1 The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2 and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man.
3 Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. 4 If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. 5 They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: "See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain." 6 But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises.
7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8 But God found fault with the people and said : "The time is coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.
9 It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord.
10 This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.
11 No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest.
12 For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more."
13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.
Promises to Keep
Hebrews 8:1-13
Sermon
by James McCormick
Do you know the name Tom Dooley? Not the folk song Tom Dooley, but Dr. Tom Dooley? You need to know his story, because Dr. Tom Dooley was a Twentieth Century saint. While serving in the Navy, he saw the physical suffering of the people of Southeast Asia - so much illness and suffering, so few doctors to deal with it. When his tour of duty was over, he resigned his commission and went to Indochina, now Laos, to serve as a medical missionary. There he poured out his life on behalf of the people. He saw patients in consultation. He prescribed. He did surgery. But not only that; he also recruited and trained doctors and nurses. And, he raised money and built hospitals. Tom Dooley was a Christian, a devout Catholic. He had been made compassionate by the compassion of Jesus. And, he felt that he had received a call from God -a call to minister to the needs of those suffering people. His Christian commitment was symbolized by a religious medal he wore always around his neck. On the back of that medal he had inscribed some words by Robert Frost:
“The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep, and miles to go before I sleep.”
Because of his Christian commitment, he had made some promises to God. His healing ministry was his way of keeping his promises. He had come to love the people of Laos. And because of his love for them, he had made promises both to God and to them. He worked at fever pitch, sometimes driving himself to near exhaustion. How would he make a dent in the need? So much to do - so little time and resources with which to do it.
In the midst of all of that, it was discovered that Tom Dooley had cancer. The doctors told him that if he returned to the United States, availed himself of the best medical care, and got plenty of rest, he could extend his life by some considerable degree. But, his work was not finished. His commitment was not complete. So, he decided to spend whatever time he had left continuing his work there in Laos. If anything, he worked even longer hours. He continued to see patients, train doctors and nurses, raise money, build hospitals. He worked and worked and worked, until one day he collapsed, and shortly thereafter, he died.
At the funeral service, the priest told the inspiring story of his life - a life that looked very much like Jesus’ life of compassion. He told of how Tom Dooley had invested his life in the healing of the people of Laos. He told of the medal he had always worn around his neck, and he read the inscription:
“The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep, and miles to go before I sleep.”
Then the priest added, “And now you can sleep, Tom Dooley, because you have kept all your promises.” It’s a marvelous thing to make big promises in life. Such promises give stature, meaning, and direction to our lives. It’s a marvelous thing to make big promises. But it’s an even better thing, once we have made big promises, to keep them. In fact, I can’t think of anything I would rather have said about me at the time of my death than, “Jim McCormick made some big promises in his life. And when he made big promises, he always kept them!”
In the Bible, the word for promise is “covenant.” And you’ll never understand the Bible unless you understand covenant because, from beginning to end, that’s what the Bible is about. A covenant is an agreement, a kind of two party contract in which each party to the contract makes certain promises. The thirty nine books of what we call the “Old Testament” should really be called the “Old Covenant” because that’s what they are about. They are about the God who called a group of people together by means of a covenant. That’s what made them the people of Israel. And in that covenant God promised, “I will be your God. I will watch over you with steadfast, dependable love. And, I will provide for all your needs.” On their part, the people promised, “We will be Your people. We will follow You faithfully. And we will keep all Your commandments.” That was the covenant. And, for their entire history, the people of Israel interpreted all the events of their lives in light of that covenant.
The twenty seven books of what we call the “New Testament” should really be called the “New Covenant” because that’s what they are about. In the new covenant, God sent Jesus into the world. He called a new group of people together, the new Israel, or the Church. And again, promises were made. God promised, “I will be your God. I will watch over you with steadfast, dependable love. And I will provide for all your needs.” And the people promised, “We will be Your people. Through faith, we receive Jesus as our Savior and Lord. We will follow You faithfully. And we will keep all of Your commandments.” That was the covenant. Those were the promises.
Read the Bible, read the history of the Church, look at your own experience, and you will discover that God has always kept His promises. Century after century He has been utterly faithful and utterly dependable! When God makes a promise, you can take it to the bank. In fact, the dependability of God is one of the great themes of the Bible. When God makes a promise, He always keeps it. But, the story of human beings is something else; we are not very dependable. We are an erratic bunch at best. We run hot and cold, on again, off again, sometimes faithful, sometimes not. That’s pretty much Judeo-Christian history in a nutshell: God makes promises and keeps them; we make promises and break them. I’m not proud of that reality, but reality it is.
Most of the contracts I know anything about have the provision that if one party fails to live up to the terms of the contract, the contract is voided. And often there are severe penalties involved. You can’t expect one party to keep his part of the agreement if the other party doesn’t keep his. That isn’t fair! But the remarkable good news of the gospel is that God keeps on keeping His promises whether we keep ours or not!
Isn’t that amazing? In spite of our faithlessness, God is still faithful. One of the great scriptural texts declares: “God makes His sun to shine on the evil and on the good, and sends His rain on the just and on the unjust.” God never forsakes us; He never abandons us; and He never gives up on us. He continues to love us and to provide for us even when we turn our backs on Him. That tells us something important about the nature of God, doesn’t it? His faithfulness is not dependent upon our faithfulness. His love does not wait for us to love Him in return. His determination to keep His promises is not dependent upon our keeping ours! Amazing! Hear it loud and clear: when God makes a promise, He keeps it!
Now, if I were God, I wouldn’t do it like that. I would make my love and the passing out of my blessings a bit more conditional. I would make it clear that there are rewards for faithfulness and that there is punishment for unfaithfulness. I mean, you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours. You show me that you deserve what I have to give. I tell you, I would run the world in such a way that people would shape up, or they would be sorry!
For example, if you are not faithful, do you think I would allow you to have an excellent job, a comfortable home, and a good family? Not on your life. Such blessings would be reserved for those who deserve them! You have to keep your part of the bargain! If you planted a garden and were not faithful, I would have it rain right up to your property line, and stop. Not a drop on your crop! There would be perpetual drought until you took your faith commitment seriously. And, if you cut church and went fishing on Sunday morning – nary a nibble, not on Sunday morning! And, Sunday morning golfers? I would have every ball find the rough, or a bunker, or the water. I would have you three putt or four putt every green. No birdies, no pars - not on Sunday morning! That’s the way I would do it if I were in charge. There would be some changes made, and I would have people shaping up right and left! Aren’t you glad I’m not God?
The Christian gospel is such good news that I can’t fully comprehend it. In spite of our unloveliness, God insists upon loving us. In spite of our unworthiness, God keeps on blessing us. In spite of our failure to keep our promises, God keeps on keeping His. Remarkably, in spite of our undependability, God insists upon believing in us. He continues to invite us to make promises to Him. And, when we do, He keeps on believing that we will keep them. I have come to believe that the heart of the gospel is not that we believe in God. The heart of the gospel is that, in spite of our track record, God continues to believe in us. And He continues to provide for us as a loving Father knows how to do. I tell you, that’s some kind of love. It’s a faithful, dependable kind of love!
Now, I don’t fully understand love like that. But I sense in my depths that God’s kind of unconditional love is my best hope in life. I don’t know about you, but I don’t respond well to threat and punishment and coercion. Such actions are not redemptive; they don’t have the power to change me on the inside. But when it finally gets through to me that God provides for me whether I deserve it or not, that God continues to love me even when I don’t love Him back – when God’s unconditional, steadfast love gets through to me, something begins to happen to me. The best Jim McCormick begins to be called forth. I don’t want to continue to take advantage of God’s love, continuing to receive and receive and receive without giving in return. His love for me makes me want to answer His love with some love of my own. God’s dependability in keeping His promises to me makes me want to answer that with some dependability of my own. I know when I am at my best that my best hope in life is precisely the dependability of God’s love - that love that keeps on loving no matter what!
Every one of us has made promises to God. If you are a Christian and a member of Christ’s church, you have made some promises to God. At some time in your life, you stood at the altar of His church and you said, “I accept Christ as my Savior and Lord, and pledge my allegiance to His Kingdom. I will be loyal to His church and uphold it by my prayers, my presence, my gifts and my service.” We said that. And, if we have kept that promise, it has given direction and meaning to our lives.
Today, I can’t help thinking of those faithful Christians who came before us and who also made some important promises. Because they kept their promises, this Chapel was organized, buildings built, worship services held, classes taught, faith kept alive and passed on from generation to generation. We are able to worship here today because of the kept promises of those who came before us. We stand today on their shoulders. And God will do great things among us in this generation, just as God did great things in generations before us, if we will be faithful
Promises. Promises. We are told in scripture not to swear. We are told, “Don’t swear by heaven or by earth or by any other oath. Just let your ‘yes’ be yes and your ‘no’ be no.” (James 5:12) Do you understand what he was saying? He was saying don’t be the kind of person who has to prop up your words, feeling that no one will believe you unless you flail your arms around and say, “I swear by all that’s holy…” No, we are told, “Just say ‘Yes’ or ‘No’.” That’s enough. In other words, be a person of such credibility, be a person of such integrity, that everyone who knows you will know that, if you say it, you will do it. If you make a promise, you will keep it.
In closing, let me tell you about someone like that. His name was Billy, and it was the first year he was old enough to play Little League baseball. For years he had gone with his parents and sat in the stands while his older brothers played. But this was his year! Ever since he could remember, he had been looking forward to it. He was going to play Little League baseball! For weeks, he had been breaking in his glove. You know how they do it: throw the ball into the glove to form the pocket, and then take it out; throw the ball in the glove and then take it out. He and his mother had been to the sporting goods store to buy baseball shoes. They had bought a baseball cap with the team insignia on it. And he and his parents had gone to the meeting to sign up and to meet the coach. Excitedly, he had said, “My name is Billy, and I’m going to play on your team this year! When is the first day of practice?” The coach smiled and said, “Monday, 4:30, the baseball field next to the school.” “I’ll be there!” Billy said. The next day he ran into the coach at the shopping mall. He called across the full width of the mall, “Hey coach! Monday, 4:30, I’ll be there!” The days passed. Several more times Billy saw the coach and every time he would say the same thing. He saw the coach at church on Sunday and said, “Tomorrow, 4:30, I’ll be there!”
Monday came. Billy could hardly contain himself. He could hardly wait. The clock moved so slowly. Minutes seemed like hours. About noon, the storm clouds began to roll in. Mid-afternoon, the bottom fell out and the rain began to pour. It rained and rained and rained some more. The coach’s house was located across the street from the practice field. As he was walking through the front room, he looked out at the field, and it was about 4 inches deep in water. There was no way they could practice that day. But as he looked, he saw a little boy standing there at the pitcher’s mound, throwing a ball into the glove, taking it out; throwing it into the glove, taking it out. Grumbling under his breath, the coach put on his boots, his raincoat, his hat, took his umbrella, and went sloshing across the field. As he got close, he saw that it was Billy. The new baseball shoes were under water. Water was running off his new cap and down his face. There was not a square inch of dry clothing anywhere on him. Impatiently the coach shouted, “Billy, you’re drenched. You’re going to catch your death of cold. What do you think you’re doing?” With all the innocence of youth, Billy replied, “Coach, I said I’d be here.”
“I accept Christ as my Savior and Lord and pledge my allegiance to his Kingdom. I will be loyal to his church, and uphold it by my prayers, my presence, my gifts, and my service.” We said that! It’s a marvelous thing to make big promises in life. It’s an even better thing, once we have made big promises, to keep them!
Prayer: God, our Father, we are grateful that You love us so much that You keep Your promises. We are grateful that You trust us so much that You invite us to have a part in what You are doing in Your world. We have made our promises. Now give us the grace to keep them. In the name of Christ we pray. Amen.
ChristianGlobe Networks, Inc., Selected Sermons, by James McCormick
Jesus has been exalted to the throne of God and now serves as high priest in the true tabernacle, the very presence of God (8:1–2). Earthly high priests served in the tabernacle built b…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
1 The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2 and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man.
3 Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. 4 If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. 5 They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: "See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain." 6 But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises.
7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8 But God found fault with the people and said : "The time is coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.
9 It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord.
10 This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.
11 No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest.
12 For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more."
13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.
The heavenly sphere of Jesus Christ’s priesthood is the subject of 8:1–6. The intricate comparison of the two priesthoods being completed, the author advances his argument by comparing the two priestly works. The point is that Jesus’s priesthood is exercised in heaven, in the very presence of God, and its effectuality is therefore neither earthly nor temporary but spiritual and eternal (8:1–2; cf. 4:14). He exercises his priesthood not at some distance from God but in God’s immediate presence (see 9:24). The point is reiterated to allay the suspicions of his Jewish readership (8:3–5). Although Christ is not now visible to his people as a priest, his priestly work is no less authentic inasmuch as it involves the offering of sacrifice (Heb. 5:1)—that of himself, not that of the law (7:27; 9:14). The recipients of the letter are attracted to the rites of the temple, but this earthly round of ritual and its setting are but a copy of the real, heavenly sacrifice, which Christ offered once and for all and on the basis of which he now intercedes for his people. The detailed instruction God gave to Moses concerning the construction of the tabernacle (Exodus 25–40) demonstrates that the tabernacle and, by implication, the temple were not the reality but only copies of it. The author’s readership is in danger of preferring the copy to the genuine article, of accepting an imitation as the true principle of salvation.
Now the author presents Jesus Christ as the guarantor of a better covenant (8:7–13). The argument now introduced in verse 7 parallels that of 7:11 and 10:2. Hebrews was written to a community inclined to regard the covenant life and experience of Israel, especially the wilderness period, as a paradigm for her own. These Jewish Christians were disposed to feel that they required nothing more than to duplicate the pattern of life with its outward forms established by their forebears. That pattern, in their minds, was the Mosaic covenant, but in fact, they conceived of that covenant not as the proclamation of the gospel (Heb. 4:1) but in legalistic and ritualistic terms. The author has already pointed out, in correcting the error of these ritualistically minded people, that the wilderness generation perished and forfeited the promise for lack of faith and thus is not at all to be emulated. In a similar way, he now argues that the very fact that another covenant was promised to replace the covenant with the fathers ipso facto demonstrates that the former covenant is obsolete and cannot serve as a paradigm for believers today (see another instance of this form of argument in Heb. 4:8).
But what are these two covenants? Commentaries are often singularly unhelpful at this point. It is usually asserted that the former covenant is the Mosaic administration per se and the new covenant is the superior administration introduced by Christ and the apostles. The contrast then is between a relatively inferior Old Testament revelation, faith, and spirituality and the fulfillment of the new epoch. But such an interpretation falls foul of the plain facts of the case and of the radical character of the distinction drawn between the two covenants (8:8–12). It does so in five ways.
First, the old covenant represents not Israel’s life of faith but her culpable and damning unbelief in the gospel, as the author emphasizes with his own striking introduction to the citation: “But God found fault with the people and said...” (8:8). The difference between the old covenant and the new is the difference between the forfeiture of salvation (“I turned away from them,” 8:9) and subjective redemption (“I will be their God,” 8:10), between death and eternal life.
Second, the fulfillment of the promises of the better covenant is not to be found in some comparative advantage enjoyed by believers in the new epoch but rather in the consummation. These better promises are only the ancient verities of Old Testament faith, which elsewhere in Hebrews are called “the good news,” “the inheritance,” the “rest” of God, “a better country,” and a “better resurrection.” Believers in the time before the incarnation claimed these promises from afar (Heb. 11:1–38), precisely as believers must today. The popular notion that the law of God was but some external ordinance in the Old Testament but now in the new era has been inscribed on the heart is not only generally unbiblical (Deut. 4:8–9; 6:5–6; 30:6, 14; Ps. 40:8; Prov. 3:1, 3; Isa. 51:7; Jer. 24:4–7) but wholly without support in this letter. It is very important to recognize that the author’s exhortation is never in the form a fortiori (from the lesser to the greater; for example, “if they could persevere in the old covenant, how much more ought we to do so in the new...”).
Third, the specific promises of Jeremiah’s prophecy of the new covenant are not considered by this author to have been fulfilled and cannot be so considered. Indeed, it would be highly ironic had the author understood that the expectation had now been fulfilled of a time when “no longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me” (8:11) but then proceeded anyway to write Hebrews, which is nothing less than an impassioned plea to his brethren to “know the Lord” in the face of an incipient apostasy in principle no different than that of the fathers in the wilderness or of that against which Jeremiah protested.
Fourth, taken at face value, Jeremiah’s prophecy is not a prophecy of the New Testament epoch, in which Israel’s failure of faith would be repeated many times and on a far more terrible scale, but a prophecy of the final triumph of the grace of God, when the church will no more be a mixture of true and false sons or pass through periods of domination by unbelief as in the wilderness, in Jeremiah’s day, and not infrequently since. The prophecy has many affinities with other prophetic texts that portray the triumph and consummation of the kingdom of God in the world (e.g., Isa. 11:6–9; 54:11–15; 59:20–21; Ezek. 16:59–63; Jer. 32:36–41; 33:14–26; Rom. 11:26–27).
Fifth, as the argument is presented in 8:7, 13 and unfolds subsequently, the author seems interested in but two features of Jeremiah’s prophecy: the covenant guaranteed by Jesus promises forgiveness, and the very fact of such a promise of the new covenant constitutes a condemnation of the old. Indeed, if by “new covenant” the author means the new dispensation and by its blessings the comparative advantages believers enjoy today, he fails altogether to make that clear.
The old covenant is the broken relationship with God that resulted from Israel’s response of unbelief and disobedience. Such a situation prevailed when the gospel was not combined with faith (Heb. 4:2). Of course, in principle it can be repeated today; indeed, the threat of repeating a breaking of the covenant is what calls forth this letter. The old covenant is not the Mosaic administration except where that system was perverted by unbelief into an occasion of apostasy. The new covenant, contrarily, is the living relationship God creates with his people by means of his gracious and powerful working within them, calling them to faith and obedience. This covenant of grace is contemplated in Jeremiah’s prophecy from the vantage point of its consummation at the end of the history of the world, but, of course, it embraces all the people of God as one (11:39–40). This covenant, which is simply the divine application of the redemption which is in Christ to those who are being saved, mediates the heavenly realities of eternal life that have always been the hope of the faithful. In saying that the old covenant is soon to disappear, the author means that the entire ritual system of Israel—the contrast of the two covenants is presented in terms of that ritual (8:1–6)—is about to disappear (7:18). That system stands under divine judgment because it has been denatured by its separation from the gospel.
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
The True High Priest and His Ministry
In this passage the author sums up his argument thus far but also brings it to a new stage. He continues to expound the definitive character of Christ’s work, now drawing the contrast in a new and fascinating manner by using the language of shadow and reality.
8:1 The point of the argument centers on the actual reality and sufficiency of our high priest. He has been able definitively to accomplish what the levitical priesthood pointed toward in anticipation. He now has assumed his rightful place at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven (this is a circumlocution for “God”; cf. 1:3). Once again the wording alludes to Psalm 110:1. Jesus is where he is because of who he is—both Son (cf. 4:14) and high priest (cf. Ps. 110:4).
8:2 We have a high priest who serves (lit., a “servant” or “minister”) in the sanctuary, that is, in the temple. This is described as the true tabernacle (lit., “tent”), one set up by the Lord, not by man (NIV changes the original active voice to a passive construction). The same point is made in verse 5, where the levitical priests are said to have been concerned with only a copy or shadow of “heavenly” realities. There has been considerable discussion of the possible influence of Greek dualism upon the author in his argumentation here and in succeeding passages (e.g., 9:23f.; 10:1; see note on 8:2).
Does the author believe in the existence of an actual sanctuary somewhere “in heaven” of which the earthly sanctuary is a copy? Although the language indeed sounds like that of the Greek philosophers, it is much more probable that the author takes his idea from the OT where Moses is instructed about building the tabernacle and its furniture by being shown patterns or models. (In addition to Exod. 25:40, which the author quotes in v. 5, see Exod. 25:9; 26:30; 27:8.) The issue here is not the existence of a heavenly tabernacle but rather Moses’ faithfulness to God’s intended purpose. In our passage the point being made is that true and finally efficacious atonement transcends the tabernacle and its ritual because now God’s purpose has been realized. What took place in that ritual of the historical tabernacle only through pictures and symbols actually takes place in the sacrificial work of Christ. The work of our high priest, therefore, concerns not pictures or symbols, but ultimate reality—the reality of God himself. What preoccupies our author is not a vertical dualism, but a historical progression from promise to fulfillment. The final and definitive character of the fulfillment is underlined by the fact that our high priest sits at the right hand of God, now fulfilling his ministry of intercession (7:25). The words “set up by the Lord” are possibly an allusion to the LXX of Numbers 24:6, where the tents of Israel (cf. Num. 24:5) are said to have been pitched by the Lord. The language is figurative and poetical.
8:3–4 The opening words, every high priest, are exactly the same as in 5:1 where the high priests are described as “appointed … to offer of gifts and sacrifices.” Since it has been already established that Jesus is the high priest spoken of in Psalm 110:4, it is obvious that it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. Although the author has already indicated what that “something” is (“himself” in 7:27), he also here anticipates what he will argue in chapters 9 and 10. But the priesthood of Jesus is categorically superior to that of earthly priests: his distinctive offering is not made on earth, … prescribed by the law. This is no denial of the death of Christ in history, but rather a way of saying that his work of atonement is of eschatological or ultimate meaning and hence “heavenly” in contrast to the “earthly” work of the levitical priesthood. This is forcefully conveyed in the following verses.
8:5 The inferiority of the work of the levitical priesthood is now stressed by noting that it concerns but a copy and shadow of the heavenly realities. This is but another way of saying that their work only prefigured the definitive atoning work of Jesus, which alone is of ultimate significance. This is further substantiated by reference to the words spoken to Moses as he was about to build the tabernacle (lit., “the tent”). He was told to follow the pattern shown you on the mountain (Exod. 25:40). This alone indicates that the tabernacle (and it successor, the temple) with its sacrificial ritual (stipulated through Moses) was not itself the ultimate reality, but only a reflection of it. The contrasting of the earthly and temporal with the heavenly and ultimate occurs again in 9:23 and 10:1. Paul can use very similar language, as in Colossians 2:17, where, speaking of certain items of the Mosaic legislation such as dietary and Sabbath rules, he writes: “These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.”
8:6 NIV omits the opening word nyni, “now,” by which the author intends to sharpen the contrast between the Mosaic era and the new circumstances now in force. In his typical fashion he now writes: But the ministry Jesus (lit., “he”) has received is superior (NIV adds to theirs). This is the first of three comparatives used in this verse. The second occurs in the statement that Jesus “is the mediator of a better covenant” (cf. 7:22). Here and in other occurrences of mediator (9:15; 12:24) the meaning intended is that the sacrifice of Jesus is itself the means or agency by which the new covenant (the word “new” is added in 9:15 and 12:24) becomes a reality. The new covenant is something he effects, since it is absolutely dependent on his person and work. The third comparative refers to better promises upon which the new covenant is founded (lit., “[legally] enacted,” cf. NEB “legally secured”). These promises will be the focus of attention in the quotation from Jeremiah 31, which will take up the remainder of chapter 8. Thus our high priest is concerned with matters altogether superior to the old covenant. His priestly work itself, the new covenant resulting from it, and the promises to which that new covenant points—in all of this the old pales in comparison to the greater excellence of the new.
Additional Notes
8:1 The point (kephalaion) can be understood to refer to a summary or to a new main point. Both aspects seem present in the opening verses of this chapter. Majesty (megalosynē) occurs in the NT only here, in 1:3, and in Jude 25. The expression such a high priest is found also in 7:26. For high priest, see note on 2:17. In heaven is, in Hebraic fashion, literally a plural, “in the heavens.”
8:2 The sanctuary is literally “the holies” (tōn hagiōn) and can have three possible meanings: “holy things,” “holy ones,” or “holy place,” i.e., sanctuary. The last is preferable because this is the obvious meaning of the same words in 9:2, 8, 24; 10:19; 13:11. “Holy place” can, according to context, indicate the “Holy of Holies” (as in 9:12, 25; for the full expression see 9:3). The word “servant” or “minister” (leitourgos) occurs elsewhere in Hebrews only in 1:7 in reference to angels and in the NT in Rom. 13:6 (referring to authorities of the state), Rom. 15:16 (Paul), and Phil. 2:25 (Epaphroditus). The cognate verb (leitourgeō) is used frequently in the LXX to refer to the priestly work of the Levites. For the cognate noun “ministry” (leitourgia), see 8:6 and 9:21.
The word tabernacle or “tent” (skēnē) here and in 9:11 has been taken to refer to the humanity of Christ (Calvin), to the church (Westcott), and to the heavenly regions through which Christ passed on the way to the Holy of Holies (Spicq, Héring). Despite John 1:14 (where the cognate verb [skēnoō] occurs), and other NT references to the body as a “tent” (e.g., 2 Cor. 5:1, 4), the suggestion that the humanity of Christ is in view is hardly compatible with the statement in 9:11 that the tent “is not a part of this creation.” The same must be said concerning the view that “tent” refers to the heavens. The argument that the church is in view depends on being able to equate “church” and “tent” (an equation found nowhere in the NT) on the basis of a third term, “body,” common to both—a rather tenuous connection at best. Sanctuary and true tabernacle are best taken as referring to the same thing, the very presence of God (see 9:24). For a full discussion of this problem, see the excursus in Hughes, pp. 283–90. The word “tent” (skēnē) is used in Hebrews far more than in any other NT book. It almost always refers to the tabernacle, the predecessor of the permanent temple (see 8:5; chap. 9; 13:10), and invariably is shown to be inferior to the reality it foreshadowed. For a discussion of the use of this word in Hebrews, see W. Michaelis, TDNT, vol. 7, pp. 375–77.
The Greek dualism often mentioned as the background to this passage derives from the philosophy of Plato wherein every earthly object is said to be the manifestation of a corresponding archetypal “idea” or “form” that can only be known through the intellect. This dualism between earthly and “heavenly” reality was influential in the Hellenistic world, especially in such a center as Alexandria, where it can be detected in Philo, the Hellenistic Jew (who was a contemporary of Christ). Some indeed have seen a considerable influence of Philo upon the author of Hebrews, and this has given rise to the speculation that the book was written from Alexandria, and even that Apollos, with his Alexandrian background (Acts 18:24), was the author. Although the debate concerning the influence of Philo upon our author has not ended, R. Williamson has presented a very convincing case that the author of Hebrews is not at all influenced by Philo. See Philo and the Epistle to the Hebrews. Williamson also denies the influence of Platonism upon Hebrews’ author, arguing that the stress on the importance of history, as well as the temporal sequence of promise and fulfillment, is quite alien to Plato. See R. Williamson, “Platonism and Hebrews,” SJT 16 (1963), pp. 415–24. The “dualism” in Hebrews is not of a metaphysical kind but of an eschatological kind, and the author’s background is more Jewish than Hellenistic.
8:3–4 The expression gifts and sacrifices (cf. Lev. 21:6), which occurs also in 5:1 and 9:9, is unique to this epistle in the NT. The phrase is a general reference to a variety of sacrifices offered by the priests. In describing this work of the priests, the author uses the present tense prospherō, the regular word for “offer”), implying the necessary repetition (and also possibly the existence of the sacrificial ritual at the time the author writes); but in referring to the offering this one must offer he uses the aorist tense, implying the once-and-for-all character of his high-priestly work. The argument that if Jesus were an earthly priest (in contrast to one whose work is “heavenly” or ultimate) he would not have anything to offer harks back to the admission that Jesus was not a member of the tribe of Levi—of which alone Moses spoke when he instituted the sacrificial ritual (7:14). If then he is a high priest, his offering must be of an entirely different order.
8:5 The word for copy (hypodeigma) and the word for shadow (skia) sound like the language of Hellenistic philosophy, but the ultimate reality to which they point is not something perceived only by the intellect, but something which occurred in the historical process: the cross of Christ. Copy occurs in the same sense in 9:23. See H. Schlier, TDNT, vol. 2, pp. 32f. Shadow is used similarly in 10:1 (and in Col. 2:17). See H.-C. Hahn, NIDNTT, vol. 3, pp. 553–56. Related to these two words is another key word in this verse, which occurs in the quotation: pattern (typos). Although this is the only occurrence in Hebrews, the counterpart “antitype” (antitypos) is found in 9:24 (see note on this verse), where the earthly sanctuary is described as “a copy of the true one.” On typos see L. Goppelt, Typos, translation of 1939 German original (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982); L. Goppelt, TDNT, vol. 8, pp. 246–59.
What is in heaven is lit., “the heavenlies,” which can mean the “heavenly things” (cf. ASV, NASB), as it is translated in 9:23, or the “heavenly sanctuary” (on the analogy of “the holies” as in 8:2). The difference is of little consequence. The earthly ritual is but a pointer to the definitive and ultimate atoning work of Christ. “Above all, the vertical typology, which is all-important in Philo, is in Hb. merely an aid to the presentation and characterisation of the horizontal” (L. Goppelt, TDNT, vol. 8, p. 258). Moses was warned comes from the verb chrēmatizō, which occurs also in 11:7 and in 12:25, where it also refers to matters of especially serious importance. After the words see to it in the quotation, the Greek contains a common formula used to indicate the quotation of Scripture: phēsin, “He says” or “it says” (cf. 1 Cor. 6:16). For tabernacle, i.e., “tent” (skēnē), see note on v. 2. Exodus 25:40 is also utilized in Stephen’s speech (Acts 7:44).
8:6 The word for priestly ministry (leitourgia), which is common in the LXX, occurs again in 9:21. The word is generally spiritualized in the NT to refer to Christian ministry (see 2 Cor. 9:12; Phil. 2:17, 30), but in Luke 1:23 the original sense is retained. See K. Hess, NIDNTT, vol. 3, pp. 551–53. On the importance of the word better (kreittōn) for our author, see note on 1:4. The word mediator (mesitēs) occurs first in this verse and reappears in 9:15 and 12:24 (cf. 1 Tim. 2:5). The word involves more than the idea of a “middleman.” It connotes the accomplishment of salvation and is close to the meaning of “guarantee” in the parallel phrase of 7:22, “the guarantee of a better covenant.” See A. Oepke, TDNT, vol. 4, pp. 598–624. On covenant (diathēkē), see note on 7:22. See also J. Schildenberger, “Covenant,” in EBT, pp. 140–46. The Greek word underlying founded (or “legally enacted”) is nomotheteō, which occurs also in 7:11, where it refers to the Mosaic legislation (see note on 7:11). The new covenant thus possesses the same authoritative and binding character in God’s will as did the old. “Better promises” not only anticipates the content of the quotation from Jer. 31, which follows, but also alludes to such eschatological realities as true sabbath rest (4:3, 9), an unshakable kingdom (12:28), and the heavenly Jerusalem (12:22). See E. Hoffmann, NIDNTT, vol. 3, pp. 68–74.
The Promise of a New Covenant
The author now cites an OT passage of major importance in the epistle, Jeremiah 31:31–34. The explicit reference to the new covenant in this text makes it ideal for his purpose. The internalizing of the law and the reality of the forgiveness of sins in particular are significant for our author’s argumentation, and sections of this same passage are quoted again in 10:16–18. The quotation enables the author to stress the discontinuity between Christianity and the Mosaic law, while at the same time indicating an underlying continuity in God’s purposes. What the author has been describing so well is now shown to have been anticipated within the prophetic Scriptures.
8:7–8a Implicit in the present existence of a new and better covenant with its better promises, which has been the subject of the preceding passage, is the intrinsic inadequacy of that first covenant. Had the first covenant been sufficient, no place would have been sought for another. And yet the hope of a new covenant is precisely what we read about in the prophet Jeremiah. The problem, however, lies not simply in the first covenant (which by its nature was only preparatory), but more fundamentally in the people themselves. Thus God (lit., “he”) found fault with the people (lit., “them”) and said, whereupon the words of the prophet follow. This assignment of the real blame to the people rather than to the first covenant is somewhat reminiscent of Paul’s vindication of the law in Romans 7:7–12.
8:8b–12 God speaks through the prophet about a future time when a new covenant will be established with his people. The prophet Jeremiah writes in a time of trouble and disillusionment; Judah and Jerusalem have fallen to the invading Babylonians and have been carried off into exile, all this by way of judgment upon the people for their disobedience. The root problem, and the reason why the new covenant will be unlike the old (for the old, see Exod. 19:5), is because they did not remain faithful to (lit., “continue in”) my covenant. The old covenant was unable to produce obedience, and hence judgment came upon the nation (and I turned away from them). The new covenant, however, will accomplish what the old could not do: it will produce true righteousness (I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts), the personal knowledge of the Lord, and effective forgiveness of sins. Our author does not exegete these fruits of the new covenant, but it is nevertheless clear that they are the “better promises” referred to in verse 6 and now experienced by the people of God, the church. From his perspective we have arrived at that new level of existence spoken of by the prophet. Fulfillment has come. This is the meaning of Jesus Christ and his finished work of atonement, for he is “the guarantee of a better covenant” (7:22), “the mediator of a new covenant” (9:15).
Although Jeremiah is the only OT writer to refer explicitly to a new covenant in the future, Ezekiel apparently had a similar expectation. He speaks of an “eternal covenant” (cf. Heb. 13:20) which the Lord will establish and which will involve transformation, knowledge of the Lord, and the forgiveness of sins (Ezek. 11:19–20; 16:60–63; 36:26–29; 37:26–28, including the words “they will be my people, and I will be their God”). Other prophets foresee similar circumstances (e.g., Isa. 54:13; cf. reference to the “covenant of peace” in 54:10; 27:9, quoted in Rom. 11:27).
The idea of the “new covenant” is of course found elsewhere in the NT. In the eucharistic words of Jesus, the new covenant is referred to in both Luke 22:20 and 1 Corinthians 11:25. Paul refers to it in 2 Corinthians 3:6 (cf. his explicit reference to the “old covenant” in 3:14). A similar contrast between two covenants is found in Galatians 4:24–26. Nowhere, outside of Hebrews, however, do we encounter the quotation of this passage or the argument based upon it that we have here (cf. also 9:15; 10:16–18; 12:24). Our author capitalizes upon Jeremiah’s reference to the new covenant. A new situation is in view within the Scriptures of the old covenant itself, a situation that envisages a new kind of living, a new spiritual possibility, and a new experience of a definitive forgiveness of sins. The law is internalized, and a new intimacy of relationship between God and his people becomes possible. Knowledge of the Lord becomes the possession of all, and the cleansing of sin becomes a reality at the deepest level. It is this that Jeremiah looked for, and it is this that has come to the readers in Christ (see the application of the passage to the readers in 10:15–18). But if the latter statement is true, the implications for the old covenant are startling.
8:13 Indeed, by virtue of the reality of the new covenant, God (lit., “he”) has made the first one obsolete. The same God who brought the old covenant into existence in anticipation of the new has now brought the fulfillment of the new. But the new, in turn, is so much better than the old that the old must give way to it. The purpose of the old has been accomplished, and hence it will soon disappear. This statement that the old covenant is near to disappearing probably implies the continuance of the cultic ritual of the levitical priesthood at the time the author writes. From his perspective that ritual is outmoded and pointless and therefore cannot last long. If the author writes in the early sixties, he may well be thinking of the prophecy of Jesus about the fall of Jerusalem (Mark 13:2). In any event, had he written after the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70, he could hardly have avoided referring explicitly to the historical confirmation of his theological argument. The author’s courage in expressing to Jewish readers the transitory nature of the Mosaic covenant is notable. It is possible only because the discontinuity is counterbalanced by the underlying continuity of promise and fulfillment stressed by the author throughout the book. The new, the better, has come, but it was nothing other than this to which the old pointed and for which the old prepared the way.
Additional Notes
8:7–8a By first covenant the author means the Sinai covenant (see v. 9) and not chronologically the first covenant of the Bible (whether with Noah or Abraham), just as by another he means in context that referred to by Jeremiah. Nothing wrong translates the word “faultless” or “blameless” (amēmptos), which occurs only here in Hebrews. The argument of v. 7 is similar to that of 7:11, i.e., if the old is sufficient, then why is a further reality mentioned in the text of Scripture? The perfect tense of the Greek participle in v. 8a, “having found fault with them” (memphomenos) implies that he not only did so in the past, but continues to do so. The Greek pronoun “them,” which underlies NIV’s the people is in the dative case (autois) in some important manuscripts rather than the accusative case (autous). This has led some commentators (e.g., Hughes) to construe the pronoun with “he says,” i.e., “to them he says.” Despite the advantage of such a hypothesis—it avoids the complexity of the author faulting both the old covenant and the people—the most natural reading even with the dative case is that the people are held blameworthy (cf. v. 9). For an opposing argument, see J. L. P. Wolmarons, “The Text and Translation of Hebrews 8:8,” ZNW 75 (1984), pp. 139–44.
8:8b–12 The author cites the LXX very closely, making only the slightest changes. The most significant lies behind NIV’s will make in v. 8, where the verb synteleō (“accomplish” or “fulfill”) is used in place of the ordinary “establish” of the LXX. This befits the author’s teleological perspective. The LXX (Jer. 31:31–34) closely follows the Hebrew text (Jer. 31:31–34) except for the following: in v. 32 the words “though I was a husband to them” are omitted by the LXX; and in v. 33 for the Hebrew “within them” LXX has “in their minds.” The author of Hebrews quotes the LXX very accurately, making what appear to be only stylistic changes.
Although the new covenant is to be made with Israel and Judah, the ultimate recipients are the people of Christ. To be sure, our Jewish readers were the people, described as the house (as also in v. 10; cf. 3:6) of Israel and Judah. But Jewish nationalism and political aspirations find no place in our epistle. In v. 9 NIV adds it will … be, in keeping with the opening words of the quotation. The further words took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt (lit., “the land of Egypt”) are of course a reference to the exodus and are expressed in language that had much earlier become formulaic. This explanation of Israel’s plight as the result of its failure to abide by the covenant is widespread in the prophets (e.g., Isa. 24:5; Ezek. 16:59; Hos. 8:1; Mal. 2:10). At the beginning of v. 10 NIV omits “because” (hoti), a word that indicates that the new covenant is not like the old for the reasons about to be stipulated. The expression after that time (lit., “those days”) is language referring to an eschatological era (cf. the opening words of Acts 15:16; quoting the LXX of Amos 9:11). The possibility of an internalizing of the law (cf. the notion of “circumcision of the heart,” Deut. 10:16; Jer. 4:4), although intimated in the OT (cf. Deut. 30:11–14), was never achieved. The affirmation I will be their God, and they will be my people is common OT language describing the basic aspect of covenant relationship, which though repeatedly promised had not become a full reality until the new covenant became effective (cf. Exod 6:7; Lev. 26:12; Ezek. 37:27; Jer. 7:23). Knowledge of the Lord is a very common eschatological expectation among the OT prophets. In v. 11 the best manuscripts read politēn (“fellow citizen”; cf. NASB) where NIV apparently chooses to follow the inferior reading plēsion (neighbor; cf. KJV). In v. 12 NIV’s I will forgive their wickedness is lit., “I will be merciful toward their iniquities” (cf. RSV). This last assertion of the quotation is climactic within Jeremiah, whose contemporaries had experienced judgment for their sins, but also for our author, who sets forth Christ’s death as the true remedy for the sinfulness of humanity.
8:13 This verse is a midrashic commentary on the significance of the single word new (kainē), which occurs at the beginning of the quotation (NIV adds the word covenant). When God speaks in this way through the prophet, he has in effect declared the first covenant transitory and outmoded. The word “first” is used repeatedly in the argument that follows in a way that implies it is outmoded (cf. 9:1, 15, 18; 10:9). The verb underlying made … obsolete and obsolete (palaioō) occurs elsewhere in Hebrews in the quotation of Ps. 102:26 in 1:11, where it is said that the heavens will “wear out like a garment” (the only other NT occurrence of the word is in Luke 12:33). It is worth noting that the contemporary Jewish sect at Qumran explicitly referred to themselves as the people of the new covenant. But whereas they understood their community as about to experience the fulfillment of the prophecy in Jeremiah 31, they looked for the future reformation rather than the abrogation of the temple cultus. Only the eschatological event of Christ’s cross and exaltation enable the author to draw his radical conclusion concerning discontinuity. See D. Peterson, “The Prophecy of the New Covenant in the Argument of Hebrews,” RefThR 38 (1979) pp. 74–81.
Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by Donald A. Hagner, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.
Birth and childhood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesus was probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’s death (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of a virginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governor Quirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place in Bethlehem (2:15). Both the census and the governorship at the time of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars. Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to either confirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must be determined on the basis of one’s view regarding the general reliability of the Gospel tradition.
On the eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keeping with the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus” (Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home of his parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel of Luke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth in strength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke also contains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Baptism, temptation, and start of ministry. After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke 3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instant ministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that the temptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Luke identify three specific temptations by the devil, though their order for the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine intervention after jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’s kingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation, quoting Scripture in response.
Matthew and Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum in Galilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13; Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirty years of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity or perhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of the Levites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning of Jesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples and the sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Galilean ministry. The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and around Galilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ first teaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30); the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for his calling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection and suffering.
All the Gospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in his Galilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke 5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioning of the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers is recorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministry is the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke 6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, in particular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synoptics focus on healings and exorcisms.
During Jesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with his identity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority (Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family (3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner of Beelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesus told parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growing kingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humble beginnings (4:1–32).
The Synoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful. No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority or ability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized many demons (5:1–13), raised the dead (5:35–42), fed five thousand (6:30–44), and walked on water (6:48–49).
In the later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew and traveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are not written with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns to Galilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fear resolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee, where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ disciples with lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed the Pharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents (7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demanding a sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, who confessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus did provide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesus withdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician woman requested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans had long resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality that allotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere “crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,” Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-mute man in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’ travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The city was the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judean ministry. Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry as he resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually led to his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem into three phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27). The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of the journey. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, and the demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem (Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45; Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journey toward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvation and judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase of the journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are the main themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Social conflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposte interactions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel (Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomic feathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who had little value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16; Luke 18:15–17).
Passion week, death, and resurrection. Each of the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with the crowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark 11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Luke describes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during which Jesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
In Jerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17). Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “began looking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segment of Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’ authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions (12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation (12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s own destruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, Judas Iscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’ arrest (14:10–11).
At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a new covenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29; Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned the disciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark 14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and later he prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agony and submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42; Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial, crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15; Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18). Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission by making disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8) and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return (Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
A pact/compact or an agreement (Heb. berit). The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legal disposition of personal goods.”
The covenant is something that binds parties together or obligates one party to the other. Although there are legal implications associated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant should not be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationship with related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant that establishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why God chose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenant metaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-human relationships.
Some covenants 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 society implies a solemn commitment to a relationship.
The most significant covenant relationship in the biblical material is the one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’s covenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surrounding nations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:89. Although Yahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for his own personal care; he established a relationship with the nation independent of and prior to the nation’s association with his land.
Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structure of the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase “covenant history” can be used to describe the biblical literature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life. It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives of the OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrative shares a covenant perspective, the individual books within the narrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to various aspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50 develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a number of subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on the other hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tension between the promise of land occupation and the responsibility of Israel to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realistic presentation of the tensions associated with the covenant relationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.
Finally, the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenant worship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenant terms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath, judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by the covenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.
Although the covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christological significance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianic role of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the new covenant in both books of Corinthians (1Cor. 11:25; 2Cor. 3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that the shed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The new covenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death, burial, and resurrection (1Cor. 11:25). The writer of the book of Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functions in contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains that Jesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7). Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of the new covenant ministry (2Cor. 3:6).
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).
Egypt is one of the earliest ancient civilizations. The first development of writing took place simultaneously in both Egypt and ancient Sumer around 3000 BC.
Ancient Sumer and Egypt were river valley cultures. Sumer was located in Mesopotamia (southeast Iraq), Egypt in the Nile Valley (northeast Africa). The Nile Valley was well suited for long-term growth and cultural success for three reasons. First, the annual flooding of the Nile (July to October) brought sediment and nutrients from up river to the fields of the Nile Valley. The water also washed the salts out of the soil. These brought great fertility to the valley and allowed the same fields to be farmed year after year for millennia without exhausting the land. Second, the Nile provided a central highway for transporting people and goods across Egypt, thus facilitating internal trade and communication. Third, Egypt was surrounded by a buffer zone of desert regions to the east, west, and south, which hindered foreign invasion. Ancient Egyptians called the fertile land of the Nile Valley the “black land” and the desert regions the “red land.” They also divided the land into “upper” and “lower” Egypt. Upper Egypt (from the first cataract northward to Memphis) was in the higher southern elevations of the Nile River (the Nile flows from south to north). Lower Egypt was made up of the Nile Delta region. Only a pharaoh who controlled and unified both could take the epithet “king of upper and lower Egypt.”
Egypt had an ancient and long history, but the following summary will only address Egypt as it comes into contact with biblical history.
First Intermediate period (21342040 BC) and Middle Kingdom (2040–1640 BC). After the death of PepyII came economic collapse due to drought and falling tax revenues. These led to political collapse, and power was split among many competing factions. This time of instability is known as the First Intermediate period; it ended when the Eleventh Dynasty pharaoh MentuhotepII reunified Egypt and reestablished a strong central government. It is likely around the time of the end of the First Intermediate period (2134–2040 BC) and the beginning of the Middle Kingdom (2040–1640 BC) that Abraham visited Egypt and later Joseph, Jacob, and his family entered Egypt. The famous Beni Hasan tomb painting of this period shows a caravan of Semitic peoples moving into Egypt, wearing multicolored clothing. In this period the position of vizier (prime minister) grew to prominence. One vizier, Amenemhet, succeeded to the throne of Egypt. Joseph filled the role of vizier in the biblical account (Gen. 41:39–40). Also dating from this period are turquoise mines in the Sinai region that have the earliest known Semitic inscription. Written on the mine walls in Proto-Sinaitic, this inscription may be the earliest alphabetic script in existence.
Second Intermediate period (1640–1550 BC). At the end of the Middle Kingdom, Egypt again fell into a fractured political situation with the decline of the pharaoh’s power. A Semitic people, the Hyksos (Egyptian for “foreign rulers” or “shepherd kings”), invaded the Nile Delta region and established their capital at Avaris. The Seventeenth Dynasty continued to rule Upper Egypt in the south while the Hyksos were in power. Although the Israelites were servants of Pharaoh from the beginning (keeping his flocks), they were not enslaved until later. It may have been a Hyksos pharaoh or a New Kingdom pharaoh who enslaved them to hard labor.
New Kingdom (1550–1069 BC). The last king of the Seventeenth (Theban) Dynasty, Kamose, attacked the Hyksos, but it was his successor, Ahmose, who drove them out and reunified Egypt. Ahmose is considered the first pharaoh of the Eighteenth Dynasty. It may have been Ahmose or one of his successors who enslaved the Hebrews. During the first half of the New Kingdom, Egypt was at the height of its power and wealth. During this period Egyptians began to call their king “Pharaoh,” meaning “great house.” The Eighteenth Dynasty pharaoh ThutmoseIII and his son AmenhotepII are good candidates for an early-date exodus (c. 1446 BC). A later king of the Eighteenth Dynasty, Akhenaten, moved the capital to Amarna and shifted his allegiance from Amun-Re, the sun god, to sole worship of the god Aton (sun-disk). For this reason, many identify him as the first monotheist. Akhenaten may have made this move in order to defund the temples and priestly orders that had grown very wealthy and powerful over time. His reforms did not last, and the worship of Amun-Re was restored by his successor, Tutankhamen. The Nineteenth Dynasty warrior RamessesII is the likely pharaoh of a late-date Exodus (c. 1250 BC).
Third Intermediate period (1069–664 BC). This period was a time of weak and divided government, with capitals in the north and the south. Pharaoh Siamun has been conjectured to be King Solomon’s father-in-law, who conquered Gezer and gave it to Solomon as a dowry (c. 960 BC; 1Kings 9:16). Later, Sheshonq (biblical Shishak), a Libyan pharaoh of the Twenty-second Dynasty, came to the throne and campaigned against Solomon’s son Rehoboam, plundering Jerusalem in the process (1Kings 14:25; 2Chron. 12:2; cf. 1Kings 11:40). The African Cushite pharaohs of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty (760–664 BC) ruled the north for a little more than a century but failed to defend against the waves of Assyrian conquest in the seventh century BC.
Late Kingdom period (664–525 BC). The Twenty-sixth (Saite) Dynasty (ruling from the Delta city of Sais) reunified Egypt under native Egyptian control. Pharaoh NechoII tried to support a declining Assyria as a buffer against the Babylonian onslaught but was unsuccessful (c. 609 BC). However, in the process Necho killed King Josiah of Judah in battle at Megiddo and placed one of Josiah’s sons, Jehoiakim, as a vassal upon the throne of Judah (2Kings 23:29–35; cf. 2Chron. 35:20–36:8; Jer. 46:2). After the Babylonian destruction of Judah/Jerusalem (587/586 BC) and the murder of their Jewish governor, Gedaliah, a group of Jewish exiles fled to Egypt. This group forced the prophet Jeremiah to go with them to Egypt (Jer. 40:1–43:7). A small group of Jewish exiles eventually found their way to a tiny island in the upper Nile, Elephantine, where they established a temple and community; there they worked as mercenaries.
Persian period (525–332 BC). CambysesII, king of Persia and son of Cyrus the Great, conquered Egypt in 525 BC. His successor, DariusI, ruled Egypt benevolently and resumed the construction of temples and canals. However, Egypt revolted against Persian rule several times, ultimately winning independence in 404 BC with the help of Greek allies. The last native Egyptian pharaoh was NectaneboII, who ruled in 359–343 BC. However, this period of Egyptian independence was short-lived, with Persia reestablishing control in 343 BC.
Hellenistic-Roman period (332–30 BC; 30 BC and beyond). Alexander the Great conquered Egypt in 332 BC. After Alexander’s death, his general Ptolemy took control of Egypt and ruled as pharaoh. From Alexander’s conquest to the death of Cleopatra, Egyptian rulers were of Greek descent. After Cleopatra’s death (30 BC), Rome annexed Egypt into its empire and governed the country until the fall of the Roman Empire. A large contingent of Jews lived and prospered in the Delta city of Alexandria in this period.
Biblically speaking, to forgive is less about changing feelings (emotions) and more about an actual restoration of a relationship. It is about making a wrong right, a process that usually is both costly and painful. To capture the biblical sense, the English word “pardon” may prove more helpful.
Forgiveness expresses the character of the merciful God, who eagerly pardons sinners who confess their sins, repent of their transgressions, and express this through proper actions. Forgiveness is never a matter of a human right; it is exclusively a gracious expression of God’s loving care. Human need for forgiveness stems from actions arising from their fallen nature. These actions (or nonactions), whether done deliberately or coincidentally, destroy people’s relationship with God and can be restored only by God’s forgiving mercy (Eph. 2:1).
Under the Mosaic covenant, sin placed offenders under God’s wrath among the ungodly. Rescue from this fate could be obtained by God’s forgiveness alone, which was attained through repentance and sacrifice. Although sacrifice was necessary to express true repentance, it is a mistake to consider it a payment that could purchase God’s forgiveness (1Sam. 15:22; Prov. 21:3; Eccles. 5:1; Hos. 6:6). The forgiveness of God remains his free, undeserved gift.
Although the sacrificial system is done away with, or rather completed, through Christ (Heb. 10:12), NT teaching continues to recognize conditions for forgiveness. Since forgiveness restores relationship, the offender remains involved and must desire the restoration (Luke 13:3; 24:47; Acts 2:38). God does not grant his forgiveness without consideration of the offending party.
Jesus expresses this most clearly in the parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15:1124). The son rebels against his father, squanders his wealth, and violates their relationship. The gracious and loving father remains willing to restore the relationship, but the reunion does not occur until the prodigal replaces rebellion with repentance; then, before he can even utter his sorrow, the eager father welcomes him back to a restored relationship. God remains free to forgive or not forgive, but, because of God’s nature and mercy, sinners can rest assured of God’s relationship-restoring forgiveness when they seek it in repentance. The forgiveness that God grants is full and restores things to an “as before” situation (cf. Ps. 103:12; Jer. 31:34), a point that the older son in the parable (Luke 15:25–32), who exemplifies religious self-righteousness, did not comprehend.
Physiologically, the heart is an organ in the body, and in the Bible it is also used in a number of metaphors.
Metaphorically, the heart refers to the mind, the will, the seat of emotions, or even the whole person. It also refers to the center of something or its inner part. These metaphors come from the heart’s importance and location.
Mind. The heart refers to the mind, but not the brain, and in these cases does not involve human physiology. It is a metaphor, and while the neurophysiology of the heart may be interesting in its own right, it has no bearing on this use of language. Deuteronomy 6:5 issues the command to love God with all one’s heart, soul, and strength. When the command is repeated in the Gospels, it occurs in three variations (Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). Common to all three is the addition of the word “mind.” The Gospel writers want to be sure that the audience hears Jesus adding “mind,” but this addition is based on the fact that the meaning of the Hebrew word for “heart” includes the mind.
The mental activities of the metaphorical heart are abundant. The heart is where a person thinks (Gen. 6:5; Deut. 7:17; 1Chron. 29:18; Rev. 18:7), where a person comprehends and has understanding (1Kings 3:9; Job 17:4; Ps. 49:3; Prov. 14:13; Matt. 13:15). The heart makes plans and has intentions (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Prov. 20:5; 1Chron. 29:18; Jer. 23:20). One believes with the heart (Luke 24:25; Acts 8:37; Rom. 10:9). The heart is the site of wisdom, discernment, and skill (Exod. 35:34; 36:2; 1Kings 3:9; 10:24). The heart is the place of memory (Deut. 4:9; Ps. 119:11). The heart plays the role of conscience (2Sam. 24:10; 1John 3:2021).
It is often worth the effort to substitute “mind” for “heart” when reading the Bible in order to grasp the mental dimension. For example, after telling the Israelites to love God with all their heart, Moses says, “These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts” (Deut. 6:6). Reading it instead as “be on your mind” changes our perspective, and in this case the idiom “on your mind” is clearer and more accurate. The following verses instruct parents to talk to their children throughout the day about God’s words. In order for parents to do this, God’s requirements and deeds need to be constantly on their minds, out of their love for him. Similarly, love for God and loyalty are expressed by meditation on and determination to obey his law (Ps. 119:11, 112). The law is not merely a list of rules; it is also a repository of a worldview in which the Lord is the only God. To live consistently with this truth requires careful, reflective thought.
Emotions and attitude. The heart, as the seat of emotion, is associated with a number of feelings and sentiments, such as gladness (Exod. 4:14; Acts 2:26), hatred (Lev. 19:17), pride (Deut. 8:14), resentment (Deut. 15:10), dread (Deut. 28:67), sympathy (Judg. 5:9), love (Judg. 16:15), sadness (1Sam. 1:8; John 16:6), and jealousy and ambition (James 3:14). The heart is also the frame of reference for attitudes such as willingness, courage, and desire.
The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2Cor. 12:24, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.
Although God is present everywhere, God is also present in a special way in “heaven.” During Jesus’ earthly ministry, the Father is sometimes described as speaking in “a voice from heaven” (Matt. 3:17). Similarly, Jesus instructs us to address our prayers to “Our Father in heaven” (6:9). Even the specific request in the Lord’s Prayer that “your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (6:10) reminds us that heaven is a place already under God’s full jurisdiction, where his will is presently being done completely and perfectly. Jesus also warns of the dangers of despising “one of these little ones,” because “their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven” (18:10). Jesus “came down from heaven” (John 6:51) for his earthly ministry, and after his death and resurrection, he ascended back “into heaven,” from where he “will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).
Given this strong connection between heaven and God’s presence, there is a natural connection in Scripture between heaven and the ultimate hope of believers. Believers are promised a reward in heaven (“Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven” [Matt. 5:12]), and even now believers can “store up for [themselves] treasures in heaven” (6:20). Even in this present life, “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20), and our hope at death is to “depart and be with Christ, which is better by far” (1:23). Since Christ is currently in heaven, deceased believers are already present with Christ in heaven awaiting his return, when “God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him” (1Thess. 4:14).
A priest is a minister of sacred things who represents God to the people and the people to God. The OT identifies priests of Yahweh and priests of other gods and idols. The only pagan priest that the NT mentions is the priest of Zeus from Lystra who wanted to offer sacrifices to Paul and Barnabas, whom the crowd mistook for deities (Acts 14:13). All other NT references build upon OT teaching about priests of Yahweh.
Early biblical history records clan heads offering sacrifices for their families (Gen. 12:78; 13:18; 22; 31:54; 46:1). Although the patriarchs performed these duties, they are never called “priests”; the only priests mentioned from this time are foreigners such as Melchizedek, 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 priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:6), a distinctive priesthood came to light when God instructed Moses to prepare special priestly clothes for Aaron and his sons (Exod. 28). The high priest was distinguished from the others by more magnificent clothes. By failing to wear their special clothes while serving at the tabernacle, the priests would incur guilt and die (Exod. 28:43).
In NT times many priests exerted religious and civil power as leaders of the Sadducees and the Essenes. Some priests, such as Zechariah, were portrayed as righteous men (Luke 1:5–6). Others were said to have come to faith in Jesus (Acts 6:7). Supporting the role assigned by Moses, Jesus regularly required those whom he healed to show themselves to the priest. Even so, most Gospel references to priests underscore their opposition to Jesus’ ministry and the role they played in his trial and crucifixion. This opposition continued after the resurrection, as priests challenged the witness of the apostles. When Peter and John proclaimed that a crippled beggar had been 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 charges of blasphemy and speaking against the temple and the Mosaic law (6:11–7:1). Saul (Paul) received a letter of authority from the high priest to arrest Christians (9:1–2). Later, as a follower of Jesus, he stood trial before Ananias, who charged him before Felix (24:1), and a wider group of chief priests who charged him before Festus (25:1–3).
Hebrews uniquely highlights how the priesthood of Jesus surpassed the OT priesthood. The OT priests presented sin offerings, but their sacrifices needed to be repeated regularly, whereas Jesus, the faithful and merciful high priest, offered a sacrifice that never needed repeating and was available to everyone at all times. Jesus also surpassed the Aaronic priests because they first needed to offer sacrifices for their own sins, but he never sinned. Furthermore, since he offered the perfect sacrifice of himself, all people, not just priests, could draw near to God.
The NT develops the idea of a priesthood of all believers by taking the concept that Israel would be a kingdom of priests and transferring it to the church (1Pet. 2:4–9; cf. Exod. 19:6). Reflecting the general biblical view of priesthood, believers offer spiritual sacrifices to God, represent God to the world by revealing his works of salvation, and represent the world to God through prayer. In the NT, the priesthood of believers is corporate; a priestly office in the church is never expressly mentioned.
The fourth son of Jacob (Gen. 35:23). The meaning of his name is debated, but his mother, Leah, links it to “praise” (29:35). He persuaded his brothers to sell Joseph instead of killing him (37:2627). He also guaranteed the safety of Benjamin when the brothers returned to Egypt to purchase food (43:1–10). In spite of his despicable behavior with his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gen. 38), his father’s blessing included the promise of kingship (49:10).
In general, Torah (Law) may be subdivided into three categories: judicial, ceremonial, and moral, though each of these may influence or overlap with the others. The OT associates the “giving of the Torah” with Moses’ first divine encounter at Mount Sinai (Exod. 1923) 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 in other pentateuchal texts, such as Leviticus and Deut. 12–24, indicating that God’s teachings were intended as the code of conduct and worship for Israel not only during its wilderness wanderings but also when it settled in the land of Canaan following the conquest.
More specifically, the word “law” often denotes the Ten Commandments (or “the Decalogue,” lit., the “ten words”) (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4) that were delivered to Moses (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). These commandments reflect a summary statement of the covenant and may be divided into two parts, consistent with the two tablets of stone on which they were first recorded: the first four address the individual’s relationship to God, and the last six focus on instructions concerning human relationships. Despite the apparent simplistic expression of the Decalogue, the complexity of these guidelines extends beyond individual acts and attitudes, encompassing any and all incentives, enticements, and pressures leading up to a thing forbidden. Not only should the individual refrain from doing the prohibited thing, but also he or she is obligated to practice its opposite good in order to be in compliance.
One who serves as a facilitator of reconciliation between two parties. The role of a mediator was taken by different individuals and offices in the OT, as seen in Abraham interceding for Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 18:2232), Moses asking God to forgive Israel (Exod. 32:31–32), and the Israelites begging Moses to speak to God on their behalf (Exod. 20:19). In addition, judges, prophets, kings, and priests assumed intermediary functions at times. Mediation functions bidirectionally: from God to humans, and from humans to God. The prophets are quintessentially the first kind of mediators (God to humans), while the priests took, mostly, the second function (humans to God).
In the NT, the role of mediator is given to Christ, since he alone, as God incarnate, is qualified for it (the “one mediator between God and mankind” [1Tim. 2:5]). This implies that insomuch as reconciliation between sinful humankind and a holy God is conceivable, Christ alone can facilitate that mediation.
In the NT the most common word used for “minister” is diakonos (e.g., 2Cor. 3:6), and for “ministry,” diakonia (e.g., 1Cor. 16:15 [NIV: “service”]). These words function as umbrella terms for NT writers to describe the whole range of ministries performed by the church. They can describe either a special ministry performed by an official functionary (1Cor. 3:5) or one performed by any believer (Rev. 2:19). In the early church, ministry was based not on institutional hierarchies but on services performed (1Tim. 3:113).
The ministry of Jesus. The church’s mind-set flows out of the way in which Jesus understood his ministry. He described his ministry pattern as that of serving (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; John 13:4–17). Thus, he called his disciples to follow a model of leadership in the new community that did not elevate them above others (Matt. 20:20–28; 23:8–12; cf. 1Pet. 5:3).
Jesus’ ministry provides the paradigm for the ministry of the church. The NT writers describe the threefold ministry of Jesus as preaching, teaching, and healing (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; Mark 1:14, 21–22, 39; Acts 10:36–38). The disciples carried on the earthly ministry of Jesus by the power of the Spirit. They too engaged in preaching, teaching, and healing (Matt. 10:7–8; 28:19–20).
The ministry of the church. The church, because it is the body of Christ, continues these ministry responsibilities. In 1Pet. 4:10–11 is a summary of the overarching ministries of the church, which include speaking the words of God and serving. As a priesthood of believers (Exod. 19:4–6; 1Pet. 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:5–6), individual members took responsibility for fulfilling the various tasks of service. Thus, all Christians are called to minister (Rom. 15:27; Philem. 13; 1Pet. 2:16). Even when a member strayed, it was another believer’s responsibility to confront that wayward person and, if necessary, involve others in the body to help (Matt. 18:15–20).
Although ministry was the responsibility of all believers, there were those with special expertise whom Christ and the church set apart for particular leadership roles (Eph. 4:11–12). Christ set apart Apollos and Paul for special ministries (1Cor. 3:5; Eph. 3:7). The church called on special functionaries to carry out specific ministries. For example, the early church appointed seven individuals to serve tables (Acts 6:2). They appointed certain ones to carry the relief fund collected for the Jerusalem Christians (2Cor. 8:19, 23). As special functionaries, Paul, Apollos, Timothy, Titus, the elders, as well as others accepted the responsibility of teaching and preaching and healing for the whole church.
All the ministries of the church, whether performed by believers in general or by some specially appointed functionary, were based on gifts received from God (Rom. 12:1–8; 1Cor. 12:4–26). God gave individuals the abilities necessary to perform works of service (Acts 20:24; Eph. 4:11; Col. 4:17; 1Tim. 1:12; 1Pet. 4:11). The NT, however, makes it clear that when it comes to one’s relationship and spiritual status before God, all Christians are equal. Yet in equality there is diversity of gifts and talents. Paul identifies some gifts given to individuals for special positions: apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers (Eph. 4:11). The description here is of special ministry roles that Christ calls certain individuals to fulfill based on the gifts given to them. The ones fulfilling these roles did not do all the ministry of the church but rather equipped the rest of the body to do ministry (Eph. 4:12–13). No one can boast in the gifts given to him or her because those gifts were given for ministry to others (1Cor. 4:7). Thus, gifts lead to service, and in turn service results in leadership.
It becomes the responsibility of those who lead to equip others for ministry. When others are equipped for ministry, they in turn minister and edify the whole body (Eph. 4:15–16; 2Tim. 2:1–2). The goal of all ministry, according to Paul, is to build up a community of believers until all reach maturity in Christ (Rom. 15:15–17; 1Cor. 3:5–4:5; Eph. 4:12–16; 1Thess. 2:19–20).
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 of God using Moses to found the nation of Israel. It begins with an account of his birth (Exod. 2) and ends with an account of his death (Deut. 34). Moses’ influence and importance extend well beyond his lifetime, as later Scripture demonstrates.
Moses was born in a dangerous time, and according to Pharaoh’s decree, he should not have survived long after his birth. He was born to Amram and Jochebed (Exod. 6:20). Circumventing Pharaoh’s decree, Jochebed placed the infant Moses in a reed basket and floated him down the river. God guided the basket down the river and into the presence of none other than Pharaoh’s daughter (Exod. 2:56), who, at the urging of Moses’ sister, hired Jochebed to take care of the child.
The next major episode in the life of Moses concerns his defense of an Israelite worker who was being beaten by an Egyptian (Exod. 2:11–25). In the process of rescuing the Israelite, Moses killed the Egyptian. When it became clear that he was known to be the killer, he fled Egypt and ended up in Midian, where he became a member of the family of a Midianite priest-chief, Jethro, by marrying his daughter Zipporah.
Although Moses was not looking for a way back into Egypt, God had different plans. One day, while Moses was tending his sheep, God appeared to him in the form of a burning bush and commissioned him to go back to Egypt and lead his people to freedom. Moses expressed reluctance, and so God grudgingly enlisted his older brother, Aaron, to accompany him as his spokesperson.
Upon Moses’ return to Egypt, Pharaoh stubbornly refused to allow the Israelites to leave Egypt. God directed Moses to announce a series of plagues that ultimately induced Pharaoh to allow the Israelites to depart. After they left, Pharaoh had a change of mind and cornered them on the shores of the Red Sea (Sea of Reeds). It was at the Red Sea that God demonstrated his great power by splitting the sea and allowing the Israelites to escape before closing it again in judgment on the Egyptians. Moses signaled the presence of God by lifting his rod high in the air (Exod. 14:16). This event was long remembered as the defining moment when God released Israel from Egyptian slavery (Pss. 77; 114), and it even became the paradigm for future divine rescues (Isa. 40:3–5; Hos. 2:14–15).
After the crossing of the Red Sea, Moses led Israel back to Mount Sinai, the location of his divine commissioning. At this time, Moses went up the mountain as a prophetic mediator for the people (Deut. 18:16). He received the Ten Commandments, the rest of the law, and instructions to build the tabernacle (Exod. 19–24). All these were part of a new covenantal arrangement that today we refer to as the Mosaic or Sinaitic 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 they had created in the form of a golden calf (Exod. 32). With the aid of the Levites, who that day assured their role as Israel’s priestly helpers, he brought God’s judgment against the offenders and also interceded in prayer with God to prevent the total destruction of Israel.
Thus began Israel’s long story of rebellion against God. God was particularly upset with the lack of confidence that the Israelites had shown when the spies from the twelve tribes gave their report (Num. 13). They did not believe that God could handle the fearsome warriors who lived in the land, and so God doomed them to forty years of wandering in the wilderness, enough time for the first generation to die. Not even Moses escaped this fate, since he had shown anger against God and attributed a miracle to his own power and not to God when 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 had led 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 of Deuteronomy. The purpose of his sermon was to tell the second generation of Israelites who were going to enter the land that they must obey God’s law or suffer the consequences. The form of the sermon was that of a covenant renewal, and so Israel on this occasion reaffirmed its loyalty to God.
After this, Moses went up on Mount Nebo, from which he could see the promised land, and died. Deuteronomy concludes with the following statements: “Since then, no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face.... For no one has ever shown the mighty power or performed the awesome deeds that Moses did in the sight of all Israel” (Deut. 34:10, 12).
The NT honors Moses as God’s servant but also makes the point that Jesus is one who far surpasses Moses as a mediator between God and people (Acts 3:17–26; Heb. 3).
The date of Moses is a matter of controversy because the biblical text does not name the pharaohs of the story. Many date him to the thirteenth century BC and associate him with RamessesII, but others take 1Kings 6:1 at face value and date him to the end of the fifteenth century BC, perhaps during the reign of ThutmoseIII.
“Tabernacle” in Hebrew (mishkan) is a general word for a tent or a dwelling. In the Pentateuch particularly, “tabernacle” most often refers to the special dwelling place of God among the Hebrew people during their wandering through the wilderness. The tabernacle was the abode of God’s glory before the building of Solomon’s temple in Jerusalem. The detailed description of the tabernacle and its construction composes more than one-third of the book of Exodus (chaps. 2540), signifying its theological importance to the life of God’s people before the forming of the nation-state of Israel.
The detailed command of God to build the tabernacle in Exod. 25–30 is part of a larger dramatic narrative. While Moses is on the mountain of God receiving the instructions for the tabernacle, the Hebrews have embarked on a festival of revelry and worship, offering sacrifices to a golden calf, constructed during Moses’ absence (32:1–19). Moses is furious and smashes the tablets of the Ten Commandments on the ground, and yet he returns to the mountain to intercede for the people. God punishes the people with a plague but does not destroy or abandon them completely, for “the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness” (34:6) renews his covenant with the people, and Moses again returns from the mountain with the Ten Commandments (34:27–29). Exodus 35–40 then recounts the careful obedience with which the people adhere to God’s command to build the tabernacle, assiduously following the instructions given in Exod. 25–30.
The description of the tabernacle given in the text is of an ornate sanctuary within a tent structure situated at the very center of Israel’s camp. The tabernacle thus took the place of the tent of meeting described in Exod. 33:7–11, which was pitched outside the camp. However, the terms “tabernacle” and “tent of meeting” appear to be used synonymously in the Pentateuch after the construction of the tabernacle was completed. According to the text, the dimensions of the tabernacle were as follows: 150 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 7.5 feet high (Exod. 27:18). Around the exterior of the tabernacle was an outer courtyard where an altar for burnt offerings stood at the entrance to the tent of meeting, as well as a basin filled with water for the ritual purifications of the priests. Within the outer enclosure of the tabernacle stood a lampstand, an incense altar, and a table where the bread of the Presence was placed. Within the temple was a second enclosure, the holy of holies, where the ark of the covenant was placed beneath the wings of the golden cherubim.
Worship of God is a critical dimension of both Testaments. One might argue that it is the very goal for which Israel and the church were formed.
The living God is the sole object of worship. He delights in the satisfying joy that his children find in him. The nature of worship is not about servant entertainment or passive observation; it is an active acknowledgment of God’s worth in a variety of humble ways.
A genuine selfless focus on the person and work of God brings about a humble response that affects one’s posture, generates works of service, and stirs up a healthy attitude of fear and respect. Knowledge of God is the foundational element in worship. God is worshiped for who he is and what he does. He is the Eternal One (Ps. 90:1; 1Tim. 1:17), unique in every way (Isa. 44:8); he is God alone (Deut. 6:4). He is distinguished by his self-existence, the self-reliant quality of his life (Exod. 3:14; Deut. 32:30). The psalmist calls God’s people to shout joyfully to their good, loving, eternal, and faithful Creator (Ps. 100).
God is worshiped as the Creator of all life. This magnificent creative work of God, declared in the opening of Genesis, is a critical focus in worship (Ps. 95:6; Rom. 1:25; Rev. 4:11). Along with this is the companion declaration that God is the redeemer. The redemptive work of God is celebrated in the Song of Moses (Exod. 15:118) and in the Song of the Redeemed (Rev. 14:3).
Worship is also associated with the royal aspects of God’s character. It was the desire of the magi to find Jesus the king and worship him (Matt. 2:1–2). The final scenes of history will be characterized by humble submission to and worship of the King of kings (1Tim. 6:15; Rev. 17:14; 19:16; cf. Rev. 15:3–4). The psalms often draw the reader’s attention to God’s royal character as a basis for worship (Pss. 45:11; 98:6).
Finally, God is worshiped as the Lord of his covenant relationship with the nation of Israel. This covenant theme and metaphor summarize the varied aspects of God’s character and his relationship with Israel. The God who brought Israel into a covenant relationship is to be sincerely and exclusively worshiped (2Kings 17:35, 38; cf. Deut. 31:20). These confessional statements about the character of God are a glorious weight that moves believers to prostrate themselves, to have an attitude of awe and respect, and to obediently serve.
Direct Matches
The high priest was the leader of the Levitical clan thatoversaw Israel’s sacrificial system, whether directlyperforming sacrifices or supervising others. As no fixed terminologywas set, he could also be referred to as the anointed priest, headpriest, chief priest, or simply the priest. He was considered theholiest person in Israel, his position corresponding to the most holyplace in the tabernacle or temple, so that he was the only oneallowed behind the veil to perform sacrifices on the Day of Atonement(see Lev. 16).
TheRole of the High Priest
Israel’sfirst high priest was Moses’ brother, Aaron, who was chosen byGod and instructed in his duty. Many of the directions that hereceived were binding on every high priest who followed him. Inaddition to taking part in offering various types of sacrifices, hewas required to enter the tabernacle twice daily to burn incense andtend the lamps (Exod. 30:7–8). An added responsibility may havebeen to place twelve loaves of bread on the table in the tabernacleeach Sabbath (Lev. 24:5–8; Ezek. 44:16). Once a year, on theDay of Atonement, the high priest entered the most holy place tosprinkle the blood of a sacrificial goat on the mercy seat of the arkof the covenant, to atone for the sins of his people.
Thehigh priest needed to be particularly careful to maintain his holystatus (Lev. 21:10–15). Like other priests, he was not allowedto touch a corpse, but he alone was forbidden to enter a house wherethere was a dead body. He was not permitted to become unclean afterthe death of his mother or father or to tear his clothes as a sign ofmourning. To prevent his offspring from being defiled, he wasinstructed to marry only a virgin of his own people.
Likeall Israelite priests, the high priest was anointed for his position.This signified that he was set aside by God and empowered for histask. The high priest was distinguished from his brothers by hisspecial clothing (Exod. 28). In addition to the linen tunic, sash,and turban worn by all priests, the high priest normally wore abreastpiece, an ephod containing the Urim and Thummim, and a robe.The breastpiece was a pouch made of blue, purple, and scarlet yarnwith thin strips of gold woven into it. Attached to the ephod by fourbraided gold chains, the breastpiece was set with twelve stones, eachof which was engraved with the name of a tribe, so that the highpriest represented all of Israel before God. The Urim and Thummimwere placed in the pouch, to be used by the priest when seekingspecial direction from God.
Theephod, made of the same material as the breastpiece, was a sleevelessgarment fastened by a belt made of the same material. Two onyxstones, each engraved with the names of six of the tribes of Israel,were set in gold filigree and attached to the shoulders of the ephod.The robe, made of blue cloth and reinforced at the neck, probably wasworn under the ephod. Golden bells and pomegranates alternated aroundits hem, the bells ringing whenever the priest entered the holy placeso that he would not die. To distinguish this turban from those wornby other priests, a golden plate or rosette was attached, engraved toproclaim that the high priest was “Holy to the Lord.”
Eventhough the high priest usually wore distinctive clothing, on the Dayof Atonement, when he entered the most holy place, he wore only atunic, sash, undergarments, and turban, all made of linen. Evidently,the special clothes were not appropriate when atoning for thenation’s sins.
Thehigh priest held a hereditary office originally occupied by theeldest direct descendant of Aaron’s son Eleazar. By the time ofEli, the priesthood had evidently passed to the descendants ofIthamar. During the reign of David, both Zadok, a descendant ofEleazar, and Abiathar, a descendant of Ithamar through Eli, served aspriests. After David’s death, Solomon deposed Abiathar forsupporting Adonijah’s attempt to become king. From this timeonward, the high priesthood remained in the hands of Zadok’sdescendants, until the rise of Antiochus Epiphanes, who sold the highpriesthood to the highest bidder, no matter what his genealogicalconnections.
Thedeath of a high priest was of national significance, as it marked thebeginning of the tenure of a new high priest, who received hisfather’s special clothing. It also gave anyone who had fled toone of the six cities of refuge for unintentionally killing someonethe opportunity to return home (Num. 35:25–28). Later rabbisconcluded that the high priest’s death in some way atoned forthose who committed manslaughter.
TheHigh Priest and Political Leaders
Fromthe period of the first temple a close link was established betweenthe high priest and the king. Both were anointed to serverespectively as Israel’s chief spiritual leader and politicalleader. Kings often exerted their authority over high priests. Thus,Solomon promoted Zadok and deposed Abiathar. Similarly, King Joashinstructed Jehoiada to repair the temple. It was also possible for ahigh priest to oppose or endorse a ruler. Thus, Jehoiada both deposedAthaliah and crowned Joash as king (2Kings 11). The chiefpriest Azariah drove Uzziah out of the temple when he attempted toburn incense on his own (2Chron. 26:16–20). At the end ofthe kingdom period, when King Zedekiah was taken captive to Babylon,the high priest Seraiah, along with his chief associates, also weretaken into exile, where they were executed (2Kings 25:18–21).
Afterthe exile, when Israel had no king, the high priests gainedadditional political significance. During the Hasmonean period, theoffices of high priest and king were sometimes united in one person.Herod the Great, in Roman times, elevated and deposed high priests atwill. After his death and his son’s removal from office, highpriests were appointed by the Roman governors and functioned as theJews’ main liaison with Roman officials.
ThePriesthood and the Early Church
Inthe first century AD, the high priest was the chief social andreligious leader among the Jews, presiding over the Sanhedrin, theJewish council that tried cases concerning Jewish laws. The Greekword used in the NT for “high priest,” archiereus, oftenappears in the plural, “chief priests,” to includecurrent or former high priests and members of the priestlyaristocracy. Luke refers to Sceva, whose seven sons attempted to castout demons in the way Paul did, as a high priest. Since no list ofhigh priests contains Sceva’s name, he may have been simply amember of a priestly family or personally used the term to boost hisreligious standing (Acts 19:13–14). After the destruction ofJerusalem in AD 70, the office of high priest disappeared entirely.
Thechief priests, in association with the Sanhedrin, scribes, and/orelders, often opposed Jesus’ ministry. The final officialrejection of Jesus came when the high priest Caiaphas proclaimed thatone man should die so that the nation might not perish. By thisproclamation, he unwittingly “prophesied that Jesus would diefor the Jewish nation” and for other children of God, thusuniting them (John 11:49–52). Caiaphas later personallyinterrogated Jesus about his status as the Messiah and proclaimed himguilty of blasphemy (Mark 14:60–64).
Afterthe resurrection, high priests joined the wider priestly oppositionto the apostles. Thus, the high priest was present when the decisionwas made to silence Peter and John for proclaiming that the crippledbeggar had been healed by the power of Jesus (Acts 4:1–20). Healso took part in their subsequent arrest and questioning (5:17–28).The high priest questioned Stephen over charges that he blasphemedand spoke against the temple and Mosaic law (6:11–7:1). Paul,before his experience of the risen Christ, received letters ofauthority from the high priest to arrest Christians (9:1–2).Paul later stood trial before the high priest Ananias, who alsobrought charges against him to Felix (24:1), and then was chargedbefore Festus by a wider group of chief priests (25:1–3).
ThePriesthood of Jesus in Hebrews
Althoughother NT books imply that Jesus had a priestly ministry, the book ofHebrews alone develops the idea that Jesus not only has the right toserve as priest but also is the great high priest who replaces the OTpriesthood. It is therefore incumbent upon all to follow Christ, asthere is no other way to be forgiven of sin and come into fellowshipwith the Father. The book shows this in a number of ways, chiefly inchapters 5–10. As a descendant of Judah, Jesus did not qualifyto serve as a priest under the Aaronic order. Hebrews thereforedemonstrates that his service as a priest in the order of Melchizedekfar surpasses the Aaronic priesthood (5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:17). SinceMelchizedek is greater than Abraham, as seen by the patriarchbringing tithes to the priest, and since Levi, as a descendant ofAbraham, in effect paid tithes through his ancestor, Jesus—as amember of a greater priesthood—is greater than the Aaronicpriests (7:4–10). For Jesus to serve as high priest, he had tobe “like his brothers in every way” (2:17). This requiredthat he share in their humanity by taking on flesh and blood,learning to trust God completely in life, and dying (2:14). It alsomeant that he would be tempted in every way humans are so that hecould sympathize with them (2:18). However, since he never succumbedto temptation, he could rescue people from theirsin.
Althoughno one chooses to become a priest, Aaron’s descendantsinherited their role, whereas Jesus was designated as priest by Godwith an oath (Heb. 5:10; 7:21; cf. Ps. 110:4). That God did not swearthat Aaron’s line would always be priests implies that a changewas possible. Since Jesus received his priesthood by an oath, hispriesthood is greater than the Aaronic priesthood, becomes theguarantee of the better covenant spoken of in Jer. 31, and will neverbe forfeited.
TheOT priests presented repeated offerings, and so their work could notdefinitively deal with the problem of sin. The sacrifices of theAaronic priests needed to be repeated regularly, whereas thesacrifice of Jesus did not have to be repeated. Similarly, Aaronicpriests needed to offer sacrifices for their own sins before theycould aid others. Since Jesus never sinned, he had no suchlimitation. What the priests had to do for themselves daily (Heb.7:27), and for the nation once a year, Christ did once for all (7:27;9:26, 28; 10:10, 12, 14, 18).
TheLevitical priesthood could continue only as new priests replacedthose who retired or died, but Jesus’ priesthood is eternalbecause of his eternal life. Melchizedek is used to illustrate howthis can be. But while Melchizedek remains a priest forever simplybecause the Bible does not record his genealogy or his death, Jesushas a permanent priesthood because he lives forever and because ofthe oath quoted from Ps. 110:4: “The Lord has sworn:...‘You are a priest forever’ ” (Heb. 5:6; cf.6:20; 7:3, 17;21).
Notonly is Jesus a greater priest, but also he presented a greatersacrifice at a greater, heavenly sanctuary. The Aaronic priestsserved only at a copy of this true heavenly tabernacle, which waserected by God himself (Heb. 8:2). Jesus presented not the blood ofanimals, which needed to be offered over and over, but rather theperfect sacrifice of himself, ensuring that no other sacrifice isneeded. After becoming a sacrifice, he returned to the heavenlysanctuary, where he appears forever at the right hand of God as kingand mediator. Due to Christ’s work, the most holy place is nolonger barred to all but the high priest once a year. Rather, thecurtain has been opened so that all his people can boldly draw nearto the Father. Similarly, Christ’s priestly work ensures thatthose who follow him can be effectively forgiven, purified,sanctified, and perfected.
“New” basically carries three senses in theBible: (1)the beginning of a cycle of time such as the newmoon, the beginning of the month; (2)fresh, pristine, orunused; (3)formerly unknown or recently coming into existence.Often, the latter two senses overlap and become difficult todistinguish. In certain cases the second sense is emphasized, and theactual age is not of primary concern: new grain (Lev. 23:16), newwine (Josh. 9:13), new ropes (Judg. 15:13), new cart (1Sam.6:7), new cloak (1Kings 11:29), new bowl (2Kings 2:20),and new tomb (Matt. 27:60). The third sense often is associated withthe time of final restoration: God will do a new thing (Isa. 43:19),make a new covenant (Jer. 31:31), and create a new heavens and a newearth (Isa. 65:17).
TheBible places a high priority on the new works that God accomplishes,for there is little hope that people are capable of doing anythingnew (cf. Eccles. 1:9–10). These new works are contrasted withthe old. There is continuity between them as the former establishes afoundation for the latter, but there is also discontinuity as thelatter surpasses the former. Therefore, God will make a new (better)covenant (Jer. 31:31; Heb. 8:13), a new (better) heart (Ezek. 36:26),a new (better) creation (2Cor. 5:17), and a new (better)heavens and earth (Isa. 65:17; Rev. 21:1).
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).
A shadow may refer to shade generally, darkness, or to aspecific shadow cast by something; “shadow” and “shade”also have other uses by extension. Perhaps because shade is aprotection from the heat of the sun, shade and shadow are metaphorsfor protection (Pss. 91:1; 121:5; Isa. 49:2), as in the phrase“shadow of [God’s] wings” (Pss. 17:8; 36:7; 57:1;63:7). Since shadows change through the day and pass away, shadowbecomes a metaphor for brevity, particularly the brevity of life(1Chron. 29:15; Job 8:9; 14:2; Pss. 102:11; 109:23; 144:4), andfor change (James 1:17 [though this text has other interpretations]).As darkness, shadow sometimes refers to a place to hide (Job 34:22)or to gloom or danger (Pss. 44:19; 107:10, 14; Isa. 9:2; Jer. 2:6).The “land of darkness and deep shadow” appears to be areference to death (Job 10:21 ESV, NASB). And since a shadow’sshape resembles the outline of what casts the shadow, shadow mayrefer to that similarity as a copy, however imperfect (Col. 2:17;Heb. 8:5; 10:1).
Twomiracles involved shadows. God gave Hezekiah a miraculous sign bymoving the shadow on the steps backward (2Kings 20:9–11).As people believed the apostles’ message, they brought the sickto Solomon’s Colonnade, where they were healed when Peter’sshadow fell on them (Acts 5:12–16).
TheHebrew word for “deep darkness,” tsalmawet,was seen as two words by LXX translators and rendered as “shadowof death” (skia thanatou). This wording came into the NT as aquotation or allusion (Matt. 4:16; Luke 1:79). Texts discovered fromaround the time of the judges in Ugaritic, a language closely relatedto Hebrew, have shown that tsalmawet is one word, meaning “deepdarkness” or “gloom.” Modern translations havetended to change the rendering of this word, but some may leave“shadow of death” in Ps. 23:4 because of the popularityof this traditional wording.
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
Hebrews 8:1-13
is mentioned in the definition.
Access usually refers to the right of a person of lesserstatus to appear in the presence of one of higher status and beheard. The word is appropriate in the context of a kingly court (seeEsther 1:14; Zech. 3:7). Anyone not granted such access would riskexecution when approaching the king for any reason unless the kingapproved it (Esther 4:11). The word is also appropriate in thecontext of the Lord’s sanctuary, where it is closely related toapproaching the Lord. In the OT, the right to approach the Lord inhis sanctuary is limited. For instance, the high priest is the onlyperson granted access to approach the Lord in the inner sanctuary,the holy of holies, and only on the Day of Atonement. Those who failto approach the Lord properly risk death as a punishment (Lev.10:1–3). In reality, these two contexts overlap significantly.
Accessin the NT focuses on the right to approach God. Unlike the accessgranted in the OT, the death of Christ grants to all believers theright to approach the Father, making no distinction between Jew andGentile, since the same Spirit indwells both (Eph. 2:18).Furthermore, Christ’s work secures access to both the kinglythrone and the “true tabernacle” of God, where one findsgrace and mercy in time of need (Heb. 4:16; 8:1–2; 10:19–22).
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.
Terminology
TheNT word for “church” is ekklēsia, which means“gathering, assembly, congregation.” In classical Greekthe term was used almost exclusively for political gatherings. Inparticular, in Athens the word signified the assembling of thecitizens for the purpose of conducting the affairs of the city.Moreover, ekklēsia referred only to the actual meeting, not tothe citizens themselves. When the people were not assembled, theywere not considered to be the ekklēsia. The NT records threeinstances of this secular usage of the term (Acts 19:32, 39, 41).
Themost important background for the Christian use of the term is theLXX (Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, dated c. 250BC), which uses the word in a religious sense about one hundredtimes, almost always as a translation of the Hebrew word qahal. Whileqahal does not indicate a secular gathering (in contrast to ’edah,the typical Hebrew word for Israel’s religious gathering,translated by Greek synagōgē), it does denote Israel’ssacred meetings. This is especially the case in Deuteronomy, whereqahal is linked with the covenant.
Inthe NT, ekklēsia is used to refer to the community of God’speople 109 times (out of 114 occurrences of the term). Although theword occurs in only two Gospel passages (Matt. 16:18; 18:17), it isof special importance in Acts (23 times) and the Pauline writings (46times). It is found 20 times in Revelation and in isolated instancesin James and Hebrews. Three general conclusions can be drawn fromthis usage. First, ekklēsia (in both the singular and theplural) applies predominantly to a local assembly of those whoprofess faith in and allegiance to Christ. Second, ekklēsiadesignates the universal church (Acts 8:3; 9:31; 1 Cor. 12:28;15:9; especially in the later Pauline letters: Eph. 1:22–23;Col. 1:18). Third, the ekklēsia is God’s congregation(1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1).
TheNature of the Church
Thenature of the church is too broad to be exhausted in the meaning ofone word. To capture its significance, the NT authors utilize a richarray of metaphorical descriptions. Nevertheless, there are thosemetaphors that seem to dominate the biblical pictures of the church,five of which call for comment: the people of God, the kingdom ofGod, the eschatological temple of God, the bride of Christ, and thebody of Christ.
Thepeople of God.Essentially, the concept of the people of God can be summed up in thecovenantal phrase: “I will be their God, and they will be mypeople” (see Exod. 6:6–7; 19:5; Lev. 26:9–14; Jer.7:23; 30:22; 32:37–40; Ezek. 11:19–20; 36:22–28;Acts 15:14; 2 Cor. 6:16; Heb. 8:10–12; Rev. 21:3). Thus,the people of God are those in both the OT and the NT eras whoresponded to God by faith and whose spiritual origin restsexclusively in God’s grace.
Tospeak of the one people of God transcending the eras of the OT andthe NT necessarily raises the question of the relationship betweenthe church and Israel. Modern interpreters prefer not to polarize thematter into an either/or issue. Rather, they talk about the churchand Israel in terms of there being both continuity and discontinuitybetween them.
Continuitybetween the church and Israel. Two ideas establish the fact that thechurch and Israel are portrayed in the Bible as being in a continuousrelationship. First, in the OT the church was present in Israel insome sense. Acts 7:38 suggests this connection when, alluding toDeut. 9:10, it speaks of the church (ekklēsia) in thewilderness. The same idea is probably to be inferred from theintimate association noted earlier existing between the wordsekklēsia and qahal, especially when the latter is qualified bythe phrase “of God.” Furthermore, if the church is viewedin some NT passages as preexistent, then one finds therein theprototype of the creation of Israel (see Exod. 25:40; Acts 7:44; Gal.4:26; Heb. 12:22; Rev. 21:11; cf. Eph. 1:3–14).
Second,Israel in some sense is present in the church in the NT. The many OTnames for Israel applied to the church in the NT establish that fact.Some of those are “Israel” (Gal. 6:15–16; Eph.2:12; Heb. 8:8–10; Rev. 2:14), “a chosen people”(1 Pet. 2:9), “the circumcision” (Rom. 2:28–29;Phil. 3:3; Col. 2:11), “Abraham’s seed” (Rom. 4:16;Gal. 3:29), “the remnant” (Rom. 9:27; 11:5–7), “theelect” (Rom. 11:28; Eph. 1:4), “the flock” (Acts20:28; Heb. 13:20; 1 Pet. 5:2), and “priesthood”(1 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 1:6; 5:10).
Discontinuitybetween the church and Israel. The church, however, is not totallyidentical with Israel; discontinuity also characterizes therelationship. The church, according to the NT, is the eschatological(end-time) Israel incorporated in Jesus Christ and, as such, is aprogression beyond historical Israel (1 Cor. 10:11; 2 Cor.5:14–21). Indeed, significant discontinuity is introduced bythe fact that the church includes Gentiles as members of Israel,without requiring them to convert to Judaism first. Gentiles enter asGentiles. However, a caveat must be issued at this point. Althoughthe church is a progression beyond Israel, it does not seem to be thepermanent replacement of Israel (see Rom. 9–11, esp. 11:25–27).
Thekingdom of God.Many scholars have maintained that the life, death, and resurrectionof Jesus inaugurated the kingdom of God, producing the overlapping ofthe two ages. The kingdom has already dawned but is not yet complete.The first aspect pertains to Jesus’ first coming, and thesecond aspect relates to his second coming. In other words, the ageto come has broken into this age, and now the two existsimultaneously. This background is crucial in ascertaining therelationship between the church and the kingdom of God, because thechurch also exists in the tension that results from the overlappingof the two ages. Accordingly, one may define the church as theforeshadowing of the kingdom. Two ideas flow from this definition:first, the church is related to the kingdom of God; second, thechurch is not equal to the kingdom of God.
Thechurch and the kingdom of God are related. Not until after theresurrection of Jesus does the NT speak with regularity about thechurch. However, there are early signs of the church in the teachingand ministry of Jesus, in both general and specific ways. In general,Jesus anticipated the later official formation of the church in thathe gathered to himself the twelve disciples, who constituted thebeginnings of eschatological Israel—in effect, the remnant.More specifically, Jesus explicitly referred to the church in twopassages: Matt. 16:18–19; 18:17. In the first passage Jesuspromised that he would build his church despite satanic opposition,thus assuring the ultimate success of his mission. The notion of thechurch overcoming the forces of evil coincides with the idea that thekingdom of God will prevail over its enemies and bespeaks theintimate association between the church and the kingdom. The secondpassage relates to the future organization of the church, not unlikethe Jewish synagogue practices of Jesus’ day.
Thechurch and the kingdom of God are not identical. As intimatelyrelated as the church and the kingdom of God are, the NT does notequate the two, as is evident in the fact that the early Christianspreached the kingdom, not the church (Acts 8:12; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23,31). The NT identifies the church as the people of the kingdom (e.g.,Rev. 5:10), not the kingdom itself. Moreover, the church is theinstrument of the kingdom. This is especially clear from Matt.16:18–19, where the preaching of Peter and the church becomethe keys to opening up the kingdom of God to all who would enter.
Theeschatological temple of God.Both the OT and Judaism anticipated the rebuilding of the temple inthe future kingdom of God (e.g., Ezek. 40–48; Hag. 2:1–9;1 En. 90:29; 91:3; Jub. 1:17, 29). Jesus hinted that he wasgoing to build such a structure (Matt. 16:18; Mark 14:58; John2:19–22). Pentecost witnessed to the beginning of thefulfillment of that dream in that when the Spirit inhabited thechurch, the eschatological temple was formed (Acts 2:16–36).Other NT writers also perceived that the presence of the Spirit inthe Christian community constituted the new temple of God (1 Cor.3:16–17; 2 Cor. 6:14–7:1; Eph. 2:19–22; seealso Gal. 4:21–31; 1 Pet. 2:4–10). However,that the eschatological temple is not yet complete is evident in thepreceding passages, especially in their emphasis on the need for thechurch to grow toward maturity in Christ, which will be fullyaccomplished only at the parousia (second coming of Christ). In themeantime, Christians, as priests of God, are to perform theirsacrificial service to the glory of God (Rom. 12:1–2; Heb.13:15; 1 Pet. 2:4–10).
Thebride of Christ.The image of marriage is applied to God and Israel in the OT (seeIsa. 54:5–6; 62:5; Hos. 2:7). Similar imagery is applied toChrist and the church in the NT. Christ, the bridegroom, hassacrificially and lovingly chosen the church to be his bride (Eph.5:25–27). Her responsibility during the betrothal period is tobe faithful to him (2 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:24). At the parousia theofficial wedding ceremony will take place, and with it the eternalunion of Christ and his wife will be actualized (Rev. 19:7–9;21:1–2).
Thebody of Christ.The body of Christ as a metaphor for the church is unique to thePauline literature and constitutes one of the most significantconcepts therein (Rom. 12:4–5; 1 Cor. 12:12–27; Eph.4:7–16; Col. 1:18). The primary purpose of the metaphor is todemonstrate the interrelatedness of diversity and unity within thechurch, especially with reference to spiritual gifts. The body ofChrist is the last Adam (1 Cor. 15:45), the new humanity of theend time that has appeared in history. However, Paul’s usage ofthe image, like the metaphor of the new temple, indicates that thechurch, as the body of Christ, still has a long way to gospiritually. It is not yet complete.
Sacraments
Atthe heart of the expression of the church’s faith are thesacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The formersymbolizes entrance into the church, while the latter providesspiritual sustenance for the church.
Baptism.Baptism symbolizes the sinner’s entrance into the church. Threeobservations emerge from the biblical treatment of this sacrament.First, the OT intimated baptism, especially in its association ofrepentance of sin with ablutions (Num.19:18–22; Ps. 51:7; Ezek.36:25; cf. John 3:5). Second, the baptism of John anticipatedChristian baptism. John administered a baptism of repentance inexpectation of the baptism of the Spirit and fire that the Messiahwould exercise (Matt. 3:11 // Luke 3:16). Those who accept Jesusas Messiah experience the baptism of fire and judgment (which may bean allusion to undergoing the great tribulation/messianic woes thatlead into the messianic kingdom). Third, the early church practicedbaptism in imitation of the Lord Jesus (Matt. 3:13–17 //Mark 1:9–11 // Luke 3:21–22; see also John 1:32–34;cf. Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38; 8:16; Rom. 6:3–6; 1 Cor.1:13–15; Gal. 3:27; Titus 3:5; 1 Pet. 3:21). Thesepassages demonstrate some further truths about baptism: baptism isintimately related to faith in God; baptism identifies the personwith the death and resurrection of Jesus; baptism incorporates theperson into the community of believers.
Lord’sSupper.The other biblical sacrament is the Lord’s Supper. This ritesymbolizes Christ’s spiritual nourishment of his church as itcelebrates the sacred meal. Two basic points emerge from the biblicaldata concerning the Lord’s Supper. First, it was instituted byChrist (Matt. 26:26–29; Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:15–20;1 Cor. 11:23–25), probably as an adaptation of thePassover meal. If that is the case, then, Jesus will have introducedtwo changes into the Passover seder: he replaced the unleavened breadwith a reference to his body being given for us on the cross; hereplaced the cup of redemption with a reference to his shed blood onthe cross, the basis of the new covenant. Second, the early churchpracticed the Lord’s Supper probably weekly, in conjunctionwith the love feast (see 1 Cor. 11:18–22; cf. Jude 12). Atwofold meaning is attached to the Lord’s Supper by the NTauthors. First, it involves participation in Christ’s salvation(Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24–25), and in two ways:participating in the Lord’s Supper looks back to the death ofJesus, in which the believer now shares; participating in the Lord’sSupper looks forward to Christ’s return, the culmination pointof the believer’s salvation. Second, the Lord’s Supperinvolves identification with the body of Christ, the community offaith (1 Cor. 10:16–17; 11:27–33).
Worship
Theultimate purpose of the church is to worship God through Christ andin the power of the Holy Spirit (see, e.g., Rev. 4–5). Theearly church first worshiped in the Jerusalem temple (Acts 2:46; 3:1;5:42) as well as in the synagogue (Acts 22:19; cf. John 9:22; James2:2). At the same time, and into the near future, believers met inhomes for worship (Acts 1:13; 2:46; 5:42; cf. Rom. 16:15; Col. 4:15;Philem. 2; 2 John 10; 3 John 1, 6). Although many JewishChristians no doubt continued to worship God on the Sabbath, theestablished time for the church’s worship came to be Sunday,the day of Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 20:7; Rev. 1:10). Theearly church most probably patterned its order of worship after thesynagogue service: praise in prayer (Acts 2:42, 47; 3:1; 1 Thess.1:2; 5:17) and in song (1 Cor. 14:26; Phil. 2:6–11; Col.1:15–20), the expounding of Scripture (Acts 2:42; 6:4; Col.4:16; 1 Thess. 2:13; 1 Tim. 4:13), and almsgiving to theneedy (Acts 2:44–45; 1 Cor. 16:1–2; 2 Cor. 8–9;James 2:15–17).
Serviceand Organization
Fiveobservations emerge from the NT regarding the service andorganization of the early church. First, the ministry of the churchcenters on its usage of spiritual gifts, which are given to believersby God’s grace and for his glory as well as for the good ofothers (Rom. 12:3; Eph. 4:7–16). Second, every believerpossesses a gift of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:7; Eph. 4:7). Third,it is through the diversity of the gifts that the body of Christmatures and is unified (Rom. 12:4; 1 Cor. 12:12–31; Eph.4:17–18). Fourth, although there was organized leadership inthe NT church, including elders (1 Tim. 3:1–7 [also called“pastors” and “bishops”; see Acts 20:17, 28;1 Pet. 5:1–4]) and deacons (1 Tim. 3:8–13),there does not seem to have been a gap between the “clergy”and the “laity” in the church of the first century;rather, those with the gift of leadership are called to equip all thesaints for the work of the ministry (Eph. 4:7–16). Fifth,spiritual gifts are to be exercised in love (1 Cor. 13).
In the Bible, gestures are made with either parts of the bodyor items, such as clothing and rings, directly connected to the body.For this reason, it makes sense to classify biblical gestures inrelation to the different body parts that are identified with thegestures. It is, however, challenging to know where to draw a line onclassifying a gesture. For example, a devious person is described inProv. 6:13 as one “who winks maliciously with his eye, signalswith his feet and motions with his fingers.” It is unclearwhether this is a single gesture or multiple ones, and whether allsignify different things or the same thing.
Head
Gesturesthat relate to the head range from simple head motions to semiviolentacts such as hair pulling. Simple head motions include lifting ofone’s head in honor (Gen. 40:13), bowing one’s head inmourning (Ps. 35:14), tossing one’s head in mockery andderision (2Kings 19:21), and shaking one’s head as insult(Ps. 22:7; Mark 15:29).
Acommon action is the shaving of the head, which can be forpurification (Lev. 14:8–9; Num. 6:9; 8:7 [includes all bodyhair]), mourning (Deut. 21:11–13; Job 1:20; Isa. 15:2; Jer.16:6; 47:5; 48:37; Ezek. 27:31; Amos 8:10; Mic. 1:16), remorse (Jer.41:5), or shaming (Jer. 2:16). However, priests are forbidden fromshaving their heads even in mourning (Lev. 21:5; Ezek. 44:20), whilethe high priest is to wear a turban on his head during sacrificialduties (Exod. 29:6).
Anointingof the head is done when a priest or king is installed (Exod. 29:7;Ps. 23:5) or simply as a sign of God’s goodness and blessing ona person (Eccles. 9:8). Blessing may also involve placing a hand onthe head of the person being blessed (Gen. 48:14–18; Exod.29:19), while the same gesture on the head of sacrificial animals isa symbolic means of transferring sin (Lev. 3:2, 8, 13; 4:4, 15, 24,29, 33; 8:18, 22).
Inthe OT, a woman’s head can be shaved in mourning (Deut.21:12–13; cf. Jer. 47:5), but in the NT, a shaved head can be acause for disgrace (1Cor. 11:5–6).
Face.Facial gestures range from expressions to actions such as touching orcovering the face. A face can be downcast in anger (Gen. 4:5–6)or bowed to the ground in honor (Gen. 48:12), in dejection (Josh.7:6), in humility (Ruth 2:10), in worship (2Chron. 20:18; Ps.138:2), in subjection, supplication, reverence (1Sam. 20:41;25:41; 28:14; 2Sam. 14:4, 22; 18:28; 24:20; 1Kings 1:23;1Chron. 21:20), or in dread (e.g., Moses before Yahweh [Exod.3:6]).
Theface can be covered or veiled as an indication of uncleanness (Lev.13:45), in grief/mourning (2Sam. 19:4; Ezek. 24:17), inresignation (1Kings 19:13), with intent to deceive in adultery(Job 24:15), or in horror of judgment (Esther 7:8; Ezek. 12:6, 12).It can also be buried in the dust in remorse (Lam. 3:29).
Godcan be described as hiding or turning away his face againstwickedness and evil (Deut. 31:18; 32:20; Ps. 34:16; Isa. 8:17; Jer.33:5; Ezek. 7:22; 15:7; 20:46; 21:2) or in an act of withholdingblessings (Job 13:15; Pss. 10:1; 13:1; 27:9; 30:7; 34:16; Isa. 54:8;59:2; 64:7). God can also turn his face toward a place in judgment(Ezek. 4:3, 7; 6:2). In 1Sam. 5:3–4 the idol of thePhilistine god Dagon falls facedown before the ark of the covenant,apparently overpowered by Yahweh.
Actsof humiliation or dishonor can involve spitting in the face (Num.12:14; Deut. 25:9; Job 17:6; 30:10; Isa. 50:6), slapping the face(1Kings 22:24; 2Chron. 18:23; Job 16:10; Lam. 3:30; Mic.5:1), pulling a skirt up over someone’s face in shamingjudgment (Jer. 13:26; Nah. 3:5), and hooking and dragging someone bythe nose (2Kings 19:28). Although being struck on the cheek ishumiliating, Jesus instructs his disciples to “turn the othercheek” as a sign of resistance to violence (Matt. 5:39; Luke6:29).
Onecan lift one’s face in worship (2Kings 20:2; Job 22:26;Isa. 38:2) or in confidence (Job 11:15) and can fail to lift it inshame and disgrace (Ezra 9:6). Although the shaving of beards inmourning is common practice (Ezra 9:3; Isa. 15:2; Jer. 41:5; 48:37),the forced shaving of beards is an act of shaming and insulting(2Sam. 10:4; 1Chron. 19:4–5; Isa. 7:20; 50:6).
Eyes.Winking the eye is perceived as an evil, deceptive, or malicious act(Ps. 35:19; Prov. 6:13; 16:30). Eyes can be lifted up in worship andexpectation (Pss. 121:1; 123:1).
Mouth.Pursed lips can characterize an evil person (Prov. 16:30), while ahand can be clapped over the mouth in awe and submission (Job 21:5;40:4). Psalm 72:9 looks to the righteous king before whom the deserttribes will bow and whose “enemies lick the dust” indefeat.
Ears.An Israelite slave for life is to have a hole punched through his orher earlobe, held against a doorpost, with an awl (Exod. 21:6; Deut.15:17). Blood is sprinkled on the lobe of the right ear forpurification (Exod. 29:20; Lev. 8:23–24; 14:17), whilesupplication can be described as asking for the turning of an ear(2Kings 19:16; Ps. 31:2). Turning one’s ear signifiespaying attention or taking something to heart (Ps. 49:4; Prov. 4:20;5:13).
Neck.The neck can be adorned (Song 1:10) as a sign of pride and honor(Gen. 41:42; Judg. 5:30; Prov. 1:9; Ezek. 16:11) or outstretched inarrogance (Ps. 75:5 TNIV: “Do not lift your horns againstheaven; do not speak with outstretched neck”). Jeremiah put ayoke on his neck as a prophetic sign of the approaching Babylonianconquest (Jer. 27–28). While putting someone’s neck in ayoke is an act of triumphal conquest (Ps. 105:18), stepping on theneck of a subdued enemy is an act of subjugation and humiliation(Josh. 10:24).
Body
Nakednessin public is considered shameful (Gen. 9:22–23; Nah. 3:5; Rev.3:18), so that it is sometimes pictured as part of divine judgment(Deut. 28:48; Isa. 47:2–3; Lam. 1:8; Mic. 1:11) or as a sign ofpromiscuity (Isa. 57:8; Ezek. 16:36). An unkempt body can be a signof mourning, as it is for Mephibosheth (2Sam. 19:24). A certainkind of body covering is a sign of marriage proposal or protection(Ezek. 16:8; 23:18; Hos. 2:9). Body dismembering, even in war, is anact of humiliation (2Sam. 4:12).
Chest.In self-mortification, one can pound one’s chest in mourning(Ezek. 21:12) or in remorse (Jer. 31:19; Luke 18:13). The breasts ofsacrificial animals are waved before God as a “wave offering”before being eaten (Exod. 29:26; Lev. 7:30; Num. 6:20).
Hand,arm.Hand gestures include motions such as lifting hands in worship,clapping hands in joy, and clapping a hand over one’s mouth inawe. The expression “outstretched arm” (Exod. 6:6; Deut.4:34; 5:15; 7:19; 9:29; 11:2; 26:8; 1Kings 8:42; 2Kings17:36; 2Chron. 6:32; Ps. 136:12; Jer. 21:5; 27:5; 32:17, 21;Ezek. 20:33–34) indicates power, might, strength. It is oftenused of God to indicate his ability to defeat powerful armies andenemies. God is implored by the psalmist to lift his hand and act forthe sake of the righteous (Ps. 10:12).
Sincethe right hand is the hand of power, the act of sitting at the righthand indicates being favored (1Kings 2:19; Ps. 110:1; Matt.22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:43; Acts 2:35; Heb. 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2;1Pet. 3:22). When taking an oath, one places a hand under thethigh/crotch (Gen. 24:2; 47:29), most likely the right hand (see Gen.48:14, 17–18; Lev. 8:23; 14:14).
Clappingthe hands can be a sign of awe (Ezek. 6:11), malice, or remorse(25:6), while a bared arm can be a sign of judgment (4:7). Job clapshis hand over his mouth in awe of God and in submission andrepentance (Job 40:4–5).
Handscan be lifted in worship (1Kings 8:22; 1Tim. 2:8), tobeseech (Ps. 28:2), to protect and bless (Ps. 10:12), in an oath(Deut. 32:40), or to harm (Exod. 24:11; 1Sam. 24:6, 10;2Sam.1:14; 18:12).
Pilatewashes his hands to proclaim his innocence over the death of Jesus(Matt. 27:24), while 1Pet. 5:6 urges believers to humblethemselves “under God’s mighty hand,” so that indue time they will be lifted up.
Buttocks.Exposure of the buttocks can serve as a humiliating insult andprovocation, as happens to David’s men (2Sam. 10:4;1Chron. 19:4) and Egyptian and Cushite captives (Isa. 20:4).
Leg.The leg or thigh is often a euphemism for the male reproductiveorgans, so that putting one’s hand under a thigh in oath (Gen.24:2; 47:29) may involve actually grabbing the genitalia. Animalthighs are waved to God in offering before being consumed (Lev. 9:21;10:14; Num. 6:20), while oaths administered to uncover adultery causea guilty woman’s thighs to waste (Num. 5:2–27).
Themost common gesture involving the knee is bowing, in worship orreverence (Deut. 33:3; Isa. 45:23; Rom. 11:4; 14:11; Phil. 2:10), indefeat (2Sam. 22:40; Ps. 18:38; Isa. 60:14), in distress (Ps.57:6), or in respect (1Kings 1:31). In what seems to be asomewhat awkward position, Elijah puts his face between his knees inprayer (1Kings 18:42).
Feet.Gestures involving the feet are probably the most common gestures inthe Bible. Feet can be washed in hospitality (Gen. 18:4; 19:2; 24:32;43:24; 1Sam. 25:41), in ablution (Exod. 30:19, 21; 40:31), orin supplication (1Sam. 25:41). Feet can be bathed in oil as ablessing (Deut. 33:24), uncovered in marriage proposals (Ezek. 16:8;cf. Ruth 3:4, 7), and stamped in remorse (Ezek. 25:6), and sandalscan be removed from them in honor (Exod. 3:1–10) or disgrace(Deut. 25:9). The heavenly seraphs cover their feet in supplicationbefore the throne of God (Isa. 6:2), while the feet of humans cansignal deception (Prov. 6:13).
Enemiescan be placed under one’s feet in subjugation (1Kings5:3; Pss. 8:6; 18:39; 45:5; 47:3; 110:1; Mal. 4:3; Rom. 16:20), havetheir feet shackled or ensnared (Job 13:27; 33:11; Pss. 25:15;105:18), and be forced to lick the feet of victors in humiliation anddefeat (Isa. 49:23). The righteous will bathe their feet in the bloodof their enemies in revenge (Pss. 58:10; 68:23).
Thoseoverwhelmed can grovel at the feet of the powerful (2Kings4:27, 37; Esther 8:3; Matt. 28:9; Mark 5:33; 7:25; Acts 10:25), whilethose emboldened can rise to their feet in confidence (Ezek. 2:1–2;3:24; Dan. 8:18).
Inthe NT, dust can be shaken off one’s feet as an indication ofdivine judgment (Matt. 10:14; Mark 6:11; Luke 9:5), even as lying ata person’s feet is a recognition of authority/submission (Matt.15:30; Mark 5:33; Luke 8:28, 35, 41, 47; 10:39; 17:16; Acts 4:37;5:2). A woman publicly washes Jesus’ feet with her tears, wipesthem with her hair, and kisses and perfumes them in what seems an actof love and repentance; but Jesus indicates that she has prepared hisbody for burial (Luke 7:38–46; John 11:2; 12:3). Jesus washeshis disciples’ feet as instruction on servanthood anddiscipleship (John 13:5–14).
Fingers,Toes.Different fingers seem to have different roles assigned them. Afinger sprinkles blood in cleansing (Lev. 4:6, 17, 25, 30, 34; 8:15;9:9; 14:16; 16:14, 19; Num. 19:4), while blood on the tip of theright thumb and on the right big toe is for cleansing (Exod. 29:20;Lev. 8:23–24; 14:17, 25, 28).
Onewears a signet ring as a sign of power (Esther 3:10) or a gesture ofrestoration and forgiveness (Luke 15:22). But fingers can also motionin deception (Prov. 6:13) or point in blame (Isa. 58:9). Jesus writeswith his finger on the ground, apparently as a gesture ofindifference to those pointing accusing fingers (John 8:6).
Clothesand Shoes
Garments.Garments attain significance as they are related to specificemotions. Wearing sackcloth and ashes in mourning is common (Gen.37:34; Ezek. 7:18; 2Sam. 3:31), while ripping garments inmourning is also frequently attested (Gen. 37:34; 44:13; Lev. 10:6;21:10; Josh. 7:6; 2Sam. 1:11; 3:31; 13:31; 1Kings 21:27;2Kings 2:12; 19:1; Esther 4:1; Isa. 32:11; 37:1; Jer. 41:5).
Rippingsomeone’s clothing to expose nakedness (Ezek. 16:39; 2Sam.10:4) or pulling a person’s skirts up over the face (Jer.13:26) is an act of shaming or insulting. But tearing one’sclothes off can be a sign of fury (Matt. 26:65). Persons withdefiling diseases are expected to warn off others by wearing tornclothes and shouting, “Unclean! Unclean!” (Lev. 13:45).
Bylaying their clothes at Saul’s feet, the crowd may beacknowledging his authority in the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58).
Sandals.A woman can remove a man’s sandal in contempt (Deut. 25:5–10),while a sandal can be removed by a kinsman-redeemer to indicategiving up a right or as a transfer of property (Ruth 4:7–8). Asandal can also be removed in mourning (Ezek. 24:17) or be cast overa piece of land to claim ownership (Pss. 60:8; 108:9).
PropheticGestures
Propheticgestures in the OT are mostly concerned with the call to repentanceand approaching judgments upon failure to heed the warning. Jeremiahputs a yoke on his neck (Jer. 27–28; cf. Deut. 28:48), Ezekielcooks with dung (Ezek. 4:12) and sleeps on his left side for 390 daysand then on his right side for 40 days (4:5–6), Isaiah stripsoff his clothing (Isa. 20:2–3; 32:11), and Hosea marries anunfaithful wife (Hos. 1:1–3).
Inthe NT, Jesus cleanses the temple as an act of symbolic judgment(Matt. 21:12; Mark 11:15; John 2:15). He also breaks bread and drinkswine (Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19; 24:30, 35; Acts 2:46;20:11; 27:35; 1Cor. 11:24–25) and washes his disciples’feet (John 13:1–13), thereby establishing symbolic Christianpractices.
The Letter to the Hebrews and the Letter to the Romans constitute the two great pillars of theology in the NT. Hebrews brings a high Christology and increases Christian understanding of Christ’s role as priest and pioneer of faith. From this book, deductions can be made regarding the early church’s understanding of OT interpretation and its view of typology.
Hebrews ends like a letter, but it does not begin like one. In particular, it lacks the names of the writer and the recipients. From the content, though, it is evident that this work is meant for a certain audience, familiar with the author. The author shows a loving pastoral concern for his readers, teaching them, exhorting them, and rebuking them when necessary. He gives them models of faith to encourage them and instructs them to encourage one another. The author describes the work as “my word of exhortation” (13:22). The book is often identified as a sermon.
Author
The letter is, strictly speaking, anonymous. No author is mentioned, and few clues as to his identity exist. He is known by his readers (13:19) and has a pastor’s heart for them (6:9). He and his audience are second-generation Christians; that is, they did not hear Jesus during his ministry but rather are dependent upon those who did (2:3). He is a companion of Timothy (13:23) and thus possibly in the circle of Paul. The letter shows that he has great organizational and rhetorical skills; he is intelligent and well educated; his writing indicates that he is likely from a Greek-speaking culture and is a converted Hellenistic Jew familiar with the Greek version of the OT. And he is a creative theologian with perspectives found nowhere else in theNT.
Early church tradition offers no name for the author. The letter’s later attribution to the apostle Paul probably granted it the authority necessary for canonicity, though problems with that view were readily apparent. The Greek is unlike Paul’s, and the rhetoric and theology are much different as well. The themes present in Hebrews are of only tangential interest to Paul. All the Pauline Epistles bear his self-identification, because he felt that his status as an apostle added authority to his words. And Paul did not consider himself to be a second-generation Christian, since he had seen the Lord himself (Gal. 1:12). Although the Catholic and Eastern Churches continue to ascribe the work to Paul, the Protestant Church has almost completely abandoned that idea.
In the absence of a known author, almost every name in the NT has been suggested, including Apollos, Barnabas, Luke, and Silas. While each name has merits and problems, too little is known to prove or disprove any prospective author. Yet, even without Pauline or other known authorship, the book maintains its authority.
Audience
The original readers almost certainly were a house church, part of a network of churches in an urban setting, likely either Jerusalem or Rome, with Rome being slightly preferred. The recipients were a specific group rather than the church at large as in the General Epistles (James, 1–2Peter, 1–3John, Jude); the author knew their circumstances (Heb. 10:32; 12:4; 13:17, 24). They were Jewish Christians who, possibly because of persecution, were in danger of drifting back into the Judaism they had left (see 10:32–39). The letter was written probably in the late 60s, as evidenced by the fact that there is no mention of the temple’s destruction, which occurred in AD 70. Given the reasoning of the author, it is quite hard to imagine that he would not mention this event were he writing after that date.
Themes
Hebrews presents two main themes. The first is faith and perseverance, especially in the face of persecution. Jesus is the pioneer of salvation through suffering (2:10) and can help those being tempted (2:18); he has been faithful to the one who appointed him (3:2) as the Son over God’s house (3:6), which is Christians who hold firmly to their confidence and hope (3:6). Christians share in Christ, if they hold their convictions firmly to the end (3:14). This is possible because Jesus is the great high priest, having ascended into heaven (4:14). A person falling away, not holding firmly, cannot be brought back again to repentance (6:4–6). Jesus has sacrificed himself once for all (7:27). Christians must hold unswervingly to the hope they profess, for the one who promised is faithful (10:23). Those who do will be richly rewarded (10:35–36).
Role models of faith are portrayed in chapter 11, the so-called Faith Chapter. The author presents Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and other OT figures as examples of living by faith. These serve as a “cloud of witnesses,” demanding “perseverance [in] the race marked out” for Christians (12:1). Jesus is the “pioneer and perfecter” of faith, enduring the cross and shame (12:2). Christians should endure hardship as discipline (12:7), which will produce a “harvest of righteousness” (12:11).
The second theme is the superiority of Christ, presented in a series of escalating comparisons between Jesus and every aspect of Judaism. The Son is a superior revelation from God (1:1–2). He is superior to the angels (1:4–14) and even to Moses (3:2–6). The Son’s Melchizedekian priesthood is superior to the Levitical priesthood (7:1–25). The new covenant brought by the Son is superior to the Mosaic covenant (8:6–13); the Son’s sacrifice is superior to the sacrifices offered under the Mosaic law (9:1–10:18).
Theology
The author brings his unique perspective to the work of Christ—his special roles as both high priest and sacrifice. Because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood (7:24), which is not a function of his ancestry but rather is “on the basis of the power of an indestructible life” (7:16). He meets the requirements of a priest, being “holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (7:26). He is a “priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek” (7:17, quoting Ps. 110:4). Melchizedek is a once-mentioned figure from Gen. 14:18. He was the king of Salem, a “priest of God Most High.” Abraham, and by extension Levi, paid him a tithe and received a blessing from him. Therefore, Melchizedek is superior to Levi, and his priestly order is superior to Levi’s. This priesthood, in fact, replaces the Levitical priesthood because the earlier priesthood could not produce perfection (Heb. 7:11), being “weak and useless” (7:18).
The Levitical priests had offered their sacrifices repeatedly, year after year, first for their own sins, then for those of the people. They had used the blood of bulls and goats to cleanse the tabernacle and accessories, because without the shedding of blood there can be no forgiveness of sin (9:22). There had been many priests, as death claimed each one. The priests, in all their weaknesses, had been appointed by the law. The sanctuary in which they serve is a “copy and shadow” of what is in heaven (8:5).
In contrast to the Levitical high priest, Jesus sits at “the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven” (8:1) and serves in the true tabernacle not made by human hands. He has been appointed not by the law but by the oath of God, which came after the law. He has no need to offer sacrifices day after day; his sacrifice was “once for all” (7:27), coming at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin (9:26). In fact, the repeated nature of the Levitical sacrifices serves as proof of their ineffectiveness. Had they been effective, they would have ceased. But “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins” (10:4), even when offered in accordance with the law (10:8). The worshipers had been left with the same guilty consciences. Christ had “entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood” and obtained eternal redemption for all believers (9:12), sprinkling their hearts to cleanse them from guilty consciences (10:22)
Because of this, Christ is the mediator of the new covenant, prophesied in Jer. 31:31, which is superior to the Mosaic covenant. The first covenant has been made obsolete and will soon disappear (Heb. 8:13), as the new covenant is “established on better promises” (8:6). The tabernacle had been designed to demonstrate that there was no way into the most holy place for anyone but the high priest. Now, the blood of Jesus has opened a way through the curtain, allowing believers to “draw near to God with a sincere heart and with the full assurance of faith” (10:22).
Exhortations
Hebrews consists of theology interspersed with exhortations to the readers to persevere in the face of persecution, not to drift away from their new faith. These hortatory passages also serve as warnings. Because the new covenant is superior to the old one, its violation carries proportional penalties: since every violation of the old covenant had been met with its just punishment, “how shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation?” (2:3). Believers must encourage one another, so that no one becomes “hardened by sin’s deceitfulness” (3:13). As recipients of new access to God, Christians must hold unswervingly to the hope, because God is faithful. This new access has completely replaced the old; there is no sacrifice remaining to forgive deliberate sinning. As those rejecting the law of Moses had died without mercy, those insulting the Spirit of grace will be punished more severely (10:29). Christians should consider “him who endured such opposition” so as not to “grow weary and lose heart” (12:3).
The author rebukes his readers for being lazy: “We have much to say about this, but it is hard to make it clear to you because you no longer try to understand” (5:11); but he patiently moves on beyond elementary teaching to teaching of Christian maturity (6:1). He warns them sternly that there is no reverse gear: those who have entered the sphere of Christian faith cannot fall away and then reenter at will; apostates would be “crucifying the Son of God all over again” (6:6). But then he softens the rebuke as a pastor: “Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are convinced of better things in your case— the things that have to do with salvation” (6:9).
The author also shows great interest in the Sabbath rest promised to Moses. Those who had disobeyed were denied the rest (3:18), but the promise of entering his rest still stands (4:1). In fact, the Sabbath rest that remains is superior, or else it would not still be offered (4:8), and Christians must make every effort to enter that rest so that no one will perish (4:11).
Outline
The Letter to the Hebrews is very organized yet difficult to outline, owing to the manner in which the author handles his transitional material. The main theological argument (the superiority of the Son) is presented as a series of overlapping and interlocked comparisons interspersed with pastoral exhortations to perseverance. The connection between sections is often a keyword used in one section and then picked up and expanded in the next.
I. Introduction (1:1–4)
II. The Son Is Superior to the Angels (1:5–14)
III. Warning: Do Not Reject the Word Spoken through God’s Son (2:1–4)
IV. Jesus Is the Perfect Pioneer of Salvation because of His Suffering (2:5–18)
V. The Son Is Superior to Moses (3:1–19)
VI. The Sabbath Rest Is Still Available and Is Superior to the OT Rest (4:1–13)
VII. The Son Is a Superior High Priest (4:14–5:10)
VIII. Rebuke: You Are Still Spiritual Children (5:11–6:3)
IX. Warning: There Is No Return to the Former Covenant (6:4–12)
X. Jesus Completes the Oath God Gave Abraham (6:13–20)
XI. Jesus Is a Priest of Melchizedek’s Order, Superior to Levi’s Priesthood (7:1–25)
XII. The Priestly Function of Jesus Is Superior to That of the OT Priest (7:26–8:6)
XIII. The New Covenant of Jesus Is Superior to the Mosaic Covenant (8:7–13)
XIV. The Tabernacle of the New Covenant Is Superior to the Old (9:1–7)
XV. The Sacrifice of Christ Is Superior to the OT Sacrifices (9:8–10:20)
XVI. Exhortation to Persevere (10:21–39)
XVII. Faith Models (11:1–40)
XVIII. Exhortation to Righteous Living (12:1–13:17)
XIX. Closing Personal Greetings (13:18–25)
The appropriation and adaptation of an OT text in the NT,often labeled “biblical intertextuality,” “innerbiblicalexegesis,” or “biblical allusion,” reflects theexegetical process whereby biblical writers deliberately appeal tothe OT in order to elucidate, expand, or lend authority to NTrevelation. This hermeneutical process finds its origins in the reuseof earlier OT texts by later OT writers. Later, the process wasrefined by the practices of scribal exegetes and rabbinical writersfrom the postexilic period well into the first century AD. Thisapproach to interpretation recognized the dynamic character ofScripture and sought to contemporize its messages to address theissues facing changing audiences.
Thebiblical reader should keep in mind that as far as the NT writerswere concerned, the OT texts comprised the authoritative corpus ofmaterial identified as the “Scriptures.” Consequently,the NT authors appeal to the authority of these accepted texts as thebasis upon which to build or expand their theological argument, toreinforce their credentials as God’s spokesmen, and toappropriate and adapt OT revelation to address contemporarycircumstances. The NT citation of an OT text assumes the familiarityof the audience with that earlier text, since the recollection of aspecific Scripture by the NT writer in the formulation of his latermessage necessarily evokes in the minds of the audience a literaryand logical connection. By drawing on the OT corpus, the NT authorreinforces the continuity of God’s message and forges theidentification of the NT audience with the experiences and promisesmade to their Israelite ancestors.
Themost frequently cited OT books in the NT are Deuteronomy, Psalms, andIsaiah, underscoring the significance and importance of these earlyIsraelite texts to the reformulation, expansion, and elucidation ofNT revelation. In addition, the numerous NT references to these booksindicate that they must have played a key role in the memories of theNT audience, forming the foundation for developing faith anddoctrine.
IdentifyingQuotations and Allusions
Onecritical and often difficult task facing the reader centers onlocating potential intertextual references in the NT, since not allscriptural citations and allusions are obvious, and the practice doesnot conform easily to an exacting scientific process. Familiaritywith the OT increases the ability to recognize the borrowing of OTthemes and passages by the NT. In addition, many NT writersunderstandably quoted from the LXX, the Greek translation of the OT,rather than from a Hebrew text tradition, since they themselves werewriting in Greek. Consequently, some variations in wording based onthe type of text tradition employed by the NT writer add complexityto the enterprise. In addition, NT writers often modeled theexegetical methods of their Jewish counterparts, which, thoughtypical of their culture and environment, seem unorthodox to somescholars.
RichardHays, in his 1989 book Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul,presents seven criteria against which to evaluate the presence ofbiblical allusions: (1)availability (did the original authorand readers have access to the source?); (2)volume (howextensive is the repetition of words from a previous text?);(3)recurrence (how often does the writer explicitly refer tothe same passage?); (4)thematic coherence (does the quotationsupport the surrounding context?); (5)historical plausibility(could the writer have intended the alleged meaning?); (6)historyof interpretation; and (7)satisfaction (does the citationilluminate the meaning of the surrounding text?). These principlesprovide a sufficient, if minimalistic, methodology for determiningauthentic instances of biblical intertextuality.
Quotations,Allusions, and Typology
TheNT use of the OT generally falls into three broad categories: directquotations (or citations), allusions, and typology.
Directquotations.Quotations normally are identified by an introductory formula, suchas “it is written” or “you have heard it said,”which serves to mark the upcoming quotation. In many instances the NTwriter identifies the OT source, either by genre (e.g., “as itwas spoken by the prophets”) or by the name of the author(“this was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah”).Occasionally, the NT writer relates his scriptural quotation orteaching to an individual, as in the case of the treatise on divorcein Matt. 19, where the Gospel writer repeatedly mentions Moses. Insome instances the NT author combines parts of two differentcitations derived from two separate sources, attributing the entirequotation to one author, sometimes the more obscure of the two. Forexample, in Matt. 27:9, a discussion of the betrayal of Judas and thethirty pieces of silver, Matthew conflates Zech. 11:12–13 andJer. 19:1–13 or (18:2–12 or 32:6–9) but assigns theentire citation to Jeremiah. The absence of a formal marker does notnegate the possibility of textual borrowing; however, the literaryconnection between a NT passage and an OT predecessor would have tobe established on the basis of literary affinities, rare terminologyor expressions, thematic similarities, and associative conceptsconnecting the OT and the NT contexts.
Allusionsand echoes.In contrast, biblical allusion employs no introductory or formulaicintroduction identifying or marking the OT reference. While alldirect quotations may be classified as biblical allusions, not allbiblical allusions include direct citation formulas. Both directcitation and biblical allusion denote the deliberate borrowing andrecontextualizing, transformation, or reinterpretation of a specifictext, which has been incorporated into the later text in order toaccommodate the writer’s message to a contemporary audience.The contextual environment of the antecedent, or OT text, influencesand informs the interpretation of the NT text. The NT authorintentionally evokes in the minds of his knowledgeable audience aspecific textual referent along with its contextual associations,reformulating them in an innovative manner.
Ina biblical echo, words or images are employed by a biblical writer inorder to evoke conscious memories associated with multiple texts orwith general themes. For example, the formulaic expression “theliving God, who made the heavens and the earth and the sea andeverything in them” (Acts 14:15) recalls multiple OT texts(e.g., Ps. 96:5; Isa. 42:5; Jon. 1:9) connected to incomparabilitystatements reinforcing the sovereignty of God. The echo in Acts 17:26generally recalls the creation account in Genesis, without invoking aspecific verse or phrase. Although a NT writer may draw on biblicalechoes without necessarily invoking a specific context of anindividual passage, echoes may consist of interconnected layers ofmeaning that arise from differing historical settings andcircumstances, each of which contributes additional meaning to theecho.
Typologyand analogy.The NT writers often sought to employ OT texts by means of typology,reinforcing links between an OT event or concept and the subsequentdevelopment and transformation of that “type” in the NT.A “type” is a divinely appointed person, place, thing, orinstitution that has significance in its original literary andhistorical context but also points toward someone or something inlater biblical revelation. The “antitype” denotes thatwhich is prefigured by the original type. By means of typology, andto some degree, analogy, the NT writers demonstrate later revelationas superseding or fulfilling OT prophecies, underscoring thecontinuity of the NT with the OT and emphasizing its role astheologically transformative and expansive. Some predominant examplesinclude the Passover lamb as a type of Christ (1Pet. 1:19; cf.Rev. 5:11–14), the Aaronic priesthood compared and contrastedas a precursor of Christ’s priestly ministry (Heb. 5; 7–9),and the earthly tabernacle as a pattern for the heavenly tabernacle(Heb.9).
TheNT writers were also fond of analogy, delineating points ofcomparison between OT characters and accounts with NT teachings. Forinstance, Rom. 4 sets forth a lengthy discourse comparing Abraham’sjustification by faith and the new relationship experienced bybelievers who are justified by faith through Christ. Analogy andtypology are not mutually exclusive, as in the case of Rom. 4.Closely related to these hermeneutical methods is the infrequent useof allegory by the NT writers, such as the allegory of Sarah andHagar in Gal. 4:21–31. The distinction lies in the nature ofallegorical approach, which focuses on symbolism, or a “ ‘this’really means ‘that’ ” interpretationalframework.
TheRoles of Context and Authorial Intent
Scholarscontinue to debate the extent to which the OT context influences andaffects the NT message, particularly in the case of citations orallusions. Some suggest that biblical quotations are purelyincidental and should be divorced from their original contextualmoorings and evaluated independent of those contexts, while othersunderstand the original context of an OT passage to contributeinformation that leads to correct NT interpretation. The questionrevolves around determining the degree of authorial intent. In otherwords, to what extent can today’s reader, historically removedby time and culture, recover the original intention behind thebiblical writer’s calculated and deliberate use of an OT textas an interpretational tool? Current scholarship continues to debatethe role of authorial intent in the innerbiblical exegetical process.
The appropriation and adaptation of an OT text in the NT,often labeled “biblical intertextuality,” “innerbiblicalexegesis,” or “biblical allusion,” reflects theexegetical process whereby biblical writers deliberately appeal tothe OT in order to elucidate, expand, or lend authority to NTrevelation. This hermeneutical process finds its origins in the reuseof earlier OT texts by later OT writers. Later, the process wasrefined by the practices of scribal exegetes and rabbinical writersfrom the postexilic period well into the first century AD. Thisapproach to interpretation recognized the dynamic character ofScripture and sought to contemporize its messages to address theissues facing changing audiences.
Thebiblical reader should keep in mind that as far as the NT writerswere concerned, the OT texts comprised the authoritative corpus ofmaterial identified as the “Scriptures.” Consequently,the NT authors appeal to the authority of these accepted texts as thebasis upon which to build or expand their theological argument, toreinforce their credentials as God’s spokesmen, and toappropriate and adapt OT revelation to address contemporarycircumstances. The NT citation of an OT text assumes the familiarityof the audience with that earlier text, since the recollection of aspecific Scripture by the NT writer in the formulation of his latermessage necessarily evokes in the minds of the audience a literaryand logical connection. By drawing on the OT corpus, the NT authorreinforces the continuity of God’s message and forges theidentification of the NT audience with the experiences and promisesmade to their Israelite ancestors.
Themost frequently cited OT books in the NT are Deuteronomy, Psalms, andIsaiah, underscoring the significance and importance of these earlyIsraelite texts to the reformulation, expansion, and elucidation ofNT revelation. In addition, the numerous NT references to these booksindicate that they must have played a key role in the memories of theNT audience, forming the foundation for developing faith anddoctrine.
IdentifyingQuotations and Allusions
Onecritical and often difficult task facing the reader centers onlocating potential intertextual references in the NT, since not allscriptural citations and allusions are obvious, and the practice doesnot conform easily to an exacting scientific process. Familiaritywith the OT increases the ability to recognize the borrowing of OTthemes and passages by the NT. In addition, many NT writersunderstandably quoted from the LXX, the Greek translation of the OT,rather than from a Hebrew text tradition, since they themselves werewriting in Greek. Consequently, some variations in wording based onthe type of text tradition employed by the NT writer add complexityto the enterprise. In addition, NT writers often modeled theexegetical methods of their Jewish counterparts, which, thoughtypical of their culture and environment, seem unorthodox to somescholars.
RichardHays, in his 1989 book Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul,presents seven criteria against which to evaluate the presence ofbiblical allusions: (1)availability (did the original authorand readers have access to the source?); (2)volume (howextensive is the repetition of words from a previous text?);(3)recurrence (how often does the writer explicitly refer tothe same passage?); (4)thematic coherence (does the quotationsupport the surrounding context?); (5)historical plausibility(could the writer have intended the alleged meaning?); (6)historyof interpretation; and (7)satisfaction (does the citationilluminate the meaning of the surrounding text?). These principlesprovide a sufficient, if minimalistic, methodology for determiningauthentic instances of biblical intertextuality.
Quotations,Allusions, and Typology
TheNT use of the OT generally falls into three broad categories: directquotations (or citations), allusions, and typology.
Directquotations.Quotations normally are identified by an introductory formula, suchas “it is written” or “you have heard it said,”which serves to mark the upcoming quotation. In many instances the NTwriter identifies the OT source, either by genre (e.g., “as itwas spoken by the prophets”) or by the name of the author(“this was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah”).Occasionally, the NT writer relates his scriptural quotation orteaching to an individual, as in the case of the treatise on divorcein Matt. 19, where the Gospel writer repeatedly mentions Moses. Insome instances the NT author combines parts of two differentcitations derived from two separate sources, attributing the entirequotation to one author, sometimes the more obscure of the two. Forexample, in Matt. 27:9, a discussion of the betrayal of Judas and thethirty pieces of silver, Matthew conflates Zech. 11:12–13 andJer. 19:1–13 or (18:2–12 or 32:6–9) but assigns theentire citation to Jeremiah. The absence of a formal marker does notnegate the possibility of textual borrowing; however, the literaryconnection between a NT passage and an OT predecessor would have tobe established on the basis of literary affinities, rare terminologyor expressions, thematic similarities, and associative conceptsconnecting the OT and the NT contexts.
Allusionsand echoes.In contrast, biblical allusion employs no introductory or formulaicintroduction identifying or marking the OT reference. While alldirect quotations may be classified as biblical allusions, not allbiblical allusions include direct citation formulas. Both directcitation and biblical allusion denote the deliberate borrowing andrecontextualizing, transformation, or reinterpretation of a specifictext, which has been incorporated into the later text in order toaccommodate the writer’s message to a contemporary audience.The contextual environment of the antecedent, or OT text, influencesand informs the interpretation of the NT text. The NT authorintentionally evokes in the minds of his knowledgeable audience aspecific textual referent along with its contextual associations,reformulating them in an innovative manner.
Ina biblical echo, words or images are employed by a biblical writer inorder to evoke conscious memories associated with multiple texts orwith general themes. For example, the formulaic expression “theliving God, who made the heavens and the earth and the sea andeverything in them” (Acts 14:15) recalls multiple OT texts(e.g., Ps. 96:5; Isa. 42:5; Jon. 1:9) connected to incomparabilitystatements reinforcing the sovereignty of God. The echo in Acts 17:26generally recalls the creation account in Genesis, without invoking aspecific verse or phrase. Although a NT writer may draw on biblicalechoes without necessarily invoking a specific context of anindividual passage, echoes may consist of interconnected layers ofmeaning that arise from differing historical settings andcircumstances, each of which contributes additional meaning to theecho.
Typologyand analogy.The NT writers often sought to employ OT texts by means of typology,reinforcing links between an OT event or concept and the subsequentdevelopment and transformation of that “type” in the NT.A “type” is a divinely appointed person, place, thing, orinstitution that has significance in its original literary andhistorical context but also points toward someone or something inlater biblical revelation. The “antitype” denotes thatwhich is prefigured by the original type. By means of typology, andto some degree, analogy, the NT writers demonstrate later revelationas superseding or fulfilling OT prophecies, underscoring thecontinuity of the NT with the OT and emphasizing its role astheologically transformative and expansive. Some predominant examplesinclude the Passover lamb as a type of Christ (1Pet. 1:19; cf.Rev. 5:11–14), the Aaronic priesthood compared and contrastedas a precursor of Christ’s priestly ministry (Heb. 5; 7–9),and the earthly tabernacle as a pattern for the heavenly tabernacle(Heb.9).
TheNT writers were also fond of analogy, delineating points ofcomparison between OT characters and accounts with NT teachings. Forinstance, Rom. 4 sets forth a lengthy discourse comparing Abraham’sjustification by faith and the new relationship experienced bybelievers who are justified by faith through Christ. Analogy andtypology are not mutually exclusive, as in the case of Rom. 4.Closely related to these hermeneutical methods is the infrequent useof allegory by the NT writers, such as the allegory of Sarah andHagar in Gal. 4:21–31. The distinction lies in the nature ofallegorical approach, which focuses on symbolism, or a “ ‘this’really means ‘that’ ” interpretationalframework.
TheRoles of Context and Authorial Intent
Scholarscontinue to debate the extent to which the OT context influences andaffects the NT message, particularly in the case of citations orallusions. Some suggest that biblical quotations are purelyincidental and should be divorced from their original contextualmoorings and evaluated independent of those contexts, while othersunderstand the original context of an OT passage to contributeinformation that leads to correct NT interpretation. The questionrevolves around determining the degree of authorial intent. In otherwords, to what extent can today’s reader, historically removedby time and culture, recover the original intention behind thebiblical writer’s calculated and deliberate use of an OT textas an interpretational tool? Current scholarship continues to debatethe role of authorial intent in the innerbiblical exegetical process.
ThePhenomenon of Prophecy
Aprophet is a messenger of God, a person to whom God entrusts hismessage to an individual or to a nation. Indeed, the last book in theOT is named “Malachi,” which means “my messenger.”Isaiah heard God ask, “Whom shall I send?” and he criedout, “Send me!” (Isa. 6:8). A good template forunderstanding the phenomenon is Moses and Aaron. Moses was to tellAaron what to say, and Aaron would say it. “Then the Lord saidto Moses, ‘See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and yourbrother Aaron will be your prophet’ ” (Exod. 7:1).
Prophetssuch as Isaiah were privy to what transpires in heaven, wheredecisions were being made that control the course of human history.Micaiah describes how he has seen God in the company of the heavenlyhost deliberating on how to entice Ahab to his death (1Kings22:13–23). All the other “prophets” in Ahab’scourt were false, since they did not have knowledge of the eventsbeyond human ken, as only true prophets can. Only one who hasencountered God in this way can speak as an agent of the heavenlycourt.
Forevery true prophet in Israel, there were many false prophets. Mosesset guidelines for distinguishing them. True prophets prophesy inaccordance with revealed religion. If a prophet contradicts the law,for example, and calls Israel to worship another god, this is not atrue prophet (Deut. 18:20). Also, if a prophet predicts somethingthat does not come to pass, that is also a false prophet (Deut.18:21–22). These criteria are not mechanical and automatic,however. Sometimes a prophet may appear to contradict priorrevelation (Jer. 26:11), and sometimes the predicted judgment isstaved off by national repentance (Jon. 4). Also, sometimes God maytest the people with a false prophet who makes a true prediction(Deut. 13:1–3).
Trueprophets occasionally exhibited bizarre behavior. Saul, whilepursuing David, was suddenly possessed by the Spirit of God and laynaked day and night, prophesying. This caused the people to ask ifSaul was now one of the prophets (1Sam. 19:24). Even in theancient world, prophets were considered a bit crazy (2Kings9:11; Jer. 23:9; 29:26; Hos. 9:7). The phenomenon he experienced isreferred to as “ecstasy.” The practice of tongues in theNT church also seems to have been ecstatic behavior. Paul notes thatobservers would call practitioners “out of your mind”(1Cor. 14:23). At Pentecost, some observers thought that theapostles were drunk. Peter replied that they were not drunk butrather had the Spirit upon them (Acts 2:15–21).
Theword “prophet” refers to one who foretells the future. Ofcourse, many people cannot accept the notion of real prophecy andthus regard all prophecy as an illusion. Either the text was writtenafter the fact, or it was couched in such general terms that it is nomiracle that it came true, or else it was a lucky guess. The textitself, however, wants to be read as real prophecy, and Christiansbefore the modern age read it as such. After all, to reject thesupernatural elements in the Bible ultimately leads to rejecting theresurrection of Christ.
However,the modern Christian should not focus on the predictive part of theprophets’ message to such an extent that the “forthtelling”element is neglected. Forthtelling is the prophets’ chiefministry—calling the people to mercy and justice, to obedienceto the law and fidelity to God. Christians who believe the Bibleshould take seriously the predictions about the future, but even moreso the challenges about the present.
TheBooks of Prophecy in the Old Testament
TheOT of Catholic and Protestant Bibles is roughly organized around theGreek translation of the OT, the Septuagint. Thus, Daniel isconsidered a prophetic book, and the prophets are separated from thehistorical books by the poetical books. However, the Hebrew Bible hasa different organization. It has only eight “books” ofprophecy, divided into the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets.The Former Prophets are Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings.Traditionally, Samuel wrote Judges. The books of 1Samuel and2Samuel form one scroll, as do 1Kings and 2Kings.The book of Samuel bears the name of the prophet, and Kings issubstantially about Elijah and Elisha. The four Former Prophetswitness to the outworking of the covenant sanctions, from theIsraelites’ entry into the promised land to their expulsionfrom it.
Usually,when Christians speak of the prophets, they are referring to theLatter Prophets, plus Daniel. In Catholic and Protestant Bibles thereare four Major Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; andtwelve Minor Prophets: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. Manyother prophets ministered in Israel but have no scroll that bearstheir name. Thus, the ones listed above can be called the “writingprophets.”
Isaiah.The book of Isaiah preserves the sermons from the prophet whoministered during the time when Hezekiah was king of Judah, thesouthern kingdom. Isaiah saw Jerusalem surrounded by the Assyrianarmy and assured the king that God would deliver his people. Thatmessage of salvation is the overall theme of the book, a salvationuniversal in scope and focused on the figure of the SufferingServant. Isaiah claims that this servant of God would be wounded and“cut off from the land of the living” (Isa. 53:8) andthrough this would bring healing and salvation to his people. Hewould see this and make many righteous (Isa. 53).
TheNT refers to Isaiah more often than any other prophet, always todemonstrate that the truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ wererevealed in advance by the prophet. For example, Paul cites Isa. 1:9in his argument as to why the Jews had rejected the gospel (Rom.9:29). When Jesus withdrew to the area of Zebulun and Naphtali,Matthew says that this act fulfilled Isa. 9:1–2 (Matt.4:15–16). Jesus himself cites Isa. 53:12, “[he] wasnumbered with the transgressors,” and claims that it waswritten about him (Luke 22:37). He does the same with Isa. 61:1–2(Luke 4:18–21).
Jeremiah.The book of Jeremiah puts in writing the words of the prophetJeremiah, who ministered at the very end of the kingdom of Judah andlived through the destruction of Jerusalem, with its temple and thepeople of God being taken away to forced exile and captivity. He seesthe weakness and powerlessness of the covenant that God had made withhis people to stir up love and fidelity in their hearts to him.According to Jeremiah, what the people chiefly need is a new covenantaltogether, one that is not external and written on tablets of stone,but internal, written on their hearts. They need a change ofpersonality to become a different sort of people altogether. This iswhat Jeremiah predicts will happen in the coming age after their timeof captivity is over (Jer. 31:31–40). The NT identifies thisnew covenant with the gospel of Jesus (Heb. 8:8–12), secured byhis blood (Heb. 10:16–17). This is the new covenant that Jesusannounces to his disciples when he eats the Last Supper with them(Luke 22:20).
Ezekiel.The book of Ezekiel picks up where Jeremiah leaves off and continuesfrom the destruction of Jerusalem into the early years of theBabylonian captivity. Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel sees the failure of theold covenant. He likens Israel to a married woman who violates hermarriage covenant at every turn (Ezek. 16). The prophet also foreseesa future character transformation of God’s people. “Iwill give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will removefrom you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And Iwill put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and becareful to keep my laws” (Ezek. 36:26–27). This isgraphically illustrated in Ezek. 37, where the prophet is told toprophesy to a valley of dry bones, and through the preaching of theword of God the company of the dead come to life and become a vastarmy—not of skeletons, but of vitally alive warriors. This is avision of what will happen when God makes an everlasting covenantwith them and will dwell with them forever (Ezek. 37:26–27).Paul cites this in 2Cor. 6:16 and argues, “We are thetemple of the living God.” The last part of Ezekiel describes agreat, larger-than-life temple that Paul interprets to be the church.Thus, Ezekiel anticipates the preaching of the gospel, bringingspiritual life to a vast company of believers, among whom God himselfwill dwell.
Daniel.The book of Daniel is not a prophetic book by genre, but much of itis devoted to predicting the future, so in Catholic and ProtestantBibles it is placed between Ezekiel and the Minor Prophets. Prophecycalls the people to repentance and threatens judgment on them due totheir sin. Daniel does the opposite: it calls them to persevere assaints, while the evil nations oppress them, until the end of time,when they will be vindicated. Daniel comforts the faithful who aresuffering due to the sins of the nations.
TheTwelve.The twelve Minor Prophets follow a roughly chronological sequence(with some notable exceptions). Hosea, Amos, and Micah date from therise of Assyria as the great power that threatened Israel and Judah.Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah date from near the end of Assyriandominance and the rise of Babylon. The Babylonian exile is skipped,and the last three—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—werewritten after the Jews’ restoration to the land of Judah. Joel,Obadiah, and Jonah are difficult to date with certainty.
Readas one book, the Minor Prophets tell a story of God’s constancyand fidelity even though everything else in the world changes. Theybegin with all twelve tribes intact and enjoying prosperity in theland. In Judah, there is a king on the throne of David. But by theend, most of the tribes are lost, the monarchy is no more, Jerusalemand the temple have been destroyed, and the Jews are under the heelof foreign powers. After all of that, God says to them, almost as themoral of the whole history of the OT, “I the Lord do notchange. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed. Eversince the time of your ancestors you have turned away from my decreesand have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you”(Mal. 3:6–7). Deeply explored in the Minor Prophets is the dayof the Lord, the climax and denouement of history, in which all thewords of the prophets will finally be fulfilled (see Joel andZephaniah). The reader is given, as a picture of this day, a view ofthe repentance of one generation of Ninevites at the preaching ofJonah and of the final judgment to fall on that city as described byNahum.
TheNT cites the Minor Prophets much more often than any book of prophecyexcept Isaiah. Peter draws upon Joel 2:28–32 to explain thepouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17–21).James cites Amos 9:11–12 to demonstrate that salvation wasalways intended for the Gentiles as well as the Jews (Acts 15:16–17).Paul quotes Hab. 2:4 to argue that righteousness before God comesthrough faith (Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11). Jesus says that like Jonah, hewill return to the land of the living after three days (Matt.12:38–41).
Prophecyin the New Testament
Inthe NT period there were a number of prophets. John the Baptist couldpoint to Jesus and proclaim him to be the Lamb of God, who takes awaythe sins of the world (John 1:29). Agabus the prophet predicted afamine and, later, Paul’s arrest (Acts 11:28; 21:10–11).
Paullists “gifts of the Spirit” (1Cor. 12:4–11),including prophecy and various phenomena reminiscent of the OTprophets’ ecstatic state. Paul warns the Corinthians not tooverdo this sort of thing and so to be mature (1Cor. 14:19–20).Near the end of his life, in one of his last letters, he speaks ofprophecy as normative in the church, particularly in establishing anauthoritative body of elders to rule and especially to preach thegospel (1Tim. 1:18; 4:14). Peter draws a connection between theministry of the OT prophets and the proclamation of the gospel ofJesus Christ (1Pet. 1:10–12). Evangelism seems to be thenormative mode for prophecy today: forthtelling by calling people toturn from their sins to Jesus, and foretelling by speaking of hisreturn and the final judgment.
Thus,all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they neverparticipate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. Thegreatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus.John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure,but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection canproclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministryof any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).
ThePhenomenon of Prophecy
Aprophet is a messenger of God, a person to whom God entrusts hismessage to an individual or to a nation. Indeed, the last book in theOT is named “Malachi,” which means “my messenger.”Isaiah heard God ask, “Whom shall I send?” and he criedout, “Send me!” (Isa. 6:8). A good template forunderstanding the phenomenon is Moses and Aaron. Moses was to tellAaron what to say, and Aaron would say it. “Then the Lord saidto Moses, ‘See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and yourbrother Aaron will be your prophet’ ” (Exod. 7:1).
Prophetssuch as Isaiah were privy to what transpires in heaven, wheredecisions were being made that control the course of human history.Micaiah describes how he has seen God in the company of the heavenlyhost deliberating on how to entice Ahab to his death (1Kings22:13–23). All the other “prophets” in Ahab’scourt were false, since they did not have knowledge of the eventsbeyond human ken, as only true prophets can. Only one who hasencountered God in this way can speak as an agent of the heavenlycourt.
Forevery true prophet in Israel, there were many false prophets. Mosesset guidelines for distinguishing them. True prophets prophesy inaccordance with revealed religion. If a prophet contradicts the law,for example, and calls Israel to worship another god, this is not atrue prophet (Deut. 18:20). Also, if a prophet predicts somethingthat does not come to pass, that is also a false prophet (Deut.18:21–22). These criteria are not mechanical and automatic,however. Sometimes a prophet may appear to contradict priorrevelation (Jer. 26:11), and sometimes the predicted judgment isstaved off by national repentance (Jon. 4). Also, sometimes God maytest the people with a false prophet who makes a true prediction(Deut. 13:1–3).
Trueprophets occasionally exhibited bizarre behavior. Saul, whilepursuing David, was suddenly possessed by the Spirit of God and laynaked day and night, prophesying. This caused the people to ask ifSaul was now one of the prophets (1Sam. 19:24). Even in theancient world, prophets were considered a bit crazy (2Kings9:11; Jer. 23:9; 29:26; Hos. 9:7). The phenomenon he experienced isreferred to as “ecstasy.” The practice of tongues in theNT church also seems to have been ecstatic behavior. Paul notes thatobservers would call practitioners “out of your mind”(1Cor. 14:23). At Pentecost, some observers thought that theapostles were drunk. Peter replied that they were not drunk butrather had the Spirit upon them (Acts 2:15–21).
Theword “prophet” refers to one who foretells the future. Ofcourse, many people cannot accept the notion of real prophecy andthus regard all prophecy as an illusion. Either the text was writtenafter the fact, or it was couched in such general terms that it is nomiracle that it came true, or else it was a lucky guess. The textitself, however, wants to be read as real prophecy, and Christiansbefore the modern age read it as such. After all, to reject thesupernatural elements in the Bible ultimately leads to rejecting theresurrection of Christ.
However,the modern Christian should not focus on the predictive part of theprophets’ message to such an extent that the “forthtelling”element is neglected. Forthtelling is the prophets’ chiefministry—calling the people to mercy and justice, to obedienceto the law and fidelity to God. Christians who believe the Bibleshould take seriously the predictions about the future, but even moreso the challenges about the present.
TheBooks of Prophecy in the Old Testament
TheOT of Catholic and Protestant Bibles is roughly organized around theGreek translation of the OT, the Septuagint. Thus, Daniel isconsidered a prophetic book, and the prophets are separated from thehistorical books by the poetical books. However, the Hebrew Bible hasa different organization. It has only eight “books” ofprophecy, divided into the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets.The Former Prophets are Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings.Traditionally, Samuel wrote Judges. The books of 1Samuel and2Samuel form one scroll, as do 1Kings and 2Kings.The book of Samuel bears the name of the prophet, and Kings issubstantially about Elijah and Elisha. The four Former Prophetswitness to the outworking of the covenant sanctions, from theIsraelites’ entry into the promised land to their expulsionfrom it.
Usually,when Christians speak of the prophets, they are referring to theLatter Prophets, plus Daniel. In Catholic and Protestant Bibles thereare four Major Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; andtwelve Minor Prophets: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. Manyother prophets ministered in Israel but have no scroll that bearstheir name. Thus, the ones listed above can be called the “writingprophets.”
Isaiah.The book of Isaiah preserves the sermons from the prophet whoministered during the time when Hezekiah was king of Judah, thesouthern kingdom. Isaiah saw Jerusalem surrounded by the Assyrianarmy and assured the king that God would deliver his people. Thatmessage of salvation is the overall theme of the book, a salvationuniversal in scope and focused on the figure of the SufferingServant. Isaiah claims that this servant of God would be wounded and“cut off from the land of the living” (Isa. 53:8) andthrough this would bring healing and salvation to his people. Hewould see this and make many righteous (Isa. 53).
TheNT refers to Isaiah more often than any other prophet, always todemonstrate that the truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ wererevealed in advance by the prophet. For example, Paul cites Isa. 1:9in his argument as to why the Jews had rejected the gospel (Rom.9:29). When Jesus withdrew to the area of Zebulun and Naphtali,Matthew says that this act fulfilled Isa. 9:1–2 (Matt.4:15–16). Jesus himself cites Isa. 53:12, “[he] wasnumbered with the transgressors,” and claims that it waswritten about him (Luke 22:37). He does the same with Isa. 61:1–2(Luke 4:18–21).
Jeremiah.The book of Jeremiah puts in writing the words of the prophetJeremiah, who ministered at the very end of the kingdom of Judah andlived through the destruction of Jerusalem, with its temple and thepeople of God being taken away to forced exile and captivity. He seesthe weakness and powerlessness of the covenant that God had made withhis people to stir up love and fidelity in their hearts to him.According to Jeremiah, what the people chiefly need is a new covenantaltogether, one that is not external and written on tablets of stone,but internal, written on their hearts. They need a change ofpersonality to become a different sort of people altogether. This iswhat Jeremiah predicts will happen in the coming age after their timeof captivity is over (Jer. 31:31–40). The NT identifies thisnew covenant with the gospel of Jesus (Heb. 8:8–12), secured byhis blood (Heb. 10:16–17). This is the new covenant that Jesusannounces to his disciples when he eats the Last Supper with them(Luke 22:20).
Ezekiel.The book of Ezekiel picks up where Jeremiah leaves off and continuesfrom the destruction of Jerusalem into the early years of theBabylonian captivity. Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel sees the failure of theold covenant. He likens Israel to a married woman who violates hermarriage covenant at every turn (Ezek. 16). The prophet also foreseesa future character transformation of God’s people. “Iwill give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will removefrom you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And Iwill put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and becareful to keep my laws” (Ezek. 36:26–27). This isgraphically illustrated in Ezek. 37, where the prophet is told toprophesy to a valley of dry bones, and through the preaching of theword of God the company of the dead come to life and become a vastarmy—not of skeletons, but of vitally alive warriors. This is avision of what will happen when God makes an everlasting covenantwith them and will dwell with them forever (Ezek. 37:26–27).Paul cites this in 2Cor. 6:16 and argues, “We are thetemple of the living God.” The last part of Ezekiel describes agreat, larger-than-life temple that Paul interprets to be the church.Thus, Ezekiel anticipates the preaching of the gospel, bringingspiritual life to a vast company of believers, among whom God himselfwill dwell.
Daniel.The book of Daniel is not a prophetic book by genre, but much of itis devoted to predicting the future, so in Catholic and ProtestantBibles it is placed between Ezekiel and the Minor Prophets. Prophecycalls the people to repentance and threatens judgment on them due totheir sin. Daniel does the opposite: it calls them to persevere assaints, while the evil nations oppress them, until the end of time,when they will be vindicated. Daniel comforts the faithful who aresuffering due to the sins of the nations.
TheTwelve.The twelve Minor Prophets follow a roughly chronological sequence(with some notable exceptions). Hosea, Amos, and Micah date from therise of Assyria as the great power that threatened Israel and Judah.Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah date from near the end of Assyriandominance and the rise of Babylon. The Babylonian exile is skipped,and the last three—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—werewritten after the Jews’ restoration to the land of Judah. Joel,Obadiah, and Jonah are difficult to date with certainty.
Readas one book, the Minor Prophets tell a story of God’s constancyand fidelity even though everything else in the world changes. Theybegin with all twelve tribes intact and enjoying prosperity in theland. In Judah, there is a king on the throne of David. But by theend, most of the tribes are lost, the monarchy is no more, Jerusalemand the temple have been destroyed, and the Jews are under the heelof foreign powers. After all of that, God says to them, almost as themoral of the whole history of the OT, “I the Lord do notchange. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed. Eversince the time of your ancestors you have turned away from my decreesand have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you”(Mal. 3:6–7). Deeply explored in the Minor Prophets is the dayof the Lord, the climax and denouement of history, in which all thewords of the prophets will finally be fulfilled (see Joel andZephaniah). The reader is given, as a picture of this day, a view ofthe repentance of one generation of Ninevites at the preaching ofJonah and of the final judgment to fall on that city as described byNahum.
TheNT cites the Minor Prophets much more often than any book of prophecyexcept Isaiah. Peter draws upon Joel 2:28–32 to explain thepouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17–21).James cites Amos 9:11–12 to demonstrate that salvation wasalways intended for the Gentiles as well as the Jews (Acts 15:16–17).Paul quotes Hab. 2:4 to argue that righteousness before God comesthrough faith (Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11). Jesus says that like Jonah, hewill return to the land of the living after three days (Matt.12:38–41).
Prophecyin the New Testament
Inthe NT period there were a number of prophets. John the Baptist couldpoint to Jesus and proclaim him to be the Lamb of God, who takes awaythe sins of the world (John 1:29). Agabus the prophet predicted afamine and, later, Paul’s arrest (Acts 11:28; 21:10–11).
Paullists “gifts of the Spirit” (1Cor. 12:4–11),including prophecy and various phenomena reminiscent of the OTprophets’ ecstatic state. Paul warns the Corinthians not tooverdo this sort of thing and so to be mature (1Cor. 14:19–20).Near the end of his life, in one of his last letters, he speaks ofprophecy as normative in the church, particularly in establishing anauthoritative body of elders to rule and especially to preach thegospel (1Tim. 1:18; 4:14). Peter draws a connection between theministry of the OT prophets and the proclamation of the gospel ofJesus Christ (1Pet. 1:10–12). Evangelism seems to be thenormative mode for prophecy today: forthtelling by calling people toturn from their sins to Jesus, and foretelling by speaking of hisreturn and the final judgment.
Thus,all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they neverparticipate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. Thegreatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus.John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure,but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection canproclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministryof any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).
ThePhenomenon of Prophecy
Aprophet is a messenger of God, a person to whom God entrusts hismessage to an individual or to a nation. Indeed, the last book in theOT is named “Malachi,” which means “my messenger.”Isaiah heard God ask, “Whom shall I send?” and he criedout, “Send me!” (Isa. 6:8). A good template forunderstanding the phenomenon is Moses and Aaron. Moses was to tellAaron what to say, and Aaron would say it. “Then the Lord saidto Moses, ‘See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and yourbrother Aaron will be your prophet’ ” (Exod. 7:1).
Prophetssuch as Isaiah were privy to what transpires in heaven, wheredecisions were being made that control the course of human history.Micaiah describes how he has seen God in the company of the heavenlyhost deliberating on how to entice Ahab to his death (1Kings22:13–23). All the other “prophets” in Ahab’scourt were false, since they did not have knowledge of the eventsbeyond human ken, as only true prophets can. Only one who hasencountered God in this way can speak as an agent of the heavenlycourt.
Forevery true prophet in Israel, there were many false prophets. Mosesset guidelines for distinguishing them. True prophets prophesy inaccordance with revealed religion. If a prophet contradicts the law,for example, and calls Israel to worship another god, this is not atrue prophet (Deut. 18:20). Also, if a prophet predicts somethingthat does not come to pass, that is also a false prophet (Deut.18:21–22). These criteria are not mechanical and automatic,however. Sometimes a prophet may appear to contradict priorrevelation (Jer. 26:11), and sometimes the predicted judgment isstaved off by national repentance (Jon. 4). Also, sometimes God maytest the people with a false prophet who makes a true prediction(Deut. 13:1–3).
Trueprophets occasionally exhibited bizarre behavior. Saul, whilepursuing David, was suddenly possessed by the Spirit of God and laynaked day and night, prophesying. This caused the people to ask ifSaul was now one of the prophets (1Sam. 19:24). Even in theancient world, prophets were considered a bit crazy (2Kings9:11; Jer. 23:9; 29:26; Hos. 9:7). The phenomenon he experienced isreferred to as “ecstasy.” The practice of tongues in theNT church also seems to have been ecstatic behavior. Paul notes thatobservers would call practitioners “out of your mind”(1Cor. 14:23). At Pentecost, some observers thought that theapostles were drunk. Peter replied that they were not drunk butrather had the Spirit upon them (Acts 2:15–21).
Theword “prophet” refers to one who foretells the future. Ofcourse, many people cannot accept the notion of real prophecy andthus regard all prophecy as an illusion. Either the text was writtenafter the fact, or it was couched in such general terms that it is nomiracle that it came true, or else it was a lucky guess. The textitself, however, wants to be read as real prophecy, and Christiansbefore the modern age read it as such. After all, to reject thesupernatural elements in the Bible ultimately leads to rejecting theresurrection of Christ.
However,the modern Christian should not focus on the predictive part of theprophets’ message to such an extent that the “forthtelling”element is neglected. Forthtelling is the prophets’ chiefministry—calling the people to mercy and justice, to obedienceto the law and fidelity to God. Christians who believe the Bibleshould take seriously the predictions about the future, but even moreso the challenges about the present.
TheBooks of Prophecy in the Old Testament
TheOT of Catholic and Protestant Bibles is roughly organized around theGreek translation of the OT, the Septuagint. Thus, Daniel isconsidered a prophetic book, and the prophets are separated from thehistorical books by the poetical books. However, the Hebrew Bible hasa different organization. It has only eight “books” ofprophecy, divided into the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets.The Former Prophets are Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings.Traditionally, Samuel wrote Judges. The books of 1Samuel and2Samuel form one scroll, as do 1Kings and 2Kings.The book of Samuel bears the name of the prophet, and Kings issubstantially about Elijah and Elisha. The four Former Prophetswitness to the outworking of the covenant sanctions, from theIsraelites’ entry into the promised land to their expulsionfrom it.
Usually,when Christians speak of the prophets, they are referring to theLatter Prophets, plus Daniel. In Catholic and Protestant Bibles thereare four Major Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; andtwelve Minor Prophets: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. Manyother prophets ministered in Israel but have no scroll that bearstheir name. Thus, the ones listed above can be called the “writingprophets.”
Isaiah.The book of Isaiah preserves the sermons from the prophet whoministered during the time when Hezekiah was king of Judah, thesouthern kingdom. Isaiah saw Jerusalem surrounded by the Assyrianarmy and assured the king that God would deliver his people. Thatmessage of salvation is the overall theme of the book, a salvationuniversal in scope and focused on the figure of the SufferingServant. Isaiah claims that this servant of God would be wounded and“cut off from the land of the living” (Isa. 53:8) andthrough this would bring healing and salvation to his people. Hewould see this and make many righteous (Isa. 53).
TheNT refers to Isaiah more often than any other prophet, always todemonstrate that the truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ wererevealed in advance by the prophet. For example, Paul cites Isa. 1:9in his argument as to why the Jews had rejected the gospel (Rom.9:29). When Jesus withdrew to the area of Zebulun and Naphtali,Matthew says that this act fulfilled Isa. 9:1–2 (Matt.4:15–16). Jesus himself cites Isa. 53:12, “[he] wasnumbered with the transgressors,” and claims that it waswritten about him (Luke 22:37). He does the same with Isa. 61:1–2(Luke 4:18–21).
Jeremiah.The book of Jeremiah puts in writing the words of the prophetJeremiah, who ministered at the very end of the kingdom of Judah andlived through the destruction of Jerusalem, with its temple and thepeople of God being taken away to forced exile and captivity. He seesthe weakness and powerlessness of the covenant that God had made withhis people to stir up love and fidelity in their hearts to him.According to Jeremiah, what the people chiefly need is a new covenantaltogether, one that is not external and written on tablets of stone,but internal, written on their hearts. They need a change ofpersonality to become a different sort of people altogether. This iswhat Jeremiah predicts will happen in the coming age after their timeof captivity is over (Jer. 31:31–40). The NT identifies thisnew covenant with the gospel of Jesus (Heb. 8:8–12), secured byhis blood (Heb. 10:16–17). This is the new covenant that Jesusannounces to his disciples when he eats the Last Supper with them(Luke 22:20).
Ezekiel.The book of Ezekiel picks up where Jeremiah leaves off and continuesfrom the destruction of Jerusalem into the early years of theBabylonian captivity. Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel sees the failure of theold covenant. He likens Israel to a married woman who violates hermarriage covenant at every turn (Ezek. 16). The prophet also foreseesa future character transformation of God’s people. “Iwill give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will removefrom you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And Iwill put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and becareful to keep my laws” (Ezek. 36:26–27). This isgraphically illustrated in Ezek. 37, where the prophet is told toprophesy to a valley of dry bones, and through the preaching of theword of God the company of the dead come to life and become a vastarmy—not of skeletons, but of vitally alive warriors. This is avision of what will happen when God makes an everlasting covenantwith them and will dwell with them forever (Ezek. 37:26–27).Paul cites this in 2Cor. 6:16 and argues, “We are thetemple of the living God.” The last part of Ezekiel describes agreat, larger-than-life temple that Paul interprets to be the church.Thus, Ezekiel anticipates the preaching of the gospel, bringingspiritual life to a vast company of believers, among whom God himselfwill dwell.
Daniel.The book of Daniel is not a prophetic book by genre, but much of itis devoted to predicting the future, so in Catholic and ProtestantBibles it is placed between Ezekiel and the Minor Prophets. Prophecycalls the people to repentance and threatens judgment on them due totheir sin. Daniel does the opposite: it calls them to persevere assaints, while the evil nations oppress them, until the end of time,when they will be vindicated. Daniel comforts the faithful who aresuffering due to the sins of the nations.
TheTwelve.The twelve Minor Prophets follow a roughly chronological sequence(with some notable exceptions). Hosea, Amos, and Micah date from therise of Assyria as the great power that threatened Israel and Judah.Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah date from near the end of Assyriandominance and the rise of Babylon. The Babylonian exile is skipped,and the last three—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—werewritten after the Jews’ restoration to the land of Judah. Joel,Obadiah, and Jonah are difficult to date with certainty.
Readas one book, the Minor Prophets tell a story of God’s constancyand fidelity even though everything else in the world changes. Theybegin with all twelve tribes intact and enjoying prosperity in theland. In Judah, there is a king on the throne of David. But by theend, most of the tribes are lost, the monarchy is no more, Jerusalemand the temple have been destroyed, and the Jews are under the heelof foreign powers. After all of that, God says to them, almost as themoral of the whole history of the OT, “I the Lord do notchange. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed. Eversince the time of your ancestors you have turned away from my decreesand have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you”(Mal. 3:6–7). Deeply explored in the Minor Prophets is the dayof the Lord, the climax and denouement of history, in which all thewords of the prophets will finally be fulfilled (see Joel andZephaniah). The reader is given, as a picture of this day, a view ofthe repentance of one generation of Ninevites at the preaching ofJonah and of the final judgment to fall on that city as described byNahum.
TheNT cites the Minor Prophets much more often than any book of prophecyexcept Isaiah. Peter draws upon Joel 2:28–32 to explain thepouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17–21).James cites Amos 9:11–12 to demonstrate that salvation wasalways intended for the Gentiles as well as the Jews (Acts 15:16–17).Paul quotes Hab. 2:4 to argue that righteousness before God comesthrough faith (Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11). Jesus says that like Jonah, hewill return to the land of the living after three days (Matt.12:38–41).
Prophecyin the New Testament
Inthe NT period there were a number of prophets. John the Baptist couldpoint to Jesus and proclaim him to be the Lamb of God, who takes awaythe sins of the world (John 1:29). Agabus the prophet predicted afamine and, later, Paul’s arrest (Acts 11:28; 21:10–11).
Paullists “gifts of the Spirit” (1Cor. 12:4–11),including prophecy and various phenomena reminiscent of the OTprophets’ ecstatic state. Paul warns the Corinthians not tooverdo this sort of thing and so to be mature (1Cor. 14:19–20).Near the end of his life, in one of his last letters, he speaks ofprophecy as normative in the church, particularly in establishing anauthoritative body of elders to rule and especially to preach thegospel (1Tim. 1:18; 4:14). Peter draws a connection between theministry of the OT prophets and the proclamation of the gospel ofJesus Christ (1Pet. 1:10–12). Evangelism seems to be thenormative mode for prophecy today: forthtelling by calling people toturn from their sins to Jesus, and foretelling by speaking of hisreturn and the final judgment.
Thus,all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they neverparticipate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. Thegreatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus.John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure,but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection canproclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministryof any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).
ThePhenomenon of Prophecy
Aprophet is a messenger of God, a person to whom God entrusts hismessage to an individual or to a nation. Indeed, the last book in theOT is named “Malachi,” which means “my messenger.”Isaiah heard God ask, “Whom shall I send?” and he criedout, “Send me!” (Isa. 6:8). A good template forunderstanding the phenomenon is Moses and Aaron. Moses was to tellAaron what to say, and Aaron would say it. “Then the Lord saidto Moses, ‘See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and yourbrother Aaron will be your prophet’ ” (Exod. 7:1).
Prophetssuch as Isaiah were privy to what transpires in heaven, wheredecisions were being made that control the course of human history.Micaiah describes how he has seen God in the company of the heavenlyhost deliberating on how to entice Ahab to his death (1Kings22:13–23). All the other “prophets” in Ahab’scourt were false, since they did not have knowledge of the eventsbeyond human ken, as only true prophets can. Only one who hasencountered God in this way can speak as an agent of the heavenlycourt.
Forevery true prophet in Israel, there were many false prophets. Mosesset guidelines for distinguishing them. True prophets prophesy inaccordance with revealed religion. If a prophet contradicts the law,for example, and calls Israel to worship another god, this is not atrue prophet (Deut. 18:20). Also, if a prophet predicts somethingthat does not come to pass, that is also a false prophet (Deut.18:21–22). These criteria are not mechanical and automatic,however. Sometimes a prophet may appear to contradict priorrevelation (Jer. 26:11), and sometimes the predicted judgment isstaved off by national repentance (Jon. 4). Also, sometimes God maytest the people with a false prophet who makes a true prediction(Deut. 13:1–3).
Trueprophets occasionally exhibited bizarre behavior. Saul, whilepursuing David, was suddenly possessed by the Spirit of God and laynaked day and night, prophesying. This caused the people to ask ifSaul was now one of the prophets (1Sam. 19:24). Even in theancient world, prophets were considered a bit crazy (2Kings9:11; Jer. 23:9; 29:26; Hos. 9:7). The phenomenon he experienced isreferred to as “ecstasy.” The practice of tongues in theNT church also seems to have been ecstatic behavior. Paul notes thatobservers would call practitioners “out of your mind”(1Cor. 14:23). At Pentecost, some observers thought that theapostles were drunk. Peter replied that they were not drunk butrather had the Spirit upon them (Acts 2:15–21).
Theword “prophet” refers to one who foretells the future. Ofcourse, many people cannot accept the notion of real prophecy andthus regard all prophecy as an illusion. Either the text was writtenafter the fact, or it was couched in such general terms that it is nomiracle that it came true, or else it was a lucky guess. The textitself, however, wants to be read as real prophecy, and Christiansbefore the modern age read it as such. After all, to reject thesupernatural elements in the Bible ultimately leads to rejecting theresurrection of Christ.
However,the modern Christian should not focus on the predictive part of theprophets’ message to such an extent that the “forthtelling”element is neglected. Forthtelling is the prophets’ chiefministry—calling the people to mercy and justice, to obedienceto the law and fidelity to God. Christians who believe the Bibleshould take seriously the predictions about the future, but even moreso the challenges about the present.
TheBooks of Prophecy in the Old Testament
TheOT of Catholic and Protestant Bibles is roughly organized around theGreek translation of the OT, the Septuagint. Thus, Daniel isconsidered a prophetic book, and the prophets are separated from thehistorical books by the poetical books. However, the Hebrew Bible hasa different organization. It has only eight “books” ofprophecy, divided into the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets.The Former Prophets are Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings.Traditionally, Samuel wrote Judges. The books of 1Samuel and2Samuel form one scroll, as do 1Kings and 2Kings.The book of Samuel bears the name of the prophet, and Kings issubstantially about Elijah and Elisha. The four Former Prophetswitness to the outworking of the covenant sanctions, from theIsraelites’ entry into the promised land to their expulsionfrom it.
Usually,when Christians speak of the prophets, they are referring to theLatter Prophets, plus Daniel. In Catholic and Protestant Bibles thereare four Major Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; andtwelve Minor Prophets: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. Manyother prophets ministered in Israel but have no scroll that bearstheir name. Thus, the ones listed above can be called the “writingprophets.”
Isaiah.The book of Isaiah preserves the sermons from the prophet whoministered during the time when Hezekiah was king of Judah, thesouthern kingdom. Isaiah saw Jerusalem surrounded by the Assyrianarmy and assured the king that God would deliver his people. Thatmessage of salvation is the overall theme of the book, a salvationuniversal in scope and focused on the figure of the SufferingServant. Isaiah claims that this servant of God would be wounded and“cut off from the land of the living” (Isa. 53:8) andthrough this would bring healing and salvation to his people. Hewould see this and make many righteous (Isa. 53).
TheNT refers to Isaiah more often than any other prophet, always todemonstrate that the truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ wererevealed in advance by the prophet. For example, Paul cites Isa. 1:9in his argument as to why the Jews had rejected the gospel (Rom.9:29). When Jesus withdrew to the area of Zebulun and Naphtali,Matthew says that this act fulfilled Isa. 9:1–2 (Matt.4:15–16). Jesus himself cites Isa. 53:12, “[he] wasnumbered with the transgressors,” and claims that it waswritten about him (Luke 22:37). He does the same with Isa. 61:1–2(Luke 4:18–21).
Jeremiah.The book of Jeremiah puts in writing the words of the prophetJeremiah, who ministered at the very end of the kingdom of Judah andlived through the destruction of Jerusalem, with its temple and thepeople of God being taken away to forced exile and captivity. He seesthe weakness and powerlessness of the covenant that God had made withhis people to stir up love and fidelity in their hearts to him.According to Jeremiah, what the people chiefly need is a new covenantaltogether, one that is not external and written on tablets of stone,but internal, written on their hearts. They need a change ofpersonality to become a different sort of people altogether. This iswhat Jeremiah predicts will happen in the coming age after their timeof captivity is over (Jer. 31:31–40). The NT identifies thisnew covenant with the gospel of Jesus (Heb. 8:8–12), secured byhis blood (Heb. 10:16–17). This is the new covenant that Jesusannounces to his disciples when he eats the Last Supper with them(Luke 22:20).
Ezekiel.The book of Ezekiel picks up where Jeremiah leaves off and continuesfrom the destruction of Jerusalem into the early years of theBabylonian captivity. Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel sees the failure of theold covenant. He likens Israel to a married woman who violates hermarriage covenant at every turn (Ezek. 16). The prophet also foreseesa future character transformation of God’s people. “Iwill give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will removefrom you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And Iwill put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and becareful to keep my laws” (Ezek. 36:26–27). This isgraphically illustrated in Ezek. 37, where the prophet is told toprophesy to a valley of dry bones, and through the preaching of theword of God the company of the dead come to life and become a vastarmy—not of skeletons, but of vitally alive warriors. This is avision of what will happen when God makes an everlasting covenantwith them and will dwell with them forever (Ezek. 37:26–27).Paul cites this in 2Cor. 6:16 and argues, “We are thetemple of the living God.” The last part of Ezekiel describes agreat, larger-than-life temple that Paul interprets to be the church.Thus, Ezekiel anticipates the preaching of the gospel, bringingspiritual life to a vast company of believers, among whom God himselfwill dwell.
Daniel.The book of Daniel is not a prophetic book by genre, but much of itis devoted to predicting the future, so in Catholic and ProtestantBibles it is placed between Ezekiel and the Minor Prophets. Prophecycalls the people to repentance and threatens judgment on them due totheir sin. Daniel does the opposite: it calls them to persevere assaints, while the evil nations oppress them, until the end of time,when they will be vindicated. Daniel comforts the faithful who aresuffering due to the sins of the nations.
TheTwelve.The twelve Minor Prophets follow a roughly chronological sequence(with some notable exceptions). Hosea, Amos, and Micah date from therise of Assyria as the great power that threatened Israel and Judah.Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah date from near the end of Assyriandominance and the rise of Babylon. The Babylonian exile is skipped,and the last three—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—werewritten after the Jews’ restoration to the land of Judah. Joel,Obadiah, and Jonah are difficult to date with certainty.
Readas one book, the Minor Prophets tell a story of God’s constancyand fidelity even though everything else in the world changes. Theybegin with all twelve tribes intact and enjoying prosperity in theland. In Judah, there is a king on the throne of David. But by theend, most of the tribes are lost, the monarchy is no more, Jerusalemand the temple have been destroyed, and the Jews are under the heelof foreign powers. After all of that, God says to them, almost as themoral of the whole history of the OT, “I the Lord do notchange. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed. Eversince the time of your ancestors you have turned away from my decreesand have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you”(Mal. 3:6–7). Deeply explored in the Minor Prophets is the dayof the Lord, the climax and denouement of history, in which all thewords of the prophets will finally be fulfilled (see Joel andZephaniah). The reader is given, as a picture of this day, a view ofthe repentance of one generation of Ninevites at the preaching ofJonah and of the final judgment to fall on that city as described byNahum.
TheNT cites the Minor Prophets much more often than any book of prophecyexcept Isaiah. Peter draws upon Joel 2:28–32 to explain thepouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17–21).James cites Amos 9:11–12 to demonstrate that salvation wasalways intended for the Gentiles as well as the Jews (Acts 15:16–17).Paul quotes Hab. 2:4 to argue that righteousness before God comesthrough faith (Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11). Jesus says that like Jonah, hewill return to the land of the living after three days (Matt.12:38–41).
Prophecyin the New Testament
Inthe NT period there were a number of prophets. John the Baptist couldpoint to Jesus and proclaim him to be the Lamb of God, who takes awaythe sins of the world (John 1:29). Agabus the prophet predicted afamine and, later, Paul’s arrest (Acts 11:28; 21:10–11).
Paullists “gifts of the Spirit” (1Cor. 12:4–11),including prophecy and various phenomena reminiscent of the OTprophets’ ecstatic state. Paul warns the Corinthians not tooverdo this sort of thing and so to be mature (1Cor. 14:19–20).Near the end of his life, in one of his last letters, he speaks ofprophecy as normative in the church, particularly in establishing anauthoritative body of elders to rule and especially to preach thegospel (1Tim. 1:18; 4:14). Peter draws a connection between theministry of the OT prophets and the proclamation of the gospel ofJesus Christ (1Pet. 1:10–12). Evangelism seems to be thenormative mode for prophecy today: forthtelling by calling people toturn from their sins to Jesus, and foretelling by speaking of hisreturn and the final judgment.
Thus,all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they neverparticipate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. Thegreatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus.John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure,but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection canproclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministryof any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).
Showing
1
to
50
of209
results
1. Tearing the Roof Off
Illustration
Larry Powell
It seemsthe scribes were always around. In our scripture we learn that Jesus was at his home in Capernaum. When word spread throughout the community, a great crowd gathered inside and out the house, prevailing upon Jesus to teach them. We are told that some of the scribes "were sitting there questioning in their hearts." Why were they there anyway? Out of curiosity? To heckle? To find fault? Were they acquaintances of Jesus that they could come into his home and find a place to sit while so many others were standing? I don’t know ... but it seems the Scriptures always bear the same foreboding comment, "the scribes were sitting there," or "nearby." At any rate, on this particular occasion, they got their eyes full.
First, there was a commotion. Four men were literally dismantling the roof of the house. When a large enough opening had been torn away, down came a pallet with a man on it. Although the Scriptures do not mention the scribe’s reaction to the paralytic’s rather crude entrance, we can imagine the sudden changing of their sophisticated expressions as they tugged nervously at their robes and mumbled beneath their breath. However, they may not have been surprised at all ... they had joked among themselves that the Nazarene’s clientele included harlots, tax collectors, the sick, unstable, ne’er-do-wells, and common sinners. Perhaps such an abrupt intrusion through the roof did not impress them at all, but was rather consistent with the kind of people attracted by the unorthodox carpenter. But again, that was but the beginning.
Jesus made bold to forgive the paralytic’s sins! The scribes could sit still no longer: "Who can forgive sins but God alone?" Jesus replied, "Why do you question me like this? Let me ask you a question; which is easier to say to a paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or ‘Rise, take up your pallet and walk?’ " In a word, it is a small matter to mouth the words, "Your sins are forgiven." It is true that anyone can repeat these words whether they have the authority or not but in order that the scribes might know that Jesus possessed the authority, he did something more. Turning to the paralytic, he said, "Rise, take up your pallet and go home." To their astonishment, the paralytic did just that. He had received a double portion inasmuch as his sins had been forgiven and he had been physically healed. Additionally, the scribes had something to think about.
I want to say a word about the persistent souls who tore the roof off the house. Their determination is to be admired. Have you ever entertained the thought of visiting a sick friend or shut-in but decided against it because the weather was threatening, or the temperature was uncomfortable, or you were tired? Even the best of intentions are sometimes easily discouraged. Here were four men who could have turned away from the house when they saw such a crowd, thinking "we’ll come again later." But no, they pushed their way through the crowd with the paralytic, climbed to the roof and made up their minds to get inside. They loved their friend enough to go to some extra effort, and they had absolute faith that the man inside could heal him. I hope I have a few friends like that. The paralytic owed a great deal of his recovery to his friends. What a combination: loving friends, persistent faith, and the touch of Christ!
2. Lead Us Not Into Temptation
Illustration
Donald B. Strobe
In our Lord's Prayer we are often puzzled by the traditional words: "Lead us not into temptation." How can this be? The Letter of James says that "God tempts no one." (James 1:13) Many of us much prefer the more modern ecumenical version of the Lord's Prayer. I'd like to know what you think. Do you find it helpful to understand the words, or would you rather use the more traditional, familiar phrasing? You all know, of course, that even in the traditional form of the prayer there are differences. Methodists ask to have their "trespasses" forgiven, while Presbyterians pray about their "debts." Someone once said that the Presbyterians, being Scots, would rather have their debts forgiven than their trespasses any day! Be that as it may, the Greek word actually means "sins". That is what we are praying about. To have our sins forgiven to the same extent that we are willing to forgive those who have sinned against us. Pretty strong stuff, huh! "Save us in time of trial," says the Ecumenical Version. Testing times are not intended to make us fall; they are sent to strengthen us. And God is there to help.
3. Unforgiveness is What Ails Us
Illustration
Michael P. Green
The famous psychiatristKarl Menningersaidthat if he could convince the patients in his psychiatric hospitals that their sins are forgiven, 75 percent of them could walk out the next day. So often we do not take God at his word!
4. Blasphemy Against the Spirit
Illustration
Staff
This statement (Matt 12:32, par Mk. 3:29, Luke 12:10) has been the subject of much questioning. Obviously the reference here is not to the naming of the Holy Spirit in a blasphemous utterance, for in Matt. 12:32 even blasphemy against the Son of man can be forgiven. Among the many attempts at exegesis, the most convincing is the suggestion that the man who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit is he who has recognized that God is working through the Holy Spirit in the actions of Jesus, and who quite consciously "misrepresent faith in God as faith in the devil. This saying is an extremely serious warning against the demonic and scarcely conceivable potential in man: To declare war on God. This is not done in weakness and doubt, but by one who has been overcome by the Holy Spirit and who knows very well on whom he is declaring war" (E. Schweizer, The Good News according to Mark, 1971, 87; cf. H.W. Beyer, TDNT I:624; O.E. Evans, "The Unforgivable Sin", ExpT 68, 1956-57, 240-44). This is the blasphemer who does it deliberately, after encounter with the God of grace, as the context shows. For Jesus has just been accused of casting out demons by Beelzebul, the prince of demons. "Therefore he who blasphemes the Spirit is no longer speaking against a God who is distant, about whom he entertains mere foolish thoughts, but against the one who makes evident to him his gracious work, and confirms it with his manifest, divine seal. He is a man who ought to give thanks, not to blaspheme" (A. Schlatter, on Matt. 12:32).
W.L. Lane draws attention to Sifre on Deut. 32:38 (end): "The Holy One, blessed be he, pardons everything else, but on profanation of the Name [i.e. blasphemy] he takes vengeance immediately" (The Gospel of Mark, NLC, 1974, 145) Lane goes on to comment: "This is the danger to which the scribes exposed themselves when they attributed to the agency of Satan the redemption brought by Jesus. The expulsion of demons was a sign of the intrusion of the Kingdom of God. Yet the scribal accusations against Jesus amount to a denial of the power and greatness of the Spirit of God. By assigning the action of Jesus to a demonic origin the scribes betray a perversion of spirit which, in defiance of the truth, chooses to call light darkness. In this historical context, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit denotes the conscious and deliberate rejection of the saving power and grace of God released through Jesus' work and act" (ibid). Thus blasphemy here is much more serious than the taking of the divine name in vain which a believer may have done before coming to repentance and faith.
It may be said to those who have been tormented by fear that they have committed the unforgivable sin that their concern is itself a sign that they have not committed the sin envisaged in Jesus' teaching here. Lane's interpretation also helps to explain the distinction drawn between blasphemy against the Son of man and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The distinction suggests that "while an attack on Jesus' own person, as son of Man and therefore 'hidden', is pardonable, any speaking against the power by which he works (i.e. the divine endowment for his messianic ministry) will not be pardoned" (D. Hill, The Gospel of Matthew, New Century Bible, 1972, 318). For such an action would be deliberately to attribute to Satan the action of God himself. (NIDNTT, v. 3, pp. 343-344)
What is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? Though many suggestions have been offered, I think the answer lies in the context here (Luke 12:7-12) and in the context of redemptive history. Remember that the Holy Spirit had not yet been poured out, and it is the Spirit who causes men to recognize who Jesus is. Hebrews 6 and 10 contain discussions of unforgivable sins, but the distinction between blasphemy against Christ and the Spirit has disappeared. Jesus seemed to be saying this: Because the Holy spirit has not yet been poured out in fullness, the Jews will be forgiven for blaspheming the Son of Man. They will be given a second chance to repent, as we see in the book of Acts. If, however, they continue to blaspheme after the Spirit has come, they will not be forgiven. But what is the sin, specifically? Since it is blasphemy, we must see it essentially as a verbal sin. In context it is the sin of saying that Jesus Christ is of the devil. Jesus was willing to excuse this blasphemy before Pentecost; but, in the new covenant era it is not longer excusable. If a person curses Jesus, but does not really know who Jesus is, that sin is forgivable. But if the Holy Spirit has borne witness to a person that Jesus is indeed the Son of God, and that person curses Him, it cannot be forgiven.
5. The Mediator
Illustration
Jonathan Edwards
The redeemed are dependent on God for all. All that we have wisdom, the pardon of sin, deliverance, acceptance in God's favor, grace, holiness, true comfort and happiness, eternal life and glory we have from God by a Mediator; and this Mediator is God. God not only gives us the Mediator, and accepts His mediation, and of His power and grace bestows the things purchased by the Mediator, but He is the Mediator. Our blessings are what we have by purchase; and the purchase is made of God; the blessings are purchased of Him; and not only so, but God is the purchaser. Yes, God is both the purchaser and the price; for Christ, who is God, purchased these blessings by offering Himself as the price of our salvation.
6. Faithful Attendance
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
A pastor was once asked to define "Faithful Attendance at Worship," and this was his reply: All that I ask is that we apply the same standards of faithfulness to our church activities that we would in other areas of our life. That doesn't seem too much to ask. The church, after all, is concerned about faithfulness. Consider these examples:
If your car started one out of three times, would you consider it faithful? If the paperboy skipped Monday and Thursdays, would they be missed? If you didn't show up at work two or three times a month, would your boss call you faithful? If your refrigerator quit a day now and then, would you excuse it and say, "Oh, well, it works most of the time." If your water heater greets you with cold water one or two mornings a week while you were in the shower, would it be faithful? If you miss a couple of mortgage payments in a year's time, would your mortgage holder say, "Oh, well, ten out of twelve isn't bad"?
If you miss worship and attend meetings only often enough to show you're interested but not often enough to get involved, are you faithful?
7. Who Will Wash Your Sins?
Illustration
Alila stood on the beach holding her tiny infant son close to her heart. Tears welled in her eyes as she began slowly walking toward the river's edge. She stepped into the water, silently making her way out until she was waist deep, the water gently lapping at the sleeping baby's feet. She stood there for a long time holding the child tightly as she stared out across the river. Then all of a sudden in one quick movement she threw the six month old baby to his watery death.
Native missionary M.V. Varghese often witnesses among the crowds who gather at the Ganges. It was he who came upon Alila that day kneeling in the sand crying uncontrollably and beating her breast. With compassion he knelt down next to her and asked her what was wrong.
Through her sobs she told him, "The problems in my home are too many and my sins are heavy on my heart, so I offered the best I have to the goddess Ganges, my first born son." Brother Varghese's heart ached for the desperate woman. As she wept he gently began to tell her about the love of Jesus and that through Him her sins could be forgiven. She looked at him strangely. "I have never heard that before," she replied through her tears. "Why couldn't you have come thirty minutes earlier? If you did, my child would not have had to die."
Each year millions of people come to the holy Indian city of Hardwar to bathe in the River Ganges. These multitudes come believing this Hindu ritual will wash their sins away. For many people like Alila, missionaries are arriving too late, simply because there aren't enough of these faithful brothers and sisters on the mission field.
8. The Wednesday Worry Box
Illustration
King Duncan
Sometimes, if you will just wait, problems take care of themselves. J. Arthur Rank had a system for doing that. He was one of the early pioneers of the film industry in Great Britain, and he also happened to be a devout Christian.
Rank found he couldn’t push his worries out of his mind completely; they were always slipping back in. So he finally made a pact with God to limit his worrying to Wednesday. He even made himself a little Wednesday Worry Box and he placed it on his desk. Whenever a worry cropped up, Rank wrote it out and dropped it into the Wednesday Worry Box.
Would you like to know his amazing discovery? When Wednesday rolled around, he would open that box to find that only a third of the items he had written down were still worth worrying about. The rest had managed to resolve themselves.
If you have a troubled heart, ask God to give you a new perspective. Also ask him to give you patience so that you do not jump ahead and worry about a problem that may never come. But most important of all, ask God for more faith. Faith in God is the best remedy for all our problems. Jesus put it plainly, “Do not let your hearts be troubled. You believe in God; believe also in me.”
9. A Simple Answer
Illustration
Lee Griess
Could that have been Judas' greatest downfall, the inability to see himself as a sinner and hence receive God's forgiveness? For without that sense of forgiveness, life holds little joy and the future is hopeless. Someone once said that the person who knows himself or herself to be a sinner and does not know God's forgiveness is like an overweight person who fears stepping on a scale.
There once was a very bitter man who was sick in soul, mind, and body. He was in the hospital in wretched condition, not because his body had been invaded by a virus or infected with some germ, but because his anger and contempt had poisoned his soul. One day, when he was at his lowest, he said to his nurse, "Won't you give me something to end it all?" Much to the man's surprise, the nurse said, "All right. I will." She went to the nightstand and pulled out the Gideon Bible and began to read, "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have eternal life." When she finished she said, "There, if you will believe that, it will end it all. God loves you, forgives you and accepts you as his child."
Such a simple answer. But it worked for that man. He realized after much soul-searching that she had spoken truly. And over a period of some time, he came to believe and accept God's love for him.
There is a way to God. Jesus died to provide it. We may not be Mary or that "woman of the city," but there are sins that weigh upon our hearts. There are scars and cuts that we have inflicted on others. There is a darkness within each of us that no one knows of but God. But that same One, our loving God, sees all and forgives all and calls us to God.
Remember, the one who is forgiven little loves little. But the one who is forgiven much loves with all the heart! May that be true of us. In Jesus' name. Amen.
10. Now Thank We All Our God
Illustration
Erskine White
You can even be thankful during the most difficult of circumstances in life. It's true! We see an especially inspiring example of a brave and thankful heart in the story behind one of the church's most popular hymns, "Now Thank We All Our God." This particularly hymn was written during the Thirty Years War in Germany, in the early 1600s. Its author was Martin Rinkart, a Lutheran pastor in the town of Eilenburg in Saxony.
Now, Eilenburg was a walled city, so it became a haven for refugees seeking safety from the fighting. But soon, the city became too crowded and food was in short supply. Then, a famine hit and a terrible plague and Eilenburg became a giant morgue.
In one year alone, Pastor Rinkart conducted funerals for 4,500 people, including his own wife. The war dragged on; the suffering continued. Yet through it all, he never lost courage or faith and even during the darkest days of Eilenburg's agony, sat down and wrote this table grace for his children:
Now thank we all our God,
with hearts and hands and voices,
Who wondrous things hath done,
In whom the world rejoices
Sokeep us in His grace,
and guide us when perplexed,
and free us from all ills,
in this world and the next.
Even when he was waist deep in destruction, Pastor Rinkart was able to lift his sights to a higher plane. He kept his mind on God's love when the world was filled with hate. He kept his mind on God's promises of heaven when the earth was a living hell. Can we not do the same - we whose lives are almost trouble-free, compared with the man who wrote that hymn?
Whom can you say "thank you" to?
11. An Ending and A Beginning
Illustration
Welcome to this time and place of worship. God bless you in your coming, and as you go forth, may God bless you in your going.
A short while ago we heard the first notes of the organ prelude as this worship hour began. That was the signal for us to close the curtain upon the week that is past, upon all its cares and burdens, its frustrations and its failures.
A short while from now we shall hear the notes of the organ postlude as this hour comes to its close. That will signal the opening of the curtain upon the week that is to be - that we may move into it with assurance, that we are forgiven the sins of yesterday, that we are at peace with God through Christ, that we are walking with him.
So then may this hour be for each of us an ending and a beginning - as a curtain closes and a curtain opens - as yesterday is put away and tomorrow opens up before us with all its hope and another chance at living.
12. Atonement: Because He Died
Illustration
Oswald Chambers
We trample the blood of the Son of God if we think we are forgiven because we are sorry for our sins. The only explanation for the forgiveness of God and for the unfathomable depth of His forgetting is the death of Jesus Christ. Our repentance is merely the outcome of our personal realization of the atonement which He has worked out for us. It does not matter who or what we are; there is absolute reinstatement into God by the death of Jesus Christ and by no other way, not because Jesus Christ pleads, but because He died. It is not earned, but accepted. All the pleading which deliberately refuses to recognize the Cross is of no avail; it is battering at a door other than the one that Jesus has opened. Our Lord does not pretend we are all right when we are all wrong. The atonement is a propitiation whereby God, through the death of Jesus, makes an unholy man holy.
13. Don’t Look Back
Illustration
Brian Stoffregen
Frankly, none of us are going to make the cut to follow Jesus. Our desires for soft pillows and comfortable beds, for fulfilling family and social obligations, will frequently have higher priorities than following Jesus especially following Jesus all the way to the cross. We might be willing to give up some evils in our lives to follow Jesus, but to give up all these good things to put them as a lower priority than Jesus? That is radical discipleship, but Paul writes about doing this in Phil 3:4-11. He considers all his past, good, religious deeds as "rubbish".
Perhaps the image of putting one's hand to the plow and not looking back (or driving forward in a car while not looking out the back window) refers to looking back both at all the very good things in our lives (and in a congregation's life), like family and friends, comforts and satisfactions, "successful" programs; but also all the sins in our lives, which have been forgiven by Christ. We can neither wallow in our past sins nor boast of our past successes if we are to be fit for the kingdom of God.
14. Forgiven and Gone
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
Corrie ten Boom, in her book Tramp for the Lord had these words to say regarding forgiveness:
"It was 1947 .... I had come from Holland to defeated Germany with the message that God forgives. It was the truth they needed most to hear in that bitter, bombed-out land, and I gave them my favorite mental picture. Maybe because the sea is never far from a Hollander's mind, I like to think that that’s where forgiven sins are thrown. 'When we confess our sins,' I said, ‘God casts them into the deepest ocean, gone forever .... Then God places a sign out there that says No Fishing Allowed!"'
15. God Loves the People
Illustration
Tom Rietveld
The United States today is very similar to what 18th century England was like. Morals were all but gone on the part of the common man. The slave trade was at its height. A godless prison system entertained the people with public hangings. Gambling was a national obsession--one historian said that England was a vast casino. Drinking dominated the pastime of men and boys. False rumors were regularly used to manipulate the financial markets.
Also, the Anglican church was in decay. Zeal for Christ was considered professionally dangerous. 20% of the clergy had been removed or dismissed because of moral and ethical failures. Bishop George Berkeley wrote at the time, "It is to be feared that the age of monsters is not far off."
On to that scene came some young men known as the Holy Club of Oxford. John and Charles Wesley, George Whitefield, and others made a mission statement together. It said, "We want to reform the nation, particularly the church, and to spread scriptural holiness over the land." From that small group of college students, the face of England was completely changed. Even to the point where most historians agree that the revival that happened under those young men in England saved the English people from the bloody revolution that France went through.
I really don't know what is going to happen to America in the future. But I do know that the only answer to the spirit of despondency, the spirit of separatism, the spirit of impurity, the spirit of guilt... is the message of the gospel of Jesus Christ. The United States of America needs the message that God loves people. And offers them the chance to start over, have their sins forgiven, and experience reconciliation.
16. As If You Had Not Sinned
Illustration
Albert Barnes
What is justification? It is the declared purpose of God to regard and treat those sinners who believe in Jesus Christ as if they had not sinned, on the ground of the merits of the Savior. It is not mere pardon. Pardon is a free forgiveness of past offenses. It has reference to those sins as forgiven and blotted out. Justification has respect to the law, and to God's future dealings with the sinner. It is an act by which God determines to treat him hereafter as righteous as if he had not sinned. The basis for this is the merit of the Lord Jesus Christ, merit that we can plead as if it were our own. He has taken our place and died in our stead; He has met the descending stroke of justice, which would have fallen on our own heads if He had not interposed.
17. FOR UNTO YOU
Illustration
John H. Krahn
Imagine with me for a moment what it was like that first Christmas Eve, the night Jesus left heaven to go down to earth. Like any boy leaving home, Jesus left heaven. Perhaps the Father said something like this to him, "Now, Son, I’ve got to send you down to earth because my people have really messed things up. They are unhappy. Many are lonely and down on themselves. I want you to go down to give them new hope and to provide a way for their sins to be forgiven so that we can all get back together again."
So Jesus walked to the door of heaven, but before descending he turned and asked, "Father, what will I tell them?" And the good Heavenly Father put his arms around his Son and said, "When you get down there, all you need to do is tell them that I love them. That is all. Just tell them that I love them."
At Christmas all of us gladly hear these words of love: "For unto you," the angel said, "is born ... a Savior." He is ours, each one of us individually. In Christ the Father says, "I love you, Bill. I love you, Barbara. I love you, Jim, Bob, Peggy, Marge. I sent my Son unto you, Ralph, Betty, Fred." The baby Jesus is the Father’s message of love for each of us individually.
Listen carefully for the Good News God has for each one of you personally. Three simple, powerful, wonderful words, "I love you." Everyone presently having a hard time - remember that you are not alone: God loves you. Everyone feeling lonely or grieving should know that you are not alone, for God loves you. Everyone afraid of tomorrow and what the future might bring, you are not alone, God loves you.
"For unto you is born a Savior." "Unto you," the angel said. Oh, let the meaning of a personal Savior, Jesus, the Babe of Bethlehem, crash in upon your heart and your entire being. There is Good News for you, the Lord of the entire universe loves you personally. For Emmanuel, God with us, is truly with us. Rejoice and give thanks over God’s gift of love to you. Receive him and the peace of God the angels sang about that first Christmas will keep your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus until life everlasting.
18. With a Repentant Heart
Illustration
Charles W. Colson,
Believers dare not come to the Lord's Table except with a repentant heart. "Whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner," as Paul puts it, "drinks judgment to himself." That should be a sobering warning, especially when the apostle adds that because of this offense many have fallen ill or died. Any pastor who takes the Word of God seriously should never administer Communion without adequately warning partakers. Those who are unrepentant should flee the table rather than trivialize the sacred.
And God does not view this sacred act lightly. Pat Novak, pastor in a nonsacramental denomination, discovered this when he was serving as a hospital chaplain intern just outside of Boston several years ago. Pat was making his rounds one summer morning when he was called to visit a patient admitted with an undiagnosed ailment. John, a man in his sixties, had not responded to any treatment; medical tests showed nothing; psychological tests were inconclusive. Yet he was wasting away; he had not even been able to swallow for two weeks. The nurses tried everything. Finally they called the chaplain's office.
When Pat walked into the room, John was sitting limply in his bed, strung with IV tubes, staring listlessly at the wall. He was a tall, grandfatherly man, balding a little, but his sallow skin hung loosely on his face, neck, and arms where the weight had dropped from his frame. His eyes were hollow.
Pat was terrified; he had no idea what to do. But John seemed to brighten a bit as soon as he saw Pat's chaplain badge and invited him to sit down. As they talked, Pat sensed that God was urging him to do something specific: He knew he was to ask John if he wanted to take Communion. Chaplain interns were not encouraged to ask this type of thing in this public hospital, but Pat did.
At that John broke down. "I can't!" he cried. "I've sinned and can't be forgiven."
Pat paused a moment, knowing he was about to break policy again. Then he told John about 1 Corinthians 11 and Paul's admonition that whoever takes Communion in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself. And he asked John if he wanted to confess his sin. John nodded gratefully. To this day Pat can't remember the particular sin John confessed, nor would he say if he did, but he recalls that it did not strike him as particularly egregious. Yet it had been draining the life from this man. John wept as he confessed, and Pat laid hands on him, hugged him, and told John his sins were forgiven.
Then Pat got the second urging from the Holy Spirit: Ask him if he wants to take Communion. He did. Pat gave John a Bible and told him he would be back later. Already John was sitting up straighter, with a flicker of light in his eyes.
Pat visited a few more patients and then ate some lunch in the hospital cafeteria. When he left he wrapped an extra piece of bread in a napkin and borrowed a coffee cup from the cafeteria. He ran out to a shop a few blocks away and bought a container of grape juice. Then he returned to John's room with the elements and celebrated Communion with him, again reciting 1 Corinthians 11. John took the bread and chewed it slowly. It was the first time in weeks he had been able to take solid food in his mouth. He took the cup and swallowed. He had been set free.
Within three days John walked out of that hospital. The nurses were so amazed they called the newspaper, which later featured the story of John and Pat, appropriately, in its "LIFE" section.
19. The Church's Mission--A Parable
Illustration
Philip Anderson
Pastor Philip Anderson tells this heart wrenching story: Not long ago I visited my sister, a director of patient services for the children's unit of a large southern California hospital. She was conducting me on a tour through that unit. All the time, echoing through the halls, we could hear the cry of a baby coming from one of the rooms. Finally, we came to that room. It was a little child, about a year old, covered with terrible bruises, scratches, scars, from head to toe.
At first, I assumed the child must have been involved in a terrible accident. Then I looked closely at its legs. Written in ink all over them were obscenities. My sister told me that the child was the victim, not of an accident, but of its parents. Its internal injuries were so severe that it couldn’t keep any food down. The scars on the bottom of its feet were burns caused by cigarettes.
If you've ever had trouble visualizing the consequences of human indifference—the perversion of life's basic relationships—what God himself is up against in this world of ours—I wish you could have looked with me at that battered, crying baby!
But I want to tell you what happened then. My sister leaned over the crib, and very carefully and tenderly lifted the child, and held it next to herself. At first the child screamed all the more, as if its innocent nature had come to be suspicious of every touch. But as she held it securely and warmly, the baby slowly began to quiet down. And finally, in spite of wounds and hurts and past experience, it felt the need to cry no more.
The baby remains in my memory as a living symbol of the choice we face in the mission of the church. Are we willing to let life's most precious values be battered and starved and crucified by default? Or will we reach out and pick them up and hold them close to our hearts? The time for commitment is not next year, next month, but now!
20. In the Quiet of the Wilderness
Illustration
Edward F. Markquart
The wilderness is silence and quiet. It is the elimination of the sounds of television, the radio, the stereo, the iPod, the cell phone. It is the elimination of the voices of mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, friends. It is the elimination of the racing tape of your own mind that absorbs your thoughts. The wilderness is quiet. It is utter stillness. It is being alone with God. It is for a moment, for a minute, for a month, being still - absolutely still - …and listening. God speaks in the wilderness of silence. The city is so noisy; so busy; so crowded. The wilderness is silence and God speaks to us through the silence.
In the wilderness, you actually hear the voice of God speaking, "Be washed. Be cleansed of the pollution of resentment, anger, fear, and vengeance. Be washed of whatever is hurting your life and the lives of those around you."Hear the voice that says, "Your sins are forgiven; go and sin no more." Hear the voice that says, "Love one another as I have loved you." Hear the voice that says, "You shall love the Lord your God with all that is in you, all your heart, all your mind, all your soul and all your strength…and love your neighbor as you love yourself."
Be quiet. Be still. In the wilderness, you finally can see the stars and hear the sounds of the wind that are blocked out by the cacophonous noise of the city. In the quietness of the wilderness. Be still and you will hear the voice of God.
21. A Heart that Sings with Joy
Illustration
Scott Hoezee
"I saw them eating and I knew who they were." That saying, or some version of it, is well-known now. And it certainly describes the Pharisees whom we encounter in Luke 15:1-2. Jesus was welcoming the very folks whom the religious establishment had written off. Worse, he was at table with them, which was an intimate act of fellowship that implied a kind of personal bond and connection. So we're told the Pharisees muttered into their beards about this. Jesus overheard their comments and knew their hearts and so told them three stories that reveal the heart of God.
And that's really what is going on in Luke 15: we're not here first of all being given stories of the "go and do likewise" variety. The parable in verses 11-32 is not in Scripture first of all to encourage fathers to be forgiving of their naughty kids any more than the first two stories were an instruction to shepherds or a cautionary tale to take better care of your fiscal assets. No, all three reveal the heart of God — a heart that is broken clean in two by lostness but a heart that sings with a joy as wide as the cosmos when even the silliest sheep or the meanest of sons comes back and/or is found again.
22. Forgiving As God Forgives
Illustration
Scott Hoezee
Someone once said that the scariest, most sobering word in the entire New Testament is that tiny little word "as." "Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us." That vital connection between God's abiding forgiveness of us and of our in turn forgiving others tells us that we must forgive. This is not some weird demand on God's part, however. This is not some hoop we must jump through to earn our salvation or to perform like some trained dog just because God enjoys watching us do tricks.
No, the reason for the connection between God's forgiving us and our forgiving others is because of the sheer power of God's forgiveness. It is so great that it simply must and will change us. The reason God expects us to forgive as a result of our being forgiven is the same reason you can expect to be wet after diving into Lake Michigan: water is wet and when you immerse yourself in it, you get wet. So also with forgiving grace: grace is magnetic and beautiful. When God immerses you in grace and saves your life eternally by it, you will be dripping with grace yourself. You will be full of grace and truth and so spread it to others.
23. FOLLOW THE LEADER
Illustration
John H. Krahn
A father was filling out the application form for his daughter who was seeking entrance to a very exclusive college. He came to the question on the form asking whether his daughter was a leader. In honesty he wrote, "No, but she’s a good follower." A few weeks later a letter arrived notifying him that his daughter had been accepted. At the bottom of the letter the dean had written, "Since the entering class of 500 has 499 leaders, we thought there ought to be one follower." Unlike the entering class of that college, the church has but one leader and many followers. Jesus Christ leads, we follow.
Remember when we, as children, played the game, "Follow the Leader"? To be a good player we had to keep our eyes on the leader and our mind on the game. As we anticipated the next action, we were able to follow it within a split second. It is difficult to follow our Lord’s lead when our eyes and minds wander away from him by focusing on ourselves or on plastic goals and desires. By plastic, I mean things that lack substance compared to love, joy, peace, patience, and kindness which the Bible describes as the fruits of knowing Christ and following him.
If you haven’t tasted joy for awhile and peace is something you have been longing for, consider getting your eyes back on the Leader. We do that by getting back into the Bible, by talking our life over with him in prayer, and by tasting his forgiveness at the Holy Communion table. Goodness, patience, and kindness can be ours as we follow the Leader.
And the ever popular concept of love ... what about that? The Lord, dwelling in the hearts of his followers, helps them develop a love that is fervent, hardy, and creative. A love that strains like a horse in full gallop. A love that endures like the strength of a long-distance runner. One that helps us create our own personality as we help others create theirs.
24. A Hostage Repents
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
Terry Anderson is probably the best known of the American hostages kept in Lebanon. Anderson, an Associated Press journalist, was held hostage for 2,454 days! His ordeal began innocently enough on March 16, 1985. As he dropped off his tennis partner after a morning match he noticed a green Mercedes pulled up just ahead of where he was stopped. Suddenly three young men came charging out of the car. Each had a 9-mm pistol hanging loosely on their hip. In a flash they were at Anderson's car window. "Get out," one of the men shouted. "I will shoot." Anderson got out. He was pressed into the back seat of the Mercedes and whisked away. The hostage ordeal for Terry Anderson had begun.
Anderson's first days of captivity were appalling. He was blindfolded most of the time. Held in chains. Interrogated roughly. His mind did not know how to react. Anderson realized that he was on the edge of madness. He was losing control of his capacity to think. "I can't do this anymore," he finally told his captors. "You can't treat me like an animal. I am a human being." When asked what he wanted he replied that he wanted a Bible. Not long afterwards a heavy object landed on his bed. He pulled down his blindfold. It was a Bible. He began to read. In Genesis!
Terry Anderson had been raised in the Catholic Church. Even though he had not been a practicing Catholic for years, however, the Bible came to him as a gift from heaven. He read. He pondered his life. He had lots of time to ponder his life. Too much time to ponder his life. He began a litany of confession in his mind. He confessed that he had hurt his first wife and daughter. He had made many mistakes. He had been a very arrogant person. He wasn't sure that people liked him much. He wasn't sure he liked himself very much.
Later in the first year of his captivity Anderson became aware of the fact that other hostages were living next door. One was a priest. Father Lawrence Jenco. He asked his captors if he could see the priest. "I am a Catholic," he told them. "I want to make a confession."
His wish was granted. Father Jenco came to his room. They both took off their blindfolds. Anderson hardly knew where to begin. It had been 25 years since he had last made confession. Father Jenco was encouraging. Anderson began reciting to this priest the sins he had been reflecting upon. There was much to confess. A bad marriage. Chasing women. Drinking. Anderson found it a very emotional experience. When he finished both he and Father Jenco were in tears. Father Jenco then laid his right hand upon Anderson's head. "In the name of a gentle, loving God, you are forgiven," the priest proclaimed.
Terry Anderson's faith deepened immensely in his hostage years. This moment of confession with Father Jenco, however, was his first formal step back into the church. Self reflection had grown within him out of the darkness of his hostage encounter. It was time to face the light. It was time in his life for a turn around."
25. Holiness Shining through Humanity
Illustration
Scott Hoezee
Frederick Buechner muses on the Transfiguration this way: In the Transfigurationit was the holiness of Jesusshining through his humanness, his face so afire with it that they were almost blinded. Even with us something like that happens once in a while. The face of a man walking his child in the park, of a woman picking peas in the garden, of sometimes even the unlikeliest person listening to a concert, say, or standing barefoot in the sand watching the waves roll in, or just having a beer at a Saturday baseball game in July. Every once and so often, something so touching, so incandescent, so alive transfigures the human face that it's almost beyond bearing" (Whistling in the Dark,Harper San Francisco, 1988, p. 108).
In one sense Buechner here is maybe rendering the actual Transfiguration of Jesus a bit too mundane, a bit too much like what could happen to us on most any given afternoon while riding the bus or walking down a sidewalk. But on the other hand, he may be on to something, and I would add to his musings this one: Even on all kinds of days when the disciples and Jesus were by no means having a mountaintop experience and when dazzling garments whiter than white were nowhere to be seen, even then when Jesus smiled kindly at lepers, looked pained to see a "sinner" being shunned by the Temple establishment, or looked winsome after telling a hurting prostitute to go in peace because her sins were forgiven, there was sense in which the disciples were seeing the face of the divine transfigured in also those ordinary moments. They were seeing hints of glory. They were seeing true God of true God, vividly and surprisingly and, yes, dazzlingly on display in God's One and Only Son, full of grace and truth.
26. The Kingdom of Heaven Is Like a Professor
Illustration
The kingdom of heaven is like a professor who went off on a long sabbatical. Before he left, he called together his graduate students and gave each of them projects to work on; to one he gave five projects, to another two, and to another one, each according to their ability. The one who received five projects immediately went to work, designing experiments, building equipment, and analyzing data. She worked long and hard, and eventually she achieved good results on each project. Likewise, the one who received two projects immediately went to work, and eventually got results as well. But the student who received one project was easily discouraged, got distracted by her coursework, and eventually gave up.
After a very long time, the professor returned to settle accounts with his students. The first student said, "Professor, you gave me these projects to work on, and see, here are the results." And the professor answered, "Well done, good and faithful graduate student. You have been faithful over five projects. You shall be co-author on five publications and receive a Ph.D! (And you can expect a good letter of recommendation, too!)" Likewise the second student showed his results, and the professor said, "Well done, good and faithful student. You have been faithful over two projects. You will be co-author on two publications, and receive a Master's degree."
But the third student came and said, "Professor, I know that you are a harsh man, publishing where you did not labor, and claiming credit where you did not contribute, and I was afraid. So I kept the lab locked up and I didn't let anyone borrow any equipment. See, everything is just the way you left it." Then the professor answered, "You wicked and slothful graduate student! I will judge you by your own words. So, you knew that I was a harsh man, publishing where I did not labor, and claiming credit where I did not contribute; well then, you should have at least gotten a teaching fellowship so that I wouldn't have had to pay your salary out of my research grants! Now depart from me and from this institution ... out into the REAL world, and try to find a job. There you will have weeping and gnashing of teeth." For to everyone who has, more will be given. But to him who has not, even what little he has will be taken away. (Matthew 25:14-30)
27. Lift Up Your Heads! - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
A.J. Gordon was the great Baptist pastor of the Clarendon Church in Boston, Massachusetts. One day he met a young boy in front of the sanctuary carrying a rusty cage in which several birds fluttered nervously. Gordon inquired, "Son, where did you get those birds?" The boy replied, "I trapped them out in the field." "What are you going to do with them?" "I'm going to play with them, and then I guess I'll just feed them to an old cat we have at home."
When Gordon offered to buy them, the lad exclaimed, "Mister, you don't want them, they're just little old wild birds and can't sing very well." Gordon replied, "I'll give you $2 for the cage and the birds." "Okay, it's a deal, but you're making a bad bargain." The exchange was made and the boy went away whistling, happy with his shiny coins. Gordon walked around to the back of the church property, opened the door of the small wire coop, and let the struggling creatures soar into the blue. The next Sunday he took the empty cage into the pulpit and used it to illustrate his sermon about Christ's coming to seek and to save the lost -- paying for them with His own precious blood. "That boy told me the birds were not songsters," said Gordon, "but when I released them and they winged their way heavenward, it seemed to me they were singing, 'Redeemed, redeemed, redeemed!'"
This is Advent. And the message of these times is the song of those wild birds. It's the song sung in every carol this season: Redeemed! It's the meaning behind every gift given under the tree: Redeemed! It's the Word the shepherds heard: Redeemed! It's the assurance Mary received: Redeemed! It's the star the Wisemen followed: Redeemed! [Depending on your style you might omit the repetition of "Redeemed" at the end of each sentence but allowing
it at the end of this paragraph.] You and I have been trapped by sin, but Christ has purchased our pardon. He who has this hope in his heart will sing, and you know the song: "Redeemed, redeemed, redeemed!"
Will YOU hear the song this season? Will YOU see the signs this Christmas. You can. If you will stand up and lift up your heads. It is all around. Don't you know that...
1. Our redemption is written in the heavens.
2. Our redemption is witnessed on earth.
3. Our redemption is wrapped in our hearts.
28. Forgive Us Our Debts - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
As with so many of the stories of Jesus, the parable of the debtors arose out of a question that was posed to Jesus. Simon Peter said to him: "Master, if my brother sins against me, how many times should I forgive him? Seven times? Even as he asks that question my mind cannot help but think about children and how they will sometimes confess something they do wrong expecting to get praise from a teacher or a parent because they were so honest.
In the same sense, Simon Peter by asking this question is not expecting rebuke but praise. He is expecting Jesus to say: ?Excellent Peter. You go to the head of the class. You get A+.? According to Jewish law, Peter had the right to think that he had done something good. Scribal law clearly read:
'If a man transgresses one time, forgive him. If a man transgresses two times, forgive him. If a man transgresses three times, forgive him. If a man transgresses four times, do not forgive him.' What Peter has done is to take this law of limited forgiveness, multiply it by two and add one, and then sit back with a smile on his face and say: Now how is that for being a great guy? And he surely must have been taken aback when Jesus said you must forgive seventy times seven.
Then Jesus proceeded to tell a story. There was a certain king who had a day of reckoning for his servants. He found one who owed him 10,000 talents and, because he could not pay, he was about to have him thrown into jail and his wife and children sold into slavery. In response to the man's pathetic pleadings, however, he forgave him the entire debt.
Whereupon that forgiven servant went to a fellow servant who owed him 100 denarii, a very small sum of money, and demanded payment. He pleaded for extra time, an extension, but the man would not hear of it and he had him thrown into jail. This story got back to the king who went into a rage. He called in the forgiven servant and said that because of his conduct, he was now to be thrown into jail. His original debt was reinstated.
Now the question is, what was Jesus attempting to say to Simon Peter?
1. First, forgiveness carries a heavy price.
2. Second, a forgiven soul should be a forgiving soul.
29. He Forgives and Forgets
Illustration
David H. Bolton
In A Forgiving God in an Unforgiving World, Ron Lee Davis retells the true story of a priest in the Philippines, a much-loved man of God who carried the burden of a secret sin he had committed many years before. He had repented but still had no peace, no sense of God's forgiveness.
In his parish was a woman who deeply loved God and who claimed to have visions in which she spoke with Christ and he with her. The priest, however, was skeptical. To test her he said, "The next time you speak with Christ, I want you to ask him what sin your priest committed while he was in seminary." The woman agreed. A few days later the priest asked., "Well, did Christ visit you in your dreams?"
"Yes, he did," she replied.
"And did you ask him what sin I committed in seminary?"
"Yes."
"Well, what did he say?"
"He said, 'I don't remember'"
This is what God wants you to know about the forgiveness He freely offers you. When your sins are forgiven, they are forgotten. The past—with its sins, hurts brokenness, and self-recrimination—is gone, dead, crucified, remembered no more. What God forgives, He forgets.
30. Renouncing Disgraceful Ways
Illustration
John R. Steward
We have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways; we refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God's Word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God." (v. 2)
A young man was visiting with his pastor one afternoon. He had been in the pastor's confirmation class many years before. In fact, after his confirmation experience he rarely came to church except for Christmas and Easter. Now he was an adult and very much involved in the world. During this visit, he was bragging to his pastor about some of his business practices. He said, "In my business, I have lied many times in order to close certain deals. But it doesn't bother me. I don't care about that. If I have to cheat and steal, I will do it because I don't really care about that."
The pastor listened very intently to the young man's testimony. Then the pastor shared with him how Jesus had come to earth to die and be raised again so that his sins could be forgiven and so that he could have eternal life. At this point, the pastor asked the young man if he would do him a favor. Would he go home and look in the mirror and say ten times, "Jesus Christ died for me, but I don't care about that." The young man thought that it was a little silly but agreed that when he got home he would do that. When he got home, he began to do what the pastor had suggested. He looked in the mirror and said, "Jesus Christ died for me, but I don't care about that." He could only say it two times and then decided to return to the pastor's office at the church. With tears in his eyes he said, "If God sent his Son to die for me, I do care about that and I want to know more."
Reprinted from With Him All the Way by Oscar Anderson, copyright 1948, Augsburg Publishing House.
31. Overcoming the Habit
Illustration
P. Meier
Many years ago in St. Louis, a lawyer visited a Christian to transact some business. Before the two parted, his client said to him, "I've often wanted to ask you a question, but I've been afraid to do so." "What do you want to know?" asked the lawyer. The man replied, "I've wondered why you're not a Christian." The man hung his head, "I know enough about the Bible to realize that it says no drunkard can enter the kingdom of God; and you know my weakness!" "You're avoiding my question," continued the believer. "Well, truthfully, I can't recall anyone ever explaining how to become a Christian."
Picking up a Bible, the client read some passages showing that all are under condemnation, but that Christ came to save the lost by dying on the cross for their sins. "By receiving Him as your Substitute and Redeemer," he said, "you can be forgiven. If you're willing to receive Jesus, let's pray together." The lawyer agreed, and when it was his turn he exclaimed, "O Jesus, I am a slave to drink. One of your servants has shown me how to be saved. O God, forgive my sins and help me overcome the power of this terrible habit in my life." Right there he was converted. That lawyer was C.I. Scofield.
A few of you may recognize that name. There is a Bible that bears his name: The Scofield Reference Bible. Over 10 million have been sold and it is easily one of the most influential Christian publications of the twentieth century.
32. Faithful Servants
Illustration
Mickey Anders
Jana Childers, Professor of Homiletics at San Francisco Theological Seminary says, "Faithful servants of the Son of Man are known not only by their freedom from anxiety but also by the length of their sleeves. Faithful servants are ones whose sleeves are always pushed up. They are the kind of people whose powder is always dry, whose bags are always packed, whose pilot light is always lit. Their toes and knuckles are on the starting line waiting for the pistol. So eager are they to be onto the next piece of the Kingdom's business that they never get around to unrolling their cuffs. They rarely light on a chair, much less settle in for a nap between jobs… Faithful servants are more than ready. They are the kind of people who not only leave the porch light on for you but also meet you at the door with warm milk, and when you say that your bride is craving for anchovy ice cream, they ask whether she would prefer a cup or a cone…"
Faithful servants are more than alert. They live their lives on tiptoe, with their ears trained for the call. Before the phone can ring a second time, they answer.
33. Remade In His Image
Illustration
George W. Hoyer
G. K. Chesterton in his autobiography wrote about the effect of forgiveness, of the absolution. He was referring to the words of absolution spoken by the presiding minister after a confession of sin: "I forgive you all your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Somewhat freely paraphrased, this is what Chesterton said: Forgiven Christians "do truly, by definition, step out again into that dawn of their own beginning ... God has really remade them in his own image. They are now, each one of them, a new experiment as they were when they were really only five years old. They stand in the white light at the worthy beginning of a new life. The accumulations of time [of previous sinning] can no longer terrify. They may be grey and gouty; but they are only five minutes old."
34. The Healing Power Of Faith
Illustration
Harold H. Lentz
The woman with the issue of blood had faith that by contact with Christ she could be cured. All around us in daily life are examples of people who, by faith, are overcoming life's difficulties.
A telephone linesman was up a pole when the pole, which was held in place only by cables, fell over him and he was dashed to the ground. His insides were badly crushed and as he was rushed to the hospital; there was little hope that he could survive. A pastor learned of the accident when the man's wife called from the hospital. She said that the very best surgeons in the community had operated but found that he was beyond repair and they had given up all hope. She had been informed that her husband would die within the hour. She asked the pastor to hurry to the hospital to baptize her husband before he died. The pastor entered the sickroom to find a patient with the color of death, too weak to speak. Quickly the pastor explained that God loved the patient. In a few words he explained that baptism makes one a child of God whose sins are forgiven through Christ's death on the cross. Then he asked the patient if he wished to be baptized. The man was too weak to do more than slightly shake his head in consent.
As the pastor left he asked the wife to call him when death came. The pastor got no call that day, nor through the following night. So the next morning he called the wife, who told him that her husband was still alive and some of his color had returned. He fell asleep after the pastor's visit, something he had not done since the accident, and he even ate some food for the first time. The man recovered completely and in a few months was once again climbing telephone poles. All medical help had proven of no avail, but evidently the introduction of faith, and the spiritual dimension, had caused the man to rally. It has been well said, that "more things are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of."
35. Rest on God's Word
Illustration
An elderly man said to H.A. Ironside, "I will not go on unless I know I'm saved, or else know it's hopeless to seek to be sure of it. I want a definite witness, something I can't be mistaken about!"
Ironside replied, "Suppose you had a vision of an angel who told you your sins were forgiven. Would that be enough to rest on?"
"Yes, I think it would. An angel should be right."
Ironside continued, "But suppose on your deathbed Satan came and said, 'I was that angel, transformed to deceive you.' What would you say?" The man was speechless.
Ironside then told him that God has given us something more dependable than the voice of an angel. He has given His Son, who died for our sins, and He has testified in His own Word that if we trust Him all our sins are gone. Ironside read I John 5:13, "You may know that you have eternal life." Then he said, "Is that not enough to rest on? It is a letter from heaven expressly to you."
God's Spirit used that to bring assurance to the man's heart.
36. No Need for Words
Illustration
Stanley Mooneyham
When you know who you are, you don't have to impress anyone. When Jesus was taken before the high priest, who asked, "What do you have to say for yourself?" Jesus was silent. Wrong question.
When the high priest then asked Him if He was the Son of God, Jesus said, "I am." Right question.
Before Pilate, who asked, "Are you the King of the Jews?" Jesus replied, “Yes, it is as you say." Right question.
In the Luke account, Herod asked Jesus question after question, but there was no reply. Wrong questions.
When you have discovered your identity, you need to say little else. Toyohiko Kagawa, the Japanese Christian who spent his life working with and for the poor, was speaking at Princeton. When he finished his talk, one student said to another, "He didn't say much, did he?"
A woman sitting nearby leaned over and murmured, "When you’re hanging on a cross, you don't have to say anything."
37. Amen: A Most Remarkable Word
Illustration
Staff
The word "amen" is a most remarkable word. It was transliterated directly from the Hebrew into the Koine Greek of the New Testament, then into Latin and into English and many other languages, so that it is practically a universal word. It has been called the best-known word in human speech. The word is directly related in fact, almost identical to the Hebrew word for "believe" (aman), or "faithful." Thus, it came to mean "sure" or truly," an expression of absolute trust and confidence. When one believes God, he indicates his faith by an "amen." When God makes a promise, the believer's response is "amen" "so it will be!" In the New Testament, it is often translated "verily" or "truly." When we pray according to His Word and His will, we know God will answer, so we close with an "amen," and so also do we conclude a great hymn or anthem of praise and faith.
The word is even a title of Christ Himself. The last of His letters to the seven churches begins with a remarkable salutation by the glorified Lord: "These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God" (Revelation 3:14). We can be preeminently certain that His Word is always faithful and true, because He is none other than the Creator of all things, and thus He is our eternal "Amen." As our text reminds us, every promise of God in Christ is "yea and amen," as strong an affirmation of truth as can be expressed in the Greek language.
It is, therefore, profoundly meaningful that the entire Bible closes with an "amen." "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen" (Revelation 22:21), assuring everyone who reads these words that the whole Book is absolutely true and trustworthy. Amen!
38. 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.
39. The Last Meal
Illustration
Larry Powell
Perhapsyou have visited the Upper Room Chapel in Nashville, Tennessee, and had the opportunity to meditate before the marvelous wood carving and its appointments which so dramatically depict the Last Supper. One of the mysterious features of this particular carving is that no matter where you kneel before the figure of Christ, his eyes gaze strangely into yours. So it must have seemed to the disciples gathered around the table in Jerusalem on that fateful evening. How much more intense it must have been for Judas, and we can but wonder where his eyes were fixed when Jesus uttered those terrible words. "He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me, will betray me" (Matthew 26:23).
So far as the disciples were concerned, they had gathered, as they had done since childhood, to partake of the traditional Passover meal. The streets of Jerusalem were crowded with pious Jews who had come into the city for this express purpose. The ritual was always the same: while at the table, the story of the escape from Egypt would be recounted ... there would be special foods on the table and unleavened bread would be eaten as a reminder of the haste in which the Exodus people had been forced to flee Egypt ... it was always the same.
To the disciples’ surprise however, Jesus suddenly departed from the familiar references; "And he took bread, and gave thanks, and broke it, and gave unto them saying, ‘This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.’ Likewise also the cup after supper saying, ‘This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.’ " Jesus had dramatically transformed the Passover supper into the Lord’s Supper on the evening of his "last supper" with them (see also Mark 14:22-24 and Matthew 26:26-29).
The Lord’s Supper:
1. Is a sacrament, meaning that it was instituted by Christ and commanded to be continued "till he come." In Paul’s familiar passage, used in the sacrament ritual, he adds, "For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye proclaim the Lord’s death till he comes" (1 Corinthians 11:26).
2. Symbolizes the new covenant. The Old Testament covenant of the Law was sealed with the blood of animal sacrifice. However, this covenant had failed. The prophets themselves had said, "Behold, the days will come, saith Jehovah, that I will make a new convenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah." The covenant of Law was being superseded by the new convenant of love, sealed by the blood of Christ.
3. Uses of common elements. In addition to using the traditional elements of the Passover, bread and wine, Jesus realized that each day when his followers partook of their meals, two things were certain to be on the table ... bread and wine. Consequently, even an ordinary meal would include reminders of the new covenant.
4. Was observed anxiously. Devout early Christians met daily to observe the sacrament in the prayerful hope that Jesus would return while they were sharing the sacred meal. In time, the early Church observed the sacrament each Sunday, a practice continued until the Reformation. Oddly enough, in Scotland, during the sixteenth century, it was observed in the country twice and in town four times a year.
5. Is called the eucharist, meaning the "thanksgiving," based on the passage, "He took a cup, and when he had given thanks...."
Perhaps John Calvin spoke for each of us when he admitted that "the matter is too sublime for me to be able to express, or even to comprehend ... I rather experience it, than understand it."
40. 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.
41. Temptations of Daily People
Illustration
Douglas R. A. Hare
This passage (4:1—11) is often appointed by lectionaries for the first Sunday of Lent. The presumption is that the narrative is of direct relevance for Christians as they enter a period of penitence. Ordinary Christians are unlikely to perceive it so, and with good cause. The story does not correspond with our experience; we do not hold conversations with a visible devil, nor are we whisked from place to place as Jesus is in the story. Moreover, the temptations that Jesus faces are peculiar to him; they seem very remote from those we face day by day. This passage may in fact prompt some to doubt the validity of Hebrews 4:15: "For we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin." What did Jesus know of the temptations that are faced daily by the recovering alcoholic and substance abuser? the lonely divorcee? the struggling business owner? the teenager who covets peer acceptance above all?
There is, however, a common denominator that links all of these with the temptation as ascribed to Jesus. The basic, underlying temptation that Jesus shared with us is the temptation to treat God as less than God. We may not be tempted to turn stones into bread (we are more apt to turn butter into guns, but we are constantly tempted to mistrust God's readiness to empower us to face our trials. None of us is likely to put God to the test by leaping from a cliff, but we are frequently tempted to question God's helpfulness when things go awry; we forget the sure promise, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness" (II Corinthians 12:9). Pagan idolatry is no more a temptation for us than it was for Jesus, but compromise with the ways of the world is a continuing seduction. It is indeed difficult for us to worship and serve God only. We should be continually grateful that we have a great high priest who, tempted as we are, was able to resist all such temptations by laying hold of Scripture and firmly acknowledging that only God is God.
42. Everything He Says Is True
Illustration
Ray Pritchard & Brett Blair
When you read the story about the Pharisee, a number of specific statements are made about his piety. Please note this. Everything the man says about himself is true. For instance, when he says, "I thank you that I am not like other men," indeed he wasn't like other men. He had a standard of morality that was far above the standard of that day.
- When he said, "I fast twice a week;" it happens to be literally true. The Pharisees fasted on Monday and Thursday of every week.
- When he says, "I give tithes of all I possess," he means he tithes on the gross and not on the net. He went beyond the Law of Moses. That's no big deal; all the Pharisees did that.
- When he says, "I am not a crook," he really isn't a crook.
- When he says, "I am not like this filthy tax collector," he's really not like that guy.
- When he says, "I do not commit adultery," he really doesn't commit adultery. He is faithful to his wife.
- When he says, "I am honest, I am faithful, I am zealous for my religion," he means it and every word of it is true. He truly is a genuinely good man.
What we are to understand is this. When he prayed he was telling the truth. When he said, "Lord, you're lucky to have a guy like me, because I'm one of the best guys I know," it was really true. He really was a wonderful guy.
While he prayed, people would be standing around watching. And they would say, "Yep, he's a fine man." While he prayed, they probably applauded. He was the kind of guy you'd want living next door to you. A good citizen. A law-abiding man. A good, religious kind of person. If he were to come to this church today we'd love him because he would be faithful, loyal, and give us a lot of money. We'd probably make him an elder or a deacon. He's just that kind of guy. He looks really good on the outside. Everything he says about himself is absolutely true.
So what's wrong? Well, for all his goodness he isn't perfect, no one is, and the Law requires perfection. I like to call this narcissistic righteousness. What good is all the law if you don't have love?If you are not reaching out to those around you. If the center of your righteousness is You, you've missed the center. The center is love God and love your neighbor.
43. What Do You Come to See?
Illustration
Keith Wagner
In the northern Portuguese town of Sobrado, a lady has a dog name Preta. Preta leaves her owner's home every Sunday morning at 5:00 a.m. and walks 16 miles to a Roman Catholic church in time to take her usual place next to the altar for mass. The dog stands and sits whenever worshippers do the same. She usually walks back home, though some of the parishioners will give her a ride. What is interesting is that the Portuguese newspaper Correio da Manha has reported that church attendance has grown as many people have attended just to see the faithful dog. Not the faithful God - the faithful dog. Go figure.
What are you looking for? Do you seek God or are you like the people in Sobrado, Italy who go to church to see a dog that worships? When someone misses worship in our church and they meet another member who worshipped they ask, "Who was there?" If the person is a member of a Pentecostal Church and misses worship and then sees a fellow parishioner who worshipped that Sunday they ask, "What happened?"
For some of us our faith is about relationships, friends, relatives and members of the flock. For others it is about what they experienced.
44. What Is Your Other Plan?
Illustration
James W. Moore
Erasmus, the famous Renaissance scholar, once told a classic story which was designed to emphasize how important it is that we take up the torch of Christ’s ministry with great commitment. In the story, Jesus returns to heaven after His time on earth. The angels gather around Him to learn what all happened during His days on earth. Jesus tells them of the miracles, His teachings, His death on the cross, and His resurrection.
When He finishes his story, Michael the Archangel asks Jesus, “But what happens now?” Jesus answers, “I have left behind eleven faithful disciples and a handful of men and women who have faithfully followed me. They will declare My message and express My love. These faithful people will build My church.” “But,” responds Michael, “What if these people fail? What then is Your other plan?” And Jesus answers, “I have no other plan!”
Jesus is counting on you and you and you and me. But the good news is, we are not alone. The Holy Spirit is here to melt us, mold us, fill us, and use us.
45. Grace Knows No Conditions
Illustration
Michael P. Green
Dr. H. A. Ironside in his book In the Heavenlies (Neptune, N.J.: Loizeau Bros., Inc.) tells the story of an attempted assassination of the first Queen Elizabeth of England. The woman who sought to do so dressed as a male page and secreted herself in the queen’s boudoir, awaiting the convenient moment to stab the queen to death. She did not realize that the queen’s attendants would be very careful to search the rooms before Her Majesty was permitted to retire. They found the woman hidden there among the gowns and brought her into the presence of the queen, after confiscating the poniard that she had hoped to plant into the heart of the sovereign.
The would-be assassin realized that her case, humanly speaking, was hopeless. She threw herself down on her knees and pleaded and begged the queen as a woman to have compassion on her, a woman, and to show her grace. Queen Elizabeth looked at her coldly and quietly said, “If I show you grace, what promise will you make for the future?” The woman looked up and said, “Grace that hath conditions, grace that is fettered by precautions, is not grace at all.” Queen Elizabeth caught the idea in a moment and said, “You are right; I pardon you of my grace.” And they led her away, a free woman.
History tells us that from that moment Queen Elizabeth had no more faithful, devoted servant than that woman who had intended to take her life. That is exactly the way the grace of God works in the life of an individual—he or she becomes a faithful servant of God.
Note: Perhaps this is a fanciful illustration on the part of Dr. Ironside. We were not able to substantiate any parts of this story.
46. Pleasing the One
Illustration
Charles W. Colson
Theodore Epp, founder of Back to the Bible radio ministry, realized something was wrong when he stopped receiving critical mail. Convicted that he was not challenging the flock enough, he changed his preaching. "I'm afraid that when I'm pleasing everybody, I'm not pleasing the Lord," he later said, "and pleasing the Lord is what counts."
This is not to suggest that a pastor is only successful when he is upsetting people! But he must be certain that he is first and foremost faithful to the One he serves. He is fulfilling a divine commission when he preaches. Just as an ambassador is entrusted not with his own message but with his superior's message, so the minister is entrusted with the Word of God. Before it is delivered, therefore, every message should be laid at the foot of His throne with one question: "Is it faithful to You, my Lord?" Or as one German pastor would always pray in the pulpit, "Cause my mind to fear whether my heart means what I say."
47. Catching Men
Illustration
John R. Steward
So often we read these words of Jesus and wonder why we do not see this taking place in our churches. A few years ago, Dr. Win Arn did a survey of 1,000 congregations. The answers that he received might help us better understand the problem. He asked both the members and pastors of these churches what they thought the purpose of their church really was. Dr. Arn reports that 89 percent of the people in those churches said that the purpose of their church was to take care of the needs of the members. The remaining eleven percent believed that the purpose of the church was to reach the world with the gospel. Contrast this with the pastors. Ninety percent of the pastors said that the purpose of their church was to reach the world for Christ while the remaining ten percent of pastors in those churches agreed with the laity that the purpose of the church is to take care of the needs of the members of the church. Is it any wonder why there is conflict in our churches today?
The great Renaissance scholar Erasmus once told a very helpful mythical story. It seems that after Jesus returned to heaven the angels gathered around him. He told them about how on earth he had performed many miracles and how he spent time teaching the many who would come to him. He told them about his death, burial, and resurrection. He told them about his ascension to heaven. Then Michael the Archangel asked, "But Lord, what happens now?" Jesus answered by telling them that he had spent three years training his disciples to carry out his plan to reach the world with the gospel. He said, "I have left behind eleven faithful men who will declare my message and express my love. These faithful men will build my church." Then Michael asked: "What if these men fail? What then?" Then Jesus thought for a moment and said, "I have no other plan."
Adapted by Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House), p. 82 & Tony Campolo, Who Switched the Price Tags (Dallas: Word Publishing), p. 170.
48. Humble Servanthood
Illustration
Scott Hoezee
Nothing succeeds in America like success, they say. We like winners and brush aside losers. Let me throw out some names for you: Alfred Landon, James Cox, John Davis, Charles Hughes, Alton Parker. Sound familiar? Probably not. Yet every one of them was so important and well thought of that at some point in the twentieth century each was a nominee for President of the United States. Millions voted for them, for a while their names were plastered all over the place. But then each one lost, of course, and in America, that's that.
We are a people in love with power and success, and this surely is one area among many that the gospel needs to address in our particular cultural context. Not unlike the people in Jesus' own day, we are swift to seize on anything that looks powerful and dazzling. The bigger the congregation, the more faithful we assume. We equate success, as the world defines it, with the work of the Holy Spirit because we can scarcely wrap our minds around the possibility that there could ever be an outwardly "successful" church that might actually work against the fundamentals of the gospel. "They must be doing something right," we say to each other about successful restaurants, enterprising entrepreneurs, and also church leaders who sell millions of books and draw large throngs of people.
And sometimes they are doing something right in the best sense. There are lots of people who are both faithful to Christ and who are successful in generating enthusiasm for the gospel through books that sell well, congregations that attract many members, and so on. Still, Jesus' desire to keep things quiet until the cross reminds us that whether or not we prove to be wildly popular, it is always a quiet and careful and humble apprehension of the gospel that is key. Jesus' own example of humble servanthood comes as a critique of our own overweening tendency to be enamored with all that is glitzy and eye-popping. We should be wary if the Jesus we worship fits too snugly into any cultural context on this earth.
49. Maintenance or Mission
Illustration
Brian Stoffregen
Churches need to be mission oriented but often fall intomaintenance behavior and many times they don't know they've slippedfrom mission into maintenance. Let's look at the following to gauge how much mission vs. maintenance exist in our congregation:
1. In measuring the effectiveness, the maintenance congregation asks, "How many pastoral visits are being made? The mission congregation asks, "How many disciples are being made?"
2. When contemplating some form of change, the maintenance congregation says, "If this proves upsetting to any of our members, we won't do it." The mission congregation says, "If this will help us reach someone on the outside, we will take the risk and do it."
3. When thinking about change, the majority of members in a maintenance congregation ask, "How will this affect me?" The majority of members in the mission congregation ask, "Will this increase our ability to reach those outside?"
4. When thinking of its vision for ministry, the maintenance congregation says, "We have to be faithful to our past." The mission congregation says, "We have to be faithful to our future."
5. The pastor in the maintenance congregation says to the newcomer, "I'd like to introduce you to some of our members." In the mission congregation the members say, "We'd like to introduce you to our pastor."
6. When confronted with a legitimate pastoral concern, the pastor in the maintenance congregation asks, "How can I meet this need?" The pastor in the mission congregation asks, "How can this need be met?"
7. The maintenance congregation seeks to avoid conflict at any cost (but rarely succeeds). The mission congregation understands that conflict is the price of progress, and is willing to pay the price. It understands that it cannot take everyone with it. This causes some grief, but it does not keep it from doing what needs to be done.
8. The leadership style in the maintenance congregation is primarily managerial, where leaders try to keep everything in order and running smoothly. The leadership style in a mission congregation is primarily transformational, casting a vision of what can be, and marching off the map in order to bring the vision into reality.
9. The maintenance congregation is concerned with their congregation, its organizations and structure, its constitutions and committees. The mission congregation is concerned with the culture, with understanding how secular people think and what makes them tick. It tries to determine their needs and their points of accessibility to the Gospel.
10. When thinking about growth, the maintenance congregations asks, "How many Lutherans live within a twenty-minute drive of this church?" The mission congregation asks, "How many unchurched people live within a twenty-minute drive of this church?"
11. The maintenance congregation looks at the community and asks, "How can we get these people to support our congregation?" The mission congregation asks, "How can the Church support these people?"
12. The maintenance congregation thinks about how to save their congregation. The mission congregation thinks about how to reach the world.
50. When the Spectacular Becomes Familiar
Illustration
Steven Molin
In his book Finding God in Unexpected Places, author Philip Yancey describes the time he and his wife visited Old Faithful Geyser in Yellowstone Park. They were having lunch in the lodge, watching the digital clock ticking down the minutes until the next big splash. When the clock reached 30 seconds, diners left their tables and rushed over to the windows overlooking the geyser. When Old Faithful erupted, and all the tourists were ooohing and aahing, Yancey looked over his shoulder and saw that the waitresses and busboys were using this time to clear tables of their dirty dishes and garbage. They had become so familiar with that spectacular eruption that it no longer impressed them; it no longer held their interest.
And Yancey wonders if that isn't also true in the church? Jesus is the Savior of the world, the Creator of the Universe, the very Son of God who came into our world to die on the cross so that we might have eternal life, and he has become to us, boring. And the Church has helped make him boring! Boring pastors drone on in monotonous voices and put people to sleep. Stale music and stale coffee and stale conversations about weather and sports and Oprah may be safe but they are not life-changing. That may not be true in all churches, but I fear it is common in much of Christendom. Like rock bands that always employ "warm up groups" so does the church, only in the church's case, Jesus is the warm up group: the main event is the building, or the liturgy, or the anthem, or the preacher's sermon about recycling, or the donuts after worship. Ho-hum, Jesus. We are no longer impressed by what you have done to save our souls, so we have to spice your story up a bit with our own side show.
Showing
1
to
50
of
209
results
- Homeschooling continues to increase across the US post-pandemic: report
- Trump campaign ad blasts Harris for backing taxpayer funding of sex-change surgeries for prisoners
- Jimmy Carter becomes first former president to celebrate 100th birthday
- Big tech, not gov't overreach, poses biggest threat to religious liberty in 2024 and beyond, legal experts warn
- Youth pastor sentenced to 50 years in prison for impregnating 13-year-old girl
- Boise State women’s volleyball forfeits game, refuses to play against man
- Ray Ortlund deletes social media post endorsing Kamala Harris after backlash
- 'God is in control' is a 'cop-out': Pastor Rafael Cruz urges Christians to get politically involved
- Former Atlanta Hawks forward AJ Griffin quits NBA to follow Jesus
- As death toll from Helene tops 100, President Biden offers help and prayers
- The Evangelicalism of Jimmy Carter
- Who Is My Neighbor?
- Widespread Helene Misery Stretches Christian Relief Groups
- 25 Precepts for This (and Every) Election
- Fasting Is A Good Thing. But For Some of Us, It’s Complicated.
- Faith Lived Close to the Land
- Can a Lebanese Seminary Move Beyond the Liberal-Conservative Impasse?
- Lausanne Theologians Explain Seoul Statement that Surprised Congress Delegates
- More Christians Are Watching Porn, But Fewer Think It’s a Problem
- Global Methodists Find Joy in Costa Rica
- Inside Kris Kristofferson's health struggles and emotional final performance
- Candace Owens: “I freaked out when I learned Buzz Aldrin was a Freemason. It's not helping my case in believing those moon landings.”
- 4 Songs That Rock Stars Claimed Were “Divine Intervention”
- Govinda Breaks Silence Over Gunshot Injury; 'I Was Shot, But The Bullet Has Been Removed'
- Death of the King of Siam
- The Good Christians: Powerful ‘Evangelicals for Harris’ ad uses Billy Graham’s words to damn Trump
- Ajay Devgn Starrer Singham Again Makes Rs 200 Crore Before Its Official Diwali Release; Find Out More
- Everything Donald Trump is selling while he runs for president
- The sweetness of a new year: Jewish students reflect on apples, honey and community
- Sacred filth offers India's sex workers brief respect
- Who Should Be the Patron Saint of Baseball?
- ETs and the Incarnation
- Even God Created Worlds and Destroyed Them
- Rosh Hashanah: Time to Recognize Israel's Achievements Amid Challenges
- How Hezbollah's Losses Highlight Philosophy of Disaster
- In Praise of Righteous Power Against Hezbollah
- The Evangelicalism of Jimmy Carter
- As Death Toll from Helene Tops 100, Biden Offers Help, Prayers
- Feeding the Hungry in War-Torn Nations
- The "Portuguese Dreyfus" Case