (1:9; 2:9–10; 7:14;11:9–10; 12:10; 13:16–17) and at times even a martyredpeople (6:9–11; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2; 20:4). ThroughoutRevelation, God’s people are characterized as those who obeythe commandments of God (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 14:12; 20:4; 22:9) andwho hold fast to the testimony of Jesus (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 19:10;20:4). They are a tempted people who are warned throughout the bookto endure in faith (13:10; 14:12; 18:4). Like their Savior, theyconquer evil by holding fast to their confession even to the point ofdeath (12:11).
5.God’s judgment.God’s judgment of evil plays a crucial role in the book. Thecentral section of Revelation contains three series of sevenjudgments: the seals (6:1–8:1), the trumpets (8:2–11:19),and the bowls (15:1–16:21). God sends these plagues on hisenemies to demonstrate his power and to vindicate his people. Theseimages of judgment also encourage repentance and remind people thatGod will win the battle against evil. Using two images ofjudgment—the grain harvest (14:14–16) and the winepress(14:17–20)—chapter 14 presents a clear choice: fear andglorify God (14:7) or face God’s inescapable and eternaljudgment (14:11, 19). God’s final judgment on “Babylonthe great, the mother of prostitutes” is reported in 17:1–19:6.Babylon represents the worldly system that has blasphemed God andpersecuted his people. God’s final judgment of the satanictrinity, their followers, and death itself is described in 19:11–21;20:7–15. Evil has been destroyed, preparing the way for therestoration of creation.
6.The paradise of God.The story culminates in God’s ultimate restoration of hispeople and his creation—the paradise of God. What God began todo in Gen. 1–2 he now completes in Rev. 21–22. The riverof life replaces the sea. The tree of life supplies food for all.God’s throne as a symbol of God’s sovereign rule over allreality serves as the source of life. God has kept his promise toconquer his enemies, vindicate his people, and restore his creation.The Abrahamic covenant of Gen. 12, that God would bless “allpeoples on earth” (v.3), is fulfilled as the tree of lifeprovides healing for the nations (Rev. 22:2). The new heaven and newearth is identified primarily as the place where God lives among hispeople (22:4). In the paradise of God there will be no more Satan orsin or death or evil of any kind. God’s people will bask in hisglory and respond in worship.
7.The present struggle.A final theme of Revelation is the believer’s struggle to liveout God’s story in the present. The Lamb’s followers relyupon the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus for their victory,but they continue to live in enemy territory. They long for the newheaven and new earth, but they must wage war in the present againstthe forces of evil. Jesus challenges the seven churches to “overcome”or “conquer,” a requirement for inheriting his promisesof eternal life, provision, justice, victory, and the presence of God(21:7). A voice from heaven summarizes what it means to overcome:“They [Christians] triumphed over him [Satan] by the blood ofthe Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love theirlives so much as to shrink from death” (12:11).
Theytriumph in the same way that Jesus triumphed: victory throughfaithfulness, even if it includes suffering. This calls for rejectingfalse teaching, resisting idolatry, living righteously, and refusingto compromise. Triumphing includes authentic faith that results inobedience to Jesus. Above all, to triumph or overcome means to followthe Lamb.
Theseseven themes of Revelation reveal how the book offers hope to thosewho are suffering for the cause of Christ and warning to those whoare compromising with the world. Revelation presents the finalchapter in God’s grand plan to defeat evil, reverse the curseof sin, transform creation, and live forever among his people. Forfirst-century readers or twenty-first-century readers, Revelationoffers a dramatic and empowering vision of what it means to followJesus.
The book of Ruth is set during the time of the judges. The book of Judges selects stories that illustrate the difficulties of the time between Joshua and the rise of kingship, particularly in the period before the rise of David. Ruth, however, gives a story of hope in the midst of suffering.
Ruth’s historical setting is signaled in English Bibles by its location right after the book of Judges. In the Hebrew Bible, it is placed after Proverbs, perhaps suggesting that the book gives us a picture of the virtuous woman (cf. Prov. 31:10–31), and at the beginning of the Megilloth, or festival scrolls, since the book was important for the celebration of the Feast of Weeks in early Judaism.
Genre
The book of Ruth, like those that precede it, has the form of theological history. However, this history is based not on large national events but rather on the story of a single family. The book has a simple style and plot but considerable drama and suspense.
Outline and Structure
I. Naomi Returns to Bethlehem with Ruth (1:1–22)
II. Ruth Meets Boaz (2:1–23)
III. Ruth and Boaz at the Threshing Floor (3:1–18)
IV. Boaz Marries Ruth (4:1–12)
V. Their Offspring, Culminating with David (4:13–22)
I. Naomi returns to Bethlehem with Ruth (1:1–22). The story begins sadly with the death of three men, Elimelek and his two sons, who had moved from Bethlehem to Moab. Their deaths leave their three wives as widows. Elimelek’s wife, Naomi, and her two Moabite daughters-in-law, Ruth and Orpah, then begin the trip back to Bethlehem.
Naomi has grown bitter in her loss, changing her name from “Naomi” (“pleasant”) to “Mara” (“bitter”). She encourages her two daughters-in-law to return home because the future looks bleak in Bethlehem. Orpah returns, but Ruth stays with her mother-in-law, and she renounces her pagan Moabite background, affirms Yahweh, and associates herself with Israel.
II. Ruth meets Boaz (2:1–23). Boaz is now introduced as a wealthy landowner and a relative of Elimelek. When Ruth goes out to glean the leftovers of the harvest, she happens to do so in the fields of Boaz. This is the first of many “coincidences” that point to the providence of God. She catches the attention of Boaz, who makes sure that she is safe and that she gets a good supply of food. Naomi reveals to Ruth that he is one of their closest relatives and a family redeemer.
III. Ruth and Boaz at the threshing floor (3:1–18). Naomi then takes matters into her own hands and encourages Ruth to go up to Boaz as he is celebrating the harvest. She instructs Ruth to wait until Boaz is done eating and drinking and goes to sleep on the threshing floor. Ruth then goes to him, lies beside him, and uncovers his “feet,” almost certainly a euphemism for his genitalia. When he awakens, she asks him to spread his covering over her, in essence asking him to marry her. He does not take advantage of her but praises her for coming to him rather than chasing after the young men of the town. Boaz virtuously admits that there is a family redeemer even closer than he, and so Boaz must deal with him first.
IV. Boaz marries Ruth (4:1–12). Boaz meets the family redeemer, whose name is never given but whose rights to Ruth are greater than those of Boaz. He does want to redeem the land of Elimelek, but when told that this also involves marrying Ruth, he refuses. The customs here are not totally clear, but it appears that if he had paid to redeem the land and then married Ruth, it would be her descendant rather than he who would benefit from the transaction. Boaz, however, does not share his hesitation and marries Ruth.
V. Their offspring, culminating with David (4:13–22). The book ends on a celebratory note. Boaz and Ruth have a baby boy, Obed. This birth is followed by a genealogy showing that Obed is none other than the father of Jesse and the grandfather of David.
Date, Authorship, and Purpose
Although the book of Ruth is clearly set in the period of the judges, no mention is made of the time of its composition or authorship.
Many scholars date Ruth late in the history of Israel. They detect a polemic from this book directed at the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. The latter books present a harsh policy toward intermarriage with Gentiles (Ezra 10; Neh. 13:23–27). On the other hand, Ruth presents the picture of a devoted Moabite woman whose sacrificial love rescues an Israelite family from oblivion and leads to the glory of the kingship of David.
However, Ruth does not have the tone of a polemic. Also, it may be argued that Ruth does not contradict Ezra and Nehemiah in the issue of intermarriage with Gentiles. Ruth has in essence become an Israelite through her devotion to Yahweh. Ezra and Nehemiah are not worried about bloodlines; they are worried about women who may lead Israel toward the worship of false gods.
A preexilic date is more likely when one takes into account what appears to be an important purpose of the book. The book ends with a genealogy of King David. The child whom Ruth bears to Boaz is an ancestor to none other than King David, with whom the genealogy concludes. The union between Boaz and Ruth is the result of divine providence (see “Theological Message” below), and this providence leads to the future king of Israel. Thus, the implicit message is that God was in control of the events that led to David. We know from the historical books that David would have been considered a usurper by some who considered a descendant of Saul the rightful heir. The book of Ruth may have had the contemporary purpose of supporting David’s claim to the throne by showing that it was the result of God’s intervention.
Although the best arguments favor an early preexilic date, the question remains open.
Theological Message
Although no supernatural events or miracles punctuate the book of Ruth, the attentive reader finishes it knowing that God’s hand guided the events of this story as directly as those of the story of the exodus from Egypt. The book of Ruth is a story of God’s providence narrated in an extremely subtle manner. When the narrator says, “As it turned out, [Ruth] was working in a field belonging to Boaz” (2:3), the meaning is that Ruth herself did not know the significance of her action. God was guiding her toward deliverance.
The book also tells a story of a non-Israelite (Gentile), Ruth herself, who joins the people of faith. In this, we are to see a preview of the fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham that his descendants will be a blessing to all peoples on earth (Gen. 12:3).
Finally, Ruth’s story may be a family story, but this family leads to great things in Israel. Ruth’s survival leads ultimately to the birth of David, one of the greatest figures in biblical history. In this way, the author says that David was a divine gift to Israel. Of course, Christian readers further recognize that Ruth is named later in the genealogy of the one who is David’s greater son, Jesus Christ (Matt. 1:5).
Contemporary Significance
At first glance, the lasting significance of the book of Ruth appears to be connected to an illustration of the foundational virtues of loyalty, kindness, and generosity. Ruth is the example of loyalty as she sticks close to her mother-in-law, Naomi. Boaz exemplifies kindness and generosity when compared to the unnamed “guardian-redeemer” (4:1–12). Because of the virtuous actions of these characters, the story ends happily. Indeed, the book does encourage its readers to act in positive ways toward others. However, such a reading fails to plumb the book for all its richness.
As noted above, the book subtly describes how God works behind the scenes in order to bring Ruth and Naomi from a dire situation to a blessed one. The book informs those who read it that God works in the lives of ordinary people to accomplish great things.
The biblical corpus known as the Pentateuch consists of thefirst five books of the OT: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, andDeuteronomy. The word “Pentateuch” comes from two Greekwords (penta [“five”] and teuchos [“scroll case,book”]) and is a designation attested in the early churchfathers. The collection is also commonly known as the “FiveBooks of Moses,” “the Law of Moses,” or simply the“Law,” reflecting the traditional Jewish name “Torah,”meaning “law” or “instruction.” The Torah isthe first of three major sections that comprise the Hebrew Bible(Torah, Nebiim, Ketubim [Law, Prophets, Writings]); thus for bothJewish and Christian traditions it represents the introduction to theBible as a whole as well as its interpretive foundation.
TheEnglish names for the books of the Pentateuch came from the LatinVulgate, based on the Greek Septuagint. These appellations are mainlydescriptive of their content. Genesis derives from “generations”or “origin,” Exodus means “going out,”Leviticus represents priestly (Levitical) service, Numbers refers tothe censuses taken in the book, and Deuteronomy indicates “secondlaw” because of Moses’ rehearsal of God’s commands(see Deut. 17:18). The Hebrew designations derive from opening wordsin each book. Beresh*t (Genesis) means “in the beginning”;Shemot (Exodus), “[these are] the names”; Wayyiqra’(Leviticus), “and he called”; Bemidbar (Numbers), “inthe desert”; and Debarim (Deuteronomy), “[these are] thewords.”
Referringto the Pentateuch as “Torah” or the “Law”reflects the climactic reception of God’s commands at MountSinai, which were to govern Israel’s life and worship in thepromised land, including their journey to get there. However, callingthe Pentateuch the “Law” can be a bit misleading becausethere are relatively few passages that simply list a set of commands,and all law passages are set within a broad narrative. The Pentateuchis a grand story that begins on a universal scale with the creationof the cosmos and ends on the plains of Moab as the readeranticipates the fulfillment of God’s plan to redeem a fallenworld through his chosen people. The books offer distinct qualitiesand content, but they are also inherently dependent upon one another,as the narrative remains unbroken through the five volumes. Genesisends with Jacob’s family in Egypt, and, though many years havepassed, this is where Exodus begins. Leviticus outlines cultic lifeat the tabernacle (constructed at the end of Exodus) and even beginswithout a clear subject (“And he called...”),which requires the reader to supply “the Lord” from thelast verse of Exodus. Numbers begins with an account of Israel’sfighting men as the nation prepares to leave Sinai, and Deuteronomyis Moses’ farewell address to the nation on the cusp of thepromised land.
Authorshipand Composition
Althoughthe Pentateuch is technically an anonymous work, Jewish and Christiantradition attributes its authorship to Moses, the main figure of thestory from Exodus to Deuteronomy. The arguments for attributing theauthorship of the Pentateuch to Moses come from internal evidencewithin both Testaments. That Moses is responsible for at leastportions of the Pentateuch is suggested by references to his explicitliterary activity reflected within the narrative itself (Exod. 17:14;24:4; 34:28; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:9, 22, 24), if not implied invarious literary formulas such as “the Lord said to Moses”(e.g., Exod. 39:1, 7, 21; Lev. 4:1; 11:1; 13:1; Num. 1:1; 2:1).Mosaic authorship receives support from the historical books, whichuse terms such as “the Book of the Law of Moses” invarious forms and references in the preexilic history (Josh. 8:30–35;23:6; 2Kings 14:6) as well as the postexilic history (e.g.,2Chron. 25:4; Ezra 6:18; Neh. 13:1). The same titles are usedby NT authors (e.g., Mark 12:26; Luke 24:44; John 1:45), evenreferring to the Pentateuch simply by the name “Moses” atvarious points (e.g., Luke 16:29; 24:27; 2Cor. 3:15).
Evenwith these examples, nowhere does the text explicitly state thatMoses is responsible for the entire compilation of the Pentateuch orthat he penned it with his own hand. Rather, a number of factorspoint to a later hand at work: Moses’ death and burial arereferenced (Deut. 34), the conquest of Canaan is referred to as past(Deut. 2:12), and there is evidence that the names of people andplaces were updated and explained for later generations (e.g., “Dan”in Gen. 14:14; cf. Josh. 19:47; Judg. 18:28b–29). Based onthese factors, it is reasonable to believe that the Pentateuchunderwent editorial alteration as it was preserved within Jewish lifeand took its final shape after Moses’ lifetime.
Overthe last century, the Documentary Hypothesis has dominated academicdiscussion of the Pentateuch’s composition. This theory wascrystallized by Julius Wellhausen in his Prolegomena to the Historyof Israel in the late nineteenth century and posits that thePentateuch originated from a variety of ancient sources derived fromdistinct authors and time periods that have been transmitted andjoined through a long and complex process. Traditionally thesedocuments are identified as J, E, D, and P. The J source is adocument authored by the “Yahwist” (German, Jahwist) inJudah around 840 BC and is so called because the name “Yahweh”is used frequently in its text. The E source stands for “Elohist”because of its preference for the divine title “Elohim”and was composed in Israel around 700 BC. The D source stands for“Deuteronomy” because it reflects material found in thatbook; it was composed sometime around Josiah’s reform in 621BC. The P document reflects material that priests would be concernedwith in the postexilic time period, approximately 500 BC. This theoryand its related forms stem from the scholarly concern over variousliterary characteristics such as the use of divine names; doubletsand duplications in the text; observable patterns of style,terminology, and themes; and alleged discrepancies in facts,descriptions, and geographic or historical perspective.
Variousdocumentary theories of composition have flourished over the lastcentury of pentateuchal scholarship and still have many adherents.However, lack of scholarly agreement about the dating and characterof the sources and the rise of other literary approaches to the texthave many conservative and liberal scholars calling into question theaccuracy and even interpretive benefit of the source theories.Moreover, if the literary observations used to create sourcedistinctions can be explained in other ways, then the DocumentaryHypothesis is significantly undermined.
Inits canonical form, the pentateuchal narrative combines artisticprose, poetry, and law to tell a dramatic history spanning thousandsof years. One could divide the story into six major sections:primeval history (Gen. 1–11), the patriarchs (Gen. 12–50),liberation from Egypt (Exod. 1–18), Sinai (Exod. 19:1–Num.10:10), wilderness journey (Num. 10:11–36:13), and Moses’farewell (Deuteronomy).
PrimevalHistory (Gen. 1–11)
Itis possible to divide Genesis into two parts based upon subjectmatter: the origin of creation and humankind’s call, fall, andpunishment (chaps 1–11), and the origin of a family that wouldbecome God’s conduit of salvation and blessing for the world(chaps. 12–50).
Theprimeval history comprises essentially the first eleven chapters ofGenesis, ending with the genealogy of Abraham in 11:26. Strictlyspeaking, 11:27 begins the patriarchal section with the sixthinstance of the toledot formula found in Genesis, referencingAbraham’s father, Terah. The Hebrew phrase ’elleh toledot(“these are the generations of”) occurs in eleven placesin Genesis and reflects a deliberate structural marker that one mayuse to divide the book into distinct episodes (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1;11:10; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1; 36:9; 37:2).
Genesisas we know it exhibits two distinct creation accounts in its firsttwo chapters. Although critical scholars contend that the differingaccounts reflect contradictory stories and different authors, it isjust as convenient to recognize that the two stories vary in styleand some content because they attempt to accomplish different aims.The first account, 1:1–2:3, is an artistic, poetic,symmetrical, and “heavenly” view of creation by atranscendent God, who spoke creation into being. In the secondaccount, 2:4–25, God is immanently involved with creation as heis present in a garden, breathes life into Adam’s nostrils,dialogues and problem-solves, fashions Eve from Adam’s side,and bestows warnings and commands. Both perspectives are foundationalfor providing an accurate view of God’s interaction withcreation in the rest of Scripture.
Asone progresses through chapters 1–11, the story quickly changesfrom what God has established as “very good” to discord,sin, and shame. Chapter 3 reflects the “fall” of humanityas Adam and Eve sin in eating from the forbidden tree in directdisobedience to God. The serpent shrewdly deceives the first couple,and thus all three incur God’s curses, which extend tounlimited generations. Sin that breaks the vertical relationshipbetween God and humanity intrinsically leads to horizontal strifebetween humans. Sin and disunity on the earth only intensify as onemoves from the murder story of Cain and Abel in chapter 4 to theflood in chapters 5–9. Violence, evil, and disorder have sopervaded the earth that God sends a deluge to wipe out all livingthings, save one righteous man and his family, along with an ark fullof animals. God makes the first covenant recorded in the biblicalnarrative with Noah (6:18), promising to save him from the flood ashe commands Noah to build an ark and gather food for survival. Noahfulfills all that God has commanded (6:22; 7:5), and God remembershis promise (8:1). This is the prototypical salvation story for therest of Scripture.
Chapter9 reflects a new start for humanity and all living things as thecreation mandate to “be fruitful and increase in number; fillthe earth and subdue it,” first introduced in 1:28, is restatedalong with the reminder that humankind is made in God’s image(1:27). Bearing the image involves new responsibilities andstipulations in the postdiluvian era (9:2–6). There will beenmity between humans and animals, animals are now appropriate food,and yet lifeblood will be specially revered. God still requiresaccountability for just and discriminate shedding of blood andorderly relationships, as he has proved in the deluge, but now herelinquishes this responsibility to humankind. In return, Godpromises never to destroy all flesh again, and he will set therainbow in the sky as a personal reminder. Like the covenant withNoah in 6:18, the postdiluvian covenant involves humankind fulfillingcommands (9:1–7) and God remembering his covenant (9:8–17),specially termed “everlasting” (9:16).
Theprimeval commentary on humankind’s unabating sinful condition(e.g., 6:5; 8:21) proves true as Noah becomes drunk and naked and hisson Ham (father of Canaan) shames him by failing to conceal hisfather’s negligence. Instead of multiplying, filling, andsubduing the earth as God has intended, humankind collaborates tomake a name for itself by building a sort of stairway to heavenwithin a special city (11:4). God foils such haughty plans byscattering the people across the earth and confusing their language.Expressed in an orderly chiastic structure, the story of the tower ofBabel demonstrates that God condescends (11:5) to set things straightwith humanity.
Patriarchs(Gen. 12–50)
Althoughthe primeval history is foundational for understanding the rest ofthe Bible, more space in Genesis is devoted to the patriarchalfigures Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. In general, the Abrahamicnarrative spans chapters 12–25, the story of Isaac serves as atransition to the Jacob cycle of chapters 25–37, and the Josephnarrative finishes the book of Genesis in chapters 37–50.
Thetransition from the primeval history to the patriarchs (11:27–32)reveals how Abraham, the father of Israel, moves from the east andsettles in Harran as the family ventures to settle in Canaan. InHarran, Abraham receives the call of God’s redemptive plan,which reverberates through Scripture. God will bless him with land,make him a great nation, grant him special favor, and use him as aconduit of blessings to the world (12:1–3). In 11:30 is theindication that the barrenness of Abraham’s wife (Sarah)relates to the essence of God’s magnificent promises. How onebecomes great in name and number, secures enemy territory, and is tobless all peoples without a descendant becomes the compellingquestion of the Abrahamic narrative. The interchange betweenAbraham’s faith in God and his attempts to contrive covenantfulfillment colors the entire narrative leading up to chapter 22. Itis there that Abraham’s faith is ultimately put to the test asGod asks him to sacrifice the promised son, Isaac. Abraham passesGod’s faith test, and a ram is provided to take Isaac’splace. This everlasting covenant that was previously sealed by thesign of circumcision is climactically procured for future generationsthrough Abraham’s exemplary obedience (22:16–18; cf.15:1–21; 17:1–27).
Thepatriarchal stories that follow show that the Abrahamic promises arerenewed with subsequent generations (see 26:3–4; 28:13–14)and survive various threats to fulfillment. The story of Isaac servesmainly as a bridge to the Jacob cycle, as he exists primarily as apassive character in relation to Abraham and Jacob.
Deception,struggle, rivalry, and favoritism characterize the Jacob narrative,as first exemplified in the jostling of twin boys in Rebekah’swomb (25:22). Jacob supplants his twin brother, Esau, for thefirstborn’s blessing and birthright. He flees to Paddan Aram(northern Mesopotamia), marries two sisters, takes their maidservantsas concubines, and has eleven children, followed by a falling-outwith his father-in-law. Jacob’s struggle for God’sblessing that began with Esau comes to a head in his wrestlingencounter with God at Peniel. Ultimately, Jacob emerges victoriousand receives God’s blessing and a name change, “Israel”(“one who struggles with God”). Throughout the Jacobstory, God demonstrates his faithfulness to the Abrahamic covenantand reiterates the promises to Jacob, most notably at Bethel (chaps.28; 35). The interpersonal strife of Jacob’s life is thusenveloped within a message of reconciliation not just with Esau(chap. 33) but ultimately with God. The reader learns from theepisodes in Jacob’s life that although God works through thelives of weak and failing people, his promises for Israel remainsecure.
AlthoughJacob and his family are already living in Canaan, God intends forthem to move to Egypt and grow into a powerful nation beforefulfilling their conquest of the promised land (see 15:13–16).The story of Joseph explains how the family ends up in Egypt at theclose of Genesis. Joseph is specially loved by his father, whichelicits significant jealousy from his brothers, who sell him off tosome nomads and fabricate the alibi that he has been killed by a wildbeast. Joseph winds up in Pharaoh’s household and eventuallybecomes his top official. When famine strikes Canaan years later,Joseph’s brothers go to Egypt to purchase food from the royalcourt, and Joseph reveals his identity to them in an emotionalreunion. Jacob’s entire family moves to Egypt to live for atime in prosperity under Joseph’s care. The Joseph storyillustrates the mysterious relationship of human decision and divinesovereignty (50:20).
Liberationfrom Egypt (Exod. 1–18)
Genesisshows how Abraham develops into a large family. Exodus shows how thisfamily becomes a nation—enslaved, freed, and then taught theways of God. Although it appears that Exodus continues a rivetingstory of God’s chosen people, it is actually the identity andpower of God that take center stage.
Manyyears have passed since Joseph’s family arrived in Egypt. TheHebrews’ good standing in Egypt has also diminished as theirmultiplication and fruitfulness during the intervening period—justas God had promised Abraham (Gen. 17:4–8)—became anational threat to the Egyptians. Abraham’s family will spendtime in Egyptian slavery before being liberated with many possessionsin hand (cf. Gen. 15:13–14).
Inthe book of Exodus the drama of suffering and salvation serves as thevehicle for God’s self-disclosure to a single man, Moses. Mosesis an Israelite of destiny even from birth, as he providentiallyavoids infant death and rises to power and influence in Pharaoh’shousehold. Moses never loses his passion for his own people, and hekills an Egyptian who was beating a fellow Hebrew. Moses flees toobscurity in the desert, where he meets God and his call to lead hispeople out of Egypt and to the promised land (3:7–8; 6:8). Likethe days of Noah’s salvation, God has remembered his covenantwith the patriarchs and responded to the groans of his people inEgypt (2:24; 6:4–5; cf. Gen. 8:1). God reveals himself, and hispersonal name “Yahweh” (“I am”), to Moses inthe great theophany of the burning bush at Mount Horeb (Sinai), thesame place where later he will receive God’s law. Moses doubtshis own ability to carry out the task of confronting Pharaoh andleading the exodus, but God foretells that many amazing signs andwonders not only will make the escape possible but also willultimately reveal the mighty nature of God to the Hebrews, Egypt, andpresumably the world (6:7; 7:5).
Thispromise of creating a nation of his people through deliverance issuccinctly conveyed in the classic covenant formula that findssignificance in the rest of the OT: “I will take you as my ownpeople, and I will be your God” (6:7). Wielding great powerover nature and at times even human decision, God “hardens”Pharaoh’s heart and sends ten plagues to demonstrate his favorfor his own people and wrath against their enemy nation. The tenthplague on the firstborn of all in Egypt provides the context for thePassover as God spares the firstborn of Israel in response to theplacement of sacrificial blood on the doorposts of their homes.Pharaoh persists in the attempt to overtake the Israelites in thedesert, where the power of God climaxes in parting the Red Sea (orSea of Reeds). The Israelites successfully pass through, buttheEgyptian army drowns in pursuit. This is the great salvationevent of the OT.
Thesong of praise for God’s deliverance (15:1–21) quicklyturns to cries of groaning in the seventy days following the exodusas the people of the nation, grumbling about their circ*mstances inthe desert, quickly demonstrate their fleeting trust in the one whohas saved them (Exod. 15:22–18:27). When a shortage of waterand food confronts the people, their faith in God’s care provesshallow, and they turn on Moses. Even though the special marks ofGod’s protection have been evident in the wilderness throughthe pillars of cloud and fire, the angel of God, the provision ofmanna and quail, water from the rock, and the leadership of Moses,the nation continually fails God’s tests of trust and obedience(16:4; cf. 17:2; 20:20). Yet God continues to endure with his peoplethrough the leadership of Moses.
Sinai(Exod. 19:1–Num. 10:10)
Mostof the pentateuchal narrative takes place at Mount Sinai. It is therethat Israel receives national legislation and prescriptions for thetabernacle, the priesthood, feasts and festivals, and othercovenantal demands for living as God’s chosen people. Theeleven-month stay at Sinai takes the biblical reader through thecenter of the Pentateuch, covering approximately the last half ofExodus, all of Leviticus, and the first third of Numbers, before thenation leaves this sacred site and sojourns in the wilderness.Several key sections of the Pentateuch fall withinthe Sinaistory: the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17), the Book of the Covenant(Exod. 20:22–23:33), the tabernacle prescriptions (Exod.25–31), the tabernacle construction (Exod. 35–40), themanual on ritual worship (Lev. 1–7), and the Holiness Code(Lev. 17–27).
Theevents and instruction at Sinai are central to the Israelitereligious experience and reflect the third eternal covenant that Godestablishes in the Pentateuch—this time with Israel, wherebythe Sabbath is the sign (Exod. 31:16; cf. Noahic/rainbow covenant[Gen. 9:16] and the Abrahamic/circumcision covenant [Gen. 17:7, 13,19]). The offices of prophet and priest develop into clear view inthis portion of the Pentateuch. Moses exemplifies the dual propheticfunction of representing the people when speaking with God and, inturn, God when speaking to the people. The priesthood is bestowedupon Aaron and his descendants in Exodus and inaugurated within oneof the few narrative sections of Leviticus (Lev. 8–10). Thegiving of the law, the ark, the tabernacle, the priesthood, and theSabbath are all a part of God’s making himself “known”to Israel and the world, which is a constant theme in Exodus (see,e.g., 25:22; 29:43, 46; 31:13).
TheIsraelites’ stay at Sinai opens with one of the greatesttheophanies of the Bible: God speaks aloud to the people (Exod.19–20) and then is envisioned as a consuming fire (Exod. 24).After communicating the Ten Commandments (“ten words”)directly to the people (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4), Mosesmediates the rest of the detailed obligations that will govern thefuture life of the nation. The covenant is ratified in ceremonialfashion (Exod. 24), and the Israelites vow to fulfill all that hasbeen spoken. God expects Israel to be a holy nation (Exod. 19:6) withwhom he may dwell, but Moses descends Sinai only to find that theIsraelites have already violated the essence of the Decalogue byfashioning a golden calf to worship as that which delivered them fromEgypt (Exod. 32). This places Israel’s future and calling injeopardy, but Moses intercedes for his people, and God graciouslypromises to preserve the nation and abide with it in his mercy, evenwhile punishing the guilty. This becomes prototypical of God’srelationship with his people in the future (Exod. 34:6–7).
Exodusends with the consecration of the tabernacle and the descent of God’spresence there. With the tent of worship in order, the priesthood andits rituals can be officially established. Leviticus reflects divineinstructions for how a sinful people may live safely in closeproximity to God. Holy living involves dealing with sin andminimizing the need for atonement, purification, and restitution. Thesacrificial and worship system established in Leviticus is based on aworldview of order, perfection, and purity, which should characterizea people who are commanded, “Be holy because I, the Lord yourGod, am holy’ (Lev. 19:2; cf. 11:44–45; 20:26). Withthese rules in place, the Israelites can make final preparations todepart Sinai and move forward on their journey. Numbers 1–10spans a nineteen-day period of such activities as the Israelitesbegin to focus on dispossessing their enemies. These chapters reflecta census of fighting men, the priority of purity, the dedication ofthe tabernacle, and the observance of the Passover before commencingthe quest to Canaan.
WildernessJourney (Num. 10:11–36:13)
Therest of the book of Numbers covers the remainder of a forty-yearstretch of great peaks and valleys in the faith and future of thenation. Chapters 11–25 recount the various events that show theexodus generation’s lack of trust in God. Chapters 26–36reveal a more positive section whereby a new generation prepares forthe conquest. With the third section of Numbers framed by episodesinvolving the inheritance rights of Zelophehad’s daughters(27:1–11; 36:1–13), it is clear that the story has turnedtothe future possession of the land.
Afterthe departure from Sinai, the narrative consists of a number ofIsraelite complaints in the desert. The Israelites have grown tiredof manna and ironically crave the food of Egypt, which they recall asfree fish, fruits, and vegetables. Having forgotten the hardship oflife in slavery, about which they had cried out to God, now thenation is crying out for a lifestyle of old. Moses becomes sooverwhelmed with the complaints of the people that God providesseventy elders, who, to help shoulder the leadership burden, willreceive the same prophetic spirit given to Moses.
Inchapters 13–14 twelve spies are sent out from Kadesh Barnea toperuse Canaan, but the people’s lack of faith to procure theland from the mighty people there proves costly. This final exampleof distrust moves God to punish and purify the nation. Theunbelieving generation will die in the wilderness during a forty-yearperiod of wandering.
Thediscontent in the desert involves not only food and water but alsoleadership status. Moses’ own brother and sister resent hisspecial relationship with God and challenge his exclusive authority.Later, Aaron’s special high priesthood is threatened as anotherLevitical family (Korah) vies for preeminence. Through a sequence ofsigns and wonders, God makes it clear that Moses and Aaron haveexclusive roles in God’s economy. Due to the deaths related toKorah’s rebellion and the fruitless staffs that represent thetribes of Israel, the nation’s concern about sudden extinctionin the presence of a holy God is appeased through the eternalcovenant of priesthood granted to Aaron’s family (chap. 18). Heand the Levites, at the potential expense of their own lives and aspart of their priestly service, will be held accountable for keepingthe tabernacle pure of encroachers.
Evenafter the people’s significant rebellion and punishment, Godcontinues to prove his faithfulness to his word. Hope is restored forthe nation as the Abrahamic promises of blessing are rehearsed fromthe mouth of Balaam, a Mesopotamian seer. The Israelites will indeedone day be numerous (23:10), enjoy the presence of God (23:21), beblessed and protected (24:9), and have a kingly leader (24:17). Thiswonderful mountaintop experience of hope for the exodus generation istragically countered by an even greater event of apostasy in thesubsequent scene. Reminiscent of the incident of the golden calf,when pagan revelry in the camp had foiled Moses’ interactionwith God on Sinai, apostasy at the tabernacle undermines Balaam’soracles of covenant fulfillment. Fornication with Moabite women notonly joins the nation to a foreign god but also betrays God’sholiness at his place of dwelling. If not for the zeal of Aaron’sgrandson Phinehas, who puts an end to the sin, the ensuing plaguecould have finished the nation. For his righteous action, Phinehas isawarded an eternal priesthood and ensures a future for the nation andAaron’s priestly lineage.
Inchapter 26 a second census of fighting men indicates that the old,unbelieving exodus generation has officially died off (except forJoshua and Caleb), and God is proceeding with a new people. Goddispossesses the enemies of the new generation; reinstates the tribalboundaries of the land; reinstates rules concerning worship, service,and bloodshed; and places Joshua at the helm of leadership. Chapters26–36 mention no deaths or rebellions as the nationoptimistically ends its journey in Moab, just east of the promisedland.
Moses’Farewell (Deuteronomy)
Althoughone could reasonably move into the historical books at the end ofNumbers, much would be lost in overstepping Deuteronomy. Deuteronomypresents Moses’ farewell speeches as his final words to anation on the verge of Caanan. Moses’ speeches are best viewedas sermons motivating his people to embrace the Sinai covenant, lovetheir God, and choose life over death and blessings over cursings(30:19). Moses reviews the desert experience since Mount Horeb/Sinai(chaps. 1–4) and recapitulates God’s expectations forlawful living in the land (chaps. 5–26). The covenant code isrecorded on a scroll, is designated the “Book of the Law”(31:24–26), and is to be read and revered by the future king.Finally, Moses leads the nation in covenant renewal (chaps. 29–32)before the book finishes with an account of his death (chaps. 33–34),including tributes such as “since then, no prophet has risen inIsrael like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (34:10).
Deuteronomyreflects that true covenant faithfulness is achieved from a rightheart for God. If there were any previous doubts about the essence ofcovenant keeping, Moses eliminates such in Deuteronomy with thefrequent use of emotive terms. Loving God involves committing to himalone and spurning idols and foreign gods. The Ten Commandments(chap. 5) are not a list of stale requirements; they reflect thegreat Shema with the words “Love the Lord your God with allyour heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. Thesecommandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts”(6:5–6). God desires an unrivaled love from the nation, notcold and superficial religiosity.
Obedienceby the Israelites will incur material and spiritual blessing, whereasdisobedience ends in the loss of both. Although Moses stronglycommends covenant obedience, and the nation participates in acovenant-renewal ceremony (chap. 27), it is clear that in the futurethe Israelites will fail to uphold their covenant obligations andwill suffer the consequences (29:23; 30:1–4; 31:16–17).Yet Moses looks to a day when the command for circumcised hearts(10:16) will be fulfilled by the power of God himself (30:6). In thefuture a new king will arise from the nation (17:14–20) as wellas a prophet like Moses (18:15–22). Deuteronomy thusunderscores the extent of God’s own devotion to his patriarchalpromises despite the sinful nature of his people.
Formuch of the middle and end of the twentieth century, Deuteronomy hasreceived a significant amount of attention for its apparentresemblance in structure and content to ancient Hittite and Assyriantreaties. Scholars debate the extent of similarity, but it ispossible that Deuteronomy reflects a suzerain-vassal treaty formbetween Israel and God much like the common format between nations inthe ancient Near East. Although comparative investigation of thistype can be profitable for interpretation, it is prudent to beconservative when outlining direct parallels, since Deuteronomy isnot a legal document but rather a dramatic narrative of God’sredemptive interaction with the world.
Prior to the rise of Roman roads, travel in the ancient NearEast was extremely dangerous. For protection, large groups of peopleand animals traveled together in caravans, especially for tradepurposes. Most OT examples are of Arabian caravans of camels carryingspices and other valuables (e.g., Judg. 6:5; 1 Kings 10:1–2;Isa. 21:13; 60:6). Abram travels from Ur to Canaan in a large caravan(Gen. 12). In Gen. 37:25 an Ishmaelite caravan buys Joseph intoslavery.
There are several censuses in Scripture, and their concern is not simply to account for the number of people or the number of men available for military service; they also have a literary and theological function.
In the creation narrative in Gen. 1–11 the fulfillment of the creation mandate is accounted for through the genealogy of Adam (Gen. 5) and the genealogy of the sons of Noah (Gen. 9:18–19; 10:1–32), which serve as a type of census. The creation narrative has a universal scope; it attempts to account for the total human population on earth.
Census lists are given for the Abrahamic family (Abraham-Isaac-Jacob line) as it grows to become a nation in accordance with God’s promise to Abraham of a great nation and innumerable offspring (Gen. 12:1–3; 15:5). The total number of Jacob’s descendants who went to Egypt was seventy (Gen. 46:8–27; Exod. 1:1–4). This old generation of Israel passed, and a new generation was born that was fruitful, multiplied, and became exceedingly numerous (Exod. 1:6–7). The total number of men of at least twenty years of age who came out of Egypt was 603,550 (Num. 1:1–46; cf. Exod. 12:37–38), and of the new generation that stood on the verge of entering the Promised Land, 601,730 (Num. 26:1–51).
In the book of Numbers there are two census accounts (actually, military registrations). These are important to the structure and theme of the book. The theme of Numbers has to do with the judgment on the first generation (the object of the census in Num. 1) and the hope for the second generation, which will enter the Promised Land (the object of the second census).
David conducted a census to measure his military power, but this is condemned by God and regarded as satanic (2 Sam. 24:1–17; 1 Chron. 21:1–30). For the Chronicler, any attempt to account for the total number of Israelite men twenty years and older, similar to the census in the book of Numbers, is regarded as challenging God’s promise to make Israel as numerous as the stars (1 Chron. 29:23–26).
Ezra and Nehemiah contain census lists of the returnees from exile: under Zerubbabel, 42,360 men returned (Ezra 2:1–66; Neh. 7:4–73), and under Ezra, 1,496 men (Ezra 8:1–14).
In the NT, Jesus participates in the universal census that encompasses not only Israel but other nations as well—a census of the entire Roman world (Luke 2:1–7). The census motif reaches its fulfillment when a great multitude from every nation, tribe, people, and language will stand before the throne and in front of the Lamb, symbolized by the 144,000 from the twelve tribes of Israel, 12,000 from each tribe (Rev. 7:4–10).
Terminology
Theword “law,” often referred to as “Torah,”occurs 220 times in the OT and derives from a Hebrew root that means“to teach or instruct.” Biblical law is the body ofinstructions or teachings that serve to govern and maintain thecovenant relationship between God and Israel. The distinctiverelationship that Israel enjoyed with God was unparalleled in theancient Near East. Unlike the Gentile nations, Israel received fromYahweh an instrument outlining his expectations of them, a set ofguidelines by which to sustain that covenant relationship (Deut.4:6–8). Outside the OT, the “Torah” or “Law”often refers to the first five books of the Bible, called the“Pentateuch” (Matt. 5:17–18; Luke 2:22). SecondTemple Judaism commonly referred to the Pentateuch in this way.
Theterm “Torah” is not limited to cultic or ceremonialpractice, but embraces civil and social law. In addition, the Torahrefers to the prophetic word and more broadly incorporates the ideaof parental instruction. The Hebrew word torah is employed in avariety of expressions, variously rendered in English versions: “thelaw” (Deut. 1:5; 4:8, 44; 2Kings 23:24), the “Bookof the Law” (Deut. 28:61; 29:21; Josh. 1:8; 2Kings 22:8),the “Book of the Law of Moses” (Josh. 8:31; 23:6), the“law of Moses” (Josh. 8:32; 1Kings 2:3), the “Bookof the Law of God” (Josh. 24:26), and the “law of theLord” (2Kings 10:31)—all of these indicate thedivine origin of the instructions or reinforce the association of theTorah with Moses as Israel’s mediator. The OT notes that Moses“wrote a Book of the Law,” which was placed by the arkfor reference (Deut. 31:26) and read aloud every seven years, duringthe Feast of Tabernacles, to all the assembly (Deut. 31:9–13).The book is not mentioned again until its discovery in the templeduring the reign of King Josiah (2Kings 22:8). The discovery ofthe book initiated a religious reform by Josiah that focused on thecentralization of worship and the destruction of idols.
TheOT employs a number of close synonyms for “law,”including “commandments,” “testimony,”“judgments,” “statutes,” “ordinances,”“decrees,” and “precepts.” Each of theseterms reflects varying nuances or particular aspects of the divineinstruction. Unfortunately, all these words as translated intoEnglish subtly misrepresent the “law” as an odiousexternal set of rules that inhibit human freedom and requirepunishment for disobedience. This perspective suggests that obedienceto the divine law was coerced by the threat of divine judgment.Contrary to this misconception, the people of Israel rejoiced infollowing Yahweh’s instructions because their greatest desirewas to please and live in harmony with him. Yahweh’s peopleenjoyed the privilege of receiving divine revelation consisting ofdirections that assured divine favor. Although perfect adherence tothese instructions proved to be an impossible task, Yahweh’scovenant stipulations provided an ideal toward which his people wereexpected to make progress as they constantly strived to fulfill thatideal. The Torah in its broadest sense reflects a verbal expressionof the character, nature, and will of God.
Typesof Law
Ingeneral, Torah may be subdivided into three categories: judicial,ceremonial, and moral, though each of these may influence or overlapwith the others. The OT associates the “giving of the Torah”with Moses’ first divine encounter at Mount Sinai (Exod. 19–23)following the Israelites’ deliverance from the land of Egypt,though some body of customary legislation existed before this time(Exod. 18). These instructions find expansion and elucidation inother pentateuchal texts, such as Leviticus and Deut. 12–24,indicating that God’s teachings were intended as the code ofconduct and worship for Israel not only during its wildernesswanderings but also when it settled in the land of Canaan followingthe conquest.
Morespecifically, the word “law” often denotes the TenCommandments (or “the Decalogue,” lit., the “tenwords”) (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4) that were delivered toMoses (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). These commandmentsreflect a summary statement of the covenant and may be divided intotwo parts, consistent with the two tablets of stone on which theywere first recorded: the first four address the individual’srelationship to God, and the last six focus on instructionsconcerning human relationships. Despite the apparent simplisticexpression of the Decalogue, the complexity of these guidelinesextends beyond individual acts and attitudes, encompassing any andall incentives, enticements, and pressures leading up to a thingforbidden. Not only should the individual refrain from doing theprohibited thing, but also he or she is obligated to practice itsopposite good in order to be in compliance.
Judiciallaw.The Book of the Covenant (Exod. 20:22–23:33), closelyassociated with the Ten Commandments, immediately follows theDecalogue and may be subdivided into casuistic, or “case,”law (21:2–22:17) and a variety of miscellaneous laws, manywhich are apodictic, or absolute, commands. The divine instructionscannot address an infinite range of circ*mstances; consequently, thecasuistic laws describe the judicial process in light of generalsituations, which form the precedence upon which future specificjudgments can be made. Apodictic instructions, generally identifiedby imperatives or volitional forms, set forth a strict prohibitionfollowed by the consequences of disobedience. Government in earlyIsraelite history revolved around the authoritative decisions ofjudges, who declared a verdict based on custom or precedent (Exod.18:13–27). The moral emphasis of the Decalogue and the Book ofthe Covenant provides the underlying theological reasons for obeyingGod’s law and forms an important part of the ethical foundationof pentateuchal discussions and elaborations of law.
Ceremoniallaw.Ceremonial, or cultic, law includes the instructions guiding theconstruction and preparation of the tabernacle for worship combinedwith the Levitical guidelines dictating the proper execution ofritual sacrifice and cultic practice. The significance of thetabernacle as a portable sanctuary of Yahweh and its integralconnection with God’s promise to dwell among the Israelites arereinforced by the tabernacle’s association with the appearanceof Yahweh at Sinai and the inauguration of the covenant. Thetabernacle becomes the place where the people meet God through amediator and seek continued divine favor through ritual purification,sacrifice, and atonement.
Leviticussystematically outlines the procedure for priestly selection andsuccession, details the consecration of cultic vessels and priests,describes conditions for participation and the celebration of sacredfestivals (Lev. 16; 23–25), and addresses other issues such asblasphemy, sexual behavior, and false prophecy. The sacrificialregulations cover sin offerings (6:25), guilt offerings (7:1, 7),burnt offerings (6:9), grain offerings (6:14), and fellowshipofferings (7:11). The book of Leviticus also provides extensiveinstruction concerning the designation of “clean”(consecrated) and “unclean” (profane), reinforcing theseparateness of God’s chosen people (e.g., 11:46; 12:7; 13:59;14:2, 32; 15:32–33). Uncircumcised foreigners were excludedfrom participation in Israel’s sacred assemblies.
Morallaw.Economic hardship presented numerous challenges in Israelite societythat were resolved through laws concerning debt and slavery. A seriesof laws sought to protect the property and rights of those indebtedto creditors (Exod. 22:25–27; Deut. 24:6, 10–13; 2Kings4:1; Amos 2:8). Those who were enslaved in order to compensate fortheir debts had to be released after six years of service (Exod.21:2, 11; Deut. 15:12–18). Property and persons who were turnedover to creditors could often be redeemed (Lev. 25:25–28,47–55). Those who harvested crops were instructed to leave thecorners of fields and the remnants of crops for gleaning by the poor(Deut. 24:19–22; Ruth 2:2–6). The systematic mistreatmentof the marginalized in society led to widespread corruption among thejudiciary, angering Yahweh and leading to the exile (Isa. 1:15–17;Amos 2:6–7; 11–13). It is clear that this type of law wasreenacted during the postexilic period (Neh. 5:1–13; Jer.34:8–16).
Torahin Wisdom Literature and in the Prophets
OTwisdom literature develops the concept of Torah as human instructionfor daily living, underscoring the dynamic character of the law andits permeation of all areas of life. Vigilant obedience to the lawresults in wise and godly conduct. In Proverbs, the son is admonishedby the father to obey the Torah (Prov. 3:1; 4:2; 6:23), and the pupilis instructed by the teacher to respect the law (13:13) and to resistthe company of those who do not obey the Torah (28:4), with suchobservance resulting in God’s blessings (29:18) and answers toprayer (28:9). The wise woman familiarizes herself with the Torahbecause the responsibility for instruction of her household lies withher (31:26).
Thebook of Psalms contains three compositions typically classified asTorah psalms (1; 19; 119). In Ps. 1 continual reflection on the Torahmanifests itself in the prosperity and the wisdom of the obedient.Psalm 19 celebrates the benefits of keeping the Torah, includingwisdom, joy, enlightenment, life, and moral discernment. In a lengthyacrostic arranged according to the Hebrew alphabet, Ps. 119 exploitsthe attitudes, effects, and practicality of the Torah as exemplifiedin the life of the faithful.
Inthe prophetic material, Torah refers to teaching administered in thename of Yahweh, either by the priests or the prophets. Moral decline,manifested by the social injustice of Israel’s leader-shipcoupled with idolatry and syncretistic worship, was directlyattributed to the failure of the priests to uphold the Torah andtheir negligence in instructing the community (Jer. 2:8; 8:8; Ezek.7:26; 22:26; Hos. 8:1–12; Amos 2:4). The prophetic emphasis onjustice and righteousness as characteristic qualities of God’speople highlights the importance placed on fair and equitabletreatment (e.g., Isa. 5:23–24; 26:1–11; 48:17–19;58:6–9; 59:9–14). The Torah provided the authoritativepoint of departure in the composition of prophetic messages andteachings, undergirding the authority and genuineness of theprophetic proclamations and exhortations to the contemporaryaudience. The messages of the prophets were in fact not new, but weresimply the adaptation and transformation of pentateuchal textsalready generally accepted by the community as authoritative.
BiblicalLaw and Ancient Near Eastern Sources
Biblicallaw did not develop in isolation from other legal systems; rather, itappears to follow long-established, widespread, and standardizedpatterns of Mesopotamian law. A persuasive number of parallelsbetween customs and familial relationships addressed in the Nuzitablets and archaic elements in the patriarchal narratives seem tosuggest that the patriarchs operated under Hurrian law. The Nuzitablets clarify the subjects of adoption, marriage, and economictransactions, apparently exerting an influence on the lives of theearly OT patriarchs. The wife-sister accounts of Abram and Isaac, inwhich the marriage eligibility of Sarai and Rebekah arise (Gen. 12;26), as well as Abraham’s proposed adoption of his servantEliezer as an heir (Gen. 15:2–4) and his siring of Ishmaelthrough Sarai’s servant Hagar (Gen. 16), reflect customarypractice described in these documents.
Avast range of legal documents regulating judicial procedures providesmaterial for comparative analysis with biblical texts. Included amongthese discoveries are a number of law collections, generally namedafter the ruler who commissioned them. Archaeologists have uncoveredevidence, from as early as the twenty-first century BC, of twosurviving Sumerian legal collections affirming the ancient origins ofsocietal governance. The Laws of King Ur-Nammu, recorded during thelast great period of Sumerian literacy (2111–2095 BC), arepreserved in scribal copies from Nippur dated between 1800 and 1700BC and consist of a fragment and two partial stone tablets. Writtenin a casuistic format, the texts attest to twenty-nine stipulations,including legislation addressing weights and measures; protectionsfor widows, orphans, and the impoverished; sexual offenses; maritallaws; slavery; false testimony; and property abuses.
Asecond Sumerian law collection dating from the nineteenth century BC,that of King Lipit-Ishtar, the fifth ruler of the Isin dynasty inlower Mesopotamia, consists of a prologue, thirty-eight wholly orpartially restored laws, and an epilogue. These laws, bequeathed toLipit-Ishtar by the Sumerian deities Anu and Enlil in order to“establish justice in the land,” represent civil lawsgoverning business practices, slavery, property, family, andinadvertent injury to an individual. What appear to be an additionalthirty-eight laws, comprising the second half of the code, have beendestroyed along with part of the prologue. All these laws wererecorded in a casuistic format.
TheLaws of Eshnunna, written in Akkadian, consist of two tabletscontaining approximately sixty different laws. The authorship anddate of origin remain unknown, but historians suggest that this lawcollection, which has no prologue or epilogue, was contemporary withthe Code of Hammurabi (1728–1686 BC). Though written in acasuistic format, this artifact assigns penalties on the basis ofsocial status.
TheCode of Hammurabi, named for the sixth of eleven kings of the OldBabylonian dynasty, is perhaps the most famous and most complete ofthe ancient Mesopotamian collections. In 1902, French archaeologistsdiscovered the code on a black diorite stela, nearly eight feet tall,in what was ancient Susa. Multiple copies of the code have beenpreserved. Written in Akkadian cuneiform, the law collection consistsof 282 legal paragraphs created to promote public welfare and thecause of justice. The format of the code, which includes a prologue,an epilogue, and a category of cursings for disobedience andblessings for obedience, closely mirrors the structure of the book ofDeuteronomy. The casuistic format addresses laws governing publicorder and individual private law. The penalties prescribed forcapital offenses, of which there were thirty, were harsh and oftencruel, including bodily mutilation, multiple punishments, andvicarious punishment. Retaliatory consequences for the protection ofprivate property were exceptionally cruel, taking the form of tortureor excessive fines. Often, those who were presumed guilty would bethrown into the river; survival indicated innocence, while drowningdemonstrated guilt. A predominant feature was the lex talionis (thelaw of retaliation, or measure for measure), whereby a correspondingpenalty was exacted against the offender based on the crime. Forinstance, if a child was killed, the death of the offender’schild was required. Capital crimes included theft of property andadultery. Contrary to biblical law, Hammurabi’s code madefinancial provision for the loss of life, whereas in the OT the valueof life was immeasurable.
Theargument from silence suggests that in the absence of a full biblicallaw code, legal instructions and stipulations in the biblical textconsist primarily of codicil emendations, that is, additions andinnovations to already existing laws. For example, the discussion ondivorce in Deut. 21 describes the execution of a document withoutgiving details concerning the content or form of such a document. Thepassage also mentions a yet undiscovered “book of divorce.”The absence of legal material on commercial and business law as wellas specifics concerning inheritance and other common subjects pointsto a more comprehensive body of unwritten law reflecting preexistingsocietal norms. Israelite society was therefore indebted to itsMesopotamian predecessors for its implementation of law as a means ofprotecting citizens, and for many legal provisions eventually adaptedby the biblical text.
TheCharacter of Biblical Law
AlthoughIsraelite law was in some ways influenced by the legal codes of otherancient Near Eastern cultures, biblical law retained a distinctidentity centered on the relationship between Yahweh and his chosenpeople. Law in the OT is presented not as secular instruction butrather as divine pronouncement, receiving its authority as anexpression of the divine will. The entirety of the divine instructionoriginates with God, and he is both author and guarantor of thecovenant with his people. The people of Israel, then, are heldresponsible to God for their actions and not just to a legislativebody or human ruler. The will of the Israelite is wholly surrenderedto the will of God to such a degree that every aspect of anindividual’s life is inextricably connected to the divineteachings. God assigns the stipulations and requirements of the lawto the entire corporate body of Israel. The responsibility forcovenant fidelity does not lie solely with the community leadership;rather, it is shared by every individual in the community, whose dualrole includes ensuring both the fair execution of justice in thecommunity and personal observance of the law. God’sinstructions are proclaimed publicly and apply equally to all socialstrata without distinction, apart from specific direction concerningslaves.
Torahbecomes the corpus of teaching directed toward the entire community.The didactic purpose of the law is evident by the motive clausesappended to many apodictic and casuistic instructions that elaborateon the ethical, religious, or historical reasons for covenantfaithfulness. The pedagogical aim serves to appeal to the Israeliteconscience as a means of motivating obedience. In addition, theteaching that humanity is created in the divine image reinforces thesacredness of human life as a foundational concern of the law.Religious rather than economic values prevail, eliminating the deathpenalty for all property crimes. Individual culpability predominatesin the biblical corpus, abolishing the notion of vicarious punishmentadvocated in extrabiblical legislation. Each offender pays theconsequences of his or her behavior. Each person, created by God andenjoying equal status with all others, receives fair and equitabletreatment.
TheLaw and the New Testament
Thecontemporary significance of the Torah is recognized in the NT byJesus’ declaration that his incarnation served to fulfill thelaw (Matt. 5:17). He affirms the continued legitimacy of the law(Matt. 5:19) and appeals to the law as the governing authority forproper practice and behavior (Matt. 12:6, 42; Luke 4:1–11; Mark7:9–12; 10:17–19).
Therelationship between gospel and law in both Testaments demonstratesfar greater continuity than is recognized by many Christians.Covenant theologians affirm that the Mosaic law described a “covenantof works,” which functions differently from the NT’s“covenant of grace,” while dispensationalists often teachthat grace supersedes and abolishes the demands of the law. Theconditional nature of the Mosaic covenant differs from that of theAbrahamic covenant, since the unconditional promise of the Abrahamiccovenant suggests that the blessings promised to Abraham and his seedwould be realized not because of human obedience but rather throughdivine fidelity (Gal. 3:15–27). The Mosaic covenant, orcovenant of law, is not contrary to the promises of God (Gal. 3:21);instead, God graciously entered into relationship with the people ofIsrael, redeemed them from Egypt, and then gave them the law so thatthey would respond in humble obedience to his redeeming work. Thus,Mosaic law provided through a mediator a way for God to revealhimself to Israel. Consequently, the idea that Israelite religion waslegalistic is mistaken. It did not teach that one could earnsalvation by “keeping the law”; rather, an individualentered into the covenant with God by grace. When God established thecovenant with his people, he forgave their sins. He did not demand acertain level of attainment as a prerequisite for entering into thatrelationship, nor did Israel have to obey the law perfectly in orderto achieve salvation. Instead, the covenantal arrangement instituteda means of forgiveness through the sacrificial system, making theremoval of the barrier of sin available to the people. Israel’sobedience to the law was a response to God’s gracious andredeeming work. Law and covenant were complementary.
Ongoingdiscussions explore the question concerning the relevance of the lawfor Christians today. Many scholars from past centuries, such asMartin Luther, claimed that the believer is freed entirely from thelaw of Moses, including its moral requirements. The OT law is bindingonly insofar as it agrees with the NT and mirrors natural law. JohnCalvin, on the other hand, maintained that the moral laws of the OTare obligatory for the believer, and he asserts that this is theprincipal function of law. Calvin’s sense of keeping the morallaw does not compromise the message of grace, for keeping the morallaw, as opposed to the ceremonial or civil law, does not earnsalvation but instead forms the acceptable response of the believerto God’s grace. Other Reformation scholars suggested that thelaw was abolished with the coming of Christ, and, as a result, whilethe moral norms remain in effect, the ceremonial laws have beenfulfilled with the coming of Christ. Although the penaltiesoriginally prescribed for disobedience are no longer effective,keeping the moral law reflects the proper outcome of a life lived bythe Spirit of God. See also Ten Commandments; Torah.
A city or region approximately sixty miles north of theconfluence of the Euphrates and the Balikh rivers. Abraham moved fromUr to Harran enroute to Canaan (Gen. 11:26–12:5). There,Eliezer acquired Rebekah as a wife for Isaac (24:1–67), andJacob later resided, marrying Leah and Rachel (29:1–30).
The Israelite conquest of the Promised Land is narrated inNumbers through 2 Samuel and includes key figures such as Moses,Joshua, Samuel, Saul, and David, although the main events of theconquest are described in Joshua and Judges. There is considerablescholarly debate about the very complicated details of the conquest.Much of this debate centers on archaeology and the dating of sitesand artifacts that have been excavated in the last century. Furthercomplicating things is the fact that many of the events recorded inthe Bible are not recorded anywhere else, making verification ofevents challenging.
Datingthe conquest (using the destruction of Jericho as a fixed point) isnotoriously difficult. Scholars who accept the biblical account ashistorically reliable tend to date the conquest of Jericho in theearly twelfth century BC. This dating is based on the identificationof the pharaoh in the exodus story as one of the Ramesses (whor*igned in the Nineteenth or Twentieth Egyptian Dynasty, or roughlythe thirteenth to tenth centuries BC). Some archaeologists, however,have argued that during this time Jericho was no more than a small,unwalled village with little or no military significance, thus makingthe story of Jericho’s destruction in the Bible impossible.Thus, other scholars have suggested a fifteenth- orsixteenth-century date for the conquest (when Jericho was knownto be fortified). This solution, however, makes identification of theexodus pharaoh difficult and requires spreading out the events inJudges over four centuries instead of two. Both sides have differenttheories of how to accommodate the statement in 1 Kings 6:1 thatit was 480 years after the exodus that Solomon began to build thetemple. This controversy involving biblical scholars, historians, andarchaeologists promises to continue for many years to come.
Thebackground for the Canaanite conquest is found in the Pentateuchnarratives that describe the Israelites’ exodus from Egypt andtheir trek toward Palestine. Indeed, the conquest is anticipatedalready in God’s promise to Abraham that his descendants willbecome a mighty nation (Gen. 12:1–3; see also 15:16). The storydescribes God’s initial command to quickly conquer the landafter meeting them on Mount Sinai (Num. 13), and the people’srebellion caused by fear of the Canaanites, who are described as“giants in the land” (NLT). As a result, the Israelitesare forced to wander in the Sinai wilderness until the entiregeneration dies (with the exception of Joshua and Caleb).
Asnarrated in the Bible, the conquest begins with defeat of theMidianites on the eastern side of the Jordan River under theleadership of Moses (Num. 31–32). Then, after Moses’death, the Israelites cross the Jordan River to attack Jericho (Josh.1–7). After the miraculous destruction of Jericho, theIsraelites move to Ai and encounter initial defeat due to one man’ssin (Josh. 8). Later, after being tricked by the Gibeonites, theIsraelites engage in battle with the five kings of the Amorites(Josh. 9–10). Finally, Josh. 11 describes the conquest of thenorthern part of the land and especially the military andstrategically important city of Hazor.
Thebook of Judges relates fewer, more concentrated battles againstdifferent enemies, sometimes in offensive attacks and other times asdefensive battles to preserve land control. The final stage of theconquest under David’s kingship is described in 2 Sam.1–8. After Saul’s death, a short and violentconfrontation takes place between Israelite forces still loyal toSaul’s family and those loyal to David. Political power isconsolidated with a few key assassinations, rather than throughfull-fledged war, orchestrated by David’s men (there is somedebate about how involved David was in these events). As a result,David, with the full support of the army (both the forces previouslyloyal to Saul and his own), takes the city of Jerusalem and thenfinally conquers the areas of the Philistines, the Ammonites, and theMoabites (areas that Saul had been unable to subdue). Thus,large-scale fighting for territory ends during David’s reign.
Thetribal boundaries are described in Josh. 14–22. How closelythese boundaries describe land actually conquered and how much of itwas a territorial stake that required further warfare in order to beobtained are subject to intense debate. By the time of David,however, the allotment (described in Joshua) fairly closely reflectsthe largest reaches of the United Kingdom under David (described in2 Samuel).
Thedescriptions of the Israelites’ total destruction of theirenemies, often including women, children, and livestock, have createdtheological difficulties for interpreters trying to reconcile theseeming incongruity of God’s love for humankind, especially theinnocent, and his commands to completely destroy these cultures. Somescholars have sought to justify these actions by describing thehorrific religious practices of these people (such as child sacrificeand ritual sexual perversions), but there are questions about howwidespread these practices actually were and doubt about how theywould justify a response involving the death of innocents. Currently,there is no strong scholarly consensus on how to resolve thisdifficult theological issue.
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
An arid environment challenging to life. Desert comprises about a third of the earth’s land surface, often overtaking verdant areas and squeezing human beings and animals into narrower oases. The deserts of the Bible—Negev, Sinai, Paran, and Zin—are part of the greater Saharo-Arabian desert system, the largest and driest in the world. Most of the land east (areas of present-day Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia) and south (Egypt) of Palestine is desert. However, the desert experience of most Israelites was not vast sands but rather arid environments that could otherwise flourish with sufficient water. In this regard, the biblical “wilderness” and “desert” semantically overlap, but they are not the same environments.
With average precipitation of ten inches or less, these regions typically have sparse vegetation and little or no agriculture (Jer. 2:2). Pliny the Elder (AD 23/24–79) describes the Essenes, who lived near the Dead Sea, as having only “the company of palm trees” (Nat. 5.73). Temperatures are severe, often exceeding 110°F on summer days, but also falling below freezing on winter nights. The limited winter rains provide short-lived grass for grazing (1Sam. 17:28; Ps. 65:13; Jer. 23:10), along with thorns and briers (Judg. 8:7). Cisterns were dug to collect the precious rain (Gen. 37:22).
The severity of the environment is not conducive for animal and human life. The Bible mentions wild asses (Job 24:5; Jer. 48:6), jackals (Mal. 1:3), ostriches (Lam. 4:3), owls (Ps. 102:7), poisonous snakes (Isa. 30:6), panthers, and wolves (Hab. 1:8). The desert came to be viewed as the haunt of demons (Matt. 12:43) but also as a place for spiritual refreshment. By definition, a desert is untouched by human hands. The patterns and sounds go back to God, not the noisy neighbors of urban life. The desert therefore can facilitate communion with God because of the absence of distractions and the inevitable deepening awareness of the fragility of existence. Scarcity of resources also requires communal sharing and cooperation for survival.
Instead of in major urban centers in Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Palestine, the Bible presents God as training people in the desert by testing their faith, beginning with the patriarchs (Gen. 12–50). God redeems Israel out of Egypt into the desert (Exod. 15:22; 16:1; 17:1), leading them to Sinai (Exod. 18:5; 19:1–2) and then a forty-year sojourn (Num. 14:33; 32:13; Deut. 2:7). Following seasons of testing, concerning which the people routinely fail, God provides freshwater and manna, the “grain of heaven” (Ps. 78:24). However, except on the Sabbath, people are not allowed to store the food but must cultivate complete dependence upon God’s provision for their daily bread. Elijah flees into the wilderness and is provided for by an angel (1Kings 19:1–8). He returns to Mount Sinai (Horeb) and experiences the immediate presence of God in a “thin silence” (1Kings 19:8–13; NIV: “gentle whisper”).
This pattern is repeated in the NT, beginning with John the Baptist, who dresses like a desert nomad and subsists on locusts and wild honey—foods near at hand and not subject to agricultural tithing (Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6). After John’s baptism, Jesus departs into the wilderness, where he fasts and is tempted for forty days and nights among the wild beasts but is also provided for by angels (Matt. 4:1–11 pars.). Paul, after his experience on the road to Damascus, departs into Arabia (Nabatea, present-day Jordan), the place “where the nomads live” and the traditional site of Mount Sinai (Pliny the Elder, Nat. 5.72; Gal. 1:17; 4:25). (Damascus, perhaps the oldest city in the world, is an oasis bordering the Arabian Desert on a highway connecting Egypt with Mesopotamia.) The author of Revelation depicts a woman, who represents the people of God, fleeing into the wilderness to escape the red dragon, Satan (Rev. 12:1–6).
Diversity, in the sense of the modern valuation of ethnic,gender, biological, and cultural heterogeneity, is anachronistic tobiblical times. Some manifestations of diversity in the modern sense,such as religious toleration and intermarriage, are stronglycondemned in some biblical passages (e.g., Deut. 7:3; 12:30). At thesame time, several biblical texts are aligned to at least some degreewith the modern value of diversity. In 1Cor. 12:4–31 Paulemphasizes that a diversity of spiritual gifts in the church is agreat blessing (see also 1Pet. 4:10). The book of Acts portraysthe early church as drawing converts from the fullest variety ofethnicities (2:5–13), and Revelation describes the church asconsisting of the redeemed of “every tribe and language andpeople and nation” (5:9 [cf. 7:9]). Indeed, this positiveevaluation of ethnic diversity is anticipated in the OT (Gen. 12:3;Mic. 4:2). The Bible anticipates the modern notion of biodiversity byemphasizing the goodness of God’s creation of distinct “kinds”and the intrinsic value of such variety (Gen. 1:21; 7:3).
A notable tree used in pagan divination practices, visiblefrom the entrance to the city Shechem (Judg. 9:37). This may be thetree near which Abram built an altar after receiving God’spromise regarding the surrounding land (Gen. 12:6–7). This mayalso be the tree under which Jacob buried his household’sforeign gods and earrings (Gen. 35:4). These possible referencescannot be verified. Renderings of the Hebrew ’elon me’onenimalso include “plain of Meonenim” (KJV), “diviners’oak” (NASB, RSV, ESV), and “oracle oak” (MSG).
A notable tree used in pagan divination practices, visiblefrom the entrance to the city Shechem (Judg. 9:37). This may be thetree near which Abram built an altar after receiving God’spromise regarding the surrounding land (Gen. 12:6–7). This mayalso be the tree under which Jacob buried his household’sforeign gods and earrings (Gen. 35:4). These possible referencescannot be verified. Renderings of the Hebrew ’elon me’onenimalso include “plain of Meonenim” (KJV), “diviners’oak” (NASB, RSV, ESV), and “oracle oak” (MSG).
A notable tree used in pagan divination practices, visiblefrom the entrance to the city Shechem (Judg. 9:37). This may be thetree near which Abram built an altar after receiving God’spromise regarding the surrounding land (Gen. 12:6–7). This mayalso be the tree under which Jacob buried his household’sforeign gods and earrings (Gen. 35:4). These possible referencescannot be verified. Renderings of the Hebrew ’elon me’onenimalso include “plain of Meonenim” (KJV), “diviners’oak” (NASB, RSV, ESV), and “oracle oak” (MSG).
The spectrum of meaning of “faith” and “faithfulness” may be applied both to God and to human beings. Cognates of “faith” are used interpersonally in human relationships but are used in the Bible specifically to denote the interaction between God and humanity, and human response to God. A question of theological pertinence is the degree to which one must distinguish between faith as an agent of personal belief and faith as an object of personal belief as pertaining to the relationship between God and human being.
In Hebrew the words most often translated “faith” or “faithful” are ’emunah and ’emet. In Greek the word rendered most frequently “faith” or “faithful” is pistis. In terms of their semantic domains, ’emunah and ’emet connote an objective sense of reliability (of persons) and stability (of inanimate objects); pistis conveys more of a subjective sense of placing confidence in a person, trusting in a person, or believing in a person or set of propositions. This subjective sense of pistis is correlated to considering the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence as reliable—“faithful.” Pistis likewise is used to communicate the quality of this person or belief as “committed” and “trustworthy.”
As noted, to some degree the meanings of the Hebrew and Greek terms overlap. However, certain dissimilarities are apparent as well. These observations play out in OT and NT expressions of faith. Martin Buber (1878–1965), a Jewish philosopher known for his academic work in the area of “faith,” distinguished between two types of faith: OT/Judaic faith, typified as tribal, national, and communal trust and fidelity based on the covenant; and NT/Christian faith, characterized as individual persuasion or belief in something.
Old Testament
Faith in the context of the OT rests on a foundation that the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence is reliable. Trust in Yahweh is expressed through loyalty and obedience. The theme of responsive obedience is emphasized in the Torah (Exod. 19:5). In the later history of Israel, faithfulness to the law became the predominant expression of faith (Dan. 1:8; 6:10). OT faith, then, is a moral response rather than abstract intellect or emotion.
Faithfulness as an attribute of God. Yahweh is presented in the OT as faithful to his promises, as faithfulness is a part of his very being. In the Torah the Israelites are reminded, “The Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). Not only is God presented as keeping his covenant, but also the prophet Hosea calls God “the faithful Holy One” (Hos. 11:12). Isaiah likewise pre-sents faithfulness as an attribute of God (Isa. 49:7). The people can rest assured, for God is unchanging and reliable.
The psalmist speaks of Yahweh as the faithful God: “You have redeemed me, O Lord, faithful God” (Ps. 31:5 NRSV); “he remains faithful forever” (Ps. 146:6). The translation “faithful” is warranted in these instances in the psalms. Its connotations are “truth” and “trustworthiness.” Yahweh is ascribed divine honor by his people recognizing and acknowledging his faithfulness and trustworthiness, and by responding to it in obedience as the people of God.
The faith of Abraham. Abraham’s (Abram’s) faith is used in the Bible as an example (Rom. 4:12; Gal. 3:6–9) in the sense that Abraham trusted God’s faithfulness in a way unequaled by other characters in the OT. Abraham lived in Mesopotamia when God spoke to him in a vision and told him that his descendants would be as innumerable as the stars in the sky (Gen. 15:1–5). Abraham trusted that God would be faithful to keep his promise despite insurmountable obstacles. This trust was credited to Abraham as righteousness (15:6). God subsequently initiated a covenant with Abraham (15:7–21).
Abraham’s life was characterized by his obedience to God and by his considering God to be faithful, something well noted by the early church (Heb. 11:8–11, 17–19) and used as an example of faith in the Christian walk (12:1). The three best-known examples of Abraham’s obedience and hence trust in God’s faithfulness are found consecutively in the departure from his homeland, the birth of his son Isaac, and the offering of Isaac as a sacrifice.
When God said to Abraham, “Go from your country, your people and your father’s household to the land I will show you” (Gen. 12:1), Abraham went as commanded (12:4). He obeyed despite his cultural disposition toward staying in the area of his ancestry and kin, and he went without knowledge of an appointed destination. Elderly and childless (12:7, 11–12), Abraham considered offspring to be impossible. However, Abraham trusted that God would be able to raise offspring for him, believing that he would become a great nation (12:2). His offspring Isaac was later reminded of the obedience of Abraham (26:5). Abraham’s greatest challenge of trust in God’s faithful provision came when he was commanded to offer his son Isaac as a burnt offering (22:2). He was commended for fearing God without reservation (22:12).
When the priest and initial leader of the Maccabean revolt, Mattathias, gave his farewell speech to his sons as he faced death in 166 BC, he placed his deeds along the lines of biblical heroes of faith such as Abraham. With likely reference to Abraham offering Isaac, he said, “Was not Abraham found faithful when tested, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness?” (1Macc. 2:52 NRSV). The early church likewise used this test in Abraham’s life as an example of his faithfulness, while at the same time claiming that the source for this faithfulness was found in faith—faith in God’s faithful provision (Heb. 11:17).
Faithfulness to the covenant. Faithfulness embodies the very core of the covenant relationship. God seeks a love relationship with humanity expressed in initiating his covenant. He is described as “abounding in love and faithfulness” (Exod. 34:6). His covenant love (Heb. khesed) is closely correlated to his faithfulness: “He is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love” (Deut. 7:9). Throughout the OT, Yahweh is shown as loyal to his covenant. Yahweh’s righteousness is seen in his faithfulness in keeping the covenant even when his people were disloyal and did not acknowledge his faithfulness. He delivered his people out of Egypt because of his covenant love and righteousness, as the psalmist declared: “But from everlasting to everlasting the Lord’s love is with those who fear him, and his righteousness with their children’s children—with those who keep his covenant and remember to obey his precepts” (Ps. 103:17–18). He delivered them out of their subsequent exile, declaring them righteous because their repentant hearts trusted in his faithfulness and sought to obey his covenant. Yahweh said, “If I have not made my covenant with day and night and established the laws of heaven and earth, then I will reject the descendants of Jacob and David my servant and will not choose one of his sons to rule over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. For I will restore their fortunes and have compassion on them” (Jer. 33:25–26).
God’s people, however, were expected to reciprocate and trust his faithfulness (1Chron. 16:15–16). When God met with Moses on Mount Sinai, he instructed Moses to tell the Israelites to obey the commands fully and to keep the covenant. It was only then that they would be a treasured possession, a holy nation (Exod. 19:5–6). The Israelites were expected to follow in obedience and thus reciprocate God’s faithfulness. The people of Israel often failed, but David and other godly people chose to be faithful to God and walk in his truth (Ps. 119:30; Heb. 11:4–38).
Faith counted as righteousness. Whereas faith is used throughout the OT in reference to God’s faithfulness and loyalty, it is used in Hab. 2:4 as pertaining to the faith of the righteous: “But the righteous will live by his faith” (NASB). In Rom. 1:17 Paul specifies, “For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: ‘The righteous will live by faith.’ ” He notes that God’s righteousness, even as revealed within OT promises, is by faith (“faith to faith,” or “faith, through and through”). By the parameters “from faith to faith,” Paul intends to exclude works of righteousness, a theme that he carries consistently in the first four chapters of Romans. Justification, for Habakkuk’s hearers, meant faithfulness, a single-minded focus on Yahweh to meet life’s essential needs. For Paul, salvation by way of justification meant that reliance upon Christ alone was foundational. In Pauline theology, faith is a thread connecting the old covenant with the new covenant.
New Testament
Faith is a central theological concept in the NT. In relational terms, faith is foremost personalized as the locus of trust and belief in the person of Jesus Christ.
In the Gospels, Jesus is spoken of not as the subject of faith (as believing in God), but as the object of faith. In the Synoptic Gospels, faith is seen most often in connection with the ministry of Jesus. Miracles, in particular healings, are presented as taking place in response to the faith of the one in need of healing or the requester. In the Gospel of John, faith (belief) is presented as something that God requires of his people (6:28–29).
In the book of Acts, “faith/belief” is used to refer to Jews and Gentiles converting to following the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and becoming part of the Christian community. The book correlates faith in Christ closely with repentance (Acts 11:21; 19:18; 20:21; 26:18).
Paul relates faith to righteousness and justification (Rom. 3:22; 5:11; Gal. 3:6). In Ephesians faith is shown as instrumental in salvation: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” (Eph. 2:8).
In Hebrews, faith is described as “being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (11:1). Faith thus is viewed as something that can be accomplished in the life of the believer—a calling of God not yet tangible or seen. To possess faith is to be loyal to God and to the gospel of Jesus Christ despite all obstacles. In the letter of James, genuine works naturally accompany genuine faith. Works, however, are expressed in doing the will of God. The will of God means, for example, caring for the poor (James 2:15–16).
In 1Peter, Christ is depicted as the broker of faith in God (1Pet. 1:21), whereas in 2Peter and Jude faith is presented as received from God (2Pet. 1:1). In the letters of John “to believe” is used as a litmus test for those who possess eternal life: “You who believe in the name of the Son of God, ... you have eternal life” (1John 5:13).
Faith is rarely addressed in the book of Revelation. Rather, faithfulness is the objective. Christ is described as the faithful and true witness (Rev. 1:5; 3:14), the perfect example for believers. One of the believers in Asia Minor, Antipas, is identified as Christ’s witness and faithful one (2:13). Those believers who, like Antipas, are faithful unto death, are called “overcomers” (2:10, 26). The faithless are thrown into the lake of fire, which represents the second death (21:8).
Faith and salvation. The role of faith in salvation is often hotly debated. Views are polarized between Christ as the object of faith and as the subject of faith. These views are designated as an objective genitive (faith in Christ), also known as an anthropological view, and a subjective genitive (the faithfulness of Christ), also known as a christological view. Thus, for example, Rom. 3:22 can be translated as “This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe” (cf. NRSV) or as “This righteousness from God comes through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe” (cf. NET). In the latter translation the faithfulness of Christ is seen as the agent of salvation.
In Eph. 2:8 the phrase “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith,” points to faith as instrumental in salvation. However, the source of that faith is not made clear. Does God provide the faith required to be saved, and thus the event is out of the hands of humanity? Or does salvation require a response from human beings in the form of faith—that is, trust?
In the Letter to the Romans, Paul indicates a correlation between grace and faith (Rom. 4:16; 5:1–2), and he shows that Abraham’s faith, his belief and unwavering hope in God’s faithfulness, was credited to him as righteousness (4:18–22). In the new covenant this righteousness likewise is credited to those who believe in God (4:23–24).
Faith and works. In Eph. 2:8–10 works are described as an outflow of the faith of believers: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.”
Faith and works are also related in the letter of James, where works appear to be a prerequisite of faith, for faith without works is dead (2:26). While at first sight this might appear to contradict a Pauline understanding of faith and works (Rom. 3:19–5:1; Gal. 2:15–3:24), James and Paul use the word “works” differently. Paul uses it in terms of “obedience to the law,” something obsolete as a requirement in the new covenant. James, however, writes with regard to works of charity, not works of obedience to Jewish ritualistic law. Authentic faith, then, shows the evidence of good works—charity, the fruit of the Spirit.
Faith and the Church
Whereas baptism was a public initiation rite into the first-century Christian community, it was faith in Christ Jesus that was understood as establishing one’s membership in the family of God (Gal. 3:26). This membership was available to both Jews and Gentiles. Faith, the shared belief system in and confession of Jesus’ salvific work, became the common denominator in the Christian community. In Ephesians, faith is identified as one of the unifying elements of the church (Eph. 4:5). The prayer of faith heals the sick person in the church, another unifying element of applying faith (James 5:13–15).
Faith as a spiritual gift. According to the apostle Paul, the gift of faith is closely related to the life and functioning of the church (1Cor. 12:9). Mentioned among other gifts, or charismata (12:4), this aspect of faith is that benefit of salvation with which certain members of the church are graced and is used for the common good (12:7). This faith, then, is understood as edifying the Christian community at large rather than just the individual believer.
Faith and the Christian life. Christians are described as living by faith (2Cor. 5:7). Not only does faith lead people to Christ, but also Christ subsequently dwells in believers’ hearts through faith (Eph. 3:17). This Christian faith is subject to testing (James 1:2).
Faith is presented by Paul as present at different levels of growth among believers. Some Christians are weak in faith (Rom. 14:1), whereas others are strong in faith (15:1). Faith can differ in its strength of conviction (4:20–22; 14:5). It is presented as something that can grow (2Cor. 10:15).
Faith is grouped among gifts and virtues. Lifted out together with hope and love, faith is mentioned among gifts that edify believers in the church (1Cor. 13:13). Likewise, faith is mentioned as a Christian virtue among the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).
The spectrum of meaning of “faith” and “faithfulness” may be applied both to God and to human beings. Cognates of “faith” are used interpersonally in human relationships but are used in the Bible specifically to denote the interaction between God and humanity, and human response to God. A question of theological pertinence is the degree to which one must distinguish between faith as an agent of personal belief and faith as an object of personal belief as pertaining to the relationship between God and human being.
In Hebrew the words most often translated “faith” or “faithful” are ’emunah and ’emet. In Greek the word rendered most frequently “faith” or “faithful” is pistis. In terms of their semantic domains, ’emunah and ’emet connote an objective sense of reliability (of persons) and stability (of inanimate objects); pistis conveys more of a subjective sense of placing confidence in a person, trusting in a person, or believing in a person or set of propositions. This subjective sense of pistis is correlated to considering the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence as reliable—“faithful.” Pistis likewise is used to communicate the quality of this person or belief as “committed” and “trustworthy.”
As noted, to some degree the meanings of the Hebrew and Greek terms overlap. However, certain dissimilarities are apparent as well. These observations play out in OT and NT expressions of faith. Martin Buber (1878–1965), a Jewish philosopher known for his academic work in the area of “faith,” distinguished between two types of faith: OT/Judaic faith, typified as tribal, national, and communal trust and fidelity based on the covenant; and NT/Christian faith, characterized as individual persuasion or belief in something.
Old Testament
Faith in the context of the OT rests on a foundation that the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence is reliable. Trust in Yahweh is expressed through loyalty and obedience. The theme of responsive obedience is emphasized in the Torah (Exod. 19:5). In the later history of Israel, faithfulness to the law became the predominant expression of faith (Dan. 1:8; 6:10). OT faith, then, is a moral response rather than abstract intellect or emotion.
Faithfulness as an attribute of God. Yahweh is presented in the OT as faithful to his promises, as faithfulness is a part of his very being. In the Torah the Israelites are reminded, “The Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). Not only is God presented as keeping his covenant, but also the prophet Hosea calls God “the faithful Holy One” (Hos. 11:12). Isaiah likewise pre-sents faithfulness as an attribute of God (Isa. 49:7). The people can rest assured, for God is unchanging and reliable.
The psalmist speaks of Yahweh as the faithful God: “You have redeemed me, O Lord, faithful God” (Ps. 31:5 NRSV); “he remains faithful forever” (Ps. 146:6). The translation “faithful” is warranted in these instances in the psalms. Its connotations are “truth” and “trustworthiness.” Yahweh is ascribed divine honor by his people recognizing and acknowledging his faithfulness and trustworthiness, and by responding to it in obedience as the people of God.
The faith of Abraham. Abraham’s (Abram’s) faith is used in the Bible as an example (Rom. 4:12; Gal. 3:6–9) in the sense that Abraham trusted God’s faithfulness in a way unequaled by other characters in the OT. Abraham lived in Mesopotamia when God spoke to him in a vision and told him that his descendants would be as innumerable as the stars in the sky (Gen. 15:1–5). Abraham trusted that God would be faithful to keep his promise despite insurmountable obstacles. This trust was credited to Abraham as righteousness (15:6). God subsequently initiated a covenant with Abraham (15:7–21).
Abraham’s life was characterized by his obedience to God and by his considering God to be faithful, something well noted by the early church (Heb. 11:8–11, 17–19) and used as an example of faith in the Christian walk (12:1). The three best-known examples of Abraham’s obedience and hence trust in God’s faithfulness are found consecutively in the departure from his homeland, the birth of his son Isaac, and the offering of Isaac as a sacrifice.
When God said to Abraham, “Go from your country, your people and your father’s household to the land I will show you” (Gen. 12:1), Abraham went as commanded (12:4). He obeyed despite his cultural disposition toward staying in the area of his ancestry and kin, and he went without knowledge of an appointed destination. Elderly and childless (12:7, 11–12), Abraham considered offspring to be impossible. However, Abraham trusted that God would be able to raise offspring for him, believing that he would become a great nation (12:2). His offspring Isaac was later reminded of the obedience of Abraham (26:5). Abraham’s greatest challenge of trust in God’s faithful provision came when he was commanded to offer his son Isaac as a burnt offering (22:2). He was commended for fearing God without reservation (22:12).
When the priest and initial leader of the Maccabean revolt, Mattathias, gave his farewell speech to his sons as he faced death in 166 BC, he placed his deeds along the lines of biblical heroes of faith such as Abraham. With likely reference to Abraham offering Isaac, he said, “Was not Abraham found faithful when tested, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness?” (1Macc. 2:52 NRSV). The early church likewise used this test in Abraham’s life as an example of his faithfulness, while at the same time claiming that the source for this faithfulness was found in faith—faith in God’s faithful provision (Heb. 11:17).
Faithfulness to the covenant. Faithfulness embodies the very core of the covenant relationship. God seeks a love relationship with humanity expressed in initiating his covenant. He is described as “abounding in love and faithfulness” (Exod. 34:6). His covenant love (Heb. khesed) is closely correlated to his faithfulness: “He is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love” (Deut. 7:9). Throughout the OT, Yahweh is shown as loyal to his covenant. Yahweh’s righteousness is seen in his faithfulness in keeping the covenant even when his people were disloyal and did not acknowledge his faithfulness. He delivered his people out of Egypt because of his covenant love and righteousness, as the psalmist declared: “But from everlasting to everlasting the Lord’s love is with those who fear him, and his righteousness with their children’s children—with those who keep his covenant and remember to obey his precepts” (Ps. 103:17–18). He delivered them out of their subsequent exile, declaring them righteous because their repentant hearts trusted in his faithfulness and sought to obey his covenant. Yahweh said, “If I have not made my covenant with day and night and established the laws of heaven and earth, then I will reject the descendants of Jacob and David my servant and will not choose one of his sons to rule over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. For I will restore their fortunes and have compassion on them” (Jer. 33:25–26).
God’s people, however, were expected to reciprocate and trust his faithfulness (1Chron. 16:15–16). When God met with Moses on Mount Sinai, he instructed Moses to tell the Israelites to obey the commands fully and to keep the covenant. It was only then that they would be a treasured possession, a holy nation (Exod. 19:5–6). The Israelites were expected to follow in obedience and thus reciprocate God’s faithfulness. The people of Israel often failed, but David and other godly people chose to be faithful to God and walk in his truth (Ps. 119:30; Heb. 11:4–38).
Faith counted as righteousness. Whereas faith is used throughout the OT in reference to God’s faithfulness and loyalty, it is used in Hab. 2:4 as pertaining to the faith of the righteous: “But the righteous will live by his faith” (NASB). In Rom. 1:17 Paul specifies, “For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: ‘The righteous will live by faith.’ ” He notes that God’s righteousness, even as revealed within OT promises, is by faith (“faith to faith,” or “faith, through and through”). By the parameters “from faith to faith,” Paul intends to exclude works of righteousness, a theme that he carries consistently in the first four chapters of Romans. Justification, for Habakkuk’s hearers, meant faithfulness, a single-minded focus on Yahweh to meet life’s essential needs. For Paul, salvation by way of justification meant that reliance upon Christ alone was foundational. In Pauline theology, faith is a thread connecting the old covenant with the new covenant.
New Testament
Faith is a central theological concept in the NT. In relational terms, faith is foremost personalized as the locus of trust and belief in the person of Jesus Christ.
In the Gospels, Jesus is spoken of not as the subject of faith (as believing in God), but as the object of faith. In the Synoptic Gospels, faith is seen most often in connection with the ministry of Jesus. Miracles, in particular healings, are presented as taking place in response to the faith of the one in need of healing or the requester. In the Gospel of John, faith (belief) is presented as something that God requires of his people (6:28–29).
In the book of Acts, “faith/belief” is used to refer to Jews and Gentiles converting to following the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and becoming part of the Christian community. The book correlates faith in Christ closely with repentance (Acts 11:21; 19:18; 20:21; 26:18).
Paul relates faith to righteousness and justification (Rom. 3:22; 5:11; Gal. 3:6). In Ephesians faith is shown as instrumental in salvation: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” (Eph. 2:8).
In Hebrews, faith is described as “being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (11:1). Faith thus is viewed as something that can be accomplished in the life of the believer—a calling of God not yet tangible or seen. To possess faith is to be loyal to God and to the gospel of Jesus Christ despite all obstacles. In the letter of James, genuine works naturally accompany genuine faith. Works, however, are expressed in doing the will of God. The will of God means, for example, caring for the poor (James 2:15–16).
In 1Peter, Christ is depicted as the broker of faith in God (1Pet. 1:21), whereas in 2Peter and Jude faith is presented as received from God (2Pet. 1:1). In the letters of John “to believe” is used as a litmus test for those who possess eternal life: “You who believe in the name of the Son of God, ... you have eternal life” (1John 5:13).
Faith is rarely addressed in the book of Revelation. Rather, faithfulness is the objective. Christ is described as the faithful and true witness (Rev. 1:5; 3:14), the perfect example for believers. One of the believers in Asia Minor, Antipas, is identified as Christ’s witness and faithful one (2:13). Those believers who, like Antipas, are faithful unto death, are called “overcomers” (2:10, 26). The faithless are thrown into the lake of fire, which represents the second death (21:8).
Faith and salvation. The role of faith in salvation is often hotly debated. Views are polarized between Christ as the object of faith and as the subject of faith. These views are designated as an objective genitive (faith in Christ), also known as an anthropological view, and a subjective genitive (the faithfulness of Christ), also known as a christological view. Thus, for example, Rom. 3:22 can be translated as “This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe” (cf. NRSV) or as “This righteousness from God comes through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe” (cf. NET). In the latter translation the faithfulness of Christ is seen as the agent of salvation.
In Eph. 2:8 the phrase “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith,” points to faith as instrumental in salvation. However, the source of that faith is not made clear. Does God provide the faith required to be saved, and thus the event is out of the hands of humanity? Or does salvation require a response from human beings in the form of faith—that is, trust?
In the Letter to the Romans, Paul indicates a correlation between grace and faith (Rom. 4:16; 5:1–2), and he shows that Abraham’s faith, his belief and unwavering hope in God’s faithfulness, was credited to him as righteousness (4:18–22). In the new covenant this righteousness likewise is credited to those who believe in God (4:23–24).
Faith and works. In Eph. 2:8–10 works are described as an outflow of the faith of believers: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.”
Faith and works are also related in the letter of James, where works appear to be a prerequisite of faith, for faith without works is dead (2:26). While at first sight this might appear to contradict a Pauline understanding of faith and works (Rom. 3:19–5:1; Gal. 2:15–3:24), James and Paul use the word “works” differently. Paul uses it in terms of “obedience to the law,” something obsolete as a requirement in the new covenant. James, however, writes with regard to works of charity, not works of obedience to Jewish ritualistic law. Authentic faith, then, shows the evidence of good works—charity, the fruit of the Spirit.
Faith and the Church
Whereas baptism was a public initiation rite into the first-century Christian community, it was faith in Christ Jesus that was understood as establishing one’s membership in the family of God (Gal. 3:26). This membership was available to both Jews and Gentiles. Faith, the shared belief system in and confession of Jesus’ salvific work, became the common denominator in the Christian community. In Ephesians, faith is identified as one of the unifying elements of the church (Eph. 4:5). The prayer of faith heals the sick person in the church, another unifying element of applying faith (James 5:13–15).
Faith as a spiritual gift. According to the apostle Paul, the gift of faith is closely related to the life and functioning of the church (1Cor. 12:9). Mentioned among other gifts, or charismata (12:4), this aspect of faith is that benefit of salvation with which certain members of the church are graced and is used for the common good (12:7). This faith, then, is understood as edifying the Christian community at large rather than just the individual believer.
Faith and the Christian life. Christians are described as living by faith (2Cor. 5:7). Not only does faith lead people to Christ, but also Christ subsequently dwells in believers’ hearts through faith (Eph. 3:17). This Christian faith is subject to testing (James 1:2).
Faith is presented by Paul as present at different levels of growth among believers. Some Christians are weak in faith (Rom. 14:1), whereas others are strong in faith (15:1). Faith can differ in its strength of conviction (4:20–22; 14:5). It is presented as something that can grow (2Cor. 10:15).
Faith is grouped among gifts and virtues. Lifted out together with hope and love, faith is mentioned among gifts that edify believers in the church (1Cor. 13:13). Likewise, faith is mentioned as a Christian virtue among the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).
The word “Gentiles” is often used to translatewords meaning “nations” or “peoples.” It hasa Latin etymology from gens, meaning “clan” or “family”and, eventually, “race” or “people.” TheGreek word genos (“race, kind”) has a close relationship.In the Bible it loosely refers to nations or peoples other thanIsrael. English Bibles often translate it as “nations,”“peoples,” or “races.”
OldTestament
Ingeneral, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. Godchose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:6–8;10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership inthe covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becomingpart of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).
TheOT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessingthrough Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping thelaw, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. Thelaw is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenantthat God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5;20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6;10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss.119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).
Suchlaw/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OTunderstanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel,the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in andthrough Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3;17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specificallyinvolves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]).Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subjectto Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16;14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed byIsrael’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel,serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fearIsrael’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5;60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic.7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages furtherelucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in theGod of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer.12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations“flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentileparticipation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa.2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).
TheServant Songs in Isa. 40–55 also reflect thislaw/Israel-centered nature of salvation for the Gentiles. Theservant, explicitly identified as Israel (41:8, 9; 42:18–19;44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3; 54:17; see also 65:9; 66:14),serves as God’s instrument for reaching the nations (42:1, 6;49:6; 52:15). The OT usually condemns Gentiles who remain separatefrom Israel to some form of judgment, especially Gentiles who haveharmed Israel.
SecondTemple Judaism and Early Christianity
SecondTemple Jewish sources exhibit diverse views about Gentiles, theirnature, their possible relation to God, and their fate at the end.Many reflect something resembling the OT views. Israel as God’speople defined by the law, variously understood and contested amongSecond Temple sources, generally continues to be the locus of God’sultimate blessing activities.
SituatingJesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentilesensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread acrossthe Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God ofIsrael in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentilesexperience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.
SomeChristians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought thatGentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God ofIsrael’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’sopponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from Godand his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13;1Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation,especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin,lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32;Eph. 4:17–19; 1Thess. 4:5; 1Pet. 1:14, 18).
However,various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keepthe law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’sultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, hasreplaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and hisdeath and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ bythe Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true,redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheritingGod’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25;8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7;Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentilesattain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightlybefore God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30;1Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1Thess. 4:3–8).Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles withrespect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.
Debatesabout Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for theseissues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocalsaying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and someother NT writings.
The twin peaks of Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal stand aboutforty miles north of Jerusalem in Samaria and flank the entrance tothe Nablus Valley, the location of biblical Shechem. Gerizim, thesouthern mountain, rises 2,889 feet above sea level, and Ebal, thenorthern mountion, 3,083 feet. Together, they form a naturalamphitheater.
Shechemwas of strategic importance in antiquity because it sat on one ofthree major north-south trade routes through Canaan—the RidgeRoute—and provided the only east-west passage in that area tothe mountains of Ephraim. Abram took this route into the promisedland, where the great trees of Moreh at Shechem became his firstrecorded stop. It was there, between Gerizim and Ebal, that he heardthe voice of God and built an altar (Gen. 12:6–7). AlthoughShechem is rich in biblical history (e.g., Gen. 33:18–19;34:2–26; Josh. 24:32; Judg. 8:31–9:57), each of the twomountains has specific individual significance.
Upontheir entry into the promised land, Moses had commanded theIsraelites to proclaim the blessings of obedience to the law on MountGerizim, and the curses of disobedience to the law on Mount Ebal(Deut. 11:29). Moses had further commanded that they build an altarof uncut stones on Ebal to bear the words of the law written inplaster (27:1–8). Moses had also specified that those sixtribes descended from Jacob’s wives stand on Gerizim, and thefive tribes descended from the maidservants plus Reuben (Gen. 49:4)stand on Ebal (Deut. 27:11–14). After the conquest of Jerichoand Ai, Joshua led a covenant renewal at the twin peaks, therebyfulfilling the Mosaic requirements (Josh. 8:30–35).
Thefinal explicit mention in the OT of Mount Gerizim occurs in Judges.There, Jotham son of Gideon challenged the Shechemites for theirloyalty to his half brother, the treacherous Abimelek (Judg. 9:7–21).A ledge about halfway up the mountain is popularly called “Jotham’sPulpit.”
Thecharacter of Mount Gerizim changed after the exile, when theSamaritans emerged as a separate people group at enmity with theJews. The Samaritan Pentateuch substitutes Gerizim for Ebal in Deut.27:4, so the Samaritans constructed their own temple there in thefourth century BC, during the reign of Alexander the Great (it laterwas destroyed by John Hyrcanus in 128 BC). During her conversationwith Jesus, the woman at Jacob’s Well in Sychar, near Shechem,brought up the topic of ancestral worship on Mount Gerizim (John4:4–38, esp. v.20). See also Ebal.
For Christians, God is the creator of the cosmos and theredeemer of humanity. He has revealed himself in historicalacts—namely, in creation, in the history of Israel, andespecially in the person and work of Jesus Christ. There is only oneGod (Deut. 6:4); “there is no other” (Isa. 45:5). Because“God is spirit” (John 4:24), he must reveal himselfthrough various images and metaphors.
Imageryof God
God’scharacter and attributes are revealed primarily through the use ofimagery, the best and most understandable way to describe themysterious nature of God. Scripture employs many images to describeGod’s being and character. Some examples follow here.
Godis compared to the father who shows compassion and love to hischildren (Ps. 103:13; Rom. 8:15). The father image is also used bythe prophets to reveal God’s creatorship (Isa. 64:8). Jesuspredominantly uses the language of “Father” in referenceto God (Mark 8:38; 13:32; 14:36), revealing his close relationshipwith the Father. God is also identified as the king of Israel evenbefore the Israelites have a human king (1Sam. 10:19).
ThePsalter exalts Yahweh as the king, acknowledging God’ssovereignty and preeminence (Pss. 5:2; 44:4; 47:6–7; 68:24;74:12; 84:3; 95:3; 145:1). God is metaphorically identified as theshepherd who takes care of his sheep, his people, to depict hisnature of provision and protection (Ps. 23:1–4). The image ofthe potter is also employed to describe the nature of God, whocreates his creatures according to his will (Jer. 18:6; Rom.9:20–23). In Hos. 2:4–3:5 God is identified as thelong-suffering husband of the adulterous wife Israel. In the settingof war, God is depicted as the divine warrior who fights against hisenemy (Exod. 15:3).
Godis also referred to as advocate (Isa. 1:18), judge (Gen. 18:25), andlawgiver (Deut. 5:1–22). The image of the farmer is alsofrequently adopted to describe God’s nature of compassionatecare, creation, providence, justice, redemption, sanctification, andmore (e.g., Isa. 5:1–7; John 15:1–12). God is oftenreferred to as the teacher (Exod. 4:15) who teaches what to do, asdoes the Holy Spirit in the NT (John 14:26). The Holy Spirit isidentified as the counselor, the helper, the witness, and the guide(John 14:16, 26; 15:26). God is often metaphorically compared tovarious things in nature, such as rock (Ps. 18:2, 31, 46), light (Ps.27:1), fire (Deut. 4:24; 9:3), lion (Hos. 11:10), and eagle (Deut.32:11–12). In particular, the Davidic psalms employ many imagesin nature—rock, fortress, shield, horn, and stronghold (e.g.,Ps. 18:2)—to describe God’s perfect protection.
Last,anthropomorphism often is employed to describe God’sactivities. Numerous parts of the human body are used to speak ofGod: face (Num. 6:25–26), eyes (2Chron. 16:9), mouth(Deut. 8:3), ears (Neh. 1:6), nostrils (Exod. 15:8), hands (Ezra7:9), arms (Deut. 33:27), fingers (Ps. 8:3), voice (Exod. 15:26),shoulders (Deut. 33:12), feet (Ps. 18:9), and back (Exod. 33:21–22).
Namesand Attributes of God
TheOT refers to God by many names. One of the general terms used forGod, ’el (which probably means “ultimate supremacy”),often appears in a compound form with a qualifying word, as in ’el’elyon (“God Most High”), ’el shadday (“GodAlmighty”), and ’el ro’i (“the God who seesme” or “God of my seeing”). These descriptive namesreveal important attributes of God and usually were derived from thepersonal experiences of the people of God in real-life settings;thus, they do not describe an abstract concept of God.
Themost prominent personal name of God is yahweh (YHWH), which istranslated as “the Lord” in most English Bibles. At theburning bush in the wilderness of Horeb, God first revealed to Moseshis personal name in sentence form: “I am who I am”(Exod. 3:13–15). Though debated, the divine name “YHWH”seems to originate from an abbreviated form of this sentence. Yahweh,who was with Moses and his people at the time of exodus, is the Godwho was with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Jesus’testimony, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the Godof Jacob” is identified as the God “of the living”(Matt. 22:32). Hence, the name “Yahweh” is closely tiedto God’s self-revelation as the God of presence and life. (Seealso Names of God.)
Manyof God’s attributes are summarized in Exod. 34:6–7: “TheLord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger,abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands,and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leavethe guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their childrenfor the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”Below are further explanations of some of the representativeattributes of God.
Holiness.The moral excellence of God is the attribute that underlies all otherattributes. Thus, all God’s attributes can be modified by theadjective holy: holy love, holy justice, holy mercy, holyrighteousness, holy compassion, holy wisdom, and so forth. God is theonly supremely holy one (1Sam. 2:2; Rev. 15:4). God’sname is also holy; those who profane God’s name are condemnedas guilty (Exod. 20:7; Lev. 22:32). God is depicted as the one whohas concern for his holy name, which the Israelites profaned amongthe nations; God actively seeks to restore the holiness of hisdefiled name (Ezek. 36:21–23). God’s holiness is revealedby his righteous action (Isa. 5:16). Not only is God holy, but alsohe expects his people to be holy (Lev. 11:45; 19:2). All thesacrificial codes of Leviticus represent the moral requirements ofholiness for the worshipers. Because of God’s character ofholiness, he cannot tolerate sin in the lives of people, and hebrings judgment to those who do not repent (Hab. 1:13).
Loveand justice.Because “God is love,” no one reaches the true knowledgeof God without having love (1John 4:8). Images of the fatherand the faithful husband are frequently employed to portray God’slove (Deut. 1:31; Jer. 31:32; Hos. 2:14–20; 11:1–4).God’s love was supremely demonstrated by the giving of his onlySon Jesus Christ for his people (John 3:16; Rom. 5:7–8; 1John4:9–10). God expects his people to follow the model of Christ’ssacrificial love (1John 3:16).
God’sjustice is the foundation of his moral law and his ways (Deut. 32:4;Job 34:12; Ps. 9:16; Rev. 15:3). It is also seen in his will (Ps.99:4). God loves justice and acts with justice (Ps. 33:5). God’sjustice is demonstrated in judging people according to theirdeeds—punishing wickedness and rewarding righteousness (Ezek.18:20; Ps. 58:11; Rev. 20:12–13). God establishes justice byupholding the cause of the oppressed (Ps. 103:6) and by vindicatingthose afflicted (1Sam. 25:39). God is completely impartial inimplementing justice (Job 34:18–19). As with holiness, Godrequires his people to reflect his justice (Prov. 21:3).
Godkeeps a perfect balance between the attributes of love and justice.God’s love never infringes upon his justice, and vice versa.The cross of Jesus Christ perfectly shows these two attributes in oneact. Because of his love, God gave his only Son for his people;because of his justice, God punished his Son for the sake of theirsins. The good news is that God’s justice was satisfied by thework of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:25–26).
Righteousnessand mercy.God’s righteousness shows his unique moral perfection. God’snature, actions, and laws display his character of righteousness(Pss. 19:8–9; 119:137; Dan. 9:14). “Righteousness andjustice” are the foundation of God’s throne (Ps. 89:14).God’s righteousness was especially demonstrated in the work ofJesus Christ (Rom. 3:21–22). God’s righteousness willultimately be revealed in his final judgment (Rev. 19:2; 20–22;cf. Ps. 7:11).
TheEnglish word “mercy” renders various words in theoriginal languages: in Hebrew, khesed, khanan, rakham; in Greek,charis, eleos, oiktirmos, splanchnon. English Bibles translate thesevariously as “mercy,” “compassion,” “grace,”“kindness,” or “love.” The word “mercy”is chosen here as a representative concept (cf. Ps. 86:15). God’smercy is most clearly seen in his act of forgiving sinners. In thePsalter, “Have mercy on me” is the most common form ofexpression when the psalmist entreats God’s forgiveness (Pss.41:4, 10; 51:1). God’s mercy is shown abundantly to his chosenpeople (Eph. 2:4–8). Because of his mercy, their sins areforgiven (Mic. 7:18), their punishments are withheld (Ezra 9:13), andeven sinners’ prayers are heard (Ps. 51:1; Luke 18:13–14).God is “the Father of mercies” (2Cor. 1:3 NRSV).
Godkeeps a perfect balance between righteousness and mercy. Hisrighteousness and mercy never infringe upon each other, nor does oneoperate at the expense of the other. God’s abundant mercy isshown to sinners through Jesus Christ, but if they do not repent oftheir sins, his righteous judgment will be brought upon them.
Faithfulness.God’s faithfulness is revealed in keeping the covenant that hemade with his people. God “is the faithful God, keeping hiscovenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him andkeep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). God is faithful to hischaracter, his name, and his word (Neh. 9:8; Ps. 106:8; 2Tim.2:13; Heb. 6:13–18). God’s faithfulness is clearly seenin fulfilling his promise (Josh. 23:14). God showed his faithfulnessby fulfilling all the promises that he made to Abraham (Gen. 12:2–3;Rom. 9:9; Gal. 4:28; Heb. 6:13–15), by having Solomon build thetemple that he promised to David (2Sam. 7:12–13; 1Kings8:17–21), and by sending his people into exile in Babylon andreturning them to their homeland (Jer. 25:8–11; Dan. 9:2–3).God’s faithfulness was ultimately demonstrated by sending JesusChrist, as was promised in the OT (Luke 24:44; Acts 13:32–33;1Cor. 15:3–8).
Goodness.Jesus said, “No one is good—except God alone” (Mark10:18). God demonstrates his goodness in his actions (Ps. 119:68), inhis work of creation (1Tim. 4:4), in his love (Ps. 86:5), andin his promises (Josh. 23:14–15).
Patience.God is “slow to anger” (Exod. 34:6; Num. 14:18), which isa favorite expression for his patience (Neh. 9:17; Pss. 86:15; 103:8;Joel 2:13). God is patient with sinful people for a long time (Acts13:18). Because of his patient character, he delays punishment (Isa.42:14). For instance, God was patient with his disobedient prophetJonah and also with the sinful people of Nineveh (Jon. 3:1–10).The purpose of God’s patience is to lead people towardrepentance (Rom.2:4).
Godof the Trinity
TheChristian God of the Bible is the triune God. God is one but existsin three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt.28:19). The Son is one with the Father (John 10:30); the Holy Spiritis one with God (2Sam. 23:2–3). All three share the samedivine nature; they are all-knowing, holy, glorious, and called“Lord” and “God” (Matt. 11:25; John 1:1;20:28; Acts 3:22; 5:3–4; 10:36; 1Cor. 8:6; 2Cor.3:17–18; 2Pet. 1:1). All three share in the same work ofcreation (Gen. 1:1–3), salvation (1Pet. 1:2), indwelling(John 14:23), and directing the church’s mission (Matt.28:18–20; Acts 16:6–10; 14:27; 13:2–4).
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.
The Egyptian maidservant whom Sarah offered to her husband,Abraham, as a solution to her own infertility (Gen. 16). When Hagarbecame pregnant, she treated Sarah disrespectfully, resulting inHagar’s dismissal. On instruction from the angel of the Lord,Hagar returned and bore Ishmael when Abraham was eighty-six yearsold. While Hagar received God’s promise that her son would havemany descendants, he was not the one through whom God’spromises to Abraham would be fulfilled (Gen. 12:1–3; 15:4;17:19). Following the birth of Isaac to Abraham and Sarah, thetension between the two women resulted in Sarah sending Hagar andIshmael off into the desert, where God reaffirmed his commitment toIshmael (Gen. 21:9–19).
Pauluses Hagar and Sarah to represent two covenants. Hagar represents thecovenant given on Mount Sinai, the law that brings slavery andcharacterizes the earthly Jerusalem. The child born to Sarah as aresult of God’s promise represents the citizens of the heavenlyJerusalem, who are free (Gal. 4:22–27).
A city or region approximately sixty miles north of theconfluence of the Euphrates and the Balikh rivers. Abraham moved fromUr to Harran enroute to Canaan (Gen. 11:26–12:5). There,Eliezer acquired Rebekah as a wife for Isaac (24:1–67), andJacob later resided, marrying Leah and Rachel (29:1–30).
The word “Gentiles” is often used to translatewords meaning “nations” or “peoples.” It hasa Latin etymology from gens, meaning “clan” or “family”and, eventually, “race” or “people.” TheGreek word genos (“race, kind”) has a close relationship.In the Bible it loosely refers to nations or peoples other thanIsrael. English Bibles often translate it as “nations,”“peoples,” or “races.”
OldTestament
Ingeneral, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. Godchose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:6–8;10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership inthe covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becomingpart of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).
TheOT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessingthrough Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping thelaw, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. Thelaw is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenantthat God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5;20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6;10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss.119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).
Suchlaw/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OTunderstanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel,the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in andthrough Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3;17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specificallyinvolves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]).Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subjectto Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16;14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed byIsrael’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel,serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fearIsrael’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5;60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic.7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages furtherelucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in theGod of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer.12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations“flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentileparticipation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa.2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).
TheServant Songs in Isa. 40–55 also reflect thislaw/Israel-centered nature of salvation for the Gentiles. Theservant, explicitly identified as Israel (41:8, 9; 42:18–19;44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3; 54:17; see also 65:9; 66:14),serves as God’s instrument for reaching the nations (42:1, 6;49:6; 52:15). The OT usually condemns Gentiles who remain separatefrom Israel to some form of judgment, especially Gentiles who haveharmed Israel.
SecondTemple Judaism and Early Christianity
SecondTemple Jewish sources exhibit diverse views about Gentiles, theirnature, their possible relation to God, and their fate at the end.Many reflect something resembling the OT views. Israel as God’speople defined by the law, variously understood and contested amongSecond Temple sources, generally continues to be the locus of God’sultimate blessing activities.
SituatingJesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentilesensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread acrossthe Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God ofIsrael in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentilesexperience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.
SomeChristians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought thatGentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God ofIsrael’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’sopponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from Godand his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13;1Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation,especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin,lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32;Eph. 4:17–19; 1Thess. 4:5; 1Pet. 1:14, 18).
However,various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keepthe law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’sultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, hasreplaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and hisdeath and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ bythe Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true,redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheritingGod’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25;8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7;Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentilesattain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightlybefore God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30;1Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1Thess. 4:3–8).Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles withrespect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.
Debatesabout Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for theseissues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocalsaying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and someother NT writings.
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).
Altars were places of sacrifice and worship constructed ofvarious materials. They could be either temporary or permanent. Somealtars were in the open air; others were set apart in a holy place.They could symbolize either God’s presense and protection orfalse worship that would lead to God’s judgment.
OldTestament
Noahand the patriarchs. Thefirst reference in the Bible is to an altar built by Noah after theflood (Gen. 8:20). This action suggests the sanctuary character ofthe mountain on which the ark landed, so that theologically the ark’sresting place was a (partial) return to Eden. The purpose of theextra clean animals loaded onto the ark was revealed (cf. 7:2–3).They were offered up as “burnt offerings,” symbolizingself-dedication to God at this point of new beginning for the humanrace.
Abrambuilt altars “to the Lord” at places where God appearedand spoke to him (Gen. 12:7) and where he encamped (12:8; 13:3–4,18). No sacrifice is explicitly mentioned in association with thesealtars. Thus, they may have had the character of monuments ormemorials of significant events. In association with Abram’saltars, he is said to have “called on the name of the Lord”(12:8)—that is, to pray. The elaborate cultic proceduresassociated with later Israelite altars (e.g., the mediation ofpriests) were absent in the patriarchal period. Succeedinggenerations followed the same practices: Isaac (26:25) and Jacob(33:20; 34:1, 3, 7). God’s test of Abraham involved the demandthat he sacrifice his son Isaac as a burnt offering. In obedience,Abraham built an altar for this purpose, but through God’sintervention a reprieve was granted, and a ram was substituted (22:9,13). Moses erected an altar after the defeat of Amalek at Rephidim,to commemorate this God-given victory (Exod. 17:15–16).
Mosesand the tabernacle.In the context of making the covenant with Israel at Sinai, God gaveMoses instructions on how to construct an altar (Exod. 20:24–26;cf. Josh. 8:31). It could be “an altar of earth” (ofsun-dried mud-brick construction?) or else made of loose naturalstones. The Israelites were expressly forbidden to use hewn stones,perhaps for fear of an idolatrous image being carved (making thisprohibition an application of Exod. 20:4; cf. Deut. 27:5–6).Even if the altar was large, it was not to be supplied with steps forthe priest to ascend, lest his nakedness be shown to God. Therequirement that priests wear undergarments reflects the same concern(Exod. 28:42–43). An altar made of twelve stones, the numberrepresenting the number of the tribes of Israel, was built by Mosesfor the covenant-making ceremony (Exod. 24:4), in which half theblood of the sacrifice was sprinkled on the altar (representing God?)and the other half on the people, the action symbolizing the covenantbond created (24:6–8).
Forthe tabernacle, a portable “altar of burnt offering” wasmade (Exod. 27:1–8; 38:1–7). It had wooden framessheathed in bronze and featured a horn at each corner. There was aledge around the altar halfway up its sides, from which was hungbronze grating, and it had four bronze rings into which poles wereslipped for transport. As part of the cultic ritual, blood wassmeared on the horns (29:12). This altar stood in the open air in thecourtyard of the tabernacle, near the entrance to the tabernacle.Included among the tabernacle furnishings was a smaller “altarof incense,” with molding around the top rim (30:1–10;37:25–28). This altar was, however, overlaid with gold, for itstood closer to God’s ritual presence, inside the tabernacle,“in front of the curtain that shields the Ark of the Covenantlaw,” the curtain that separated the most holy place from theholy place. The high priest placed fragrant incense on this altarevery morning and evening. The fact that this was a daily procedureand the description of the positioning of the tabernacle furnishingsin Exod. 40:26–28 (mentioning the altar of incense afterspeaking about the lampstand) might be taken as implying that theincense altar was in the holy place, but 1 Kings 6:22 and Heb.9:4 suggest that it was actually in the most holy place, near theark.
God,through Moses, instructed the people that on entering the PromisedLand they were to destroy all Canaanite altars along with the otherparaphernalia of their pagan worship (Deut. 7:5; 12:3). Bronze Agealtars discovered at Megiddo include horned limestone incense altarsand a large circular altar mounted by a flight of steps. In Josh. 22the crisis caused by the building of “an imposing altar”by the Transjordanian tribes was averted when these tribes explainedto the rest of the Israelites that it was intended as a replica ofthe altar outside the tabernacle and not for the offering ofsacrifices. The worship of all Israel at the one sanctuary bothexpressed and protected the religious unity and purity of the nationat this vital early stage of occupation of the land. In laternarratives, however, Gideon (Judg. 6), Samuel (1 Sam. 7:17),Saul (1 Sam. 14:35), and David (2 Sam. 24) are said tobuild altars for sacrifice and to have done so with impunity, and infact with the apparent approval of the biblical author. Theestablished custom of seeking sanctuary from threat of death in thenation’s shrine is reflected in 1 Kings 1:50–53;2:28–35, where Adonijah and Joab are described as “clingingto the horns of the altar.”
Solomon’stemple and rival worship centers.In the temple built by Solomon, the altar of incense that belonged tothe “inner sanctuary” was overlaid with gold (1 Kings6:20, 22). Solomon’s prayer at the dedication of the temple wasmade before the bronze altar in the courtyard (1 Kings 8:22,54). The altar for sacrifices was much larger than the one that hadbeen in the tabernacle (1 Chron. 4:1 gives its dimensions).
Althoughmany of the psalms may originally have been used in worship in thefirst temple, there are surprisingly few references to the altar inthe Psalter (only Pss. 26:6; 43:4; 51:19; 84:3; 118:27). They expressthe psalmist’s devotion to God and the temple as the placewhere God’s presence is enjoyed as the highest blessing.
Afterthe division of the kingdom, Jeroboam offered sacrifices at the rivalaltar that he set up in Bethel (1 Kings 12:32–33). Anunnamed “man of God” (= prophet) predicted Josiah’sdesecration of this altar, which lay many years in the future(1 Kings 13:1–5). Amos and Hosea, who prophesied in thenorthern kingdom of the eighth century BC, condemned this and theother altars in that kingdom (e.g., Amos 3:14; Hos. 8:11–13).Ahab set up an altar to Baal in Samaria (1 Kings 16:32), and thesuppression of Yahwism by Jezebel included the throwing down of theLord’s altars in Israel (19:10, 14). The competition on MountCarmel between Elijah and the prophets of Baal involved rival altars(1 Kings 18), and Elijah’s twelve-stone altar recalls thatof Exod. 24, for he was calling the nation back to the exclusivemonotheism preached by Moses (1 Kings 18:30–32).
Withregard to the southern kingdom, the spiritual declension in the timeof Ahaz manifested itself in this king making an altar modeled on theAssyrian prototype that he had seen on a visit to Damascus (2 Kings16:10–14). He shifted the Lord’s altar from in front ofthe temple, where it had previously stood. Godly Hezekiah’sreligious reform included the removal of the altars at the highplaces that up to that time had been centers of deviant worship(2 Kings 18:4, 22). The apostasy of King Manasseh showed itselfin his rebuilding the high places that Hezekiah his father haddestroyed and in erecting altars to Baal (2 Kings 21), thusrepeating the sin of Ahab (cf. 1 Kings 16:32). Josiah’sreform included the destruction of all altars outside Jerusalem(2 Kings 23) and the centralizing of worship in the Jerusalemtemple.
InEzekiel’s vision of the new temple of the future, thesacrificial altar is its centerpiece (Ezek. 43:13–17). Thealtar was to be a large structure, with three-stepped stages and ahorn on each corner, and it was to be fitted with steps on itseastern side for the use of the priests.
Thesecond temple.The Israelites’ return from Babylonian exile was with theexpress aim of rebuilding the temple. The first thing that thepriests did was to build “the altar on its foundation”(i.e., its original base; Ezra 3:2–3). The returnees placed thealtar on the precise spot that it had occupied before the Babyloniansdestroyed it along with the temple. They took such care because theywanted to ensure that God would accept their sacrifices and so grantthem protection. At the very end of the OT period, the prophetMalachi condemned the insincerity of Israel’s worship that wasmanifested in substandard sacrifices being offered on God’saltar (Mal. 1:7, 10; 2:13).
NewTestament
Inthe NT, the altar is mentioned in a number of Jesus’ sayings(e.g., Matt. 5:23–24; 23:18–20). In the theology of thebook of Hebrews, which teaches about the priesthood of Jesus Christ(in the order of Melchizedek), the role of the priest is defined asone who “serve[s] at the altar” (7:13), and Christ’saltar (and that of Christ’s followers) is the cross on which heoffered himself as a sacrifice for sin (13:10). Another argument ofHebrews is that since on the most important day in the Jewish ritualcalendar (the Day of Atonement), the flesh of the sacrifice was noteaten (see Lev. 16:27), the eating of Jewish ceremonial foods is notrequired, nor is it of any spiritual value. The altar in the heavenlysanctuary is mentioned a number of times in the book of Revelation(6:9; 8:3, 5; 9:13; 11:1; 14:18; 16:7). It is most likely the altarof incense and is related to the prayers of God’s persecutedpeople, which are answered by the judgments of God upon the people ofthe earth.
The incorporation or integration of multiple and diversegroups into one. God promised that all peoples would be blessed inAbraham and his descendants (Gen. 12:3; 22:18; cf. Gal. 3:8). Israel,as the recipient of God’s blessing, was to be a light to thenations (Isa. 49:6), a kingdom of priests mediating God’spresence to the surrounding peoples (Exod. 19:6; Ps. 67:1–2).The prophets anticipated a glorious day when the nations would flowinto God’s house and his word would go out from Jerusalem tothe nations (Isa. 2:1–5). In Christ, Gentiles have beenincluded in the “Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16), and Paullonged for the fullness (ESV: “full inclusion”) of theJewish people through faith (Rom. 11:12–17). Ultimately, peoplefrom every tribe, language, people, and nation will together worshipChrist forever (Rev. 5:9).
Jesusembodied the inclusive nature of the kingdom of God in his practiceof table fellowship with the socially marginalized or despised (Luke15:2). His ministry included women, Samaritans, and Gentiles (Luke8:2–3; John 4:40; 12:20). Christ commissioned his Jewishfollowers to make disciples of all nations (Matt. 28:19), infulfillment of OT expectation (Luke 24:47). In the church,differences in ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status continue,but believers are called to a profound unity amid diversity becauseof the work of Christ (Gal. 3:26–28) and the gift of the Spirit(1Cor. 12:11).
Genderinclusiveness is an important consideration for modern Bibletranslations. It concerns the question of whether to use languagethat is not gender specific instead of masculine language when thecontext calls for it (e.g., “people” rather than “men,”and “brothers and sisters” rather than “brothers”).Some versions (e.g., TNIV, NRSV, NET, NLT, REB) prefergender-inclusive language, while others (e.g., NASB, ESV, NKJV)donot.
The incorporation or integration of multiple and diversegroups into one. God promised that all peoples would be blessed inAbraham and his descendants (Gen. 12:3; 22:18; cf. Gal. 3:8). Israel,as the recipient of God’s blessing, was to be a light to thenations (Isa. 49:6), a kingdom of priests mediating God’spresence to the surrounding peoples (Exod. 19:6; Ps. 67:1–2).The prophets anticipated a glorious day when the nations would flowinto God’s house and his word would go out from Jerusalem tothe nations (Isa. 2:1–5). In Christ, Gentiles have beenincluded in the “Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16), and Paullonged for the fullness (ESV: “full inclusion”) of theJewish people through faith (Rom. 11:12–17). Ultimately, peoplefrom every tribe, language, people, and nation will together worshipChrist forever (Rev. 5:9).
Jesusembodied the inclusive nature of the kingdom of God in his practiceof table fellowship with the socially marginalized or despised (Luke15:2). His ministry included women, Samaritans, and Gentiles (Luke8:2–3; John 4:40; 12:20). Christ commissioned his Jewishfollowers to make disciples of all nations (Matt. 28:19), infulfillment of OT expectation (Luke 24:47). In the church,differences in ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status continue,but believers are called to a profound unity amid diversity becauseof the work of Christ (Gal. 3:26–28) and the gift of the Spirit(1Cor. 12:11).
Genderinclusiveness is an important consideration for modern Bibletranslations. It concerns the question of whether to use languagethat is not gender specific instead of masculine language when thecontext calls for it (e.g., “people” rather than “men,”and “brothers and sisters” rather than “brothers”).Some versions (e.g., TNIV, NRSV, NET, NLT, REB) prefergender-inclusive language, while others (e.g., NASB, ESV, NKJV)donot.
The incorporation or integration of multiple and diversegroups into one. God promised that all peoples would be blessed inAbraham and his descendants (Gen. 12:3; 22:18; cf. Gal. 3:8). Israel,as the recipient of God’s blessing, was to be a light to thenations (Isa. 49:6), a kingdom of priests mediating God’spresence to the surrounding peoples (Exod. 19:6; Ps. 67:1–2).The prophets anticipated a glorious day when the nations would flowinto God’s house and his word would go out from Jerusalem tothe nations (Isa. 2:1–5). In Christ, Gentiles have beenincluded in the “Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16), and Paullonged for the fullness (ESV: “full inclusion”) of theJewish people through faith (Rom. 11:12–17). Ultimately, peoplefrom every tribe, language, people, and nation will together worshipChrist forever (Rev. 5:9).
Jesusembodied the inclusive nature of the kingdom of God in his practiceof table fellowship with the socially marginalized or despised (Luke15:2). His ministry included women, Samaritans, and Gentiles (Luke8:2–3; John 4:40; 12:20). Christ commissioned his Jewishfollowers to make disciples of all nations (Matt. 28:19), infulfillment of OT expectation (Luke 24:47). In the church,differences in ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status continue,but believers are called to a profound unity amid diversity becauseof the work of Christ (Gal. 3:26–28) and the gift of the Spirit(1Cor. 12:11).
Genderinclusiveness is an important consideration for modern Bibletranslations. It concerns the question of whether to use languagethat is not gender specific instead of masculine language when thecontext calls for it (e.g., “people” rather than “men,”and “brothers and sisters” rather than “brothers”).Some versions (e.g., TNIV, NRSV, NET, NLT, REB) prefergender-inclusive language, while others (e.g., NASB, ESV, NKJV)donot.
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).
There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin;hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, orportrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of thedriving forces of the entire Bible.
Sinin the Bible
OldTestament.Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’scommandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. WhenAdam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete.They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaveswere inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with theirattempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent,Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).
Inthe midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways thatsin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised toput hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of thewoman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blowupon the offspring of the woman, the offspring ofthe womanwould defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequatecovering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implicationis that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adamand Eve, covering their sin.
InGen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on fulldisplay. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able toeradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humansgathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make aname for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them toscatter across the earth (11:1–9).
Inone sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holyGod satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationshipwith human beings without compromising his justice? The short answeris: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), whoeventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemedthem from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought themto Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated onobedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant wasthe sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided asa means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrificesmade for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year toatone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement thehigh priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies andsprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took asecond goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people ofIsrael, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them onthe head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness....The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barrenregion; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev.16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinfulpeople, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.
Despitethese provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke itscovenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under thereign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people,including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder(2Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wivesand concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods(1Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israeland Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry becamerampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judahin 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised toraise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as aguilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
AfterGod’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that thegreat prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, wereat hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remainedunder foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell ofSolomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Beforelong, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning awayfrom him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administrationof the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failedto properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).
NewTestament.During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longingfor God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last,when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it wasrevealed that he would “save his people from their sins”(Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, Johnthe Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism ofrepentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereasboth Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to bethe obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation(Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13;Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also theSuffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45;cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrathof God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. Withhis justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify allwho are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). Whatneither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, JesusChrist did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).
Afterhis resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers beganproclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus didand calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one ofyou, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”(Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness,they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned againstthem (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believerscontinue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal.5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23).The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the newheaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse(Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).
Aseven this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesisto Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’splot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative;it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved inorder for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.
Definitionand Terminology
Definitionof sin. Althoughno definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of theconcept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conformto God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action,orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered thatGod’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character,so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather isa personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited toactions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen.4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature ashuman beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.
Terminology.TheBible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying themis not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and useof the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one ofthe following four categories.
1.Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator andruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’sself-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankindfoolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom.1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows tohumans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31).Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodlinessor impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa.9:17; 1Pet. 4:18).
2.Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from thelawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass”picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or thecrossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42;Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’slaw, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45;Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violatinghis statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result isguilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’slaw is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectivelyfeels guilt.
3.Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what isgood. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what isgood (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contraststhe upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could alsoinclude here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speakof perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequentmention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievousdeparture from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27;1Cor. 5:1–11).
4.Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individualhad to be in a state of purity before him. While a person couldbecome impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating womanwas impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity”clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek.24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Althoughit is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, inother places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7;Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).
Metaphors
Inaddition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible usesseveral metaphors or images to describe it. The following four areamong the more prominent.
Missingthe mark.In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin”have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sinis reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that aperson simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it isthat he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9;Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional ornot, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num.15:30).
Departingfrom the way.Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in thewisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of therighteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19).Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways,but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18).Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed bytheir own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).
Adultery.Since God’s relationship with his people is described as amarriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32),it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness asadultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous womanvividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them ofspiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52).When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate inidolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1Cor.6:12–20; 10:1–22).
Slavery.Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clearthat Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture ofits far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7;49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to thosewho do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything thatpleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic powerthat is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare(Rom. 7:7–25).
Scopeand Consequences
Sindoes not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage alongwith it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.
Scope.The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As aresult of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist humanefforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen.3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under theweight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2Chron.36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation aswell (Rom. 8:19–22).
Sinaffects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions,motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom.3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “totaldepravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful asthey could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is taintedby sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as asinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societalstructures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economicmarkets, to name but a few.
Consequences.Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’sneighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sinhas consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level.Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen.2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty inGod’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, andsubjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20;5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict betweenindividuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breedsmistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closestrelationships.
Conclusion
Nosubject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding ofsin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As thePuritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ willnot be sweet.”
Along with Abraham and Jacob, Isaac is a central character inthe narratives of Gen. 12–35. Isaac is the offspring of Abrahamand Sarah, the fulfillment of a promise from God of an heir forAbraham (15:4). The promise of offspring is one component in a set(protection and land being some of the others), the provisions of acovenant between God and the patriarchs (12:1–3; 17:1–8;26:2–5). The name “Isaac” is associated with theverb for “laugh” (21:3–7), referring to Sarah’sreaction upon hearing the promise of a child coming well beyond herchildbearing years (18:9–15). Sarah’s incredulity, andAbraham’s sympathy to it, may be witnessed by their attempt toenact fulfillment to the promise through the insemination of Hagar,Sarah’s slave (16:1–4, 16).
Inthe narratives of Gen. 12–35 Isaac is the least prominent ofthe patriarchs. The main event of his life is encapsulated in theincident known as the Akedah, the “binding” (22:1–19).Abraham demonstrates his loyalty to God by complying with a commandto offer Isaac as a sacrifice on Mount Moriah. After an initialinquiry about the absence of a sacrificial beast, Isaac (apparently)passively follows Abraham’s directions in compliance with God’swill. A divine emissary, however, halts Abraham’s actions justprior to the slaying of Isaac.
Theprocurement of Isaac’s wife, Rebekah, by Abraham’sservant is found in Gen. 24:1–67. Like Abraham, Isaac describeshis wife as a sister in order to deflect danger to his person(26:6–11; cf. 12:10–16; 20:1–18). Rebekah bears twosons to Isaac, Esau and Jacob (25:21–26). Through theinstigation and cooperation of Rebekah, Jacob tricks Isaac intoconferring a blessing upon him, one originally intended for Esau(27:1–30).
In the NT, “Jews” (Ioudaioi) is an ethnic andreligious term to describe the people of Judah. In Jesus’ day,Jews were distinguished from Samaritans (John 4:9, 22). Gradually theterm began to be used more in a religious than in an ethnic sense,and it has come to represent the descendants from Abraham as a wholeand religious converts who regard the Mosaic law and customs as theinalienable religious foundation for faith and practices (Mark 7:3;John 2:6).
TheGospels
Inthe Synoptic Gospels the term “Jews” is used largely inthe phrase “the king of the Jews” with reference to Jesus(Matt. 2:2; 27:11, 29; Mark 15:2, 9, 12, 18; Luke 23:3, 37). Born asthe king of the Jews, Jesus claimed to have come to fulfill the lawof Moses instead of abolishing it (Matt. 5:17). He emphasized theimportance of practicing the law in obedience (Matt. 7:24–27),and he rebuked the Pharisees and the scribes for teaching the lawwithout carrying it out (Matt. 23). They opposed him, not onlybecause they rejected his claim to be the Messiah, but also becausethey viewed his teaching and practices as destabilizing theirreligious status quo (Matt. 12:1–8; John 5:10; 11:48).
TheJews are represented in the Gospels by both the upper class (e.g.,Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, chief priests) and the lower classes(the crowds). Usually the religious upper class would not acceptJesus’ teaching and challenged him by asking questions ordenying his authority (Matt. 15:1; 16:1). The crowds generallyaccepted Jesus’ teaching and experienced his power to heal andother benefits. The Synoptic account of the opposition by the upperclass is contrasted with the widespread opposition to Jesus by the“Jews” in general in John’s Gospel. But Matthew andLuke also highlight Jesus’ lament of the unrepentant Jewishcities (Matt. 11:20–24; Luke 10:12–15), indicating thatresistance to Jesus’ teaching was a common phenomenon among theJews.
Jesusresponded to the unbelieving Jews with strong rebuke and condemnation(Matt. 12:30–32; 21:33–46). When Jesus healed a servantof a Roman centurion and marveled at the amazing faith of thisGentile (8:5–13), Jesus predicted that “the subjects ofthe kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness” becauseof unbelief, whereas the Gentiles will come to eat with Abraham inthe kingdom of heaven (8:11–12). In spite of the unbelief ofthe Jews, the privilege to hear the gospel was given to them first.Jesus sent out the twelve disciples, instructing them that theyshould not go anywhere among the Gentiles or enter the towns of theSamaritans, but instead go “to the lost sheep of Israel”(Matt. 10:6 [cf. Rom. 1:16]).
Theterm “Jews” occurs only four times in the Synopticsoutside the phrase “king of the Jews,” but seventy-onetimes in the Gospel of John. John uses the term especially as atechnical one for those Jews who were hostile to Jesus and hisfollowers. Whereas the Synoptics focus on the Jewish leaders’rejection of Jesus’ messianic actions, John focuses on theirrejection of his teaching that he is the Son of God in uniquerelationship with the Father. Jesus in John is not only the “oneand only”(monogenēs) of God (1:18), but also the fulfiller of what thetemple signifies and all the Jewish tradition and customs represent.John thus describes the Jewish opposition to Jesus as much morewidespread and intense than that in the Synoptics, presenting theJews as opposing Jesus’ teaching because of their loyalty toJewish tradition (5:15–18; 6:41; 7:1–2, 13; 8:31–57;9:22; 10:31–33; 19:7–12, 38; 20:19).
Actsand the Pauline Letters
Inthe book of Acts the term “Jews” (eighty-one occurrences)is used especially with reference to the Jewish people who opposePaul’s law-free gospel (9:23; 13:45, 50; 14:2, 4; 17:5; 18:12,14; 20:3; 21:11; 22:30; 23:12; 24:9).
Inhis letters, Paul refers to “Jews” primarily in an ethnicand religious sense without connoting that they have theologicalantagonism against the gospel. The Jews are thus contrasted with theGentiles in that they are “the people of Israel”: “Theirsis the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants,the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises”(Rom. 9:4). While Paul acknowledges the continuity of Jewish identitythrough their lineage from Abraham, he distinguishes true Jews fromfalse Jews in terms of Jesus’ accomplishment of redemption.Paul says, “A person is a Jew who is one inwardly; andcircumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by thewritten code” (2:29). This distinction of true Jews from falseJews resonates with his distinction of true Israel from false Israel(9:6). The redefinition of the group of spiritual Israelites is theresult of Jesus’ death and resurrection according to the OTprophecies. Those who believe in Jesus are reckoned as “childrenof Abraham” according to the gospel announced in Gen. 12:3(Gal. 3:7–8).
Paul’spresentation of spiritual Jews is foreseen in Jesus’ statementthat the Jews who do not believe in him are not Abraham’schildren but rather the children of the devil (John 8:30–44).In 1John the children of God are defined in terms of loverather than ethnic lineage (3:10). According to the book ofRevelation, those “who say they are Jews” are not, butare a “synagogue of Satan” (2:9; 3:9). These passagesshow that salvation is obtained through faith in Jesus rather thanthrough the ethnic lineage of Abraham and observances of the Mosaiclaw (Rom. 3:20–28).
Thesepolemics against the Jews and Jewish law do not necessarily make theNT teachings anti-Semitic or anti-Judaic. What the NT polemicizes isneither the Jewish nation nor Judaism but rather the unbelief of theJews who rejected Jesus, inasmuch as Jesus is the Messiah, who hascome in flesh and fulfilled the prophecies of the OT.
In the NT, “Jews” (Ioudaioi) is an ethnic andreligious term to describe the people of Judah. In Jesus’ day,Jews were distinguished from Samaritans (John 4:9, 22). Gradually theterm began to be used more in a religious than in an ethnic sense,and it has come to represent the descendants from Abraham as a wholeand religious converts who regard the Mosaic law and customs as theinalienable religious foundation for faith and practices (Mark 7:3;John 2:6).
TheGospels
Inthe Synoptic Gospels the term “Jews” is used largely inthe phrase “the king of the Jews” with reference to Jesus(Matt. 2:2; 27:11, 29; Mark 15:2, 9, 12, 18; Luke 23:3, 37). Born asthe king of the Jews, Jesus claimed to have come to fulfill the lawof Moses instead of abolishing it (Matt. 5:17). He emphasized theimportance of practicing the law in obedience (Matt. 7:24–27),and he rebuked the Pharisees and the scribes for teaching the lawwithout carrying it out (Matt. 23). They opposed him, not onlybecause they rejected his claim to be the Messiah, but also becausethey viewed his teaching and practices as destabilizing theirreligious status quo (Matt. 12:1–8; John 5:10; 11:48).
TheJews are represented in the Gospels by both the upper class (e.g.,Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, chief priests) and the lower classes(the crowds). Usually the religious upper class would not acceptJesus’ teaching and challenged him by asking questions ordenying his authority (Matt. 15:1; 16:1). The crowds generallyaccepted Jesus’ teaching and experienced his power to heal andother benefits. The Synoptic account of the opposition by the upperclass is contrasted with the widespread opposition to Jesus by the“Jews” in general in John’s Gospel. But Matthew andLuke also highlight Jesus’ lament of the unrepentant Jewishcities (Matt. 11:20–24; Luke 10:12–15), indicating thatresistance to Jesus’ teaching was a common phenomenon among theJews.
Jesusresponded to the unbelieving Jews with strong rebuke and condemnation(Matt. 12:30–32; 21:33–46). When Jesus healed a servantof a Roman centurion and marveled at the amazing faith of thisGentile (8:5–13), Jesus predicted that “the subjects ofthe kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness” becauseof unbelief, whereas the Gentiles will come to eat with Abraham inthe kingdom of heaven (8:11–12). In spite of the unbelief ofthe Jews, the privilege to hear the gospel was given to them first.Jesus sent out the twelve disciples, instructing them that theyshould not go anywhere among the Gentiles or enter the towns of theSamaritans, but instead go “to the lost sheep of Israel”(Matt. 10:6 [cf. Rom. 1:16]).
Theterm “Jews” occurs only four times in the Synopticsoutside the phrase “king of the Jews,” but seventy-onetimes in the Gospel of John. John uses the term especially as atechnical one for those Jews who were hostile to Jesus and hisfollowers. Whereas the Synoptics focus on the Jewish leaders’rejection of Jesus’ messianic actions, John focuses on theirrejection of his teaching that he is the Son of God in uniquerelationship with the Father. Jesus in John is not only the “oneand only”(monogenēs) of God (1:18), but also the fulfiller of what thetemple signifies and all the Jewish tradition and customs represent.John thus describes the Jewish opposition to Jesus as much morewidespread and intense than that in the Synoptics, presenting theJews as opposing Jesus’ teaching because of their loyalty toJewish tradition (5:15–18; 6:41; 7:1–2, 13; 8:31–57;9:22; 10:31–33; 19:7–12, 38; 20:19).
Actsand the Pauline Letters
Inthe book of Acts the term “Jews” (eighty-one occurrences)is used especially with reference to the Jewish people who opposePaul’s law-free gospel (9:23; 13:45, 50; 14:2, 4; 17:5; 18:12,14; 20:3; 21:11; 22:30; 23:12; 24:9).
Inhis letters, Paul refers to “Jews” primarily in an ethnicand religious sense without connoting that they have theologicalantagonism against the gospel. The Jews are thus contrasted with theGentiles in that they are “the people of Israel”: “Theirsis the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants,the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises”(Rom. 9:4). While Paul acknowledges the continuity of Jewish identitythrough their lineage from Abraham, he distinguishes true Jews fromfalse Jews in terms of Jesus’ accomplishment of redemption.Paul says, “A person is a Jew who is one inwardly; andcircumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by thewritten code” (2:29). This distinction of true Jews from falseJews resonates with his distinction of true Israel from false Israel(9:6). The redefinition of the group of spiritual Israelites is theresult of Jesus’ death and resurrection according to the OTprophecies. Those who believe in Jesus are reckoned as “childrenof Abraham” according to the gospel announced in Gen. 12:3(Gal. 3:7–8).
Paul’spresentation of spiritual Jews is foreseen in Jesus’ statementthat the Jews who do not believe in him are not Abraham’schildren but rather the children of the devil (John 8:30–44).In 1John the children of God are defined in terms of loverather than ethnic lineage (3:10). According to the book ofRevelation, those “who say they are Jews” are not, butare a “synagogue of Satan” (2:9; 3:9). These passagesshow that salvation is obtained through faith in Jesus rather thanthrough the ethnic lineage of Abraham and observances of the Mosaiclaw (Rom. 3:20–28).
Thesepolemics against the Jews and Jewish law do not necessarily make theNT teachings anti-Semitic or anti-Judaic. What the NT polemicizes isneither the Jewish nation nor Judaism but rather the unbelief of theJews who rejected Jesus, inasmuch as Jesus is the Messiah, who hascome in flesh and fulfilled the prophecies of the OT.
In the NT, “Jews” (Ioudaioi) is an ethnic andreligious term to describe the people of Judah. In Jesus’ day,Jews were distinguished from Samaritans (John 4:9, 22). Gradually theterm began to be used more in a religious than in an ethnic sense,and it has come to represent the descendants from Abraham as a wholeand religious converts who regard the Mosaic law and customs as theinalienable religious foundation for faith and practices (Mark 7:3;John 2:6).
TheGospels
Inthe Synoptic Gospels the term “Jews” is used largely inthe phrase “the king of the Jews” with reference to Jesus(Matt. 2:2; 27:11, 29; Mark 15:2, 9, 12, 18; Luke 23:3, 37). Born asthe king of the Jews, Jesus claimed to have come to fulfill the lawof Moses instead of abolishing it (Matt. 5:17). He emphasized theimportance of practicing the law in obedience (Matt. 7:24–27),and he rebuked the Pharisees and the scribes for teaching the lawwithout carrying it out (Matt. 23). They opposed him, not onlybecause they rejected his claim to be the Messiah, but also becausethey viewed his teaching and practices as destabilizing theirreligious status quo (Matt. 12:1–8; John 5:10; 11:48).
TheJews are represented in the Gospels by both the upper class (e.g.,Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, chief priests) and the lower classes(the crowds). Usually the religious upper class would not acceptJesus’ teaching and challenged him by asking questions ordenying his authority (Matt. 15:1; 16:1). The crowds generallyaccepted Jesus’ teaching and experienced his power to heal andother benefits. The Synoptic account of the opposition by the upperclass is contrasted with the widespread opposition to Jesus by the“Jews” in general in John’s Gospel. But Matthew andLuke also highlight Jesus’ lament of the unrepentant Jewishcities (Matt. 11:20–24; Luke 10:12–15), indicating thatresistance to Jesus’ teaching was a common phenomenon among theJews.
Jesusresponded to the unbelieving Jews with strong rebuke and condemnation(Matt. 12:30–32; 21:33–46). When Jesus healed a servantof a Roman centurion and marveled at the amazing faith of thisGentile (8:5–13), Jesus predicted that “the subjects ofthe kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness” becauseof unbelief, whereas the Gentiles will come to eat with Abraham inthe kingdom of heaven (8:11–12). In spite of the unbelief ofthe Jews, the privilege to hear the gospel was given to them first.Jesus sent out the twelve disciples, instructing them that theyshould not go anywhere among the Gentiles or enter the towns of theSamaritans, but instead go “to the lost sheep of Israel”(Matt. 10:6 [cf. Rom. 1:16]).
Theterm “Jews” occurs only four times in the Synopticsoutside the phrase “king of the Jews,” but seventy-onetimes in the Gospel of John. John uses the term especially as atechnical one for those Jews who were hostile to Jesus and hisfollowers. Whereas the Synoptics focus on the Jewish leaders’rejection of Jesus’ messianic actions, John focuses on theirrejection of his teaching that he is the Son of God in uniquerelationship with the Father. Jesus in John is not only the “oneand only”(monogenēs) of God (1:18), but also the fulfiller of what thetemple signifies and all the Jewish tradition and customs represent.John thus describes the Jewish opposition to Jesus as much morewidespread and intense than that in the Synoptics, presenting theJews as opposing Jesus’ teaching because of their loyalty toJewish tradition (5:15–18; 6:41; 7:1–2, 13; 8:31–57;9:22; 10:31–33; 19:7–12, 38; 20:19).
Actsand the Pauline Letters
Inthe book of Acts the term “Jews” (eighty-one occurrences)is used especially with reference to the Jewish people who opposePaul’s law-free gospel (9:23; 13:45, 50; 14:2, 4; 17:5; 18:12,14; 20:3; 21:11; 22:30; 23:12; 24:9).
Inhis letters, Paul refers to “Jews” primarily in an ethnicand religious sense without connoting that they have theologicalantagonism against the gospel. The Jews are thus contrasted with theGentiles in that they are “the people of Israel”: “Theirsis the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants,the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises”(Rom. 9:4). While Paul acknowledges the continuity of Jewish identitythrough their lineage from Abraham, he distinguishes true Jews fromfalse Jews in terms of Jesus’ accomplishment of redemption.Paul says, “A person is a Jew who is one inwardly; andcircumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by thewritten code” (2:29). This distinction of true Jews from falseJews resonates with his distinction of true Israel from false Israel(9:6). The redefinition of the group of spiritual Israelites is theresult of Jesus’ death and resurrection according to the OTprophecies. Those who believe in Jesus are reckoned as “childrenof Abraham” according to the gospel announced in Gen. 12:3(Gal. 3:7–8).
Paul’spresentation of spiritual Jews is foreseen in Jesus’ statementthat the Jews who do not believe in him are not Abraham’schildren but rather the children of the devil (John 8:30–44).In 1John the children of God are defined in terms of loverather than ethnic lineage (3:10). According to the book ofRevelation, those “who say they are Jews” are not, butare a “synagogue of Satan” (2:9; 3:9). These passagesshow that salvation is obtained through faith in Jesus rather thanthrough the ethnic lineage of Abraham and observances of the Mosaiclaw (Rom. 3:20–28).
Thesepolemics against the Jews and Jewish law do not necessarily make theNT teachings anti-Semitic or anti-Judaic. What the NT polemicizes isneither the Jewish nation nor Judaism but rather the unbelief of theJews who rejected Jesus, inasmuch as Jesus is the Messiah, who hascome in flesh and fulfilled the prophecies of the OT.
Terminology
Theword “law,” often referred to as “Torah,”occurs 220 times in the OT and derives from a Hebrew root that means“to teach or instruct.” Biblical law is the body ofinstructions or teachings that serve to govern and maintain thecovenant relationship between God and Israel. The distinctiverelationship that Israel enjoyed with God was unparalleled in theancient Near East. Unlike the Gentile nations, Israel received fromYahweh an instrument outlining his expectations of them, a set ofguidelines by which to sustain that covenant relationship (Deut.4:6–8). Outside the OT, the “Torah” or “Law”often refers to the first five books of the Bible, called the“Pentateuch” (Matt. 5:17–18; Luke 2:22). SecondTemple Judaism commonly referred to the Pentateuch in this way.
Theterm “Torah” is not limited to cultic or ceremonialpractice, but embraces civil and social law. In addition, the Torahrefers to the prophetic word and more broadly incorporates the ideaof parental instruction. The Hebrew word torah is employed in avariety of expressions, variously rendered in English versions: “thelaw” (Deut. 1:5; 4:8, 44; 2Kings 23:24), the “Bookof the Law” (Deut. 28:61; 29:21; Josh. 1:8; 2Kings 22:8),the “Book of the Law of Moses” (Josh. 8:31; 23:6), the“law of Moses” (Josh. 8:32; 1Kings 2:3), the “Bookof the Law of God” (Josh. 24:26), and the “law of theLord” (2Kings 10:31)—all of these indicate thedivine origin of the instructions or reinforce the association of theTorah with Moses as Israel’s mediator. The OT notes that Moses“wrote a Book of the Law,” which was placed by the arkfor reference (Deut. 31:26) and read aloud every seven years, duringthe Feast of Tabernacles, to all the assembly (Deut. 31:9–13).The book is not mentioned again until its discovery in the templeduring the reign of King Josiah (2Kings 22:8). The discovery ofthe book initiated a religious reform by Josiah that focused on thecentralization of worship and the destruction of idols.
TheOT employs a number of close synonyms for “law,”including “commandments,” “testimony,”“judgments,” “statutes,” “ordinances,”“decrees,” and “precepts.” Each of theseterms reflects varying nuances or particular aspects of the divineinstruction. Unfortunately, all these words as translated intoEnglish subtly misrepresent the “law” as an odiousexternal set of rules that inhibit human freedom and requirepunishment for disobedience. This perspective suggests that obedienceto the divine law was coerced by the threat of divine judgment.Contrary to this misconception, the people of Israel rejoiced infollowing Yahweh’s instructions because their greatest desirewas to please and live in harmony with him. Yahweh’s peopleenjoyed the privilege of receiving divine revelation consisting ofdirections that assured divine favor. Although perfect adherence tothese instructions proved to be an impossible task, Yahweh’scovenant stipulations provided an ideal toward which his people wereexpected to make progress as they constantly strived to fulfill thatideal. The Torah in its broadest sense reflects a verbal expressionof the character, nature, and will of God.
Typesof Law
Ingeneral, Torah may be subdivided into three categories: judicial,ceremonial, and moral, though each of these may influence or overlapwith the others. The OT associates the “giving of the Torah”with Moses’ first divine encounter at Mount Sinai (Exod. 19–23)following the Israelites’ deliverance from the land of Egypt,though some body of customary legislation existed before this time(Exod. 18). These instructions find expansion and elucidation inother pentateuchal texts, such as Leviticus and Deut. 12–24,indicating that God’s teachings were intended as the code ofconduct and worship for Israel not only during its wildernesswanderings but also when it settled in the land of Canaan followingthe conquest.
Morespecifically, the word “law” often denotes the TenCommandments (or “the Decalogue,” lit., the “tenwords”) (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4) that were delivered toMoses (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). These commandmentsreflect a summary statement of the covenant and may be divided intotwo parts, consistent with the two tablets of stone on which theywere first recorded: the first four address the individual’srelationship to God, and the last six focus on instructionsconcerning human relationships. Despite the apparent simplisticexpression of the Decalogue, the complexity of these guidelinesextends beyond individual acts and attitudes, encompassing any andall incentives, enticements, and pressures leading up to a thingforbidden. Not only should the individual refrain from doing theprohibited thing, but also he or she is obligated to practice itsopposite good in order to be in compliance.
Judiciallaw.The Book of the Covenant (Exod. 20:22–23:33), closelyassociated with the Ten Commandments, immediately follows theDecalogue and may be subdivided into casuistic, or “case,”law (21:2–22:17) and a variety of miscellaneous laws, manywhich are apodictic, or absolute, commands. The divine instructionscannot address an infinite range of circ*mstances; consequently, thecasuistic laws describe the judicial process in light of generalsituations, which form the precedence upon which future specificjudgments can be made. Apodictic instructions, generally identifiedby imperatives or volitional forms, set forth a strict prohibitionfollowed by the consequences of disobedience. Government in earlyIsraelite history revolved around the authoritative decisions ofjudges, who declared a verdict based on custom or precedent (Exod.18:13–27). The moral emphasis of the Decalogue and the Book ofthe Covenant provides the underlying theological reasons for obeyingGod’s law and forms an important part of the ethical foundationof pentateuchal discussions and elaborations of law.
Ceremoniallaw.Ceremonial, or cultic, law includes the instructions guiding theconstruction and preparation of the tabernacle for worship combinedwith the Levitical guidelines dictating the proper execution ofritual sacrifice and cultic practice. The significance of thetabernacle as a portable sanctuary of Yahweh and its integralconnection with God’s promise to dwell among the Israelites arereinforced by the tabernacle’s association with the appearanceof Yahweh at Sinai and the inauguration of the covenant. Thetabernacle becomes the place where the people meet God through amediator and seek continued divine favor through ritual purification,sacrifice, and atonement.
Leviticussystematically outlines the procedure for priestly selection andsuccession, details the consecration of cultic vessels and priests,describes conditions for participation and the celebration of sacredfestivals (Lev. 16; 23–25), and addresses other issues such asblasphemy, sexual behavior, and false prophecy. The sacrificialregulations cover sin offerings (6:25), guilt offerings (7:1, 7),burnt offerings (6:9), grain offerings (6:14), and fellowshipofferings (7:11). The book of Leviticus also provides extensiveinstruction concerning the designation of “clean”(consecrated) and “unclean” (profane), reinforcing theseparateness of God’s chosen people (e.g., 11:46; 12:7; 13:59;14:2, 32; 15:32–33). Uncircumcised foreigners were excludedfrom participation in Israel’s sacred assemblies.
Morallaw.Economic hardship presented numerous challenges in Israelite societythat were resolved through laws concerning debt and slavery. A seriesof laws sought to protect the property and rights of those indebtedto creditors (Exod. 22:25–27; Deut. 24:6, 10–13; 2Kings4:1; Amos 2:8). Those who were enslaved in order to compensate fortheir debts had to be released after six years of service (Exod.21:2, 11; Deut. 15:12–18). Property and persons who were turnedover to creditors could often be redeemed (Lev. 25:25–28,47–55). Those who harvested crops were instructed to leave thecorners of fields and the remnants of crops for gleaning by the poor(Deut. 24:19–22; Ruth 2:2–6). The systematic mistreatmentof the marginalized in society led to widespread corruption among thejudiciary, angering Yahweh and leading to the exile (Isa. 1:15–17;Amos 2:6–7; 11–13). It is clear that this type of law wasreenacted during the postexilic period (Neh. 5:1–13; Jer.34:8–16).
Torahin Wisdom Literature and in the Prophets
OTwisdom literature develops the concept of Torah as human instructionfor daily living, underscoring the dynamic character of the law andits permeation of all areas of life. Vigilant obedience to the lawresults in wise and godly conduct. In Proverbs, the son is admonishedby the father to obey the Torah (Prov. 3:1; 4:2; 6:23), and the pupilis instructed by the teacher to respect the law (13:13) and to resistthe company of those who do not obey the Torah (28:4), with suchobservance resulting in God’s blessings (29:18) and answers toprayer (28:9). The wise woman familiarizes herself with the Torahbecause the responsibility for instruction of her household lies withher (31:26).
Thebook of Psalms contains three compositions typically classified asTorah psalms (1; 19; 119). In Ps. 1 continual reflection on the Torahmanifests itself in the prosperity and the wisdom of the obedient.Psalm 19 celebrates the benefits of keeping the Torah, includingwisdom, joy, enlightenment, life, and moral discernment. In a lengthyacrostic arranged according to the Hebrew alphabet, Ps. 119 exploitsthe attitudes, effects, and practicality of the Torah as exemplifiedin the life of the faithful.
Inthe prophetic material, Torah refers to teaching administered in thename of Yahweh, either by the priests or the prophets. Moral decline,manifested by the social injustice of Israel’s leader-shipcoupled with idolatry and syncretistic worship, was directlyattributed to the failure of the priests to uphold the Torah andtheir negligence in instructing the community (Jer. 2:8; 8:8; Ezek.7:26; 22:26; Hos. 8:1–12; Amos 2:4). The prophetic emphasis onjustice and righteousness as characteristic qualities of God’speople highlights the importance placed on fair and equitabletreatment (e.g., Isa. 5:23–24; 26:1–11; 48:17–19;58:6–9; 59:9–14). The Torah provided the authoritativepoint of departure in the composition of prophetic messages andteachings, undergirding the authority and genuineness of theprophetic proclamations and exhortations to the contemporaryaudience. The messages of the prophets were in fact not new, but weresimply the adaptation and transformation of pentateuchal textsalready generally accepted by the community as authoritative.
BiblicalLaw and Ancient Near Eastern Sources
Biblicallaw did not develop in isolation from other legal systems; rather, itappears to follow long-established, widespread, and standardizedpatterns of Mesopotamian law. A persuasive number of parallelsbetween customs and familial relationships addressed in the Nuzitablets and archaic elements in the patriarchal narratives seem tosuggest that the patriarchs operated under Hurrian law. The Nuzitablets clarify the subjects of adoption, marriage, and economictransactions, apparently exerting an influence on the lives of theearly OT patriarchs. The wife-sister accounts of Abram and Isaac, inwhich the marriage eligibility of Sarai and Rebekah arise (Gen. 12;26), as well as Abraham’s proposed adoption of his servantEliezer as an heir (Gen. 15:2–4) and his siring of Ishmaelthrough Sarai’s servant Hagar (Gen. 16), reflect customarypractice described in these documents.
Avast range of legal documents regulating judicial procedures providesmaterial for comparative analysis with biblical texts. Included amongthese discoveries are a number of law collections, generally namedafter the ruler who commissioned them. Archaeologists have uncoveredevidence, from as early as the twenty-first century BC, of twosurviving Sumerian legal collections affirming the ancient origins ofsocietal governance. The Laws of King Ur-Nammu, recorded during thelast great period of Sumerian literacy (2111–2095 BC), arepreserved in scribal copies from Nippur dated between 1800 and 1700BC and consist of a fragment and two partial stone tablets. Writtenin a casuistic format, the texts attest to twenty-nine stipulations,including legislation addressing weights and measures; protectionsfor widows, orphans, and the impoverished; sexual offenses; maritallaws; slavery; false testimony; and property abuses.
Asecond Sumerian law collection dating from the nineteenth century BC,that of King Lipit-Ishtar, the fifth ruler of the Isin dynasty inlower Mesopotamia, consists of a prologue, thirty-eight wholly orpartially restored laws, and an epilogue. These laws, bequeathed toLipit-Ishtar by the Sumerian deities Anu and Enlil in order to“establish justice in the land,” represent civil lawsgoverning business practices, slavery, property, family, andinadvertent injury to an individual. What appear to be an additionalthirty-eight laws, comprising the second half of the code, have beendestroyed along with part of the prologue. All these laws wererecorded in a casuistic format.
TheLaws of Eshnunna, written in Akkadian, consist of two tabletscontaining approximately sixty different laws. The authorship anddate of origin remain unknown, but historians suggest that this lawcollection, which has no prologue or epilogue, was contemporary withthe Code of Hammurabi (1728–1686 BC). Though written in acasuistic format, this artifact assigns penalties on the basis ofsocial status.
TheCode of Hammurabi, named for the sixth of eleven kings of the OldBabylonian dynasty, is perhaps the most famous and most complete ofthe ancient Mesopotamian collections. In 1902, French archaeologistsdiscovered the code on a black diorite stela, nearly eight feet tall,in what was ancient Susa. Multiple copies of the code have beenpreserved. Written in Akkadian cuneiform, the law collection consistsof 282 legal paragraphs created to promote public welfare and thecause of justice. The format of the code, which includes a prologue,an epilogue, and a category of cursings for disobedience andblessings for obedience, closely mirrors the structure of the book ofDeuteronomy. The casuistic format addresses laws governing publicorder and individual private law. The penalties prescribed forcapital offenses, of which there were thirty, were harsh and oftencruel, including bodily mutilation, multiple punishments, andvicarious punishment. Retaliatory consequences for the protection ofprivate property were exceptionally cruel, taking the form of tortureor excessive fines. Often, those who were presumed guilty would bethrown into the river; survival indicated innocence, while drowningdemonstrated guilt. A predominant feature was the lex talionis (thelaw of retaliation, or measure for measure), whereby a correspondingpenalty was exacted against the offender based on the crime. Forinstance, if a child was killed, the death of the offender’schild was required. Capital crimes included theft of property andadultery. Contrary to biblical law, Hammurabi’s code madefinancial provision for the loss of life, whereas in the OT the valueof life was immeasurable.
Theargument from silence suggests that in the absence of a full biblicallaw code, legal instructions and stipulations in the biblical textconsist primarily of codicil emendations, that is, additions andinnovations to already existing laws. For example, the discussion ondivorce in Deut. 21 describes the execution of a document withoutgiving details concerning the content or form of such a document. Thepassage also mentions a yet undiscovered “book of divorce.”The absence of legal material on commercial and business law as wellas specifics concerning inheritance and other common subjects pointsto a more comprehensive body of unwritten law reflecting preexistingsocietal norms. Israelite society was therefore indebted to itsMesopotamian predecessors for its implementation of law as a means ofprotecting citizens, and for many legal provisions eventually adaptedby the biblical text.
TheCharacter of Biblical Law
AlthoughIsraelite law was in some ways influenced by the legal codes of otherancient Near Eastern cultures, biblical law retained a distinctidentity centered on the relationship between Yahweh and his chosenpeople. Law in the OT is presented not as secular instruction butrather as divine pronouncement, receiving its authority as anexpression of the divine will. The entirety of the divine instructionoriginates with God, and he is both author and guarantor of thecovenant with his people. The people of Israel, then, are heldresponsible to God for their actions and not just to a legislativebody or human ruler. The will of the Israelite is wholly surrenderedto the will of God to such a degree that every aspect of anindividual’s life is inextricably connected to the divineteachings. God assigns the stipulations and requirements of the lawto the entire corporate body of Israel. The responsibility forcovenant fidelity does not lie solely with the community leadership;rather, it is shared by every individual in the community, whose dualrole includes ensuring both the fair execution of justice in thecommunity and personal observance of the law. God’sinstructions are proclaimed publicly and apply equally to all socialstrata without distinction, apart from specific direction concerningslaves.
Torahbecomes the corpus of teaching directed toward the entire community.The didactic purpose of the law is evident by the motive clausesappended to many apodictic and casuistic instructions that elaborateon the ethical, religious, or historical reasons for covenantfaithfulness. The pedagogical aim serves to appeal to the Israeliteconscience as a means of motivating obedience. In addition, theteaching that humanity is created in the divine image reinforces thesacredness of human life as a foundational concern of the law.Religious rather than economic values prevail, eliminating the deathpenalty for all property crimes. Individual culpability predominatesin the biblical corpus, abolishing the notion of vicarious punishmentadvocated in extrabiblical legislation. Each offender pays theconsequences of his or her behavior. Each person, created by God andenjoying equal status with all others, receives fair and equitabletreatment.
TheLaw and the New Testament
Thecontemporary significance of the Torah is recognized in the NT byJesus’ declaration that his incarnation served to fulfill thelaw (Matt. 5:17). He affirms the continued legitimacy of the law(Matt. 5:19) and appeals to the law as the governing authority forproper practice and behavior (Matt. 12:6, 42; Luke 4:1–11; Mark7:9–12; 10:17–19).
Therelationship between gospel and law in both Testaments demonstratesfar greater continuity than is recognized by many Christians.Covenant theologians affirm that the Mosaic law described a “covenantof works,” which functions differently from the NT’s“covenant of grace,” while dispensationalists often teachthat grace supersedes and abolishes the demands of the law. Theconditional nature of the Mosaic covenant differs from that of theAbrahamic covenant, since the unconditional promise of the Abrahamiccovenant suggests that the blessings promised to Abraham and his seedwould be realized not because of human obedience but rather throughdivine fidelity (Gal. 3:15–27). The Mosaic covenant, orcovenant of law, is not contrary to the promises of God (Gal. 3:21);instead, God graciously entered into relationship with the people ofIsrael, redeemed them from Egypt, and then gave them the law so thatthey would respond in humble obedience to his redeeming work. Thus,Mosaic law provided through a mediator a way for God to revealhimself to Israel. Consequently, the idea that Israelite religion waslegalistic is mistaken. It did not teach that one could earnsalvation by “keeping the law”; rather, an individualentered into the covenant with God by grace. When God established thecovenant with his people, he forgave their sins. He did not demand acertain level of attainment as a prerequisite for entering into thatrelationship, nor did Israel have to obey the law perfectly in orderto achieve salvation. Instead, the covenantal arrangement instituteda means of forgiveness through the sacrificial system, making theremoval of the barrier of sin available to the people. Israel’sobedience to the law was a response to God’s gracious andredeeming work. Law and covenant were complementary.
Ongoingdiscussions explore the question concerning the relevance of the lawfor Christians today. Many scholars from past centuries, such asMartin Luther, claimed that the believer is freed entirely from thelaw of Moses, including its moral requirements. The OT law is bindingonly insofar as it agrees with the NT and mirrors natural law. JohnCalvin, on the other hand, maintained that the moral laws of the OTare obligatory for the believer, and he asserts that this is theprincipal function of law. Calvin’s sense of keeping the morallaw does not compromise the message of grace, for keeping the morallaw, as opposed to the ceremonial or civil law, does not earnsalvation but instead forms the acceptable response of the believerto God’s grace. Other Reformation scholars suggested that thelaw was abolished with the coming of Christ, and, as a result, whilethe moral norms remain in effect, the ceremonial laws have beenfulfilled with the coming of Christ. Although the penaltiesoriginally prescribed for disobedience are no longer effective,keeping the moral law reflects the proper outcome of a life lived bythe Spirit of God. See also Ten Commandments; Torah.
Terminology
Theword “law,” often referred to as “Torah,”occurs 220 times in the OT and derives from a Hebrew root that means“to teach or instruct.” Biblical law is the body ofinstructions or teachings that serve to govern and maintain thecovenant relationship between God and Israel. The distinctiverelationship that Israel enjoyed with God was unparalleled in theancient Near East. Unlike the Gentile nations, Israel received fromYahweh an instrument outlining his expectations of them, a set ofguidelines by which to sustain that covenant relationship (Deut.4:6–8). Outside the OT, the “Torah” or “Law”often refers to the first five books of the Bible, called the“Pentateuch” (Matt. 5:17–18; Luke 2:22). SecondTemple Judaism commonly referred to the Pentateuch in this way.
Theterm “Torah” is not limited to cultic or ceremonialpractice, but embraces civil and social law. In addition, the Torahrefers to the prophetic word and more broadly incorporates the ideaof parental instruction. The Hebrew word torah is employed in avariety of expressions, variously rendered in English versions: “thelaw” (Deut. 1:5; 4:8, 44; 2Kings 23:24), the “Bookof the Law” (Deut. 28:61; 29:21; Josh. 1:8; 2Kings 22:8),the “Book of the Law of Moses” (Josh. 8:31; 23:6), the“law of Moses” (Josh. 8:32; 1Kings 2:3), the “Bookof the Law of God” (Josh. 24:26), and the “law of theLord” (2Kings 10:31)—all of these indicate thedivine origin of the instructions or reinforce the association of theTorah with Moses as Israel’s mediator. The OT notes that Moses“wrote a Book of the Law,” which was placed by the arkfor reference (Deut. 31:26) and read aloud every seven years, duringthe Feast of Tabernacles, to all the assembly (Deut. 31:9–13).The book is not mentioned again until its discovery in the templeduring the reign of King Josiah (2Kings 22:8). The discovery ofthe book initiated a religious reform by Josiah that focused on thecentralization of worship and the destruction of idols.
TheOT employs a number of close synonyms for “law,”including “commandments,” “testimony,”“judgments,” “statutes,” “ordinances,”“decrees,” and “precepts.” Each of theseterms reflects varying nuances or particular aspects of the divineinstruction. Unfortunately, all these words as translated intoEnglish subtly misrepresent the “law” as an odiousexternal set of rules that inhibit human freedom and requirepunishment for disobedience. This perspective suggests that obedienceto the divine law was coerced by the threat of divine judgment.Contrary to this misconception, the people of Israel rejoiced infollowing Yahweh’s instructions because their greatest desirewas to please and live in harmony with him. Yahweh’s peopleenjoyed the privilege of receiving divine revelation consisting ofdirections that assured divine favor. Although perfect adherence tothese instructions proved to be an impossible task, Yahweh’scovenant stipulations provided an ideal toward which his people wereexpected to make progress as they constantly strived to fulfill thatideal. The Torah in its broadest sense reflects a verbal expressionof the character, nature, and will of God.
Typesof Law
Ingeneral, Torah may be subdivided into three categories: judicial,ceremonial, and moral, though each of these may influence or overlapwith the others. The OT associates the “giving of the Torah”with Moses’ first divine encounter at Mount Sinai (Exod. 19–23)following the Israelites’ deliverance from the land of Egypt,though some body of customary legislation existed before this time(Exod. 18). These instructions find expansion and elucidation inother pentateuchal texts, such as Leviticus and Deut. 12–24,indicating that God’s teachings were intended as the code ofconduct and worship for Israel not only during its wildernesswanderings but also when it settled in the land of Canaan followingthe conquest.
Morespecifically, the word “law” often denotes the TenCommandments (or “the Decalogue,” lit., the “tenwords”) (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4) that were delivered toMoses (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). These commandmentsreflect a summary statement of the covenant and may be divided intotwo parts, consistent with the two tablets of stone on which theywere first recorded: the first four address the individual’srelationship to God, and the last six focus on instructionsconcerning human relationships. Despite the apparent simplisticexpression of the Decalogue, the complexity of these guidelinesextends beyond individual acts and attitudes, encompassing any andall incentives, enticements, and pressures leading up to a thingforbidden. Not only should the individual refrain from doing theprohibited thing, but also he or she is obligated to practice itsopposite good in order to be in compliance.
Judiciallaw.The Book of the Covenant (Exod. 20:22–23:33), closelyassociated with the Ten Commandments, immediately follows theDecalogue and may be subdivided into casuistic, or “case,”law (21:2–22:17) and a variety of miscellaneous laws, manywhich are apodictic, or absolute, commands. The divine instructionscannot address an infinite range of circ*mstances; consequently, thecasuistic laws describe the judicial process in light of generalsituations, which form the precedence upon which future specificjudgments can be made. Apodictic instructions, generally identifiedby imperatives or volitional forms, set forth a strict prohibitionfollowed by the consequences of disobedience. Government in earlyIsraelite history revolved around the authoritative decisions ofjudges, who declared a verdict based on custom or precedent (Exod.18:13–27). The moral emphasis of the Decalogue and the Book ofthe Covenant provides the underlying theological reasons for obeyingGod’s law and forms an important part of the ethical foundationof pentateuchal discussions and elaborations of law.
Ceremoniallaw.Ceremonial, or cultic, law includes the instructions guiding theconstruction and preparation of the tabernacle for worship combinedwith the Levitical guidelines dictating the proper execution ofritual sacrifice and cultic practice. The significance of thetabernacle as a portable sanctuary of Yahweh and its integralconnection with God’s promise to dwell among the Israelites arereinforced by the tabernacle’s association with the appearanceof Yahweh at Sinai and the inauguration of the covenant. Thetabernacle becomes the place where the people meet God through amediator and seek continued divine favor through ritual purification,sacrifice, and atonement.
Leviticussystematically outlines the procedure for priestly selection andsuccession, details the consecration of cultic vessels and priests,describes conditions for participation and the celebration of sacredfestivals (Lev. 16; 23–25), and addresses other issues such asblasphemy, sexual behavior, and false prophecy. The sacrificialregulations cover sin offerings (6:25), guilt offerings (7:1, 7),burnt offerings (6:9), grain offerings (6:14), and fellowshipofferings (7:11). The book of Leviticus also provides extensiveinstruction concerning the designation of “clean”(consecrated) and “unclean” (profane), reinforcing theseparateness of God’s chosen people (e.g., 11:46; 12:7; 13:59;14:2, 32; 15:32–33). Uncircumcised foreigners were excludedfrom participation in Israel’s sacred assemblies.
Morallaw.Economic hardship presented numerous challenges in Israelite societythat were resolved through laws concerning debt and slavery. A seriesof laws sought to protect the property and rights of those indebtedto creditors (Exod. 22:25–27; Deut. 24:6, 10–13; 2Kings4:1; Amos 2:8). Those who were enslaved in order to compensate fortheir debts had to be released after six years of service (Exod.21:2, 11; Deut. 15:12–18). Property and persons who were turnedover to creditors could often be redeemed (Lev. 25:25–28,47–55). Those who harvested crops were instructed to leave thecorners of fields and the remnants of crops for gleaning by the poor(Deut. 24:19–22; Ruth 2:2–6). The systematic mistreatmentof the marginalized in society led to widespread corruption among thejudiciary, angering Yahweh and leading to the exile (Isa. 1:15–17;Amos 2:6–7; 11–13). It is clear that this type of law wasreenacted during the postexilic period (Neh. 5:1–13; Jer.34:8–16).
Torahin Wisdom Literature and in the Prophets
OTwisdom literature develops the concept of Torah as human instructionfor daily living, underscoring the dynamic character of the law andits permeation of all areas of life. Vigilant obedience to the lawresults in wise and godly conduct. In Proverbs, the son is admonishedby the father to obey the Torah (Prov. 3:1; 4:2; 6:23), and the pupilis instructed by the teacher to respect the law (13:13) and to resistthe company of those who do not obey the Torah (28:4), with suchobservance resulting in God’s blessings (29:18) and answers toprayer (28:9). The wise woman familiarizes herself with the Torahbecause the responsibility for instruction of her household lies withher (31:26).
Thebook of Psalms contains three compositions typically classified asTorah psalms (1; 19; 119). In Ps. 1 continual reflection on the Torahmanifests itself in the prosperity and the wisdom of the obedient.Psalm 19 celebrates the benefits of keeping the Torah, includingwisdom, joy, enlightenment, life, and moral discernment. In a lengthyacrostic arranged according to the Hebrew alphabet, Ps. 119 exploitsthe attitudes, effects, and practicality of the Torah as exemplifiedin the life of the faithful.
Inthe prophetic material, Torah refers to teaching administered in thename of Yahweh, either by the priests or the prophets. Moral decline,manifested by the social injustice of Israel’s leader-shipcoupled with idolatry and syncretistic worship, was directlyattributed to the failure of the priests to uphold the Torah andtheir negligence in instructing the community (Jer. 2:8; 8:8; Ezek.7:26; 22:26; Hos. 8:1–12; Amos 2:4). The prophetic emphasis onjustice and righteousness as characteristic qualities of God’speople highlights the importance placed on fair and equitabletreatment (e.g., Isa. 5:23–24; 26:1–11; 48:17–19;58:6–9; 59:9–14). The Torah provided the authoritativepoint of departure in the composition of prophetic messages andteachings, undergirding the authority and genuineness of theprophetic proclamations and exhortations to the contemporaryaudience. The messages of the prophets were in fact not new, but weresimply the adaptation and transformation of pentateuchal textsalready generally accepted by the community as authoritative.
BiblicalLaw and Ancient Near Eastern Sources
Biblicallaw did not develop in isolation from other legal systems; rather, itappears to follow long-established, widespread, and standardizedpatterns of Mesopotamian law. A persuasive number of parallelsbetween customs and familial relationships addressed in the Nuzitablets and archaic elements in the patriarchal narratives seem tosuggest that the patriarchs operated under Hurrian law. The Nuzitablets clarify the subjects of adoption, marriage, and economictransactions, apparently exerting an influence on the lives of theearly OT patriarchs. The wife-sister accounts of Abram and Isaac, inwhich the marriage eligibility of Sarai and Rebekah arise (Gen. 12;26), as well as Abraham’s proposed adoption of his servantEliezer as an heir (Gen. 15:2–4) and his siring of Ishmaelthrough Sarai’s servant Hagar (Gen. 16), reflect customarypractice described in these documents.
Avast range of legal documents regulating judicial procedures providesmaterial for comparative analysis with biblical texts. Included amongthese discoveries are a number of law collections, generally namedafter the ruler who commissioned them. Archaeologists have uncoveredevidence, from as early as the twenty-first century BC, of twosurviving Sumerian legal collections affirming the ancient origins ofsocietal governance. The Laws of King Ur-Nammu, recorded during thelast great period of Sumerian literacy (2111–2095 BC), arepreserved in scribal copies from Nippur dated between 1800 and 1700BC and consist of a fragment and two partial stone tablets. Writtenin a casuistic format, the texts attest to twenty-nine stipulations,including legislation addressing weights and measures; protectionsfor widows, orphans, and the impoverished; sexual offenses; maritallaws; slavery; false testimony; and property abuses.
Asecond Sumerian law collection dating from the nineteenth century BC,that of King Lipit-Ishtar, the fifth ruler of the Isin dynasty inlower Mesopotamia, consists of a prologue, thirty-eight wholly orpartially restored laws, and an epilogue. These laws, bequeathed toLipit-Ishtar by the Sumerian deities Anu and Enlil in order to“establish justice in the land,” represent civil lawsgoverning business practices, slavery, property, family, andinadvertent injury to an individual. What appear to be an additionalthirty-eight laws, comprising the second half of the code, have beendestroyed along with part of the prologue. All these laws wererecorded in a casuistic format.
TheLaws of Eshnunna, written in Akkadian, consist of two tabletscontaining approximately sixty different laws. The authorship anddate of origin remain unknown, but historians suggest that this lawcollection, which has no prologue or epilogue, was contemporary withthe Code of Hammurabi (1728–1686 BC). Though written in acasuistic format, this artifact assigns penalties on the basis ofsocial status.
TheCode of Hammurabi, named for the sixth of eleven kings of the OldBabylonian dynasty, is perhaps the most famous and most complete ofthe ancient Mesopotamian collections. In 1902, French archaeologistsdiscovered the code on a black diorite stela, nearly eight feet tall,in what was ancient Susa. Multiple copies of the code have beenpreserved. Written in Akkadian cuneiform, the law collection consistsof 282 legal paragraphs created to promote public welfare and thecause of justice. The format of the code, which includes a prologue,an epilogue, and a category of cursings for disobedience andblessings for obedience, closely mirrors the structure of the book ofDeuteronomy. The casuistic format addresses laws governing publicorder and individual private law. The penalties prescribed forcapital offenses, of which there were thirty, were harsh and oftencruel, including bodily mutilation, multiple punishments, andvicarious punishment. Retaliatory consequences for the protection ofprivate property were exceptionally cruel, taking the form of tortureor excessive fines. Often, those who were presumed guilty would bethrown into the river; survival indicated innocence, while drowningdemonstrated guilt. A predominant feature was the lex talionis (thelaw of retaliation, or measure for measure), whereby a correspondingpenalty was exacted against the offender based on the crime. Forinstance, if a child was killed, the death of the offender’schild was required. Capital crimes included theft of property andadultery. Contrary to biblical law, Hammurabi’s code madefinancial provision for the loss of life, whereas in the OT the valueof life was immeasurable.
Theargument from silence suggests that in the absence of a full biblicallaw code, legal instructions and stipulations in the biblical textconsist primarily of codicil emendations, that is, additions andinnovations to already existing laws. For example, the discussion ondivorce in Deut. 21 describes the execution of a document withoutgiving details concerning the content or form of such a document. Thepassage also mentions a yet undiscovered “book of divorce.”The absence of legal material on commercial and business law as wellas specifics concerning inheritance and other common subjects pointsto a more comprehensive body of unwritten law reflecting preexistingsocietal norms. Israelite society was therefore indebted to itsMesopotamian predecessors for its implementation of law as a means ofprotecting citizens, and for many legal provisions eventually adaptedby the biblical text.
TheCharacter of Biblical Law
AlthoughIsraelite law was in some ways influenced by the legal codes of otherancient Near Eastern cultures, biblical law retained a distinctidentity centered on the relationship between Yahweh and his chosenpeople. Law in the OT is presented not as secular instruction butrather as divine pronouncement, receiving its authority as anexpression of the divine will. The entirety of the divine instructionoriginates with God, and he is both author and guarantor of thecovenant with his people. The people of Israel, then, are heldresponsible to God for their actions and not just to a legislativebody or human ruler. The will of the Israelite is wholly surrenderedto the will of God to such a degree that every aspect of anindividual’s life is inextricably connected to the divineteachings. God assigns the stipulations and requirements of the lawto the entire corporate body of Israel. The responsibility forcovenant fidelity does not lie solely with the community leadership;rather, it is shared by every individual in the community, whose dualrole includes ensuring both the fair execution of justice in thecommunity and personal observance of the law. God’sinstructions are proclaimed publicly and apply equally to all socialstrata without distinction, apart from specific direction concerningslaves.
Torahbecomes the corpus of teaching directed toward the entire community.The didactic purpose of the law is evident by the motive clausesappended to many apodictic and casuistic instructions that elaborateon the ethical, religious, or historical reasons for covenantfaithfulness. The pedagogical aim serves to appeal to the Israeliteconscience as a means of motivating obedience. In addition, theteaching that humanity is created in the divine image reinforces thesacredness of human life as a foundational concern of the law.Religious rather than economic values prevail, eliminating the deathpenalty for all property crimes. Individual culpability predominatesin the biblical corpus, abolishing the notion of vicarious punishmentadvocated in extrabiblical legislation. Each offender pays theconsequences of his or her behavior. Each person, created by God andenjoying equal status with all others, receives fair and equitabletreatment.
TheLaw and the New Testament
Thecontemporary significance of the Torah is recognized in the NT byJesus’ declaration that his incarnation served to fulfill thelaw (Matt. 5:17). He affirms the continued legitimacy of the law(Matt. 5:19) and appeals to the law as the governing authority forproper practice and behavior (Matt. 12:6, 42; Luke 4:1–11; Mark7:9–12; 10:17–19).
Therelationship between gospel and law in both Testaments demonstratesfar greater continuity than is recognized by many Christians.Covenant theologians affirm that the Mosaic law described a “covenantof works,” which functions differently from the NT’s“covenant of grace,” while dispensationalists often teachthat grace supersedes and abolishes the demands of the law. Theconditional nature of the Mosaic covenant differs from that of theAbrahamic covenant, since the unconditional promise of the Abrahamiccovenant suggests that the blessings promised to Abraham and his seedwould be realized not because of human obedience but rather throughdivine fidelity (Gal. 3:15–27). The Mosaic covenant, orcovenant of law, is not contrary to the promises of God (Gal. 3:21);instead, God graciously entered into relationship with the people ofIsrael, redeemed them from Egypt, and then gave them the law so thatthey would respond in humble obedience to his redeeming work. Thus,Mosaic law provided through a mediator a way for God to revealhimself to Israel. Consequently, the idea that Israelite religion waslegalistic is mistaken. It did not teach that one could earnsalvation by “keeping the law”; rather, an individualentered into the covenant with God by grace. When God established thecovenant with his people, he forgave their sins. He did not demand acertain level of attainment as a prerequisite for entering into thatrelationship, nor did Israel have to obey the law perfectly in orderto achieve salvation. Instead, the covenantal arrangement instituteda means of forgiveness through the sacrificial system, making theremoval of the barrier of sin available to the people. Israel’sobedience to the law was a response to God’s gracious andredeeming work. Law and covenant were complementary.
Ongoingdiscussions explore the question concerning the relevance of the lawfor Christians today. Many scholars from past centuries, such asMartin Luther, claimed that the believer is freed entirely from thelaw of Moses, including its moral requirements. The OT law is bindingonly insofar as it agrees with the NT and mirrors natural law. JohnCalvin, on the other hand, maintained that the moral laws of the OTare obligatory for the believer, and he asserts that this is theprincipal function of law. Calvin’s sense of keeping the morallaw does not compromise the message of grace, for keeping the morallaw, as opposed to the ceremonial or civil law, does not earnsalvation but instead forms the acceptable response of the believerto God’s grace. Other Reformation scholars suggested that thelaw was abolished with the coming of Christ, and, as a result, whilethe moral norms remain in effect, the ceremonial laws have beenfulfilled with the coming of Christ. Although the penaltiesoriginally prescribed for disobedience are no longer effective,keeping the moral law reflects the proper outcome of a life lived bythe Spirit of God. See also Ten Commandments; Torah.
Galatians is often understood as the great letter teachingjustification by faith in Christ alone. Paul inveighs against falseteachers who teach Christians to supplement the work of Christ withtheir own keeping of the law as part of earning salvation.
Thistraditional reading has been powerful and edifying. However, settingGalatians within a plausible ancient social setting reveals furtherpowerful functions of the letter. Galatians turns out to be more thana container delivering the timeless and vital doctrine of salvationby believing and not by doing. The approach to Galatians in thisarticle seeks to establish plausible ancient social settingsprimarily through exploring a constellation of ancient Mediterraneancultural codes. This contextual orienting helps modern readersappreciate how issues that seem to us bizarre or insignificant mighthave been issues of life and death to people in different contexts.
Settingand Message
Culturalcontext.By the time of Galatians (mid-first century AD), a relatively commonmoral sensitivity existed among the diverse spectrum of Greco-Roman(pagan, Jewish, and Christian) intellectuals: self-mastery(enkrateia). The ideal person led a life of virtue by masteringpowerful irrational passions, which led to excessive, weak,irrational, and evil behavior. Although people differed on the meansto self-mastery, this general ideal defined broader notions about thesuccessful life. Elites represented the ideal leader as one definedby self-mastery. This qualified such a person to rule others whosecapacity for and attainment of self-mastery were inferior, to rulethose who cannot even rule themselves. Authority figures projectedthis characteristic and perpetuated social worlds in which prestigeand authority were bound up with the ideal of self-mastery. Manyaverage people also made self-mastery an ideal, whether striving forit in their own lives or allocating authority and prestige to thoseperceived to have attained it. Various Jewish teachers presentedJudaism, especially keeping its laws and studying its sacredwritings, as the premier path to self-mastery and thus a happy life.Some pagans also conceived of Judaism, especially some of its laws,along these lines.
CertainJewish views of Gentiles constitute another important cultural code.Many Jews read the OT as depicting the following concerning Gentiles:They were separated from Israel’s God and his promises for hispeople, the Jews (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13; 1Pet.2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation, especially becausethey were idolaters controlled by their passions and sin, lackingself-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32;Eph. 4:17–19; 1Thess. 4:5; 1Pet. 1:14, 18). Jews,on the other hand, were by definition God’s special people,whom he had chosen over other nations (Deut. 7:6–8; 10:15;26:18–19). He had watched over them and would ultimately rescuethem. Gentiles would experience covenant blessing in and throughIsrael if they functionally became Jews by keeping the law, includingthe parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. The law was thatspecial life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenant that Godhad revealed to Israel, which defined Jews as Jews (Lev. 18:1–5;20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6;10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss.119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21). Suchlaw/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OTunderstanding: God had planned to restore the world through Israel,the locus of his saving activity. God would bless the nations inAbraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3; 17:4–6;22:18; 26:4; 28:14). Various passages depict this happening as thenations were subjected to Israel, came to Israel, served Israel,presented Israel with their own wealth and possessions, and/or fearedIsrael’s God (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa.11:10–16; 14:2; 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 54:3;55:5; 60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic.7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages furtherelucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in theGod of Israel’s salvation (Gen. 17:9–14; Exod. 12:48;Isa. 2:2–5; 56:1–8; Jer. 12:14–17; Mic. 4:1–5;Zech. 14:16–21). God would condemn Gentiles who remain separatefrom Israel, especially Gentiles who harm Israel. For many Jewsaround the time of Galatians, salvation for Gentiles thus remainedIsrael-centered.
Manyancient Jews also construed the world through apocalyptic views ofreality. This understanding conceived of the present visible world ascharacterized by the influence of evil supernatural beings (demons),suffering, and evil. One day God and his angels would completelytriumph in the invisible heavenly reality; the events in this realitydetermine life in the lower visible world. Then the evil age of thepresent world of suffering would be over. Evil and suffering would bevanquished, God’s people would be rescued, the agents ofsuffering in the old age would be judged, the Spirit would be pouredout, the nations would come to Israel’s God, and the heavenlyreality would fully break in and renew the visible world. God’speople, Israel, would experience ultimate salvation, having beenrescued from the evil age. The law remained a defining reality inGod’s plans to rescue the world in most Jewish apocalypticscenarios. Experiencing this salvation remained a matter of beingpart of God’s righteous people, Israel.
Situationof the letter.With these cultural codes in view, the following situation for theletter of Galatians seems plausible. Paul proclaimed to some of thepredominantly Gentile population of Galatia the good news (“gospel”)of the God of Israel’s salvation through Jesus the Messiah(Gal. 1:8–9, 11; 4:13). Some accepted this message of faith anddevoted themselves to Jesus and the God of Israel (1:2, 9; 3:1–6;4:14–20). After Paul left, other Christian teachers came toGalatia. They possibly claimed association with the Jerusalem churchand, perhaps, with Peter and James. In line with some of the Jewishviews of Gentiles discussed above, they taught that the GentileChristians in Galatia must functionally become Jews and keep the law(for other examples of such early Christian teachers, see Acts11:1–3; 15:1, 5). These other teachers probably drew onScriptures and traditions about Abraham to make their arguments. TheGod of Israel would save his people, “the righteous,” andthrough them the rest of the world, through the relationship that hehad initially established with Abraham (Gen. 12:1–3; 17:4–6;22:18; 26:4; 28:14). The teachers could easily show from theScriptures that circumcision and the law defined God’srelationship with Abraham and were always intended to do so (17:9–14;26:5). They, like most contemporary Jewish writers, thought thatobedience to the law (26:5) defined Abraham’s faith toward God(15:6). If the Galatians were to be Abraham’s descendants, theytoo must keep the law and be circumcised like their new father,Abraham. The teachers could also deploy passages from the Scripturesto the effect that everyone who did not keep the law was cursed(Deut. 27:26; cf. Gal. 3:10), but that everyone who kept the lawwould live (Lev. 18:5; cf. Gal. 3:12). For these teachers, Jesus theMessiah was part of the final stage in the God of Israel’slaw-shaped apocalyptic plan to rescue his people (the Jews) and,through them, the nations.
Itseems that the teachers also capitalized on the moral sensitivity ofself-mastery and the not uncommon understanding of the Jewish law asan ideal means for attaining it. Thus, they also urged the Galatiansto keep the law through representing it as a means to attaining theprestigious moral and social ideal of self-mastery. Furthermore, theGalatians may have thought that the law offered them a concrete guideto life because of its numerous detailed prescriptions. It alsoprovided substantive ways for the Galatians to reinforce theiridentity in the midst of their villages, especially because itcommanded practices that could set them apart. As a result, at leastsome of the Galatian Christians decided to keep the law, perhapsseeking circumcision. They were persuaded that the God of Israel andJesus only save those within the Jewish space defined by the law.These Galatians sought to keep the law, looking to its power forself-mastery.
Outline
I.Greeting (1:1–5)
II.The Law-Defined Gospel Is a Different Gospel (1:6–10)
III.Paul’s Gospel Is Straight from God (1:11–24)
IV.The Jerusalem Apostles Recognize Paul’s Law-Free Gospel(2:1–10)
V.Paul and Peter on Whether Gentiles Should Live Like Jews (2:11–21)
VI.Works of the Law or Christ’s Faithfulness? (3:1–5)
VII.Paul Addresses the Situation in Galatia (3:6–4:31)
A.Scriptural arguments to answer Paul’s question (3:6–14)
B.Incorporation into Christ means incorporation into Abraham (3:15–29)
C.Heirs versus slaves (4:1–11)
D.The Galatians’ past experience with Paul and the gospel(4:12–20)
E.Heirs versus slaves: Sarah and Hagar (4:21–31)
VIII.Summary and Restatement of Paul’s Argument (5:1–12)
IX.The Faithfulness of Christ and Communal Living (5:13–6:10)
A.Freedom in Christ (5:13–15)
B.Self-mastery (5:16–24)
C.The way of the Spirit and Christ’s cruciform faithfulness(5:25–6:10)
X.Conclusion and Summary (6:11–18)
Structureand Contents
I.Greeting(1:1–5).When Paul hears of this situation among the Galatian churches, hewrites them a frustrated letter. He commences by stressing how Jesus,through giving himself for our sins, is God’s means fordelivering us from the present evil age (1:3–4). As Paul willmake clear, Jesus and the law represent mutually exclusive means ofdeliverance (3:21–22). In contrast to most Jews, Paul will thusshockingly dissociate the law from the God of Israel’sapocalyptic deliverance.
II.Thelaw-defined gospel is a different gospel (1:6–10).Paul continues by making clear his point of view: despite what theother teachers say, their law-defined gospel is in fact a damnable“different gospel” (1:6–10).
III.Paul’sgospel is straight from God (1:11–24).While the other teachers may claim that their gospel comes from theauthoritative Jerusalem church, Paul explains that his gospel comesstraight from God and not from other men (1:11–24).
IV.TheJerusalem apostles recognize Paul’s law-free gospel (2:1–10).However, when he had met with the Jerusalem apostles, they hadrecognized his law-free gospel (1:18–2:10). Indeed, they hadnot forced Titus to be circumcised (2:3). Also, 1:18–2:10represents Paul as an embodiment of the radical transforming power ofthe gospel. Whereas Paul previously had advanced far and zealously“in Judaism,” persecuting the church, now he steadfastlyserves the church and boldly stands against Jews who zealously seekto impose the law (“Judaism”) on Gentile Christians.
V.Pauland Peter on whether Gentiles should live like Jews (2:11–21).Paul then narrates an account of an incident that speaks directly tothe Galatian situation (2:11–21). Previously in Antioch Peterhad acted so as to imply that Gentiles would have to live like Jews(e.g., keep the law) in order to truly be unified with God’speople (2:11–14). Paul, however, has rebuked Peter (2:14). Paulcontinues with a speech about how Gentiles are made righteous(“justified”) not within the space demarcated by the“works of the law,” but rather within the faithfulness ofJesus the Messiah (2:15–16). The works of the law, or theduties commanded by the law, do not define those who are“righteous”—that is, God’s true people whowill be saved. Rather, the faithfulness of Christ defines God’strue people, the ones who believe in Jesus. Here Paul for the firsttime explicitly dissociates the law from the God of Israel’sapocalyptic salvation in Jesus (the) Christ. The law, which definesGentiles as “sinners,” has been torn down in Christ’scrucifixion (2:17–18). Paul then presents himself as anembodiment of God’s saving work in Christ. In being crucifiedwith Christ, he has died to the law. Paul no longer lives, but nowChrist lives in him. The faithfulness of Christ, who loves him andhas given himself for him, now defines Paul’s life, not the law(2:19–20). From a more traditional Jewish perspective, Paul hasundermined God’s grace because he has marginalized the law, thepremier means of grace and life that God has given to his people. Infact, however, the law is utterly opposed to Christ’s faithfulsaving death, which is the true means of God’s ultimate savingand gracious actions toward his people (2:21).
Thisunderstanding of 2:11–21 revolves around how Paul considers hisentire discussion of justification, the faithfulness of Christ, andthe words of the law to be dealing with the issue of whether Gentilesshould be forced to live like Jews (2:14). This might seem surprisingto us. Does this not reduce Paul’s discussion of the greatdoctrine of justification to dealing merely with social and identityissues? Within the logic of Jewish apocalyptic thought, however,issues of the identity of God’s people and what defines themare by definition ultimate salvation issues, not merely socialissues. The God of Israel will rescue only his true people. Thusquestions of who really constitutes his true people and how they aredefined are paramount, life-and-death, salvation issues. Paul neverabandons Jewish apocalyptic salvation logic; he simply redefines itaround Christ and not the law.
Thisreading understands the phrase pistis Christou as “thefaithfulness of Christ,” a shorthand reference to Jesus’faithful saving death on the cross. Traditionally people translatethe phrase as “faith in Christ.” In line with much recentscholarship, however, this discussion understands the phrasedifferently, while still recognizing that Paul considers belief inChrist to be of paramount importance: “so we also have believedin Christ Jesus in order to be justified by the faithfulness ofChrist and not by the works of the law” (2:16 [all translationsare the author’s]).
VI.Worksof the law or Christ’s faithfulness? (3:1–5).So far, Paul has not addressed the powerful scriptural arguments andappeals to the law as a means to self-mastery through which theopposing teachers have gained influence. As becomes clear from therest of the letter, Paul does not anchor his counterargumentsultimately in interpretations of the Jewish Scriptures, possiblybecause the scriptural arguments of the opposing teachers would havemore cogency. Again, they draw on understandings about Gentiles thatthey can easily ground in the God of Israel’s sacred writings.Paul instead appeals directly to how the Galatians have experiencedsalvation initially. Have they received and experienced the workingsof the Spirit “out of/from the works of the law, or from themessage of (Christ’s) faithfulness” (3:1–5)? Paul,of course, knows that the answer is “from the message ofChrist’s faithfulness” (often translated as “hearingwith faith”) apart from the works of the law. Paul thus plays atrump card that undercuts the opposing teachers. The Galatians havereceived the Spirit, a classic end-time blessing for the God ofIsrael’s people, apart from the law. Thus, in Christ, God’speople clearly cannot be defined by the law (see also Acts10:44–11:18; 15:6–11). The law-defined gospel of theopposing teachers simply cannot be right, since the Galatians havereceived the Spirit and experienced salvation apart from the law. Onecannot overstate the importance of this obvious argument from theGalatians’ experience for Paul. This settles the entire issuewithin the logic of his letter. All of Paul’s followingarguments using the Jewish Scriptures presuppose that his readings ofthem, depicting Gentile participation in the God of Israel’speople apart from the law, must be correct, and that the opposingteachers’ arguments from Scripture also must be wrong.
VII.Pauladdresses the situation in Galatia (3:6–4:31).For the rest of 3:6–4:31, Paul continues to address thesituation in Galatia within the cultural codes and kinds of concernssketched above. In 3:6–13 Paul launches into a densely packedexcursus of scriptural arguments to set up an answer to hisrhetorical question “Does he who supplies the Spirit to you andworks miracles among you do so out of/from the works of the law, orfrom the message of (Christ’s) faithfulness?” (3:5). Hesets up the answer to his question, which comes in 3:14, by focusingon the nature of the Galatians’ Abra-hamic sonship—thatis, the nature of their identity as the God of Israel’s specialpeople. Paul argues that Christ’s faithfulness, and not thelaw, defines their Abrahamic sonship. Within this excursus it seemsplausible that Paul draws upon and undercuts texts that the opposingteachers have used (Lev. 18:5; Deut. 27:26). In 3:15–29 Paulelucidates how the Galatians’ incorporation into Christ throughhis faithfulness can actually mean that they are incorporated intoAbraham, become his descendants, and thus become “heirsaccording to promise” (3:29).
In4:1–7 Paul restates parts of his preceding discussion in adifferent way, introducing the language of slavery. In 4:12–20Paul returns to reminding the Galatians of their past experience withhimself and the gospel. Paul has embodied Christ to them, and they tohim. He has brought them Christ in his weakness, and they haveaccepted him as such. Their turn to the opposing teachers marks adeparture from how they first received Paul.
VIII.Summaryand restatement of Paul’s argument (5:1–12).In 5:2–6 Paul quickly summarizes the substance of his argumentsthus far, while in 5:7–12 he resummarizes the situation.
IX.Thefaithfulness of Christ and communal living (5:13–6:10).In 5:13–6:10 Paul finally depicts the positive content of thefaithfulness of Christ for the Galatians. This section, in which Paulfocuses on how the Galatians live communally, has been his drivingfocus all along. Not only must he offer something in place of the lawfor self-mastery in order to wrench the Galatians from the influenceof the opposing teachers, but also Paul considers it absolutelynecessary for the Galatians to live together in ways embodyingChrist’s other-oriented, cross-shaped faithfulness (2:19–20;4:19; 5:13–6:10). Paul does not view the law simply as aneutral, ineffectual means to self-mastery; rather, he thinks thatthe law will positively work death, slavery, and irrational passions,the things that would bar the Galatians from inheriting the kingdomof God (5:22). Thus, 5:13–6:10 is the most important part ofthe letter for Paul. All his earlier arguments serve his purposeshere.
Paulbegins his positive sketch of the faithfulness of Christ in 5:13–15by talking about their freedom in Christ (5:1). This freedom from thelaw by no means implies freedom from the obligation to livefaithfully. In fact, this freedom paradoxically means freedom for theGalatians to become slaves to one another through love (5:13). Thisis what Paul means by the cross-shaped faithfulness of Christdefining God’s people. This is what Paul means when he writesthat he longs for Christ to be formed in them (4:19). Christ’sfaithfulness redefines the law itself, such that becoming slaves toone another through love by loving your neighbor fulfills the wholelaw (5:14; 6:2). In 5:13–14 Paul thus surprisingly informs theGalatians that freedom in Christ means other-oriented, love-driven(cf. 5:6), cross-shaped freedom. Cross-shaped faithfulness leadingthem to become slaves to one another through love is the onlyantidote to their biting and devouring one another (5:15), classicGreco-Roman language for describing the control of irrationalpassions.
Paulgets more specific in 5:16–25, explicitly moving his discussionwithin the discourse of self-mastery. His earlier argumentsdissociating the Spirit and Christ’s faithfulness from the lawinform this passage, as does Paul’s implicit association of thelaw and the opposing teachers with “flesh” in 4:29. Onlyby the Spirit can the Galatians overcome the desires of the flesh(5:16–17). In 5:18–19 Paul makes clear his association ofthe law with the desires of the flesh, especially in 5:19, where hespeaks of the “works of the flesh,” an obvious play onhis frequent phrase “works of the law.” The works of theflesh in 5:19–21 read like a catalog of the vices with whichbroader Greco-Roman moral discourse characterizes people who lackself-mastery. People who engage in such vices, who lack the struggleto self-mastery empowered by the Spirit, “will not inherit thekingdom of God” (5:21). Paul then spells out the positivecontent of the faithfulness of Christ for the Galatians in terms ofthe fruit of the Spirit. He concludes this list of virtues, whichcharacterize people who have the Spirit, with enkrateia,“self-mastery” (5:22–23). He continues, “Andthe ones who belong to Christ have crucified the flesh, with itspassions and desires” (5:24). Paul’s language here seemsreminiscent of his earlier self-representation as one who has beencrucified with Christ (2:19–20; see also 6:14–15). TheSpirit, who belongs exclusively to those who are God’s childrenthrough Christ’s faithfulness and not the law (3:14; 4:4–6),empowers the Galatians to attain self-mastery. Not only does the lawfail to help them attain self-mastery, but also, as part of the old“evil” age, it works with the desires of the flesh toproduce everything contrary to self-mastery, everything thatdisqualifies people from inheriting the kingdom of God.
Paulcontinues in 5:25–6:10, stressing the way of the Spirit andChrist’s cruciform faithfulness. In 6:6–10 Paulunderlines the ultimate importance of the Galatians living inaccordance with the Spirit and not the flesh. For Paul, this does notimply that salvation and self-mastery result from the Galatians’own autonomous effort. That would miss the point entirely. OnlyChrist’s faithfulness and the Spirit can bring about thecross-shaped lives and self-mastery of which Paul speaks. Apart fromChrist’s faithfulness and the Spirit, the Galatians wouldremain people mastered by their passions and desires and cut off fromGod’s salvation and blessings, since they would not beAbraham’s descendants in Christ. At the same time, Paul writesthe letter with such passion because he is convinced that whereChrist’s other-oriented, cross-shaped faithfulness andself-mastery do not characterize people, God’s saving blessingsare absent as well. Thus Paul “is again in the anguish ofchildbirth” until Christ is formed in them (4:19).
X.Conclusionand summary (6:11–18).Paul concludes in 6:11–18, summarizing most of his main points.The law and circumcision now count for nothing; only faithfulnessworking through love and new creation in Christ count for anything(5:6; 6:15).
ForPaul in Galatians, the other-oriented, cross-shaped faithfulness ofChrist offers a more concrete communal identity and practical way tolife than the law ever could. The faithfulness of Christ and Spiritdefine the Galatians as a people of the new creation. Justificationin Galatians involves more than the traditional doctrine. It involvesthe unification associated with the fruit of the Spirit, not thedivision and strife of the works of the flesh/law. It relates to andestablishes the conditions for the radical and tangibleother-oriented and cross-shaped communal faithfulness (of Christ)that must define God’s people.
OldTestament
Preconditionsto love. Accordingto the OT, three preconditions must exist for us to know what itmeans to love.
First,we have the capacity for relationships because we are made in thelikeness of a personal God. God created us to reciprocate love backto him, in a relationship of mutual love.
Second,the true meaning of love depends on a true understanding of God,whose love causes him to pursue human beings even though their heartshave turned away from him for other substitute “loves.”This second point assumes that human beings still love, but they doso in a way distorted by sin. Sin causes human beings to live theirlives as though God did not exist. However, God in his mercy haschosen to intervene through his redemptive acts in history andthrough revelatory speech in order to deliver people from theblindness and corruption of sin. His pursuit of his unfaithful sonsand daughters gives us a picture of what true love looks like.
Third,God’s pursuit of human beings in history was by means ofelection and the establishment of a covenant. God chose to makehimself known to a particular people, those who would descend fromAbraham. God called Abraham to leave his country and go to a newplace that he would inherit as a new homeland, where his descendantswould be blessed (Gen. 12:1–3; 15; 17). God’s promise toAbraham took the form of an everlasting covenant, by which heguaranteed that he would fulfill what he had promised. He would bethe God of Abraham’s descendants, and they would be his people.They would receive the land of Canaan as an inheritance (17:6–8).In response, Abraham’s descendants were to obey God’scovenant by circumcising their male children (17:9–14). Thiscovenant would depend not on human faithfulness but on God’sfaithfulness. God would redeem this people to be his own specialpeople.
Severalgenerations later, God addressed the people through Moses, tellingthem that he chose them for no other reason than that he loved them(Deut. 7:7–8). Through Moses, God freed the people from theirslavery in Egypt and gave them the law. The law told them how to liveholy lives in response to God. It also included the provisions foratonement through the sacrificial system. In short, loving Godinvolved obeying his statutes.
Lovein wisdom books.The OT wisdom books Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes give us furtherinsight into the meaning of love. Proverbs exhorts its readers,“Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flowsfrom it” (4:23). One’s affections are the gateway to theallegiances of one’s heart. Once one’s affections havebeen hijacked by sinful passions, allegiance to God is subjugated toanother “master.” To the degree that sin usurps thethrone of the heart, it will steer the course of one’s actions(i.e., one’s “path”).
Inthe book of Job, Satan is convinced that Job serves God only becauseGod blesses Job, so Satan challenges God to let him afflict Job.Satan insists that if God removes Job’s blessings, Job willcurse God to his face (1:10–12). When God agrees to remove thehedge of protection and allows Job to suffer, the depth of Job’slove for God is vindicated. Although perplexed that God would allowhim to endure such suffering, he endures without forsaking God. Jobloved the giver more than his gifts, so his love did not turn tohatred when the gifts of God were removed.
Inthe book of Ecclesiastes, Qoheleth (the Teacher) reflects honestly onthe many vain pursuits and unexplainable dissonances thatcharacterize life “under the sun.” Only faith-filled lovefor God can enable one to live each moment of life with joy insteadof striving to find meaning in “under the sun” pursuits.This love chooses to trust the inscrutable wisdom of God in the faceof life’s many enigmas, uncertainties, and sufferings. One cando this honestly because of the belief that God’s just ruleover the affairs of the universe will be vindicated at the future dayof judgment (Eccles. 12:14).
Marriagemetaphor.The Bible uses the metaphor of marriage to describe God’scovenant relationship with his people (Isa. 54:5–8). Thismetaphor captures the intimate character of the relationship that Goddesires to have with his people. Marriage is the most intimate humanrelationship in two ways. First, marriage is a relationship in whichknowledge is the most intimate. A spouse can see many of the flawsthat are hidden from others. Thus, each spouse must accept and lovethe other for who that person is, in spite of his or herimperfections. Second, the depth and passion of the expressions oflove are most intimate in marriage. Consequently, there is no greaterpain than that caused by unfaithfulness to this covenant.
Sadly,as the story of the OT unfolds, God’s “wife”betrays him. How so? His people worship idols in their hearts (Ezek.14:1–5). Because God is jealous for the exclusive love of hispeople, idolatry is spiritual unfaithfulness. God wants both theallegiance and the affection of their hearts to be reservedexclusively for him. The people continue the formalities of worship,but their hearts have turned away from God. The book of Hoseaillustrates the sense of betrayal that God feels when his people arespiritually unfaithful. God tells Hosea to marry a woman who will beunfaithful to him. Subsequently, she leaves Hosea for one lover afteranother. This story is intended to give God’s people a vividpicture of how painful their spiritual betrayal of him is. His heartis crushed by the rebellious and idolatrous condition of his people.Hosea’s wife ends up on the market as a prostitute, and Godtells him to buy her back and love her again.
NewTestament
Thestory of God’s love for his people is expanded by what theFather did centuries later when he sent Jesus to pay the ransom forthe sins of his people so that they might be healed of theirrebellion and receive eternal life (John 3:16; 17:24). The death andresurrection of Christ were necessary because sin had to be atonedfor. This love is a free gift that comes to the one who trusts inChrist for forgiveness of sin and a new heart. The new heart inclinesone to please God. The gift of the Spirit enables one to bear the“fruit” of love (Gal. 5:22–23). As Abraham’sengrafted children (Gal. 3:7), believers are called by God to live aspilgrims on their way to a heavenly promised land (Heb. 11:9–10;1Pet. 2:11).
Christmodeled genuine love by serving us (Mark 10:42–45). His loveshould motivate us and enable us to practice sacrificial servicetoward others (Matt. 22:39; 1John 3:16). It should also causeus to practice forbearance, long-suffering, and forgiveness towardthose who wrong us (Matt. 18:21–35). It should cause us torepay evil with good (Rom. 12:14). Our love for truth should motivateus to act in the best interests of others (1Cor. 13:4–8)in the hope that they may become reconciled to God (2Tim.2:24–26).
Behind the English translation “mercy” liediverse biblical words in Hebrew (khesed, khanan, rakham) and inGreek (charis, eleos, oiktirmos, splanchnon). These words are alsotranslated as “love,” “compassion,” “grace,”“favor,” “kindness,” “loving-kindness,”and so on, depending on context. Hence, a conceptual approach to themeaning of “mercy” is best.
God’sMercy
Mercyas part of God’s character.Mercy is a distinguishing characteristic of the nature of God. God iscalled “the Father of mercies” (2Cor. 1:3 NRSV[NIV: “Father of compassion”]). God is “rich inmercy” (Eph. 2:4; cf. 2Sam. 24:14; Dan. 9:9). God’smercy was demonstrated in his covenantal faithfulness to his people(1Kings 8:23–24; Mic. 7:18–20). God redeemed theoppressed Israelites from slavery under Pharaoh because of his mercy,which was stirred when he heard their groaning and cry for help.Here, the rekindling of God’s mercy toward the Israelites wasdepicted in terms of remembering his covenant with Abraham, Isaac,and Jacob (Exod. 2:23–25). Mercy is a manifestation of God’sfaithfulness to his covenant. Hence, God’s mercy to hiscovenant people never ceases (Pss. 119:132; 103:17).
Godhas absolute sovereignty in electing the people to whom he wills toshow mercy. A classic expression appears in Exod. 33:19: “Iwill have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassionon whom I will have compassion.” Paul quoted this to explainGod’s sovereignty in electing Jacob as the recipient of God’smercy (Rom. 9:13–15). God’s mercy cannot be acquired byhuman effort or desire (Rom. 9:16). God even ordered the Israelitesto show no mercy to the Canaanites because of their corruption andidolatry (Deut. 7:2).
Diverseimages are used to describe God’s mercy. God is compared to aloving father who has compassion on his children (Jer. 31:20; Mal.3:17). “As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lordhas compassion on those who fear him; for he knows how we are formed,he remembers that we are dust” (Ps. 103:13–14). God’scompassion is also compared to that of a nursing mother who feeds herbaby at her breast (Isa. 49:15). The images of the loving father andthe loving mother reflect closely the heart of God’s mercytoward his chosen people. God is especially merciful to the needy,the weak, the afflicted, and the oppressed (Exod. 2:23–24; Ps.123:2–3; Isa. 49:13; Heb. 4:16). God is called “a fatherto the fatherless” and “a defender of widows” (Ps.68:5). Sinners appeal for God’s mercy when they requestforgiveness (Ps. 51:1). “Have mercy on me” is a commonform of expression when the psalmist entreats God for his forgiveness(Pss. 41:4, 10; 51:1). God’s mercy is also shown in his act ofsalvation and blessing (Exod. 15:13; Deut. 13:17–18; Judg.2:18; Eph. 2:4–5).
God’smercy in redemptive history.Redemptive history is a successive demonstration of God’s mercytoward his chosen people. It was because of God’s mercy that hetook the initiative to save fallen human beings (Gen. 3:15). Deathwas the due penalty for Adam and Eve (Gen. 2:17), but God preachedthe good news of mercy that the descendant of the woman would somedaycrush the head of the serpent. In Rev. 20:2 that ancient serpent inthe garden of Eden is identified as “the devil, or Satan,”whose head was crushed by Jesus Christ on the cross and is bound bythe coming Messiah “for a thousand years” and will be“thrown into the lake of burning sulfur” (Rev. 20:2, 10).In spite of God’s judgment on Cain, the first murderer, Godshowed mercy by putting a mark on him so that no one would kill him(Gen. 4:15). As the psalmist later confesses, God proves himself asthe merciful God who “does not treat us as our sins deserve orrepay us according to our iniquities” (Ps. 103:10).
Noahand his family were saved from the judgment of the flood because ofGod’s special mercy toward them (Gen. 6:8). Immediately afterGod confused the languages of human beings because of their challengeto him (Gen. 11:1–9), God showed mercy on Abram, “awandering Aramean” (Deut. 26:5), and designated him to be thefather of his chosen people (Gen. 12:1–3). Jacob’selection originated solely from God’s mercy, as Paul pointedout by quoting Scripture: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated”(Rom. 9:13). The exodus is also the clearest evidence of God’sdemonstration of mercy toward his chosen people (Exod. 2:23–25).They were saved not by their own righteousness but rather by God’smercy on the covenant people, who suffered under the bondage ofPharaoh’s slavery. God’s mercy reached its climax when hesent his only Son, Jesus Christ, to save sinners (Rom. 5:8). It isbecause of God’s mercy that we are saved, not because of ourrighteousness (Titus 3:5).
Christ’sMercy
JesusChrist lived a life full of mercy. He is, in a sense, the bodilymanifestation of God’s mercy. Jesus expressed deep mercywhenever he saw the sick and the lost. The writers of the Gospelsdescribe Jesus’ demonstrations of mercy when he healed theblind, the lame, the deaf, the leprous, the demon-possessed, and thedead (Matt. 9:36; 14:14; 20:34; Mark 1:41; 5:19; 6:34; 8:2; Luke7:13; John 11:33). Jesus especially had compassion on the crowds, whodid not have a spiritual leader, and he compared them to “sheepwithout a shepherd” (Matt. 9:36).
Jesus’ministry of healing and evangelism was motivated by his deep mercyand compassion toward people in physical and spiritual need (Luke4:16–21; cf. Isa. 61:1–2). Whenever the sick appealed tohis mercy, Jesus never refused to dispense it to them (Matt. 15:22;17:14–18). For example, he healed the two blind men whoentreated his mercy (Matt. 20:30–34). When a leper, kneelingbefore him, entreated his mercy, Jesus touched him (risking his ownuncleanness according to the law) and healed him (Matt. 8:2–3).When a centurion asked for Jesus’ mercy on his sick servant, hewas willing to go and heal the sick man (Matt. 8:5–13). Jesus’mercy was aroused especially when he saw people crying for the dead,and even he shed tears (John 11:33–35). When Jesus saw a widowcrying for her dead son during a funeral procession, he comforted andhad compassion on her and made her son alive (Luke 7:12–15).
Accordingto Heb. 2:17–18, Jesus became “a merciful and faithfulhigh priest” to make atonement for the sins of his people. Heis also compared to the high priest who is able to sympathize withour weaknesses because he “has been tempted in every way, justas we are” (Heb. 4:15). His high priestly work on earth washighlighted in terms of his ministry of mercy toward his people. LikeGod’s mercy, Jesus’ mercy was shown in his actions ofsalvation (Luke 19:10; Eph. 5:2; 1Tim. 1:14–16; Titus3:4–7), of blessing (Mark 10:13–16), and of forgiveness(Mark 2:10; Luke 23:34). Paul’s personal experience led him toconfess, “He saved us, not because of righteous things we haddone, but because of his mercy” (Titus 3:5). Jesus’character of mercy was most vividly manifested on the cross when heprayed for the forgiveness of the crucifying soldiers and the cursingcrowds (Luke 23:33–37).
HumanResponse to God’s Mercy
Whatis the proper response to God’s mercy and compassion? Godexpects believers to show the same kind of mercy toward other people.One of the best examples is the parable of the unmerciful servant(Matt. 18:23–35). The central focus of this parable is on theunmerciful servant, to whom a tremendous mercy is shown by the king,but who refuses to show a little mercy to his fellow servant. Theparable concludes with the king’s statement that no mercy willbe shown to those who do not show mercy and forgiveness to others.Hence, a forgiving attitude is a must for believers, who havereceived immeasurable mercy from God when he forgave their sins atthe time of repentance. The Lord’s Prayer also includes thebeliever’s forgiveness of others as being inseparably linked tothe request for forgiveness from God (Matt. 6:12). Jesus affirms thisidea in a subsequent statement: “For if you forgive otherpeople when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will alsoforgive you. But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Fatherwill not forgive your sins” (6:14–15).
Mercyis one of the eight blessings in the Beatitudes: “Blessed arethe merciful, for they will be shown mercy” (Matt. 5:7). Jesus’response to the critical Pharisees reveals that our merciful lifeshould precede our religious life (9:13). According to the parable ofthe good Samaritan (Luke 10:25–37), the true neighbor is theone who shows mercy to the afflicted. Its conclusion, “Go anddo likewise” (10:37), requires believers to show mercy to theirsuffering neighbors. At the last judgment the righteous arecharacterized by their lives of showing mercy to the hungry, thethirsty, the stranger, the unclothed, the sick, and the imprisoned(Matt. 25:37–40). In Luke 6:36, Jesus summarizes the law ofmercy: “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.”According to James, “judgment without mercy will be shown toanyone who has not been merciful”; however, “mercytriumphs over judgment” (James 2:12–13). And according tothe prophets, a merciless life is characteristic of godless people(Isa. 13:18; Jer. 6:23; 21:7; 50:42; Amos 1:11–12).
Itis by God’s mercy that believers can persevere during the timeof suffering (2Cor. 4:1). Their prayer is the channel throughwhich they draw God’s mercy. Hence, the writer of Hebrewsexhorts believers to “approach God’s throne of grace withconfidence, so that we may receive mercy” (Heb. 4:16).
The word “mission” was coined by the Jesuits inthe sixteenth century to refer to the sending of the Godhead into theworld, reflecting a particular trinitarian formulation. The Jesuitsused the term “mission” to describe the Father, who sendsthe Son, who sends the Holy Spirit, who sends the church into theworld as an agent of redemption and reconciliation. Simply put, theJesuits conceived of missionas sending. That biblical term “send” (e.g., Gk.apostellō) described the fundamental nature of the church asbeing sent by God into the world with a specific purpose, animated bythe Holy Spirit to accomplish*ts task given by God, as a sign and instrument of God’skingdom. Initially, the Jesuits employed the term in the context ofboth the conversion of heathens (those who failed to recognize theGod of the Bible) and the reconversion of Protestants to RomanCatholicism.
Thebiblical notion of mission affirms that God is a sending God (Lat.,missio Dei), who loves the world so much that he sent his Son intothe world to redeem it (e.g., John 3:16), and whose Son then sendsthe Holy Spirit as the Counselor (Gk.paraklētos [e.g., John 16:5–7]) and guide so that thechurch can fulfill its purpose. Mission (sending), therefore,expresses both the heart of God and the nature of the church in theworld.
TheRole of Language and Culture
Functionally,mission is the sharing of the good news of Jesus Christ in word anddeed across cultural and linguistic boundaries, without granting anyparticular language or culture a superior position in the divineeconomy. The Bible tells the story of God’s mission in offeringhuman beings a covenantal relationship with himself. South Africanmission scholar David Bosch suggests that the missionary in the OT isGod himself, whereas the NT presents several significantmissionaries, with Jesus and his disciples being the mostillustrative examples. Indeed, it can be said that the NT is itself amission document, since it was written by people actively involved inmission (e.g., Paul, Luke). Biblically, the Christian mission impliesa certain perspective on language and culture whereby all languagesand cultures are relativized in the light of Christ, with no languageor culture having privileged access to God, for God communicatesthrough every particular language and culture. Thus, for instance,Koreans, Zulus, Cambodians, Quechuas, and Swedes have the same accessto God through their own language and culture, and none of them arerequired to adopt another language or culture, such as Hebrew, Greek,or English, in order to know and worship God.
Theimportance of the parity of languages and cultures worldwide asvehicles of the gospel is exemplified biblically in the account ofthe Jerusalem council, where the apostle Paul confronted JewishChristians who would have made Torah and circumcision the litmus testof authentic faith in Jesus Christ (Acts 15). Paul argued vigorouslyagainst those who sought to require new Christians to adopt Jewishceremonial practices of the OT in order to join the body of Christ.The relativization of language and culture is so crucial to Christianmission that Scripture records Paul rebuking Peter for seeking tomake Gentile Christians follow Jewish customs (Gal. 2:14). Requiringfollowers of Christ to adopt Jewish (or other) ceremonial traditions(e.g., circumcision) would render the grace of Christ useless, makinga mockery of the cross (Gal. 2:21), since Christ liberates humanbeings within their own language and culture. Simply put, people wereto become followers of Jesus Christ on the basis of their ownlanguage and culture (Greek or otherwise) rather than according toany other tradition. According to the biblical account, no languageor culture is too profane to communicate the good news of JesusChrist.
Missionas Sending
Biblically,sending implies a sender, the one sent, and a message. The sender isthe agent who initiates the deliverance of the message. The one senthas been given the authority to deliver in word and deed the messageof the sender. The message refers to the content in word and deedthat is shared by the agent (e.g., missionary) of the sender. Theauthority of the sender is invested in the messenger, so much so thatthe messenger (e.g., the missionary) represents the sender directly.More broadly, the biblical term “sending” appears in bothTestaments, and it occurs in mundane contexts that are not concernedwith God’s mission (missio Dei) as well as in texts that areexplicitly mission related. In the OT, the Hebrew term shalakh, whichoccurs in various forms over eight hundred times, refers to sendingthe intentions of an authority figure, often a king, judge, or otherperson of high status. An example would be God, as a demonstration ofhis authority, sending Adam out of the garden (Gen. 3:23). The act ofsending expresses the intention of the sender. The mission of God aspresented in the OT is communicated clearly in Gen. 12:1–3 (inwhat is known as the Abrahamic covenant), where God tells Abram toleave his country, guided by God, in order to be a blessing to theentire world. Following Israel’s continual disobedience, Godpromises to send them a savior (Isa. 19:20), a statement thatChristians interpret as foreshadowing the birth and ministry of JesusChrist.
Inthe NT, the Greek terms for “send,” and their variations,occur over two hundred times, appearing in texts such as “I amsending you out like sheep among wolves” (Matt. 10:16); “Asthe Father has sent me, I am sending you” (John 20:21); and“Jesus sent two of his disciples” (Mark 11:1). Peopleoften assume that there is one Great Commission text, Matt. 28:18–20,which summarizes the biblical warrant for mission. However, there areseveral “great commissions” in the Gospels, which mightbe better understood as “last commissions.” Each Gospelwriter records his own version of the last commission, reflecting histheological purposes within the particular contexts out of which hewrites his account. The last commissions appear in Matt. 28:16–20;Mark 16:14–20; Luke 24:44–47; John 20:19–23.
Themost responsible interpretive strategy with regard to these passagesis to read them within the larger context of each Gospel narrativerather than as individual texts (i.e., proof texts) disconnected fromtheir wider context. That is to say, a faithful theology of missionin part entails letting the text interpret itself through study ofthe entire Gospel account. Otherwise, one may fail to understand thebiblical notion of mission in its entirety. For instance, Luke 24:47announces that “repentance for the forgiveness of sins will bepreached in his [Christ’s] name to all nations, beginning atJerusalem,” which emphasizes the need for confession,forgiveness, and redemption (vertical aspects of mission). Yet onecould misinterpret Luke’s Gospel were one to understand missionsolely through the words of Luke 24:44–47, the vertical(spiritual) aspect, while overlooking Luke 4:16–30, verses thatannounce Jesus’ mission to liberate captives and give sight tothe blind, reflecting the horizontal (social) nature of mission. InLuke’s Gospel, mission is characterized as equally vertical(i.e., calling for repentance and forgiveness) and horizontal (i.e.,seeking sociopolitical justice). According to Luke’s Gospel,then, both vertical and horizontal aspects must be present inmission.
Missionand Missions
Itis worthwhile to note the difference between the terms “mission”(sg.) and “missions” (pl.). Whereas “mission”refers to the singular act of God, who sends his Son, who sends theHoly Spirit into the world, “missions” refers to thespecific agencies and organizations in history and currently thathave sought to carry out that mission of God. There is only onemission (missio Dei), with several missions aiming to accomplish thatsingular mission through time and space. Generally, missions aredivided into denominational and faith missions. Denominationalmissions, such as those of Roman Catholic, Baptist, Methodist,Lutheran, or Presbyterian churches, send out missionaries financiallysupported by the denomination. Faith missions, such as Wycliffe BibleTranslators, Operation Mobilization, or SIM (Serving in Mission,formally Sudan Interior Mission), require that missionaries serve inmission by faith, either by going where they are called by Godwithout having prior financial support or by raising financialsupport from friends and churches prior to leaving for their intendedregion of service.
Conclusion
Finally,there are two important lessons from the biblical account of mission.First, Paul and the other disciples, while seeking to communicate thegospel of good news to particular people, sought to maintain theunity of the churches in the face of their diverse cultural andlinguistic makeup (e.g., Eph. 4:4–7). This means that abiblical perspective on mission sees culture and language as channelsrather than obstacles to the communication of the gospel. Second,Paul and the disciples never started missions but rather establishedchurches. Since mission implies movement across cultural andlinguistic frontiers, the earlier followers of Christ were on themove, with the conviction that the Holy Spirit would guide, direct,and protect them until Christ returned.
Moses played a leadership role in the founding of Israel as a“kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:6).Indeed, the narrative of Exodus through Deuteronomy is the story ofGod using Moses to found the nation of Israel. It begins with anaccount of his birth (Exod. 2) and ends with an account of his death(Deut. 34). Moses’ influence and importance extend well beyondhis lifetime, as later Scripture demonstrates.
Abraham’sDescendants in Egypt
Thebook of Genesis prepares the way for the story of Moses and thefounding of Israel. After recounting the creation of the world andthe fall into sin, the book eventually describes God’s choiceof Abraham as the one whose descendants he will make “a greatnation” and bring a blessing to the world (Gen. 12:1–3).However, by the end of Genesis, Abraham’s descendants have goneto Egypt in order to survive a devastating famine. Although they arein a good relationship with the Egyptian government, the hope isexpressed that God will eventually return them to the land of promise(Gen. 50:24–26).
Manyyears pass between the close of the book of Genesis and the beginningof Exodus. The Israelite population has grown from family size (aboutseventy people) to nation size. Out of fear, the Egyptians had begunto oppress them. Indeed, the size of the Israelite population soworried them that Pharaoh instituted a decree calling for the deathof all male babies born to the Israelites.
Moses’Life before the Exodus
Moseswas born in a dangerous time, and according to Pharaoh’sdecree, he should not have survived long after his birth. He was bornto Amram and Jochebed (Exod. 6:20). Circumventing Pharaoh’sdecree, Jochebed placed the infant Moses in a reed basket and floatedhim down the river. This act seems desperate, but there are similarstories from the Near East (the account of the birth of Sargon, anAkkadian king), and perhaps it was a way of placing the endangeredchild in the hands of God. God guided the basket down the river andinto the presence of none other than Pharaoh’s daughter (Exod.2:5–6), who, at the urging of Moses’ sister, hiredJochebed to take care of the child. When the infant grew older,Pharaoh’s daughter gave him a Hebrew name, “Moses,”which sounds like the Hebrew verb mashah, meaning “to draw out”(Exod. 2:10). This amazing story of Moses’ survival at birthinforms later Israel that their human savior was really provided bytheir divine savior.
Modernmovie adaptations of this story dwell on Moses’ upbringing inPharaoh’s household, but the Bible itself is essentially silenton this period of his life (apart from a reference to Moses’Egyptian education in Acts 7:22; cf. Heb. 11:24). The next majorepisode concerns his defense of an Israelite worker who was beingbeaten by an Egyptian (Exod. 2:11–25). In the process ofrescuing the Israelite, Moses killed the Egyptian. Apparently, hisrelationship to the ruler’s household would not save him frompunishment, so when it became clear that he was known to be thekiller, he fled Egypt and ended up in Midian, where he became amember of the family of a Midianite priest-chief, Jethro, by marryinghis daughter Zipporah.
Theterritory of Midian is vaguely described in the Bible, perhapsbecause its people were nomadic sheepherders. They were often foundaround the Gulf of Aqaba and sometimes farther northeast of theJordan River. The question is whether the tent of Jethro and MountSinai were on the Sinai Peninsula or on the eastern side of Aqaba inwhat is today Saudi Arabia.
AlthoughMoses was not looking for a way back into Egypt, God had differentplans. One day, while Moses was tending his sheep, God appeared tohim in the form of a burning bush and commissioned him to go back toEgypt and lead his people to freedom. Moses expressed reluctance, andso God grudgingly enlisted his older brother, Aaron, to accompany himas his spokesperson.
TheExodus and Wilderness Wandering
UponMoses’ return to Egypt, Pharaoh stubbornly refused to allow theIsraelites to leave Egypt. God directed Moses to announce a series ofplagues that ultimately induced Pharaoh to allow the Israelites todepart. After they left, Pharaoh had a change of mind and corneredthem on the shores of the Red Sea (Sea of Reeds). It was at the RedSea that God demonstrated his great power by splitting the sea andallowing the Israelites to escape before closing it again in judgmenton the Egyptians. Moses signaled the presence of God by lifting hisrod high in the air (Exod. 14:16). This event was long remembered asthe defining moment when God released Israel from Egyptian slavery(Pss. 77; 114), and it even became the paradigm for future divinerescues (Isa. 40:3–5; Hos. 2:14–15).
Afterthe crossing of the Red Sea, Moses led Israel back to Mount Sinai,the location of his divine commissioning. At this time, Moses went upthe mountain as a prophetic mediator for the people (Deut. 18:16). Hereceived the Ten Commandments, the rest of the law, and instructionsto build the tabernacle (Exod. 19–24). All these were part of anew covenantal arrangement that today we refer to as the Mosaic orSinaitic covenant.
However,as Moses came down the mountain with the law, he saw that the people,who had grown tired of waiting, were worshiping a false god that theyhad created in the form of a golden calf (Exod. 32). With the aid ofthe Levites, who that day assured their role as Israel’spriestly helpers, he brought God’s judgment against theoffenders and also interceded in prayer with God to prevent the totaldestruction of Israel.
Thusbegan Israel’s long story of rebellion against God. God wasparticularly upset with the lack of confidence that the Israeliteshad shown when the spies from the twelve tribes gave their report(Num. 13). They did not believe that God could handle the fearsomewarriors who lived in the land, and so God doomed them to forty yearsof wandering in the wilderness, enough time for the first generationto die. Not even Moses escaped this fate, since he had shown angeragainst God and attributed a miracle to his own power and not to Godwhen he struck a rock in order to get water (Num. 20:1–13).
Thus,Moses was not permitted to enter the land of promise, though he hadled the Israelites to the very brink of entry on the plains of Moab.There he gave his last sermon, which we know as the book ofDeuteronomy. The purpose of his sermon was to tell the secondgeneration of Israelites who were going to enter the land that theymust obey God’s law or suffer the consequences. The form of thesermon was that of a covenant renewal, and so Israel on this occasionreaffirmed its loyalty to God.
Afterthis, Moses went up on Mount Nebo, from which he could see thepromised land, and died. Deuteronomy concludes with the followingstatements: “Since then, no prophet has risen in Israel likeMoses, whom the Lord knew face to face.... For noone has ever shown the mighty power or performed the awesome deedsthat Moses did in the sight of all Israel” (Deut. 34:10, 12).
Legacyand Dates
TheNT honors Moses as God’s servant but also makes the point thatJesus is one who far surpasses Moses as a mediator between God andpeople (Acts 3:17–26; Heb.3).
Thedate of Moses is a matter of controversy because the biblical textdoes not name the pharaohs of the story. Many date him to thethirteenth century BC and associate him with RamessesII, butothers take 1Kings 6:1 at face value and date him to the end ofthe fifteenth century BC, perhaps during the reign of ThutmoseIII.
Although essentially characterized by bearing offspring, amother is associated with much more in the Bible. Especiallyprominent are the characteristic ways in which a mother relates toher children: she tends to their needs (1Thess. 2:7), looksafter their welfare (1Kings 3:16–27), comforts them (Ps.131:2), and instructs them (Prov. 1:8; 31:1).
Motherhoodis held in high regard. Bearing a child is an occasion for rejoicing(Gen. 4:1; Ps. 113:9). A virtuous and industrious mother is praisedby her children and husband alike (Prov. 31:28). The Bible describesa mother both crowning a king (Song 3:11) and sitting beside histhrone (1Kings 2:19). The death of a mother brings extremesorrow (Gen. 24:67; Ps. 35:14). Furthermore, God’s promises areoften associated with the birth of a child (e.g., Gen. 3:15; 12:2–3;Judg. 13:3; Isa. 7:14). Mary is blessed among women as the mother ofJesus Christ (Luke 1:42–45). Finally, the Bible protects thedignity of a mother as it does that of the father. The law requireshonor and reverence for both father and mother (Exod. 20:12; Lev.19:3; Deut. 5:16) and condemns to death those who strike or curseeither parent (Exod. 21:15, 17; Lev. 20:9).
Thereis also great concern that adult children look after the welfare oftheir parents as a means of honoring them. David makes provisions forhis parents as he flees from Saul (1Sam. 22:3–4). Jesuscondemns the Pharisees and the scribes for taking the resources duetheir parents and offering them as a gift to God instead (Matt.15:4–6). Even Jesus’ final act upon the cross is toensure the welfare of his mother by defining her relationship withthe Beloved Disciple as mother and son (John 19:26–27). On theother hand, Jesus makes clear that concern for one’s family issubordinate to discipleship to him (Matt. 10:37; Mark 3:35; Luke14:26).
Theword “mother” also carries symbolic or metaphoricalsenses. Sometimes the “mother” is a fitting example ofother things or persons like it, such as Babylon the Great as themother of prostitutes and earthly abominations (Rev. 17:5). In theextended analogy between Hosea’s marriage and God’srelationship to Israel, the nation is called a “mother,”and its inhabitants are her “children” (Hos. 2:4; 4:5;cf. Isa. 50:1; Jer. 50:12). The image of a mother may also refer to alarge city (2Sam. 20:19; Gal. 4:26).
Common and valuable for food, beans were cooked while green in the pods or after being dried. Dry beans were threshed and winnowed like cereals and other grains. Beans are mentioned twice in the NIV (2Sam. 17:28; Ezek. 4:9).
(1)Adescendant of Shem, he was the son of Serug, father of Terah, andgrandfather of Abraham (Gen. 11:22–25). (2)Theson of Terah and the brother of Abraham and Haran (Gen. 11:26). Nahormarried Milkah, the daughter of his deceased brother, Haran (Gen.11:28–32). When Abraham headed west for the land of Canaan(Gen. 12:1, 4), Nahor remained in the city of Harran. Through hiswife, Milkah, Nahor fathered eight sons, and he fathered another fourthrough his concubine, Reumah (Gen. 22:20–24). Bethuel, one ofNahor’s sons through Milkah, fathered Rebekah, who became thewife of Isaac, Abraham’s son (Gen. 24:15, 67). Relationsbetween Nahor’s eastern branch of the family and Abraham’swestern branch apparently ceased when Laban, Nahor’s grandson,had a falling out with Jacob, Abraham’s grandson, in whichLaban called on the Lord (Abraham’s God) and on Nahor’sgod to judge between the two parties (Gen. 31:53). (3)“Thetown of Nahor” is a town in northwest Mesopotamia, whereAbraham’s servant encounters Rebekah at the well (Gen. 24:10).“Nahor” may be the name of the town, or the text issimply referring to the town where Nahor once lived (so GNT, NLT).
(1)Adescendant of Shem, he was the son of Serug, father of Terah, andgrandfather of Abraham (Gen. 11:22–25). (2)Theson of Terah and the brother of Abraham and Haran (Gen. 11:26). Nahormarried Milkah, the daughter of his deceased brother, Haran (Gen.11:28–32). When Abraham headed west for the land of Canaan(Gen. 12:1, 4), Nahor remained in the city of Harran. Through hiswife, Milkah, Nahor fathered eight sons, and he fathered another fourthrough his concubine, Reumah (Gen. 22:20–24). Bethuel, one ofNahor’s sons through Milkah, fathered Rebekah, who became thewife of Isaac, Abraham’s son (Gen. 24:15, 67). Relationsbetween Nahor’s eastern branch of the family and Abraham’swestern branch apparently ceased when Laban, Nahor’s grandson,had a falling out with Jacob, Abraham’s grandson, in whichLaban called on the Lord (Abraham’s God) and on Nahor’sgod to judge between the two parties (Gen. 31:53). (3)“Thetown of Nahor” is a town in northwest Mesopotamia, whereAbraham’s servant encounters Rebekah at the well (Gen. 24:10).“Nahor” may be the name of the town, or the text issimply referring to the town where Nahor once lived (so GNT, NLT).
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
John and the author of Hebrews call Jesus Christ the “onlybegotten,” as traditionally translated (John 1:14, 18; 3:16,18; 1John 4:9; Heb. 11:17 KJV). The epithet, which is a singleword in Greek (monogenēs),signifies being the only one of its kind within a specificrelationship, and therefore, as we find in more recent translations,it may also be translated “one and only Son” (NIV) or“only son” (NRSV). Although the Bible claims that God hasmany humansons and daughters, in various senses he has but one “onlybegotten” Son, who must also be distinguished from the angels,who arealso identified as sons of God (Heb. 1:1–14; seealso Gen. 6:2,4).
Theauthor of Hebrews and Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian,present Isaac as Abraham’s “only begotten son”(Heb. 11:17 KJV; Josephus, Ant. 1.222). But Abraham has two sons, theother one being Ishmael, as the biblical narrative and Paul makeclear (Gen. 16:11–16; Gal. 4:22). The difference is that Isaacwas the only begotten between Abraham and his wife, Sarah, and theone for whom God decided to perpetuate the covenant that heoriginally made with Abraham (Gen. 12:1–3; 15:1–6;17:19). Isaac is presented by early Christians as a type of Christ,and for Paul, he is a type of all the children of the new covenant(Gal. 4:21–31). Nevertheless, through Jesus’ fulfillmentof God’s covenant obligations, many, including the descendantsof Ishmael, will be called “sons of God” (Gen. 17:20;Hos. 1:10, cited in Rom. 9:26; Matt. 5:9; Rom. 8:14, 19; Gal. 3:26;4:6).
Withoutcompromising the uniqueness of his position, the “one and only”Son is happy to share his status before God the Father through faith,by grace, which brings the believer into union with his body, thechurch (Gal. 2:19–20; Eph. 2:1–10; Heb. 2:10). Theconviction that Christ cannot be compared to human children orangels, parts of God’s creation, contributed to the belief ofcomparing Christ only with God, the uncreated.
Divine pronouncements given to humankind that are eitherunsolicited (Isa. 7:3–9; Hag. 1:2–11; Zech. 12:1) or aresponse to an inquiry (2Kings 8:8). It was common practicethroughout the ancient Near East to seek pronouncements from deitiesand to identify holy sites where sacred individuals could query thedeities (e.g., the shrine of Apollo at Delphi). How much time elapsedbetween the transmission of an oracle and its inscription isuncertain. Inscriptions from the surrounding Near Eastern milieuattest that messages received from a deity often were transcribedimmediately upon reception, with the prophet’s name attached.
Receptionand Delivery of Oracles
TheHebrew word massa’ (derived from nasa’, “to lift,take, carry”), variously translated “oracle” (Isa.17:1; 19:1; 21:1; 30:6), “burden” (Isa. 17:1 JPS, KJV),or “prophecy” (Prov. 30:1; 31:1 KJV), is used in thisfigurative sense primarily in prophetic speech (Prov. 30:1; 31:1 arethe exceptions) to refer to threatening pronouncements against Israel(Hab. 1:1; Zech. 12:1; Mal. 1:1), its neighbors (Isa. 13:1; 14:28;15:1; Nah. 1:1), or an individual (2Kings 9:25; 2Chron.24:27). Although the word itself is used infrequently, the propheticactivity of delivering divine pronouncements was prevalent throughoutIsrael’s history, rising in prominence during the monarchy andceasing at the beginning of the intertestamental period.
Priests,judges (Deut. 17:9), and prophets (1Sam. 9:9) could be therecipients and deliverers of divine oracles, although as the dutiesof these offices became more differentiated over time, delivery oforacles became more the province of the prophet (2Kings22:11–14; Jer. 21:2). A few oracles found in the OT areattributed to non-Israelites (Balaam [Num. 22–24]; Agur [Prov.30:1]; King Lemuel [Prov. 31:1]). The Israelites were commanded toseek Yahweh (Isa. 55:6; Hos. 10:12), and they (Isa. 9:13) and theirleaders (Jer. 10:21) were condemned both for failure to do so and fortheir dismissive response to a prophetic oracle once it had beendelivered, whether solicited (Ezek. 33:30–32) or not (Zech.7:12).
Prophetswere often sought to inquire about obtaining an oracle (1Sam.9:9; 2Kings 3:11; 22:13) during times of crisis or need. Suchoracles were for the benefit of either an individual (Exod. 18:15;2Kings 8:8) or the nation (1Kings 22:5; 2Kings3:11; 2Chron. 18:6) and were sought by commoners (Gen. 25:22;Exod. 18:15; Ezek. 33:30), elders (Ezek. 14:1–3; 20:1; see also8:1), royalty (1Kings 14:5; 22:5–8; 2Kings 22:18;2Chron. 26:5), army officials (Jer. 42:1–3), andforeigners (2Kings 8:7; Isa. 14:32). Prophetic response tooracular inquiry was not automatic. Deliverance of an oracle after aninquiry could be immediate (Jer. 37:17), delayed for an extendedperiod of time (Jer. 42:7 [ten days]), or the prophet could refuse todeliver an oracle (Jer. 23:33; Ezek. 14:1). A previous oracle couldbe superseded (Isa. 38 [compare v.1 with vv. 4–6]).Various commodities could be used for payment, including silver(1Sam. 9:7–8), food (1Kings 14:3), and foreigngoods (2Kings 8:7–9).
Oraclescould be pronounced publicly in various places, including the palace(2Kings 20:4–5), the temple (Jer. 7:2; 26:2), the citygates (1Kings 22:10; 2Chron. 18:9), the roadside (1Kings20:38–43), or privately to individuals, including royalty (Jer.37:17), officials (Isa. 22:15), and foreigners (Jer. 39:15–17).There are several mentions in Scripture of oracles that are not partof the canonical record (e.g., 2Chron. 24:27).
Oracularpronouncements could be brief (1Kings 17:1) or lengthy (thebooks of Nahum and Malachi), and they consisted of a variety ofgenres, including satire (Isa. 44:9–20), parable (2Sam.12:1–14), and lament (Jer. 9:20; Ezek. 19; Amos 5:1), toproduce the desired rhetorical effect. The prophetic introductory orconcluding oracular formulas “thus says the Lord” and“declares the Lord” echo the messenger terminology of thebroader culture, in which a similar introductory “thus saysX”was used by messengers delivering public proclamations on behalf ofthe one who commissioned them (2Chron. 36:23). In this way, theprophet presented an oracle as God’s message to the people, nothis own.
NominalIsrael was condemned for seeking pronouncements from false gods(2Kings 1:3–4, 6, 16; 2Chron. 25:15; Hos. 4:12),necromancy (Isa. 8:19), and failure to inquire of the true God ofIsrael (Zeph. 1:6). False prophets could also claim to have receivedcommunication from God (Deut. 13:1–11; 18:20; Ezek. 13), butthey were indicted for delivering their own message without divinesanction (Jer. 23:34–39; 28; Lam. 2:14; Ezek. 13), turning thepeople away from the true God to worship false gods (Deut. 13:1–11)and delivering oracular pronouncements in order to enjoy personalpleasure (Mic. 2:11) and gain (Jer. 6:13–15; 8:10–12).
OftenScripture simply notes that a prophet received a “word of theLord” (Jer. 1:2; Hos. 1:1; Joel 1:1; cf. Isa. 14:28; Hab. 1:1)without explicitly stating the means by which the divinepronouncement was received. The prophetic witness mentions bothseeing (Isa. 1:1; 13:1; Amos 8:1; Hab. 1:1) and hearing (Ezek.1:24–25, 28) divine communication, but what actually happenedto the prophet is not easily determined. The references to the Spiritcoming upon an individual (Num. 11:25; 24:2; 1Sam. 10:6, 10;Ezek. 8:1; 11:5; 37:1) point to some sort of divine intervention thatseized the prophet’s consciousness in such a way as to preparethe prophet for a revelation from God.
Prophetswere known to have ecstatic or visionary experiences that marked themas operating under divine influence. In addition, several of theprophets (Isa. 20; Jer. 13:1–11; Ezek. 5:1–4) acted outdemonstrations (sign-acts) as part of their oracular ministry. Theseecstatic experiences and peculiar actions offended many of theircontemporaries (2Kings 9:11; Jer. 29:26; Hos. 9:7). Thesephenomena were concentrated around the two great crises faced byIsrael: the demise of the northern kingdom in 722 BC and of thesouthern kingdom in 586 BC. Having been given warning that nationaljudgment was imminent, these prophets were led to augment theirpreaching with dramatizations in order to convey more persuasively tothe audience the urgency of heeding their message (Ezek. 12:8–11).
Typesof Oracles
Formcritics have identified three main types of prophetic oracles:oracles of salvation, judgment, and repentance. The first is furtherdivided into subcategories: individual salvation oracles (1Kings17:8–16) and community salvation oracles (1Sam. 7:3–15).The prophets, however, were not tightly bound to the traditionalforms, and they demonstrated great creativity in modifying the formsto fit their personal style and the situation before them.
Thesevarious types of oracles were not arbitrary pronouncements; they werefounded on Israel’s covenantal relationship with Yahweh (Jer.34:18). The prophets served as covenant prosecutors, and theiroracles were part of the prosecution’s case on behalf of Yahwehagainst the people. Behavior, whether an individual’s or thenation’s, was evaluated in light of the demands of thecovenant. So too, Yahweh’s response—judgment orsalvation—was cast in terms of his faithfulness to thecovenant(s) that he made with Israel.
Salvationoracles announced Yahweh’s glorious deliverance andrestoration, mostly in response to the catastrophe of 586 BC (Ezek.11:16–21; 36:24–38; 37:15–28; Amos 9:11–15;Zeph. 3:14–20), and they could include in thesalvificpronouncement the destruction of the enemy (Zeph. 3:19). They oftenopen with the formulaic “in that day” (Amos 9:11; Mic.4:6), focusing Israel’s attention on a future time when all itsenemies would be subdued and covenantal blessings would beestablished and enjoyed by the redeemed community.
Judgmentoracles typically were introduced with an interjection, oftentranslated into English as “woe,” followed by a formaladdress and accusation accompanied by an announcement of thepunishment to be inflicted (Isa. 1:4; 5:8, 11, 18, 20, 21, 22; Jer.22:13; Ezek. 34:2). These oracles could take the form of a lawsuit.In Isa. 1:2 “heaven and earth” are summoned as witnesses,harking back to Deut. 30:19; 31:28; 32:1, where these elements ofnature were invoked by Moses to be witnesses of God’s covenantwith Israel. Some oracles state explicitly that a case has beenbrought against the people (Isa. 3:13; Jer. 2:9; Hos. 4:1; 12:2; Mic.6:1–2).
Repentanceoracles specifically summon the addressee to repentance and arecommitment to the covenant in order to avoid destruction (Isa.31:6; Jer. 4:1; Hos. 12:6).
Meansof Oracles
Variousobjects were sanctioned for use in discerning God’s will.Scripture is silent on many of the details regarding the manipulationof these objects, but the validity of their use for discerning thedivine will is not questioned. The mysterious Urim and Thummim, twostonelike objects kept in the high priest’s breastpiece, appearto have operated to give a “yes or no” response (Exod.28:30; Lev. 8:8; Deut. 33:8; 1Sam. 14:41), though sometimesthere is no response at all (1Sam. 28:6). The ephod, some sortof two-piece linen apron or loin cloth worn by priests under thebreastpiece (Exod. 28:4, 6; 1Sam. 23:9–12; 1Sam.30:7–8; but note that Samuel was wearing one as he assisted thehigh priest Eli [1Sam. 2:18], and David, as he led theprocession returning the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem [2Sam.6:14]), was also pressed into service for discerning God’swill. Another method, the casting of lots, is shrouded in mystery.This method was used to determine the scapegoat on the Day ofAtonement (Lev. 16:8–10), the guilty party in the loss at Ai(Josh. 7:14), land allotment in Canaan (Josh. 14–19; 21),priestly assignments in the temple (1Chron. 24:5; 25:8; 26:13),residency in Jerusalem in the postexilic community (Neh. 11:1), theday to massacre the Jews in Persia as plotted by Haman (Esther 3:7;9:24), and dividing the Messiah’s clothing (Ps. 22:18; cf. John19:24).
Oraclesagainst the Foreign Nations
Aspecial group of oracles are those addressed to Israel’shistoric enemies, commonly referred to as “oracles against the[foreign] nations.” Blocks of these oracles are found in Amos1–2; Isa. 13–23; Jer. 46–51; Ezek. 25–32 andthe entire books of Nahum and Obadiah. These oracles were addressedto a specific foreign nation (the putative audience) but were heardby Israel. During a time when most people’s conception of deitywas tied to a specific land, these oracles maintained that Yahweh wassovereign over the whole earth, and that his purposes included allhumankind. All the nations do his bidding. These oracles were to beunderstood against the backdrop of Israel’s infidelity toYahweh and its futile reliance on the support of foreign nations. Theoracles demonstrated that Yahweh would bring down all that washaughty and would order events so that he alone would be high andexalted in the day of his coming. Those nations that cursed Israelwould themselves be cursed (Gen. 12:1–3; 27:29).
NewTestament Usage
Inthe NT, “oracle” (Gk. logion) occurs four times, alwaysin the plural (logia [NIV: “words”]). It refers to theMosaic law (Acts 7:38) and unspecified portions of revelation (Rom.3:2; Heb. 5:12; 1Pet. 4:11).
The biblical corpus known as the Pentateuch consists of thefirst five books of the OT: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, andDeuteronomy. The word “Pentateuch” comes from two Greekwords (penta [“five”] and teuchos [“scroll case,book”]) and is a designation attested in the early churchfathers. The collection is also commonly known as the “FiveBooks of Moses,” “the Law of Moses,” or simply the“Law,” reflecting the traditional Jewish name “Torah,”meaning “law” or “instruction.” The Torah isthe first of three major sections that comprise the Hebrew Bible(Torah, Nebiim, Ketubim [Law, Prophets, Writings]); thus for bothJewish and Christian traditions it represents the introduction to theBible as a whole as well as its interpretive foundation.
TheEnglish names for the books of the Pentateuch came from the LatinVulgate, based on the Greek Septuagint. These appellations are mainlydescriptive of their content. Genesis derives from “generations”or “origin,” Exodus means “going out,”Leviticus represents priestly (Levitical) service, Numbers refers tothe censuses taken in the book, and Deuteronomy indicates “secondlaw” because of Moses’ rehearsal of God’s commands(see Deut. 17:18). The Hebrew designations derive from opening wordsin each book. Beresh*t (Genesis) means “in the beginning”;Shemot (Exodus), “[these are] the names”; Wayyiqra’(Leviticus), “and he called”; Bemidbar (Numbers), “inthe desert”; and Debarim (Deuteronomy), “[these are] thewords.”
Referringto the Pentateuch as “Torah” or the “Law”reflects the climactic reception of God’s commands at MountSinai, which were to govern Israel’s life and worship in thepromised land, including their journey to get there. However, callingthe Pentateuch the “Law” can be a bit misleading becausethere are relatively few passages that simply list a set of commands,and all law passages are set within a broad narrative. The Pentateuchis a grand story that begins on a universal scale with the creationof the cosmos and ends on the plains of Moab as the readeranticipates the fulfillment of God’s plan to redeem a fallenworld through his chosen people. The books offer distinct qualitiesand content, but they are also inherently dependent upon one another,as the narrative remains unbroken through the five volumes. Genesisends with Jacob’s family in Egypt, and, though many years havepassed, this is where Exodus begins. Leviticus outlines cultic lifeat the tabernacle (constructed at the end of Exodus) and even beginswithout a clear subject (“And he called...”),which requires the reader to supply “the Lord” from thelast verse of Exodus. Numbers begins with an account of Israel’sfighting men as the nation prepares to leave Sinai, and Deuteronomyis Moses’ farewell address to the nation on the cusp of thepromised land.
Authorshipand Composition
Althoughthe Pentateuch is technically an anonymous work, Jewish and Christiantradition attributes its authorship to Moses, the main figure of thestory from Exodus to Deuteronomy. The arguments for attributing theauthorship of the Pentateuch to Moses come from internal evidencewithin both Testaments. That Moses is responsible for at leastportions of the Pentateuch is suggested by references to his explicitliterary activity reflected within the narrative itself (Exod. 17:14;24:4; 34:28; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:9, 22, 24), if not implied invarious literary formulas such as “the Lord said to Moses”(e.g., Exod. 39:1, 7, 21; Lev. 4:1; 11:1; 13:1; Num. 1:1; 2:1).Mosaic authorship receives support from the historical books, whichuse terms such as “the Book of the Law of Moses” invarious forms and references in the preexilic history (Josh. 8:30–35;23:6; 2Kings 14:6) as well as the postexilic history (e.g.,2Chron. 25:4; Ezra 6:18; Neh. 13:1). The same titles are usedby NT authors (e.g., Mark 12:26; Luke 24:44; John 1:45), evenreferring to the Pentateuch simply by the name “Moses” atvarious points (e.g., Luke 16:29; 24:27; 2Cor. 3:15).
Evenwith these examples, nowhere does the text explicitly state thatMoses is responsible for the entire compilation of the Pentateuch orthat he penned it with his own hand. Rather, a number of factorspoint to a later hand at work: Moses’ death and burial arereferenced (Deut. 34), the conquest of Canaan is referred to as past(Deut. 2:12), and there is evidence that the names of people andplaces were updated and explained for later generations (e.g., “Dan”in Gen. 14:14; cf. Josh. 19:47; Judg. 18:28b–29). Based onthese factors, it is reasonable to believe that the Pentateuchunderwent editorial alteration as it was preserved within Jewish lifeand took its final shape after Moses’ lifetime.
Overthe last century, the Documentary Hypothesis has dominated academicdiscussion of the Pentateuch’s composition. This theory wascrystallized by Julius Wellhausen in his Prolegomena to the Historyof Israel in the late nineteenth century and posits that thePentateuch originated from a variety of ancient sources derived fromdistinct authors and time periods that have been transmitted andjoined through a long and complex process. Traditionally thesedocuments are identified as J, E, D, and P. The J source is adocument authored by the “Yahwist” (German, Jahwist) inJudah around 840 BC and is so called because the name “Yahweh”is used frequently in its text. The E source stands for “Elohist”because of its preference for the divine title “Elohim”and was composed in Israel around 700 BC. The D source stands for“Deuteronomy” because it reflects material found in thatbook; it was composed sometime around Josiah’s reform in 621BC. The P document reflects material that priests would be concernedwith in the postexilic time period, approximately 500 BC. This theoryand its related forms stem from the scholarly concern over variousliterary characteristics such as the use of divine names; doubletsand duplications in the text; observable patterns of style,terminology, and themes; and alleged discrepancies in facts,descriptions, and geographic or historical perspective.
Variousdocumentary theories of composition have flourished over the lastcentury of pentateuchal scholarship and still have many adherents.However, lack of scholarly agreement about the dating and characterof the sources and the rise of other literary approaches to the texthave many conservative and liberal scholars calling into question theaccuracy and even interpretive benefit of the source theories.Moreover, if the literary observations used to create sourcedistinctions can be explained in other ways, then the DocumentaryHypothesis is significantly undermined.
Inits canonical form, the pentateuchal narrative combines artisticprose, poetry, and law to tell a dramatic history spanning thousandsof years. One could divide the story into six major sections:primeval history (Gen. 1–11), the patriarchs (Gen. 12–50),liberation from Egypt (Exod. 1–18), Sinai (Exod. 19:1–Num.10:10), wilderness journey (Num. 10:11–36:13), and Moses’farewell (Deuteronomy).
PrimevalHistory (Gen. 1–11)
Itis possible to divide Genesis into two parts based upon subjectmatter: the origin of creation and humankind’s call, fall, andpunishment (chaps 1–11), and the origin of a family that wouldbecome God’s conduit of salvation and blessing for the world(chaps. 12–50).
Theprimeval history comprises essentially the first eleven chapters ofGenesis, ending with the genealogy of Abraham in 11:26. Strictlyspeaking, 11:27 begins the patriarchal section with the sixthinstance of the toledot formula found in Genesis, referencingAbraham’s father, Terah. The Hebrew phrase ’elleh toledot(“these are the generations of”) occurs in eleven placesin Genesis and reflects a deliberate structural marker that one mayuse to divide the book into distinct episodes (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1;11:10; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1; 36:9; 37:2).
Genesisas we know it exhibits two distinct creation accounts in its firsttwo chapters. Although critical scholars contend that the differingaccounts reflect contradictory stories and different authors, it isjust as convenient to recognize that the two stories vary in styleand some content because they attempt to accomplish different aims.The first account, 1:1–2:3, is an artistic, poetic,symmetrical, and “heavenly” view of creation by atranscendent God, who spoke creation into being. In the secondaccount, 2:4–25, God is immanently involved with creation as heis present in a garden, breathes life into Adam’s nostrils,dialogues and problem-solves, fashions Eve from Adam’s side,and bestows warnings and commands. Both perspectives are foundationalfor providing an accurate view of God’s interaction withcreation in the rest of Scripture.
Asone progresses through chapters 1–11, the story quickly changesfrom what God has established as “very good” to discord,sin, and shame. Chapter 3 reflects the “fall” of humanityas Adam and Eve sin in eating from the forbidden tree in directdisobedience to God. The serpent shrewdly deceives the first couple,and thus all three incur God’s curses, which extend tounlimited generations. Sin that breaks the vertical relationshipbetween God and humanity intrinsically leads to horizontal strifebetween humans. Sin and disunity on the earth only intensify as onemoves from the murder story of Cain and Abel in chapter 4 to theflood in chapters 5–9. Violence, evil, and disorder have sopervaded the earth that God sends a deluge to wipe out all livingthings, save one righteous man and his family, along with an ark fullof animals. God makes the first covenant recorded in the biblicalnarrative with Noah (6:18), promising to save him from the flood ashe commands Noah to build an ark and gather food for survival. Noahfulfills all that God has commanded (6:22; 7:5), and God remembershis promise (8:1). This is the prototypical salvation story for therest of Scripture.
Chapter9 reflects a new start for humanity and all living things as thecreation mandate to “be fruitful and increase in number; fillthe earth and subdue it,” first introduced in 1:28, is restatedalong with the reminder that humankind is made in God’s image(1:27). Bearing the image involves new responsibilities andstipulations in the postdiluvian era (9:2–6). There will beenmity between humans and animals, animals are now appropriate food,and yet lifeblood will be specially revered. God still requiresaccountability for just and discriminate shedding of blood andorderly relationships, as he has proved in the deluge, but now herelinquishes this responsibility to humankind. In return, Godpromises never to destroy all flesh again, and he will set therainbow in the sky as a personal reminder. Like the covenant withNoah in 6:18, the postdiluvian covenant involves humankind fulfillingcommands (9:1–7) and God remembering his covenant (9:8–17),specially termed “everlasting” (9:16).
Theprimeval commentary on humankind’s unabating sinful condition(e.g., 6:5; 8:21) proves true as Noah becomes drunk and naked and hisson Ham (father of Canaan) shames him by failing to conceal hisfather’s negligence. Instead of multiplying, filling, andsubduing the earth as God has intended, humankind collaborates tomake a name for itself by building a sort of stairway to heavenwithin a special city (11:4). God foils such haughty plans byscattering the people across the earth and confusing their language.Expressed in an orderly chiastic structure, the story of the tower ofBabel demonstrates that God condescends (11:5) to set things straightwith humanity.
Patriarchs(Gen. 12–50)
Althoughthe primeval history is foundational for understanding the rest ofthe Bible, more space in Genesis is devoted to the patriarchalfigures Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. In general, the Abrahamicnarrative spans chapters 12–25, the story of Isaac serves as atransition to the Jacob cycle of chapters 25–37, and the Josephnarrative finishes the book of Genesis in chapters 37–50.
Thetransition from the primeval history to the patriarchs (11:27–32)reveals how Abraham, the father of Israel, moves from the east andsettles in Harran as the family ventures to settle in Canaan. InHarran, Abraham receives the call of God’s redemptive plan,which reverberates through Scripture. God will bless him with land,make him a great nation, grant him special favor, and use him as aconduit of blessings to the world (12:1–3). In 11:30 is theindication that the barrenness of Abraham’s wife (Sarah)relates to the essence of God’s magnificent promises. How onebecomes great in name and number, secures enemy territory, and is tobless all peoples without a descendant becomes the compellingquestion of the Abrahamic narrative. The interchange betweenAbraham’s faith in God and his attempts to contrive covenantfulfillment colors the entire narrative leading up to chapter 22. Itis there that Abraham’s faith is ultimately put to the test asGod asks him to sacrifice the promised son, Isaac. Abraham passesGod’s faith test, and a ram is provided to take Isaac’splace. This everlasting covenant that was previously sealed by thesign of circumcision is climactically procured for future generationsthrough Abraham’s exemplary obedience (22:16–18; cf.15:1–21; 17:1–27).
Thepatriarchal stories that follow show that the Abrahamic promises arerenewed with subsequent generations (see 26:3–4; 28:13–14)and survive various threats to fulfillment. The story of Isaac servesmainly as a bridge to the Jacob cycle, as he exists primarily as apassive character in relation to Abraham and Jacob.
Deception,struggle, rivalry, and favoritism characterize the Jacob narrative,as first exemplified in the jostling of twin boys in Rebekah’swomb (25:22). Jacob supplants his twin brother, Esau, for thefirstborn’s blessing and birthright. He flees to Paddan Aram(northern Mesopotamia), marries two sisters, takes their maidservantsas concubines, and has eleven children, followed by a falling-outwith his father-in-law. Jacob’s struggle for God’sblessing that began with Esau comes to a head in his wrestlingencounter with God at Peniel. Ultimately, Jacob emerges victoriousand receives God’s blessing and a name change, “Israel”(“one who struggles with God”). Throughout the Jacobstory, God demonstrates his faithfulness to the Abrahamic covenantand reiterates the promises to Jacob, most notably at Bethel (chaps.28; 35). The interpersonal strife of Jacob’s life is thusenveloped within a message of reconciliation not just with Esau(chap. 33) but ultimately with God. The reader learns from theepisodes in Jacob’s life that although God works through thelives of weak and failing people, his promises for Israel remainsecure.
AlthoughJacob and his family are already living in Canaan, God intends forthem to move to Egypt and grow into a powerful nation beforefulfilling their conquest of the promised land (see 15:13–16).The story of Joseph explains how the family ends up in Egypt at theclose of Genesis. Joseph is specially loved by his father, whichelicits significant jealousy from his brothers, who sell him off tosome nomads and fabricate the alibi that he has been killed by a wildbeast. Joseph winds up in Pharaoh’s household and eventuallybecomes his top official. When famine strikes Canaan years later,Joseph’s brothers go to Egypt to purchase food from the royalcourt, and Joseph reveals his identity to them in an emotionalreunion. Jacob’s entire family moves to Egypt to live for atime in prosperity under Joseph’s care. The Joseph storyillustrates the mysterious relationship of human decision and divinesovereignty (50:20).
Liberationfrom Egypt (Exod. 1–18)
Genesisshows how Abraham develops into a large family. Exodus shows how thisfamily becomes a nation—enslaved, freed, and then taught theways of God. Although it appears that Exodus continues a rivetingstory of God’s chosen people, it is actually the identity andpower of God that take center stage.
Manyyears have passed since Joseph’s family arrived in Egypt. TheHebrews’ good standing in Egypt has also diminished as theirmultiplication and fruitfulness during the intervening period—justas God had promised Abraham (Gen. 17:4–8)—became anational threat to the Egyptians. Abraham’s family will spendtime in Egyptian slavery before being liberated with many possessionsin hand (cf. Gen. 15:13–14).
Inthe book of Exodus the drama of suffering and salvation serves as thevehicle for God’s self-disclosure to a single man, Moses. Mosesis an Israelite of destiny even from birth, as he providentiallyavoids infant death and rises to power and influence in Pharaoh’shousehold. Moses never loses his passion for his own people, and hekills an Egyptian who was beating a fellow Hebrew. Moses flees toobscurity in the desert, where he meets God and his call to lead hispeople out of Egypt and to the promised land (3:7–8; 6:8). Likethe days of Noah’s salvation, God has remembered his covenantwith the patriarchs and responded to the groans of his people inEgypt (2:24; 6:4–5; cf. Gen. 8:1). God reveals himself, and hispersonal name “Yahweh” (“I am”), to Moses inthe great theophany of the burning bush at Mount Horeb (Sinai), thesame place where later he will receive God’s law. Moses doubtshis own ability to carry out the task of confronting Pharaoh andleading the exodus, but God foretells that many amazing signs andwonders not only will make the escape possible but also willultimately reveal the mighty nature of God to the Hebrews, Egypt, andpresumably the world (6:7; 7:5).
Thispromise of creating a nation of his people through deliverance issuccinctly conveyed in the classic covenant formula that findssignificance in the rest of the OT: “I will take you as my ownpeople, and I will be your God” (6:7). Wielding great powerover nature and at times even human decision, God “hardens”Pharaoh’s heart and sends ten plagues to demonstrate his favorfor his own people and wrath against their enemy nation. The tenthplague on the firstborn of all in Egypt provides the context for thePassover as God spares the firstborn of Israel in response to theplacement of sacrificial blood on the doorposts of their homes.Pharaoh persists in the attempt to overtake the Israelites in thedesert, where the power of God climaxes in parting the Red Sea (orSea of Reeds). The Israelites successfully pass through, buttheEgyptian army drowns in pursuit. This is the great salvationevent of the OT.
Thesong of praise for God’s deliverance (15:1–21) quicklyturns to cries of groaning in the seventy days following the exodusas the people of the nation, grumbling about their circ*mstances inthe desert, quickly demonstrate their fleeting trust in the one whohas saved them (Exod. 15:22–18:27). When a shortage of waterand food confronts the people, their faith in God’s care provesshallow, and they turn on Moses. Even though the special marks ofGod’s protection have been evident in the wilderness throughthe pillars of cloud and fire, the angel of God, the provision ofmanna and quail, water from the rock, and the leadership of Moses,the nation continually fails God’s tests of trust and obedience(16:4; cf. 17:2; 20:20). Yet God continues to endure with his peoplethrough the leadership of Moses.
Sinai(Exod. 19:1–Num. 10:10)
Mostof the pentateuchal narrative takes place at Mount Sinai. It is therethat Israel receives national legislation and prescriptions for thetabernacle, the priesthood, feasts and festivals, and othercovenantal demands for living as God’s chosen people. Theeleven-month stay at Sinai takes the biblical reader through thecenter of the Pentateuch, covering approximately the last half ofExodus, all of Leviticus, and the first third of Numbers, before thenation leaves this sacred site and sojourns in the wilderness.Several key sections of the Pentateuch fall withinthe Sinaistory: the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17), the Book of the Covenant(Exod. 20:22–23:33), the tabernacle prescriptions (Exod.25–31), the tabernacle construction (Exod. 35–40), themanual on ritual worship (Lev. 1–7), and the Holiness Code(Lev. 17–27).
Theevents and instruction at Sinai are central to the Israelitereligious experience and reflect the third eternal covenant that Godestablishes in the Pentateuch—this time with Israel, wherebythe Sabbath is the sign (Exod. 31:16; cf. Noahic/rainbow covenant[Gen. 9:16] and the Abrahamic/circumcision covenant [Gen. 17:7, 13,19]). The offices of prophet and priest develop into clear view inthis portion of the Pentateuch. Moses exemplifies the dual propheticfunction of representing the people when speaking with God and, inturn, God when speaking to the people. The priesthood is bestowedupon Aaron and his descendants in Exodus and inaugurated within oneof the few narrative sections of Leviticus (Lev. 8–10). Thegiving of the law, the ark, the tabernacle, the priesthood, and theSabbath are all a part of God’s making himself “known”to Israel and the world, which is a constant theme in Exodus (see,e.g., 25:22; 29:43, 46; 31:13).
TheIsraelites’ stay at Sinai opens with one of the greatesttheophanies of the Bible: God speaks aloud to the people (Exod.19–20) and then is envisioned as a consuming fire (Exod. 24).After communicating the Ten Commandments (“ten words”)directly to the people (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4), Mosesmediates the rest of the detailed obligations that will govern thefuture life of the nation. The covenant is ratified in ceremonialfashion (Exod. 24), and the Israelites vow to fulfill all that hasbeen spoken. God expects Israel to be a holy nation (Exod. 19:6) withwhom he may dwell, but Moses descends Sinai only to find that theIsraelites have already violated the essence of the Decalogue byfashioning a golden calf to worship as that which delivered them fromEgypt (Exod. 32). This places Israel’s future and calling injeopardy, but Moses intercedes for his people, and God graciouslypromises to preserve the nation and abide with it in his mercy, evenwhile punishing the guilty. This becomes prototypical of God’srelationship with his people in the future (Exod. 34:6–7).
Exodusends with the consecration of the tabernacle and the descent of God’spresence there. With the tent of worship in order, the priesthood andits rituals can be officially established. Leviticus reflects divineinstructions for how a sinful people may live safely in closeproximity to God. Holy living involves dealing with sin andminimizing the need for atonement, purification, and restitution. Thesacrificial and worship system established in Leviticus is based on aworldview of order, perfection, and purity, which should characterizea people who are commanded, “Be holy because I, the Lord yourGod, am holy’ (Lev. 19:2; cf. 11:44–45; 20:26). Withthese rules in place, the Israelites can make final preparations todepart Sinai and move forward on their journey. Numbers 1–10spans a nineteen-day period of such activities as the Israelitesbegin to focus on dispossessing their enemies. These chapters reflecta census of fighting men, the priority of purity, the dedication ofthe tabernacle, and the observance of the Passover before commencingthe quest to Canaan.
WildernessJourney (Num. 10:11–36:13)
Therest of the book of Numbers covers the remainder of a forty-yearstretch of great peaks and valleys in the faith and future of thenation. Chapters 11–25 recount the various events that show theexodus generation’s lack of trust in God. Chapters 26–36reveal a more positive section whereby a new generation prepares forthe conquest. With the third section of Numbers framed by episodesinvolving the inheritance rights of Zelophehad’s daughters(27:1–11; 36:1–13), it is clear that the story has turnedtothe future possession of the land.
Afterthe departure from Sinai, the narrative consists of a number ofIsraelite complaints in the desert. The Israelites have grown tiredof manna and ironically crave the food of Egypt, which they recall asfree fish, fruits, and vegetables. Having forgotten the hardship oflife in slavery, about which they had cried out to God, now thenation is crying out for a lifestyle of old. Moses becomes sooverwhelmed with the complaints of the people that God providesseventy elders, who, to help shoulder the leadership burden, willreceive the same prophetic spirit given to Moses.
Inchapters 13–14 twelve spies are sent out from Kadesh Barnea toperuse Canaan, but the people’s lack of faith to procure theland from the mighty people there proves costly. This final exampleof distrust moves God to punish and purify the nation. Theunbelieving generation will die in the wilderness during a forty-yearperiod of wandering.
Thediscontent in the desert involves not only food and water but alsoleadership status. Moses’ own brother and sister resent hisspecial relationship with God and challenge his exclusive authority.Later, Aaron’s special high priesthood is threatened as anotherLevitical family (Korah) vies for preeminence. Through a sequence ofsigns and wonders, God makes it clear that Moses and Aaron haveexclusive roles in God’s economy. Due to the deaths related toKorah’s rebellion and the fruitless staffs that represent thetribes of Israel, the nation’s concern about sudden extinctionin the presence of a holy God is appeased through the eternalcovenant of priesthood granted to Aaron’s family (chap. 18). Heand the Levites, at the potential expense of their own lives and aspart of their priestly service, will be held accountable for keepingthe tabernacle pure of encroachers.
Evenafter the people’s significant rebellion and punishment, Godcontinues to prove his faithfulness to his word. Hope is restored forthe nation as the Abrahamic promises of blessing are rehearsed fromthe mouth of Balaam, a Mesopotamian seer. The Israelites will indeedone day be numerous (23:10), enjoy the presence of God (23:21), beblessed and protected (24:9), and have a kingly leader (24:17). Thiswonderful mountaintop experience of hope for the exodus generation istragically countered by an even greater event of apostasy in thesubsequent scene. Reminiscent of the incident of the golden calf,when pagan revelry in the camp had foiled Moses’ interactionwith God on Sinai, apostasy at the tabernacle undermines Balaam’soracles of covenant fulfillment. Fornication with Moabite women notonly joins the nation to a foreign god but also betrays God’sholiness at his place of dwelling. If not for the zeal of Aaron’sgrandson Phinehas, who puts an end to the sin, the ensuing plaguecould have finished the nation. For his righteous action, Phinehas isawarded an eternal priesthood and ensures a future for the nation andAaron’s priestly lineage.
Inchapter 26 a second census of fighting men indicates that the old,unbelieving exodus generation has officially died off (except forJoshua and Caleb), and God is proceeding with a new people. Goddispossesses the enemies of the new generation; reinstates the tribalboundaries of the land; reinstates rules concerning worship, service,and bloodshed; and places Joshua at the helm of leadership. Chapters26–36 mention no deaths or rebellions as the nationoptimistically ends its journey in Moab, just east of the promisedland.
Moses’Farewell (Deuteronomy)
Althoughone could reasonably move into the historical books at the end ofNumbers, much would be lost in overstepping Deuteronomy. Deuteronomypresents Moses’ farewell speeches as his final words to anation on the verge of Caanan. Moses’ speeches are best viewedas sermons motivating his people to embrace the Sinai covenant, lovetheir God, and choose life over death and blessings over cursings(30:19). Moses reviews the desert experience since Mount Horeb/Sinai(chaps. 1–4) and recapitulates God’s expectations forlawful living in the land (chaps. 5–26). The covenant code isrecorded on a scroll, is designated the “Book of the Law”(31:24–26), and is to be read and revered by the future king.Finally, Moses leads the nation in covenant renewal (chaps. 29–32)before the book finishes with an account of his death (chaps. 33–34),including tributes such as “since then, no prophet has risen inIsrael like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (34:10).
Deuteronomyreflects that true covenant faithfulness is achieved from a rightheart for God. If there were any previous doubts about the essence ofcovenant keeping, Moses eliminates such in Deuteronomy with thefrequent use of emotive terms. Loving God involves committing to himalone and spurning idols and foreign gods. The Ten Commandments(chap. 5) are not a list of stale requirements; they reflect thegreat Shema with the words “Love the Lord your God with allyour heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. Thesecommandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts”(6:5–6). God desires an unrivaled love from the nation, notcold and superficial religiosity.
Obedienceby the Israelites will incur material and spiritual blessing, whereasdisobedience ends in the loss of both. Although Moses stronglycommends covenant obedience, and the nation participates in acovenant-renewal ceremony (chap. 27), it is clear that in the futurethe Israelites will fail to uphold their covenant obligations andwill suffer the consequences (29:23; 30:1–4; 31:16–17).Yet Moses looks to a day when the command for circumcised hearts(10:16) will be fulfilled by the power of God himself (30:6). In thefuture a new king will arise from the nation (17:14–20) as wellas a prophet like Moses (18:15–22). Deuteronomy thusunderscores the extent of God’s own devotion to his patriarchalpromises despite the sinful nature of his people.
Formuch of the middle and end of the twentieth century, Deuteronomy hasreceived a significant amount of attention for its apparentresemblance in structure and content to ancient Hittite and Assyriantreaties. Scholars debate the extent of similarity, but it ispossible that Deuteronomy reflects a suzerain-vassal treaty formbetween Israel and God much like the common format between nations inthe ancient Near East. Although comparative investigation of thistype can be profitable for interpretation, it is prudent to beconservative when outlining direct parallels, since Deuteronomy isnot a legal document but rather a dramatic narrative of God’sredemptive interaction with the world.
The concept of a people of God in the Bible may be traced toits origins in Gen. 12. Following the dispersion of humanity bydivine design in the previous chapter, God elects Abraham as ancestorof a nation. God grants to Abraham promises of protection, growth inthe number of offspring, and a homeland for his descendants andenvisions a flow of blessing to the nations through the seed ofAbraham.
Thepromise of numerous offspring comes to fruition in Exod. 1, to thepoint that the Israelites are perceived to be a threat by theEgyptians. In Exodus, God begins to refer to the descendants ofAbraham as his people (3:7; 6:7; 7:16; 18:1). They are to be a“kingdom of priests” and a “holy nation”(19:5–6), set apart from other nations. The gathering of thepeople at Sinai, in the view of Moses, is an important moment in theestablishment of the community, a moment marked by the conclusion ofa covenant (Deut. 5:2; 9:10–11).
TheFormer Prophets, however, tell a story of deterioration in therelationship. Israel and its kings consistently turn to the worshipof other deities (Judg. 2:11–23; 1Kings 11:1–8),rejecting God as king and overlord (1Sam. 8:19). After thereign of Solomon and because of Solomon’s acts of idolatry, thenation is torn in two (1Kings 11:1–13). Ultimately, bothpolitical entities, because of their persistence in apostasy, sufferdemise (2Kings 23:24–27).
Inresponse to Israel’s apostasy, the Latter Prophets envision adistinction between the national entity that is Israel and a “truepeople of God,” one abiding in covenantal faithfulness (e.g.,Isa. 11:11, 16; Amos 5:15; Hos. 1:10–11). The prophets,therefore, see within the nation a remnant that receives forgivenessand becomes the object of national restoration in the postexilicperiod (Hag. 1:2–15; Zech. 8:1–23). The covenantalfaithfulness of the remnant is marked by a passion for righteousnessand justice for the poor and oppressed (Isa. 11:1–5; Amos5:11–15).
Thespirit of restoration and redemption carries over into the NT (Rom.11:1–10). The Gospels present Jesus as one gathering a lostpeople (Matt. 15:24; Luke 2:25; John 1:31), redirecting them in thecorrect way (1Pet. 2:10). Employing a series of metaphors (thebody of Christ, a bride, the house of God, God’s flock) todescribe God’s people, the church, the concept of a faithfulremnant (the true Israel) persists. Thus, Paul speaks of a“circumcision of the heart” (not just of the flesh) thatmarks one as a true descendant of Abraham (Rom. 2:25–29;4:1–25). Similar to how the remnant is understood in the LatterProphets, the church of Jesus Christ will be characterized by itsconcern for covenantal faithfulness (Heb. 8:7–13),righteousness, and the pursuit of justice for the poor (James 2:1–7).
Common and valuable for food, beans were cooked while green in the pods or after being dried. Dry beans were threshed and winnowed like cereals and other grains. Beans are mentioned twice in the NIV (2Sam. 17:28; Ezek. 4:9).
Common and valuable for food, beans were cooked while green in the pods or after being dried. Dry beans were threshed and winnowed like cereals and other grains. Beans are mentioned twice in the NIV (2Sam. 17:28; Ezek. 4:9).
A priest is a minister of sacred things who represents God tothe people and the people to God. The OT identifies priests of Yahwehand priests of other gods and idols. The only pagan priest that theNT mentions is the priest of Zeus from Lystra who wanted to offersacrifices to Paul and Barnabas, whom the crowd mistook for deities(Acts 14:13). All other NT references build upon OT teaching aboutpriests of Yahweh.
OldTestament
Earlybiblical history records clan heads offering sacrifices for theirfamilies (Gen. 12:7–8; 13:18; 22; 31:54; 46:1). Although thepatriarchs performed these duties, they are never called “priests”;the only priests mentioned from this time are foreigners such asMelchizedek, the Egyptian priest of On, and Moses’father-in-law Jethro (Gen. 14:18; 41:45, 50; 46:20; Exod. 3:1; 18:1).Whereas all Israelites could be called “a kingdom of priestsand a holy nation” (Exod. 19:6), a distinctive priesthood cameto light when God instructed Moses to prepare special priestlyclothes for Aaron and his sons (Exod. 28). The high priest wasdistinguished from the others by more magnificent clothes. By failingto wear their special clothes while serving at the tabernacle, thepriests would incur guilt and die (Exod. 28:43).
Bybeing anointed, the priests became holy like the tabernacle and itsfurnishings and thus were distinguished from their compatriots (Lev.8–9). Their holy status was to be scrupulously maintained, asit was essential for serving the congregation and ensured that theywould not die due to their close contact with God. Their prime rolewas to minister before God by offering sacrifices so that the holyplace and the people could be purified. They were also to live holylives as an example to others, assess and treat uncleanness among thepeople, discern God’s will through the Urim and Thummim,pronounce God’s blessings, and teach God’s precepts andlaws (Lev. 10:10–11; Num. 6:22–27; Deut. 33:8–11).
Likeother Levites, the priests received no land in Canaan, since God wastheir inheritance. In payment for their services, the priestsreceived a portion of the sacrifices and a tithe of the tithe givenby the Israelites for the Levites’ support.
TheBible consistently states that priests were to come from the tribe ofLevi, but it is not always clear whether all Levites or only Aaron’sdescendants could serve as priests. Some texts (particularly Exodusthrough Numbers) indicate that only those of Aaron’s linequalified to be priests (Ezek. 40:46 narrows this to Zadok’sdescendants), and that all other Levites, though more holy than theother tribes, did not. Other passages indicate that Levites at timesserved as priests, even though some contexts indicate that thisservice was inappropriate. For instance, a Levite served as priest toMicah and then the Danites (Judg. 17:7–13; 18:19–20).Viewed more positively, Samuel, a Levite from Ephraim (1Chron.6:16, 27) who served Eli while young, also acted as priest.
Afterthe division of the kingdom, JeroboamI rejected specificbiblical instructions about the priesthood by erecting shrines tocalf idols at Dan and Bethel and enlisted non-Levites as priests(1Kings 12:31; 13:33; 2Chron. 11:15). Political concernsapparently led him to cut off the northern kingdom from worship atthe temple in Jerusalem. As a result, many Levites and priestsrelocated to Jerusalem.
Ezrarecords that 341 Levites and 4,289 priests returned to Jerusalemafter the exile (Ezra 2:36–42). In line with earlier practice,the priests offered sacrifices to God and were joined by the Levitesin rebuilding the wall and teaching the law to the people. Isaiah hasa broader understanding of the priesthood, as he anticipates Israelbringing peoples of other nations as an offering to God and indicatesthat some of them would serve as priests and Levites (Isa. 66:19–21).
NewTestament
InNT times many priests exerted religious and civil power as leaders ofthe Sadducees and the Essenes. Some priests, such as Zechariah, wereportrayed as righteous men (Luke 1:5–6). Others were said tohave come to faith in Jesus (Acts 6:7). Supporting the role assignedby Moses, Jesus regularly required those whom he healed to showthemselves to the priest. Even so, most Gospel references to priestsunderscore their opposition to Jesus’ ministry and the rolethey played in his trial and crucifixion. This opposition continuedafter the resurrection, as priests challenged the witness of theapostles. When Peter and John proclaimed that a crippled beggar hadbeen healed by Jesus’ power, the priests and others jailed,interrogated, and forbade them from speaking in Jesus’ name(Acts 4:1–20). The Sanhedrin questioned Stephen about chargesof blasphemy and speaking against the temple and the Mosaic law(6:11–7:1). Saul (Paul) received a letter of authority from thehigh priest to arrest Christians (9:1–2). Later, as a followerof Jesus, he stood trial before Ananias, who charged him before Felix(24:1), and a wider group of chief priests who charged him beforeFestus (25:1–3).
Hebrewsuniquely highlights how the priesthood of Jesus surpassed the OTpriesthood. The OT priests presented sin offerings, but theirsacrifices needed to be repeated regularly, whereas Jesus, thefaithful and merciful high priest, offered a sacrifice that neverneeded repeating and was available to everyone at all times. Jesusalso surpassed the Aaronic priests because they first needed to offersacrifices for their own sins, but he never sinned. Furthermore,since he offered the perfect sacrifice of himself, all people, notjust priests, could draw near to God.
TheNT develops the idea of a priesthood of all believers by taking theconcept that Israel would be a kingdom of priests and transferring itto the church (1Pet. 2:4–9; cf. Exod. 19:6). Reflectingthe general biblical view of priesthood, believers offer spiritualsacrifices to God, represent God to the world by revealing his worksof salvation, and represent the world to God through prayer. In theNT, the priesthood of believers is corporate; a priestly office inthe church is never expressly mentioned.
A technical term for “promise” does not appear inthe OT, but its concept is present throughout Scripture. God unfoldsthe history of redemption by employing the idea of promises. Thewriters of the NT repeatedly assert that Jesus Christ has fulfilledGod’s promises in the OT (e.g., Luke 24:44–48; 1Cor.15:3–8).
OldTestament
Thepromises in the OT are closely related to the history of salvation.At each stage of redemptive history, God delivered a new messageabout redemption, usually in the form of a covenant. Immediatelyafter the fall of humankind, God first revealed his plan ofsalvation: the promise that the seed of the woman would ultimatelycrush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). After the flood, God madea covenant with Noah, promising never again to destroy the earth witha flood (Gen. 8:21–9:17).
Mostremarkable is the promise that God made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob(Gen. 12:1–3; 13:14–17; 17:4–8; 22:17–18;26:1–5; 28:13–15). God called Abraham in order to givehim three specific blessings: the land, descendants, and the channelof blessing among the nations. As a sign of his promise, God made acovenant of circumcision with Abraham and his descendants (17:10–14).With Isaac (26:1–5) and Jacob (28:13–15), God repeatedlyreconfirmed the promise made to Abraham. At the time of the exodusand later the settlement in Canaan, God’s promise to Abrahamwas partially fulfilled by multiplying his descendants into millionsand by giving them the promised land.
AtMount Sinai, God made another covenant with the Israelites. In thiscovenant, God promised that they would be his “treasuredpossession” among the nations if they would obey him and keephis covenant (Exod. 19:5). God’s special blessings werepronounced for them to be “a kingdom of priests and a holynation” (19:6). For this purpose, God gave them the TenCommandments, which became the religious and ethical standard for hiscovenant people (20:1–17). In the book of Deuteronomy,moreover, God’s promises were made in the form of blessings tothe obedient and of curses to the disobedient (Deut. 28). Later thesebecame the criteria by which the kings of Israel were judged todetermine whether they had lived an obedient life.
Accordingto 2 Sam. 7:11–16, God made an eternal covenant with David,promising the permanence of David’s house, kingdom, and throne.In this covenant it was also promised that his offspring would buildthe house of the Lord. The Davidic covenant was partially fulfilledat the time of Solomon, who as king built the house of the Lord, thefirst temple in Jerusalem (1Kings 8:15–25). Later, in theperiod of the classical prophets, when the hope for the Davidicthrone was endangered, the permanence of the Davidic throne andkingdom reappeared in the form of messianic prophecy (Jer. 23:5–8;Ezek. 37:24–28). This promise was ultimately fulfilled by thecoming of Jesus Christ from the line of David (Matt. 1:1–17).
Thehistory of Israel shows that although the nation repeatedly brokeGod’s covenants, he remained faithful to them. According toNum. 23:19, God’s promises are absolutely trustworthy: “Godis not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he shouldchange his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise andnot fulfill?” The trustworthiness of God’s promisesresults from his unchanging character (Ps. 110:4; Mal. 3:6–7).The almighty God has the power to fulfill his promises (Isa. 55:11).When Joshua finished conquering the land of Canaan, he confessed thatGod was faithful in keeping all his promises to his ancestors (Josh.21:45; 23:14–15). Joshua himself witnessed that trusting God’spromises is a life-and-death issue. Those who had not trusted hispromise to give them the land of Canaan perished in the wilderness,but those who had trusted his promise were allowed to enter it (Num.14:1–35).
NewTestament
Thecentral message of the NT is that God’s promises in the OT arefulfilled with the coming of Jesus Christ. Matthew’s numerouscitation formulas are evidence of this theme. In Luke 4:16–21Jesus pronounces the fulfillment of Isaiah’s promise (about theMessiah’s ministry [Isa. 61:1–3]) in his own life. Thebook of Acts specifically states that Jesus’ suffering andresurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit are the fulfillment ofthe OT promises (2:29–31; 13:32–34). Jesus’identity both as the descendant of David (Acts 13:23) and as theprophet like Moses (Acts 3:21–26; cf. Deut. 18:15–18) isalso regarded as the fulfillment of theOT.
Paul’sview of God’s promises is summarized in this statement: “Forno matter how many promises God has made, they are ‘Yes’in Christ” (2Cor. 1:20). According to Rom. 1:2–3,Paul regards the gospel as the message that God “promisedbeforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding hisSon.” In Rom. 4 Abraham’s faith is described in terms ofhis trust in God’s promises, which leads to his righteousness.He is presented as our model of faith in God’s promises. Thefamous phrase “according to the Scriptures” in 1Cor.15:3–4 is, in a sense, understood by Paul as the fulfillment ofGod’s promises regarding Christ’s death and resurrection.
Inthe book of Hebrews, the concept of promise plays an important role.In Heb. 6 Abraham is presented as the exemplary man who trusted inGod’s promise. The author exhorts the Hebrew Christians tofollow Abraham’s model of trust in God’s promise(6:12–20). The author also asserts that Jesus’ newcovenant is superior to the old one because his ministry “isestablished on better promises” (8:6). In Heb. 11 the faith ofthe great OT saints is acclaimed in terms of their faith in God’spromises.
Inthe NT, God makes new promises based on the work of Christ, includingthe final resurrection and the second coming of Christ (John 5:29;11:25–26; 1Cor. 15:48–57; 2Cor. 4:14;1Thess. 4:13–18). Furthermore, the message of the gospelis presented as multiple promises, including eternal life, thefullness of life in Christ, the forgiveness of sins, the indwellingof the Holy Spirit, the peace of God, the knowledge of God, and thejoy of God (Matt. 28:18–20; John 3:16; 10:10; 14:16, 27;16:20–24; 17:25–26; Phil. 4:4–9; 1John 1:9).
HumanPromises
TheScriptures contain many cases of people making promises to otherpeople. For example, Abraham made promises to the king of Sodom andto Abimelek (Gen. 14:22–24; 21:22–24). The Israelitespies made a promise to Rahab (Josh. 2:12–21). People also makepromises to God: Jacob, Jephthah, Hannah, and the returning exiles(Gen. 28:20–21; Judg. 11:29–40; 1Sam. 1:11–20;Neh. 10:28–29). Human promises usually are accompanied by thetaking of an oath (Gen. 14:22; 21:24; Deut. 6:13; Josh. 2:12–14)or the declaration of a curse in case of its breach (Ruth 1:17;1Sam. 14:24; 2Sam. 3:35; 1Kings 2:23). It isimperative to keep the promise that one makes to a human being or toGod (Num. 30:1–2; Ps. 50:14). In Mal. 2:14–16, divorce isregarded as a breaking of the oath between husband and wife. In OTtimes, people were afraid of curses falling upon them when they brokea promise. The Bible warns of the danger of making false promises, asdoing so will bring about sin and judgment (Lev. 19:12; Deut. 23:21;Zech. 8:17). It is an axiom of the wisdom literature that one shouldnot make promises rashly or lightly (Prov. 20:25; Eccles. 5:1–7),and Jesus prohibits the taking of any oath because of the possibilityof its breach (Matt. 5:33–37).
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).
The final book of the Bible is known by its opening line:“The revelation of Jesus Christ” (1:1 ESV, NRSV, KJV).This phrase could indicate a “revelation about Jesus Christ”(the main character), or a “revelation from Jesus Christ”(the primary giver of the message to John; so NIV), or, as manybelieve, some of both.
Inpowerful language and vivid imagery, Revelation presents theconclusion to God’s grand story of salvation, in which hedefeats evil, reverses the curse of sin, restores creation, and livesforever among his people. Although the details are often difficult tounderstand, the main idea of Revelation is clear: God is in controland will successfully accomplish his purposes. In the end, God wins.As a transformative vision, Revelation empowers its readers/listenersto persevere faithfully in a fallen world until their Lord returns.
Genreand Historical Context
Genre.Revelation is best understood in light of its literary genre and itshistorical context. The literary genre of Revelation—letter,prophecy, and apocalyptic literature—explains much of thestrangeness of the book. The entire book is a single letter to sevenchurches in Asia Minor (note the letter greeting in 1:4–5 andthe benediction in 22:21). John is commanded to write what he seesand send it to the seven churches (1:11). A letter to seven churchesis in reality a letter to the whole church, since the number “seven”symbolizes wholeness or completeness in Revelation. NT letters wereintended to be read aloud to the gathering of Christians, and thesame is true of Revelation. The book opens with a blessing on the onewho reads the letter aloud and on those who listen (1:3) and closeswith a stern warning to anyone (reader or listener) who changes thebook (22:18–19). Like other NT letters, Revelation alsoaddresses a specific situation. For this reason, any approach toRevelation that ignores the situation faced by the seven churcheswill fail to grasp its central message. Many say that the message ofRevelation extends beyond the first century, but it certainly doesnot ignore its first audience.
Revelationis also a letter that is prophetic. In both the opening (1:3) and theclosing (22:7, 10, 18–19), the book is described as a“prophecy” (cf. 19:10). In 22:9 the angel identifies Johnas a prophet: “I am a fellow servant with you and with yourfellow prophets.” As a prophetic book in line with OT propheticbooks, Revelation contains both prediction about the future andproclamation about God’s will for the present, with emphasisfalling on the latter.
Finally,Revelation is a prophetic letter that is apocalyptic. In the openingphrase, “the revelation of Jesus Christ,” the term“revelation” is a translation of the Greek termapokalypsis,meaning “to unveil” or “to reveal” what hasbeen hidden. Most believe that apocalyptic literature grew out ofHebrew prophecy. The OT books of Daniel and Zechariah are oftenassociated with apocalyptic literature, and there were many Jewishapocalypses written during the time between the Testaments (e.g.,1–2Enoch, 2–3Baruch, 4Ezra).
Inapocalyptic literature there is a revelation from God to somewell-known human figure through a heavenly intermediary. God promisesto intervene in human history, to defeat evil, and to establish hisrightful rule. Such is the case with Revelation, which assumes asituation where God’s people are threatened by hostile powers.God is portrayed as sovereign, and he promises to intervene soon todestroy evil. Through bizarre visions and imagery common toapocalyptic literature, those who hear Revelation are transported toanother world for much-needed heavenly perspective. As the hearersmove outside their hopeless circ*mstances and see God winning the waragainst evil, their perspective is reshaped, and they are empoweredto persevere faithfully. They are simultaneously called to live holyand blameless lives as they worship the one, true God.
Historicalcontext.Along with understanding the literary genre of Revelation, one mustgrasp its historical context in order to read the book responsibly.Revelation itself describes a historical situation where someChristians are suffering for their faith with the real possibilitythat the suffering could become more intense and widespread. Johnhimself has been exiled to the island of Patmos because of hiswitness for Jesus (1:9). Antipas, a Christian in Pergamum, has beenput to death for his faith (2:13). In his message to the church atSmyrna, Jesus indicates that they should not be surprised by whatthey are about to suffer (2:10). The book also includes severalreferences to pagan powers shedding the blood of God’s people(6:10; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2). Revelation addresses a situation inwhich pagan political power has formed a partnership with falsereligion. Those who claim to follow Christ are facing mountingpressure to conform to this ungodly partnership at the expense ofloyalty to Christ.
Thetwo primary possibilities for the date of Revelation are a timeshortly after the death of Nero (AD 68–69) or a date near theendof Domitian’s reign (AD 95). Although there is solidevidence for both dates, the majority opinion at present favors adate during the reign of Domitian, when persecution threatened tospread across the Roman Empire. The imperial cult (i.e., the worshipof the Roman emperor) was a powerful force to be reckoned withprimarily because it united religious, political, social, andeconomic elements into a single force. As chapters 2–3indicate, not every Christian was remaining faithful in thisdifficult environment. Some were compromising in order to avoidreligious or economic persecution. Revelation has a pointed messagefor those who are standing strong as well as for those who arecompromising, and this central message ties into the overall purposeof the book.
Purposeand Interpretation
Theoverall purpose of Revelation is to comfort those who are facingpersecution and to warn those who are compromising with the worldsystem. During times of oppression, the righteous suffer and thewicked seem to prosper. This raises the question “Who is Lord?”Revelation says that Jesus is Lord in spite of how things appear, andhe will return soon to establish his eternal kingdom. Those facingpersecution find hope through a renewed perspective, and those whoare compromising are warned to repent. Revelation’s goal is totransform the audience to follow Jesus faithfully.
Thereare five main theories about how Revelation should be interpreted:preterist, historicist, futurist, idealist, and eclectic. Thepreterist theory views Revelation as relating only to the time inwhich John lived rather than to any future period. John communicatesto first-century readers how God plans to deliver them from thewickedness of the Roman Empire. The historicist theory argues thatRevelation gives an overview of the major movements of church historyfrom the first century until the return of Christ. The futuristtheory claims that most of Revelation (usually chaps. 4–22)deals with a future time just before the end of history. The idealisttheory maintains that Revelation is a symbolic portrayal of theongoing conflict between good and evil. Revelation offers timelessspiritual truths to encourage Christians of all ages. The eclectictheory combines the strengths of several of the other theories (e.g.,a message to the original audience, a timeless spiritual message, andsome future fulfillment), while avoiding their weaknesses.
Outlineand Structure
Therehave been many attempts to understand how Revelation is organized.Some see a threefold structure based on 1:19:
Whatyou have seen (past) (1:1–20)
Whatis now (present) (2:1–3:21)
Whatwill take place later (future) (4:1–22:21)
Otherssee the book organized around seven dramatic scenes with interludesoccurring throughout:
Prologue(1:1–8)
Act1: Seven Oracles (1:9–3:22)
Act2: Seven Seals (6:1–17)
Act3: Seven Trumpets (8:1–9:21)
Act4: Seven Signs (12:1–14:20)
Act5: Seven Bowls (16:1–21)
Act6: Seven Visions (19:1–20:15)
Act7: Seven Prophecies (21:2–22:17)
Epilogue(22:18–21)
Thefollowing outline provides an overview of Revelation in ten stages:
I.Introduction (1:1–20)
II.Messages to the Seven Churches (2:1–3:22)
III.Vision of the Heavenly Throne Room (4:1–5:14)
IV.Opening of the Seven Seals (6:1–8:1)
V.Sounding of the Seven Trumpets (8:2–11:19)
VI.The People of God versus the Powers of Evil (12:1–14:20)
VII.Pouring Out of the Seven Bowls (15:1–16:21)
VIII.Judgment and Fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5)
IX.God’s Ultimate Victory (19:6–22:5)
X.Conclusion (22:6–21)
I.Introduction (1:1–20).Chapter 1 includes both a prologue (1:1–8) and John’scommission to write what he sees (1:9–20). John’s visionfocuses on the risen, glorified Christ and his continued presenceamong the seven churches.
II.Messages to the seven churches (2:1–3:22).Chapters 2–3 contain messages to seven churches of Asia Minor:Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, andLaodicea. The seven messages follow a similar literary pattern: adescription of Jesus, a commendation, an accusation, an exhortationcoupled with either warning or encouragement, an admonition tolisten, and a promise to those who overcome. These messages reflectthe twin dangers faced by the church: persecution and compromise.
III.Vision of the heavenly throne room (4:1–5:14).In chapters 4–5 the scene shifts to the heavenly throne room,where God reigns in majestic power. All of heaven worships theCreator and the Lion-Lamb (Jesus), who alone is qualified to open thescroll because of his sacrificial death.
IV.Opening of the seven seals (6:1–8:1).The unveiling of God’s ultimate victory formally begins here.This section begins the first of a series of three judgment visions(seals, trumpets, and bowls), with seven elements each. When thesixth seal is opened, the question is asked, “Who can withstandit?” Chapter 7 provides the answer with its two visions ofGod’s people; only those belonging to God can withstand theoutpouring of the Lamb’s wrath.
V.Sounding of the seven trumpets (8:2–11:19).The trumpet judgments, patterned after the plagues of Egypt, revealGod’s judgment upon a wicked world. Again, before the seventhelement in the series, there is an interval with two visions(10:1–11; 11:1–14) that instruct and encourage God’speople.
VI.The people of God versus the powers of evil (12:1–14:20).Chapter12 offers the main reason why God’s people face hostility inthis world. They are caught up in the larger conflict between God andSatan (the dragon). Although Satan was defeated by the death andresurrection of Christ, he continues to oppose the people of God.Chapter 13 introduces Satan’s two agents: the beast from thesea and the beast from the earth. The dragon and the two beastsconstitute an unholy trinity bent on seducing and destroying God’speople. As another interval, chapter 14 offers a glimpse of the finalfuture that God has in store for his people. One day the Lamb and hisfollowers will stand on Mount Zion and sing a new song of redemption.
VII.Pouring out of the seven bowls (15:1–16:21).The seven golden bowls follow the trumpets and seals as the finalseries of seven judgments. As the bowls of God’s wrath arepoured out on an unrepentant world, the plagues are devastatingindicators of God’s anger toward sin and evil. The onlyresponse from the “earth dwellers” (MSG; NIV:“inhabitants of the earth” [17:2, 8]; this is a commonterm in Revelation for unbelievers) is to curse God rather thanrepent (16:9, 11, 21).
VIII.Judgment and fall of Babylon (17:1–19:5). Thissection depicts the death of Babylon, a pagan power said to be “drunkwith the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those whobore testimony to Jesus” (17:6). The funeral laments for thedeceased Babylon of chapter 18 give way to a celebration as God’speople rejoice over Babylon’s downfall (19:1–5).
IX.God’s ultimate victory (19:6–22:5). Thisclimactic section describes God’s ultimate victory over eviland the final reward for the people of God. This scene includes thereturn of Christ for his bride (19:6–16), Christ’s defeatof the two beasts and their allies (19:17–21), the binding ofSatan and the millennial reign (20:1–6), the final defeat ofSatan (20:7–10), and the final judgment and the death of deathitself (20:11–15). Chapter 21 features a description of the newheaven and new earth, where God’s long-standing promise to liveamong his people is fully realized.
X.Conclusion (22:6–21).Revelation closes with final blessings for those who heed the messageof the book and warnings for those who do not. Jesus’ promiseto return soon is met with John’s prayer, “Come, LordJesus” (22:20).
Charactersand Themes
Theforegoing outlines are helpful for understanding Revelation, butperhaps an even better way to grasp the message of the book is tolook closely at its main characters and story line. The followingseven themes capture the overall theological message of this dynamicprophetic-apocalyptic letter.
1.God.Revelation presents God as a central character in the story. He issovereign and firmly in control of history, as his description from1:4–8 suggests: “the Alpha and the Omega” (thebeginning and the end), “the one who is, and who was, and whois to come” (God of the past, the present, and the future), and“the Lord God, ... the Almighty” (ruler overthe universe). The throne room vision of chapters 4–5 alsoclearly asserts God’s sovereign rule. The throne of God itselfstands as a central symbol in the book, representing God’ssovereignty over all things. As a main character, God rightlyreceives worship. He is worshiped because he is the creator (e.g.,4:11; 14:7) and the righteous judge who condemns evil and vindicateshis people (15:3–4; 16:5–7; 19:1–2). Revelationalso describes God as one who desires to be fully and intimatelypresent with his people. God cares for and protects his people (e.g.,7:2–3; 14:1; 21:4). As the book closes, God announces thefulfillment of his long-standing promise to live among his people(21:6–7; cf. Exod. 29:45–46; Lev. 26:11–12). God’schildren have unhindered access to their loving Father as they servehim, see his face, and bear his name—all in his presence(22:1–5).
2.God’s enemies.Although God reigns supreme, he has enemies who oppose him and hispeople. As God’s chief enemy, Satan (also known as the dragon,the devil, the serpent, the accuser) works through worldly systemswith the intent of thwarting God’s plan. Chapter 12 summarizesthis cosmic conflict. In that scene, God defeats the dragon, who thenturns his anger against the woman and the rest of her offspring. Thedragon’s evil partners include the beast fromthe sea(traditionally called the “antichrist”) and the beastfrom the earth (the “false prophet”). The first beastoften has been identified with Rome, the dominant pagan power in thefirst century, although the reference likely extends beyond Rome toany political-economic power that demands absolute allegiance (see13:1–8; 19:19–20; 20:10). The second beast usesmiraculous signs to deceive people into worshiping the first beast.This opponent represents religious power organized in support of thefirst beast (13:11–18; 19:20; 20:10). The dragon, the beastfrom the sea, and the false prophet constitute the unholy trinity.God’s enemies also include people (usually called the“inhabitants of the earth”) who follow the beast (13:8,12), indulge in the ways of this world (17:2), and persecutebelievers (6:10; 11:10).
3.The Lamb of God. Jesus,the Lamb of God, plays a central role in God’s redemptive plan.In Revelation the Lamb is clearly identified as a divine figure whoshares in the authority, glory, and worship reserved for God (5:6,9–14; 7:10, 17; 12:10; 21:22–23; 22:1, 3). Expressionsthat refer to God are also used of Jesus, thereby affirming Jesus’deity (e.g., “Alpha and Omega,” “Lord” [seealso 1:4–5]). Revelation highlights the Lamb’ssacrificial death as the key to his victory over evil, paradoxicalthough it may be (1:5, 18; 5:9). As the slaughtered yet risen Lamb(1:17–18), Jesus is able to identify with his suffering people(1:9; 12:17; 20:4). The Lamb promises to return as the warrior-judgeto defeat God’s enemies and rescue God’s people (1:7;3:11; 16:15; 19:11–21). The famous battle with the forces ofevil is recorded in 19:20: “But the beast was captured, andwith it the false prophet.” The two beasts are then condemnedto the lake of fire, and their followers become the banquet meal forthe birds of prey.
4.God’s people.The people of God figure prominently in the book of Revelation. Johnuses a variety of terms and images to portray God’s people(e.g., church, saints, great multitude, bride of the Lamb, newJerusalem). These people have been redeemed by the Lamb, and theycontinue to rely upon his sacrificial death in spite of opposition(1:5; 5:9; 14:3–4). They are a genuinely multicultural people,as indicated by the seven uses of a fourfold formula: every “tribe,language, people, and nation” (5:9; 7:9; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; cf.17:15). They are also a persecuted people (1:9; 2:9–10; 7:14;11:9–10; 12:10; 13:16–17) and at times even a martyredpeople (6:9–11; 16:6; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2; 20:4). ThroughoutRevelation, God’s people are characterized as those who obeythe commandments of God (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 14:12; 20:4; 22:9) andwho hold fast to the testimony of Jesus (1:2, 9; 6:9; 12:17; 19:10;20:4). They are a tempted people who are warned throughout the bookto endure in faith (13:10; 14:12; 18:4). Like their Savior, theyconquer evil by holding fast to their confession even to the point ofdeath (12:11).
5.God’s judgment.God’s judgment of evil plays a crucial role in the book. Thecentral section of Revelation contains three series of sevenjudgments: the seals (6:1–8:1), the trumpets (8:2–11:19),and the bowls (15:1–16:21). God sends these plagues on hisenemies to demonstrate his power and to vindicate his people. Theseimages of judgment also encourage repentance and remind people thatGod will win the battle against evil. Using two images ofjudgment—the grain harvest (14:14–16) and the winepress(14:17–20)—chapter 14 presents a clear choice: fear andglorify God (14:7) or face God’s inescapable and eternaljudgment (14:11, 19). God’s final judgment on “Babylonthe great, the mother of prostitutes” is reported in 17:1–19:6.Babylon represents the worldly system that has blasphemed God andpersecuted his people. God’s final judgment of the satanictrinity, their followers, and death itself is described in 19:11–21;20:7–15. Evil has been destroyed, preparing the way for therestoration of creation.
6.The paradise of God.The story culminates in God’s ultimate restoration of hispeople and his creation—the paradise of God. What God began todo in Gen. 1–2 he now completes in Rev. 21–22. The riverof life replaces the sea. The tree of life supplies food for all.God’s throne as a symbol of God’s sovereign rule over allreality serves as the source of life. God has kept his promise toconquer his enemies, vindicate his people, and restore his creation.The Abrahamic covenant of Gen. 12, that God would bless “allpeoples on earth” (v.3), is fulfilled as the tree of lifeprovides healing for the nations (Rev. 22:2). The new heaven and newearth is identified primarily as the place where God lives among hispeople (22:4). In the paradise of God there will be no more Satan orsin or death or evil of any kind. God’s people will bask in hisglory and respond in worship.
7.The present struggle.A final theme of Revelation is the believer’s struggle to liveout God’s story in the present. The Lamb’s followers relyupon the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus for their victory,but they continue to live in enemy territory. They long for the newheaven and new earth, but they must wage war in the present againstthe forces of evil. Jesus challenges the seven churches to “overcome”or “conquer,” a requirement for inheriting his promisesof eternal life, provision, justice, victory, and the presence of God(21:7). A voice from heaven summarizes what it means to overcome:“They [Christians] triumphed over him [Satan] by the blood ofthe Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love theirlives so much as to shrink from death” (12:11).
Theytriumph in the same way that Jesus triumphed: victory throughfaithfulness, even if it includes suffering. This calls for rejectingfalse teaching, resisting idolatry, living righteously, and refusingto compromise. Triumphing includes authentic faith that results inobedience to Jesus. Above all, to triumph or overcome means to followthe Lamb.
Theseseven themes of Revelation reveal how the book offers hope to thosewho are suffering for the cause of Christ and warning to those whoare compromising with the world. Revelation presents the finalchapter in God’s grand plan to defeat evil, reverse the curseof sin, transform creation, and live forever among his people. Forfirst-century readers or twenty-first-century readers, Revelationoffers a dramatic and empowering vision of what it means to followJesus.
The wife of Abraham, the father of Israel and God’schosen people. Thus, Sarah is a matriarch (mother) of Israel alongwith Rebekah and Rachel. When first introduced, her name is given as“Sarai,” but God changes it to “Sarah” (atthe same time Abram’s name is changed to “Abraham”[Gen. 17:15–16]). Both names mean “princess.” Thesignificance of the change may be subtle, since “Sarai”is an East Semitic version of West Semitic “Sarah,”indicating her transition from Mesopotamia to the promised land.
Accordingto Gen. 11:29–30, Sarai was married to Abram before theyentered the promised land. The passage also announces that she wasbarren. Since an essential part of the divine promises to Abram isthat he will be father to a great nation, the lack of offspring is aconsiderable problem and propels much of the plot of the narrative(esp. Gen. 12–26).
Inbrief, Sarai’s inability to conceive is an obstacle to thefulfillment of the promise and is a threat to Abram’s faith.Thus, when a famine forces them to go to Egypt to survive, he tellshis wife to lie about her status by saying that she is his sister.Although it is true that she is his half sister, the statement is alie because he hides the most relevant part of his relationship withher and puts the matriarch in danger (Gen. 12:10–20; 20:12).Abraham’s faith (the narrative does not reveal Sarah’sthinking except perhaps in Gen. 18:10–15, when she laughs atthe thought of giving birth in her old age) in God’s ability tofulfill the promise fluctuates, and he certainly has not come to aconsistent position of trust even just before the birth of Isaac(Gen. 20). As a matter of fact, acting on fear and trying to producean heir, Abraham takes a concubine, Hagar, who gives birth toIshmael. Sarah’s relationship with Hagar is troubled (Gen. 16),and Sarah treats her harshly and eventually has Hagar and Ishmaelexpelled from their camp (21:8–21).
Eventually,in advanced old age, Sarah gives birth to Isaac, the child of thepromise (Gen. 21:1–7). Sarah is not mentioned in the story ofthe “binding of Isaac,” the focus again being onAbraham’s faith.
Sarahpredeceases Abraham, and he buys a field from Ephron the Hittite inorder to bury her (Gen. 23), the first part of the promised landowned by the people of promise. This location near Hebron became theburial spot of Abraham and other patriarchs.
LaterOT literature often looks back on Abraham as patriarch, but only Isa.51:2 explicitly mentions Sarah in the role of cofounder of the peopleof God. She is mentioned also in the NT, along with Abraham, as theone through whom God brings the promise of a son to fulfillment (Rom.4:19; 9:9; Heb. 11:11). In 1Pet. 3:6 Sarah is put forward as amodel of wifely submission because she obeys Abraham and refers tohim as her lord (likely a reference to the Greek version of Gen.18:12).
There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin;hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, orportrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of thedriving forces of the entire Bible.
Sinin the Bible
OldTestament.Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’scommandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. WhenAdam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete.They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaveswere inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with theirattempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent,Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).
Inthe midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways thatsin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised toput hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of thewoman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blowupon the offspring of the woman, the offspring ofthe womanwould defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequatecovering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implicationis that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adamand Eve, covering their sin.
InGen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on fulldisplay. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able toeradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humansgathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make aname for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them toscatter across the earth (11:1–9).
Inone sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holyGod satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationshipwith human beings without compromising his justice? The short answeris: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), whoeventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemedthem from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought themto Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated onobedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant wasthe sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided asa means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrificesmade for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year toatone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement thehigh priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies andsprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took asecond goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people ofIsrael, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them onthe head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness....The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barrenregion; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev.16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinfulpeople, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.
Despitethese provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke itscovenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under thereign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people,including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder(2Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wivesand concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods(1Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israeland Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry becamerampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judahin 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised toraise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as aguilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
AfterGod’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that thegreat prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, wereat hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remainedunder foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell ofSolomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Beforelong, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning awayfrom him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administrationof the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failedto properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).
NewTestament.During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longingfor God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last,when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it wasrevealed that he would “save his people from their sins”(Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, Johnthe Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism ofrepentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereasboth Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to bethe obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation(Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13;Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also theSuffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45;cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrathof God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. Withhis justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify allwho are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). Whatneither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, JesusChrist did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).
Afterhis resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers beganproclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus didand calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one ofyou, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”(Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness,they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned againstthem (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believerscontinue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal.5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23).The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the newheaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse(Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).
Aseven this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesisto Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’splot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative;it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved inorder for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.
Definitionand Terminology
Definitionof sin. Althoughno definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of theconcept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conformto God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action,orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered thatGod’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character,so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather isa personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited toactions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen.4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature ashuman beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.
Terminology.TheBible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying themis not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and useof the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one ofthe following four categories.
1.Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator andruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’sself-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankindfoolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom.1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows tohumans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31).Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodlinessor impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa.9:17; 1Pet. 4:18).
2.Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from thelawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass”picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or thecrossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42;Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’slaw, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45;Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violatinghis statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result isguilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’slaw is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectivelyfeels guilt.
3.Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what isgood. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what isgood (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contraststhe upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could alsoinclude here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speakof perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequentmention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievousdeparture from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27;1Cor. 5:1–11).
4.Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individualhad to be in a state of purity before him. While a person couldbecome impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating womanwas impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity”clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek.24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Althoughit is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, inother places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7;Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).
Metaphors
Inaddition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible usesseveral metaphors or images to describe it. The following four areamong the more prominent.
Missingthe mark.In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin”have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sinis reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that aperson simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it isthat he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9;Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional ornot, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num.15:30).
Departingfrom the way.Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in thewisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of therighteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19).Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways,but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18).Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed bytheir own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).
Adultery.Since God’s relationship with his people is described as amarriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32),it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness asadultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous womanvividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them ofspiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52).When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate inidolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1Cor.6:12–20; 10:1–22).
Slavery.Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clearthat Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture ofits far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7;49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to thosewho do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything thatpleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic powerthat is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare(Rom. 7:7–25).
Scopeand Consequences
Sindoes not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage alongwith it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.
Scope.The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As aresult of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist humanefforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen.3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under theweight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2Chron.36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation aswell (Rom. 8:19–22).
Sinaffects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions,motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom.3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “totaldepravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful asthey could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is taintedby sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as asinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societalstructures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economicmarkets, to name but a few.
Consequences.Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’sneighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sinhas consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level.Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen.2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty inGod’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, andsubjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20;5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict betweenindividuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breedsmistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closestrelationships.
Conclusion
Nosubject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding ofsin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As thePuritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ willnot be sweet.”
A notable tree used in pagan divination practices, visiblefrom the entrance to the city Shechem (Judg. 9:37). This may be thetree near which Abram built an altar after receiving God’spromise regarding the surrounding land (Gen. 12:6–7). This mayalso be the tree under which Jacob buried his household’sforeign gods and earrings (Gen. 35:4). These possible referencescannot be verified. Renderings of the Hebrew ’elon me’onenimalso include “plain of Meonenim” (KJV), “diviners’oak” (NASB, RSV, ESV), and “oracle oak” (MSG).
The act of yielding or consenting to the authority ofanother, voluntarily or involuntarily; personal deference,compliance, or humility toward another; to become subject to.Submission incorporates obedience, and in certain usages the termsare synonymous. However, “obedience” indicates compliancewith directions or guidance, while “submission” describesone’s subservient posture toward another. Submission within aformalized hierarchy is subordination—for example, Jesus’relationship to the Father.
Scripturepresents submission in two ways: as the translation of a number ofspecific Hebrew and Greek terms that convey an aspect of the concept,and as a general portrait of relationships—for example,patriarchs and prophets before the Lord, or demons toward Jesus.Sometimes, the presentation is negative, as in a refusal to submit.
Inthe OT, the use of the word “submission” (or itsderivatives) in the major English versions is primarily a function oftranslator preference. In fact, Gen. 16:9, the angel’sinstructions to Hagar, is the sole instance where “submit”is broadly agreed to be the best translation of the underlyingHebrew. Elsewhere, the NIV and at least one other version use formsof “submission” to interpretively translate Hebrewexpressions meaning the following: “become a slave to”(Gen. 49:15); “serve” (2Chron. 30:8); “have arelationship with” (Job 22:21); “quickly stretch outhands” (Ps. 68:31); “give over to” (Ps. 81:11); and“give the hand to” (Lam. 5:6).
Inthe NT, “submission” (along with its derivatives and,often, “to be subject to”) appears only in Luke and theepistles, and it translates forms of four different Greek roots.
1.Dogmatizōappears once: “Why ... do you submit to rules?”(Col. 2:20). It includes the aspect of obligation to something thathas been decreed.
2.Hypeikōappears once: “Obey your leaders and submit to them”(Heb. 13:17 NASB, NRSV). Here, obedience isspecifically distinguished from submission.
3.Hypotagēappears four times as “submission.” In Gal. 2:5; 1Tim.2:11; 3:4 it indicates the main understanding: subordinate posturingtoward superiors; in 2Cor. 9:13, however, it refers toobedience to a decree,in this case confession of the gospel.
4.Hypotassōis by far the most significant root. It appears almost forty times inthe NT; about half of these occurrences can be translated using aform of “submission” (or “to be subject to”).It is used to conveythe subordination of children to parents (Luke 2:51); demons to theseventy-two missionaries (Luke 10:17, 20); sinners to God’s lawor righteousness (Rom. 8:7; 10:3); people to governing authorities(Rom. 13:1, 5; Titus 3:1; 1Pet. 2:13); believers to one another(1Cor. 16:16; Eph. 5:21); wives to husbands (1Cor. 14:34;Eph. 5:22, 24; Col. 3:18; Titus 2:5; 1Pet. 3:1, 5); slaves tomasters (Titus 2:9; 1Pet. 2:18); angels, authorities, andpowers to Jesus (1Pet. 3:22); believers to God (Heb. 12:9;James 4:7); younger men to elders (1Pet. 5:5).
Afew additional uses of “submission” in some translationshave other primary meanings: “turn in for inspection”(Gal. 2:2 NASB); “reverence” (Heb. 5:7 NIV, NRSV); and“open-mindedness” (James 3:17 NIV).
Vividportraits of submission conveying the concept without invoking thespecific vocabulary include Abraham’s submission to God (Gen.12:1–4; 17:1–27; 21:4; 22:1–19); Moses at theburning bush (Exod. 3:1–4:17); Joshua toward God (Josh. 24:29);prophets toward God (1Sam. 3:10; Isa. 6:8; Hos. 1:1–3);Jesus’ submission to the Father (Matt. 26:39, 42, 44; Mark14:35–36, 39; Luke 2:49; 22:42); Paul’s submission toJesus (Rom. 1:1; Titus 1:1); believers doing the will of the Father(Matt. 12:50; 21:28–32); the prodigal son toward his father(Luke 15:18, 21); believers toward Jesus (John 12:26; 14:21, 23–24;15:10); husbands and wives toward each other (1Cor. 7:3–5;11:11); believers humble before one another (Rom. 12:10; Phil.2:3–4); and the bowing of every knee to Jesus (Phil. 2:10–13).
The act of yielding or consenting to the authority ofanother, voluntarily or involuntarily; personal deference,compliance, or humility toward another; to become subject to.Submission incorporates obedience, and in certain usages the termsare synonymous. However, “obedience” indicates compliancewith directions or guidance, while “submission” describesone’s subservient posture toward another. Submission within aformalized hierarchy is subordination—for example, Jesus’relationship to the Father.
Scripturepresents submission in two ways: as the translation of a number ofspecific Hebrew and Greek terms that convey an aspect of the concept,and as a general portrait of relationships—for example,patriarchs and prophets before the Lord, or demons toward Jesus.Sometimes, the presentation is negative, as in a refusal to submit.
Inthe OT, the use of the word “submission” (or itsderivatives) in the major English versions is primarily a function oftranslator preference. In fact, Gen. 16:9, the angel’sinstructions to Hagar, is the sole instance where “submit”is broadly agreed to be the best translation of the underlyingHebrew. Elsewhere, the NIV and at least one other version use formsof “submission” to interpretively translate Hebrewexpressions meaning the following: “become a slave to”(Gen. 49:15); “serve” (2Chron. 30:8); “have arelationship with” (Job 22:21); “quickly stretch outhands” (Ps. 68:31); “give over to” (Ps. 81:11); and“give the hand to” (Lam. 5:6).
Inthe NT, “submission” (along with its derivatives and,often, “to be subject to”) appears only in Luke and theepistles, and it translates forms of four different Greek roots.
1.Dogmatizōappears once: “Why ... do you submit to rules?”(Col. 2:20). It includes the aspect of obligation to something thathas been decreed.
2.Hypeikōappears once: “Obey your leaders and submit to them”(Heb. 13:17 NASB, NRSV). Here, obedience isspecifically distinguished from submission.
3.Hypotagēappears four times as “submission.” In Gal. 2:5; 1Tim.2:11; 3:4 it indicates the main understanding: subordinate posturingtoward superiors; in 2Cor. 9:13, however, it refers toobedience to a decree,in this case confession of the gospel.
4.Hypotassōis by far the most significant root. It appears almost forty times inthe NT; about half of these occurrences can be translated using aform of “submission” (or “to be subject to”).It is used to conveythe subordination of children to parents (Luke 2:51); demons to theseventy-two missionaries (Luke 10:17, 20); sinners to God’s lawor righteousness (Rom. 8:7; 10:3); people to governing authorities(Rom. 13:1, 5; Titus 3:1; 1Pet. 2:13); believers to one another(1Cor. 16:16; Eph. 5:21); wives to husbands (1Cor. 14:34;Eph. 5:22, 24; Col. 3:18; Titus 2:5; 1Pet. 3:1, 5); slaves tomasters (Titus 2:9; 1Pet. 2:18); angels, authorities, andpowers to Jesus (1Pet. 3:22); believers to God (Heb. 12:9;James 4:7); younger men to elders (1Pet. 5:5).
Afew additional uses of “submission” in some translationshave other primary meanings: “turn in for inspection”(Gal. 2:2 NASB); “reverence” (Heb. 5:7 NIV, NRSV); and“open-mindedness” (James 3:17 NIV).
Vividportraits of submission conveying the concept without invoking thespecific vocabulary include Abraham’s submission to God (Gen.12:1–4; 17:1–27; 21:4; 22:1–19); Moses at theburning bush (Exod. 3:1–4:17); Joshua toward God (Josh. 24:29);prophets toward God (1Sam. 3:10; Isa. 6:8; Hos. 1:1–3);Jesus’ submission to the Father (Matt. 26:39, 42, 44; Mark14:35–36, 39; Luke 2:49; 22:42); Paul’s submission toJesus (Rom. 1:1; Titus 1:1); believers doing the will of the Father(Matt. 12:50; 21:28–32); the prodigal son toward his father(Luke 15:18, 21); believers toward Jesus (John 12:26; 14:21, 23–24;15:10); husbands and wives toward each other (1Cor. 7:3–5;11:11); believers humble before one another (Rom. 12:10; Phil.2:3–4); and the bowing of every knee to Jesus (Phil. 2:10–13).
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
(1)Thefather of Abram (Abraham), Nahor, and Haran (Gen. 11:24–32).After Har-an’s death in Ur, Terah and family traveled to thecity of Harran, where Terah died at the age of 205. He was a pagan(Josh. 24:2), perhaps a moon worshiper, for his name is related tothe Hebrew word for “moon,” and Ur and Harran are knownancient centers of moon worship. Abram only moved after his fatherdied (Acts 7:4), suggesting that Abram, though listed first among thesons, was not the oldest son, being only seventy-five at the time(Gen. 12:4). (2)AnIsraelite wilderness encampment (Num. 33:27–28).
(1)Thefather of Abram (Abraham), Nahor, and Haran (Gen. 11:24–32).After Har-an’s death in Ur, Terah and family traveled to thecity of Harran, where Terah died at the age of 205. He was a pagan(Josh. 24:2), perhaps a moon worshiper, for his name is related tothe Hebrew word for “moon,” and Ur and Harran are knownancient centers of moon worship. Abram only moved after his fatherdied (Acts 7:4), suggesting that Abram, though listed first among thesons, was not the oldest son, being only seventy-five at the time(Gen. 12:4). (2)AnIsraelite wilderness encampment (Num. 33:27–28).
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
An appearance by God. The word “theophany” is notfound in the Bible; however, by the early fourth century AD, the termhad come to be used in reference to God. Eusebius, bishop of Caesareaat that time, uses the term (Gk. theophaneia) in reference to God’sappearances to people as these are recounted in Gen. 18:1–5,25; 32:28–30; Exod. 3:4–6; Josh. 5:13–15 (Hist.eccl. 1.2.10). This meaning of “theophany,” referring tothe biblical phenomenon of God’s appearing, is the sense of theword considered here.
“Theophany”is a compound word, related to the Greek words theos(usually translated as “god” or “God”) andphainō (often translatedas “to appear”). The Bible says in many places that God“appeared” (e.g., Gen. 12:7; 17:1; 18:1; 26:2, 24; 35:9;48:3; Exod. 3:16; 4:5; Deut. 31:15). For example, Gen. 18:1 says that“the Lord appeared” to Abraham. Several other passagessay that people saw God (Gen. 32:30; Exod. 24:10; Isa. 6:1). Forexample, Isa. 6:1 says that Isaiah “saw the Lord.”“Appeared” and “see” usually reflectdifferent forms of the same Hebrew verb.
Closelyrelated to these appearances are statements describing God’spresence and glory within a cloud and at God’s tent or temple.During the exodus of Israel from Egypt, “by day the Lord wentahead of them in a pillar of cloud,” leading them (Exod.13:21). When Moses later constructs the tabernacle or tent ofmeeting, a cloud covers it, and the glory of God fills the tabernacle(40:34). God typically speaks to Moses from the tabernacle (Exod.33:7–9; Num. 1:1; 7:89).
Later,when the temple is dedicated, “the cloud filled the temple ofthe Lord” (1Kings 8:10). This cloud is associated withGod’s glory, and where God says he would dwell (8:11–12).In the book of Ezekiel, God forsakes the temple because of the sinsof Israel, so the cloud and God’s glory depart (Ezek. 10:4).Throughout the Bible, the local presence of God is regularlyindicated by the tabernacle and later by the temple, for this is theplace where all offerings are given to God, and where people comebefore God.
Inthe Bible, an appearance by God does not limit God to one place.Solomon says during the dedication of the temple that even heavencannot contain God, much less the temple that Solomon has built(1Kings 8:27). God’s omnipresence is likewise expressedby the psalmist (Ps. 139:7–8).
Goddoes not always appear in the same form in theophanies. The angel ofthe Lord appears in the fire of a burning bush, saying that he is theGod of Abraham (Exod. 3:2–6). Elsewhere, the angel of the Lordis described as a man, but then ascends to heaven in the flame of analtar (Judg. 13:3–13, 20). John describes God sitting on athrone (Rev. 4:2; 5:1). In other passages God is locally present andspeaks, yet without explicitly appearing, which might be classifiedas a theophany (Num. 22:9, 20; 23:16; Mark 1:11; 9:7; John 12:28).
Despitethese examples of theophanies, some biblical passages state thatpeople cannot see God. However, these passages may refer to practicalhuman limitations rather than any inherent characteristic of Godhimself. In Exodus, for example, God tells Moses that no one seeingGod’s face can live (33:20). However, God then says that Moses,without seeing God’s face, “will see my back”(33:23). The entire passage indicates that God can be seen morefully, but only with fatal results. Several NT passages similarlyindicate that God cannot be fully seen (John1:18; 4:24; 1Tim.1:17; 6:15–16; Heb. 11:27).
Justas God dwelled within the tabernacle, at times showing his glory, theNT says that the Word of God was made to dwell in flesh (incarnate)as Jesus Christ and so revealed God’s glory (John1:14).This Word of God is the same word that created all things in Gen. 1and so is genuinely God (John1:1–3).
The Hebrew word torahmost broadly means “teaching” or “instruction.”In the OT, torahmost commonly refers to the collection of teachings divinely revealedto Moses by God. This collection of teachings preserved in thePentateuch became authoritative and binding, not only for thecommunity of Hebrews wandering in the Sinai Desert, but also for eachsuccessive generation with whom the covenant with Yahweh was renewed(Exod. 24; Deut. 4:5–14, 44).
TheTorah of Moses
Thus,torah occurs often in combination with Moses’ name (“torahof Moses”), particularly in the Pentateuch, the DeuteronomisticHistory (Deuteronomy, Joshua through Kings), and Ezra, Nehemiah, andChronicles. Perhaps the use of Moses’ name in this wayemphasizes the authority of the teachings by reminding readers oftheir connection to him. In the prophetic literature and Psalms,however, torah is more commonly used in combination with the specialname for God revealed to Moses at the burning bush (“torah ofYahweh”). Perhaps the use of Yahweh’s special name inthis case emphasizes the divine nature of the teachings given toMoses by God.
Themeaning of torah in the OT is not uniform, however, and encompasses arange of related meanings. Torah sometimes refers to a more specificset of teachings within the corpus of Mosaic instructions. In somecases, torah seems to refer only to the Ten Commandments (Exod. 24;Deut. 4:44). In other cases, particularly in Leviticus and Numbers,torah can refer to a specific instruction pertaining to the people’sworship and service to God. For example, the specific regulation forhow to carry out a burnt offering is a torah for the burnt offering(Lev. 6:9), and the instruction for how to carry out a Nazirite vowis a torah for the Nazirite vow (Num. 6:13).
Agreat deal of the Mosaic teaching in Exodus through Deuteronomyfocuses on the community’s worship, offering specificinstruction on things such as offerings, sacrifices, the distinctionbetween clean and unclean, as well as instructions for constructingthe ancient sanctuary, the tabernacle. Because the Levitical priestswere leaders in the Israelite community’s worship, they werespecifically charged with careful transmission and interpretation oftorah (2Kings 22:8; Mal. 2:7–8). Indeed, Leviticalpriests held an authoritative position in the Israelite communitywith regard to interpretations of torah. Accordingly, sometimes torahrefers to a decision rendered by a priest, on behalf of Yahweh, whenthe application of an individual instruction is unclear. For example:“This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘Ask the priestswhat the law [torah] says: If someone carries consecrated meat in thefold of their garment, and that fold touches some bread or stew,... does it become consecrated?’ ”(Hag. 2:11–12 [cf. Deut. 17:8–13]). Priests who fail intheir duties of transmission and interpretation of torah are chargedwith doing “violence to the law [torah]” and corruptingthe people (Zeph. 3:4; see also Jer. 2:8; Ezek. 7:26; 22:26; Hos.4:6).
OtherUses of Torah
Torahcan also be a more general term for the direct command of God, apartfrom the teachings of Moses. For example, God said of Abraham that he“obeyed me and did everything I required of him, keeping mycommands, my decrees and my instructions [torot]” (Gen. 26:5).Since Abraham died before the time of Moses, this reference to torahlikely emphasizes Abraham’s faithful obedience to God’sspecific instructions to him (cf. Gen. 12:1–4; 15:1–21).
Particularlyin the prophetic literature, torah often refers to the standard ofbehavior with which Israel will be judged: “The people havebroken my covenant and rebelled against my law [torah]” (Hos.8:1 [cf. Isa. 1:10; 5:24; 8:16, 19–20; 30:9; Zech. 7:12]). Inthe prophetic texts, torah is often the basis for God’sindictment of the people, and yet torah also holds promise for theredemption of God’s people, when “I [God] will put my law[torah] in their minds and write it on their hearts” (Jer.31:33).
Inthe book of Proverbs, torah usually refers to instructions given by aparent to a child: “Listen, my son, to your father’sinstruction and do not forsake your mother’s teaching [torah]”(1:8). In this case, torah represents practical parental wisdom todirect everyday living. While the use of torah in Proverbs is notdirectly associated with the Mosaic teachings in the Pentateuch, thecontent of the teaching (torah) of the parent to the child inProverbs is in alignment with the teachings of Moses to the Israelitecommunity, particularly with the Ten Commandments. Indeed, parentalinstruction (torah) in the book of Proverbs includes a prohibitionagainst dishonoring one’s parents (1:8; 10:1), violence ormurder (1:11–12; 3:29), stealing (1:13; 10:2), adultery(2:16–19; 5:3–20), and lying (3:30; 6:12–15).
Overall,torah is presented not as a stale collection of restrictive rules inthe OT, but rather as a joy and a delight: “The law [torah] ofthe Lord is perfect, refreshing the soul. The statutes of the Lordare trustworthy, making wise the simple. The precepts of the Lord areright, giving joy to the heart. The commands of the Lord are radiant,giving light to the eyes.... They are sweeter thanhoney” (Ps. 19:7–10). See also Law.
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
The spectrum of meaning of “faith” and “faithfulness” may be applied both to God and to human beings. Cognates of “faith” are used interpersonally in human relationships but are used in the Bible specifically to denote the interaction between God and humanity, and human response to God. A question of theological pertinence is the degree to which one must distinguish between faith as an agent of personal belief and faith as an object of personal belief as pertaining to the relationship between God and human being.
In Hebrew the words most often translated “faith” or “faithful” are ’emunah and ’emet. In Greek the word rendered most frequently “faith” or “faithful” is pistis. In terms of their semantic domains, ’emunah and ’emet connote an objective sense of reliability (of persons) and stability (of inanimate objects); pistis conveys more of a subjective sense of placing confidence in a person, trusting in a person, or believing in a person or set of propositions. This subjective sense of pistis is correlated to considering the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence as reliable—“faithful.” Pistis likewise is used to communicate the quality of this person or belief as “committed” and “trustworthy.”
As noted, to some degree the meanings of the Hebrew and Greek terms overlap. However, certain dissimilarities are apparent as well. These observations play out in OT and NT expressions of faith. Martin Buber (1878–1965), a Jewish philosopher known for his academic work in the area of “faith,” distinguished between two types of faith: OT/Judaic faith, typified as tribal, national, and communal trust and fidelity based on the covenant; and NT/Christian faith, characterized as individual persuasion or belief in something.
Old Testament
Faith in the context of the OT rests on a foundation that the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence is reliable. Trust in Yahweh is expressed through loyalty and obedience. The theme of responsive obedience is emphasized in the Torah (Exod. 19:5). In the later history of Israel, faithfulness to the law became the predominant expression of faith (Dan. 1:8; 6:10). OT faith, then, is a moral response rather than abstract intellect or emotion.
Faithfulness as an attribute of God. Yahweh is presented in the OT as faithful to his promises, as faithfulness is a part of his very being. In the Torah the Israelites are reminded, “The Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). Not only is God presented as keeping his covenant, but also the prophet Hosea calls God “the faithful Holy One” (Hos. 11:12). Isaiah likewise pre-sents faithfulness as an attribute of God (Isa. 49:7). The people can rest assured, for God is unchanging and reliable.
The psalmist speaks of Yahweh as the faithful God: “You have redeemed me, O Lord, faithful God” (Ps. 31:5 NRSV); “he remains faithful forever” (Ps. 146:6). The translation “faithful” is warranted in these instances in the psalms. Its connotations are “truth” and “trustworthiness.” Yahweh is ascribed divine honor by his people recognizing and acknowledging his faithfulness and trustworthiness, and by responding to it in obedience as the people of God.
The faith of Abraham. Abraham’s (Abram’s) faith is used in the Bible as an example (Rom. 4:12; Gal. 3:6–9) in the sense that Abraham trusted God’s faithfulness in a way unequaled by other characters in the OT. Abraham lived in Mesopotamia when God spoke to him in a vision and told him that his descendants would be as innumerable as the stars in the sky (Gen. 15:1–5). Abraham trusted that God would be faithful to keep his promise despite insurmountable obstacles. This trust was credited to Abraham as righteousness (15:6). God subsequently initiated a covenant with Abraham (15:7–21).
Abraham’s life was characterized by his obedience to God and by his considering God to be faithful, something well noted by the early church (Heb. 11:8–11, 17–19) and used as an example of faith in the Christian walk (12:1). The three best-known examples of Abraham’s obedience and hence trust in God’s faithfulness are found consecutively in the departure from his homeland, the birth of his son Isaac, and the offering of Isaac as a sacrifice.
When God said to Abraham, “Go from your country, your people and your father’s household to the land I will show you” (Gen. 12:1), Abraham went as commanded (12:4). He obeyed despite his cultural disposition toward staying in the area of his ancestry and kin, and he went without knowledge of an appointed destination. Elderly and childless (12:7, 11–12), Abraham considered offspring to be impossible. However, Abraham trusted that God would be able to raise offspring for him, believing that he would become a great nation (12:2). His offspring Isaac was later reminded of the obedience of Abraham (26:5). Abraham’s greatest challenge of trust in God’s faithful provision came when he was commanded to offer his son Isaac as a burnt offering (22:2). He was commended for fearing God without reservation (22:12).
When the priest and initial leader of the Maccabean revolt, Mattathias, gave his farewell speech to his sons as he faced death in 166 BC, he placed his deeds along the lines of biblical heroes of faith such as Abraham. With likely reference to Abraham offering Isaac, he said, “Was not Abraham found faithful when tested, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness?” (1Macc. 2:52 NRSV). The early church likewise used this test in Abraham’s life as an example of his faithfulness, while at the same time claiming that the source for this faithfulness was found in faith—faith in God’s faithful provision (Heb. 11:17).
Faithfulness to the covenant. Faithfulness embodies the very core of the covenant relationship. God seeks a love relationship with humanity expressed in initiating his covenant. He is described as “abounding in love and faithfulness” (Exod. 34:6). His covenant love (Heb. khesed) is closely correlated to his faithfulness: “He is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love” (Deut. 7:9). Throughout the OT, Yahweh is shown as loyal to his covenant. Yahweh’s righteousness is seen in his faithfulness in keeping the covenant even when his people were disloyal and did not acknowledge his faithfulness. He delivered his people out of Egypt because of his covenant love and righteousness, as the psalmist declared: “But from everlasting to everlasting the Lord’s love is with those who fear him, and his righteousness with their children’s children—with those who keep his covenant and remember to obey his precepts” (Ps. 103:17–18). He delivered them out of their subsequent exile, declaring them righteous because their repentant hearts trusted in his faithfulness and sought to obey his covenant. Yahweh said, “If I have not made my covenant with day and night and established the laws of heaven and earth, then I will reject the descendants of Jacob and David my servant and will not choose one of his sons to rule over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. For I will restore their fortunes and have compassion on them” (Jer. 33:25–26).
God’s people, however, were expected to reciprocate and trust his faithfulness (1Chron. 16:15–16). When God met with Moses on Mount Sinai, he instructed Moses to tell the Israelites to obey the commands fully and to keep the covenant. It was only then that they would be a treasured possession, a holy nation (Exod. 19:5–6). The Israelites were expected to follow in obedience and thus reciprocate God’s faithfulness. The people of Israel often failed, but David and other godly people chose to be faithful to God and walk in his truth (Ps. 119:30; Heb. 11:4–38).
Faith counted as righteousness. Whereas faith is used throughout the OT in reference to God’s faithfulness and loyalty, it is used in Hab. 2:4 as pertaining to the faith of the righteous: “But the righteous will live by his faith” (NASB). In Rom. 1:17 Paul specifies, “For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: ‘The righteous will live by faith.’ ” He notes that God’s righteousness, even as revealed within OT promises, is by faith (“faith to faith,” or “faith, through and through”). By the parameters “from faith to faith,” Paul intends to exclude works of righteousness, a theme that he carries consistently in the first four chapters of Romans. Justification, for Habakkuk’s hearers, meant faithfulness, a single-minded focus on Yahweh to meet life’s essential needs. For Paul, salvation by way of justification meant that reliance upon Christ alone was foundational. In Pauline theology, faith is a thread connecting the old covenant with the new covenant.
New Testament
Faith is a central theological concept in the NT. In relational terms, faith is foremost personalized as the locus of trust and belief in the person of Jesus Christ.
In the Gospels, Jesus is spoken of not as the subject of faith (as believing in God), but as the object of faith. In the Synoptic Gospels, faith is seen most often in connection with the ministry of Jesus. Miracles, in particular healings, are presented as taking place in response to the faith of the one in need of healing or the requester. In the Gospel of John, faith (belief) is presented as something that God requires of his people (6:28–29).
In the book of Acts, “faith/belief” is used to refer to Jews and Gentiles converting to following the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and becoming part of the Christian community. The book correlates faith in Christ closely with repentance (Acts 11:21; 19:18; 20:21; 26:18).
Paul relates faith to righteousness and justification (Rom. 3:22; 5:11; Gal. 3:6). In Ephesians faith is shown as instrumental in salvation: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” (Eph. 2:8).
In Hebrews, faith is described as “being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (11:1). Faith thus is viewed as something that can be accomplished in the life of the believer—a calling of God not yet tangible or seen. To possess faith is to be loyal to God and to the gospel of Jesus Christ despite all obstacles. In the letter of James, genuine works naturally accompany genuine faith. Works, however, are expressed in doing the will of God. The will of God means, for example, caring for the poor (James 2:15–16).
In 1Peter, Christ is depicted as the broker of faith in God (1Pet. 1:21), whereas in 2Peter and Jude faith is presented as received from God (2Pet. 1:1). In the letters of John “to believe” is used as a litmus test for those who possess eternal life: “You who believe in the name of the Son of God, ... you have eternal life” (1John 5:13).
Faith is rarely addressed in the book of Revelation. Rather, faithfulness is the objective. Christ is described as the faithful and true witness (Rev. 1:5; 3:14), the perfect example for believers. One of the believers in Asia Minor, Antipas, is identified as Christ’s witness and faithful one (2:13). Those believers who, like Antipas, are faithful unto death, are called “overcomers” (2:10, 26). The faithless are thrown into the lake of fire, which represents the second death (21:8).
Faith and salvation. The role of faith in salvation is often hotly debated. Views are polarized between Christ as the object of faith and as the subject of faith. These views are designated as an objective genitive (faith in Christ), also known as an anthropological view, and a subjective genitive (the faithfulness of Christ), also known as a christological view. Thus, for example, Rom. 3:22 can be translated as “This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe” (cf. NRSV) or as “This righteousness from God comes through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe” (cf. NET). In the latter translation the faithfulness of Christ is seen as the agent of salvation.
In Eph. 2:8 the phrase “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith,” points to faith as instrumental in salvation. However, the source of that faith is not made clear. Does God provide the faith required to be saved, and thus the event is out of the hands of humanity? Or does salvation require a response from human beings in the form of faith—that is, trust?
In the Letter to the Romans, Paul indicates a correlation between grace and faith (Rom. 4:16; 5:1–2), and he shows that Abraham’s faith, his belief and unwavering hope in God’s faithfulness, was credited to him as righteousness (4:18–22). In the new covenant this righteousness likewise is credited to those who believe in God (4:23–24).
Faith and works. In Eph. 2:8–10 works are described as an outflow of the faith of believers: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.”
Faith and works are also related in the letter of James, where works appear to be a prerequisite of faith, for faith without works is dead (2:26). While at first sight this might appear to contradict a Pauline understanding of faith and works (Rom. 3:19–5:1; Gal. 2:15–3:24), James and Paul use the word “works” differently. Paul uses it in terms of “obedience to the law,” something obsolete as a requirement in the new covenant. James, however, writes with regard to works of charity, not works of obedience to Jewish ritualistic law. Authentic faith, then, shows the evidence of good works—charity, the fruit of the Spirit.
Faith and the Church
Whereas baptism was a public initiation rite into the first-century Christian community, it was faith in Christ Jesus that was understood as establishing one’s membership in the family of God (Gal. 3:26). This membership was available to both Jews and Gentiles. Faith, the shared belief system in and confession of Jesus’ salvific work, became the common denominator in the Christian community. In Ephesians, faith is identified as one of the unifying elements of the church (Eph. 4:5). The prayer of faith heals the sick person in the church, another unifying element of applying faith (James 5:13–15).
Faith as a spiritual gift. According to the apostle Paul, the gift of faith is closely related to the life and functioning of the church (1Cor. 12:9). Mentioned among other gifts, or charismata (12:4), this aspect of faith is that benefit of salvation with which certain members of the church are graced and is used for the common good (12:7). This faith, then, is understood as edifying the Christian community at large rather than just the individual believer.
Faith and the Christian life. Christians are described as living by faith (2Cor. 5:7). Not only does faith lead people to Christ, but also Christ subsequently dwells in believers’ hearts through faith (Eph. 3:17). This Christian faith is subject to testing (James 1:2).
Faith is presented by Paul as present at different levels of growth among believers. Some Christians are weak in faith (Rom. 14:1), whereas others are strong in faith (15:1). Faith can differ in its strength of conviction (4:20–22; 14:5). It is presented as something that can grow (2Cor. 10:15).
Faith is grouped among gifts and virtues. Lifted out together with hope and love, faith is mentioned among gifts that edify believers in the church (1Cor. 13:13). Likewise, faith is mentioned as a Christian virtue among the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).
(1)Anancient Sumerian city that can be identified with modern TellMuqayyar near the Euphrates River in modern-day Iraq. The site wasexcavated in the early twentieth century, revealing a long historyreaching back to the earliest period of southern Mesopotamiancivilization (c. 5000 BC) and stretching to around the third centuryBC. The most impressive archaeological remains date to the thirdmillennium BC and feature royal tombs (c. 2600–2500 BC) thatcontained multiple royal treasures including jewelry, gold weapons,and musical instruments, and also a ziggurat (c. 2154–2004 BC).After 2004 BC Ur fell under the control of various external powersand never achieved political independence again.
Thefour biblical references to Ur mention it as the place of origin ofAbraham’s family (Gen. 11:28, 31; 15:7; Neh. 9:7). Genesis11:31–12:9 describes Abraham’s journey from “Ur ofthe Chaldeans” northwest to Harran and then south into Canaan.The name “Ur of the Chaldeans” for the city at the timeof Abraham (Middle Bronze Age [2000–1550 BC]) is most likely ananachronism, since the Chaldeans did not arise as a recognizablegroup until the ninth century BC.
(2)Thefather of Eliphal, one of David’s mighty warriors (1Chron.11:35).
Covenant is one of the most significant concepts in thebiblical material that affects our understanding of God, hisrelationship with his people (past, present, and future), and thestructure and message of his word. Since the covenant concept is nota unique biblical idea, comparative literature from the world of theScriptures has enriched our understanding of the nature and thefunction of covenant. This article highlights the covenant conceptand the genre of covenant and provides a brief overview of the majorbiblical covenants.
Terminology
Defining“covenant.”What is a covenant (Heb. berit)? Most dictionaries refer to it as apact/compact or an agreement. Although there is some uncertaintyregarding the etymology of berit, the two most commonly suggestedetymological derivations are from the Akkadian burru, which refers tothe establishment of a legal situation by a testimony with an oath,or the Akkadian bittu, often translated as “to bind, fetter.”The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legaldisposition of personal goods.” Interestingly, this NT term isused in reference to the initiative of one person who establishes theterms and provisions of the relationship, which is in keeping withunilateral OT covenants. Some OT dictionaries list the “covenant”root with the root for the word “to eat,” perhapsassociating the covenant with a covenant meal.
Ifthe concept of binding best represents the covenant terminology, thenthe covenant is something that binds parties together or obligatesone party to the other. Although there are legal implicationsassociated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant shouldnot be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationshipwith related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant thatestablishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why Godchose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenantmetaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-humanrelationships. The concept of a covenant relationship between God andpeople is uniquely developed in the biblical material.
Somecovenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties);others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties),between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife(Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of societyimplies a solemn commitment to a relationship. Hittite treatiesillustrate reports of covenant commitments that include a record ofnegotiations, formulations of terms, a statement that the act ofcovenant making actually happened, and a closure of negotiations withsolemn ratification of the terms.
Themost significant covenant relationship in the biblical material isthe one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’scovenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surroundingnations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8–9. AlthoughYahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for hisown personal care; he established a relationship with the nationindependent of and prior to the nation’s association with hisland. This was a unique application of the covenant that ran counterto the prevailing Semitic mind-set, which connected deities tospecific geographic territories first and was concerned with theinhabitants of those areas only in a secondary sense. Individual OTbelievers celebrated their relationship with Yahweh and proclaimedhim as the unrivaled universal God (Exod. 15; 1 Sam. 2; Isa.40).
Otherkey terms.In addition to the “covenant” terminology word group,several other key terms fill out our understanding of this importantconcept.
“Oath”is a term used synonymously with “covenant” and functionsat times to describe the making of a covenant. The oath emphasizesthe liability and obligation associated in the relationship (Deut.29:19). The oath can be taken by both parties (Gen. 26:28) or by justone party (Ezek. 17:13).
Theword “testimony” refers to the contents of the twotablets of stone (Exod. 31:18) received by Moses from God at MountSinai. The Ark of the Covenant is also identified by the phrase “arkof the testimony” (Exod. 26:34; 30:6; 31:7 KJV, ESV). Testimonyin the context of the covenant refers to the obligations placed uponthe nation in covenant with Yahweh.
Theterm “word” can be understood in connection with covenantcommunication. The conquest of the land (a covenant promise) isviewed as a performance of the word of God (Deut. 9:5 KJV). Thephrases “establish his covenant” (Deut. 8:18 KJV) and“perform his word” (Deut. 9:5 KJV) are parallel ideaswithin the overall concept of covenant. The sure “word of theLord” to David in 2 Sam. 7:4 can be contrasted withworthless words of the nation used in making a covenant with God(Hos. 10:4).
Torahis a Hebrew term related to covenant. The terms berit and torah arefound in parallel structure in Ps. 78:10. The binding arrangementbetween God and his people is ultimately based upon and regulated bythe instructions of his word. The phrase “Book of the Law”(2 Kings 22:8) has the same covenant implications as the phrase“tablets of the Testimony” (Exod. 31:18 ESV, NASB). Godindicted the priesthood for misguiding the people and causing them tostumble at the law (Mal. 2:5–8) and ultimately to be misguidedin their relationship with him.
Khesedis another Hebrew term that is frequently used with relation to acovenant. Defined as “steadfast covenant loyalty,” it isalso understood as grace, mercy, kindness, loving-kindness. Khesed isthat characteristic of God which causes him to act consistently andfaithfully regarding self-imposed obligations in covenantrelationships despite the failure or success of the other party. Thekhesed of God will never cease (Lam. 3:19–21) because he keepscovenant and mercy (Deut. 7:9, 12). The loyalty of God to David isstated in 2 Sam. 7:14–15 and celebrated in Ps. 89:14, 24,28, 33–34, 49. In contrast, the people are indicted for theirlack of loyalty (Hos. 4:1).
Commonphrases. Themost common covenant-making phrase is “to cut a covenant.”Two possible practices lie behind this phrase. The first reflects apractice in Mesopotamia and Syria, cutting a covenant into a tabletwith a stylus. This may be somewhat similar to what is found in Exod.31:18, where it is said that the two tablets of stone were “inscribedby the finger of God.” The second practice behind this phraseis the cutting of sacrificial animals. The halving of animals waspart of the covenant made with Abraham in Gen. 15:9–18. In asituation of covenant violation God tells Israel that he will treatthem like the calf they cut in covenant making (Jer. 34:17–19).Covenant making is also described as establishing a covenant (2 Sam.23:5), giving a covenant (Gen. 9:12), and erecting a covenant (Exod.6:4).
Faithfulnessand loyalty to a covenant are expressed by several phrases. “Keepa covenant” exhorts the covenant parties to watch, guard,exercise faithfulness to the terms of the relationship established(Exod. 34:7). “Observe a covenant” implies thedemonstration of covenant fidelity in observing and doing (Gen.17:9–10; Exod. 19:5; NIV: “keep my covenant”). Godis obviously faithful in observing the covenant (Deut. 7:9–12).“Remember a covenant” conveys more than just a mentalexercise, especially when God is the subject of the verbal action ofremembering. When God remembers a covenant, he acts with resolve andintervention (Gen. 8:1; 19:29; 30:22; Exod. 2:24).
Covenantinfidelity is expressed by the phrases “break the covenant”(Lev. 26:14–16; Jer. 11:10; 31:32; 33:20–21), “notfaithful” (Ps. 78:37), “violate the covenant”(Deut. 17:2; Josh. 7:11, 15; 23:16), and “forsake the covenant”(Jer. 22:9; cf. Deut. 29:25; 1 Kings 19:10, 14).
TheCovenant Genre
Wenow turn to the form, content, and function of a covenant, or thecovenant genre. There is evidence of a common treaty form used byancient Near Eastern peoples to govern relationships between nationsand tribes. This evidence dates back to the third millennium BC andis derived from literary texts discovered in the ancient Near East.The most helpful contributions to this discussion come from theHittites (1400–1200 BC), the Assyrians (800–600 BC), andthe Babylonians. From this evidence, we are able to identify fourancient Near Eastern arrangements.
1. Theintertribal treaty was a legal arrangement between tribes and clansfor various purposes such as the purchase of land, trading, orpeaceful coexistence. The arrangements made in this format wereequally binding on both parties. A possible biblical example is thearrangement between Abraham and Abimelek in Gen. 21:22–34 orthe arrangement between Abimelek and Isaac in Gen. 26:28.
2.The parity treaty was an arrangement made between kings and princeswho were equal in each other’s eyes. This arrangement involvedmutual participation, as illustrated in the economic relationshipestablished between King Solomon and King Hiram of Tyre in 1 Kings5:1–12.
3.The suzerainty treaty was established between two parties, oneinferior and one superior. The distinctive emphasis of the treaty wason the superior party, the suzerain. In this arrangement the suzerainagrees to make certain provisions for the vassal. He agrees to defendthe vassal in the case of attack, along with permitting the existenceof the vassal nation. In addition, the suzerain has the right to taketribute from the vassal at any time. The vassal, for his part, agreesto a position of servanthood but not slavery. Vassals honor thesuzerain with tribute and material goods.
Thereare six basic parts to the format of this treaty. Many scholarsbelieve that the suzerainty treaty form has influenced the structureof the book of Deuteronomy.
(a) Thetreaty begins with the preamble that identifies the treaty’sauthor/originator (cf. Deut. 1:1–6a; 5:6a, 23–27).
(b) Thesecond part is the prologue, which contains a review of the pastrelationship between the vassal and the suzerain constructed in an“I-Thou” format (cf. Deut. 1:6b–3:29; 2:7;4:32–38). The purpose of this section is to review the previousacts of benevolence demonstrated by the suzerain toward the vassal.The faithfulness of the suzerain to the vassal would perhaps instillsome measure of confidence for entrance into this relationship. InHittite treaties there was often a grace ethic ideology thatcharacterized the prologue and served as a basis of appeal forobedience. The Hittites demonstrated a measure of appreciation forconquered vassals and treated them with dignity by allowing themlimited sovereignty. The Assyrians operated with a power ethic thatmotivated obedience by threatening dismemberment, torture, and evendeath. Yahweh appealed to Israel on the basis of the grace ofredemption (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15) and theprivilege of revelation (Deut. 4:12; cf. Rom. 3:2).
(c) Thestipulations are the third part of the treaty form. These are theexpectations of the suzerain for the vassal (cf. Deut. 4:1–23;6:4–7:2; 10:12–22; 12–26). The stipulations callfor the vassal to be loyal in war, to loyally return politicalrefugees, and to not murmur against the suzerain and his kingdom. Theheart of the stipulation in Deuteronomy is the appeal to “lovethe Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and withall your strength” (6:5), one of the most important verses ofthe OT.
(d) Thedeposit and public reading of the treaty is the next division. Thissection instructs the vassal to place the treaty in his sanctuary anddirects the vassal to publicly read the document from one to fourtimes per year (cf. Deut. 10:1–5; 31:9–13). A regularreading was designed to keep the stipulations before the vassal inorder to nurture respect for the suzerain.
(e) Inthe next part, a list of witnesses, usually gods, are called upon toobserve the covenant and to punish any breach of it (cf. Deut.30:19–20).
(f) Thefinal part of the treaty is a section of blessing and curse. Thissection contains a list of potential rewards for faithfulness andterrifying possibilities of retribution for covenant violations (cf.Deut. 28–29).
4.The royal grant treaty, used in both biblical and secular literature,is somewhat similar to the suzerainty treaty. The distinctivedifference is that the obligation of the grant is not on the vassalbut rather on the suzerain to protect the rights of the vassal. Inthis format the curse is directed against any third party that wouldoppose the vassal or against the suzerain who would act unfaithfullyagainst the vassal.
Covenantsin the Bible
Typesof covenants. Thematerial on covenant form, content, and structure comes into playwhen attempts are made to interpret the major covenants recorded inthe Bible (Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and new). Initialdiscussions usually revolve around whether these covenants areconditional or unconditional. Although there is merit to thisdiscussion, covenants should also be understood in light of whichparty is bearing the treaty obligation. As described above, theobligation of the suzerainty treaty is upon the vassal to fulfill theexpectations of the suzerain. In the grant treaty the obligation isplaced upon the suzerain to fulfill the treaty promises made to thevassal. There is a sense of conditionality and unconditionality inboth treaty forms.
Onthis basis, the Mosaic covenant is most fittingly understood in lightof the suzerainty treaty. This covenant made at Mount Sinaiestablished Israel as a covenant nation. Yahweh never intended tocreate a relationship with Israel on the basis of this covenant.Rather, he chose this covenant form as the means to regulate hisrelationship with Israel, the nation that he had just graciouslyredeemed. The Mosaic covenant addressed every aspect of Israelitelife. so that the prophetic charges against the nation’stransgressions were considered covenant violations.
TheAbrahamic and Davidic covenants are more like a grant. In theAbrahamic covenant Yahweh is obligating himself to gift Israel withland, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12–17). The halving of animalsin Gen. 15:9–20 resembles a covenant-cutting ceremony in whichYahweh, in the form of a smoking firepot, walks between the animals,obligating himself to the terms of the covenant. In the Davidiccovenant (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89), Yahweh obligates himself to provideDavid and his descendants a king and a kingdom. The new covenant isfirst referenced by Moses in Deut. 30:6 and then developed moreextensively in Jer. 31:31–33 and Ezek. 36. Scholars debate thenature of this covenant and the promises associated with it. Somedefine it as a grant and speak of it in unconditional terms, whileothers view it as an administrative covenant. The new covenantanticipates a change in the heart of the vassal that ultimatelyfacilitates keeping of the law. The OT Scriptures see this happeningin connection with Israel’s occupation of the land at a futuretime.
Covenantleadership positions. Inaddition to the very specific covenant arrangements made by God inthe OT defining and regulating the life and future of Israel, Godestablished three key covenant leadership positions for the nation:prophet, priest, and king (Deut. 17–18). Their connection withthe covenant is evident from the fact that their origin and functionare detailed in the covenant book of Deuteronomy.
Godprovided a prophet (Deut. 18:9–22) for the nation so that itwould not learn the abominations of the Canaanites and surroundingnations. God desired spiritual integrity for his people andestablished the prophet as his mouthpiece to speak what he commanded(Deut. 18:18–20). The prophet was to be an Israelite who fit aMoses-like pattern (Deut. 18:18–19). The writing and nonwritingprophets often called Israel back to covenant fidelity. They did thisby using legal terminology to illustrate covenant violations, thusestablishing covenant lawsuits against them. Isaiah 1 is a case madeby God against the nation. In this lawsuit God functions as judge,jury, and lawyer.
Thepriest (Deut. 17:8–13; 18:1–8; 33:8–11) had athreefold function within the covenant community. He was a mediatorof people before God and of God before people. This particularfunction of the priesthood was broad and encompassed much of itswork. The priest was a teacher who sought from the Torah resolutionto disagreements between parties (cf. Jer. 18:18). It is also worthnoting that the teaching of the priest preceded sacrifice. Finally,he was a minister of sacrifice. The priest led Israel in worship andsacrifice, giving instruction concerning what was clean and unclean(Lev. 13–15).
Theking was also a provision of the covenant (Deut. 17). Kingship wasnot a divine accommodation to the desire of Israel (1 Sam. 8)but rather a part of the overall covenant plan of God revealed toAbraham (Gen. 17:16). The promise of kingship was reiterated in Gen.35:11; 49:10. The duty of the king involved administration of thekingdom on the basis of the word of God (Deut. 17:18–20; cf.Prov. 29:4, 14).
Covenantin the Old Testament.Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structureof the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase“covenant history” can be used to describe the biblicalliterature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life.It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives ofthe OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrativeshares a covenant perspective, the individual books within thenarrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to variousaspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a numberof subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on theother hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tensionbetween the promise of land occupation and the responsibility ofIsrael to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realisticpresentation of the tensions associated with the covenantrelationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally,the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenantworship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenantterms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath,judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by thecovenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Covenantin the New Testament. Althoughthe covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christologicalsignificance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianicrole of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the newcovenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor.3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that theshed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The newcovenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death,burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the bookof Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functionsin contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains thatJesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7).Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of thenew covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).
Those who offer themselves freely and willingly, withoutcompulsion or consideration of value in return, to perform a task,make a vow, or serve another. In the OT, volunteers usually serve God(Deut. 23:23; 2Chron. 17:16; Ps. 110:3), Israel (Ezra 7:13;Neh. 11:2), or a leader in Israel (Judg. 5:2, 9; 1Chron.28:21). God himself is the ultimate volunteer, as he freely givesplace, purpose, and a partner to Adam (Gen. 2:15–22);unilaterally covenants with Abram to give him descendants, blessing,and land (Gen. 12:2–3; 15:17–21); liberates Israel frombondage in Egypt (Exod. 6:6–8; Deut. 20:1; Josh. 24:17; Ps.81:10); and remains faithful to Israel despite its repeated failures(Pss. 68:35; 106:44–46).
Inthe NT, God is also the sender of Jesus (Matt. 10:40; Mark 9:37; Luke4:18–21; John 4:34; 5:24, 30, 36–37), who heals of hisown volition (Luke 5:13), gives rest to the weary (Matt. 11:28), andlays down his life of his own accord for our redemption (Mark 10:45;John 10:18; Gal. 3:13–14; Eph. 5:2; Titus 2:14; 1Pet.1:18–19). With Jesus as the standard, the concept of willinglygiving of oneself and one’s possessions runs throughout the NT(Eph. 5:1–2). Christians are called to love and serve oneanother in spiritual and practical ways (Acts 2:44–45; Rom.12:9–21; 1Thess. 5:15–18; Philem. 14). They arealso to love their enemies and pray for their persecutors (Matt.5:44; Luke 6:27, 35). Those who wish to lead must first volunteerthemselves as servants to others (Matt. 20:27; Mark 9:35; Luke22:26). Elders are to shepherd voluntarily (1Pet. 5:2). Paul,who urges Christians to offer their bodies as living sacrifices (Rom.12:1), is himself a model of volunteerism and self-sacrifice (Acts20:34–35; 21:13; 1Cor. 9:19–23; 2Cor. 4:5;11:23–27).
Ceremonies marking entry into marriage. In the Bible,weddings initiate the formation of new households with the blessingof family and community.
OldTestament
Inthe OT, weddings were important to the patriarchs and to Israelbecause the new couple was expected to produce children to helpfulfill the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 12:2; 17:6; 22:15–18; Ruth4:11–13; Isa. 65:23). Heirs were also the assurance that aman’s name remained eternally with Israel, so much so that if aman died childless, his brother was obligated to wed the widow andproduce children in his name (Gen. 38:8; Deut. 25:5–10).Moreover, weddings assured that property was kept within families andtribes and also transferred in an orderly way from one generation tothe next (Num. 36:1–12; Ruth 4:5; Ps. 25:13).
Multiplewives were allowed in the OT (Gen. 30:26; Deut. 21:15; 1Sam.1:2; 2Sam. 5:13; 1Kings 11:3), as were multipleconcubines, who had official standing in the household, though lowerthan that of wives. Weddings usually were associated with a manpublicly taking a wife; he acquired concubines with less fanfare(Gen. 16:1–3; 30:3–5; Judg. 19:1, 3).
OTweddings included certain distinctive elements. The bridegroom or hisfather paid a bride-price, or dowry, to the father of thebridegroom’s prospective wife (Gen. 34:12; Exod. 22:16–17;1Sam. 18:25). The bridegroom had a more central role than thebride. He emerged from a chamber or tent to claim his wife (Ps. 19:5;Joel 2:16), who, in the case of a royal wedding, may have processedto him (Ps. 45:13–15). Both he and the bride were adorned (Song3:11; Isa. 49:18; 61:10; Jer. 2:32); the woman was also veiled (Gen.24:65; 29:23, 25; 38:14, 19; Song 4:1, 3; Isa. 47:1–3). Theirwedding was the occasion of much rejoicing and feasting (Gen. 29:22;Jer. 7:34; 16:9; 25:10; 33:11) and lasted seven days (Gen. 29:27;Judg. 14:17). The main event was their sexual union (Isa. 62:5),which occurred on the first night (Gen. 29:23; Ruth 4:13). Unless shehad been a widow, the bride was presumed to be a virgin on herwedding night, and evidence of her virginity, a bloodstained cloth,was retained as proof (Deut. 22:13–19). Virginity was essentialto a previously unmarried bride; a woman who had been raped orotherwise engaged in premarital sexual relations was deemed defiledand unmarriageable to any but the first man with whom she hadintercourse (Deut. 22:21; 2Sam. 13:1–20). The importanceof this underpins the shock value of the book of Hosea (see esp.1:2), an extended metaphor that presents Israel as a prostitutenevertheless pursued by Yahweh as her husband.
NewTestament
TheNT continues to testify to many of these wedding traditions,significantly including the gathering of community (Matt. 22:2; John2:1–2) in joyful celebration (Matt. 9:15; Mark 2:19; Luke 5:34;John 2:9–10). Wedding feasts could be lavish affairs (Matt.22:4; John 2:6–10), with protocols regarding seating (Luke14:8–10) and attire (Matt. 22:11–13; Rev. 19:7–9).
Inthe NT, these and other first-century wedding customs illustrateaspects of the kingdom of heaven. The parable of the wedding feast(Matt. 22:1–14) contrasts the invited guests (corrupt religiousleaders in Israel) who ignored the king’s wedding invitationand murdered his servants with those people, good and evil, gatheredfrom the streets (the downtrodden) who took their place. Theirwillingness to attend is qualified only by their coming properlyattired in wedding robes, which by inference were provided by theking himself (Rev. 19:7–8).
Theparable of the ten virgins (Matt. 25:1–13) plays on theunderstanding that weddings occurred not at a specific time but whenthe bridegroom was ready. His readiness was determined by, amongother things, the readiness of a dwelling place for his new bride. Infirst-century Capernaum, this would have been a room or rooms builtonto his father’s insula, a multifamily compound surrounding aninterior courtyard; the same image is behind John 14:2–4. Theparable, identifying the Son of Man as the bridegroom, illustratesthat while his coming in glory is certain, its timing is unknown.Therefore, the bridal party is to be vigilant and prepared.
Elsewhere,Jesus is specifically named asthe bridegroom preparing to marryhis bride, the church (2Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:25–27, 31–32).Thewedding feast at Cana (John 2:1–11), which beginsJesus’ public ministry, points proleptically to the marriagesupper of the Lamb, which inaugurates the eschatological age (Rev.19:7–9). The culminating picture of God with his people (Deut.16:13–16; Matt. 1:23; John 1:14) is a magnificent wedding (Rev.21:2, 9) between Christ and the new Jerusalem.
Worship of God is a critical dimension of both Testaments.One might argue that it is the very goal for which Israel and thechurch were formed.
Terminology
Ourunderstanding of worship is informed by the terms, practices,exhortations, and warnings of Scripture. The worship vocabulary inboth Testaments provides insight into the personal dispositions andposture associated with worship focused on the person of God. Thefirst set of biblical terms concerns the posture of the worshiper.The Hebrew terminology communicates the idea of bowing down andfalling prostrate before the sovereign and worthy God (Ps. 95:6;1Chron. 29:20). NT words bear a similar idea of humbleacknowledgment of God’s authority with a reverent prostrateposition (Matt. 28:9; Rev. 5:14).
Thesecond set of worship terms concerns service. In the OT, the worshipof God includes the idea of serving with a view to bringing honor tohim (Exod. 3:12; Mal. 3:14, 18). In the NT, worship bears the nuanceof serving in the sense of carrying out religious duties (Heb.12:28). This set of terminology has a priestly connotation to it. TheOT priests and the NT believers (1Pet. 2:5) serve God withtheir individual lives and their routines of life as acceptableofferings.
Thefinal set of terms describes the attitude or disposition of worship.This word group includes terms such as “fear,” “awe,”and “dread,” which initially seem out of place in thecontext of worship. However, the terminology serves to inculcate anattitude of genuine respect. Yahweh is the awesome God, who is to befeared (Exod. 3:6; 15:11). Israel is to love and trust who God is andwhat God says in promise or in warning. The fear that one is to havefor God involves a respect for him, a reverence for his divine worth(Col. 3:22; Rev. 11:18).
Godas the Object of Worship
Theworship terminology sets the focus of worship. The living God is thesole object of worship. He delights in the satisfying joy that hischildren find in him. The nature of worship is not about servantentertainment or passive observation; it is an active acknowledgmentof God’s worth in a variety of humble ways.
Agenuine selfless focus on the person and work of God brings about ahumble response that affects one’s posture, generates works ofservice, and stirs up a healthy attitude of fear and respect.Knowledge of God is the foundational element in worship. God isworshiped for who he is and what he does. He is the Eternal One (Ps.90:1; 1Tim. 1:17), unique in every way (Isa. 44:8); he is Godalone (Deut. 6:4). He is distinguished by his self-existence, theself-reliant quality of his life (Exod. 3:14; Deut. 32:30). Thepsalmist calls God’s people to shout joyfully to their good,loving, eternal, and faithful Creator (Ps. 100).
Godis worshiped as the Creator of all life. This magnificent creativework of God, declared in the opening of Genesis, is a critical focusin worship (Ps. 95:6; Rom. 1:25; Rev. 4:11). Along with this is thecompanion declaration that God is the redeemer. The redemptive workof God is celebrated in the Song of Moses (Exod. 15:1–18) andin the Song of the Redeemed (Rev. 14:3).
Worshipis also associated with the royal aspects of God’s character.It was the desire of the magi to find Jesus the king and worship him(Matt. 2:1–2). The final scenes of history will becharacterized by humble submission to and worship of the King ofkings (1Tim. 6:15; Rev. 17:14; 19:16; cf. Rev. 15:3–4).The psalms often draw the reader’s attention to God’sroyal character as a basis for worship (Pss. 45:11; 98:6).
Finally,God is worshiped as the Lord of his covenant relationship with thenation of Israel. This covenant theme and metaphor summarize thevaried aspects of God’s character and his relationship withIsrael. The God who brought Israel into a covenant relationship is tobe sincerely and exclusively worshiped (2Kings 17:35, 38; cf.Deut. 31:20). These confessional statements about the character ofGod are a glorious weight that moves believers to prostratethemselves, to have an attitude of awe and respect, and to obedientlyserve.
TheForm of Worship
Althoughthe form of worship looks different in each Testament, the essentialelements of worship are constant. In the OT, the priests primarilyled the worship of God. In addition, the duties of the king (Deut.17:18–20) and of the prophet (18:14–22) had worshipimplications and responsibilities. Ideally, these threeadministrators were to work together to ensure a healthy quality ofcovenant life for the nation. Worship in both Testaments has bothcorporate and individual aspects.
OTworship was organized around sacred places such as designatedlocations (Gen. 3:8; 12:7), the tabernacle (Exod. 29:42), and thetemple (1Kings 8; cf. Rev. 21–22). In addition, therewere sacred times in the calendar of Israel for celebration of theappointed feasts (Lev. 23). The three main feasts in Israel’scalendar are Unleavened Bread, Weeks, and Tabernacles (Deut. 16:16;cf. Exod. 34:23). The sacred actions of worship for the nationinvolved burnt offerings, meal or tribute offerings, peace offerings,sin offerings, and guilt offerings (Lev. 1–5).
Theregulation and routine of OT worship never were intended to be merelydutiful. The routine of worship was to manifest a love for God andfor the covenant community (Deut. 6:1–5; Mal. 2:10). Theprophets often challenged Israel to have a heart for God and at timescalled upon them to consider the emptiness of their worship routine(Isa. 1:11). The heart of worship was nurtured in psalms of praiseand lament and in the call to remember God (Pss. 42; 77:11).
Theform of NT worship is not distinguished with the same externals as inthe OT. However, similar core beliefs underlie the form and practiceof NT worship. The distinguishing feature in this new era is thefinal and sufficient work of Christ (Heb. 9–10). As withprevious revelation, worship is not anthropocentric; it is joyfullyChristocentric, based on the gospel (1Cor. 15:1–5).Christ and his work replace the OT temple. Jesus is the greatertemple that has come (Matt. 12:6). Sacrifice is no longer limited toany particular geographic location, but instead involves the offeringof oneself (Rom. 12:1–2) along with the presentation ofspiritual sacrifices acceptable to God (1Pet. 2:4–5). NTworship is regulated by the Spirit and truth (John 4:20–24).This type of worship is distinguished by the word of God, the Spirit,preaching, prayer, Spirit-filled service, and mutual edification. NTworship also includes the regular celebration of the ordinances ofbaptism and the Lord’s Supper (Acts 2:42–47) within thecontext of the local church.
Showing
1
to
50
of129
results
1. The Laughter Of Faith
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
God called Sarah, too! We talk so much about God's call to Abraham that we can easily forget that God called Sarah as well. The story is told in Genesis 17. This old story begins with God's call to Abraham. It then moves to Sarah. "As for Sarah," God says, "she shall no longer be called Sarai but Sarah shall be her name." "I will bless her ..." God promises, "and she shall give rise to nations; kings of people shall come from her" (Genesis 17:16).
We can only imagine the solemnity of the moment when God made this promise to Abraham and Sarah. Abraham broke the solemnity. He fell on his face laughing at the very thought of God's promise. "Can a child be born to a man who is 100 years old?" Abraham laughed to himself. "Can Sarah, who is 90 years old, bear a child?" Abraham's laughter, it turns out, is the laughter of unbelief. He doesn't believe that God can keep this promise. The Lord has to scold Abraham a bit for his unseemly laughter. "No," God says firmly, "your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall name him Isaac" (Genesis 17:19). The Lord, it seems, also has a sense of humor. The name Isaac means: "he laughs."
Very soon thereafter the Lord visited Abraham in the guise of three messengers. Abraham and Sarah scurried around like mad making their home suitable for a visit from the Lord. They put on their finest spread. As the meal begins we hear that the Lord has made this appearance in order to speak with Sarah. "Where is Sarah your wife?" the Lord said to Abraham. Abraham had laughed off God's promise to Sarah. But the Lord perseveres. The Lord speaks the promise again in Sarah's hearing. "I will surely return to you in due season and your wife Sarah shall have a son" (Genesis 18:10).
This time it was Sarah who laughed. "After I have grown old, and my husband is old, shall I have pleasure?" she mused (Genesis 18:12). Sarah joined her husband in the laughter of unbelief. For the Lord, however, this was not a laughing matter. The Lord was angry with all this laughter of unbelief. "Is anything too wonderful for the Lord?" the Lord says in reprimand of Sarah's laughter. Sarah protested. "I did not laugh," she said to the Lord in fear. "Oh yes you did laugh," the Lord replied (Genesis 18:14-15).
Now a little laughter cannot dissuade the Lord. The Lord had made a promise to Sarah. The Lord kept that promise. The Lord means what the Lord says! Sarah did conceive and bear a son. What joy this son must have brought into the life of Abraham and Sarah! They named him "laughter," Isaac, as the one who promised had instructed them.
But we're not done with the laughing. Now it was Sarah's turn to laugh. "God has brought laughter for me; everyone who hears will laugh with me," Sarah said. "Who would ever have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? Yet I have born him a son in his old age" (Genesis 21:6-7). Sarah's laughter here is clearly a sign of her faith. At least that's how the author of the book of Hebrews understands the story. Sarah's laughter has turned from the laughter of unbelief to the laughter of belief. She has heard the promise. She has conceived. She has given birth. She has believed it all. And she has laughed about it all. As Sarah is our witness, what better response can be given to this promise-making, promise-keeping Lord?
2. A Renewal of Faith
Illustration
Mark Trotter
Christopher Parkening is a concert guitarist. At age 30, he was at the top of his profession. His concert schedule booked years in advance. His CD's were best sellers. And then it all stopped. For three years he just disappeared. He stopped recording. He stopped performing. He said he was burned out. He did what all of us, I think, have been tempted to do from time to time in our life. He just chucked it all and went away. He had resources sufficient enough to buy a little ranch up in Montana, with a trout stream running through it. He was a champion fly fisherman. He saw himself now solving the problems in his life by fishing. He hoped to find what was missing in his life.
He did, only in a way that was unexpected. In Montana it is nice from May to October. You can fish. But the rest of the time, the other six months, it is a different world up there. You have to stay inside, or you will die. So that is what he did. He read books, and he read the Bible.
One day a neighbor asked him to go to church. The minister on that Sunday preached a sermon on the Christian life, the ways that we find to avoid living it. Parkening said, "That's me!" From that point on, he began to see things differently. He doesn't use the term, "born again." He said he doesn't like it. What he said was that he had a "renewal" of his faith. The effect on him of the renewal of his faith is the effect it has on everybody. He got his sense of mission in his life.
He went back to playing the guitar. He is a different man now. He said he was burned out because there was only one purpose in his life, being famous. "Now," he said, "my music has a purpose. Now I can give voice to what I believe in my music." He has a mission in life now.
3. The Wind Blows Where It Chooses
Illustration
Nan Stokes
Since Ash Wednesday and the beginning of Lent, we may have been wrestling with what to "give up" or what to "take on" during this season of penitence.
Whatever we decide to do or not to do, this is a time of change, of movement, of going from what we are to the place or condition where we want to be. In the Old Testament lesson, Abram heard the call of God to move to a new land, and we can only wonder at the strength of that call. What would it take to get us to move to a new land? Moving from an old place to a new place in our spiritual lives may be what we are called to do, and such a move will require an act of will, too. What will it take to get us to make that move?
Jesus says to Nicodemus, "The wind blows where it chooses, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes.
So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit." Abram must have heard the "sound of the Spirit", and he picked up all his family and possessions and went where that sound led him. The Gospel of John doesn't tell us what happened to Nicodemus at that point in time, but he, too, must have moved to new places, because he appears again to help with preparations when Jesus is lifted down from the cross. As we move deeper into Lent, it is time to begin our journey, and who knows where it will lead?
4. Twice Named
Illustration
Brett Blair
Repeating a person's name is a Hebrew expression of intimacy. When God speaks to Abraham at Mount Moriah, as he is about to plunge the knife into the breast of Isaac, He says, "Abraham, Abraham." Or when God encourages Jacob in his old age to take the trip to Egypt, He says, "Jacob, Jacob" (Genesis 22:11, 46:2). Compare the call of Moses from the burning bush: "Moses, Moses," or the call of Samuel in the night, "Samuel, Samuel" (Exodus 3:4; 1 Sam 3:10). Or consider David's cry of agony, "Absalom, Absalom," and Jesus' cry of desolation on the cross, "My God, my God." (2 Samuel 18:33; Matt 27:46). When Jesus comforted Martha, when He warned Peter, and when He wept over Jerusalem in each case we find the word repeated for intimacy's sake (Luke 10:41; 22:31; Matt 23:37).
So when Jesus says, "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven," he is pointing out a false intimacy. People who say they love God, and use the right language, but in truth their hearts are far away.
5. The Pastoral Search Report
Illustration
James Kegel
A pastoral report: "We have been unable to find a suitable candidate for this congregation though we have one promising prospect. We have followed up the recommendations from church members with interviews or calling at least three references. This is a confidential report on the prospective candidates:
ADAM: Good man but has had problems with his wife and children. He and his wife have been known to walk around outside without wearing clothes.
NOAH: Former pastorate of 120 years with no converts. Prone to unrealistic building projects.
ABRAHAM: References reported that he once offered to share his wife with another man.
JOSEPH: Big thinker, but brags, believes in dream – interpretation and has a prison record.
MOSES: Modest and meek man but a poor communicator. Stutters. Known to blow his stack and act rashly. Left an earlier position under a murder charge.
DAVID: The most promising leader of all. Very musical. We discovered he had an affair with his neighbor's wife.
SOLOMON: Great preacher but our parsonage wouldn't hold all his wives and children. Has grandiose tastes.
ELIJAH: Prone to depression; collapses under pressure.
HOSEA: A tender, loving pastor but his wife is a floosy or worse.
DEBORAH: Pushy female.
JEREMIAH: Emotionally unstable, alarmist, negative, always lamenting things.
ISAIAH: Claims to have seen angels. Has trouble with his language.
JONAH: Refused God's call until he was forced to obey when he was swallowed by a fish. He said the fish spit him out on the shore. We hung up.
AMOS: Backward and unpolished. Would only fit in a poor rural congregation.
JOHN: Says he is a Baptist but doesn't dress like one. Has slept outdoors for months on end, eats a weird diet. Doesn't work well with others – we suggest he become a camp director instead of a pastor.
PAUL: Powerful CEO type and fascinating preacher. Short on tact. So long-winded he has been known to preach all night.
JESUS: Popular at times, but once his church grew to 5000 he managed to offend them all and his church dwindled to 12 people. Seldom stays in one place every long. And of course, he is single.
JUDAS: His references are solid. A steady plodder and good money manager. Conservative and well-connected with the community and religious leaders. This is the candidate we recommend to the congregation..."
6. You Can't Inherit Faith
Illustration
Maxie Dunnam
Somewhere recently I read this statement: “Most of the 500 wealthiest Americans got their money the old-fashioned way -- they inherited it!”
That may be the case with money, but it is not true with the most important things of life. It’s not true of character. Of course, we are influenced in character by our parents, but our own character is our own doing, by our own choices, the way we choose to live.
We may inherit money, but we do not inherit faith. Someone put it in a catchy line: “God has no grandchildren.”
Faith must be first-hand, personal, appropriated by each person. Too many of us are seeking to live on borrowed faith. The 500 wealthiest Americans may have gotten their wealth the old-fashioned way -- by inheriting it -- but we don’t get character and faith that way. They’re not inherited, they’re claimed, personally, and cultivated.
7. Training with Water
Illustration
Source Unknown
Arabian horses go through rigorous training in the deserts of the Middle East. The trainers require absolute obedience from the horses, and test them to see if they are completely trained. The final test is almost beyond the endurance of any living thing. The trainers force the horses to do without water for many days. Then he turns them loose and of course they start running toward the water, but just as they get to the edge, ready to plunge in and drink, the trainer blows his whistle. The horses who have been completely trained and who have learned perfect obedience, stop. They turn around and come pacing back to the trainer. They stand there quivering, wanting water, but they wait in perfect obedience. When the trainer is sure that he has their obedience he gives them a signal to go back to drink.
Now this may be severe but when you are on the trackless desert of Arabia and your life is entrusted to a horse, you had better have a trained obedient horse. We must accept God's training and obey Him.
8. A Revolution in Seven Verses
Illustration
Mickey Anders
Walter Wink, in his book Engaging the Powers, suggests that Jesus' action represented a revolution happening in seven short verses. In this short story, Jesus tries to wake people up to the kind of life God wants for them. He often talks about the Kingdom of God where people have equal worth and all of life has dignity. But in the latter part of his ministry, he begins to act this out. In the midst of a highly patriarchal culture Jesus breaks at least six strict cultural rules:
1. Jesus speaks to the woman. In civilized society, Jewish men did not speak to women. Remember the story in John 4 where Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman at the well. She was shocked because a Jew would speak to a Samaritan. But when the disciples returned, the Scripture records, "They were astonished that he was speaking with a woman?" In speaking to her, Jesus jettisons the male restraints on women's freedom.
2. He calls her to the center of the synagogue. By placing her in the geographic middle, he challenges the notion of a male monopoly on access to knowledge and to God.
3. He touches her, which revokes the holiness code. That is the code which protected men from a woman's uncleanness and from her sinful seductiveness.
4. He calls her "daughter of Abraham," a term not found in any of the prior Jewish literature. This is revolutionary because it was believed that women were saved through their men. To call her a daughter of Abraham is to make her a full-fledged member of the nation of Israel with equal standing before God.
5. He heals on the Sabbath, the holy day. In doing this he demonstrates God's compassion for people over ceremony, and reclaims the Sabbath for the celebration of God's liberal goodness.
6. Last, and not least, he challenges the ancient belief that her illness is a direct punishment from God for sin. He asserts that she is ill, not because God willed it, but because there is evil in the world. (In other words, bad things happen to good people.)
And Jesus did all this in a few seconds.
9. A Vision for Coca-Cola
Illustration
Gary Nicolosi
At the end of World War II, Robert Woodruff, president of the Coca-Cola Company from 1923 to 1955, had a mission. "In my generation," he declared, "it is my desire that everyone in the world have a taste of Coca-Cola." With a vision and dedication rarely matched in corporate American culture, Woodruff and his colleagues spanned the globe with their soft drink.
Why is it all right for people to feel that passionate about a soft drink but not about taking Christ to the world? Are there no people who seek meaning and purpose for their lives? Are there no families in crisis that need Christ's love and understanding? Are there no young people at risk because their lives lack a solid spiritual and moral foundation? St. Paul felt a passion. He was on a mission, which was to win as many people as possible to Jesus Christ.
10. Obedience Is the Gateway for Love
Illustration
Jennette F. Scholer
Shortly after arriving at the Keller household, Annie Sullivan wrote, "I am convinced that obedience is the gateway by which knowledge, yes and even love, enter the mind of the child." With this remarkable insight, Sullivan had the courage to teach Helen to obey - to sit at the table, to eat properly, to fold her napkin. It was by first learning obedience that Helen learned the concept of language and also grew to love her teacher.
Annie Sullivan's words speak to us as we reflect on Zechariah's and Mary's questions. "Obedience is the gateway by which knowledge, yes and love, enter" our minds. It is in acts of obedience that we grow in the knowledge and love of God.
11. All Together
Illustration
Keith Wagner
A while ago, there was a special on the PBS channel about three families who lived on the prairie. It was an experiment to see whether or not 21st century families could live the way people lived in the 19th century. Their mission was to plant crops, raise animals and prepare themselves for the upcoming winter. At that point they were evaluated and then returned to their normal lives.
Following the experiment they were interviewed and everyone commented on how much time they spent together. Since there was no television, radio, telephone, cars and all the modern conveniences, everyone said that they were together constantly. That created a need for them to learn how to really live in their togetherness. It was a real challenge for them and for some it actually caused them stress, since being together was not something they were used to.
In today's world it is almost impossible for families to get together. We are extremely mobile, living great distances apart and our busy schedules give us little quality time when we gather together. The windows are small and frequently someone or something has to be sacrificed. People are in a hurry, going in a hundred different directions. They're trying to make ends meet, often living in a state of chaos and confusion. Consequently people feel empty, lost or bored and for some, life has no purpose or joy.
What happened at Pentecost was the result of the faithful being "together in one place."
12. Neighbors Who Never Met - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
What parable would make a man with three doctoral degrees (one in medicine, one in theology, one in philosophy) leave civilization with all of its culture and amenities and depart for the jungles of darkest Africa? What parable could induce a man, who was recognized as one of the best concert organists in all of Europe, go to a place where there were no organs to play. What parable would so intensely motivate a man that he would give up a teaching position in Vienna, Austria to go and deal with people who were so deprived that they were still living in the superstitions of the dark ages for all practical purposes. The man who I am talking about, of course, is Dr. Albert Schweitzer. And the single parable that so radically altered his life, according to him, was our text for this morning. It was the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus.
The Rich Man and Lazarus were neighbors, you know. They saw each other every day. Oh, not socially you understand, but there was contact. Every day the Rich Man saw this beggar at his front gate. Who were these men?
We shall call the Rich Man Dives [pronounced ‘Dive-ees': it's Latin for "Rich Man" as he has been called for centuries] Dives would have felt very comfortable living in our present time. He was a progressive kind of a guy. He was self-indulgent and this is the age of self-indulgency. The contrasting life-styles of these two men is so obvious that you can't miss it. Dives was a connoisseur, a lover of the arts, one who knows and appreciates fine living, four star restaurants.
We are told in vs. 19 that he habitually dressed in purple. Purple was known as the color of royalty because it was the most expensive dye in the ancient world. Only the upper echelon and the high priest could afford it. We are also told that his undergarments were made of fine linen. Linen, the lifestyle of the rich and famous.
The other man in the story is Lazarus. How can we describe Lazarus? Lararus is homeless. We are told in vs. 20 that he was a cripple. Lazarus barely made it from day to day, living off the leftovers thrown to him by Dives as he daily passed him. He is just a survivor, that's all you can say of him.
One day, said Jesus, both men died. Death after all is the great equalizer. Death does not care about your social standing, your color, or your standing in the community. Lazarus, said Jesus, was carried away by the angel of death unto heaven, where he occupied the seat of honor next to Abraham. About Dives, the rich man, all that Jesus says is that he was buried. Isn't that strange that that is all that he says? After all, Dives funeral must having been something that the community would remember for years to come. Apparently, however, that fact failed to impress Jesus. Oh, Jesus did add one additional fact about Dives' death that may be of interest to you. His soul was sent to hell.
This is an unnerving story. I can well see why this was the irritating grain of sand in Albert Schweitzer's oyster. Why is this story so bothersome? For a few moments this morning I would like to share exactly why. It is bothersome because….
- First, it shows how God reverses the standards of the world.
- Second, it is a terrible fate for a man who was not mean.
- Third, the rich man begs to warn his living brothers.
13. THE ONLY WAY OUT
Illustration
John H. Krahn
You are because I am. I was there from the beginning. My Father, God, and I fashioned the world that you enjoy. We hung the stars in the sky, scooped out the lakes, formed the mountains. But our genius was no more evident than when we made you. You are so magnificent. Consider yourself - your ability to think and reason. Do you realize how special you are? We had such a great thing going in the garden.
Unfortunately, the devil talked your forebears into trying to be like God, and they both fell for it. My Father and I had no choice but to show them the exit from Eden. Because of their sin, we had to face the decision whether or not to save what we created or to destroy it all. Save it, we decided. Later, in response to a promise made to your father Abraham, I, the son of God, was implanted by the Holy Spirit in a young virgin’s womb. They called me Jesus, for I had come to save you and all humankind from the consequences of your sins.
The plan of salvation was not complicated, although it was generous perhaps to a fault. You had sinned and continue to sin. It is your nature from the time of the Fall. Therefore, you cannot save yourself. Although some of you sin less than others, none of you is perfect. My Father demands perfection - he will not stand for any imperfection in eternity. Fortunately for you, my Father is also compassionate, and his love goes beyond human love. He wanted to reclaim you as his own, therefore, he decided to be inflicted with suffering and death. To accomplish this, he sent me - part of himself - to become a person like you and to receive punishment and death in your place.
Some of you only see me as an Alka Seltzer for an occasional headache, rather than a Savior for a whole new life. You call upon me and my Father for help only when all else seems to fail. Voices we haven’t heard in years make their way heavenward in dying breaths. Others make a puzzle out of our plan for your salvation. You continue to believe that you must add some of your goodness and righteousness (which is really in short supply by heaven’s standards) to my sacrificial death on the cross. Friends, I paid the price - one hundred percent at Calvary.
Can you imagine how I feel as your God, having humbled myself by becoming a human being, giving up heaven for a stinking stable, being misunderstood, mocked, tortured, spit upon, and hung, all because of you and your wretched sinfulness ... and then to have you believe that this was not enough. To have you, in your pride, believe that some goodness of yours would need to be added in order for the Father to receive you into heaven angers and disappoints me. You can do nothing to save yourself; I did it all because I love you. Please get it into your head, once and for all, I am your only way out of the pits of hell. As I said while I was with you on earth, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me!" May the Holy Spirit convince your hearts of my love, and may you understand that believing in me is the only way to be saved; sufficient in itself, needing absolutely no human works, no false pride, no human righteousness, nothing ... nothing ... nothing at all to be added to it. I died to purchase a place for you in heaven which I offer to you as a gift which you must receive totally and exclusively by faith.
14. Paying Attention to Your Mission
Illustration
Phil Roughton
A good many years ago now, a brilliant theologian by the name of Reinhold Niebuhr noticed and wrote about an interesting thing that happens in groups and organizations. Put any group of people together, Niebuhr said, no matter how high and noble their initial purpose may be, and it doesn't take too long before two things begin to happen: they start becoming self-serving and self-protective. And when that happens, their own self-preservation becomes more important to them than their mission or their reason for existence. Pretty amazing, huh?
A classic example from business is IBM. They used to rule the world, with a business machine dominance nobody, anywhere, could match. But then a subtle shift started occurring. Niebuhr would say they became more fixated on their preservation and self-interest than their mission. And so for a time there, to people watching from the outside, it looked like IBM was spending more time, money, and energy building huge, impressive corporate office buildings, filled with gifted managers and executives, than improving and selling what had been state-of-the-art, cutting edge products. And in that gap, little upstart companies like Apple and then later Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Compaq and others, stepped in and took a huge slice of the pie. Now IBM's a great company, and it was smart enough to fix that problem and regain a whole lot of their strength and market share. But it's a classic case of not paying attention to business; of shifting away from the assignment, and worrying more about taking care of yourself than paying careful attention to your whole reason for being.
15. Overcoming and Achieving
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
Some of the world's greatest men and women have been saddled with disabilities and adversities but have managed to overcome them.
- Cripple him, and you have a Sir Walter Scott.
- Lock him in a prison cell, and you have a John Bunyan.
- Bury him in the snows of Valley Forge, and you have a George Washington.
- Raise him in abject poverty, and you have an Abraham Lincoln.
- Subject him to bitter religious prejudice, and you have a Benjamin Disraeli.
- Strike him down with infantile paralysis, and he becomes a Franklin D. Roosevelt.
- Burn him so severely in a schoolhouse fire that the doctors say he will never walk again, and you have a Glenn Cunningham, who seta world's record in 1934 for running a mile in 4 minutes, 4.4seconds.
- Deafen a genius composer, and you have a Ludwig van Beethoven.
- Have him or her born black in a society filled with racial discrimination, and you have a Booker T. Washington, a Harriet Tubman, a Marian Anderson, or a George Washington Carver.
- Make him the first child to survive in a poor Italian family of eighteen children, and you have an Enrico Caruso.
- Have him born of parents who survived a Nazi concentration camp, paralyze him from the waist down when he is four, and you have an incomparable concert violinist, Iczhak Perlman.
- Call him a slow learner, "retarded," and write him off as ineducable, and you have an Albert Einstein.
16. Having a Life Purpose
Illustration
In his book, "Man's Search for Meaning," Austrian psychiatrist Dr. Viktor Frankl documents the profound power that a life purpose exerts over an individual under even the worst of circ*mstances. Frankl, who survived the Nazi concentration camps, described how prisoners who felt they had nothing to live for succumbed, while those who perceived themselves as having a mission to complete, struggled to survive. Deprived of all external supports that might give life meaning, these survivors came to realize that, in Frankl's words, "It did not really matter what we expected of life, but rather what life expected from us." Their sense of an inner purpose pulled them through the most horrible physical and emotional experiences so that they might make their unique contribution to the world.
Everyone has a purpose in life beyond one's immediate interests and gratifications, though that purpose frequently goes undiscovered. Many people devote their entire lives to the pursuit of greater ease and pleasure. Those who had not found the "why" that gives meaning to existence may achieve material success, yet the real goodness of life will elude them. The true meaning of life lies in sharing our particular qualities of greatness with others.
17. How Many Legs Does a Cow Have?
Illustration
There is a story about Abraham Lincoln who was arguing with a political opponent.
"How many legs does a cow have?" he asked his adversary.
"Four, of course," came the disgusted reply.
"That's right," agreed Lincoln. "Now suppose you call the cow's tail a leg; how many legs would the cow have?
"Why, five, of course," was the confidant reply.
"Now, that's where you're wrong," said Lincoln. "Calling a cow's tail a leg doesn't make it a leg."
18. I Choose You
Illustration
Victoria Brooks
There's an old, word-of-mouth story, which is probably aprochryphal, about Abraham Lincoln visitinga slave auction. Observing the proceedings from the rear of the crowd, his attention was caught by a strong, defiant, young slave girl with sharp, angry eyes.
Something in her manner pierced him; the sheer intensity of her gaze spoke to him of the anguish of her captivity and her longing for freedom. When it was her turn to step to the auction block, he and several others bid. With each rise in price, her hostility grew. Finally, Lincoln won, paid the money, and had her brought to him.
She came, rigid with resistance, arms tied behind her back, leg chains dragging.
“Untie her,” Lincoln said.
“Oh no, sir!” her auctioneer responded, pulling her forward with a jerk. “She be a wild one! Ain’t no end o’ trouble in her. Ya best git her home afore ya be takin’ her chains off.” With that, he secured her to the horse rail, turned, and left.
Lincoln stood quietly for a moment, looking at the young woman. “What is your name?” he asked.
She did not respond.
“What are you called?” he repeated.
Steeling herself for the inevitable blow, she set her jaw, stared at the ground, and said nothing.
Taking the bill of sale from his pocket, Lincoln read it carefully, then marked the bottom with his signature. Slowly he stooped, undid the clasp of her ankle irons, and untied the rope that had cut into her wrists.
“You’re free to go, Sara-Jane,” he said, handing her the document. “You are free to choose your own life now.”
Reaching again into his pocket, he drew out a card and several coins. “If you have any trouble,” he said, “call on me at this address and I will help you.”
As the reality of what she had heard seeped slowly through her brain and into her muscles, the young woman grew weak and unable to sustain her rage. Minutes ticked by as anger gave way to confusion, and confusion to disbelief. Like someone in the grip of a personal earthquake, shockwaves of agonizing hope rippled through the muscles of her face. As she fought for control, her jaw clenched, then settled again; her muscular shoulders convulsed, then were still. Finally, a large, work-callused hand rose to take the papers and the money. Instantly, she turned and ran.
Lincoln watched as she disappeared down the rutted road.
Taking the reins of his horse, he began to mount when he saw her suddenly stop. Some distance away, she stood totally still. More minutes passed. Then, slowly, deliberately, she made her way back. Standing in front of him, she handed him the money.
“I choose you,” she said, looking up for the first time into Lincoln’s gaunt, craggy face. “You say I choose my own life now,” she continued haltingly, “ ... that I work for who I want. You give me papers to show that I be free.” The deep sinkholes of her oval face were wet with emotion. “If that be true . . . if I be free . . . then I choose you.”
19. In Spite Of
Illustration
Michael A. Guido of Metter, Georgia, columnist of several newspapers writes:
"An artist in Mexico lost his right hand while working on a statue. But he did not give up his work. He learned to carve with his left hand. His beautifully finished masterpiece was called 'In Spite Of.'
"A sound body, a brilliant mind, a cultural background, a huge amount of money, a wonderful education none of these guarantee success. Booker T. Washington was born in slavery. Thomas Edison was deaf. Abraham Lincoln was born of illiterate parents. Lord Byron had a club foot. Robert Louis Stevenson had tuberculosis. Alexander Pope was a hunchback. Admiral Nelson had only one eye. Julius Caesar was an epileptic. But these men made history in spite of their handicaps. And there was Louis Pasteur, so near-sighted that he had a difficult time finding his way in his laboratory without glasses. There was Helen Keller, who could not hear or see, but who graduated with honors from a famous college.
"Got a handicap? Call on the Lord. No problem is too big for Him, or too small. He will make everything 'work together for good' if you trust Him."
Surely, Guido understands the nature of the human spirit to overcome all obstacles, and that by the power of God!
20. When the Invitation Comes
Illustration
Larry Bethune
You never know where the invitation will come. Abraham was sitting at home. Moses was out in the wilderness. Isaiah was in a worship service. Matthew was at work. The woman caught in adultery was, well, caught in adultery and about to be stoned. I would call that a crisis, wouldn't you? But it doesn't matter where you are or in what situation; God will find you. As the psalmist suggests:
Where can I go from your spirit? Or where can I flee from your presence? If I ascend to heaven, you are there; if I make my bed in Sheol, you are there. If Itake the wings of the morning and settle at the farthest limits of the sea, even there your hand shall lead me, and your right hand shall hold me fast.
21. A Greater Purpose
Illustration
In 1986, Stephen Saint traveled to Timbuktu, Africa, on a mission trip. Stephen had dedicated his life to Christian missions, just as his father, Nate, had done before him. Nate Saint was one of five missionaries who had been murdered by members of the Auca Indian tribe in Ecuador. As little Stephen Saint grew up, he sorely missed having a father to guide and love him. In his darkest moments, he sometimes wondered if his father's death had served any purpose.
At one point on his African trip, Stephen found himself stranded in a small town among hostile people. He made his way to a nearby Christian church. The African pastor welcomed Stephen, and the two men began discussing their faith. The pastor had come to Christianity at a young age. Afterwards, the townspeople shunned him, his teacher beat him, his family tried to kill him. But the pastor mentioned that he found great inspiration in the stories of Christian martyrs. For instance, he asked, had Stephen ever heard of a missionary to Ecuador named Nate Saint? Stephen was speechless. At that moment, herealized the gift that God was giving him. He had traveled halfway around the world to hear from a stranger's lips that his father's death had been used for a profoundpurpose. Nate Saint had not settled for the mid-range of human needs. He had aimed much higher. He gave his life for others. Not everyone who does that is martyred. Many people serve Christ and serve others in their daily lives right in their own community. It matters not where service is given, only that we give our best.
22. The Cross: A Sign of Hope
Illustration
Billy D. Strayhorn
In Alexander Solzhenitsyn's book, Gulag Archipelago, he described life in a Siberian prison.At one point he was so physically weak and discouraged that all he could hope for was death. The hard labor, terrible conditions, and inhumane treatment had taken its toll.
He knew the guards would beat him severely and probably kill him if he stopped working. So, he planned to help them by simply stopping his work and leaning on his shovel. But when he stopped, a fellow Christian reached over with his shovel and quickly drew a sign of the cross at the feet ofSolzhenitsynthen erased it before a guard could see it.
Solzhenitsyn later wrote that his entire being was energized by that little reminder of the hope and courage we find in Christ through the cross. It was a turning point. Through the cross and a fellow believer, he found the strength and the hope to continue.
In today's scripture we see a turning point in the life and ministry of Jesus. From this point on, Jesus' focus changes. From this point on, Jesus' mind and heart and mission are pointed to Jerusalem and the cross that awaits him. He has one purpose: the cross.
23. Jesus’ Inaugural Adress
Illustration
Mickey Anders
Every four years the new president of the United States gives his inaugural address. In it, he articulates his program or his plan of action for his term of office. See if you recognize who these inaugural address lines are from, which president said:
"With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations." - Abraham Lincoln, 1865.
"This great nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself--nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance." - Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1933.
"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country. My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man." - John F Kennedy, 1960.
Today's Scripture is Luke's version of the opening moments of Jesus' public ministry. We might call this his inaugural sermon: "The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed,to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."
24. John’s Understanding of Self
Illustration
Brian Stoffregen
Peter Steinke in Healthy Congregations: A Systems Approach, has a chapter called "The Immune Congregation." In this chapter he states: "The immune system is a network of cells that recognize and attack foreign invaders. The system asks one profound question: What is self, and what is not self?" [p. 91]
A little later he applies this insight:
The community needs an immune response, to determine what is self and not self. The community needs to ask, for instance, if a certain action continues, whether it will enhance the mission of the congregation or detract from it. Does an individual's or a group's behavior contradict or serve the congregation's purpose? Is there clarity about who is responsible for what and accountable to whom. [p. 91]
In a sense, that is what John does in vv. 19-28. He is both defining who he is and who he is not. He is clear about who he is and his mission. When he states that he is not the Christ and he is not Elijah and he is not one of the prophets, he is not saying that the Christ or Elijah or the prophets are bad; but simply that he is not them. Being clear about who he is and his mission, also means that he is clear about who he is not and what things will not contribute to his mission. While such an understanding of self (and non-self) is important for individuals, Steinke goes a step further and says that it is an essential part of being a healthy congregation.
25. Give To God The Things That Are God's
Illustration
Phyllis Faaborg Wolk
"Tell us what you think, Teacher. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?" When the Pharisees asked Jesus that question, he responded with a request, "Show me the coin used for the tax," and someone handed Jesus a coin embossed with the head of the current Roman emperor, Tiberius. Engraved around his head was the inscription, "Tiberius Caesar, majestic son of the majestic God, and High Priest." "Whose image is on this coin?" Jesus asked. "The emperor's," they responded. "Well then," Jesus said, "give to the emperor what belongs to the emperor." The image of the emperor was embossed on the coin, therefore the coin belonged to him.
But in answering the Pharisees' question, Jesus didn't stop with the issue of taxation. He continued, "and give to God what belongs to God." As Jesus spoke the words, "give to God what belongs to God," standing right before him were those on whom the image of God had been embossed. The Pharisees, teachers of the law of Israel, children of Abraham whom God had claimed as his own, had been created from the very beginning in the image of God. In the image of himself, God had created them. They belonged to God. Those in whose eyes Jesus looked as he spoke were the coins of God. "Give to God what belongs to God," Jesus said. But when he spoke those words, the Pharisees left him and went away.
Should we pay taxes to the government? Yes, Jesus would say. But again, Jesus wouldn't stop there. Today he looks you in the eye and says, "Give to God what belongs to God." And as he looks at you, Jesus sees the image of God. In the beginning God created you and embossed his image upon you. In the waters of baptism, God marked you with the cross of Christ forever. God has given himself to you and has promised to love you and be with you forever.
Mrs. Detweiler was created in the image of God. She worked at Murray Elementary as the special education teacher. It didn't take her students long to recognize the image of God within her which made them feel special and loved. Even though she was a special education teacher, the students of Murray Elementary considered it a privilege to be invited to Mrs. Detweiler's room. The walls of her small classroom were covered with stars made out of bright yellow construction paper. Neatly written in black permanent marker on the star at the top of each row was the name of one of her students. As soon as a student finished reading a book, the title of that book was placed on another star that soon appeared directly beneath the star bearing the student's name. The more books a person read, the more stars accumulated under the name. Whenever her students finished a book, Mrs. Detweiler made them feel like stars, themselves. Her ability to make her students feel special and important was a mark of the image of God shining through her.
Mrs. Detweiler bore the image of God. She loved her students -- that was the image of God. She gave of herself by teaching them to read -- that was the image of God. She believed in her students -- that was the image of God. But even as one created in the image of God, Mrs. Detweiler would be the first to say that she had her faults. There were times when she let her students down; times when she lost her patience; times when her mood affected her ability to respond to her students enthusiastically. Mrs. Detweiler wasn't perfect, but she had been created in the image of God, claimed as God's child through her baptism and renewed each day with the gift of forgiveness. As she gave God what belonged to God by giving of herself to her students, Jesus worked through her. Through Mrs. Detweiler, God's love, acceptance and encouragement was shown to many students as they grew and matured into the people God had created them to be. As she gave God what belonged to God, God continued to give himself to her, revealing his love again and again through the sparkle in her students' eyes.
You are God's. His image has been placed within you. When I look at you, I see the image of God. I see the image of God in your faces as you greet one another before worship. I see the image of God each time you pray for each other and share one another's concerns. I see the image of God when I go to the nursing home and watch you hug and hold and gently speak with those who reside there. I see the image of God when I watch the Sunday school staff relate with the children -- so often God's love is given and received in the simple interactions they share. I see the image of God in the church kitchen, as members of this congregation work side by side to prepare a meal after a funeral or before a fellowship event. I see the image of God every time one of you gives to the Lord's work in a generous and cheerful way, sharing with others the blessings God has given you. God's image shines when you invite and welcome your neighbors to church -- not only those who are like you, but those who bring different perspectives and talents and needs to this body of Christ. I see God's image as this congregation reaches beyond itself to support missionaries and relieve world hunger. Whenever you give of yourself to others, the image of God within you is being revealed.
You are the bearers of God's image. Jesus said, "Give to God the things that are God's." You are God's. Jesus says, "Give yourself to God." But before you can even respond to Jesus' call to give yourself to God, God gives himself to you. Even before you have a chance to respond to Jesus' command, Jesus goes to the cross. Jesus goes to the cross to give to God what belongs to God. Jesus goes to the cross to give you to his Father in Heaven, who then blesses you with salvation and eternal life. Jesus goes to the cross for you and gives you life.
Give to God the things that are God's. When you give yourself to God, God will nurture his image within you. Jesus who now lives in you will give himself to others whenever you give of yourself to those in need. Jesus will use you to reveal God's love and forgiveness, to show all God's children how special they are to God, and to proclaim salvation to all who have been created in the image of God. Give to God things that are God's, remembering that Jesus has already given himself for you. Amen.
26. The Reality of the Resurrection - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
100 years ago few people thought it possible that man could fly. No one except the two sons of Rev. Milton Wright who at 10:35 on the morning of Dec. 17 1903 made their first successful flight of 175 feet in a airplane driven by a four cylinder combustion engine. Today we fly much more sophisticated crafts around the moons of Jupiter. It was very hard to believe 100 years ago today but the evidence of that first flight is all around us today.
200 years ago the borders of the United States stretched from the Atlantic to the Mississippi river and none other than Napoleon Bonaparte in France granted her the rights to trade on the Mississippi, and the held the right to impose a duty on every ship that sailed out of the mouth of the Mississippi in New Orleans. What made matters worse is that it looked like Napoleon was going to close the rights to the Mississippi to the Americans entirely. There was no way to expect Napoleon to give up this kind of control. But a U.S. ambassador to France, Robert R. Livingston, concocted a plan to trump Napoleon, and he played that trump with a flourish. He made it known in the right circles that the United States was considering settling its difference with Great Britain and reconciling with her politically. This Napoleon did not want. He was already close to war with England. So when James Monroe, who would later become president, along with Livingston, approached Napoleon?s men with the idea of a land treaty, they agreed. And on May 2, 1803 the Louisiana Purchase was made for three cents an acre. The humor in it all is this: Livingston and Monroe were never commissioned to make such a purpose. But now standing on the eastern banks of the Mississippi River 200 years ago it was hard to believe that the US would ever have the rights to that 828,000 square mile area. But it doubled the size of the United States and the evidence of that great purchase is all around us today.
300 years ago on June 17, 1703 a young boy named John was born to Rev. Samuel and Suzanna Wesley in Epworth England. It was perhaps no surprise that John grew up to become a priest himself. What was a surprise is the kind of ministry he implemented. He formed a small religious study group, which put special emphasis on methodical study and devotion. They had communion often, fasted twice a week, and as they grew they added other things: social services, visiting prisoners, care for the poor, and they even ran a school. Onlookers called them Methodist and it wasn't a polite term, it was said to mock them. When John left the group, it disintegrated. But the name stuck and the evidence of that early movement is all around us today. In almost every town in this country there is a Methodist Church.
There are events in life that amaze us, fill us with joy, and make us wonder whether it really is possible. It is hard to believe, even standing on this side of history, that some of these things were ever accomplished. They are impossible stories that positively happened.
2000 years ago 11 men gathered to discuss in private their next move. They were frightened and confused. Life seemed to be closing in on them and it was not possible for them to continue their three-year-old ministry. Here were the facts: They were betrayed by one of their own. The crowds had turned on them. Their leader had been executed. They had denied their relationship to their leader. And any further development of their leader's ideas would almost certainly mean their own deaths. Into this hopeless scene walks a man they never expected to see. They were so startled by this event that, to a man, they feared they were seeing a ghost. The resurrection amazed them, filled them with joy, and turned their lives around. It's an impossible story that positively happened and the evidence of the resurrection is all around us today.
What amazes you about the resurrection of Jesus? What impossible aspects of it fill you with joy? Let me share a couple of things that are amazing to me.
1. First, the reality of the resurrection amazes me (36-43).
2. Second, the scope of our mission amazes me (44-49).
27. Cruise Ship or Life Boat?
Illustration
Simon Bickersteth
Did you know that the design of many wooden church roofs, was similar to that of the hull of a ship. And that the nave, the central part of the church, derives its name from the Latin word for boat. Using this imagery of the church as a boat, we can have two pictures of what the church looks like.
The first is a cruise ship. On a cruise ship, the majority of people on board are passengers, who have paid good money to sit back and enjoy the cruise while they are served on hand and foot by the hard working crew. The passengers can relax and watch the scenery slip slowly by, and enjoy all the facilities the cruise ship offers, the entertainment and food, and relax and unwind while others do the work.
The other image of the church is of a life boat. The purpose of the life boat is not to serve the people already on board the boat, but to save lives. Every person on board the lifeboat has a job to do. There is no room for idleness on the lifeboat, because it’s on a mission to navigate lives stormy waters, and rescue people.
28. At the Root of Rebellion
Illustration
Alexander Maclaren
Important lessons are given by this alternation of the two ideas of faith and unbelief, obedience and disobedience. Disobedience is the root of unbelief. Unbelief is the mother of further disobedience. Faith is voluntary submission within a person's own power. If faith is not exercised, the true cause lies deeper than all intellectual reasons. It lies in the moral aversion of human will and in the pride of independence, which says, "who is Lord over us? Why should we have to depend on Jesus Christ?" As faith is obedience and submission, so faith breeds obedience, but unbelief leads on to higher-handed rebellion. With dreadful reciprocity of influence, the less one trusts, the more he disobeys; the more he disobeys, the less he trusts.
29. Break A Leg
Illustration
Michael P. Green
Please see the note below this illustration.
A woman visiting in Switzerland came to a sheepfold on one of her daily walks. Venturing in, she saw the shepherd seated on the ground with his flock around him. Nearby, on a pile of straw lay a single sheep, which seemed to be suffering. Looking closely, the woman saw that its leg was broken.
Her sympathy went out to the suffering sheep, and she looked up inquiringly to the shepherd as she asked how it happened. “I broke it myself,” said the shepherd sadly and then explained. “Of all the sheep in my flock, this was the most wayward. It would not obey my voice and would not follow when I was leading the flock. On more than one occasion, it wandered to the edge of a perilous cliff. And not only was it disobedient itself, but it was leading other sheep astray.
“Based on my experience with this kind of sheep, I knew I had no choice, so I broke its leg. The next day I took food and it tried to bite me. After letting it lie alone for a couple of days, I went back and it not only eagerly took the food, but licked my hand and showed every sign of submission and affection.
“And now, let me say this. When this sheep is well, it will be the model sheep of my entire flock. No sheep will hear my voice so quickly nor follow so closely. Instead of leading the others away, it will be an example of devotion and obedience. In short, a complete change will come into the life of this wayward sheep. It will have learned obedience through its sufferings.”
Many times it is the same in human experience. Through our suffering, God may be seeking to teach us obedience and reliance on his care.
Note: There is no evidence that this was a practice among shepherds. See the following page for more information.
30. A Life of Despair
Illustration
Brett Blair
Two of his daughters and a son-in-law committed suicide. Three of his children died of malnutrition. Marx felt no obligation to earn a living, but instead lived by begging from Engels. He fathered an illegitimate child by his maidservant. He drank heavily. He was a paid informer of the Austrian police, spying on revolutionaries. Though Marx and his wife were poor, he kept investing in the stock market where he constantly lost. His wife left him twice, but returned. When she died, he didn't attend her funeral. His correspondence with Engels was full of obscenities. His favorite daughter, Eleanor, with her father's approval, married Edward Eveling, a man who advocated blasphemy and worshiped Satan. Daughter Eleanor committed suicide, poisoning herself with cyanide. Karl Marx died in despair.
Laura Marx, Karl's other daughter committed suicide together with her husband on25 November 1911. The coupledecided they had nothing left to give to the movement to which they had devoted their lives. Laura was 66 and her husband Paul Lafargue was 69. In their suicide letter, which Paul wrote,they explained why they committed suicide.It reads:
"Healthy in body and mind, I end my life before pitiless old age which has taken from me my pleasures and joys one after another; and which has been stripping me of my physical and mental powers, can paralyse my energy and break my will, making me a burden to myself and to others. For some years I had promised myself not to live beyond 70; and I fixed the exact year for my departure from life. I prepared the method for the execution of our resolution, it was a hypodermic of cyanide acid. I die with the supreme joy of knowing that at some future time, the cause to which I have been devoted for forty-five years will triumph. Long live Communism! Long Live the international socialism!"
Vladimir Lenin was one of the speakers at the funeral. He would later write the following to his wife: "If one cannot work for the Party any longer, one must be able to look truth in the face and die like the Lafargues."
Is it any wonder things ended this way for the Marx family?When you look at the tenets of Marxism, where else would you end up but in despair? Listen to these 10 basic principles:
- Abolition of private property
- A heavy progressiveincome tax.
- Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
- Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
- State control of banks.
- State controlof communication and the press.
- State owned businesses.
- Equal liability of all to work, establishingindustrial armies
- Equal distribution of the populace over the country.
- Combination of education with industrial production.
What is there left to live for? This world would lead to the despair that caused the Marx family to take their lives. They stand in contrast to the Greatest Commandment to love God and love your neighbor and to the admonitionof the Beatitudes. Christianity frees and affirms; Marxism controls and demands. It's life or death isn't it? It's God's offer to the Israelites: I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live
31. Commitment
Illustration
Donald Deffner
J. Upton Dickson, who brands himself as a Christian humorist, joked after writing a pamphlet called “Cower Power,”that he was thinking about founding a society called D.O.O.R.M.A.T.S. It is an acronym for “Dependent Order of Really Meek and Timid Souls.” Their logo would be a yellow caution light. And their motto would be“The meek shall inherit the earth…if that’s okay with everybody.”Of course, Upton quipped, the society didn’t last very long when someone objected!
32. Wrong Choices
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
This story is about a man named Fred who inherited $10 million, but the will provided that he had to accept it either in Chile or Brazil. He chose Brazil. Unhappily it turned out that in Chile he would have received his inheritance in land on which uranium, gold, and silver had just been discovered. Once in Brazil he had to choose between receiving his inheritance in coffee or nuts. He chose the nuts. Too bad! The bottom fell out of the nut market, and coffee went up to $1.30 a pound wholesale, unroasted. Poor Fred lost everything he had to his name. He went out and sold his solid gold watch for the money he needed to fly home. It seems that he had enough for a ticket to either New York or Boston. He chose Boston. When the plane for New York taxied up he noticed it was a brand-new super 747 jet with red carpets and chic people and wine-popping hostesses. The plane for Boston then arrived. It was a 1928 Ford trimotor with a sway back and it took a full day to get off the ground. It was filled with crying children and tethered goats. Over the Andes, one of the engines fell off. Our man Fred made his way up to the captain and said, "I'm a jinx on this plane. Let me out if you want to save your lives. Give me a parachute." The pilot agreed, but added, "On this plane, anybody who bails out must wear two chutes." So, Fred jumped out of the plane, and as he fell dizzily through the air he tried to make up his mind which ripcord to pull. Finally, he chose the one on the left. It was rusty and the wire pulled loose. So, he then pulled the other handle. This chute opened, but its shroud lines snapped. In desperation, the poor fellow cried out, "St. Francis save me!" A great hand from heaven reached down and seized the poor fellow by the wrist and let him dangle in midair. Then a gentle but inquisitive voice asked, "St. Francis Xavier or St. Francis of Assisi?"
33. Life as a Piece of Music
Illustration
Mark Radecke
Think of your life as a piece of music. Life in the microwave world provides you the staccato notes, the quick and sometimes dissonant voice. By itself, it is confusing and lacking in substance or form. It may even seem chaotic and annoying.
Along baptismal obedience in the same direction provides the sustenuto, the sustained voice, the continuo line. It gives body and substance to the piece. By itself, it could become tedious or dull.
But when the sustained voice undergirds and supports the staccato notes, when life in the microwave world is sustained and supported by God's gift of a long baptismal obedience in the same direction, then life is a magnificent fugue beautiful, rich, multi-textured, varied; surprising yet graceful and grace-filled.
Such a life is beautiful music; played and sung to the glory of the composer God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit, into whose eternal name we are baptized!
34. Obedience Is a Means
Illustration
Martha Thatcher
Whenever I take the opportunity to actively love God in personal obedience, I end up sensing a new tenderness in my heart toward Him and a stronger resolve to obey again next time. Obedience is not an end, but a means - a means to express our love to God, and a means to increase our love for God. It is a catalyst in the process of loving God and becoming more like Jesus.
35. Obedience
Illustration
Erma Bombeck
Erma Bombeck wrote abouthaving the meanness parents in all the world:
I had the meanest parents in all the world. When I was seven years old they dared to spank me just because I told them I would not do what they asked me to do to help around the house. My friend next door never got spanked. He didn't have to help at home. He had nice parents.
I had the meanest parents. I had to eat all my broccoli and carrots before they would ever let me have dessert. My friend next door never had to eat vegetables. He had fast food brought in with burgers and shakes and brownies with all kinds of ice cream.
I had the meanest parents. They made me go to church every Sunday as long as I lived under their roof, sit there in that boring worship service. My friend next door could do as he pleased. He never went to church. Sunday was a fun day for him.
I had the meanest parents. They made me work for my allowance. I had to get a job helping an elderly old man with chores around his house. My friend next door never had to do anything and he was given four times as much allowance as I could ever earn. He had nice parents.
I had the meanest parents. When I turned sixteen, they made me earn points before I could drive the family car. My friend next door was given a brand new luxury automobile. My folks had bought an old jalopy for me to get back and forth to school, but you think I'd drive that hunk of junk and park it beside those Jeep Wagoneers, BMWs, Buicks and Mercedes? My friend had it made.
Or so I once thought, but, when we reached age thirty, I had a change in perspective. I had learned that my parents were not so mean after all. I was experiencing: the pleasure of work, the reward of recreation, the strength of a healthy body, the bonds of a strong marriage, the inward confidence that comes from faith and the wonderful supportive fellowship that comes from the Church as a community of believers.
As for my friend, things were not going so well: he was not finding his niche in the workplace, nothing seemed to satisfy him, he was having difficulty getting along with people who were not willing to do everything just as he thought he knew it ought to be done, his marriage had not lasted even two years, his body was getting out of shape, and he evidenced a cynical outlook without any under-girding that comes from the assurance of faith.
Erma came to understand that obedience to her parents ways instilled in her lasting, life giving values. "If you love me, obey..." Obedience.
36. Freedom Requires Discipline
Illustration
Michael P. Green
Many people think that freedom is the license to do whatever a person wants, but true freedom is the ability to do what is right. It takes obedience in order to have true freedom. I can sit at a piano and be at liberty to play any keys that I want, but I don’t have freedom, because I can’t play anything but noise. I have no freedom to play Bach, or even “Chopsticks.” Why? Because it takes years of practice and obedience to lesson plans to be truly free at the piano. Then, and only then, does one have the freedom to play any piece of music.
The same is true of freedom in living. To be truly free, we must have the power and ability to be obedient.
37. An Institute By Smithson
Illustration
Michael P. Green
Born in 1765 in France, James Smithson was the illegitimate son of a prominent English duke (Hugh Percy, 1st Duke of Northumberland) and a direct lineal descendant of King Henry VII through his mother (Elizabeth Hungerford Keate Macie). Branded as a bastard, James was refused British citizenship and denied a rich inheritance through his true father. Due to this rejection the young Smithson felt constrained to succeed at whatever he did, and he became one of England’s leading scientists and a member of the Royal Society (the chief association of leading scientists) at the age of twenty-two.
In 1829 Smithson, who never married, died and left his considerable fortune to a nephew. Rumor had it that the terms of Smithson’s will stipulated that his entire estate was to go to one recipient upon the nephew’s death. The English scientific community hoped that he had made sizable grants to their favorite institutions. But when the terms of the will were made public they were shocked!
Smithson had written: “Just as England has rejected me, so have I rejected England.” During Smithson’s lifetime, England had fought two bitter wars with her rebellious colonies in America. So, to show his utter contempt for those who had mistreated him, he gave everything to the United States Government for the establishment of a scientific institution in the young nation’s capital. To this day the Smithsonian Institution is recognized as one of the most prominent institutions of its kind in the world. England made the tremendous mistake of thinking that she had no need of this man, from whom she might have benefited greatly.
Let us be careful of saying to some member of the body of Christ, “I have no need of you,” only to find that the same member could have met some of our greatest spiritual needs.
Note: Most of the facts of this story are true. Wikipedia demonstrates that he was naturalized as a British citizen. So that's probably an error in thestory. Likewise, the part of his being mistreated andcontempt being the motive for the inheritance going to the founding of the Smithsonian Institute seems doubtful. The legal will stipulated that should certain events occur, like the fortune being unclaimed due to the death of heirs, the fortune would then go to the establishment of the SI in the Americas. Those events occurred. Per Wikipedia:
"Smithson never married and had no children; therefore, when he wrote his will, he left his estate to his nephew, or his nephew's family if his nephew died before Smithson. If his nephew were to die without heirs, however, Smithson's will stipulated that his estate be used "to found in Washington, under the name of the Smithsonian Institution, an establishment for the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men". He died in Genoa, Italy on 27 June 1829, aged 64. Six years later, in 1835, his nephew died without heir, setting in motion the bequest to the United States. In this way Smithson became the patron of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. despite having never visited the United States."
38. Flexing Your Muscles
Illustration
Billy D. Strayhorn
Unfortunately, a lot of people are like mummies, all wrapped up in themselves. And they don't want to become unwrapped. All they do is come unwound at the thought of coming out of their safe tomb or stepping out in faith. But Jesus calls us out of the tomb, sets us free and calls us to move beyond ourselves into a life of faith, commitment, obedience and service.
A body builder was a guest on a talk show. During the interview, hostasked "Why do you develop those particular muscles?" The body builder simply stepped forward and flexed a series of well-defined muscles from chest to calf. The audience applauded. "What do you use all those muscles for?" the hostasked. Again, the muscular specimen flexed, and biceps and triceps sprouted to impressive proportions. "But what do you USE those muscles for?" The host persisted. The body builder was bewildered. He didn't have an answer other than to display his well-developed frame. I was reminded that our spiritual exercises Bible Study and, prayerarefor a purpose. They're meant to strengthen our ability to build God's kingdom, not simply to improve our pose before an admiring world.
Jesus calls us out of the tomb, sets us free and calls us to move beyond ourselves into a life of faith, commitment, obedience and service. When we just come to Church and sometimes read our Bibles and just enjoy the fellowship but nothing else, then we're like thosebodybuilding guests. We're like mummies, still wrapped up in ourselves. Jesus calls us to move beyond self to a life of faith and committed service.
39. 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.
40. The Saddest Story
Illustration
Maxie Dunnam
Bishop Peter Storey from South Africa tells a story of three men in town for a convention. They were assigned rooms on the 51st floor of the convention hotel. They had been out for an evening having had a late dinner and entertainment. When they came in, the elevator was out of order. Can you imagine that? In a room on the 51st floor and no way to get there but to climb the stairs.
It was a terrible dilemma, but they had no alternative. Being creative, they decided that they would devise a way to make that climb bearable. For 17 stories as they climbed the stairs they would tell funny stories. Then, for the next 17 stories, they would tell scary stories. Then, for the final 17 stories, they would tell sad stories.
Well, it did work. For 17 stories, they laughed and laughed as they told funny story after funny story, taking their minds off of their arduous climb. Then, for the next 17 stories there were the scary tales and that helped because it seemed to energize them. Then as they began the last trek up the steps of the last 17 stories they began to tell sad story after sad story. When they got to the 50th floor, they had run out of stories seemingly. No one spoke up. Then it happened. One fellow broke the silence, "Fellows, here is the saddest story of all. I forgot the key at the reception desk."
The key whether a door is being opened, or a door is being closed; the key is that we stay awake. Because we never know when we are going to be surprised by a new possibility; nor, do we ever know when something important is going to be taken from us.
41. Building Barns, Postponing Life - Sermon Opener
Illustration
The background for our story this morning is an incident that occurred in Galilee as Jesus was teaching to a large crowd. A young man called out from the crowd and said: "Rabbi, tell my brother to divide the inheritance of our father.” Now, Jewish law clearly prescribed that at the death of a father, the elder son received 2/3 of the inheritance, and the young son received 1/3. This is obviously a younger son who is complaining about the inherent unfairness of it all. Nothing will divide brothers and sisters more than dividing up an estate. So it was then, and so it is now. Jesus refused to get involved in a petty family squabble.
Jesus was concerned, however, with the larger implications of preoccupation with the things of this world. He said: Beware of greed, for life does not consist of things possessed. The sum total of a person’s life is more than their financial portfolio.
He then illustrated this point by telling a story. There was once a man who had an unbroken run of prosperity. In today’s language, he had successfully played the commodities market. So prosperous did he become that his barns could not hold all of his crops. His solution was to tear down these barns and build bigger and better barns. Then, with his financial security in hand, he could sit back and truly enjoy life. His philosophy was: eat, drink, and be merry.
Truth be told, when we hear this story we find ourselves rather envious of this man. A financially successful man—we see him as savvy and wise. Yet, Jesus concluded the story by saying that this man was a fool.
The issue before us this morning is then: what did this man do wrong? To answer that question we must understand that this is not a parable about money. It is a parable about values and what is important in life. With that in mind, let me suggest four things that this man did that made him a fool.
I. First, he was a fool because he had full barns, but an empty heart.
II. Secondly, this man was a fool because he overestimated his own value in the scheme of things.
III. Third, this man was a fool because he forgot what his real business in life was really all about.
IV. Fourth, this man was a fool because he forgot about the nature of time.
42. Preparing for the Wrong Thing
Illustration
Larry Powell
According to Jewish religious laws the eldest son of a family was entitled to inherit twice the share as the younger brother (Deuteronomy 21:15-17). In all probability the person who approached Jesus in our text was a younger brother who wanted more than his legal share of an inheritance. Jesus replied to the subject at hand by citing the parable of the "Rich Young Fool." The bottom line of the parable is that the rich fool had prepared for the wrong thing. He had taken his goods into account, but had made up no provision for his own soul.
A dear couple in another city, exceptionally active in the church I was serving at the time, constructed a storm cellar in their backyard. Over a period of several months both of them had shoveled dirt, poured concrete, laid blocks, and literally built the cellar themselves. Soon after it was completed, they invited me out to see what they had accomplished. Understandably proud, they pointed out the neat, solid blockwork of the exterior and called attention to the more than adequate drain-offs. Inside, every provision was made in the event of an extended stay. It was an exceptional storm cellar in all respects, and in every sense of the word, they were more than prepared for a storm. However, in a few short weeks, both of them were killed by a speeding motorist as they attempted to turn from the highway into their driveway. Despite meticulous preparations, the fact remains that they had prepared for the wrong thing. But you say, "It is impossible to prepare for the unexpected!" Yes, that is precisely one of the points Jesus was attempting to underscore in our scriptures.
A young businessman, workaholic, full of hustle and drive, spends twelve hours each day at the office. His wife asks him to come home early to eat the evening meal with the family, but no, he must chase the distant horizon. While other children’s fathers take them to the park, his children find solace in video games. When the wife says he ought to spend more time with the children, he replies that he has given them everything they will ever need. When she complains about his hours, he reminds her of the diamonds she has on her fingers. He had prepared for their every need, right down to the insurance. One day he is summoned to the hospital to be by the bedside of his oldest daughter who has overdosed on drugs. Two days later, he has a heart attack and is told by the doctor that he must change his lifestyle drastically. He has not prepared for any of that.
Jesus asked the rich fool, "And the things you have prepared for, whose will they be?" Are we prepared to deal with that question?
43. Building According to Code
Illustration
Our Daily Bread
In 1992, Hurricane Andrew destroyed thousands of homes in South Florida. Yet in an area where the wreckage looked like a war zone, one house remained standing, still firmly anchored to its foundation.
When a reporter asked the homeowner why his house had not been blown away, he replied, "I built this house myself. I also built it according to the Florida state building code. When the code called for 2" x 6" roof trusses, I used 2" x 6" roof trusses. I was told that a house built according to code could withstand a hurricane-- and it did."
Jesus talked about the importance of building our lives on a solid foundation. He said that the person who obeys His Word is like "a wise man who built his house on the rock" (Matt. 7:24). If we build according to His code of obedience, we will not be swept away when crises hit with hurricane-like force. The tempests of temptation and the storms of suffering will not be able to sweep us off a solid foundation of faith and obedience.
Adversity may come, yet because we have built according to the code of the unshakable Rock, Jesus Christ, we can emerge with our character strengthened. Are we building our lives according to Jesus' code?
44. Obedience
Illustration
Johnny Dean
Obedience … now that's pretty much a dirty word these days isn't it? I remember the very first wedding I had the honor to officiate. The young couple had requested pre-marital counseling and I agreed to provide it for them. At our first counseling session, the bride-to-be - a petite, soft-spoken, beautiful young woman who had just turned 18 a month before - said this: "Preacher, let me tell you one thing right up front. If the word 'obey' comes out of your mouth during the marriage vows, I will hike up my wedding dress and run screaming right back down that aisle and out the front door and I will not be back!" I suppose it's the American spirit of independence that makes us so resistant to the concept of obedience, even when it comes to our relationship with God.
45. Amazing Grace
Illustration
Richard J. Fairchild
John Newton, who wrote the hymn Amazing Grace back in 1779 certainly identified with the younger son, the son who wasted his inheritance. As a young man he left home and went to sea and there lived wildly and free. Like many people who abandon God, he was highly critical of the Christian faith, and spent much time tearing down the faith of the people he met as he went from place to place. It was only in later years that he realized that he had wasted his young life, and indeed not only wasted it - but in all that time he had been offensive to God and to all God-fearing people. And like the young prodigal, he repented and sought, in humility and submissiveness, to serve God for the rest of his days.
His resulting experience of God's forgiveness, of God's grace, is not only described well in the emotion packed words of the song he wrote, it is also to be found in his epitaph, an epitaph he himself wrote shortly before his death in 1807. He describes himself and his experience of God this way: "John Newton, clerk, once an infidel and libertine, was by the rich mercy of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, preserved, restored, pardoned, and appointed to preach the faith he had long labored to destroy."
46. 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.
47. Fame Doesn't Shoo the Flies
Illustration
Michael P. Green
A reporterasked Walt Disney how it felt to be a celebrity. “It feels fine,” he replied, “when being a celebrity helps me get a choice reservation for a football game.… As far as I can remember, being a celebrity has never helped me make a good picture, or a good shot in a polo game, or command the obedience of my daughter, or impress my wife. It doesn’t even seem to help keep fleas off our dogs and, if being a celebrity won’t give me an advantage over a couple of fleas, then I guess there can’t be that much in being a celebrity after all.”
48. Death of a Blacksnake
Illustration
Staff
I was drivingalong a rural road recently when the car in front of me swerved off the shoulder and came to a sudden stop. The driver jumped out of the car and ran up a small bank, grabbing a large stick with which he immediately began to flail wildly at the ground.
I stopped and rushed up to the man, certain that he had encountered some vicious threat to human life. But I was wrong.
"Why did you kill it?" I asked. "It was only a blacksnake."
"Blacksnake or rattlesnake, it makes no difference to me," the man said, still beating the now lifeless body. "I kill 'em all!"
I walked away from the man feeling very angry and a little sick. The killing of the snake was not anything unusual, and neither was the man's attitude concerning it. And yet - perhaps the very commonness of the act and the attitude behind it indicates something more than just an aversion to snakes.
The man went out of his way to kill the snake - not because it posed a danger to him, or because he especially enjoys killing snakes (I hope) - but because he was using that club in an exercise of his fears and prejudices.
In that respect he was no different than most of us. At one time or another we have all flailed wildly at those things which society, with its misguided traditions, has taught us to hate or to fear.
We have been taught that the snake is a symbol of evil, and because there are a few poisonous species we treat them all equally - equally bad.
In the same way we categorize people and allow myth and rumor to determine our relationship with those who might be "different" from us. Catholic-Protestant; Jew-Gentile; Black-White; Indian-Anglo; Northerner-Southerner; Russian-American; etc.; each mistrusts or hates the other not because there is a valid reason, but merely because of some fear or prejudice which has been passed on by a parent, teacher, or preacher.
That particular blacksnake is dead - killed by ignorance, perhaps, rather than by a particular cruelty - but dead nonetheless. His very valuable contribution to the balance of nature has ceased simply because someone thoughtlessly reacted to the stimulus of traditional fear or prejudice.
And, as blacksnakes are killed, so are humans. They are slaughtered because human beings have not yet learned to rise above traditional fears and prejudices and to live in harmony with those around us. But we had better learn soon because time may be running out. If the "meek" are really going to inherit the earth, they had better start making themselves known.
Because the violent people are becoming more numerous - and the blacksnakes fewer.
49. Listen for the Questions
Illustration
Joel D. Kline
The Scriptures include a significant number of life-and-death questions about meaning, purpose and value in life. Consider some of the questions posed by Scripture:
- What will it profit us if we gain the whole world but forfeit our life? (Matthew 16:26)
- Who do you say that I am? (Matthew 16:15)
- What are you looking for? (John 1:38)
- Who is my neighbor? (Like 10:29)
- What must I do to inherit eternal life? (Mark 10:17)
- Who can separate us from the love of Christ? (Romans 8:35)
- Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? (Mark 10:38)
- Which commandment is the first of all? (Mark 12:28)
- Where can I go from your Spirit? (Psalm 139:7).
- What is this new teaching, with authority? (Mark 1:27)
- Who is this about whom I hear such things? (Luke 9:9)
- What is truth? (John 18:38)
And this morning's Gospel lesson ends with the question, "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?" Who is this Jesus, the one who speaks with a new level of authority, the one who is able to bring calm into the storms of life, the one who comes among us as prince of peace, suffering servant, fount of compassion and grace?
50. Human Image-Bearers
Illustration
James Packer
The image of God in which man was and is made has been variously explained in detail. Although scholars may differ on the nuances of the phrase, there is general agreement that it has to do with dignity, destiny, and freedom.
The assertion that man is made in God's image shows each man his true dignity and worth. As God's image-bearer, he merits infinite respect. God's claims on us must be taken with total seriousness. No human being should ever be thought of as simply a cog in a machine, or mere means to an end.
The assertion points also to each man's true destiny. Our Maker so designed us that our nature finds final satisfaction and fulfillment only in a relationship of responsive Godlikeness which means, precisely, that state of correspondence between our acts and God's will which we call obedience. Living that is obedient will thus be teleological progressively realizing our telos (Greek for "end" or "goal").
Also the assertion confirms the genuineness of each man's freedom. Experience tells us that we are free, in the sense that we make real choices between alternatives and could have chosen differently, and theology agrees. Self-determining freedom of choice is what sets God and his rational creatures apart from, say, birds and bees, as moral beings.
Showing
1
to
50
of
129
results
- Black preachers condemn Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood: 'Nothing is more racist in America'
- Liberty University faces civil rights lawsuit after firing trans-identified employee
- 'Duck Dynasty' star Willie Robertson on turning darkness into light one conversation at a time
- 13-year-old budding preacher who lived for the ‘Glory of God’ killed for camera
- 5 things to know about Kamala Harris' pastor
- Nigerian Christian remained in captivity to aid elderly Muslim woman
- Nigerian bishop leaves UMC amid hom*osexuality schism; regional body’s future uncertain
- Sen. Mike Lee warns of 'increased hostility' toward Christianity in Washington
- Top 5 nominees for 2024 Gospel Music Association Dove Awards
- Russell Brand slams Olympics opening ceremony 'decadence,' shares favorite Bible verse
- 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
- Christian Bioethicists Help Students Consider The Moral Complexities Of IVF
- Hinduism: Concepts and Controversies
- Boys, Boys, Boys - 3 Quarks Daily
- 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...'
- Harris hit with blistering ad targeting Catholic, Hispanic voters on key issue in crucial swing state
- Bride Is Slammed For Wearing See-Through Wedding Dress To Her Church Ceremony
- “The word on the street was, ‘No-one could be playing that without overdubs.’ Well, the secret’s out. I’ve come clean”: Still copping Victor Wooten’s 20-year-old bass licks? You’d better take another look
- Texas pastor resigns over ‘inappropriate and hurtful’ actions
- Genius Candace Owens dismantles evolution theory
- Trump's 'Beautiful Christians' are Not Only Ones Whose Values Matter
- Being Good Is as Important as Being Right
- Blasphème & Olympiques
- Drag Queen in Olympic Opening Ceremony has No Regrets
- Is Hindu Nationalism Friendly to Christianity?
- Where Lynchings Still Happen
- Vatican II: For Better or For Worse
- After the Fall: A Christian's Confession of His Role in Afghanistan
- Art Center Founded By Fr. Rupnik Pushes Back on Removal of Artwork
- The Trad Family
