Sermon and Worship Resources (2024)

Athens is located five miles northeast of the port of Piraeus on the Saronic Gulf. It was the chief city of the ancient Greek province of Attica (2Macc. 9:15; Acts 17:1518; 18:1; 1Thess. 3:1) and is the capital of modern Greece.

Paul visited this city on his second missionary journey. His debate with the Greek philosophers in the agora (the marketplace) brought him before the city council of Athens, the Areopagus, where religious matters were settled (Acts 17:16–34). Traditionally, the site is identified as Mars Hill, located on the west side of the Acropolis. Interestingly, Paul founded no church in Athens.

The word for “blood” in the Bible is used both literally and metaphorically. “Blood” is a significant biblical term for understanding purity boundaries and theological concepts. Blood is a dominant ritual symbol in biblical literature. Blood was used in sacrifices and purification rites, and it was inherently connected to menstruation, animal slaughter, and legal culpability. Among the physical properties of blood are the ability to coagulate, the liquid state of the substance (Rev. 16:34), and the ability to stain (Rev. 19:13). Blood can symbolize moral order in terms of cult, law, and power.

The usage of blood in the OT is predominantly negative. The first direct mention of blood in the biblical text involves a homicide (Gen. 4:10). Henceforward, the shedding of human blood is a main concern (Gen. 9:6). Other concerns pertaining to blood include dietary prohibitions of blood (Lev. 17:10–12), purity issues such as the flow of blood as in menstrual blood (Lev. 15:19–24), and blood as a part of religious rites such as circumcision (Gen. 17:10–11; Exod. 4:24–26).

Leviticus 17:11 contains a central statement in the OT concerning the significant role of blood in the sacrificial system: “The life of a creature is in the blood.” Blood was collected from all animal sacrifices, and blood was poured onto the altar (Lev. 1:5).

The covenant with Abraham was sealed with a covenantal ritual (Gen. 15:10–21). Moses sealed the covenant between the Israelites and God with a blood ritual during which young Israelite men offered young bulls among other sacrifices as fellowship offerings (Exod. 24:5). Moses read the words of the Book of the Covenant and sprinkled the blood of the bulls on the people, saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words” (Exod. 24:7–8).

During the Passover observance at the time of the exodus, blood was placed on the sides and tops of the doorframes of the Hebrews (Exod. 12:7). Not only altars were sprinkled and thus consecrated with blood, but priests were as well. Aaron and his sons were consecrated by the application of blood to their right earlobe, thumb, and big toe, and the sprinkling of blood and oil on their garments (Exod. 29:20). On the Day of Atonement, the high priest entered the holy of holies and sprinkled blood on the mercy seat to seek atonement for the sins of the people (Lev. 16:15).

Many events in the passion of Christ include references to blood. During the Last Supper, Jesus redefined the last Passover cup: “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:28). Judas betrayed “innocent blood” (Matt. 27:4), and the money he received for his betrayal was referred to as “blood money” (Matt. 27:6). At Jesus’ trial, Pilate washed his hands and declared, “I am innocent of this man’s blood” (Matt. 27:24).

The apostle Paul wrote that believers are justified by the blood of Christ (Rom. 5:9). This justification or righteous standing with God was effected through Christ’s blood sacrifice (Rom. 3:25–26; 5:8). The writer of Hebrews stressed the instrumental role of blood in bringing about forgiveness (Heb. 9:22). In the picture of the ideal community of Christ, the martyrs in the book of Revelation are situated closest to the throne of God because “they triumphed over him [Satan] by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death” (Rev. 12:11). The blood of the Lamb, Christ, is the effective agent here and throughout the NT, bringing about the indirect contact between sinner and God.

In the OT, the Hebrew words ruakh (“breath, spirit”) and neshamah (“blast, spirit”) are the standard terms, even collectively translated “wind.” Constructively, these terms reflect the vibrant relationship between God and humankind. However, God’s “breath” can also be an agent of judgment. So “breath/wind” is the invasive power of God—proof of his supremacy—capable of disruption or transformation of human life.

It is in human creation that God’s breath is given one of its most dynamic illustrations. Formed of “dust,” the human being must be enlivened by the Creator’s breath. In the OT, human flesh remains dormant and helplessly passive until God breathes; then a living human being is animated (Gen. 2:7; 6:17; cf. Pss. 33:6; 104:29).

“Breath/wind” is also a powerful force in God’s anger, when a “blast of breath from his nostrils” can undo and destroy (2Sam. 22:16). Similarly, a “strong east wind” rolls back the Red Sea for the Israelites’ crossing (Exod. 14:21), but the very same force is the undoing of Pharaoh’s army, which was destroyed as God, Israel’s warrior, “blew” with his “breath” (Exod. 15:10).

Not surprisingly, themes combining breath, wind, and spirit are also used to describe new creation (Ezek. 37:9). The life-generating force of the ruakh/spirit emerges in the NT as the Holy Spirit, manifested in wind, a breath, or Spirit (Gk. pneuma). At Pentecost “a violent wind came from heaven,” enacting another creation (Acts 2:2). John clearly symbolizes Jesus’ “breathing” on the disciples (John 20:22). Not only does this illustrate John’s theology of being born “from above” (3:3 NRSV), but also “he breathed” reenacts the enlivening of Gen. 2:7. The two creations are connected: God’s enlivening in Gen. 2:7 and Jesus’ creation of eternal life following his own resurrection.

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).

The Bible contains many references to minerals and metals. Minerals can encompass a wide array of topics, thus the focus here is on valuable minerals such as ornamental stones as well as precious and useful metals.

Copper. References to copper within the Bible are few. Several passages discuss the basic origins of copper, such as the gathering of ore or the smelting process (Deut. 8:9; Job 28:2; Ezek. 22:18, 20; 24:11). Several NT passages acknowledge the presence of minted copper coins as currency (Matt. 10:9; Mark 12:42; Luke 21:2). Pure copper, however, was hard to use, although it could be combined with tin to make the alloy bronze.

Bronze. The first biblical reference to bronze is found in Gen. 4:22, in which we are told that Tubal-Cain forged tools out of bronze and iron. Next, bronze is mentioned in its use in the tabernacle built in the desert. Among the bronze items included were the many bronze clasps and bases for the tent construction (Exod. 26:11, 37; 27:1011, 17–19). The altar and all its utensils were made of, or overlaid with, bronze (27:1–8). God also instructed Moses to make a bronze basin for washing (30:18). Moses also made a snake out of bronze and placed it on top of his staff when the Israelites were struck with an abundance of venomous snakes (Num. 21:9). Samson was bound with shackles of bronze (Judg. 16:21), and Goliath wore armor and carried weapons of bronze (1Sam. 17:5–6). Solomon used an extensive amount of bronze in his building of the temple (2Kings 25:16), and there was bronze in the statue that Daniel dreamed of (Dan. 2:32, 35). Many of the prophets used bronze as a way to discuss something that was to be strong or strengthened by God (Isa. 45:2; Jer. 1:18; Ezek. 40:3).

Iron and steel. One of the earliest references to iron in Scripture is its use by the Canaanites to make chariots (Josh. 17:16, 18). This would have been an early use of the metal in the Iron AgeI period (1200–1000 BC). Also, Goliath’s spear, which was as big as a weaver’s rod, is said to have had a head made of iron (1Sam. 17:7). Elisha’s miracle of making a borrowed ax head float (2Kings 6:6) shows the continued value of the metal. In his latter days, David amassed iron among the goods to give Solomon to use in building the temple (1Chron. 22:14; 29:2); Solomon later used these materials with the help of Huram-Abi (2Chron. 2:13–14). Ezekiel discusses the economic value of iron in the context of trading (Ezek. 27:12, 19), and Daniel uses it as a metaphor for discussing strength (Dan. 2:40–41). The NT recognizes the strength of iron when discussing Christ’s iron scepter (Rev. 2:27; 19:15).

Tin. Tin was initially used mainly to produce the copper alloy bronze. Tin was not used in its pure form until well into the Roman period, and even then seldom by itself. The sources of tin in the ancient world are currently debated. The tin from large deposits in Tarshish in southern Spain (Ezek. 27:12) was available through Phoenician traders. Tin is also found in large deposits in Anatolia, but it is currently unknown whether these deposits had been discovered and used during biblical times. A third option is modern-day Afghanistan. Archaeologists have discovered in modern Turkey the remains of a wrecked ship, dated to around 1350 BC, that was carrying ten tons of copper ingots and about one ton of tin ingots. These ingots possibly originated in the area of modern-day Afghanistan and were bound for the Mediterranean trade routes. Tin is mentioned only four times in Scripture, always within a list of other metals (Num. 31:22; Ezek. 22:18, 20; 27:12).

Lead. Lead was used early in human history, but its applications were few. It would have been mined with copper and silver ore and then extracted as a by-product. The Romans used it for various implements, most notably wine vessels. It is referenced nine times within Scripture, either in a list or in reference to its weight. The only two times it is referenced as an object is when Job mentions a lead writing implement (Job 19:24), and when Zechariah has the vision of a woman sitting in the basket with a lead cover (Zech. 5:7, 8).

Gold and silver. Sought after for much of human history, gold and silver have been worked by humans for their ornamental value. The practical uses of these metals within the biblical setting were constrained mainly to their economic and ornamental value. Gold and silver jewelry were used as a form of payment and were minted into coins during the Greco-Roman era. Gold objects are relatively scarce in archaeological finds, mainly because most gold items would have been part of a large treasury carried off as tribute or plunder. Silver appears in the archaeological record more frequently; a remarkable hoard of silver in lump form was found at Eshtemoa (see 1Sam. 30:26–28). This silver has been dated to the time of the kingdom of Judah, after the northern kingdom of Israel had fallen. The silver in raw lump form was most likely used as a monetary payment, even though it had not yet been minted into coins.

Gold in the ancient world came largely from Egypt and northern Africa. The Bible mentions Havilah as a land of gold (Gen. 2:11), as well as Ophir (1Kings 9:28), but the exact location of both places is unknown. Silver was mined in southern Spain, along with other metals, and brought to the area through sea trading. The Athenians of the Classical period were also known for their vast silver-mining operations.

Silver and gold are mentioned repeatedly in the OT in reference to their uses in trading and their economic value. Most notably, the Israelites asked their Egyptian neighbors to give them gold and silver items just before they left Egypt (Exod. 3:22). The tabernacle was highly ornamented with these two metals, as was the temple built by Solomon. It is said that Solomon made the nation so wealthy that silver was considered as plentiful as stone (1Kings 10:27). Perhaps the most notorious articles of silver within Scripture are those paid to Judas for his betrayal of Jesus (Matt. 26:15).

Precious stones. Stones of various origins were used in and around Palestine. The Bible makes few references to their use. Like gold and silver, they were used mainly for their ornamental value. Their scarcity made them highly prized. One notable exception is turquoise. The Egyptian pharaohs were fascinated with turquoise, and they mined extensively for it on the Sinai Peninsula. The remains of several turquoise mines have been found with Canaanite markings, indicating the presence of Canaanite slaves working the Egyptian mines. There was also a line of forts along the northern edge of the Egyptian Empire, used presumably to protect the pharaohs’ turquoise interests. Precious stones were also found in Syria, where Phoenician traders would have been able to bring them from other parts of the known world.

Exodus 28:17–21 describes twelve stones set in the breastpiece worn by the Israelite high priest. Twelve stones likewise appear in the foundations of the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:19–20). Ezekiel uses nine of these same twelve stones to discuss the adornment of the king of Tyre (Ezek. 28:13).

The Bible uses the blanket term “precious stones” to denote a hoard of riches, such as that owned by Solomon (1Kings 10:10).

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).

At times simply indicating a wish (2Cor. 11:1), in the Bible the word “hope” most often designates a disposition of soul, the grounds for one’s hope, or the outcome for which one hopes. At its core, biblical hope is hope in God, rooted in God’s covenant faithfulness (Ps. 62:58; Jer. 14:8; 17:13; Rom. 4:18; 5:1–5). Hope trusts God in the present and lives even now on the strength of God’s future accomplishments (Gal. 5:5; Heb. 11:1).

In the NT, hope is closely associated with Christ and his saving work. Christians now live by hope in Christ (Eph. 1:12; 1Pet. 1:3; 3:15); indeed, he is “Christ Jesus our hope” (1Tim. 1:1), and his future appearing is “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). Thus, hope refers to eschatological glory (2Cor. 3:11–12; Eph. 1:18). It is “the hope of the resurrection” (Acts 23:6; cf. 24:15; 26:6–9), our transformation into Christ’s likeness (1John 3:1–3). That expectation stimulates various hopes for God’s plans to be realized in one’s own or others’ lives (1Cor. 9:10, 13; Phil. 2:19, 23; 2Tim. 2:25; 2John 12). So hope is named repeatedly as an essential Christian attribute (Rom. 12:12; 15:4, 13; 1Cor. 13:13).

An image or likeness of a deity, whether carved from wood, molded from metal, or even formed in one’s mind.

In contrast to other ancient religions, the Bible rejects worship of all images as incompatible with worship of God. This includes images of Yahweh, since he is transcendent and cannot be represented by anything in creation. As Moses reminded Israel, they saw no form at Sinai but only heard God’s voice (Deut. 4:12). No form can adequately represent Yahweh, as he is incomparable. The Bible similarly forbids worshiping images of other deities because it elevates them to the status reserved for God alone. Thus, the second commandment prohibits making and worshiping idols in the image of anything found in heaven, on earth, or in the water (Exod. 20:45).

By NT times, idol worship was no longer a problem for Jews, but it remained an important issue for the growing church because many believers came from idolatrous backgrounds. Thus, the apostles included idolatry in lists of sins to be judged, warned their readers to flee from it, and addressed eating food sacrificed to idols. Indicating that idolatry went beyond worship of images, they linked it with the love of money (Matt. 6:24) and greed (Col. 3:5). The NT authors believed that their readers could turn from idols to worship the true and living God, praised them for doing so, and looked to the time when all idol worship would cease.

The concept of justice pervades the Bible, especially, though not exclusively, the OT. The biblical concept of justice is an embodiment of two contemporary concepts: righteousness and justice. The former designates compliance with the divine norm, while the latter emphasizes conformity to a societal standard of what is right and equitable. Focusing exclusively on the latter hinders the correct understanding of justice in the biblical sense.

The source of justice is God himself. It flows from his essential character as one who is both just and righteous, whose actions are flawless, perfect, upright, and just (Deut. 32:4; 1Sam. 12:7; 2Sam. 22:31; Job 37:23; Ps. 89:14). God is the righteous lawgiver, hence the one who establishes the norm for right conduct (Deut. 4:48; Ps. 19:7–9). He requires justice of all his creatures (cf. Gen. 9:5–6; Exod. 21:12, 28–29). God also judges righteously (Gen. 18:25; 1Kings 8:32; Ps. 9:4, 9; Jer. 9:24) and defends and vindicates the weak and oppressed (Deut. 10:18; Ps. 103:6). The responsibility of maintaining justice in the human community, however, he delegates to its leaders, such as civil magistrates or political officials, and requires them to execute this responsibility with integrity, equity, and impartiality (Deut. 1:16–17; 16:18–20; Ps. 82:2–4; Prov. 31:8–9; John 7:24; 1Pet. 2:13–14). God’s requirement of justice in the human community is not limited to its leaders only; it is incumbent upon everyone therein (Ps. 15:1–5; Mic. 6:8; Zech. 7:9; 8:17; Matt. 23:23).

A Pharisee commissioned by Jesus Christ to preach the gospel to Gentiles. His Jewish name was “Saul” (Acts 9:4; 13:9), but he preferred using his Roman name, especially when he signed his letters.

By our best estimates, Paul spent about thirty years preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ (AD 3467)—a ministry that can be divided roughly into three decades. The first decade of his ministry (AD 34–46) has been called the “silent years,” as we have few details from Acts or the Pauline Epistles about his activities. For example, we know that he preached in Damascus for a while and spent some time in Arabia (a total of three years [Gal. 1:17–18]). He made a quick trip to Jerusalem to meet Peter and James the brother of Jesus. Then he returned home to Tarsus, evidently preaching there for several years, until Barnabas brought him to Antioch in Syria to help with the ministry of this mixed congregation of Jews and Gentiles (Acts 9:26–30; 11:25–26). In the second decade of his ministry (AD 46–59), Paul spent most of his life on the road, an itinerant ministry of preaching the gospel and planting churches from Cyprus to Corinth. For most of the third decade (AD 59–67), Paul ministered the gospel from prison, spending over two years imprisoned in Caesarea, another two to three years in a Roman prison (Acts ends here), released for a brief time (two years?) before his final arrest and imprisonment in Rome, where, according to church tradition, he was executed.

During his itinerant ministry, Paul traveled Roman roads that led him to free cities (Ephesus, Thessalonica, Athens) and Roman colonies (Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe, Troas, Philippi, Corinth). Founding churches in urban centers afforded Paul more opportunities for ministry and for his work of making and repairing tents. Traveling within the borders of the Roman Empire also provided a better chance of protection as a citizen. At first, Paul and Barnabas covered familiar territory: Cyprus (Barnabas’s home region) and Anatolia (Paul’s home region). Then, with successive journeys Paul and other missionary companions branched out to Asia Minor, Macedonia, and Achaia. Some of the towns that Paul visited were small and provincial (Derbe, Lystra); others were major cities of great economic and intellectual commerce (Ephesus, Corinth, Athens). In the midst of such cultural diversity, Paul found receptive ears among a variety of ethnic groups: Gauls, Phrygians and Lycaonians, Greeks, Romans, and Jews. Previously, Paul’s Gentile converts had worshiped many gods (local, ethnic, and imperial), offered sacrifices at many shrines and temples, and joined in all the religious festivals (often involving immoral and ungodly practices). After believing the gospel, Paul’s predominantly Gentile churches turned from their idolatrous ways to serve “the living and true God” (1Thess. 1:9). Their exclusive devotion to one God quickly led to economic and political problems, for both Paul’s converts and the cities of their residence. No more offerings for patron gods, no more support for local synagogues or the imperial cult—Paul’s converts were often persecuted for their newly found faith by local religious guilds (idol makers!) and civic leaders courting Roman favor (Acts 17:6–9; 19:23–41; Phil. 1:27–30; 1Thess. 2:14–16). Indeed, Paul often was run out of town as a troublemaker who preached a message that threatened both the Jewish and the Roman ways of life (Acts 16:19–24; Phil. 3:17–4:1). It is no wonder that Paul’s activities eventually landed him in a Roman prison. It was only a matter of time before his reputation as a “lawbreaker” caught up with him (Acts 21:21). But that did not stop Paul. Whether as a prisoner or a free man, Paul proclaimed the gospel of Jesus Christ until the day he died.

Paul was a tentmaker, a missionary, a writer, a preacher, a teacher, a theologian, an evangelist, a mentor, a prophet, a miracle worker, a prisoner, and a martyr. His life story reads like the tale of three different men: a devout Pharisee, a tireless traveler, an ambitious writer. He knew the Scriptures better than did most people. He saw more of the world than did most merchants. He wrote some of the longest letters known at that time. To his converts, he was a faithful friend. To his opponents, he was an irrepressible troublemaker. But, according to Paul, he was nothing more or less than the man whom God had called through Jesus Christ to take the gospel to the ends of the earth.

Christ’s resurrection is the foundational event for the Christian faith. Paul goes so far as to say that if Christ did not rise, then the Christian faith is futile and Christians are to be pitied more than all others (1Cor. 15:1719). Resurrection’s climaxing position in all four Gospel narratives yields the same understanding. Christ came not merely to die, as some claim, but to conquer death. Resurrection gives everything that Christ did before his death an “of God” significance, and it establishes everything that follows as a guarantee of God’s eschatological promises. Without the resurrection, Jesus would have been just another “prophet hopeful” who died a tragic peasant death in Jerusalem. However, as it is, evidenced by the resurrection, he is the Son of God. According to the NT, the resurrection is the triumphant cry that God indeed did come to visit his creation and conquer the power of sin and death.

Although the Gospels’ presentations of Jesus’ resurrection vary in some detail (probably due to purpose and audience), all of them treat the event as the theological centerpiece of the Gospel narrative. The resurrection story launches God’s eschatological work and opens the door, as the postresurrection appearances show, for a connection between the Jesus story and the church story. It is the foundation both for the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18–20) and for Pentecost (Luke 24:49). All people of all nations can now meet the living Christ.

Righteousness is an important theme in both Testaments of the Bible. The concept includes faithfulness, justice, uprightness, correctness, loyalty, blamelessness, purity, salvation, and innocence. Because the theme is related to justification, it has important implications for the doctrine of salvation.

Being careful to avoid imposing Western philosophical categories onto OT texts, we may say that the core idea of righteousness is conformity to God’s person and will in moral uprightness, justness, justice, integrity, and faithfulness. Behind the many and varied uses of righteousness language in the OT stands the presupposition that God himself is righteous in the ultimate sense (e.g., Ezra 9:15; Isa. 45:21; Zeph. 3:5). Righteousness is the expression of his holiness in relationship to others (Isa. 5:16), and all other nuances of righteousness in the biblical texts are derived from this.

Related to humans, righteousness is often found as the opposite of wickedness. Righteousness often occurs in evaluative contexts, where it relates to proper conduct with respect to God, the order of the world as he created it, the covenant, or law (e.g., Deut. 6:25). God reigns in righteousness and justice (e.g., Ps. 97:2), and humans should align their conduct with this righteous reign. Righteousness can be expressed as personal integrity with phrases such as “my righteousness” (2Sam. 22:21, 25; Ps. 7:8) and “their righteousness” (1Sam. 26:23). Unrighteousness is found in poetic parallel to injustice (e.g., Jer. 22:13); the unjust are parallel with the wicked (Ps. 82:2).

Righteousness language is more rare in the Gospels than one might expect in light of OT and Jewish intertestamental usage. These references fit with the Jewish setting: righteousness is required of God’s people, and unrighteousness is to be avoided. Righteousness is proper conduct with respect to God or Torah (Matt. 21:32) in contrast to wickedness (Matt. 13:49). Righteousness could be conceived as one’s own (e.g., Luke 18:9) and has its reward (Matt. 10:41). While the specific terms related to righteousness are infrequent in the Gospels, the broader concept of conformity to God’s will is widely apparent in calls for repentance, personal moral uprightness, mercy, and concern for the marginalized. The NT Epistles continue these general strands of the concept. Righteousness is related to personal conduct (1Thess. 2:10; 1Tim. 6:11; 2Tim. 2:22; 1Pet. 2:24) and is contrasted with wickedness (2Cor. 6:14); it is a matter of doing, not knowing (Rom. 2:13). An example of righteousness in doing is the kindness shown by the prostitute Rahab, who hid the Israelite spies (James 2:25).

The NT does signal some new dimensions related to righteousness. In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 57), Jesus extends the requirements of righteousness to conformity to his own teaching and directives, a shocking display of authority. In his mission to call sinners rather than the “righteous” (e.g., Mark 2:17), Jesus implicitly questions the righteousness of the “righteous.” In similar manner, personal righteousness in terms of a righteousness of one’s own is negative in the NT (Rom. 10:3; Phil. 3:6; cf. Luke 18:9).

The NT continues the OT theme of righteousness as it relates to God himself. God is righteous (John 17:25; Rom. 3:5; 9:14; Heb. 6:10; cf. Matt. 6:33). His judgments are righteous (Rom. 2:5), and his commands and laws are righteous (Rom. 7:12; 8:4). God is a righteous judge (2Tim. 4:8). His saving activity is righteous; he does not compromise his own justice in justifying the ungodly (Rom. 3:24–26). The righteousness of God is contrasted with human unrighteousness and wickedness (Rom. 3:5; James 1:20). Since God reigns over creation in righteousness, human conduct should conform to that standard (e.g., Rom. 14:17). Jesus is also noted as righteous (Acts 3:14; 7:52; 22:14; 1Pet. 3:18; 1John 2:1, 29). He fulfilled righteousness in the absolute sense of demonstrating complete conformity to the nature and will of God (e.g., 1Pet. 3:18). He also fulfilled God’s righteousness in the sense of his saving activity toward humans (e.g., 2Pet. 1:1).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rocks and stones were found naturally on the ground (Job 8:17; Ps. 91:12; Isa. 5:2; Mark 5:5; Luke 3:8). They could be heaped or piled up as a sign of disgrace (Josh. 7:26; 8:29; 2Sam. 18:17), as a marker or memorial (Gen. 31:4650), or as an altar (Exod. 20:25). A single rock or stone could also be used as a place marker (Gen. 28:22; 35:14, 20; 1Sam. 7:12), especially standing stones (Deut. 27:2–8; Josh. 4:3–9). Large stones could also be used to cover a well (Gen. 29:2–3) or to seal a cave or tomb, such as at the tombs of Lazarus (John 11:38–39) and of Jesus (Matt. 27:60; Mark 16:3–4).

Stone was used as a construction material, particularly for the temple (1Kings 5:15–18; 1Chron. 2:22; Ezra 5:8; Hag. 2:15; Mark 13:1–2). Stone was used in a building’s foundation and for the cornerstone or capstone (1Kings 5:17; Jer. 51:26; Isa. 28:16), as well as for the walls (Hab. 2:11). Psalm 118:22 refers metaphorically to the stone rejected by the builders becoming the cornerstone. In the NT, this is interpreted as referring to Jesus (Matt. 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17; Acts 4:11; 1Pet. 2:7; cf. Eph. 2:20). Stone could also function as a writing material (Josh. 8:32), such as the tablets on which the Ten Commandments were inscribed (Exod. 24:12; Deut. 9:9–11; 1Kings 8:9; cf. 2Cor. 3:3, 7). Stone was also carved, although at Sinai the Israelites are instructed not to use cut or “dressed” stones when constructing an altar (Exod. 20:25; cf. Josh. 8:31). The phrase “carved stone” refers specifically to idols, since stone was one material used for crafting false gods (Lev. 26:1; cf. Deut. 4:28; 29:17; 2Kings 19:18; Isa. 37:19; Rev. 9:20); the term “stone” itself can therefore be used to refer to an idol, especially in the phrase “wood and stone” (Jer. 3:9; Ezek. 20:32).

Stones were used as a weapon or instrument of destruction, whether thrown by hand (Num. 35:17, 23) or flung with a sling (Judg. 20:16; 1Sam. 17:40, 49–50; Prov. 26:8). The verb “to stone” refers to the throwing of stones at an individual, which typically functioned as an official manner of execution (Exod. 19:13; 21:28–29; Deut. 21:20–21; 1Kings 21:13–15; John 8:5; Acts 7:58–59), although it was at times the action of an angry crowd (Exod. 17:4; 1Kings 12:18; cf. John 8:59).

The phrases “precious stones” and “costly stones” refer to gems (2Sam. 12:30; Esther 1:6; Isa. 54:12; 1Cor. 3:12). Gems were used as a display of wealth or honor (1Kings 10:2, 10–11; 2Chron. 32:27; Ezek. 27:22) and for decoration (1Chron. 3:6; Rev. 17:4; 18:16). The two stones on the high priest’s ephod and the twelve precious stones on his breastpiece represented the twelve tribes (Exod. 25:7; 28:9–12, 17–21), a symbolism echoed in the twelve types of precious stones adorning the foundations of the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:19–20).

Rocks and stones are used often in metaphors or similes (e.g., hard as a rock, still as a stone). They can represent something that is common (1Kings 10:27; Job 5:23; Matt. 3:9; 4:3), strong (Job 6:12), hard (Job 38:30; 41:24), heavy (Exod. 15:5; Prov. 27:3), motionless (Exod. 15:16), or immovable (Zech. 12:3). A “heart of stone” describes coldheartedness (Ezek. 11:19; 36:26). A “stumbling stone,” which is literally a stone that causes one to stumble (Isa. 8:14), is used in the NT as a metaphor for an obstacle to faith in Jesus (Rom. 9:32–33; 1Pet. 2:8).

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

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

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

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

In the Bible, woman is first encountered along with man in Gen. 1:2628. God created “man” in the plural, male and female, and commanded them to reproduce and to fill the earth and subdue it. Being created male and female is set in parallel to being created in the image of God. In the ancient Near East, perhaps the king would be thought of as the image of God. But in Genesis, not only is the first man the image of God, but the first woman participates in the image as well. This is all but unthinkable in the ancient world, and it suggests an unparalleled dignity and worth in womankind.

Genesis records that the human race fell through the instrumentality of a man, a woman, and the serpent. The serpent approached the woman, not the man. The woman was convinced by the serpent and ate the forbidden fruit. She gave some to her husband, who also ate it without saying a word. Thus, the woman can be blamed in part for the fall of the race. Adam was condemned because he “listened to [his] wife” (Gen. 3:17). Her judgment, for heeding the serpent, was pain in childbirth and a desire for her husband, who would rule over her (Gen. 3:16). The exact parameters of this judgment are unclear, but it appears that her desire will be for his position of leadership and will be perpetually frustrated.

Often in the Bible, women are motivated by their desire to have children. Rachel demanded of Jacob, “Give me children, or I’ll die!” (Gen. 30:1). She saw herself in competition with her sister, Leah, in this respect (30:8). The “fruit of the womb” is a reward, and like arrows, the blessed man’s quiver is full of them (Ps. 127:1–5). Note also the beatitude of Ps. 128:3: “Your wife will be like a fruitful vine within your house; your children will be like olive shoots around your table.”

In Genesis, the reproductive capability of slave girls is at the disposal of their owners. Thus, Rachel and Leah’s maidservants became surrogate mothers for a number of their sons (Gen. 30:3–10). Sarah also became frustrated at her inability to conceive, so she gave Hagar to Abraham. The result was great familial turmoil, finally resulting in the banishment of both Hagar and Ishmael, whom she bore to Abraham.

In the beginning, God joined one man and one woman together as husband and wife. But soon this idea was corrupted, and Lamech, a man from Cain’s lineage, is credited with the first polygamous marriage (Gen. 4:19). Although the patriarchs (such as Jacob) did have more than one wife, the household discontent and strife are what is highlighted in those stories, such as with Hagar. In the NT, an elder is to be, literally, a “one-woman man” (1Tim. 3:2; ESV, KJV: “the husband of one wife”), meaning monogamous.

The Torah contains significant legislation regarding women. The daughters of Zelophehad argued that their father died without sons, so in Canaan they were disinherited. God agreed and decreed that in Israel daughters would inherit land in the absence of sons. Only if there were no children at all would the land pass to other kin (Num. 27:1–11).

When a man made a vow, he must fulfill it, but a young woman’s vow was subject to her father. If he remained silent, the vow stood, but if he expressed disapproval, then she was freed from it. If she was married, her husband governed her vows, but if she was divorced, then there was no responsible male over her, and her vow was treated as a man’s (Num. 30:1–16).

Sexual intercourse was also regulated in the law of Moses, insofar as the act rendered both parties ritually impure (Lev. 15:18). Both must bathe and were unclean until evening. A woman’s menstrual discharge also made her unclean for a week. Everything she sat or lay upon was unclean, as was anyone who touched these things. She must wash and offer sacrifice to become clean again (15:18–31).

If a man discovered on his wedding night that his bride was not a virgin, he could accuse her publicly. If her parents provided evidence that she had in fact been a virgin, then the man was severely punished for lying and not allowed to divorce her (otherwise, it was simply a matter of writing a letter to divorce her [Deut. 24:1]). If her virginity could not be proved, she was to be put to death by stoning (Deut. 22:13–21).

In the case of a rape of a betrothed virgin, if it occurred in the city, both the rapist and the victim were stoned, since apparently she had failed to cry out for help and thus, the law assumed, consented to sexual intercourse. If she was raped in the countryside, only the man was killed. But if he raped a woman who was not spoken for, his punishment was that he must marry her without possibility of divorce (Deut. 22:23–29).

Numbers 5:11–31 treats cases where a husband was suspicious that his wife had been unfaithful—that is, a matter of covenantal jealousy. The unprovable was left to God to punish.

In the Bible, women sometimes are afforded dignity beyond what is expected in an ancient Near Eastern provenance. Hagar is the only woman in all ancient Near Eastern literature who gave a name to a deity (Gen. 16:13). In Judg. 4:4, Deborah “judged” Israel (despite the NIV’s “leading,” the underlying Hebrew verb indicates “judging,” as in the NRSV). Even as judge, however, she did not lead the army against the enemy general Sisera; Barak did so. But Barak was unwilling to undertake this mission unless Deborah went with him (4:8). Thus, God ensured that the prestige of killing Sisera went to a woman, Jael (4:9, 21). Another prominent woman was Huldah, to whom the priests turned for guidance when the law was rediscovered (2Kings 22:14).

Many biblical stories feature heroines. Mighty Pharaoh was undermined by two midwives in his attempt to destroy Israel (Exod. 1:15–21). Ruth the Moabite woman gave her name to the book that recounts her trek from Moab to Israel, including her famous oath of loyalty (Ruth 1:16–17). Esther too was a courageous woman whose book bears her name. Heroines are especially prominent in the Gospels, and the women there have the distinction of being the first to witness the risen Lord. Luke’s birth narrative is largely organized around Mary. Priscilla (with her husband) taught and helped to shape the early church (Acts 18:26). Paul lists many women in Rom. 16, calling them “deaconess,” “fellow worker,” and possibly even “apostle.”

Scripture also at times portrays various women as being temptations to men. Eve handed the fruit to Adam (Gen. 3:6). In the wilderness Israel worshiped Moabite gods in conjunction with sexual activity (Num. 25:1–9). Later, Israelites intermarried with Canaanite women, directly leading to worship of their idols (Judg. 3:6). Bathsheba was a temptation to David, and this began a series of events that marred his career as a man after God’s own heart. Solomon loved many foreign women, who turned him to worship their gods. After the exile, the Israelites were admonished by Nehemiah to put away their foreign wives lest history repeat itself (Neh. 13:26).

Women and marriage are used in the Bible as images for spiritual things. Paul writes that marital love mirrors the church’s relationship with Christ (Eph. 5:32–33). A man should love his wife as Christ loved the church. Revelation portrays the climax to human history in the figure of two women: the bride of Christ, adorned with righteous deeds for her husband (19:7–8), and the whor* Babylon, drunk on the blood of the saints (17:5–6). The consummation of the age is when one is judged and the other enters her eternal marital bliss.

The book of Proverbs also separates humankind into two groups, symbolized by two women. Along the path of life, the youth hears the voices of Woman Folly (9:13–18) and of Woman Wisdom (1:20–33) calling out to him. Folly is incarnated in the flesh-and-blood temptation of the immoral woman (7:6–27), whereas Woman Wisdom has her counterpart at the end of the book in the detailed description of the woman of virtue (31:10–31). There, the woman who fears God is set as a prize far above earthly wealth—the highest blessing of the wise.

Paul uses two women from sacred history to help explain his gospel of law versus grace. Hagar the slave woman represents the Mosaic covenant given at Sinai, and the earthly Jerusalem—that is, a mind-set of slavery that futilely attempts to earn God’s favor by works of the law. Sarah was the free woman, and her son was the promised son, who represents the heavenly Jerusalem, the new covenant, and freedom from the requirements of the law (Gal. 4:21–31). Again, two women symbolize two paths and two peoples—one being slaves, the other being God’s free people.

Worship of God is a critical dimension of both Testaments. One might argue that it is the very goal for which Israel and the church were formed.

The living God is the sole object of worship. He delights in the satisfying joy that his children find in him. The nature of worship is not about servant entertainment or passive observation; it is an active acknowledgment of God’s worth in a variety of humble ways.

A genuine selfless focus on the person and work of God brings about a humble response that affects one’s posture, generates works of service, and stirs up a healthy attitude of fear and respect. Knowledge of God is the foundational element in worship. God is worshiped for who he is and what he does. He is the Eternal One (Ps. 90:1; 1Tim. 1:17), unique in every way (Isa. 44:8); he is God alone (Deut. 6:4). He is distinguished by his self-existence, the self-reliant quality of his life (Exod. 3:14; Deut. 32:30). The psalmist calls God’s people to shout joyfully to their good, loving, eternal, and faithful Creator (Ps. 100).

God is worshiped as the Creator of all life. This magnificent creative work of God, declared in the opening of Genesis, is a critical focus in worship (Ps. 95:6; Rom. 1:25; Rev. 4:11). Along with this is the companion declaration that God is the redeemer. The redemptive work of God is celebrated in the Song of Moses (Exod. 15:118) and in the Song of the Redeemed (Rev. 14:3).

Worship is also associated with the royal aspects of God’s character. It was the desire of the magi to find Jesus the king and worship him (Matt. 2:1–2). The final scenes of history will be characterized by humble submission to and worship of the King of kings (1Tim. 6:15; Rev. 17:14; 19:16; cf. Rev. 15:3–4). The psalms often draw the reader’s attention to God’s royal character as a basis for worship (Pss. 45:11; 98:6).

Finally, God is worshiped as the Lord of his covenant relationship with the nation of Israel. This covenant theme and metaphor summarize the varied aspects of God’s character and his relationship with Israel. The God who brought Israel into a covenant relationship is to be sincerely and exclusively worshiped (2Kings 17:35, 38; cf. Deut. 31:20). These confessional statements about the character of God are a glorious weight that moves believers to prostrate themselves, to have an attitude of awe and respect, and to obediently serve.

Athens is located five miles northeast of the port of Piraeuson the Saronic Gulf. It was the chief city of the ancient Greekprovince of Attica (2 Macc. 9:15; Acts 17:15–18; 18:1;1 Thess. 3:1) and is the capital of modern Greece. The name“Athens” probably derived from the name of the goddessAthena.

Asearly as the fourth millennium BC there was already evidence ofsettlement, and during the Mycenaean period (c. 1300–1225 BC)Athens was a fortified city. However, it was in the fifth century BC,under the reign of Pericles (495–429 BC), that the glory ofAthens reached its zenith. During this time the Parthenon was built,and arts, philosophy, drama, and Greek culture were developed totheir highest point. The Romans conquered the city in 146 BC, but itcontinued to be an intellectual and cultural center. With the fall ofthe Roman Empire, Athens’s importance declined as well.

Paulvisited this city on his second missionary journey. His debate withthe Greek philosophers in the agora (the marketplace) brought himbefore the city council of Athens, the Areopagus, where religiousmatters were settled (Acts 17:16–34). Traditionally, the siteis identified as Mars Hill, located on the west side of theAcropolis. Interestingly, Paul founded no church in Athens.

In Gen. 3 the serpent entices humankind to sin. Not untilRev. 12:9 are we told explicitly that the serpent is Satan. InEnglish, “Satan” is a name, whereas in the Bible thisentity does not have a name. Rather, he is identified through asystem of descriptive name-calling labels. In Hebrew, satan means“opponent”—in war, an enemy; in court, an accuser.The verb satan means “to be an adversary, to oppose”someone or something. Most commonly, satan refers to human enemies,and so 1Chron. 21:1 simply refers to “an enemy”(not “Satan,” as the NIV reads) who “rose upagainst Israel” (cf. 1Kings 11:14). It is only as “thesatan” (Job 1–2; Zech. 3:1–2; NIV: “Satan”)that we meet the one we know from the NT as “the devil.”

Thewidely held myth of Satan having been an angel who rebelled is notfound in the Bible. Origen (AD 185–254) was the first toallegorize Isa. 14:3–23 and Ezek. 28:1–10 in this way,and Jerome (AD 345–420) the first to translate “theMorning Star” as the name “Lucifer” (cf. Isa.14:12; Rev. 22:16). The Bible tells us nothing of Satan’sorigins.

Inthe OT, “evil spirit” may be a heavenly being sent by God(1Sam. 16:14–23; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 1Kings 22:22–23).The OT engages in extensive rebuke of the superstitions of thesurrounding nations that included belief in demons (Deut. 32:17; Ps.106:37; perhaps Isa. 13:21; cf. Rev. 18:2).

Around200 BC, works falsely attributed to Enoch began to appear, presentingevil and mortality as essential aspects of all physical creatures.Understanding “sons of God” (Gen. 6:1–4) as angels,these books tell of angels marrying women and producing murderousgiants. In response, God imprisoned the fallen angels, caused thegiants to slaughter one another, and cleansed the earth with theflood. The spirits of the giants then reappear as demons havingcontrol of the Gentile nations, appearing to them as gods, worshipedas idols. The book Jubilees (c. 160 BC) introduced a leader of thesedemons and labeled him “Mastema” (“hatred,enmity”).

Pickingup on these ideas, the Qumran literature speaks of many satans andexpands the number of abusive labels used to refer to the ruler ofthe demons—for example, “Belial” (“worthlessone”). In the same way, the LXX uses “slanderer”(diabolos) as a translation of satan. The word satan also was takenover into LXX Greek as a loanword to mean “enemy” or“adversary” (1Kings 11:14). Both satanas anddiabolos are used in the NT.

Jesus’encounter with the devil in the wilderness recalls Adam and Eve’sencounter with the serpent in Eden. The setting, significantly, isnow a wasteland. The second man to walk the earth with no sin claimsthe right to take back the dominion that Adam passed to the serpent.Jesus can have the whole world (without the cross) if only he willsubmit to the devil’s rule (Luke 4:5–7). Jesus rejectsthe offer. Later, he sees Satan’s fall from heaven to earth(Luke 10:18; cf. Rev. 12:5–12). Whereas once the devil hadaccess to God’s courtroom, now his case is lost. His onlyrecourse is murderous persecution. Between the ascension of the Sonof Man (Acts 1:9) and the final judgment, this is understood to bethe experience of Christ’s people (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:17; cf.1Pet.5:8).

Whereasthe OT provides sparse information about Satan and his angels/demons,the NT opens with an intensity of activity. Demons are also called“evil spirits,” and they are associated with physicalillness, madness, and fortune-telling. In Acts 17:22 Paul describeshis pagan Athenian listeners as “demon-fearers” (NIV:“religious”). Jesus’ miracles demonstrate hislordship over Satan’s regime as the demons flee in terrorbefore him (Mark 1:23–26; 5:1–15). According to Paul,Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:19), andJohn urges believers to “test the spirits to see whether theyare from God” (1John 4:1), assuring them that they neednot fear Satan or his forces, “because the one who is in you isgreater than the one who is in the world” (1John 4:4). Onjudgment day Satan will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14–15)along with all of God’s enemies.

In Gen. 3 the serpent entices humankind to sin. Not untilRev. 12:9 are we told explicitly that the serpent is Satan. InEnglish, “Satan” is a name, whereas in the Bible thisentity does not have a name. Rather, he is identified through asystem of descriptive name-calling labels. In Hebrew, satan means“opponent”—in war, an enemy; in court, an accuser.The verb satan means “to be an adversary, to oppose”someone or something. Most commonly, satan refers to human enemies,and so 1Chron. 21:1 simply refers to “an enemy”(not “Satan,” as the NIV reads) who “rose upagainst Israel” (cf. 1Kings 11:14). It is only as “thesatan” (Job 1–2; Zech. 3:1–2; NIV: “Satan”)that we meet the one we know from the NT as “the devil.”

Thewidely held myth of Satan having been an angel who rebelled is notfound in the Bible. Origen (AD 185–254) was the first toallegorize Isa. 14:3–23 and Ezek. 28:1–10 in this way,and Jerome (AD 345–420) the first to translate “theMorning Star” as the name “Lucifer” (cf. Isa.14:12; Rev. 22:16). The Bible tells us nothing of Satan’sorigins.

Inthe OT, “evil spirit” may be a heavenly being sent by God(1Sam. 16:14–23; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 1Kings 22:22–23).The OT engages in extensive rebuke of the superstitions of thesurrounding nations that included belief in demons (Deut. 32:17; Ps.106:37; perhaps Isa. 13:21; cf. Rev. 18:2).

Around200 BC, works falsely attributed to Enoch began to appear, presentingevil and mortality as essential aspects of all physical creatures.Understanding “sons of God” (Gen. 6:1–4) as angels,these books tell of angels marrying women and producing murderousgiants. In response, God imprisoned the fallen angels, caused thegiants to slaughter one another, and cleansed the earth with theflood. The spirits of the giants then reappear as demons havingcontrol of the Gentile nations, appearing to them as gods, worshipedas idols. The book Jubilees (c. 160 BC) introduced a leader of thesedemons and labeled him “Mastema” (“hatred,enmity”).

Pickingup on these ideas, the Qumran literature speaks of many satans andexpands the number of abusive labels used to refer to the ruler ofthe demons—for example, “Belial” (“worthlessone”). In the same way, the LXX uses “slanderer”(diabolos) as a translation of satan. The word satan also was takenover into LXX Greek as a loanword to mean “enemy” or“adversary” (1Kings 11:14). Both satanas anddiabolos are used in the NT.

Jesus’encounter with the devil in the wilderness recalls Adam and Eve’sencounter with the serpent in Eden. The setting, significantly, isnow a wasteland. The second man to walk the earth with no sin claimsthe right to take back the dominion that Adam passed to the serpent.Jesus can have the whole world (without the cross) if only he willsubmit to the devil’s rule (Luke 4:5–7). Jesus rejectsthe offer. Later, he sees Satan’s fall from heaven to earth(Luke 10:18; cf. Rev. 12:5–12). Whereas once the devil hadaccess to God’s courtroom, now his case is lost. His onlyrecourse is murderous persecution. Between the ascension of the Sonof Man (Acts 1:9) and the final judgment, this is understood to bethe experience of Christ’s people (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:17; cf.1Pet.5:8).

Whereasthe OT provides sparse information about Satan and his angels/demons,the NT opens with an intensity of activity. Demons are also called“evil spirits,” and they are associated with physicalillness, madness, and fortune-telling. In Acts 17:22 Paul describeshis pagan Athenian listeners as “demon-fearers” (NIV:“religious”). Jesus’ miracles demonstrate hislordship over Satan’s regime as the demons flee in terrorbefore him (Mark 1:23–26; 5:1–15). According to Paul,Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:19), andJohn urges believers to “test the spirits to see whether theyare from God” (1John 4:1), assuring them that they neednot fear Satan or his forces, “because the one who is in you isgreater than the one who is in the world” (1John 4:4). Onjudgment day Satan will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14–15)along with all of God’s enemies.

In Christian theology, doctrine is the synthesis of Christianteaching, especially as set forth in its various related themes. Theearly disciples frequently referred to the teachings of Christ and tothe teachings of the apostles and the church. These were memorized,compiled, and passed through the generations in the church (2Tim.2). As early as Acts 2 reference is made to the teaching of theapostles and the devotion of the church to it. By the second century,a body of teaching had crystallized into a doctrinal treatise calledthe Didache. Doctrinal teaching as a set structure is especiallyemphasized in the Pastoral Epistles, such that it has caused some toconjecture a later date and early catholic outlook for those letters.Regardless of the validity of this postulation, these lettersevidence an early doctrinal and confessional outlook within thechurch.

Thiswas, of course, nothing new, since the Israelites had a body ofteaching that they had passed on through the generations: the law,both written and oral. For the Israelites, the law, both written andoral, was memorized, taught, interpreted, and heeded through all ofsociety. The church simply followed suit in forming its teachings.

Inthe NT two words, didachē and didaskalia, are commonlytranslated “teaching” and in some cases are rendered bysome translations as “doctrine.” The term didachēappears more widely throughout the NT, whereas didaskalia is usedlargely in the Pastoral Epistles (referring to both the content andthe act of teaching). The term didaskalia is sometimes used with theterm logos when the latter indicates sound speech (Titus 2:7–8)and words of the faith (1Tim. 4:6). In fact, in one verse inthe Pastoral Epistles all three terms are used together as “thefaithful word,” “in accordance with the teaching,”and “in sound doctrine” (Titus 1:9 NASB).

Thefirst body of teaching for the church is the teaching of Jesus (Matt.7:28), such as that found in the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesusnotes the ethic of his messiahship and his followers. The teaching ofJesus, which is authoritative (Mark 1:22, 27), and confrontational(Mark 12:38), is an astonishing answer to the religious leaders(Matt. 22:33; cf. Luke 4:32). Jesus notes the vanity of teaching thehuman commandments as if they were the doctrine from God (Mark 7:7).When questioned, Jesus sets forth his teaching as from the Father(John 7:16–17). The chief priests seek to destroy both Jesusand his followers because of the teaching (Mark 11:18; John 18:19;Acts 5:28). On Cyprus the proconsul is astonished at the doctrine ofChrist taught by Paul (Acts 13:12), and in Athens Paul’steaching about Christ is new and unusual to those of the Areopagus(Acts 17:18–20).

ForPaul, doctrine is fundamental for believers. He notes the commitmentto the teaching of Christ after conversion as normative for the Romanbelievers (Rom. 6:17), and he instructs further that they keep an eyeout for those who cause division and hinder adherence to sounddoctrine (Rom. 16:17). In fact, God has given gifted people to thebody for building up the saints to avoid such doctrinal problems(Eph. 4:12–14). Further, a straightforward expression ofteaching has priority over gifts such as tongues (1Cor. 14:6,26). Paul also points out that the Colossian heresy is the doctrineof human beings rather than that of God (Col. 2:22).

Inthe Pastoral Epistles the injunction from Paul to Timothy is that hebe nourished on and persevere in sound doctrine (1Tim. 4:6, 16)and set forth doctrine in preaching (1Tim. 4:13 [along withpublic reading of Scripture]; 2Tim. 4:2). All this is certainlyfitting for Timothy, as he has followed the teaching of Paul (2Tim.3:10). The injunction to Titus is to hold to the word and to thesound doctrine and teaching as he corrects the church (Titus 1:9).Those who are servants are encouraged to show honesty and good faith,so that the teaching of the Savior will be respected (Titus 2:10). Itis clear for Paul that Scripture is the basis of doctrine (2Tim.3:16). This doctrine (teaching) will be tolerated by few; as a whole,sound doctrine will be rejected in favor of a message more palatableto human interest (2Tim. 4:3). The task of the servant of Godis to stand against heterodox teaching (1Tim. 1:3; 6:3).Heterodoxy leads to heteropraxy (1Tim. 1:10). Paul notes thedoctrine of demons, false teaching that is ultimately based insatanic teaching (1Tim. 4:1).

Theinjunction of the writer to the Hebrews is that they are not tosubmit to strange teachings, which deny grace (13:9). This accordswith the book’s argument as a whole. For John, staying in thedoctrine of Christ is salvific, but going outside it is not (2John9). John’s readers are not to receive those who pervert thedoctrine of Christ (2John 10).

Inthe book of Revelation, Jesus warns the church at Pergamum about thefalse teaching of Balaam (2:14) and that of the Nicolaitans (2:15).The church at Thyatira is likewise warned to shun the teachings ofthe false prophetess known as “Jezebel” (2:20,24).

A school of thought named for the late fourth-century BCphilosopher Epicurus. Core values of Epicureanism include atomism,pleasure, friendship, and retirement from public life.

Atomismaffirms that all matter is composed of indivisible “atoms,”which are in constant motion. The random collisions of atoms produceall natural events, and the ability of atoms to “swerve”accounts for human free will. Although sometimes accused of atheism,Epicurean thought expressed belief in gods who existed materially butlived apart from and did not intervene in human affairs.

Epicurusidentified the sensation of pleasure, defined as the absence ofdisturbance and fear, as the greatest good. He renounced the sorts ofexcesses now associated with the contemporary word “Epicurean”in favor of moderation coupled with wisdom and justice. The simple,quiet life among friends such as those who dwelled at the Garden inAthens was deemed most likely to produce a life of pleasure. Thestress of civil involvement was to be avoided.

Acts17:18 mentions the presence of Epicurean philosophers among Paul’saudience in the Athens Areopagus; although not explicitly identified,they are likely the ones who sneered at Paul’s preaching ofresurrection (17:32). Paul’s education may have acquainted himwith Epicurean philosophy, and his exhortations to quiet, responsibleliving among believers (1Thess. 4:9–12) may exhibitvalues similar to those in Epicurean thought. Likewise, theskepticism expressed in 2Pet. 3:4 may reflect an Epicureanargument.

Scopeand Uses of the Word “Hope”

Attimes simply indicating a wish (2Cor. 11:1), in the Bible theword “hope” most often designates a disposition of soul,the grounds for one’s hope, or the outcome for which one hopes.

Thosewhom God has helped and delivered expect to see God’s poweragain when future needs arise, knowing that in God there are reasonsfor hope. Mere optimism assumes that bad circ*mstances will improvewith the passing of time. In contrast, hope assumes that God isfaithful and is convinced that he is able to bring about his goodpurpose (Isa. 44:1–8). So at its core, biblical hope is hope inGod, rooted in God’s covenant faithfulness (Ps. 62:5–8;Jer. 14:8; 17:13; Rom. 4:18; 5:1–5). Hope trusts God in thepresent and lives even now on the strength of God’s futureaccomplishments (Gal. 5:5; Heb. 11:1).

Bothof the main OT words for “hope” (Heb. roots qwh and ykhl)are at times translated “wait.” By definition, hope meansthat God’s promised outcome has not arrived, and that some timewill pass before it does. But that time is filled with a sense ofwaiting on God, often with a deep ache of longing for God to act (seePss. 25:16–21; 39:4–7; Isa. 40:28–31; Lam.3:19–24).

Theinner disposition of hope may be seriously threatened by injusticeand other devastating life experiences, as reflected in Job 6:8–13;14:19; 19:10. The refrain of Pss. 42:5–6, 11; 43:5 is apsalmist’s self-exhortation to hope amid oppressive anddepressing circ*mstances: “Why, my soul, are you downcast? Whyso disturbed within me? Put your hope in God, for I will yet praisehim, my Savior and my God.” Words for “hope”function similarly in other psalms of lament (Pss. 9:18; 31:24; 71:5,14; cf. Mic. 7:7).

TheOT usually locates individual hope within the horizon and limits ofthis world. One hopes for outcomes that may be realized in one’sown lifetime; indeed, when life ends, hope ends (Prov. 11:7; 24:20;Eccles. 9:4; Isa. 38:18). Proverbs that mention hope regardingsomeone’s character development show an underlying concern thatGod’s purposes be vindicated in one’s life (e.g., Prov.19:18; 26:12). When used in conjunction with Israel as a whole, hopelooks to a more distant future and coming generations.

Inthe NT, hope is closely associated with Christ and his saving work.Christians now live by hope in Christ (Eph. 1:12; 1Pet. 1:3;3:15); indeed, he is “Christ Jesus our hope” (1Tim.1:1), and his future appearing is “the blessed hope”(Titus 2:13). Thus, hope refers to eschatological glory (2Cor.3:11–12; Eph. 1:18). It is “the hope of the resurrection”(Acts 23:6; cf. 24:15; 26:6–9), our transformation intoChrist’s likeness (1John 3:1–3). That expectationstimulates various hopes for God’s plans to be realized inone’s own or others’ lives (1Cor. 9:10, 13; Phil.2:19, 23; 2Tim. 2:25; 2John 12). So hope is namedrepeatedly as an essential Christian attribute (Rom. 12:12; 15:4, 13;1Cor. 13:13).

Hopeas a Biblical Theme

Withthe God of hope as its covenant Lord, hope is a defining reality forIsrael and a persistent theme in the historical books (e.g., 2Sam.23:1–7; 2Kings 25:27–30). Psalmists find hopeeither in continuity with present structures (Ps. 37) or in drasticchange (Pss. 33; 82), such as personal or corporate restoration.

Judgmentdominates the message of the preexilic prophets, although expressionsof hope are also found. But Judah’s downfall in 587/586 BCmarks a turning point in prophetic hope. While preexilic prophecybases its indictment, appeal, and warning in the exodus and thecovenant, Jeremiah and Ezekiel tend to redirect hope and expectationto a new work of salvation that God will accomplish through and afterthe judgment of exile (e.g., Jer. 31:31–34; Ezek. 11:16–21;cf. Isa. 43:18–19). In the wake of Judah’s destruction,these prophets grasp a remarkable new vision of grace and promise.Restoration will be personal as well as national; forgiveness of sinwill enable obedience to God’s law, now to be found written ontheir hearts.

Duringthe exile, collection of Israel’s sacred texts enabled theshattered community to sustain identity and hope. Postexilic prophecyis often “text prophecy” that arises from reflection uponand reapplication of written prophecies, psalms, and other scripturaltexts. For example, the book of Zechariah (especially chaps. 9–14)alludes to many earlier writings and also moves toward apocalypticl*terature, contributing dramatic new imagery of God’s conquestof evil to establish his cosmic reign and fulfill his covenant.Messianic hopes rose throughout this period, fueled by earlierprophecies (e.g., Isa. 9; 11; 65:17; Jer. 23:5; Mic. 5:2).

Ifthe OT gives occasional hints of an afterlife, this hope becomesmanifest in the NT (2Tim. 1:10). Jesus promises the thief onthe cross fellowship after death (Luke 23:43). For Paul, “todepart and be with Christ” is such a vivid hope that “todie is gain” (Phil. 1:21–24). Such texts imply that deathushers the believer into Christ’s presence. Yet thisintermediate state is not the whole picture. We are saved in hope ofthe redemption of our bodies (Rom. 8:23–25)—ourresurrection from the dead and entry into a new glorified, bodilyexistence (1Cor. 15; Phil. 3:20–21).

Christis judge as well as savior (Matt. 16:27; 25:31–46; Acts 17:31;Rom. 2:16), and the NT anticipates final judgment of all persons andpowers arrayed against God, including sin and death (1Cor.15:24–26; 2Thess. 1:5–10). Christian hope involvesnothing less than the return and full revelation of Jesus Christ, theresurrection of the dead, and the renewal of all creation (1Thess.4:13–18; Rev. 21–22)—the complete vindication ofGod’s rule, secured already in Christ. Then God’sredeemed people will see his face and live in his presence forever(Matt. 5:8; Jude 24; Rev. 22:4). A vision of this future enables usto press on with hope, stretching toward what is to come (Phil.3:13–14).

The public space in a town set up for commerce and publicgatherings; also, a region renowned for its trade. AncientPalestinian towns conducted business at the city gate, including themarshaling of troops (2Chron. 32:6) and holding of religiousassemblies (Neh. 8:1). The Phoenician seaport of Tyre was labeled the“marketplace of the nations” (Isa. 23:3), where numerousgoods, such as metalwork, ivory, fine fabrics, spices, and livestock,were exchanged with neighboring nations (Ezek. 27:12–23).

ByNT times, Herod the Great had rebuilt many Palestinian cities with acentral Greek-style marketplace, or agora, where children played(Matt. 11:16; Luke 7:32), day laborers gathered (Matt. 20:3), andreligious leaders networked (Matt. 23:7; Mark 7:4; 12:38; Luke 11:43;20:46). In the smaller Galilean villages, Jesus healed sick people inthe marketplaces (Mark 6:56). Paul suffered hostile magistrates andmobs in the Greek marketplaces of Philippi and Thessalonica (Acts16:19; 17:5), while in Athens the marketplace was his venue forpreaching to the public and curious philosophers (Acts 17:17–18).Jesus berated the sellers in the Jerusalem temple courts forimitating a marketplace (John 2:16), and Paul assured the Corinthiansthat they may eat meat of unknown provenance sold in the marketplace(1Cor. 10:25).

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

Origins

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

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

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

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

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

First-CenturySynagogues

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

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

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

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

TheSynagogue in the Bible

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

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

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

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

In classical Greek, “world” (kosmos)communicated the idea that the external universe is a well-orderedsystem. In early Greek usage, the term was used with reference tospecific types of social orderings, such as the seating order ofrowers (Homer, Od. 13.77), the order of soldiers (Homer, Il. 12.225),and well-ordered political states such as Sparta (Herodotus, Hist.1.65).

CreatedWorld

Inthe OT, the notion of the created “world” departed fromthe Greek understanding specifically in that creation is never seenas an independent entity controlled by an impersonal, all-embracingorder. Rather, the universe, usually described with the phrase “theheavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1; 2:1, 4; Ps. 113:6; Jer.10:11) or at times the “all” or “all things”(Ps. 103:19; Jer. 10:16), is always understood in its relationship toits creator: “He who created the heavens, he is God; he whofashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it tobe empty, but formed it to be inhabited—he says: ‘I amthe Lord, and there is no other’ ” (Isa. 45:18).Here, the “world” (“earth”) refers to thematerial elements that make up the planet (see also Jer. 32:17; Zech.12:1) and the sum total of the entire universe (cf. Acts 17:24). Evenin the account of creation in Gen. 1:1–2:4, where many of theelements of the physical world are mentioned (waters, firmament,stars, etc.), the primary intent of the account is to convey that Godis Lord over everything because he is the Creator. Often thesecreated elements that make up the world are praised not for their owninherent beauty, but as a testimony to the majesty, supremacy, andomnipotence of the Creator (Pss. 8; 19:1–6; 33:6–9). InPs. 148:3–6 the elements within the natural order (kosmos) areinstructed to praise God: “Praise him, sun and moon; praisehim, all you shining stars. Praise him, you highest heavens and youwaters above the skies. Let them praise the name of the Lord, for athis command they were created, and he established them for ever andever—he issued a decree that will never pass away.”

Thoughnot providing a comprehensive description, the OT does at times referto how the world is constructed as a whole. The “vault”(Gen. 1:6–20 [RSV: “firmament”]) of heavenseparates the waters above from the waters below (which arerestrained by God’s sovereign care [Gen. 1:7; 7:11; 49:25]),and this area or chamber rests on “pillars” (Job 26:11).At times the earth is described as a disc with the sanctuary as itscenter point (Judg. 9:37; Ezek. 38:12), which rests on pillars (Job9:6). There is an underworld, from which there is no return (Job10:21); however, the OT does not engage in the kind of speculationregarding the underworld as is evident in the Greco-Roman tradition.

Earthand Its Inhabitants

Theterm “world” conveys other nuances in the Bible. It oftenrefers to the inhabitants of the earth or the place of human life:“He rules the world in righteousness and judges the peopleswith equity” (Ps. 9:8 [cf. Pss. 96:13; 98:9]); or, “Comenear, you nations, and listen; pay attention, you peoples! Let theearth hear, and all that is in it, the world, and all that comes outof it!” (Isa. 34:1). Also, in the Gospels “world”is used in this way: “What good is it for someone to gain thewhole world, yet forfeit their soul?” (Mark 8:36). Matthew 4:8refers to all the kingdoms of the world. Also the expressions “cominginto the world” (John 1:9; 3:19), “in the world”(John 1:10; 2Cor. 1:12), and “leave this world”(1Cor. 5:10) can be understood as referring to the sphere ofhuman life.

UngodlyCulture and Worldview

“World”can also refer to something more than the material world or humanityin general; it can refer to the entire cultural value system or worldorder that is hostile toward God. The “world” is a commonbiblical way of referring to the ungodly worldview and lifestyle thatcharacterize human life in its rebellion against the Creator. Thecourse of the world is profoundly affected by fallen humans, throughwhom death came into the world and rules over it (Rom. 5:12).Therefore, Paul can claim that “the whole world” hasbecome guilty before God (Rom. 3:19), and even the created world isaffected by such rebellion (8:20–22). Paul especially links“this world” with “this age” (1Cor.3:19; 5:10; Eph. 2:2 NET), which God has judged (Rom. 3:6). Johndeclares that Satan is the “prince of this world” (John12:31; 14:30; 16:11). Paul refers to Satan as the “god of thisworld” (2Cor. 4:4 ESV, NRSV, NASB), who is able to blindindividuals to the truth and who animates human rebellion (Eph. 2:2).In this sense, God and the world are strictly separate: “Don’tyou know that friendship with the world means enmity against God?Therefore, anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes anenemy of God” (James 4:4). Because of this call to an exclusiverelationship with God, believers are mandated to resist and evenconfront the world. Followers of Christ must not be taken captive byphilosophy or the “elemental spiritual forces of this world”(Col. 2:8, 20), since, as Paul says, “the worldhas beencrucified to me, and I to the world” (Gal. 6:14).

Butit is the world that designates the location and object of God’ssaving activity. Indeed, God sent his Son into this world in order toreconcile it to himself (2Cor. 5:19). Jesus, the sacrificialLamb of God, “takes away the sins of the world” (John1:29). Out of love for this world, God sent his Son (John 3:1), notto judge it but to save it: “God did not send his Son into theworld to condemn the world, but to save the world through him”(John 3:17).

Althoughbelievers live in the world (1Cor. 5:10; Phil. 2:15) and musthave dealings with the world, ultimately they are not of the world(John 17:14). Remaining in Christ, believers are able to demonstratein the world the belief and practice of the new commandment to love(John 13:34; 15:9). Therefore, Christians must maintain a criticaldistance from the world’s system: “Do not love the worldor anythingin the world. If anyone loves the world, love forthe Father is not in them. For everything inthe world—thelust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comesnot from the Father but from the world” (1John 2:15–16[cf. James 1:27; 4:4]). Believers are to avoid the seductive power ofthe world and not abandon themselves to it; they are to follow theirLord in proclaiming God’s project of reconciling the world tohimself through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (2Cor.5:18).

This book, commonly referred to simply as Acts, is the sequelto the Gospel of Luke and records the exciting history of the firstthree decades of the early church. The book begins with the ascensionof Jesus, followed by his sending of the Holy Spirit, and ends withthe gospel message being proclaimed by Paul as a prisoner in thecapital city of the Roman Empire. In the pages in between, the readeris introduced to the key people, places, and events of this strategicand crucial time of Christian history. The book of Acts providesinsightful and inspiring reading. It forms the backdrop forunderstanding much of the NT (especially Paul’s letters), andit provides important models for the contemporary church.

HistoricalBackground

Inorder to understand the book of Acts, one must become familiar withits historical background. This includes understanding the book’sauthorship, recipients, and setting. In terms of authorship, the booktechnically is anonymous; however, there are good reasons for holdingto church history’s traditional view that its author is Luke.This tradition dates back to the early second century and issupported by internal evidence. This evidence further reveals thatLuke was a physician and close companion of the apostle Paul (infact, Luke was actually with Paul for some of the events that herecords in Acts; see the “we” passages, found in16:10–17; 20:5–15; 21:8–18; 27:1–28:16). Lukewas well educated, well traveled, and familiar with both the Jewishand the Greco-​Roman worlds. He was a Hellenistic God-fearerand a Christian. He was also familiar with the Jewish Scriptures,Greco-Roman rhetoric, and ancient histories, thus making him theperfect candidate to write an accurate history of early Christianity.

Thespecific recipient of Acts is Theophilus (1:1). Theophilus could becharacterized as a relatively new believer of high social status, aperson educated in Greco-Roman rhetoric and history, and one whopossessed the financial means to promote and publish Luke’swork (both the Gospel of Luke and Acts). It is probable that in someway Theophilus served as a bridge to a wider readership. It seemslikely that Theophilus was Luke’s ideal reader (i.e., aninfluential Greco-Roman of high social standing).

Thespecific setting of Acts is difficult to determine; however, it seemsclear that the book was written during a time of crisis for thechurch. This crisis involved persecution and slander of Christians byboth Jews and Gentiles. Both groups were trying to persuade publicopinion against Christianity, including the opinion of Greco-Romanauthorities. The persecution and slander were taking their toll onthe church, and many Christians were demoralized and struggling toremain faithful as witnesses of Jesus. Christianity needed someone towrite a response to this crisis. This response had to do threethings: (1) accurately relate the history of the church toinfluential Greco-Romans of high social status; (2) show thatChristianity was an ancient religion (ancient religions wereconsidered to be legitimate by Roman authorities) and an asset to theRoman Empire, not a threat; (3) legitimize Christianity overagainst Judaism. The author of this reponse had to be someone who wasrespected both inside and outside of the Christian faith community,who knew the church’s history well, and who was educated inGreco-Roman rhetoric. What better authorial candidate than Luke?Finally, the church also needed a person of high social status andfinancial means to help publish and promote the work; thus,Theophilus was chosen.

Purpose

Thebook of Acts was written for a variety of purposes. These includeapologetics, legitimization, discipleship, and witness to salvation.The apologetic purpose of Acts focuses on how Christianity could berecognized as an ancient, honorable, and officially protectedreligion in the Roman Empire. Although Judaism had the status ofreligio licita (legal religion) with Roman authorities for most ofthe first century, Christianity encountered serious problems in thisrespect. Acts itself reveals a substantial amount of such evidence inthis regard. For example, 16:20–21 shows that at Philippi, Pauland Silas were charged with disturbing the peace by advocatingunlawful customs. In Thessalonica, the missionaries were accused ofdefying Caesar by promoting another king named “Jesus”(17:7). At Corinth, the charge was that of persuading the peopletoward unlawful worship (18:13). Later in Acts, Paul was charged bythe Jewish priestly leaders with being part of an unacceptable sectthat was stirring up riots in Jewish communities (24:5–9). In28:22, when Paul addressed the Roman Jews, they responded by sayingthat “people everywhere are talking against this sect[Christianity].” Such accusations, accompanied by the fact thatChristianity’s founder had been crucified by Roman authorities,made it difficult for the Christians to gain credibility.Christianity’s precarious position with Rome was furtherexacerbated by a strong Jewish campaign to separate from Christiansand to label them as sectarian. This strategy certainly intended forChristianity to be viewed by Rome as religio illicita (illegal orforbidden religion). Thus, Luke writes Acts to defend Christianity byshowing that it is not a replacement of Judaism, but rather itslegitimate continuation. Therefore, it should be accepted by theRoman authorities as a legal religion just as Judaism was accepted.

Luke’sapologetic message also appears to be directed inwardly, to astruggling church. This inward focus leads to Luke’s next mainpurpose: legitimization of the Christian faith for its adherents. Aspart of his defense, Luke intends to equip the church in the midst ofan identity crisis due to the constant threats of illegitimacy. Thisexplains Luke’s strategy of retelling the story of the church’sorigins so that followers of Christ would understand their trueposition from God’s perspective. Thus, Luke verifies fourthings: (1) the Jewish Scriptures prophesied a coming messiah,and Jesus matched these prophecies; (2) the resurrection wasforetold in Scripture and verified by eyewitnesses; (3) it wasGod’s plan all along for Gentiles to be included in God’sredemptive work; (4) Jews who rejected Jesus were acting in thesame way their ancestors did; therefore, believers should not besurprised by their negative reaction to Jesus. Luke uses stories suchas the one in Acts 2:41–47 to verify that salvation wasgenuinely being accomplished in the church and that Christians wereexperiencing the fulfillment of God’s ancient promises toIsrael. Luke’s writing is intended to encourage hiscontemporary church members to remain faithful in their service andwitness for the Lord. He reminds them that they are the true(legitimate) “people of God” and that God’s Spiritwill help them prevail and will give them abundant life even in themidst of hardship and persecution.

Anotherkey purpose of the book of Acts is to foster discipleship. Theprologues of both Luke’s Gospel and Acts verify that Luke iswriting to provide instruction and teaching for Theophilus (see Luke1:1–4; Acts 1:1–2). Part of this instruction reveals thatthe ascension of Jesus was not the end of his relationship with theworld, but rather a new beginning. Jesus’ departure did notmean abandonment; in fact, it meant just the opposite. Jesus verifieshis continuing presence and work in the world after his departurejust as he had lived and worked before. In other words, the sameSpirit who directed the ministry of Jesus is now going to direct theministry of Jesus’ followers. The rest of the book of Actsprovides instruction (with many personal examples) on how Christ canfulfill the ministry of believers through the power and direction ofthe Holy Spirit. Luke’s discipleship teaching includes helpingbelievers learn how to experience and follow God’s Spirit(chap. 2), to boldly witness for Christ in the midst of persecution(chaps. 3–4, 8, 14, 16–17, 19–28), to sacrificiallyshare resources with other Christians in need (chaps. 2, 4, 11), toresolve disputes within the church (chaps. 6, 15), and to take thegospel message of salvation to all people (chaps. 2, 11, 13–28).

Thebook of Acts places great emphasis on the message of salvation andthe responsibility given to believers to share this salvific messagewith all people. This salvation-witness concept is clearly one ofLuke’s key purposes for the book of Acts. The Pentecost eventof Acts 2 initiates the theme of salvation for all people and thussets the agenda for the rest of the book. In this passage, variousJews from many nations hear the good news in their own tongue, whichsuggests that this news is for peoples of all tongues and nations yetfor Jews first. The rest of Acts continues this theme of theuniversal scope of salvation. Luke makes it clear that this salvationcrosses all geographical, ethnic, and social boundaries. In Acts,Luke is bridging the gap between Jesus’ earthly ministry and alater generation of Christ followers who are to take the gospel to amuch wider geographical area with even greater ethnic diversity. Themessage of salvation should be joined with Luke’s emphasis onwitness. The centrality of the theme of witness in Acts is verifiedby Jesus’ words right before the ascension: “And you willbe my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and tothe ends of the earth” (1:8). The book of Acts tells the storyof how the early church received and obeyed the command of Jesus tobear witness of him to the ends of the earth.

LiteraryFeatures

Thesekey purposes of Acts are expounded through some distinctive literaryfeatures found in the book. One such literary feature is that thebook of Acts was written in a literary genre called “apologetichistoriography.” This genre can be defined as the story of asubgroup of people told by a member of the group who explains thegroup’s traditions and history while using Greco-Roman literaryfeatures. A good example of this literary genre is Josephus’sJewish Antiquities. Josephus tells the story of the Jews toGreco-Roman readers in hopes that they will better understand Jewishhistory and traditions and will accept the Jews in the largerGreco-Roman world. This appears to be exactly what Luke is doing inthe book of Acts for Christians. However, Luke is not giving adefense of a particular ethnic group; rather, he is defending amulticultural people who transcend ethnic and geographicalboundaries. In fact, this is a key part of Luke’s message.Throughout Acts, Luke is trying to explain why his religion is onethat crosses ethnic boundaries and is a universal religion inclusiveof all ethnicities. As Luke tells the story of Christianity, he iscareful to utilize Hellenistic literary features in order to connectwith his primary audience. Evidence of these Hellenistic literaryfeatures in the book of Acts includes a narrative style illustratingthe history through the personal experiences of key characters (Actstells the history of the early church through characters such asPeter and Paul), the frequent use of speeches, personal observationof at least part of the narrative while maintaining anonymity ofauthorship (the “we” passages of Acts), and the frequentuse of summaries to guide the narrative (Acts contains three majorsummaries [2:42–47; 4:32–37; 5:12–16] and a numberof minor summaries [6:7; 9:31; 12:24; 16:5; 19:20; 28:31]).

Outlineand Survey

Actscan be outlined according to Jesus’ final words, recorded in1:8: “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you;and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea andSamaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

I.Witnesses in Jerusalem (1:1–8:3)II. Witnesses in Judeaand Samaria (8:4–12:25)III. Witnesses to the Ends of theEarth (13:1–28:31)

I.Witnesses in Jerusalem (Acts 1:1–8:3).Immediately following his ascension, Jesus tells his followers toreturn to Jerusalem and wait for the coming of the Holy Spirit. Theypromptly obey, and after ten days of waiting, the disciples aredramatically filled with the Holy Spirit and begin to share thegospel with those around them. This event occurs at the JewishPentecost festival, which was attended by Jews and Jewish proselytesfrom throughout the Roman Empire. After the Spirit comes atPentecost, Peter boldly preaches to the crowds, and over threethousand people respond with saving faith (2:41).

Lukenext provides an exciting summary of the Spirit-led life within theearly church. This life is characterized by the early believers’participation together in the sharing of worship activities, materialpossessions, and spiritual blessings (2:42–47). This summary isfollowed by several dramatic healing miracles accomplished throughPeter and the subsequent arrest of Christian leaders by Jewishreligious authorities. Instead of squelching the Christian movement,however, these arrests only enhance the spiritual revival and itsaccompanying miracles. This revival is characterized by extremegenerosity and unity within the early church (4:32–37).

Therevival joy, however, is marred by the deceitful actions of Ananiasand Sapphira, who lie to the church and to the Holy Spirit and arejudged by God with immediate death (5:1–11). This story provesthat God will go to extreme lengths to protect the unity of hischurch. Following more persecution and miracles, the disciples chooseseven men to oversee distribution of food to Hellenistic widows whohave been neglected in daily food distributions (6:1–7). One ofthese leaders, Stephen, is arrested and brought before the Sanhedrin.Stephen testifies boldly before the Jewish leaders and is promptlyexecuted by stoning (chap. 7). This execution is endorsed by Saul, azealous Pharisee who begins to lead fierce persecution against thechurch in Jerusalem (8:1–3).

II.Witnesses in Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:4–12:25).Saul’s persecution forces many of the early church believers toleave Jerusalem. These believers scatter throughout the surroundingareas of Judea and Samaria. As they scatter, however, they continueto preach the gospel (8:4). Philip preaches in Samaria and performsmany miraculous signs, producing a spiritual revival in the region.Hearing about this, the apostles send Peter and John to Samaria tominister to the Samaritans (8:18–25), thus confirming thecross-cultural nature of the gospel (Samaritans traditionally werehated by the Jews). Next Luke tells of Philip’s evangelizing ofan Ethiopian eunuch (8:26–40).

Followingthe Ethiopian’s belief in Jesus, the narrative tells of Saul’sdramatic conversion while traveling to Damascus to persecuteChristians there (9:1–19). Saul’s dramatic turnaround ismet with suspicion by the other disciples, but eventually he isaccepted by the believers with the help of Barnabas (9:27–30).Next Peter travels to the Judean countryside and heals the paralyticAeneas and raises Dorcas from the dead (9:32–42). Thesemiracles produce an exciting spiritual revival in the region.Following this, God gives Peter a vision to go to the coastal city ofCaesarea in order to minister to Cornelius, a Roman army officer.Cornelius is a God-fearer, and through Peter’s witness heresponds to the gospel message and receives the Holy Spirit (chap.10). Peter explains his actions with Cornelius to his concernedJewish companions and verifies that God has indeed included theGentiles in his plan of salvation (11:1–18).

Thisverification is followed by the report of what is happening in thechurch at Antioch, where Jews begin to share the gospel with largergroups of Gentiles (11:19–21). This cross-cultural evangelismproduces a spiritual revival in Antioch, causing the Jerusalem churchto send Barnabas to the large Syrian city to investigate (11:22–30).Barnabas confirms that God is indeed at work in Antioch and invitesSaul to come and help him disciple the new Gentile believers(11:25–26). Next Luke reports more persecution breaking outagainst Christians in Jerusalem, resulting in the arrest of James andPeter by King Herod. James is executed, but Peter miraculouslyescapes from prison with the help of an angel (12:1–19), andthe church continues to increase, spreading throughout the RomanEmpire.

III.Witnesses to the ends of the earth (Acts 13:1–28:31).Starting with chapter 13, the narrative shifts its focus from theministry of Peter to that of Paul (formerly Saul). The church atAntioch begins to take center stage over the church at Jerusalem.This church commissions Paul and Barnabas and sends them off on theirfirst missionary journey, accompanied by Bar­na­bas’scousin John Mark. The missionaries first sail to Cyprus, where theypreach in synagogues and encounter a Jewish sorcerer, Bar-Jesus. Nextthey sail to Pamphylia, thus crossing into Asia Minor, and preach thegospel in Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe (this area wasknown as part of the region of Galatia). In these cities, Godprovides numerous miracles, and the missionaries experience a greatresponse to the gospel as well as much persecution because of thegospel. On one occasion, Paul is actually stoned and left for dead(14:19–20).

Unfazed,Paul and his team boldly continue their mission. Eventually, theyretrace their steps, strengthen the churches that they have started,and sail back to Syrian Antioch, where they give an exciting reportto the church (14:26–28). Following this report, Luke tells ofan important meeting of church leaders in Jerusalem. The subject ofthe meeting involves whether or not the new Gentile Christians shouldbe required to follow the Jewish laws and customs. After debating theissue, the leaders side with Paul, determining that the Gentilesshould not be burdened with Jewish laws and traditions, but simplymust live moral lives and not eat food that has been sacrificed toidols (chap. 15).

Followingthis meeting, Paul and Barnabas decide to make a second missionaryjourney. Unfortunately, the two missionaries get into a dispute overwhether to take John Mark with them again. The argument is such thatthe missionaries decide to separate, and Paul chooses a new partner,Silas. They travel by land back to Galatia. Barnabas takes John Markand sails to Cyprus. Paul and Silas return to Derbe and Lystra andthen make their way to Macedonia and Greece. They spend significanttime in Philippi, Thessalonica, and Corinth before returning toCaesarea and Antioch (chaps. 16–18). Following his return, Paulmakes a third missionary journey, revisiting churches in Galatia andPhrygia and staying in Ephesus for three years before visitingMacedonia and Greece for a second time.

Paulconcludes his third missionary journey with a trip to Jerusalem,where he is falsely accused of bringing a Gentile into the temple.This accusation creates a riot, and Paul is rescued by Romansoldiers, who arrest him and transfer him to a prison in Caesarea,where he spends two years awaiting trial under the rule of Felix andFestus (23:34–25:22). Paul eventually exercises his right as aRoman citizen to have his case heard by the emperor. He is sent toRome by boat and is shipwrecked on the island of Malta. Eventually hemakes his way to the capital city, where he is placed under housearrest. While in Rome, Paul maintains a rented house and is free toreceive visitors and write letters. In fact, it is thought that Paulpenned his “prison letters” during this time of housearrest (Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon). The narrativeof Acts ends with Paul ministering boldly in Rome while awaiting histrial.

Actsand the Contemporary Church

Thebook of Acts provides a model for today’s church on numeroustopics. These include understanding the role of the Holy Spirit,practicing community life within the church, dealing with hardshipand persecution, overcoming social injustices, and carrying outmissions.

Actsreveals that the key issue for Christians is learning to experienceand follow God’s Holy Spirit, who enables believers to be boldin their witness for Christ, generous in their physical and spiritualsupport of each other, and effective in their ministries. Actsconsistently reveals that one’s joy, power, and purpose comefrom the Holy Spirit. According to Acts, learning to follow anddepend upon God’s Holy Spirit is the key to having a healthychurch.

Actsalso shows that the Holy Spirit produces a unique community lifecharacterized by worship, generosity, blessing, and unity. Luke callsthis Spirit-led common life koinōnia, which is explained andillustrated in the first five chapters of Acts (see esp. 2:42–47).It should be the desire and goal of every church to re-create thiskoinōnia community first experienced by the primitive church inActs.

Inaddition to its koinōnia, the book of Acts serves as a model forthe church in overcoming persecution and hardship. The narrative ofActs consistently reveals the sovereign power of God in overcomingopposition. The early church found great joy and growth in the midstof hardship and persecution, and today’s church can do thesame.

Anotherimportant example for the church provided by Acts is in the area ofsocial justice. Luke’s primitive church consistently removedethnic prejudices, eliminated social hierarchy and status within thechurch, and elevated the role of women. Acts provides inspiration andguidance for today’s church in facing these same social issues.

Inaddition to overcoming social injustices, the church in Acts providesan excellent example of mission ministry. These believersconsistently revealed God’s heart for the nations and made it apriority to share the gospel with all people everywhere. Acts’emphasis on the universal nature of the gospel, the responsibility ofindividual Christians to witness for Christ, and the importance ofplanting new churches and discipling new believers sets a pattern fortoday’s church in the area of missions.

Theseexamples should serve to inspire and guide the contemporary church asit seeks to follow and experience the Holy Spirit, who is sopowerfully revealed in the book of Acts.

The blessings and curses of Scripture are grounded in aworldview that understands the sovereign God to be the ultimatedispenser of each. Blessings and curses are not the outcomes ofmagicians who attempt to manipulate the gods for personal gain orretribution. Rather, God is the giver of blessing and ultimately thefinal judge who determines withdrawal or ban. He is the source ofevery good gift (James 1:17) and the one who gives power and strengthto prosper (Deut. 8:17).

Someview the nature of blessing and curse as simply a gift from God,while others see it as an act in which one party transmits power forlife to another party. Perhaps the common thread between views is theidea of relationship.

Terminology.In the OT, the key Hebrew terms for blessing are the verb barak andthe noun berakah. When the context of their use identifies a personor a living creature as the object of blessing, the basic idea is toprovide someone with special power that will ultimately enhance hisor her life. The blessing theme is also illuminated by means of wordssuch as “grace,” “favor,” “loyalty,”and “happiness.”

Inthe NT, the Greek term eulogeō and its cognates are bestunderstood in terms of the impartation of favor, power, and benefits.The makarios word group describes a state or status of beingfortunate, happy, or privileged.

TheOT curse vocabulary includes the ideas of disgracing, makingcontemptible, and imprecation. The NT curse terminology comprises theideas of curse, slander, or consecrated to destruction.

OldTestament.Thesovereign God sometimes employs agents of blessing in his creation.The blessing extends to the nations through Abraham (Gen. 12:3), toJacob through Isaac (Gen. 26–27), and to the people through thepriests (Num. 6:24–26).

Thetheme of blessing/curse is used to structure Deut. 27–28 andLev. 26 (cf. Josh. 8:34) in the overall covenant format of thesebooks. Scholars have observed that the object of this format is notsymmetry or logical unity but fullness. From this perspective, theblessing/curse structure functions to enforce obedience for thepurpose of ensuring a relationship. The blessing of Deuteronomy alsoincludes the benefits of prosperity, power, and fertility. The curse,on the other hand, is the lack or withdrawal of benefits associatedwith the relationship.

Thecreation narratives are marked with the theme and terminology ofblessing (Gen. 1:22, 28; 2:3; cf. 5:2; 9:1). The objects of blessingin Gen. 1:22, 28 (cf. 5:2; 9:1) are the living creatures and humanbeings created in the image of God. As the revelation progresses, theblessing of God is particularized in the lives of Noah (Gen. 6–8),Abraham (Gen. 12–25) and his descendants, and the nation ofIsrael and its leadership (Gen. 26–50). In these contexts, theblessing is intended to engender offspring and to prosper recipientsin material and physical ways (compare a similar NT emphasis in Acts17:25; cf. Matt. 5:45; 6:25–33; Acts 14:17).

Theblessing of God is also extended to inanimate objects that enhanceand prosper one’s quality of life. The seventh day of creationis the object of blessing (Gen. 2:7; Exod. 20:11), perhaps giving ita sense of well-being and health. Objects and activities of life suchas baskets and kneading troughs (Deut. 28:5), barns (Deut. 28:8), andwork (Job 1:10; Ps. 90:17) are blessed.

Godpromises to bless those who fear him (Ps. 128:1). Blessing isdesigned for those who, out of a deep sense of awe of God’scharacter, love and trust him. The God-fearer confidently embracesGod’s promises, obediently serves, and takes seriously God’swarnings. The blessings itemized in Ps. 128 are comparable to thosedetailed in Deut. 28 relating to productivity and fruitfulness (cf.Ps. 128:2 with Deut. 28:12; Ps. 128:3 with Deut. 28:4, 11). TheDeuteronomic concept of blessing and curse is questioned whenGod-fearers undergo a period of suffering or experience God’sapparent absence (e.g., Joseph, Job; cf. Jesus).

NewTestament.Inthe NT, blessings are not exclusively spiritual. God gives both foodand joy (Acts 14:17) and provides the necessities of life (Matt.6:25–33). The NT does connect blessing with Christ, and itfocuses attention on the spiritual quality of the gift thatoriginates from Christ himself and its intended benefit for spiritualindividuals.

Regardingcurse, the NT explains that Christ bore the curse of the law to freeus from its deadening effect (Gal. 3:10–13). Revelation 22:3anticipates a time when the curse associated with sin will becompletely removed and the blessing associated with creation willprevail.

A call or calling is God’s summons to live one’s life in accordance with his purposes. At creation God instructed Adam to fill the earth and subdue it, and to have dominion over it. God created Eve to be Adam’s lifelong companion and to help him fulfill this task (Gen. 1:28). Thus, in the broader (universal) sense, the notion of calling includes the ordinances that God established at creation: work (Gen. 2:15), marriage (2:18, 24), building a family (1:28), and Sabbath rest (2:2–3).

When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became alienated from God (Gen. 3:6–19). Their fall brought the same plight of alienation from God upon all humanity. However, it did not abolish the human duty to carry out God’s original creation ordinances. Since God showers his blessings on everyone alike (common grace), all human beings possess gifts and are given opportunities to “fill” the earth and “subdue” it. Thus, everyone participates in the universal call (Acts 17:25–26). This has come to be called the “cultural mandate.”

However, God’s original intention was to have communion with human beings. This could not be realized unless he made provision for human beings to be reconciled with him. Against this backdrop, God initiated his plan to redeem people from their plight of spiritual alienation.

The general call. The promise of God to bring deliverance through a future descendant of Eve established the provision for individuals (e.g., Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah) to be “called” back into a relationship of favor with him (Gen. 3:15). The first occasion when this call is made explicit is in God’s call to Abram to leave his country and go to a land that God would show him (11:32–12:1). God promised that Abram would become the father of a nation (12:2–3). In response to God’s call and his promise, Abram believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (15:6). Abram’s call was implicitly twofold. First, it was a general call to acknowledge this God as the true God and yield to his lordship. Second, it entailed a specific call to leave his country and journey toward a new country.

Several generations later, God appointed Moses to lead these descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, where they had lived for four hundred years. God’s act of delivering them from slavery in Egypt also symbolized redemption from sin’s bondage (Exod. 20:2). God had called the people by means of a covenant to be his own special people, to serve him as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (19:5–6). This was a call to set their lives apart for God by living according to his commands. This general call was more than a verbal summons; it was also the means God used to bring his people into existence (Hos. 11:1).

The NT indicates there is a general call to all people to believe in Christ (Matt. 11:28; Acts 17:30) that becomes effective in the ones that God has already chosen (Matt. 22:14; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4–5). The latter, which theologians identify as the “effectual call,” is what Paul refers to when he says, “Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . . And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Thus, this is also a sovereign call.

Particular callings. God has endowed each individual Christian with a particular gift set and calls each one to use those gifts in a variety of ways in service to him (1 Pet. 4:10). These callings include one’s occupation, place of residence, status as married or single, involvement in public life, and service in the local church. In the OT, God gifted Bezalel and “filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills” (Exod. 35:31–32) to beautify the tabernacle. In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that God has made each of us stewards of whatever he has entrusted to us; we are to become skilled in the use of our gifts and to seek opportunities to use them in service to him (Matt. 25:14–30). Desire is an important factor in discerning one’s particular callings (Ps. 37:4). One’s particular calling is progressive, unfolding through the different seasons of one’s life (Eph. 2:10; 1 Cor. 7:20, 24). No particular calling is more “sacred” than another in God’s eyes.

A call or calling is God’s summons to live one’s life in accordance with his purposes. At creation God instructed Adam to fill the earth and subdue it, and to have dominion over it. God created Eve to be Adam’s lifelong companion and to help him fulfill this task (Gen. 1:28). Thus, in the broader (universal) sense, the notion of calling includes the ordinances that God established at creation: work (Gen. 2:15), marriage (2:18, 24), building a family (1:28), and Sabbath rest (2:2–3).

When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became alienated from God (Gen. 3:6–19). Their fall brought the same plight of alienation from God upon all humanity. However, it did not abolish the human duty to carry out God’s original creation ordinances. Since God showers his blessings on everyone alike (common grace), all human beings possess gifts and are given opportunities to “fill” the earth and “subdue” it. Thus, everyone participates in the universal call (Acts 17:25–26). This has come to be called the “cultural mandate.”

However, God’s original intention was to have communion with human beings. This could not be realized unless he made provision for human beings to be reconciled with him. Against this backdrop, God initiated his plan to redeem people from their plight of spiritual alienation.

The general call. The promise of God to bring deliverance through a future descendant of Eve established the provision for individuals (e.g., Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah) to be “called” back into a relationship of favor with him (Gen. 3:15). The first occasion when this call is made explicit is in God’s call to Abram to leave his country and go to a land that God would show him (11:32–12:1). God promised that Abram would become the father of a nation (12:2–3). In response to God’s call and his promise, Abram believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (15:6). Abram’s call was implicitly twofold. First, it was a general call to acknowledge this God as the true God and yield to his lordship. Second, it entailed a specific call to leave his country and journey toward a new country.

Several generations later, God appointed Moses to lead these descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, where they had lived for four hundred years. God’s act of delivering them from slavery in Egypt also symbolized redemption from sin’s bondage (Exod. 20:2). God had called the people by means of a covenant to be his own special people, to serve him as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (19:5–6). This was a call to set their lives apart for God by living according to his commands. This general call was more than a verbal summons; it was also the means God used to bring his people into existence (Hos. 11:1).

The NT indicates there is a general call to all people to believe in Christ (Matt. 11:28; Acts 17:30) that becomes effective in the ones that God has already chosen (Matt. 22:14; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4–5). The latter, which theologians identify as the “effectual call,” is what Paul refers to when he says, “Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . . And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Thus, this is also a sovereign call.

Particular callings. God has endowed each individual Christian with a particular gift set and calls each one to use those gifts in a variety of ways in service to him (1 Pet. 4:10). These callings include one’s occupation, place of residence, status as married or single, involvement in public life, and service in the local church. In the OT, God gifted Bezalel and “filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills” (Exod. 35:31–32) to beautify the tabernacle. In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that God has made each of us stewards of whatever he has entrusted to us; we are to become skilled in the use of our gifts and to seek opportunities to use them in service to him (Matt. 25:14–30). Desire is an important factor in discerning one’s particular callings (Ps. 37:4). One’s particular calling is progressive, unfolding through the different seasons of one’s life (Eph. 2:10; 1 Cor. 7:20, 24). No particular calling is more “sacred” than another in God’s eyes.

A call or calling is God’s summons to live one’s life in accordance with his purposes. At creation God instructed Adam to fill the earth and subdue it, and to have dominion over it. God created Eve to be Adam’s lifelong companion and to help him fulfill this task (Gen. 1:28). Thus, in the broader (universal) sense, the notion of calling includes the ordinances that God established at creation: work (Gen. 2:15), marriage (2:18, 24), building a family (1:28), and Sabbath rest (2:2–3).

When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became alienated from God (Gen. 3:6–19). Their fall brought the same plight of alienation from God upon all humanity. However, it did not abolish the human duty to carry out God’s original creation ordinances. Since God showers his blessings on everyone alike (common grace), all human beings possess gifts and are given opportunities to “fill” the earth and “subdue” it. Thus, everyone participates in the universal call (Acts 17:25–26). This has come to be called the “cultural mandate.”

However, God’s original intention was to have communion with human beings. This could not be realized unless he made provision for human beings to be reconciled with him. Against this backdrop, God initiated his plan to redeem people from their plight of spiritual alienation.

The general call. The promise of God to bring deliverance through a future descendant of Eve established the provision for individuals (e.g., Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah) to be “called” back into a relationship of favor with him (Gen. 3:15). The first occasion when this call is made explicit is in God’s call to Abram to leave his country and go to a land that God would show him (11:32–12:1). God promised that Abram would become the father of a nation (12:2–3). In response to God’s call and his promise, Abram believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (15:6). Abram’s call was implicitly twofold. First, it was a general call to acknowledge this God as the true God and yield to his lordship. Second, it entailed a specific call to leave his country and journey toward a new country.

Several generations later, God appointed Moses to lead these descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, where they had lived for four hundred years. God’s act of delivering them from slavery in Egypt also symbolized redemption from sin’s bondage (Exod. 20:2). God had called the people by means of a covenant to be his own special people, to serve him as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (19:5–6). This was a call to set their lives apart for God by living according to his commands. This general call was more than a verbal summons; it was also the means God used to bring his people into existence (Hos. 11:1).

The NT indicates there is a general call to all people to believe in Christ (Matt. 11:28; Acts 17:30) that becomes effective in the ones that God has already chosen (Matt. 22:14; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4–5). The latter, which theologians identify as the “effectual call,” is what Paul refers to when he says, “Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . . And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Thus, this is also a sovereign call.

Particular callings. God has endowed each individual Christian with a particular gift set and calls each one to use those gifts in a variety of ways in service to him (1 Pet. 4:10). These callings include one’s occupation, place of residence, status as married or single, involvement in public life, and service in the local church. In the OT, God gifted Bezalel and “filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills” (Exod. 35:31–32) to beautify the tabernacle. In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that God has made each of us stewards of whatever he has entrusted to us; we are to become skilled in the use of our gifts and to seek opportunities to use them in service to him (Matt. 25:14–30). Desire is an important factor in discerning one’s particular callings (Ps. 37:4). One’s particular calling is progressive, unfolding through the different seasons of one’s life (Eph. 2:10; 1 Cor. 7:20, 24). No particular calling is more “sacred” than another in God’s eyes.

Most families in the ancient world were agrarian or engagedin raising livestock. Families that lived in cities led preindustriallifestyles, often dwelling in cramped quarters. The majority offamilies resided in rural areas and villages.

Peoplein the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin.Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family wasthe source of people’s status in the community and provided theprimary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.

Marriagewas not an arrangement merely between two individuals; rather,marriage was between two families. Family members and kin thereforetook precedence over individuals. In the worlds of both Testaments,authority within families and communities was determined by rankamong kin. Christianity was looked upon with hostility because itoverthrew foundational values of Jewish and even Greco-Romantradition. Service rather than rank became normative in family andcommunity relationships.

PatriarchalStructures

Apatrilineal system ruled in ancient Israel. Every family and everyhousehold belonged to a lineage. These lineages made up a clan inwhich kinship and inheritance were based on the patriarchs, thefathers of the families. These clans in turn made up larger clangroups and then tribal groups. The later Hellenistic and Roman worldmaintained patriarchal and patrilineal social structures as well.

Familydiscipline was in the hands of the father, the patriarch. The honorof the father depended on his ability to keep every family memberunder his authority (1Tim. 3:4). Other male members of thefamily assisted the father in defending the honor of the family (Gen.34).

AristotelianHousehold Codes

Notonly was the biblical world patriarchal (male dominated), but alsothe later societal influence by Greek philosophers impacted thebiblical text. The ancient Greeks viewed the household as a microcosmof society. Greek philosophers offered advice regarding householdmanagement, seeking to influence society for the greater good. Thisadvice was presented in oral and written discourses known as“household codes.” Aristotle’s household codes,written in the fourth century BC, were among the most famous. Suchcodes consisted of instructions on how the paterfamilias (the malehead of the household) should manage his wife, children, and slaves.The Stoic philosopher Arius Didymus summarized Aristotle’shousehold codes for Caesar Augustus. He argued, “A man has therule of this household by nature, for the deliberative faculty in awoman is inferior, in children it does not yet exist, and in the caseof slaves, it is completely absent.”

TheAristotelian household codes appear to be the background to NT textsthat, at face value, appear to treat women as inferior to men (Eph.5:22–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1; 1Pet. 3:1–7). Allthese texts are set in a Greco-Roman matrix, and the advice given tothe congregations seems to have been of contextual missional valuefor the sake of the gospel rather than as a guide for family livingfor all times in all contexts.

Marriageand Divorce

Marriagein the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between twofamilies, arranged by the bride’s father or a malerepresentative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’sprice.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction butalso an expression of family honor. Only the rich could affordmultiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself wascelebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.

Theprimary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to producea male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. Theconcept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs,especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.

Marriageamong Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jewssought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev.18:6–17). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew.Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainlyoutside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness.Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romansdid practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinshipgroup (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategicalliances between families.

InJewish customs, marriage was preceded by a period of betrothal. Thisstate of betrothal was legally binding and left the survivor of theman’s death a widow. A betrothed couple, like Joseph and Mary(Matt. 1:18), did not live together or have sexual intercourse. Yettheir union was as binding as marriage and could be dissolved onlythrough death or divorce.

Greekand Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. InJewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorceproceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release herand repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (inparticular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Siracomments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to thefather (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery(Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictiveuse of divorce than the Old Testament (Mark 10:1–12).

Children,Parenting, and Education

Childbearingwas considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman andher entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to thisblessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, andspecifically their husbands.

Abortioncommonly took place in the Greco-Roman world. Women therefore had tobe encouraged to continue in their pregnancies (1Tim. 2:15).

Childrenwere of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. Anestimated 60percent of the children in the first-centuryMediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.

AncientNear Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting stylebased on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and eviltendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent eviltendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The mainconcern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty.Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stagechildren were taught to accept the total authority of the father. Therearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girlswere taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so thatthey could help with household tasks.

Earlyeducation took place in the home. Jewish education was centeredaround the teaching of Torah. At home it was the father’sresponsibility to teach the Torah to his children (Deut. 6:6–7),especially his sons. By the first century, under the influence ofHellenism, Judaism had developed its own school system. Girls,however, did not regularly attend school. Many of the boys wereeducated in primary and secondary schools, learning written and orallaw. Sometimes schools were an extension of the synagogues. Romaneducation was patterned after Greek education. Teachers of primaryschools often were slaves. Mostly boys attended schools, but in somecases girls were allowed to attend school as well.

Familyas an Analogy

Therelationship between Israel and God.Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak offidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT,the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In theiroverall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to infamilial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod.4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16;64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).

Theprophet Hosea depicts Israel as sons and daughters who are offspringof a harlot. The harlot represents faithless Israel. God is portrayedas a wronged father and husband, and both children and wife asrebellious and adulterous (Hos. 1–3). Likewise, the prophetJeremiah presents the Mosaic covenant as a marriage soured by theinfidelity of Israel and Judah (e.g., Jer. 2:2–13). Thefamilial-marriage metaphor used by the prophets is a vehicle forproclaiming God’s resolve to go beyond customary law andcultural expectations to reclaim that which is lost. A similarpicture of reclaiming and restoring is seen in Malachi. Oneinterpretation of Mal. 4:6 holds that it implicitly preserves aneschatological tradition of family disruption with a futurerestoration in view. The restored family in view is restored Israel.

Thechurch as the family of God.Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him.This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship,the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt.16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into thecommunity was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom,belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39;16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63;John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30;Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community waseventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the communityof his followers, God’s family—the church. See alsoAdoption.

In Gen. 3 the serpent entices humankind to sin. Not untilRev. 12:9 are we told explicitly that the serpent is Satan. InEnglish, “Satan” is a name, whereas in the Bible thisentity does not have a name. Rather, he is identified through asystem of descriptive name-calling labels. In Hebrew, satan means“opponent”—in war, an enemy; in court, an accuser.The verb satan means “to be an adversary, to oppose”someone or something. Most commonly, satan refers to human enemies,and so 1Chron. 21:1 simply refers to “an enemy”(not “Satan,” as the NIV reads) who “rose upagainst Israel” (cf. 1Kings 11:14). It is only as “thesatan” (Job 1–2; Zech. 3:1–2; NIV: “Satan”)that we meet the one we know from the NT as “the devil.”

Thewidely held myth of Satan having been an angel who rebelled is notfound in the Bible. Origen (AD 185–254) was the first toallegorize Isa. 14:3–23 and Ezek. 28:1–10 in this way,and Jerome (AD 345–420) the first to translate “theMorning Star” as the name “Lucifer” (cf. Isa.14:12; Rev. 22:16). The Bible tells us nothing of Satan’sorigins.

Inthe OT, “evil spirit” may be a heavenly being sent by God(1Sam. 16:14–23; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 1Kings 22:22–23).The OT engages in extensive rebuke of the superstitions of thesurrounding nations that included belief in demons (Deut. 32:17; Ps.106:37; perhaps Isa. 13:21; cf. Rev. 18:2).

Around200 BC, works falsely attributed to Enoch began to appear, presentingevil and mortality as essential aspects of all physical creatures.Understanding “sons of God” (Gen. 6:1–4) as angels,these books tell of angels marrying women and producing murderousgiants. In response, God imprisoned the fallen angels, caused thegiants to slaughter one another, and cleansed the earth with theflood. The spirits of the giants then reappear as demons havingcontrol of the Gentile nations, appearing to them as gods, worshipedas idols. The book Jubilees (c. 160 BC) introduced a leader of thesedemons and labeled him “Mastema” (“hatred,enmity”).

Pickingup on these ideas, the Qumran literature speaks of many satans andexpands the number of abusive labels used to refer to the ruler ofthe demons—for example, “Belial” (“worthlessone”). In the same way, the LXX uses “slanderer”(diabolos) as a translation of satan. The word satan also was takenover into LXX Greek as a loanword to mean “enemy” or“adversary” (1Kings 11:14). Both satanas anddiabolos are used in the NT.

Jesus’encounter with the devil in the wilderness recalls Adam and Eve’sencounter with the serpent in Eden. The setting, significantly, isnow a wasteland. The second man to walk the earth with no sin claimsthe right to take back the dominion that Adam passed to the serpent.Jesus can have the whole world (without the cross) if only he willsubmit to the devil’s rule (Luke 4:5–7). Jesus rejectsthe offer. Later, he sees Satan’s fall from heaven to earth(Luke 10:18; cf. Rev. 12:5–12). Whereas once the devil hadaccess to God’s courtroom, now his case is lost. His onlyrecourse is murderous persecution. Between the ascension of the Sonof Man (Acts 1:9) and the final judgment, this is understood to bethe experience of Christ’s people (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:17; cf.1Pet.5:8).

Whereasthe OT provides sparse information about Satan and his angels/demons,the NT opens with an intensity of activity. Demons are also called“evil spirits,” and they are associated with physicalillness, madness, and fortune-telling. In Acts 17:22 Paul describeshis pagan Athenian listeners as “demon-fearers” (NIV:“religious”). Jesus’ miracles demonstrate hislordship over Satan’s regime as the demons flee in terrorbefore him (Mark 1:23–26; 5:1–15). According to Paul,Christians are temples of the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 6:19), andJohn urges believers to “test the spirits to see whether theyare from God” (1John 4:1), assuring them that they neednot fear Satan or his forces, “because the one who is in you isgreater than the one who is in the world” (1John 4:4). Onjudgment day Satan will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14–15)along with all of God’s enemies.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Definitionof Terms

Theterm “pagan” has two separate but related definitions inthe English language, both of which are somewhat misleading whenapplied to religions in the ancient Near East. The first definitiondefines a pagan as someone who follows a less-established religion ora person who is outside the mainstream of belief within a givensociety. Applying this definition to an ancient Near Eastern religionis somewhat misleading because often within biblical society theJewish or Christian belief system was the religion that was outsidethe mainstream. Being outside the mainstream certainly was a fact oflife for first-century Christians, who often were persecuted as ifthey were atheists and for their failure to acknowledge a pantheon ofgods, which was a mainstream belief. In OT society the competingreligions, especially the Canaanite and Babylonian pantheons,certainly were more widely accepted and followed. Even withinIsraelite society these non-Israelite religions offered a viablealternative to the religion of Yahweh. Thus, if one were to use thisdefinition either in the OT or the NT, it likely would need to beapplied to the religion of the Jews and Christians and not theprevailing religions of the Canaanites, the Babylonians, the Greeks,or the Romans.

Thesecond English definition of the term “pagan” involvesthe worship of the gods or forces of nature that control the world.This definition is applied specifically to agrarian societies, wherethe changing of seasons, the bringing of favorable weather andgrowing conditions for the crops, the possibility for prosperity thatgood weather brings, and a general desire for fertility are part ofthe religious understanding and belief system. While this definitioncertainly applies to many of the non-Israelite religions followed bythe Israelites’ neighbors and to some of the Greeks and Romansof the NT, it also would apply to many of the followers of Yahweh inthe OT who saw Yahweh as the God of the mountains and storms indirect conflict with the Baal myth, which ascribed these traits toBaal (see below). Therefore, it is prudent to remember that the label“pagan gods” is anachronistic and should be used withcare when discussing the religions described in the Bible.

Ona related note, the terminology of “idolatry” is alsooften misunderstood. Most of the non-Israelite religions discussed inthe Bible would have understood the images of their gods to berepresentations of the deity (or even a throne or meeting place forthe god) rather than an object of worship in its own right. Whilethey would have believed that the god dwelled in the object and waspresent when worship was being performed, they would not havebelieved that the object was the god. Most of the idols made in theancient Near East are indistinguishable from one another unless oneobserves their specific weapons. This, coupled with the idol’santhropomorphic representation, rather than a heavenlyrepresentation, suggests that the concern for early worshipers wasnot to worship an inanimate image, but rather to see a representationof the god who indwelled the image if worshiped correctly. It was thepresence of the god that was desired. Thus, the prohibition againstimages in the OT is a prohibition against trying to depict Yahweh inany physical form.

Whendealing with the non-Israelite gods of the Bible, it is helpful todivide them into historical periods. Within the OT, the majorgroupings of non-Israelite gods should include the gods of theCanaanites and the gods of the Babylonians (which are very similar tothe gods of the Assyrians). To a lesser degree the gods of thePhilistines, the Egyptians, and the Persians can also be considered.In the NT, the gods of the Greeks and the Romans (which often areassimilated Greek gods with new names) can be considered. Along withthese somewhat artificial historical divisions are innumerablepersonal gods and local gods worshiped by small groups of people oreven by a single town or village. For example, Gen. 31:30 referencesLaban’s gods, which Rachel steals when she leaves home totravel with Jacob. These personal gods likely played a huge role inthe day-to-day life of the average person, but most often they arelost to history. Similarly in the NT, the mystery religions of theGreeks and the Romans likely played an important role in the lives ofmany people, but they are difficult to reconstruct because of thelimited amount of documentation that has survived.

CanaanitePantheon

Thereis considerable overlap between the Canaanite pantheon and those ofthe Mesopotamian cultures, and often this can create some confusionabout the deities being discussed, especially their names andfunctions. Further complicating matters, the descriptions of godswithin the Mesopotamian pantheons often have fluid identities, asdifferent textual traditions conflict with each other at times. Boththe Canaanite and the Babylonian pantheons borrow heavily from theSumerian pantheon, which adds both to their similarities and to thepossibility of confusion.

Withoutquestion, the most important god within the Canaanite pantheon wasBaal. The story of Baal, often called the “Baal Cycle,”describes the life and deeds of Baal. The cult of Baal was afertility religion, and all the events of Baal’s life wereconnected to the changing seasons and nature’s fertility. TheBaal Cycle also explained how the worship of Baal affected theagricultural success of farmers. This detailed story of Baal was allbut unknown, except for a few details that could be gleaned from theBible, prior to the accidental discovery of the city of Ugarit andits extensive library in 1928 by a farmer plowing his field. The cityof Ugarit appears to have been a major trading center between theyears of about 1450 and 1200 BC. Besides Baal, other importantdeities within the pantheon were El, the elderly, long-bearded fathergod; Asherah, El’s wife, or occasionally portrayed as Baal’swife or sister; and Mot, the god of death, usually represented as asnake.

Baalwas the god of weather, especially thunder, lightning, and rain (Baalis almost always depicted with a lightning bolt in one hand and a rodof power in the other). Other representations or symbols of Baalinclude the bull (the strongest and most powerful animal of theancient Near East), water, mist, dew, grain, oil, and any othersymbol of fertility. Worship of Baal was intended to keep him happyin order to assure the coming of spring (preferably, early), thenecessary rain for crops, and finally the lengthening of summer sothat two crops could be planted and harvested. The second crop, whichoften was the crop that a farmer could sell for a profit (the firstbeing reserved for the farmer’s own food), was especially tiedto the favor of Baal. Baal was worshiped not only in hope ofa*gricultural prosperity but also for family fertility in terms ofchildren and for help in battle. The primary means for producing andkeeping the favor of Baal was by offering the firstfruits of anyharvest to him. When the first portion of a crop was harvested, itwas expected that a portion of that harvest (most often a tithe) beoffered to Baal in hopes of receiving his favor and extending thegrowing season. Not only were the first of the crops to be given toBaal but also the firstborn of all herded animals. It was also acommon practice for the firstborn of a family to be given to Baal inhuman sacrifice. Baal is often referred to as Molek in the Bible(e.g., Jer. 19) when describing human sacrifice. Another practice ofBaal worship was ritual sexual intercourse between a worshiper and apriest or a priestess. This ritual sexual activity was thought toincrease the fertility of the worshiper, thereby increasing thechances of having more children.

Apparentlyfor much of the history of Israel, especially during the monarchy,Baal worship offered an enticing alternative to the worship ofYahweh. In fact, the stories of Elijah and Elisha serve as a directpolemic against Baal worship. Most of the stories of Elijah andElisha use the symbols of Baal to demonstrate that Yahweh is muchstronger than Baal. By the time of the first century AD, Baal worshipwas a thing of the past, but some vestiges of the worship remained.For example, in the Gospels Jesus says that a person cannot worshipboth “God and money” (KJV: “mammon”) (Matt.6:24; Luke 16:13). The Greek word translated “money,”mamōnas, is borrowed from Aramaic and actually refers to theworship of Baal, but by Jesus’ time it had evolved to take onthe more generic definition “prosperity.”

Alongwith Baal, the worship of Asherah, a female member of the pantheon,was common. Although scholars are not completely sure of its form, itis believed that the reference in the OT to “Asherah poles”was likely a reference to a phallic symbol that represented fertility(Judg. 6:26; 1Kings 14:23). Recently, several references toAsherah have been discovered in Kuntillet ‘Ajrud innortheastern Sinai, dated to about the eighth century. Theseinscriptions say that Asherah was the consort of Yahweh rather thanBaal, providing further evidence for the amount of syncretism presentin Israel during the monarchy. Another female deity, Ashtoreth (knownalso by her Mesopotamian name, “Ishtar”), is called“Queen of Heaven” several times in the book of Jeremiah(7:18; 44:17–19,25).

Inrelationship to the infiltration of Baal worship into the northernkingdom is the debate about the nature of the “sin of Jeroboam”that was instituted by JeroboamI when he, along with the tennorthern tribes, ceded from Israel (1Kings 12:25–33). Atissue is whether Jeroboam was instituting a new religion based on thecalves, thus becoming syncretistic with these tribes’ northernPhoenician neighbors (which would have been tantamount to introducingBaal worship into Israel), or simply rejecting the centrality ofJerusalem for Yahweh worship (which only a few years before had beencentralized in Jerusalem by Solomon’s temple, resulting in thedisenfranchisem*nt of the Levites outside Jerusalem). Clearly, thesouthern kingdom viewed the events as apostasy, but whether thenorthern tribes did is unclear. Amos, for example, seems to focus hiscriticism of the cult at Bethel not on the worship itself but ratheron the hypocrisy of the worshipers, who were not following the law asprescribed in the Torah.

BabylonianPantheon

Althoughdebate continues over the exact relationship between the two, theBabylonian pantheon had many elements similar to the Canaanitepantheon. There are dozens of primary documents about the religion ofBabylon; the most important of them include the Enuma Elish, acreation story and apologetic for Marduk the chief of gods; theAtrahasis Epic, which has a version of the flood story in it; and theEpic of Gilgamesh, which describes the quest for eternal life by KingGilgamesh. Within the Babylonian pantheon, Marduk is the chief ofgods, who is also the patron god of Babylonia. The Enuma Elish, whichdescribes the creation of the world, deals primarily with theascension of Marduk to the role of chief god by destroying the forcesof chaos represented by the monster Tiamat and bringing order to boththe pantheon and the natural world. Marduk, like Baal, had retainedthe most powerful cosmic weapons, which include water, rain, and war.The Epic of Gilgamesh describes the journey of King Gilgamesh, who ispart human and part divine, in search of immortality. During thecourse of his trip, he learns that eternal life is reserved for thegods, and humans must make their mark on the world by what they doduring their lives. The Babylonian religion and pantheon exerted itsstrongest influence on Israel during the exile. The biblical textclearly has been influenced by these Babylonian beliefs. However, theBible consistently presents these viewpoints as contrary to the trueworship of Yahweh and insists that only Yahweh deserves worship asthe true creator of the world, vanquisher of chaos, and provider ofprosperity and life.

OtherAncient Near Eastern Pantheons

TheEgyptian gods are mentioned only briefly in the Bible. The most overtreferences to the gods of Egypt are found in the story of the tenplagues, which most scholars believe was a direct attack on thedeities of Egypt by Yahweh. It is unclear if the calf described inExod. 32 should be understood as an Egyptian god, a completely new ordifferent god, or as a forbidden representation of Yahweh.

Littleis known about the Philistine pantheon of gods, but it appears to bequite similar to the Canaanite pantheon (if not the same with localvariations). The Philistines’ chief god, referred to in theBible as “Dagon” (Judg. 16:23; 1Sam. 5:2–7;1Chron. 10:10), likely also went by the name “Baal-Zebul”(“Lord Prince”), which in the OT is mocked by beingchanged to “Baal-Zebub” (“Lord of the Flies”)(2Kings 1:2–3, 6, 16). In the NT, this god is recalledwhen the Pharisees accuse Jesus of being in league with Satan (Matt.12:24; Luke 11:15 [Gk. Beelzeboul]). Because the Philistines wereknown as the Sea Peoples, it is not surprising that this deity hadseveral fishlike qualities (including a fish tail).

NewTestament Religion

Inthe NT, the Greek pantheon that was subsumed by the Roman pantheonwas the common religious expression of the day. Like other ancientpantheons, these pantheons tried to explain the natural world by theinvolvement of various deities in nature. Proof that Jews living inthe province of Judah were under constant pressure to assimilate tothe Greek religion is provided in the reports of the books ofMaccabees that describe the Jewish revolt against the Seleucids inwhat was essentially a religious war against assimilation. In theGospels, little is said about the Greek or Roman pantheons, but thebook of Acts contains several reports of Paul’s interactionwith the Greeks and their religious practices. Especially notable isPaul’s interaction with the Athenians when he debatedphilosophers who were followers of the “Unknown God”(Acts 17:23). Three other deities are named in Acts, includingArtemis in Ephesus (Acts 19:24, 27–28, 34–35), whom theRomans called “Diana,” and Zeus and Hermes (Acts14:12–13), called “Jupiter” and “Mercury”by the Romans, whom Paul and Barnabas were mistaken for in Lystrawhen Paul preached and healed a crippled man.

Summary

Theproblem of God’s people Israel worshiping other gods permeatesmost of biblical history. These reports range over time from theearly story of Rachel in Genesis, to the period of the judges whenMicah’s images (Judg. 17:1–6) and Gideon’s ephod(Judg. 8:26–27) were worshiped, to when Solomon and his wiveswere worshiping foreign gods (1Kings 11:5–8), to the timeof Ahab when all Israel followed Baal, whom Elijah vanquished onMount Carmel (1Kings 18:16–46). Depending on when onedates the book of Deuteronomy, the strong prohibitions againstidolatry either went unheeded (if Moses wrote the book) or were aculminating statement of the anti-idolatry Deuteronomistic writerjust before the exile. There is considerable debate about when Israelbecame an exclusively monotheistic nation (if it ever did), but bythe eighth century BC, Isaiah and Amos castigate worshipers of thesefalse gods. Clearly, by the time of Jeremiah, some factions withinIsrael (the prophet included) have begun to question whether the godsof the other nations even exist (Jer. 2:28). Finally, with thedestruction of the temple in Jerusalem, ironically, the worship ofother gods is ended. It is certain that by the time of the firstcentury AD, the evolution to a monotheistic view is complete, andPaul can claim that an “idol is nothing” (1Cor.8:4), and that any sin is tantamount to idolatry (Eph.5:5).

Most families in the ancient world were agrarian or engagedin raising livestock. Families that lived in cities led preindustriallifestyles, often dwelling in cramped quarters. The majority offamilies resided in rural areas and villages.

Peoplein the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin.Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family wasthe source of people’s status in the community and provided theprimary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.

Marriagewas not an arrangement merely between two individuals; rather,marriage was between two families. Family members and kin thereforetook precedence over individuals. In the worlds of both Testaments,authority within families and communities was determined by rankamong kin. Christianity was looked upon with hostility because itoverthrew foundational values of Jewish and even Greco-Romantradition. Service rather than rank became normative in family andcommunity relationships.

PatriarchalStructures

Apatrilineal system ruled in ancient Israel. Every family and everyhousehold belonged to a lineage. These lineages made up a clan inwhich kinship and inheritance were based on the patriarchs, thefathers of the families. These clans in turn made up larger clangroups and then tribal groups. The later Hellenistic and Roman worldmaintained patriarchal and patrilineal social structures as well.

Familydiscipline was in the hands of the father, the patriarch. The honorof the father depended on his ability to keep every family memberunder his authority (1Tim. 3:4). Other male members of thefamily assisted the father in defending the honor of the family (Gen.34).

AristotelianHousehold Codes

Notonly was the biblical world patriarchal (male dominated), but alsothe later societal influence by Greek philosophers impacted thebiblical text. The ancient Greeks viewed the household as a microcosmof society. Greek philosophers offered advice regarding householdmanagement, seeking to influence society for the greater good. Thisadvice was presented in oral and written discourses known as“household codes.” Aristotle’s household codes,written in the fourth century BC, were among the most famous. Suchcodes consisted of instructions on how the paterfamilias (the malehead of the household) should manage his wife, children, and slaves.The Stoic philosopher Arius Didymus summarized Aristotle’shousehold codes for Caesar Augustus. He argued, “A man has therule of this household by nature, for the deliberative faculty in awoman is inferior, in children it does not yet exist, and in the caseof slaves, it is completely absent.”

TheAristotelian household codes appear to be the background to NT textsthat, at face value, appear to treat women as inferior to men (Eph.5:22–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1; 1Pet. 3:1–7). Allthese texts are set in a Greco-Roman matrix, and the advice given tothe congregations seems to have been of contextual missional valuefor the sake of the gospel rather than as a guide for family livingfor all times in all contexts.

Marriageand Divorce

Marriagein the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between twofamilies, arranged by the bride’s father or a malerepresentative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’sprice.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction butalso an expression of family honor. Only the rich could affordmultiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself wascelebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.

Theprimary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to producea male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. Theconcept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs,especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.

Marriageamong Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jewssought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev.18:6–17). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew.Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainlyoutside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness.Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romansdid practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinshipgroup (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategicalliances between families.

InJewish customs, marriage was preceded by a period of betrothal. Thisstate of betrothal was legally binding and left the survivor of theman’s death a widow. A betrothed couple, like Joseph and Mary(Matt. 1:18), did not live together or have sexual intercourse. Yettheir union was as binding as marriage and could be dissolved onlythrough death or divorce.

Greekand Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. InJewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorceproceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release herand repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (inparticular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Siracomments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to thefather (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery(Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictiveuse of divorce than the Old Testament (Mark 10:1–12).

Children,Parenting, and Education

Childbearingwas considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman andher entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to thisblessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, andspecifically their husbands.

Abortioncommonly took place in the Greco-Roman world. Women therefore had tobe encouraged to continue in their pregnancies (1Tim. 2:15).

Childrenwere of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. Anestimated 60percent of the children in the first-centuryMediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.

AncientNear Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting stylebased on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and eviltendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent eviltendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The mainconcern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty.Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stagechildren were taught to accept the total authority of the father. Therearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girlswere taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so thatthey could help with household tasks.

Earlyeducation took place in the home. Jewish education was centeredaround the teaching of Torah. At home it was the father’sresponsibility to teach the Torah to his children (Deut. 6:6–7),especially his sons. By the first century, under the influence ofHellenism, Judaism had developed its own school system. Girls,however, did not regularly attend school. Many of the boys wereeducated in primary and secondary schools, learning written and orallaw. Sometimes schools were an extension of the synagogues. Romaneducation was patterned after Greek education. Teachers of primaryschools often were slaves. Mostly boys attended schools, but in somecases girls were allowed to attend school as well.

Familyas an Analogy

Therelationship between Israel and God.Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak offidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT,the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In theiroverall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to infamilial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod.4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16;64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).

Theprophet Hosea depicts Israel as sons and daughters who are offspringof a harlot. The harlot represents faithless Israel. God is portrayedas a wronged father and husband, and both children and wife asrebellious and adulterous (Hos. 1–3). Likewise, the prophetJeremiah presents the Mosaic covenant as a marriage soured by theinfidelity of Israel and Judah (e.g., Jer. 2:2–13). Thefamilial-marriage metaphor used by the prophets is a vehicle forproclaiming God’s resolve to go beyond customary law andcultural expectations to reclaim that which is lost. A similarpicture of reclaiming and restoring is seen in Malachi. Oneinterpretation of Mal. 4:6 holds that it implicitly preserves aneschatological tradition of family disruption with a futurerestoration in view. The restored family in view is restored Israel.

Thechurch as the family of God.Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him.This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship,the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt.16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into thecommunity was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom,belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39;16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63;John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30;Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community waseventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the communityof his followers, God’s family—the church. See alsoAdoption.

Most families in the ancient world were agrarian or engagedin raising livestock. Families that lived in cities led preindustriallifestyles, often dwelling in cramped quarters. The majority offamilies resided in rural areas and villages.

Peoplein the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin.Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family wasthe source of people’s status in the community and provided theprimary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.

Marriagewas not an arrangement merely between two individuals; rather,marriage was between two families. Family members and kin thereforetook precedence over individuals. In the worlds of both Testaments,authority within families and communities was determined by rankamong kin. Christianity was looked upon with hostility because itoverthrew foundational values of Jewish and even Greco-Romantradition. Service rather than rank became normative in family andcommunity relationships.

PatriarchalStructures

Apatrilineal system ruled in ancient Israel. Every family and everyhousehold belonged to a lineage. These lineages made up a clan inwhich kinship and inheritance were based on the patriarchs, thefathers of the families. These clans in turn made up larger clangroups and then tribal groups. The later Hellenistic and Roman worldmaintained patriarchal and patrilineal social structures as well.

Familydiscipline was in the hands of the father, the patriarch. The honorof the father depended on his ability to keep every family memberunder his authority (1Tim. 3:4). Other male members of thefamily assisted the father in defending the honor of the family (Gen.34).

AristotelianHousehold Codes

Notonly was the biblical world patriarchal (male dominated), but alsothe later societal influence by Greek philosophers impacted thebiblical text. The ancient Greeks viewed the household as a microcosmof society. Greek philosophers offered advice regarding householdmanagement, seeking to influence society for the greater good. Thisadvice was presented in oral and written discourses known as“household codes.” Aristotle’s household codes,written in the fourth century BC, were among the most famous. Suchcodes consisted of instructions on how the paterfamilias (the malehead of the household) should manage his wife, children, and slaves.The Stoic philosopher Arius Didymus summarized Aristotle’shousehold codes for Caesar Augustus. He argued, “A man has therule of this household by nature, for the deliberative faculty in awoman is inferior, in children it does not yet exist, and in the caseof slaves, it is completely absent.”

TheAristotelian household codes appear to be the background to NT textsthat, at face value, appear to treat women as inferior to men (Eph.5:22–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1; 1Pet. 3:1–7). Allthese texts are set in a Greco-Roman matrix, and the advice given tothe congregations seems to have been of contextual missional valuefor the sake of the gospel rather than as a guide for family livingfor all times in all contexts.

Marriageand Divorce

Marriagein the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between twofamilies, arranged by the bride’s father or a malerepresentative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’sprice.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction butalso an expression of family honor. Only the rich could affordmultiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself wascelebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.

Theprimary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to producea male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. Theconcept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs,especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.

Marriageamong Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jewssought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev.18:6–17). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew.Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainlyoutside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness.Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romansdid practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinshipgroup (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategicalliances between families.

InJewish customs, marriage was preceded by a period of betrothal. Thisstate of betrothal was legally binding and left the survivor of theman’s death a widow. A betrothed couple, like Joseph and Mary(Matt. 1:18), did not live together or have sexual intercourse. Yettheir union was as binding as marriage and could be dissolved onlythrough death or divorce.

Greekand Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. InJewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorceproceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release herand repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (inparticular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Siracomments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to thefather (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery(Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictiveuse of divorce than the Old Testament (Mark 10:1–12).

Children,Parenting, and Education

Childbearingwas considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman andher entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to thisblessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, andspecifically their husbands.

Abortioncommonly took place in the Greco-Roman world. Women therefore had tobe encouraged to continue in their pregnancies (1Tim. 2:15).

Childrenwere of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. Anestimated 60percent of the children in the first-centuryMediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.

AncientNear Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting stylebased on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and eviltendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent eviltendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The mainconcern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty.Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stagechildren were taught to accept the total authority of the father. Therearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girlswere taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so thatthey could help with household tasks.

Earlyeducation took place in the home. Jewish education was centeredaround the teaching of Torah. At home it was the father’sresponsibility to teach the Torah to his children (Deut. 6:6–7),especially his sons. By the first century, under the influence ofHellenism, Judaism had developed its own school system. Girls,however, did not regularly attend school. Many of the boys wereeducated in primary and secondary schools, learning written and orallaw. Sometimes schools were an extension of the synagogues. Romaneducation was patterned after Greek education. Teachers of primaryschools often were slaves. Mostly boys attended schools, but in somecases girls were allowed to attend school as well.

Familyas an Analogy

Therelationship between Israel and God.Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak offidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT,the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In theiroverall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to infamilial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod.4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16;64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).

Theprophet Hosea depicts Israel as sons and daughters who are offspringof a harlot. The harlot represents faithless Israel. God is portrayedas a wronged father and husband, and both children and wife asrebellious and adulterous (Hos. 1–3). Likewise, the prophetJeremiah presents the Mosaic covenant as a marriage soured by theinfidelity of Israel and Judah (e.g., Jer. 2:2–13). Thefamilial-marriage metaphor used by the prophets is a vehicle forproclaiming God’s resolve to go beyond customary law andcultural expectations to reclaim that which is lost. A similarpicture of reclaiming and restoring is seen in Malachi. Oneinterpretation of Mal. 4:6 holds that it implicitly preserves aneschatological tradition of family disruption with a futurerestoration in view. The restored family in view is restored Israel.

Thechurch as the family of God.Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him.This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship,the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt.16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into thecommunity was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom,belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39;16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63;John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30;Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community waseventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the communityof his followers, God’s family—the church. See alsoAdoption.

Ancient Greece was a federation of several loosely affiliatedcity-states located on the islands of the Aegean Sea, the land southof the Balkan Peninsula, west Asia Minor, and Crete.

TheMinoan Civilization (c. 2000–1400 BC)

Archaeologicalevidence shows that as early as the fourth millennium BC there werealready human inhabitants in the Aegean basin. Early migrants fromAsia Minor came to settle in Crete (c. 2600 BC) and started itscivilization at Knossos and Phaistos. It was called “Minoan,”after the mythical king Minos. The Minoan civilization reached itspeak around 1600 BC, when sophisticated palaces, highly developedmetal work, and fine pottery were produced. The popular religion wasthe worship of the Mother Goddess. Not only did the Minoans excel inarts and crafts, but also they were literate and developed asyllable-based (non-Greek) writing system known as LinearA.Minoan culture came to a sudden end around 1400 BC, probably due tointernal turmoil, natural disasters, and foreign invasion.

TheMycenaean Civilization (c. 1450–1200 BC)

TheMycenaeans may have arrived in the Early or Middle Bronze Age, andeventually they took over the Cretan palace settlement in 1450 BC andthus dominated the Aegean region for a time. The discovery of thecity of Mycenae gave rise to the name “Mycenaean.” Duringthis period, the Greek mainland enjoyed prosperity. While retainingtheir own culture, the Mycenaeans were greatly influenced by theMinoans, as indicated by their pottery, luxury items, and religioussymbolism. They were great engineers who built remarkable bridges andcitadels. One of the finest examples of their handiwork was the goldmasks that were buried together with their warriors. They employed aform of Greek language, known as LinearB, evidence of which hasbeen discovered at Knossos, Pylos, Tiryns, Mycenae, Thebes, andelsewhere. Between 1250 and 1150 BC, for unknown reasons, all theMycenaean palace citadels were destroyed.

TheAge of Expansion (c. 1200–800 BC)

Alreadyin the thirteenth century, the Greeks were scattered all over theeastern Mediterranean, as far as the coast of southern Palestine.Migration increased around 1200 BC, driven by population growth andthe accompanying demand for food and space, which led to colonizationin other regions. By the eighth century BC, great cities (e.g., Troy)along the northwest coast of Asia Minor had been taken by theAeolians. The Dorians dominated the south of the Balkan Peninsula andeventually founded Sparta, while the Ionians settled in theeast-central area of the Balkan Peninsula and founded Athens. Thisperiod was known as the Dark Age because of a lack of culturaladvancements, and the art of writing was largely lost after theMycenaean civilization was destroyed.

TheArchaic Period (c. 800–500 BC)

Greatchanges took place in this period. The rise of the city-state (polis)not only provided stability, where leagues were formed amongindividual city-states, but also brought forth the establishment ofinstitutions such as gymnasiums, symposiums, and temples. Tradingwith the Phoenicians allowed the Greeks to adopt and perfect theiralphabet. Military defense was enhanced with huge city walls, andarchitecturally sophisticated buildings of various kinds wereconstructed. The first Olympian games were held during this period,in 776 BC. Science and philosophy began to be taught; lyric poetryexpressing human emotions was created; and various gods (e.g., Zeus)were honored in their sanctuaries, which were overshadowed by mysteryreligions in the sixth century BC (e.g., Demeter, Dionysus, andOrpheus).

Greeksettlements were established in southern Italy, the northern Aegean,and along the northern coast of Africa. At this time, two importantcity-states representing two very different cultures came into thepicture. Sparta was made up of unwalled villages and ruled by kings,while Athens was a walled city governed first by the aristocrats,later by tyrants. Sparta was famous for its disciplined army, whileAthens boasted of its superior naval force. The social structure ofSparta produced a political system that upheld the interest of thestates, while Athens developed a legal system that laid thefoundation for democracy.

Perhapsmost important in this age were the Persian Wars. As the Greekscontinued to expand into the southern Balkan Peninsula and to thenorth of the Black Sea, and to establish colonies in theMediterranean, they encountered the superpower of that time. By 500BC, Darius I of Persia controlled the Greek world, except themainland of the Balkan Peninsula. Although on several occasions thePersians tried to invade mainland Greece, Athens (in alliance withSparta) was able to successfully defeat them, rendering thempowerless for a long period.

TheClassical Period (c. 500–338 BC)

Afterthe Persian Wars, Greek civilization advanced significantly into whatis now known as Classical Greece. Political leadership shifted fromSparta to Athens, which held naval hegemony, dominating the Aegeanislands and the coast of Asia Minor. According to the Athenianhistorian Thucydides, the growth of Athenian power, which posed athreat to neighboring city-states, caused the Peloponnesian War (c.431–404 BC). With the aid of the Persians, Sparta defeatedAthens, tearing down its Long Walls, which guarded the city and itsport of Piraeus, and making it an ally.

Thisperiod was a golden age for the Greeks, with the flowering ofdemocratic institutions, architecture, literature, and art. Massivebuildings were constructed, such as the Parthenon (447–438 BC),the Athena Nike (427–424 BC), the Erectheion (421–407 BC)on the Acropolis, and the Theseion (449 BC) on the Agora. Greekwritings of history, poetry, philosophy, comedy, and tragedyflourished. Thanks to the works of great historians such as Herodotusand Thucydides, events that transpired in ancient Greece have beenmade known to us. The four greatest Greek playwrights, Aeschylus,Aris-tophanes, Euripides, and Sophocles, were products of thisperiod. Some of the greatest plastic arts were produced during thistime, such as the statue of Athena Promachos (458 BC). Greatthinkers, such as Socrates and Plato, were born during this period.The end of Classical period Greece, however, was marked with endlesscivil wars and wars with the outside forces.

TheHellenistic Period (338–146 BC)

PhilipIIof Macedon defeated the Greeks at the battle of Chaeronea in 338 BCand took control of the entire Balkan Peninsula. His son Alexanderthe Great further expanded his territory all the way to India.Although his empire crumbled after his death (at the age ofthirty-three), Alexander contributed so much to the furtherance ofGreek culture and language that this age is known as the Hellenisticperiod, a time when Greek culture and language became widespread anddominant. Greece became a region of Macedon until 196 BC, when Romedeclared it independent.

TheRoman Period (146 BC–AD 100)

In148 BC Rome defeated Macedon, making it a Roman province. Two yearslater, Rome further took control of Greece, and in 46 BC the provinceof Achaia was created. These two provinces were not only strategicfor Rome; they also became the centers of the NT church. The Greeklanguage became the lingua franca and the language of the NT. Paul’ssecond and third missionary journeys brought him to Macedonia andAchaia (Acts 16:11–20:6). During the Roman period, Greececontinued to be a cultural and intellectual center, and Greekinfluence even went beyond that of early Christianity.

Most families in the ancient world were agrarian or engagedin raising livestock. Families that lived in cities led preindustriallifestyles, often dwelling in cramped quarters. The majority offamilies resided in rural areas and villages.

Peoplein the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin.Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family wasthe source of people’s status in the community and provided theprimary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.

Marriagewas not an arrangement merely between two individuals; rather,marriage was between two families. Family members and kin thereforetook precedence over individuals. In the worlds of both Testaments,authority within families and communities was determined by rankamong kin. Christianity was looked upon with hostility because itoverthrew foundational values of Jewish and even Greco-Romantradition. Service rather than rank became normative in family andcommunity relationships.

PatriarchalStructures

Apatrilineal system ruled in ancient Israel. Every family and everyhousehold belonged to a lineage. These lineages made up a clan inwhich kinship and inheritance were based on the patriarchs, thefathers of the families. These clans in turn made up larger clangroups and then tribal groups. The later Hellenistic and Roman worldmaintained patriarchal and patrilineal social structures as well.

Familydiscipline was in the hands of the father, the patriarch. The honorof the father depended on his ability to keep every family memberunder his authority (1Tim. 3:4). Other male members of thefamily assisted the father in defending the honor of the family (Gen.34).

AristotelianHousehold Codes

Notonly was the biblical world patriarchal (male dominated), but alsothe later societal influence by Greek philosophers impacted thebiblical text. The ancient Greeks viewed the household as a microcosmof society. Greek philosophers offered advice regarding householdmanagement, seeking to influence society for the greater good. Thisadvice was presented in oral and written discourses known as“household codes.” Aristotle’s household codes,written in the fourth century BC, were among the most famous. Suchcodes consisted of instructions on how the paterfamilias (the malehead of the household) should manage his wife, children, and slaves.The Stoic philosopher Arius Didymus summarized Aristotle’shousehold codes for Caesar Augustus. He argued, “A man has therule of this household by nature, for the deliberative faculty in awoman is inferior, in children it does not yet exist, and in the caseof slaves, it is completely absent.”

TheAristotelian household codes appear to be the background to NT textsthat, at face value, appear to treat women as inferior to men (Eph.5:22–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1; 1Pet. 3:1–7). Allthese texts are set in a Greco-Roman matrix, and the advice given tothe congregations seems to have been of contextual missional valuefor the sake of the gospel rather than as a guide for family livingfor all times in all contexts.

Marriageand Divorce

Marriagein the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between twofamilies, arranged by the bride’s father or a malerepresentative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’sprice.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction butalso an expression of family honor. Only the rich could affordmultiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself wascelebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.

Theprimary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to producea male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. Theconcept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs,especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.

Marriageamong Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jewssought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev.18:6–17). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew.Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainlyoutside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness.Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romansdid practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinshipgroup (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategicalliances between families.

InJewish customs, marriage was preceded by a period of betrothal. Thisstate of betrothal was legally binding and left the survivor of theman’s death a widow. A betrothed couple, like Joseph and Mary(Matt. 1:18), did not live together or have sexual intercourse. Yettheir union was as binding as marriage and could be dissolved onlythrough death or divorce.

Greekand Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. InJewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorceproceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release herand repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (inparticular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Siracomments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to thefather (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery(Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictiveuse of divorce than the Old Testament (Mark 10:1–12).

Children,Parenting, and Education

Childbearingwas considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman andher entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to thisblessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, andspecifically their husbands.

Abortioncommonly took place in the Greco-Roman world. Women therefore had tobe encouraged to continue in their pregnancies (1Tim. 2:15).

Childrenwere of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. Anestimated 60percent of the children in the first-centuryMediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.

AncientNear Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting stylebased on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and eviltendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent eviltendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The mainconcern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty.Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stagechildren were taught to accept the total authority of the father. Therearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girlswere taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so thatthey could help with household tasks.

Earlyeducation took place in the home. Jewish education was centeredaround the teaching of Torah. At home it was the father’sresponsibility to teach the Torah to his children (Deut. 6:6–7),especially his sons. By the first century, under the influence ofHellenism, Judaism had developed its own school system. Girls,however, did not regularly attend school. Many of the boys wereeducated in primary and secondary schools, learning written and orallaw. Sometimes schools were an extension of the synagogues. Romaneducation was patterned after Greek education. Teachers of primaryschools often were slaves. Mostly boys attended schools, but in somecases girls were allowed to attend school as well.

Familyas an Analogy

Therelationship between Israel and God.Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak offidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT,the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In theiroverall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to infamilial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod.4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16;64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).

Theprophet Hosea depicts Israel as sons and daughters who are offspringof a harlot. The harlot represents faithless Israel. God is portrayedas a wronged father and husband, and both children and wife asrebellious and adulterous (Hos. 1–3). Likewise, the prophetJeremiah presents the Mosaic covenant as a marriage soured by theinfidelity of Israel and Judah (e.g., Jer. 2:2–13). Thefamilial-marriage metaphor used by the prophets is a vehicle forproclaiming God’s resolve to go beyond customary law andcultural expectations to reclaim that which is lost. A similarpicture of reclaiming and restoring is seen in Malachi. Oneinterpretation of Mal. 4:6 holds that it implicitly preserves aneschatological tradition of family disruption with a futurerestoration in view. The restored family in view is restored Israel.

Thechurch as the family of God.Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him.This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship,the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt.16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into thecommunity was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom,belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39;16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63;John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30;Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community waseventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the communityof his followers, God’s family—the church. See alsoAdoption.

Most families in the ancient world were agrarian or engagedin raising livestock. Families that lived in cities led preindustriallifestyles, often dwelling in cramped quarters. The majority offamilies resided in rural areas and villages.

Peoplein the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin.Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family wasthe source of people’s status in the community and provided theprimary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.

Marriagewas not an arrangement merely between two individuals; rather,marriage was between two families. Family members and kin thereforetook precedence over individuals. In the worlds of both Testaments,authority within families and communities was determined by rankamong kin. Christianity was looked upon with hostility because itoverthrew foundational values of Jewish and even Greco-Romantradition. Service rather than rank became normative in family andcommunity relationships.

PatriarchalStructures

Apatrilineal system ruled in ancient Israel. Every family and everyhousehold belonged to a lineage. These lineages made up a clan inwhich kinship and inheritance were based on the patriarchs, thefathers of the families. These clans in turn made up larger clangroups and then tribal groups. The later Hellenistic and Roman worldmaintained patriarchal and patrilineal social structures as well.

Familydiscipline was in the hands of the father, the patriarch. The honorof the father depended on his ability to keep every family memberunder his authority (1Tim. 3:4). Other male members of thefamily assisted the father in defending the honor of the family (Gen.34).

AristotelianHousehold Codes

Notonly was the biblical world patriarchal (male dominated), but alsothe later societal influence by Greek philosophers impacted thebiblical text. The ancient Greeks viewed the household as a microcosmof society. Greek philosophers offered advice regarding householdmanagement, seeking to influence society for the greater good. Thisadvice was presented in oral and written discourses known as“household codes.” Aristotle’s household codes,written in the fourth century BC, were among the most famous. Suchcodes consisted of instructions on how the paterfamilias (the malehead of the household) should manage his wife, children, and slaves.The Stoic philosopher Arius Didymus summarized Aristotle’shousehold codes for Caesar Augustus. He argued, “A man has therule of this household by nature, for the deliberative faculty in awoman is inferior, in children it does not yet exist, and in the caseof slaves, it is completely absent.”

TheAristotelian household codes appear to be the background to NT textsthat, at face value, appear to treat women as inferior to men (Eph.5:22–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1; 1Pet. 3:1–7). Allthese texts are set in a Greco-Roman matrix, and the advice given tothe congregations seems to have been of contextual missional valuefor the sake of the gospel rather than as a guide for family livingfor all times in all contexts.

Marriageand Divorce

Marriagein the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between twofamilies, arranged by the bride’s father or a malerepresentative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’sprice.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction butalso an expression of family honor. Only the rich could affordmultiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself wascelebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.

Theprimary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to producea male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. Theconcept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs,especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.

Marriageamong Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jewssought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev.18:6–17). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew.Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainlyoutside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness.Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romansdid practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinshipgroup (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategicalliances between families.

InJewish customs, marriage was preceded by a period of betrothal. Thisstate of betrothal was legally binding and left the survivor of theman’s death a widow. A betrothed couple, like Joseph and Mary(Matt. 1:18), did not live together or have sexual intercourse. Yettheir union was as binding as marriage and could be dissolved onlythrough death or divorce.

Greekand Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. InJewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorceproceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release herand repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (inparticular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Siracomments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to thefather (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery(Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictiveuse of divorce than the Old Testament (Mark 10:1–12).

Children,Parenting, and Education

Childbearingwas considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman andher entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to thisblessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, andspecifically their husbands.

Abortioncommonly took place in the Greco-Roman world. Women therefore had tobe encouraged to continue in their pregnancies (1Tim. 2:15).

Childrenwere of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. Anestimated 60percent of the children in the first-centuryMediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.

AncientNear Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting stylebased on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and eviltendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent eviltendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The mainconcern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty.Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stagechildren were taught to accept the total authority of the father. Therearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girlswere taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so thatthey could help with household tasks.

Earlyeducation took place in the home. Jewish education was centeredaround the teaching of Torah. At home it was the father’sresponsibility to teach the Torah to his children (Deut. 6:6–7),especially his sons. By the first century, under the influence ofHellenism, Judaism had developed its own school system. Girls,however, did not regularly attend school. Many of the boys wereeducated in primary and secondary schools, learning written and orallaw. Sometimes schools were an extension of the synagogues. Romaneducation was patterned after Greek education. Teachers of primaryschools often were slaves. Mostly boys attended schools, but in somecases girls were allowed to attend school as well.

Familyas an Analogy

Therelationship between Israel and God.Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak offidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT,the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In theiroverall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to infamilial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod.4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16;64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).

Theprophet Hosea depicts Israel as sons and daughters who are offspringof a harlot. The harlot represents faithless Israel. God is portrayedas a wronged father and husband, and both children and wife asrebellious and adulterous (Hos. 1–3). Likewise, the prophetJeremiah presents the Mosaic covenant as a marriage soured by theinfidelity of Israel and Judah (e.g., Jer. 2:2–13). Thefamilial-marriage metaphor used by the prophets is a vehicle forproclaiming God’s resolve to go beyond customary law andcultural expectations to reclaim that which is lost. A similarpicture of reclaiming and restoring is seen in Malachi. Oneinterpretation of Mal. 4:6 holds that it implicitly preserves aneschatological tradition of family disruption with a futurerestoration in view. The restored family in view is restored Israel.

Thechurch as the family of God.Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him.This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship,the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt.16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into thecommunity was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom,belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39;16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63;John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30;Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community waseventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the communityof his followers, God’s family—the church. See alsoAdoption.

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

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jesus’Life

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).

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

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

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

Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).

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

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

InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).

Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).

TheIdentity of Jesus Christ

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jesus’Purpose and Community

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

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

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

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

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

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

TheQuests for the Historical Jesus

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

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

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

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

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

JudgmentDay in the Bible

Thebook of Revelation concludes with a harrowing vision of finaljudgment. On that day, when the God of all creation sits on his greatwhite throne and holds court, the dead will rise and answer for theirdeeds, whether good or bad (20:11–13). The record of eachperson’s conduct appears in books, one of which is the Book ofLife (20:12–13). Anyone whose name does not appear in the Bookof Life is thrown into the lake of fire (20:15).

Theapostle Paul refers to this same event in Acts 17:30–31. Allhuman beings will face their scheduled day in court, as God certifiedby raising Christ from the dead. It will be a day of wrath, amongother things, when God’s righteous anger against sin is fullydisplayed (Rom. 2:5). In the presence of this God, Isaiah proclaimedhimself to be ruined because of his sinfulness before the one who iscalled “Holy, holy, holy” (Isa. 6:1–5). Wetherefore confess with the author of Hebrews, who says, “It is[and will be] a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the livingGod” (Heb. 10:31).

Manyother texts of Scripture forecast the same event: judgment day iscoming, and nothing can stop it. They also describe this day inequally frightening terms, anticipating fire, darkness, and weepingfor some, but everlasting joy and peace for others. Even Christianswill be judged on this day, notwithstanding the promise ofeverlasting life for everyone who believes (e.g., John 3:16; 5:24;Rom. 3:21–24; 8:1–2; 2Cor. 5:21). In Rom. 14:10–12Paul says, “For we will all stand before God’s judgmentseat,” at which time, “each of us will give an account ofourselves to God.” Similarly, in 2Cor. 5:10 Paul warns,“For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, sothat each one of us may receive what is due us for the things donewhile in the body, whether good or bad.”

Justificationand Judgment

Inthese texts, an apparent tension exists between the promise ofjustification, upon which all Christian hope stands, and thecertainty of final judgment, including the judgment of believers. Itwill not do simply to downplay the one or the other, as if thebiblical writers had not really intended one or both of them. Thesetexts say what they say, the good news no less plainly than the bad.Yet, closer inspection shows that the tension is merely apparent.

Wemust first recognize that Scripture treats piety as the evidence ofregeneration and saving faith. Jesus says that a “good tree,”which is a genuine disciple, bears good fruit (Matt. 7:17). That is,the observable righteousness of such a disciple will surpass thehypocritical casuistry of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 5:20). Onjudgment day, therefore, no actual conflict will or ever could arisebetween the general tendency of the believer’s conduct and hisor her position in Christ. Over a lifetime, the believer’shabitual behavior will have differed fundamentally, though neversatisfactorily, from that of a lost person. As for unrepentantsinners, they will be sentenced to eternal damnation because of theirlawlessness (Rom. 3:9–19). Their conduct demonstrates that theyhave rejected the gospel and are deserving of wrath (Heb. 2:3). Thislinkage between justification and right conduct accounts for James’spolemical statement: “You see that a person is consideredrighteous by what they do and not by faith alone” (James 2:24).Abraham’s positional righteousness, secured by faith in whatGod would do on his behalf, became publicly evident through hisobedience (James 2:21–22).

Weshould also note the different purpose that God has in judging hischurch. One aspect of it certainly is to grasp the enormity of oursins, so that we might properly acknowledge the depth of his mercy onthat day. But also this judgment will occur in order to mete out thediffering rewards that Scripture anticipates for the people of God.The definitive text in this regard is 1Cor. 3:1–17, whichconnects the believer’s rewards and losses to the quality ofhis or her behavior within the body of Christ. Some are building onChrist, the sure foundation, using the available materials, and theyreceive their proper reward. Others build selfishly on themselves,with the result that they are saved, “though only as oneescaping through the flames” (1Cor. 3:15). In both cases,however, the question seems to be one of greater and lesser reward,as opposed to salvation or damnation. Even in hell itself, variousdegrees of suffering come into play. According to Jesus, one canreceive a heavy or light “beating” for disobedience,based on one’s prior knowledge of the master’s will (Luke12:47–48). Judgment day, therefore, should not frightenChristians. Jesus really did suffer the full measure of God’swrath against our sin. But this day reminds us that we areaccountable for what we do as his disciples, and it motivates theevangelism that we are commanded to practice.

JudgmentDay in the Bible

Thebook of Revelation concludes with a harrowing vision of finaljudgment. On that day, when the God of all creation sits on his greatwhite throne and holds court, the dead will rise and answer for theirdeeds, whether good or bad (20:11–13). The record of eachperson’s conduct appears in books, one of which is the Book ofLife (20:12–13). Anyone whose name does not appear in the Bookof Life is thrown into the lake of fire (20:15).

Theapostle Paul refers to this same event in Acts 17:30–31. Allhuman beings will face their scheduled day in court, as God certifiedby raising Christ from the dead. It will be a day of wrath, amongother things, when God’s righteous anger against sin is fullydisplayed (Rom. 2:5). In the presence of this God, Isaiah proclaimedhimself to be ruined because of his sinfulness before the one who iscalled “Holy, holy, holy” (Isa. 6:1–5). Wetherefore confess with the author of Hebrews, who says, “It is[and will be] a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the livingGod” (Heb. 10:31).

Manyother texts of Scripture forecast the same event: judgment day iscoming, and nothing can stop it. They also describe this day inequally frightening terms, anticipating fire, darkness, and weepingfor some, but everlasting joy and peace for others. Even Christianswill be judged on this day, notwithstanding the promise ofeverlasting life for everyone who believes (e.g., John 3:16; 5:24;Rom. 3:21–24; 8:1–2; 2Cor. 5:21). In Rom. 14:10–12Paul says, “For we will all stand before God’s judgmentseat,” at which time, “each of us will give an account ofourselves to God.” Similarly, in 2Cor. 5:10 Paul warns,“For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, sothat each one of us may receive what is due us for the things donewhile in the body, whether good or bad.”

Justificationand Judgment

Inthese texts, an apparent tension exists between the promise ofjustification, upon which all Christian hope stands, and thecertainty of final judgment, including the judgment of believers. Itwill not do simply to downplay the one or the other, as if thebiblical writers had not really intended one or both of them. Thesetexts say what they say, the good news no less plainly than the bad.Yet, closer inspection shows that the tension is merely apparent.

Wemust first recognize that Scripture treats piety as the evidence ofregeneration and saving faith. Jesus says that a “good tree,”which is a genuine disciple, bears good fruit (Matt. 7:17). That is,the observable righteousness of such a disciple will surpass thehypocritical casuistry of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 5:20). Onjudgment day, therefore, no actual conflict will or ever could arisebetween the general tendency of the believer’s conduct and hisor her position in Christ. Over a lifetime, the believer’shabitual behavior will have differed fundamentally, though neversatisfactorily, from that of a lost person. As for unrepentantsinners, they will be sentenced to eternal damnation because of theirlawlessness (Rom. 3:9–19). Their conduct demonstrates that theyhave rejected the gospel and are deserving of wrath (Heb. 2:3). Thislinkage between justification and right conduct accounts for James’spolemical statement: “You see that a person is consideredrighteous by what they do and not by faith alone” (James 2:24).Abraham’s positional righteousness, secured by faith in whatGod would do on his behalf, became publicly evident through hisobedience (James 2:21–22).

Weshould also note the different purpose that God has in judging hischurch. One aspect of it certainly is to grasp the enormity of oursins, so that we might properly acknowledge the depth of his mercy onthat day. But also this judgment will occur in order to mete out thediffering rewards that Scripture anticipates for the people of God.The definitive text in this regard is 1Cor. 3:1–17, whichconnects the believer’s rewards and losses to the quality ofhis or her behavior within the body of Christ. Some are building onChrist, the sure foundation, using the available materials, and theyreceive their proper reward. Others build selfishly on themselves,with the result that they are saved, “though only as oneescaping through the flames” (1Cor. 3:15). In both cases,however, the question seems to be one of greater and lesser reward,as opposed to salvation or damnation. Even in hell itself, variousdegrees of suffering come into play. According to Jesus, one canreceive a heavy or light “beating” for disobedience,based on one’s prior knowledge of the master’s will (Luke12:47–48). Judgment day, therefore, should not frightenChristians. Jesus really did suffer the full measure of God’swrath against our sin. But this day reminds us that we areaccountable for what we do as his disciples, and it motivates theevangelism that we are commanded to practice.

(1)A“dealer in purple cloth” “from the city ofThyatira” who believed and was baptized when Paul came toPhilippi on his second missionary journey (Acts 16:14). Luke recordsthat Lydia was “a worshiper of God,” a designation thathe uses elsewhere only in Acts 18:7. The description is similar to“God-fearing,” which applied usually to devout Gentilefollowers of the Jewish God (Acts 10:2; 17:17).

Paulshared the gospel with Lydia and her female companions at a place ofprayer near a river. God “opened her heart to respond to Paul’smessage” (Acts 16:14), and Lydia became the first namedChristian convert in Europe. Lydia then invited Paul and hiscompanions to stay at her house (16:15), indicating that she was awoman of some means. Paul, Luke, and the rest of the missionary bandseem to have stayed at Lydia’s house until they left Philippi(16:40).

Lydia’shometown, Thyatira, over two hundred miles from Philippi, is home toone of the seven churches of Revelation (Rev. 2:18–29).

(2)Aregion in western Asia Minor, mentioned in Jeremiah and Ezekiel inclose connection with Cush and Put (Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 27:10; 30:5).

(1)A“dealer in purple cloth” “from the city ofThyatira” who believed and was baptized when Paul came toPhilippi on his second missionary journey (Acts 16:14). Luke recordsthat Lydia was “a worshiper of God,” a designation thathe uses elsewhere only in Acts 18:7. The description is similar to“God-fearing,” which applied usually to devout Gentilefollowers of the Jewish God (Acts 10:2; 17:17).

Paulshared the gospel with Lydia and her female companions at a place ofprayer near a river. God “opened her heart to respond to Paul’smessage” (Acts 16:14), and Lydia became the first namedChristian convert in Europe. Lydia then invited Paul and hiscompanions to stay at her house (16:15), indicating that she was awoman of some means. Paul, Luke, and the rest of the missionary bandseem to have stayed at Lydia’s house until they left Philippi(16:40).

Lydia’shometown, Thyatira, over two hundred miles from Philippi, is home toone of the seven churches of Revelation (Rev. 2:18–29).

(2)Aregion in western Asia Minor, mentioned in Jeremiah and Ezekiel inclose connection with Cush and Put (Jer. 46:9; Ezek. 27:10; 30:5).

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

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jesus’Life

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).

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

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

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

Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).

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

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

InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).

Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).

TheIdentity of Jesus Christ

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jesus’Purpose and Community

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

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

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

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

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

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

TheQuests for the Historical Jesus

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

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

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

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

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

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 contemporarycirc*mstances. 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 andcirc*mstances, 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 contemporarycirc*mstances. 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 andcirc*mstances, 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.

An oration is a formal public speech; an orator is a personskilled in delivering an oration. Classical oratory flourished infifth-century BC Athens, when itinerant intellectuals, known asSophists, trained pupils in the art of persuasive speech. The Greekphilosopher Plato disdained the Sophists as hucksters more concernedwith making money and winning arguments than with presenting truth.He and his successor Aristotle extolled reason and virtue over merepersuasiveness in rhetoric. Greek oratory was admired and taught bythe Romans to their young men, who needed to speak persuasively inlawcourts and public assemblies. The Roman orator Cicero stressedskills necessary for effective oration: proper word choice andsentence construction, practiced gestures and vocal modulation,appropriate emotion, wit, andcharm, along with a prodigiousmemory and copious knowledge of history and law.

Skilledoration is particularly stressed in the Greek and Roman venues of theapostle Paul. But even in the OT the “eloquent orator” ispart of Judah’s support system (Isa. 3:3 KJV). Moses decrieshis inadequacy as God’s spokesperson due to his lack ofeloquence (Exod. 4:10). Before Paul’s apostleship, theunschooled Peter becomes an effective orator of the gospel to hisJewish audiences (Acts 2:14–40; 3:12–26; 4:8–13),while the Greek Jew Stephen’s oratorical defense of the HebrewScriptures’ fulfillment in Christ so inflames the Sanhedrinthat they stone him (Acts 7:2–57).

Paulorates the gospel to the pagan Greek cultures of the Roman Empire. InAthens, his orations arouse the interest of philosophers (Acts17:17–20). He quotes Greek poets in his oration at theAreopagus (17:22–31). In Ephesus, Paul’s orations aboutthe kingdom of God (19:8–9) jeopardize the idol trade,antagonizing the local artisans. An oration by the city clerk calmsand diffuses the resultant riotous mob (19:35–40). Paul usesoratory in his legal defense before the governor Felix (24:10–21)and in his attempt to persuade King Agrippa of the truth andreasonableness of the gospel (26:2–29). But Paul’sspeaking skills are not admired by all (2Cor. 10:10), and Paulhimself disdains the so-called wisdom of those who value sucheloquence (1Cor. 1:18–22; 2Cor. 10:5; 11:6). Hestresses that his message is not a matter of clever and confidentoratorical skills but is instead taught by the Holy Spirit andempowered by God (1Cor. 2:1–4, 13; 4:20).

An oration is a formal public speech; an orator is a personskilled in delivering an oration. Classical oratory flourished infifth-century BC Athens, when itinerant intellectuals, known asSophists, trained pupils in the art of persuasive speech. The Greekphilosopher Plato disdained the Sophists as hucksters more concernedwith making money and winning arguments than with presenting truth.He and his successor Aristotle extolled reason and virtue over merepersuasiveness in rhetoric. Greek oratory was admired and taught bythe Romans to their young men, who needed to speak persuasively inlawcourts and public assemblies. The Roman orator Cicero stressedskills necessary for effective oration: proper word choice andsentence construction, practiced gestures and vocal modulation,appropriate emotion, wit, andcharm, along with a prodigiousmemory and copious knowledge of history and law.

Skilledoration is particularly stressed in the Greek and Roman venues of theapostle Paul. But even in the OT the “eloquent orator” ispart of Judah’s support system (Isa. 3:3 KJV). Moses decrieshis inadequacy as God’s spokesperson due to his lack ofeloquence (Exod. 4:10). Before Paul’s apostleship, theunschooled Peter becomes an effective orator of the gospel to hisJewish audiences (Acts 2:14–40; 3:12–26; 4:8–13),while the Greek Jew Stephen’s oratorical defense of the HebrewScriptures’ fulfillment in Christ so inflames the Sanhedrinthat they stone him (Acts 7:2–57).

Paulorates the gospel to the pagan Greek cultures of the Roman Empire. InAthens, his orations arouse the interest of philosophers (Acts17:17–20). He quotes Greek poets in his oration at theAreopagus (17:22–31). In Ephesus, Paul’s orations aboutthe kingdom of God (19:8–9) jeopardize the idol trade,antagonizing the local artisans. An oration by the city clerk calmsand diffuses the resultant riotous mob (19:35–40). Paul usesoratory in his legal defense before the governor Felix (24:10–21)and in his attempt to persuade King Agrippa of the truth andreasonableness of the gospel (26:2–29). But Paul’sspeaking skills are not admired by all (2Cor. 10:10), and Paulhimself disdains the so-called wisdom of those who value sucheloquence (1Cor. 1:18–22; 2Cor. 10:5; 11:6). Hestresses that his message is not a matter of clever and confidentoratorical skills but is instead taught by the Holy Spirit andempowered by God (1Cor. 2:1–4, 13; 4:20).

Definitionof Terms

Theterm “pagan” has two separate but related definitions inthe English language, both of which are somewhat misleading whenapplied to religions in the ancient Near East. The first definitiondefines a pagan as someone who follows a less-established religion ora person who is outside the mainstream of belief within a givensociety. Applying this definition to an ancient Near Eastern religionis somewhat misleading because often within biblical society theJewish or Christian belief system was the religion that was outsidethe mainstream. Being outside the mainstream certainly was a fact oflife for first-century Christians, who often were persecuted as ifthey were atheists and for their failure to acknowledge a pantheon ofgods, which was a mainstream belief. In OT society the competingreligions, especially the Canaanite and Babylonian pantheons,certainly were more widely accepted and followed. Even withinIsraelite society these non-Israelite religions offered a viablealternative to the religion of Yahweh. Thus, if one were to use thisdefinition either in the OT or the NT, it likely would need to beapplied to the religion of the Jews and Christians and not theprevailing religions of the Canaanites, the Babylonians, the Greeks,or the Romans.

Thesecond English definition of the term “pagan” involvesthe worship of the gods or forces of nature that control the world.This definition is applied specifically to agrarian societies, wherethe changing of seasons, the bringing of favorable weather andgrowing conditions for the crops, the possibility for prosperity thatgood weather brings, and a general desire for fertility are part ofthe religious understanding and belief system. While this definitioncertainly applies to many of the non-Israelite religions followed bythe Israelites’ neighbors and to some of the Greeks and Romansof the NT, it also would apply to many of the followers of Yahweh inthe OT who saw Yahweh as the God of the mountains and storms indirect conflict with the Baal myth, which ascribed these traits toBaal (see below). Therefore, it is prudent to remember that the label“pagan gods” is anachronistic and should be used withcare when discussing the religions described in the Bible.

Ona related note, the terminology of “idolatry” is alsooften misunderstood. Most of the non-Israelite religions discussed inthe Bible would have understood the images of their gods to berepresentations of the deity (or even a throne or meeting place forthe god) rather than an object of worship in its own right. Whilethey would have believed that the god dwelled in the object and waspresent when worship was being performed, they would not havebelieved that the object was the god. Most of the idols made in theancient Near East are indistinguishable from one another unless oneobserves their specific weapons. This, coupled with the idol’santhropomorphic representation, rather than a heavenlyrepresentation, suggests that the concern for early worshipers wasnot to worship an inanimate image, but rather to see a representationof the god who indwelled the image if worshiped correctly. It was thepresence of the god that was desired. Thus, the prohibition againstimages in the OT is a prohibition against trying to depict Yahweh inany physical form.

Whendealing with the non-Israelite gods of the Bible, it is helpful todivide them into historical periods. Within the OT, the majorgroupings of non-Israelite gods should include the gods of theCanaanites and the gods of the Babylonians (which are very similar tothe gods of the Assyrians). To a lesser degree the gods of thePhilistines, the Egyptians, and the Persians can also be considered.In the NT, the gods of the Greeks and the Romans (which often areassimilated Greek gods with new names) can be considered. Along withthese somewhat artificial historical divisions are innumerablepersonal gods and local gods worshiped by small groups of people oreven by a single town or village. For example, Gen. 31:30 referencesLaban’s gods, which Rachel steals when she leaves home totravel with Jacob. These personal gods likely played a huge role inthe day-to-day life of the average person, but most often they arelost to history. Similarly in the NT, the mystery religions of theGreeks and the Romans likely played an important role in the lives ofmany people, but they are difficult to reconstruct because of thelimited amount of documentation that has survived.

CanaanitePantheon

Thereis considerable overlap between the Canaanite pantheon and those ofthe Mesopotamian cultures, and often this can create some confusionabout the deities being discussed, especially their names andfunctions. Further complicating matters, the descriptions of godswithin the Mesopotamian pantheons often have fluid identities, asdifferent textual traditions conflict with each other at times. Boththe Canaanite and the Babylonian pantheons borrow heavily from theSumerian pantheon, which adds both to their similarities and to thepossibility of confusion.

Withoutquestion, the most important god within the Canaanite pantheon wasBaal. The story of Baal, often called the “Baal Cycle,”describes the life and deeds of Baal. The cult of Baal was afertility religion, and all the events of Baal’s life wereconnected to the changing seasons and nature’s fertility. TheBaal Cycle also explained how the worship of Baal affected theagricultural success of farmers. This detailed story of Baal was allbut unknown, except for a few details that could be gleaned from theBible, prior to the accidental discovery of the city of Ugarit andits extensive library in 1928 by a farmer plowing his field. The cityof Ugarit appears to have been a major trading center between theyears of about 1450 and 1200 BC. Besides Baal, other importantdeities within the pantheon were El, the elderly, long-bearded fathergod; Asherah, El’s wife, or occasionally portrayed as Baal’swife or sister; and Mot, the god of death, usually represented as asnake.

Baalwas the god of weather, especially thunder, lightning, and rain (Baalis almost always depicted with a lightning bolt in one hand and a rodof power in the other). Other representations or symbols of Baalinclude the bull (the strongest and most powerful animal of theancient Near East), water, mist, dew, grain, oil, and any othersymbol of fertility. Worship of Baal was intended to keep him happyin order to assure the coming of spring (preferably, early), thenecessary rain for crops, and finally the lengthening of summer sothat two crops could be planted and harvested. The second crop, whichoften was the crop that a farmer could sell for a profit (the firstbeing reserved for the farmer’s own food), was especially tiedto the favor of Baal. Baal was worshiped not only in hope ofa*gricultural prosperity but also for family fertility in terms ofchildren and for help in battle. The primary means for producing andkeeping the favor of Baal was by offering the firstfruits of anyharvest to him. When the first portion of a crop was harvested, itwas expected that a portion of that harvest (most often a tithe) beoffered to Baal in hopes of receiving his favor and extending thegrowing season. Not only were the first of the crops to be given toBaal but also the firstborn of all herded animals. It was also acommon practice for the firstborn of a family to be given to Baal inhuman sacrifice. Baal is often referred to as Molek in the Bible(e.g., Jer. 19) when describing human sacrifice. Another practice ofBaal worship was ritual sexual intercourse between a worshiper and apriest or a priestess. This ritual sexual activity was thought toincrease the fertility of the worshiper, thereby increasing thechances of having more children.

Apparentlyfor much of the history of Israel, especially during the monarchy,Baal worship offered an enticing alternative to the worship ofYahweh. In fact, the stories of Elijah and Elisha serve as a directpolemic against Baal worship. Most of the stories of Elijah andElisha use the symbols of Baal to demonstrate that Yahweh is muchstronger than Baal. By the time of the first century AD, Baal worshipwas a thing of the past, but some vestiges of the worship remained.For example, in the Gospels Jesus says that a person cannot worshipboth “God and money” (KJV: “mammon”) (Matt.6:24; Luke 16:13). The Greek word translated “money,”mamōnas, is borrowed from Aramaic and actually refers to theworship of Baal, but by Jesus’ time it had evolved to take onthe more generic definition “prosperity.”

Alongwith Baal, the worship of Asherah, a female member of the pantheon,was common. Although scholars are not completely sure of its form, itis believed that the reference in the OT to “Asherah poles”was likely a reference to a phallic symbol that represented fertility(Judg. 6:26; 1Kings 14:23). Recently, several references toAsherah have been discovered in Kuntillet ‘Ajrud innortheastern Sinai, dated to about the eighth century. Theseinscriptions say that Asherah was the consort of Yahweh rather thanBaal, providing further evidence for the amount of syncretism presentin Israel during the monarchy. Another female deity, Ashtoreth (knownalso by her Mesopotamian name, “Ishtar”), is called“Queen of Heaven” several times in the book of Jeremiah(7:18; 44:17–19,25).

Inrelationship to the infiltration of Baal worship into the northernkingdom is the debate about the nature of the “sin of Jeroboam”that was instituted by JeroboamI when he, along with the tennorthern tribes, ceded from Israel (1Kings 12:25–33). Atissue is whether Jeroboam was instituting a new religion based on thecalves, thus becoming syncretistic with these tribes’ northernPhoenician neighbors (which would have been tantamount to introducingBaal worship into Israel), or simply rejecting the centrality ofJerusalem for Yahweh worship (which only a few years before had beencentralized in Jerusalem by Solomon’s temple, resulting in thedisenfranchisem*nt of the Levites outside Jerusalem). Clearly, thesouthern kingdom viewed the events as apostasy, but whether thenorthern tribes did is unclear. Amos, for example, seems to focus hiscriticism of the cult at Bethel not on the worship itself but ratheron the hypocrisy of the worshipers, who were not following the law asprescribed in the Torah.

BabylonianPantheon

Althoughdebate continues over the exact relationship between the two, theBabylonian pantheon had many elements similar to the Canaanitepantheon. There are dozens of primary documents about the religion ofBabylon; the most important of them include the Enuma Elish, acreation story and apologetic for Marduk the chief of gods; theAtrahasis Epic, which has a version of the flood story in it; and theEpic of Gilgamesh, which describes the quest for eternal life by KingGilgamesh. Within the Babylonian pantheon, Marduk is the chief ofgods, who is also the patron god of Babylonia. The Enuma Elish, whichdescribes the creation of the world, deals primarily with theascension of Marduk to the role of chief god by destroying the forcesof chaos represented by the monster Tiamat and bringing order to boththe pantheon and the natural world. Marduk, like Baal, had retainedthe most powerful cosmic weapons, which include water, rain, and war.The Epic of Gilgamesh describes the journey of King Gilgamesh, who ispart human and part divine, in search of immortality. During thecourse of his trip, he learns that eternal life is reserved for thegods, and humans must make their mark on the world by what they doduring their lives. The Babylonian religion and pantheon exerted itsstrongest influence on Israel during the exile. The biblical textclearly has been influenced by these Babylonian beliefs. However, theBible consistently presents these viewpoints as contrary to the trueworship of Yahweh and insists that only Yahweh deserves worship asthe true creator of the world, vanquisher of chaos, and provider ofprosperity and life.

OtherAncient Near Eastern Pantheons

TheEgyptian gods are mentioned only briefly in the Bible. The most overtreferences to the gods of Egypt are found in the story of the tenplagues, which most scholars believe was a direct attack on thedeities of Egypt by Yahweh. It is unclear if the calf described inExod. 32 should be understood as an Egyptian god, a completely new ordifferent god, or as a forbidden representation of Yahweh.

Littleis known about the Philistine pantheon of gods, but it appears to bequite similar to the Canaanite pantheon (if not the same with localvariations). The Philistines’ chief god, referred to in theBible as “Dagon” (Judg. 16:23; 1Sam. 5:2–7;1Chron. 10:10), likely also went by the name “Baal-Zebul”(“Lord Prince”), which in the OT is mocked by beingchanged to “Baal-Zebub” (“Lord of the Flies”)(2Kings 1:2–3, 6, 16). In the NT, this god is recalledwhen the Pharisees accuse Jesus of being in league with Satan (Matt.12:24; Luke 11:15 [Gk. Beelzeboul]). Because the Philistines wereknown as the Sea Peoples, it is not surprising that this deity hadseveral fishlike qualities (including a fish tail).

NewTestament Religion

Inthe NT, the Greek pantheon that was subsumed by the Roman pantheonwas the common religious expression of the day. Like other ancientpantheons, these pantheons tried to explain the natural world by theinvolvement of various deities in nature. Proof that Jews living inthe province of Judah were under constant pressure to assimilate tothe Greek religion is provided in the reports of the books ofMaccabees that describe the Jewish revolt against the Seleucids inwhat was essentially a religious war against assimilation. In theGospels, little is said about the Greek or Roman pantheons, but thebook of Acts contains several reports of Paul’s interactionwith the Greeks and their religious practices. Especially notable isPaul’s interaction with the Athenians when he debatedphilosophers who were followers of the “Unknown God”(Acts 17:23). Three other deities are named in Acts, includingArtemis in Ephesus (Acts 19:24, 27–28, 34–35), whom theRomans called “Diana,” and Zeus and Hermes (Acts14:12–13), called “Jupiter” and “Mercury”by the Romans, whom Paul and Barnabas were mistaken for in Lystrawhen Paul preached and healed a crippled man.

Summary

Theproblem of God’s people Israel worshiping other gods permeatesmost of biblical history. These reports range over time from theearly story of Rachel in Genesis, to the period of the judges whenMicah’s images (Judg. 17:1–6) and Gideon’s ephod(Judg. 8:26–27) were worshiped, to when Solomon and his wiveswere worshiping foreign gods (1Kings 11:5–8), to the timeof Ahab when all Israel followed Baal, whom Elijah vanquished onMount Carmel (1Kings 18:16–46). Depending on when onedates the book of Deuteronomy, the strong prohibitions againstidolatry either went unheeded (if Moses wrote the book) or were aculminating statement of the anti-idolatry Deuteronomistic writerjust before the exile. There is considerable debate about when Israelbecame an exclusively monotheistic nation (if it ever did), but bythe eighth century BC, Isaiah and Amos castigate worshipers of thesefalse gods. Clearly, by the time of Jeremiah, some factions withinIsrael (the prophet included) have begun to question whether the godsof the other nations even exist (Jer. 2:28). Finally, with thedestruction of the temple in Jerusalem, ironically, the worship ofother gods is ended. It is certain that by the time of the firstcentury AD, the evolution to a monotheistic view is complete, andPaul can claim that an “idol is nothing” (1Cor.8:4), and that any sin is tantamount to idolatry (Eph.5:5).

Most families in the ancient world were agrarian or engagedin raising livestock. Families that lived in cities led preindustriallifestyles, often dwelling in cramped quarters. The majority offamilies resided in rural areas and villages.

Peoplein the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin.Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family wasthe source of people’s status in the community and provided theprimary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.

Marriagewas not an arrangement merely between two individuals; rather,marriage was between two families. Family members and kin thereforetook precedence over individuals. In the worlds of both Testaments,authority within families and communities was determined by rankamong kin. Christianity was looked upon with hostility because itoverthrew foundational values of Jewish and even Greco-Romantradition. Service rather than rank became normative in family andcommunity relationships.

PatriarchalStructures

Apatrilineal system ruled in ancient Israel. Every family and everyhousehold belonged to a lineage. These lineages made up a clan inwhich kinship and inheritance were based on the patriarchs, thefathers of the families. These clans in turn made up larger clangroups and then tribal groups. The later Hellenistic and Roman worldmaintained patriarchal and patrilineal social structures as well.

Familydiscipline was in the hands of the father, the patriarch. The honorof the father depended on his ability to keep every family memberunder his authority (1Tim. 3:4). Other male members of thefamily assisted the father in defending the honor of the family (Gen.34).

AristotelianHousehold Codes

Notonly was the biblical world patriarchal (male dominated), but alsothe later societal influence by Greek philosophers impacted thebiblical text. The ancient Greeks viewed the household as a microcosmof society. Greek philosophers offered advice regarding householdmanagement, seeking to influence society for the greater good. Thisadvice was presented in oral and written discourses known as“household codes.” Aristotle’s household codes,written in the fourth century BC, were among the most famous. Suchcodes consisted of instructions on how the paterfamilias (the malehead of the household) should manage his wife, children, and slaves.The Stoic philosopher Arius Didymus summarized Aristotle’shousehold codes for Caesar Augustus. He argued, “A man has therule of this household by nature, for the deliberative faculty in awoman is inferior, in children it does not yet exist, and in the caseof slaves, it is completely absent.”

TheAristotelian household codes appear to be the background to NT textsthat, at face value, appear to treat women as inferior to men (Eph.5:22–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1; 1Pet. 3:1–7). Allthese texts are set in a Greco-Roman matrix, and the advice given tothe congregations seems to have been of contextual missional valuefor the sake of the gospel rather than as a guide for family livingfor all times in all contexts.

Marriageand Divorce

Marriagein the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between twofamilies, arranged by the bride’s father or a malerepresentative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’sprice.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction butalso an expression of family honor. Only the rich could affordmultiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself wascelebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.

Theprimary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to producea male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. Theconcept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs,especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.

Marriageamong Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jewssought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev.18:6–17). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew.Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainlyoutside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness.Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romansdid practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinshipgroup (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategicalliances between families.

InJewish customs, marriage was preceded by a period of betrothal. Thisstate of betrothal was legally binding and left the survivor of theman’s death a widow. A betrothed couple, like Joseph and Mary(Matt. 1:18), did not live together or have sexual intercourse. Yettheir union was as binding as marriage and could be dissolved onlythrough death or divorce.

Greekand Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. InJewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorceproceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release herand repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (inparticular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Siracomments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to thefather (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery(Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictiveuse of divorce than the Old Testament (Mark 10:1–12).

Children,Parenting, and Education

Childbearingwas considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman andher entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to thisblessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, andspecifically their husbands.

Abortioncommonly took place in the Greco-Roman world. Women therefore had tobe encouraged to continue in their pregnancies (1Tim. 2:15).

Childrenwere of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. Anestimated 60percent of the children in the first-centuryMediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.

AncientNear Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting stylebased on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and eviltendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent eviltendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The mainconcern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty.Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stagechildren were taught to accept the total authority of the father. Therearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girlswere taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so thatthey could help with household tasks.

Earlyeducation took place in the home. Jewish education was centeredaround the teaching of Torah. At home it was the father’sresponsibility to teach the Torah to his children (Deut. 6:6–7),especially his sons. By the first century, under the influence ofHellenism, Judaism had developed its own school system. Girls,however, did not regularly attend school. Many of the boys wereeducated in primary and secondary schools, learning written and orallaw. Sometimes schools were an extension of the synagogues. Romaneducation was patterned after Greek education. Teachers of primaryschools often were slaves. Mostly boys attended schools, but in somecases girls were allowed to attend school as well.

Familyas an Analogy

Therelationship between Israel and God.Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak offidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT,the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In theiroverall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to infamilial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod.4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16;64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).

Theprophet Hosea depicts Israel as sons and daughters who are offspringof a harlot. The harlot represents faithless Israel. God is portrayedas a wronged father and husband, and both children and wife asrebellious and adulterous (Hos. 1–3). Likewise, the prophetJeremiah presents the Mosaic covenant as a marriage soured by theinfidelity of Israel and Judah (e.g., Jer. 2:2–13). Thefamilial-marriage metaphor used by the prophets is a vehicle forproclaiming God’s resolve to go beyond customary law andcultural expectations to reclaim that which is lost. A similarpicture of reclaiming and restoring is seen in Malachi. Oneinterpretation of Mal. 4:6 holds that it implicitly preserves aneschatological tradition of family disruption with a futurerestoration in view. The restored family in view is restored Israel.

Thechurch as the family of God.Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him.This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship,the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt.16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into thecommunity was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom,belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39;16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63;John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30;Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community waseventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the communityof his followers, God’s family—the church. See alsoAdoption.

Most families in the ancient world were agrarian or engagedin raising livestock. Families that lived in cities led preindustriallifestyles, often dwelling in cramped quarters. The majority offamilies resided in rural areas and villages.

Peoplein the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin.Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family wasthe source of people’s status in the community and provided theprimary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.

Marriagewas not an arrangement merely between two individuals; rather,marriage was between two families. Family members and kin thereforetook precedence over individuals. In the worlds of both Testaments,authority within families and communities was determined by rankamong kin. Christianity was looked upon with hostility because itoverthrew foundational values of Jewish and even Greco-Romantradition. Service rather than rank became normative in family andcommunity relationships.

PatriarchalStructures

Apatrilineal system ruled in ancient Israel. Every family and everyhousehold belonged to a lineage. These lineages made up a clan inwhich kinship and inheritance were based on the patriarchs, thefathers of the families. These clans in turn made up larger clangroups and then tribal groups. The later Hellenistic and Roman worldmaintained patriarchal and patrilineal social structures as well.

Familydiscipline was in the hands of the father, the patriarch. The honorof the father depended on his ability to keep every family memberunder his authority (1Tim. 3:4). Other male members of thefamily assisted the father in defending the honor of the family (Gen.34).

AristotelianHousehold Codes

Notonly was the biblical world patriarchal (male dominated), but alsothe later societal influence by Greek philosophers impacted thebiblical text. The ancient Greeks viewed the household as a microcosmof society. Greek philosophers offered advice regarding householdmanagement, seeking to influence society for the greater good. Thisadvice was presented in oral and written discourses known as“household codes.” Aristotle’s household codes,written in the fourth century BC, were among the most famous. Suchcodes consisted of instructions on how the paterfamilias (the malehead of the household) should manage his wife, children, and slaves.The Stoic philosopher Arius Didymus summarized Aristotle’shousehold codes for Caesar Augustus. He argued, “A man has therule of this household by nature, for the deliberative faculty in awoman is inferior, in children it does not yet exist, and in the caseof slaves, it is completely absent.”

TheAristotelian household codes appear to be the background to NT textsthat, at face value, appear to treat women as inferior to men (Eph.5:22–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1; 1Pet. 3:1–7). Allthese texts are set in a Greco-Roman matrix, and the advice given tothe congregations seems to have been of contextual missional valuefor the sake of the gospel rather than as a guide for family livingfor all times in all contexts.

Marriageand Divorce

Marriagein the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between twofamilies, arranged by the bride’s father or a malerepresentative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’sprice.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction butalso an expression of family honor. Only the rich could affordmultiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself wascelebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.

Theprimary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to producea male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. Theconcept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs,especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.

Marriageamong Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jewssought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev.18:6–17). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew.Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainlyoutside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness.Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romansdid practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinshipgroup (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategicalliances between families.

InJewish customs, marriage was preceded by a period of betrothal. Thisstate of betrothal was legally binding and left the survivor of theman’s death a widow. A betrothed couple, like Joseph and Mary(Matt. 1:18), did not live together or have sexual intercourse. Yettheir union was as binding as marriage and could be dissolved onlythrough death or divorce.

Greekand Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. InJewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorceproceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release herand repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (inparticular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Siracomments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to thefather (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery(Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictiveuse of divorce than the Old Testament (Mark 10:1–12).

Children,Parenting, and Education

Childbearingwas considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman andher entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to thisblessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, andspecifically their husbands.

Abortioncommonly took place in the Greco-Roman world. Women therefore had tobe encouraged to continue in their pregnancies (1Tim. 2:15).

Childrenwere of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. Anestimated 60percent of the children in the first-centuryMediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.

AncientNear Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting stylebased on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and eviltendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent eviltendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The mainconcern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty.Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stagechildren were taught to accept the total authority of the father. Therearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girlswere taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so thatthey could help with household tasks.

Earlyeducation took place in the home. Jewish education was centeredaround the teaching of Torah. At home it was the father’sresponsibility to teach the Torah to his children (Deut. 6:6–7),especially his sons. By the first century, under the influence ofHellenism, Judaism had developed its own school system. Girls,however, did not regularly attend school. Many of the boys wereeducated in primary and secondary schools, learning written and orallaw. Sometimes schools were an extension of the synagogues. Romaneducation was patterned after Greek education. Teachers of primaryschools often were slaves. Mostly boys attended schools, but in somecases girls were allowed to attend school as well.

Familyas an Analogy

Therelationship between Israel and God.Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak offidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT,the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In theiroverall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to infamilial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod.4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16;64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).

Theprophet Hosea depicts Israel as sons and daughters who are offspringof a harlot. The harlot represents faithless Israel. God is portrayedas a wronged father and husband, and both children and wife asrebellious and adulterous (Hos. 1–3). Likewise, the prophetJeremiah presents the Mosaic covenant as a marriage soured by theinfidelity of Israel and Judah (e.g., Jer. 2:2–13). Thefamilial-marriage metaphor used by the prophets is a vehicle forproclaiming God’s resolve to go beyond customary law andcultural expectations to reclaim that which is lost. A similarpicture of reclaiming and restoring is seen in Malachi. Oneinterpretation of Mal. 4:6 holds that it implicitly preserves aneschatological tradition of family disruption with a futurerestoration in view. The restored family in view is restored Israel.

Thechurch as the family of God.Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him.This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship,the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt.16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into thecommunity was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom,belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39;16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63;John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30;Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community waseventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the communityof his followers, God’s family—the church. See alsoAdoption.

The philosophy (“love of wisdom”) most familiarto the writers of the NT began in Ionia, among those who attempted todetermine the fundamental substance of the universe without recourseto superstition and myth (the pre-Socratics). Platonists,Peripatetics (Aristotelians), Stoics, and Epicureans—all beganin Athens, extending the work of Socrates (c.469–399 BC),who was executed for challenging the status quo and “corruptingthe minds of the youth.” But by the first century BC,Hellenistic philosophy had permeated the Mediterranean world. Theontological quest for the nature of being, however, had joined itselfto ethics: What is the good life? Therefore, philosophy and thegospel, which also made claims about the “is” and “ought”of the universe, would compete for the hearts of the people. Actsrelates that Paul debated with Epicureans and Stoics (17:18).

Epicureanism.Epicurus (c. 341–270 BC) founded a school in his garden. Hisfollowers believed that he was divine, possessing answers for all oflife’s questions. The founder wrote didactic letters todisseminate his philosophy. By coining maxims and slogans forilliterate people to memorize and pattern their lives by, he becameperhaps the first popular philosopher (perhaps the equivalent of amodern “self-help guru”). His disciples wereevangelistic, traversing the Roman Empire to win converts. Theycarefully memorized his teachings and, after his death, preserved hiswritings, which often were cited in an unchanging canon.

Epicuruspreached a “common sense” gospel. The goal of life ispersonal happiness. The greatest obstacle to happiness is anxiety. Heproposed a four-part “cure,” an intellectualappropriation of these truth claims: (1)there are no divinebeings who threaten us; (2)there is no next life; (3)whatwe truly need is easy to get; (4)what makes us suffer is easyto put up with. A fundamental Epicurean conviction is that life onthis earth comes with no strings attached. The implicit atheism andselfishness of the system were largely unappealing to Jews and piouspagans.

Stoicism.More influential were the Stoics, who had many leaders and no singlesource of authority. Zeno (c. 336–264 BC) founded the school,which took its name from the “painted porch” (stoa) onthe north side of the Athenian market where he lectured. Like theEpicureans, the Stoics saw the goal of life to be personal happiness,but they embraced providence, the ordering of all things for thebest. Therefore, happiness is living virtuously according to nature,which involves a two-part process:(1)we conform our livesto the rational principle guiding the universe, what they called the“Logos,” or “Word”; (2)we resignourselves completely and without complaint to whatever providence maysend us. This is living a life of reason.

Theimpersonal nature of the Logos and seeming coldness to the humancondition made Stoicism difficult for most people to embrace. Perhapsthrough the mediating reflection of the Jewish philosopher Philo (c.20 BC–AD 50), who attempted to synthesize Scripture andphilosophy, the apostle John interpreted the mystery of theincarnation, in part, by presenting Jesus as the Logos/Word (John1:1–18; see also Col. 1:15–20).

Otherforms of philosophy. Alsoprominent were Cynics, who embraced the defiance of Socrates, andNeo-Pythagoreans, who extended asceticism to the rejection of wine,marriage, eating meat (and for some, beans), sacrifice, shoes, allclothing except that made of linen, shaving, and dancing. Thesingular reference to philosophy in the Bible is negative (Col. 2:8;cf. Acts 17:18–21). The context suggests that Paul’sopponents were influenced by Neo-Pythagoreans (Col. 2:6–23; seealso 1Tim. 4:1–5; 5:23).

Theearly church did not embrace a singular position on philosophy.Tertullian (c.AD 160–240) famously asks, “What isthere in common between Athens and Jerusalem? What between theAcademy and the Church?” (Praescr. 7). But Clement ofAlexandria (c. AD 150–215) claims, “For God is the sourceof all good things.... Thus philosophy was apreparation, paving the way towards perfection in Christ”(Strom. 1.5.28). The church fathers appropriated the precision ofphilosophical vocabulary in their attempt to rationalize themysteries of the Christian faith.

God is the all-powerful, all-knowing, morally perfect creatorof the universe; and we are his creatures—no less, but also nomore. Thus, an unimaginable distance must exist between God and us;and this fact has led some theologians to despair of knowing anythingabout him for sure, not even that he actually has these attributes ofdeity. It might seem, furthermore, that some biblical texts encouragesuch a view. Psalm 92:5 recognizes the distance: “How great areyour works, O Lord, how profound your thoughts!” Psalm 145:3says that “no one can fathom” God’s greatness.According to Ps. 147:5, “Great is our Lord and mighty in power;his understanding has no limit.” In Ps. 139:6, David tries tocomprehend God’s perfect insight and concludes, “Suchknowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain.”The doxology of Rom. 11:33–36 exults in the uniqueness of God:“Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge ofGod! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracingout!” In Isa. 55:9, God says, “As the heavens are higherthan the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughtshigher than your thoughts.” Based on these passages and others,and knowing what the difference between creator and creature mustgenerally imply, one might suspect that we can know nothing ofsubstance about God.

Infact, however, the biblical writers tell a different story, beingcautiously optimistic about theology’s prospects. On the onehand, they note our creaturely limitations and God’stranscendence, as seen above. We cannot fully comprehend our Creator.We never will, not even through the eons of eternity. God will alwayshave something more to show us about himself, more that we can learnand adore. In that sense, the biblical writers are cautious aboutwhat theology can grasp. On the other hand, we must be able to learnsome things about God; otherwise, the Scriptures themselves would notexist, since they tell us about God and much else besides. Divineomnipotence, therefore, includes the ability to produce in usadequate theological understanding. We always lean on God, and no oneunderstands him at all apart from his initiative. He remainssovereign over this event, as with any other. But God has madehimself known in two general ways, according to Scripture.

Generaland Special Revelation

First,the biblical writers expect each of us to grasp something of God’snature, based on what is called “general revelation.”General revelation operates in a broadcasted way, so to speak,relying upon commonplace experience and the latter’s God-givenability to make us aware of his existence and nature. We all see theheavens that “declare the glory of God” (Ps. 19:1). Paulargues that every person can detect the “invisible qualities”of God, his “eternal power and divine nature,” in what hehas created, so that we have no excuse for decadent theology andbehavior (Rom. 1:20). The law of God is “written on [our]hearts” (Rom. 2:15), so that we grasp what we owe to him andeach other. Even though God has not spoken directly to every nation,“he has not left himself without testimony”; he has shownall people “kindness by giving [them] rain from heaven andcrops in their seasons” (Acts 14:17). We can learn some thingsabout God from these sources given to us, and thus we are accountablefor right conduct in relationship to them. However, generalrevelation lacks the detail and assurance of what is called “specialrevelation.”

Specialrevelation differs from general revelation in having a targetaudience. It conveys information about God, human beings, and ourworld that cannot be deduced from everyday, highly accessibleexperience. Jesus suffered for our sins. Our trust in his death onthe cross will save us. God is a Trinity of Father, Son, and HolySpirit, though there is one God. Christ will return in power andglory to judge all nations. We can think of God as our heavenlyFather, a morally perfect deity who cares about the individualperson. The Holy Spirit helps us in our weakness as we wonder how topray. God is always sovereign, even over the wicked deeds of humanbeings and the suffering that they cause. These are essential pointsof Christian doctrine. Yet we cannot substantiate any of them bycarefully observing ourselves, our world, or the facts of history.Indeed, sometimes our own thoughts lead us to resist these claimsbecause they entail great mysteries. One can easily (but wrongly)equate “I do not understand this” with “This isfalse.” Thus, our knowledge of these doctrines rests upon God’swillingness to speak and our readiness to hear what he says withhumility and trust, without having all our questions answered. Thevehicle for this latter kind of knowledge is called “specialrevelation.”

Allrevelation is “special,” simply because we can learnnothing about God apart from his self-disclosure. However,theologians use the technical term “special revelation”to capture the idea that God has revealed some matters of doctrineonly to specific people, with the expectation that they will preachthese truths to others as he requires them to do. These doctrinalmatters include the claims given above concerning some aspects ofGod’s nature, his attitude toward human beings, the plan ofsalvation, and so forth. Thus, the Bible is special revelation parexcellence; likewise, the preaching of prophets, Jesus, and then hischosen apostles (to list them in chronological order) is specialrevelation. Of course, since we do not have access to propheticteaching and the life and words of Christ apart from Scripture, thelatter is our sole source of special revelation. We cannot now seeand hear Jesus as his first-century observers did, but we encounterhim as the incarnate Word through the inerrant written word ofScripture. Theology, therefore, concerns what the Bible says aboutGod, humanity, Christ, and so forth, and it looks to generalrevelation, if at all, merely to corroborate or illustrate whatScripture substantiates. Likewise, the promises of God to bless thepreaching of his truth attach to special revelation rather than towhat one might glean from other sources (Isa. 55:11).

TheBible as Special Revelation

TheBible stands alone in revealing who God is and showing what pleaseshim. Its exact contents were ordained by God through inspiration.Scripture is “God-breathed” (2Tim. 3:16), havingbeen produced when people “spoke from God as they were carriedalong by the Holy Spirit” (2Pet. 1:21). Consequently,even though prophecy occurs in NT churches (1Cor. 14), it isnot received there as the unchallengeable teaching of OT prophets,Jesus, or his apostles. Rather, observers are to weigh carefully whatprophets say (1Cor. 14:29). John expressly warns of falseprophecy in the churches: “Dear friends, do not believe everyspirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God,because many false prophets have gone out into the world”(1John 4:1). These facts should lead one to be cautious inusing such phrases as “God told me that...”and in urging other Christians to act upon anyone’s privatesensations of being led by the Spirit, absent any objective reasonsfor doing so. Prophecy given by the Holy Spirit today should involvethe application of biblical truth to present challenges andopportunities. The same principle applies to subjective promptingsfrom the Holy Spirit. They should apply received doctrine withoutrevising it and must always be tested by the church.

Thesixty-six books of the Bible were written by real people, living inconcrete historical settings, and using ordinary language. Yet theyintend to speak of heavenly things and of a holy God. Consequently,theologians face the challenge of “seeing through” theBible’s figurative statements and artistic forms to the truthsthey convey, but without landing in unhelpful abstractions. Mostpeople who read the book of Exodus assume that God does not have anactual “arm” to outstretch (6:6) or a “face”that one may not see and live (33:23). But Moses chose these words toreveal something about God, and thus we have to ask how far theanalogy goes and to what degree it reaches down to our human level ofunderstanding. We know that God must somehow “talk down”to us, using our own language, even as he gives us historical andtheological claims having real content. Balancing these tworealities—the “otherness” of God and the earthinessof the written, human word that reveals him—is the delicatetask of exegesis.

Theinterpreter must also negotiate the various kinds or genres ofliterature found in the Bible, especially the ones that seem mostalien to our own ways of communicating. Our own documents do not(usually) feature the elaborate images of the book of Revelation orthe structures of Hebrew poetry found in the Psalter, and we do notlive in the first-century world. Therefore, to read the Scripturescorrectly, we must become culturally literate, so that we see ourtexts through ancient Near Eastern and Greco-Roman eyes. These fieldsare studied with care, based on the assumption that the Bible’sforms of literature were customary for their own time. They were notentirely strange to their original audiences. Thus, they can becomeless strange to us; and since the Bible is fully human as well asfully divine, reading its pages through the appropriate culturallenses will give us access to what the Spirit says to the churches.

HumanLimitations

Ananalysis of general and special revelation should consider theso-called noetic effects of sin—that is, the effects that sinhas upon our ability to reason and to learn. Human beings werecreated in the image of God (Gen. 1:26–27), having the capacityto interact with their Creator. They bear some “familyresemblance” to God, notwithstanding their materiality andfinitude. But when Adam and Eve sinned, they corrupted themselves andtheir descendants, so much so that Paul can describe them as beingenslaved to sin and death (Rom. 5–6). Since the fall, thebiblical writers have proclaimed the blindness of human beings to thethings of God. All people are “under the power of sin,”and “there is no one who understands” (Rom. 3:9–11).In Eph. 2:1–3 Paul describes unrepentant sinners as being “deadin [their] transgressions and sins,” so that they follow carnal“desires and thoughts.” Even someone as naturallyqualified as Nicodemus fails to see who Jesus is apart from thesovereign power of the Holy Spirit (John 3:1–15). Fallen humanbeings do not see what they ought to see and grasp what they ought tograsp. They can even say in their hearts, “There is no God”(Ps. 14:1).

Humanbeings do not have 20/20 intellectual vision, and our desires arecorrupted. Consequently, we do not benefit from God’sself-revelation as Adam did, not to mention the glorified Christianwho knows fully (1Cor. 13:12). In some cases, the sinner doesnot want to acknowledge the disclosures of God and thus does notperceive them. Habitual sin and doc-trin-al innovation can “sear”the conscience as with an iron, making “hypocritical liars”impervious to sound teaching (1Tim. 4:2). Although the heavensdeclare the glory of God, and although “in these last days hehas spoken to us by his Son” (Heb. 1:2), fallen human beingswill not grasp these truths. Yet they remain accountable to Godbecause the disabling wounds of sin are self-inflicted. Even thedemons of Scripture, who identify Jesus accurately, recoil from whatthey clearly perceive (Matt. 8:29; Mark 3:11; 5:7), as do thePharisees who attribute the Spirit’s work to Beelzebul (Matt.12:22–32). In these cases, the difficulty is not cognitive butaffective. Character becomes intellectual destiny.

Theworld abounds with religious viewpoints, each one claiming to revealhow it works and what constitutes the good life. It is also unlikelythat each of them contains only false statements and no true ones. Onthe contrary, the major rivals to Christianity gain some converts, wemay assume, by including fractions of truth and addressing someperceived human needs. Islam is not wrong in its rejection ofpolytheism and idolatry. Buddhism is right in its belief thatsuffering raises key philosophical questions. However, we shouldavoid saying that God has actually revealed something of his naturethrough these sources, as if their existence were a subset of generalrevelation. Paul may note the Athenians’ religiosity andillustrate a point by quoting one of their poets (Acts 17:22, 28),but his overall polemic makes it clear that he views their ideas asmistaken responses to general revelation. Similar remarks would applyto cults that mix some orthodoxy, based on Scripture, with enougherror to pervert the whole. God is not speaking indistinctly throughthem; rather, they are mishandling what he has said through thebiblical writers. In this sense, therefore, the Bible stands alone asthe unique word of God.

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

Origins

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

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

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

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

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

First-CenturySynagogues

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

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

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

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

TheSynagogue in the Bible

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

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

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

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

The philosophy (“love of wisdom”) most familiarto the writers of the NT began in Ionia, among those who attempted todetermine the fundamental substance of the universe without recourseto superstition and myth (the pre-Socratics). Platonists,Peripatetics (Aristotelians), Stoics, and Epicureans—all beganin Athens, extending the work of Socrates (c.469–399 BC),who was executed for challenging the status quo and “corruptingthe minds of the youth.” But by the first century BC,Hellenistic philosophy had permeated the Mediterranean world. Theontological quest for the nature of being, however, had joined itselfto ethics: What is the good life? Therefore, philosophy and thegospel, which also made claims about the “is” and “ought”of the universe, would compete for the hearts of the people. Actsrelates that Paul debated with Epicureans and Stoics (17:18).

Epicureanism.Epicurus (c. 341–270 BC) founded a school in his garden. Hisfollowers believed that he was divine, possessing answers for all oflife’s questions. The founder wrote didactic letters todisseminate his philosophy. By coining maxims and slogans forilliterate people to memorize and pattern their lives by, he becameperhaps the first popular philosopher (perhaps the equivalent of amodern “self-help guru”). His disciples wereevangelistic, traversing the Roman Empire to win converts. Theycarefully memorized his teachings and, after his death, preserved hiswritings, which often were cited in an unchanging canon.

Epicuruspreached a “common sense” gospel. The goal of life ispersonal happiness. The greatest obstacle to happiness is anxiety. Heproposed a four-part “cure,” an intellectualappropriation of these truth claims: (1)there are no divinebeings who threaten us; (2)there is no next life; (3)whatwe truly need is easy to get; (4)what makes us suffer is easyto put up with. A fundamental Epicurean conviction is that life onthis earth comes with no strings attached. The implicit atheism andselfishness of the system were largely unappealing to Jews and piouspagans.

Stoicism.More influential were the Stoics, who had many leaders and no singlesource of authority. Zeno (c. 336–264 BC) founded the school,which took its name from the “painted porch” (stoa) onthe north side of the Athenian market where he lectured. Like theEpicureans, the Stoics saw the goal of life to be personal happiness,but they embraced providence, the ordering of all things for thebest. Therefore, happiness is living virtuously according to nature,which involves a two-part process:(1)we conform our livesto the rational principle guiding the universe, what they called the“Logos,” or “Word”; (2)we resignourselves completely and without complaint to whatever providence maysend us. This is living a life of reason.

Theimpersonal nature of the Logos and seeming coldness to the humancondition made Stoicism difficult for most people to embrace. Perhapsthrough the mediating reflection of the Jewish philosopher Philo (c.20 BC–AD 50), who attempted to synthesize Scripture andphilosophy, the apostle John interpreted the mystery of theincarnation, in part, by presenting Jesus as the Logos/Word (John1:1–18; see also Col. 1:15–20).

Otherforms of philosophy. Alsoprominent were Cynics, who embraced the defiance of Socrates, andNeo-Pythagoreans, who extended asceticism to the rejection of wine,marriage, eating meat (and for some, beans), sacrifice, shoes, allclothing except that made of linen, shaving, and dancing. Thesingular reference to philosophy in the Bible is negative (Col. 2:8;cf. Acts 17:18–21). The context suggests that Paul’sopponents were influenced by Neo-Pythagoreans (Col. 2:6–23; seealso 1Tim. 4:1–5; 5:23).

Theearly church did not embrace a singular position on philosophy.Tertullian (c.AD 160–240) famously asks, “What isthere in common between Athens and Jerusalem? What between theAcademy and the Church?” (Praescr. 7). But Clement ofAlexandria (c. AD 150–215) claims, “For God is the sourceof all good things.... Thus philosophy was apreparation, paving the way towards perfection in Christ”(Strom. 1.5.28). The church fathers appropriated the precision ofphilosophical vocabulary in their attempt to rationalize themysteries of the Christian faith.

Founded in 315 BC by the general Kassandros, the city ofThessalonica is located on the eastern coast of Macedonia, on thewestern shore of the Aegean Sea. The city was well situated fortrade, both as a port for seagoing trade vessels along the Aegean andfor land trade along the Via Egnatia. The city is approximately 77miles from Philippi, also on the Via Egnatia, and 320 miles fromAthens in the south of Greece. No doubt the apostle Paul traveledfrom Asia Minor to Philippi to reach several major cities on thisroute, going through Amphipolis and Apollonia to come toThessalonica, where the Via Egnatia then turns westward.

Paulhad not been well received by many in the city of Philippi, and afterbeing escorted out of town there, he made his way to Thessalonica(Acts 17:1). As was his custom, he went to the synagogue of the Jews.Paul planted a church here after preaching only a few weeks. Thoughit is not certain from the account in Acts 17 just how long Paulspent in Thessalonica, the text leaves the impression that his timethere was short, cut off due to opposition.

AfterPaul was ill treated in Thessalonica, he went to Berea. According toLuke, the Jews in Berea were more noble than those in Thessalonicabecause they were willing to search the Scriptures and test what Paulwas saying to them (Acts 17:11). In fact, the Jewish leaders inThessalonica were so upset by the message of Paul that they followedPaul and company to Berea to stir up trouble there (17:13).

Becausehis visit had been cut short, Paul was concerned about the spiritualcondition of the church. After sending Timothy to check on theirwelfare, he was elated to find this church walking faithfully.

Thetwo final references in the NT to Thessalonica note that Paul wassent a gift from those in the church of Philippi when he was inThessalonica (Phil. 4:16), and when Demas abandoned Paul, Demas thenwent to Thessalonica (2Tim. 4:10).

A call or calling is God’s summons to live one’s life in accordance with his purposes. At creation God instructed Adam to fill the earth and subdue it, and to have dominion over it. God created Eve to be Adam’s lifelong companion and to help him fulfill this task (Gen. 1:28). Thus, in the broader (universal) sense, the notion of calling includes the ordinances that God established at creation: work (Gen. 2:15), marriage (2:18, 24), building a family (1:28), and Sabbath rest (2:2–3).

When Adam and Eve disobeyed God, they became alienated from God (Gen. 3:6–19). Their fall brought the same plight of alienation from God upon all humanity. However, it did not abolish the human duty to carry out God’s original creation ordinances. Since God showers his blessings on everyone alike (common grace), all human beings possess gifts and are given opportunities to “fill” the earth and “subdue” it. Thus, everyone participates in the universal call (Acts 17:25–26). This has come to be called the “cultural mandate.”

However, God’s original intention was to have communion with human beings. This could not be realized unless he made provision for human beings to be reconciled with him. Against this backdrop, God initiated his plan to redeem people from their plight of spiritual alienation.

The general call. The promise of God to bring deliverance through a future descendant of Eve established the provision for individuals (e.g., Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah) to be “called” back into a relationship of favor with him (Gen. 3:15). The first occasion when this call is made explicit is in God’s call to Abram to leave his country and go to a land that God would show him (11:32–12:1). God promised that Abram would become the father of a nation (12:2–3). In response to God’s call and his promise, Abram believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (15:6). Abram’s call was implicitly twofold. First, it was a general call to acknowledge this God as the true God and yield to his lordship. Second, it entailed a specific call to leave his country and journey toward a new country.

Several generations later, God appointed Moses to lead these descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, where they had lived for four hundred years. God’s act of delivering them from slavery in Egypt also symbolized redemption from sin’s bondage (Exod. 20:2). God had called the people by means of a covenant to be his own special people, to serve him as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (19:5–6). This was a call to set their lives apart for God by living according to his commands. This general call was more than a verbal summons; it was also the means God used to bring his people into existence (Hos. 11:1).

The NT indicates there is a general call to all people to believe in Christ (Matt. 11:28; Acts 17:30) that becomes effective in the ones that God has already chosen (Matt. 22:14; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4–5). The latter, which theologians identify as the “effectual call,” is what Paul refers to when he says, “Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . . And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:29–30). Thus, this is also a sovereign call.

Particular callings. God has endowed each individual Christian with a particular gift set and calls each one to use those gifts in a variety of ways in service to him (1 Pet. 4:10). These callings include one’s occupation, place of residence, status as married or single, involvement in public life, and service in the local church. In the OT, God gifted Bezalel and “filled him with the Spirit of God, with wisdom, with understanding, with knowledge and with all kinds of skills” (Exod. 35:31–32) to beautify the tabernacle. In the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that God has made each of us stewards of whatever he has entrusted to us; we are to become skilled in the use of our gifts and to seek opportunities to use them in service to him (Matt. 25:14–30). Desire is an important factor in discerning one’s particular callings (Ps. 37:4). One’s particular calling is progressive, unfolding through the different seasons of one’s life (Eph. 2:10; 1 Cor. 7:20, 24). No particular calling is more “sacred” than another in God’s eyes.

Most families in the ancient world were agrarian or engagedin raising livestock. Families that lived in cities led preindustriallifestyles, often dwelling in cramped quarters. The majority offamilies resided in rural areas and villages.

Peoplein the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin.Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family wasthe source of people’s status in the community and provided theprimary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.

Marriagewas not an arrangement merely between two individuals; rather,marriage was between two families. Family members and kin thereforetook precedence over individuals. In the worlds of both Testaments,authority within families and communities was determined by rankamong kin. Christianity was looked upon with hostility because itoverthrew foundational values of Jewish and even Greco-Romantradition. Service rather than rank became normative in family andcommunity relationships.

PatriarchalStructures

Apatrilineal system ruled in ancient Israel. Every family and everyhousehold belonged to a lineage. These lineages made up a clan inwhich kinship and inheritance were based on the patriarchs, thefathers of the families. These clans in turn made up larger clangroups and then tribal groups. The later Hellenistic and Roman worldmaintained patriarchal and patrilineal social structures as well.

Familydiscipline was in the hands of the father, the patriarch. The honorof the father depended on his ability to keep every family memberunder his authority (1Tim. 3:4). Other male members of thefamily assisted the father in defending the honor of the family (Gen.34).

AristotelianHousehold Codes

Notonly was the biblical world patriarchal (male dominated), but alsothe later societal influence by Greek philosophers impacted thebiblical text. The ancient Greeks viewed the household as a microcosmof society. Greek philosophers offered advice regarding householdmanagement, seeking to influence society for the greater good. Thisadvice was presented in oral and written discourses known as“household codes.” Aristotle’s household codes,written in the fourth century BC, were among the most famous. Suchcodes consisted of instructions on how the paterfamilias (the malehead of the household) should manage his wife, children, and slaves.The Stoic philosopher Arius Didymus summarized Aristotle’shousehold codes for Caesar Augustus. He argued, “A man has therule of this household by nature, for the deliberative faculty in awoman is inferior, in children it does not yet exist, and in the caseof slaves, it is completely absent.”

TheAristotelian household codes appear to be the background to NT textsthat, at face value, appear to treat women as inferior to men (Eph.5:22–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1; 1Pet. 3:1–7). Allthese texts are set in a Greco-Roman matrix, and the advice given tothe congregations seems to have been of contextual missional valuefor the sake of the gospel rather than as a guide for family livingfor all times in all contexts.

Marriageand Divorce

Marriagein the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between twofamilies, arranged by the bride’s father or a malerepresentative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’sprice.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction butalso an expression of family honor. Only the rich could affordmultiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself wascelebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.

Theprimary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to producea male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. Theconcept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs,especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.

Marriageamong Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jewssought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev.18:6–17). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew.Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainlyoutside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness.Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romansdid practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinshipgroup (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategicalliances between families.

InJewish customs, marriage was preceded by a period of betrothal. Thisstate of betrothal was legally binding and left the survivor of theman’s death a widow. A betrothed couple, like Joseph and Mary(Matt. 1:18), did not live together or have sexual intercourse. Yettheir union was as binding as marriage and could be dissolved onlythrough death or divorce.

Greekand Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. InJewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorceproceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release herand repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (inparticular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Siracomments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to thefather (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery(Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictiveuse of divorce than the Old Testament (Mark 10:1–12).

Children,Parenting, and Education

Childbearingwas considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman andher entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to thisblessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, andspecifically their husbands.

Abortioncommonly took place in the Greco-Roman world. Women therefore had tobe encouraged to continue in their pregnancies (1Tim. 2:15).

Childrenwere of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. Anestimated 60percent of the children in the first-centuryMediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.

AncientNear Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting stylebased on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and eviltendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent eviltendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The mainconcern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty.Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stagechildren were taught to accept the total authority of the father. Therearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girlswere taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so thatthey could help with household tasks.

Earlyeducation took place in the home. Jewish education was centeredaround the teaching of Torah. At home it was the father’sresponsibility to teach the Torah to his children (Deut. 6:6–7),especially his sons. By the first century, under the influence ofHellenism, Judaism had developed its own school system. Girls,however, did not regularly attend school. Many of the boys wereeducated in primary and secondary schools, learning written and orallaw. Sometimes schools were an extension of the synagogues. Romaneducation was patterned after Greek education. Teachers of primaryschools often were slaves. Mostly boys attended schools, but in somecases girls were allowed to attend school as well.

Familyas an Analogy

Therelationship between Israel and God.Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak offidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT,the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In theiroverall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to infamilial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod.4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16;64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).

Theprophet Hosea depicts Israel as sons and daughters who are offspringof a harlot. The harlot represents faithless Israel. God is portrayedas a wronged father and husband, and both children and wife asrebellious and adulterous (Hos. 1–3). Likewise, the prophetJeremiah presents the Mosaic covenant as a marriage soured by theinfidelity of Israel and Judah (e.g., Jer. 2:2–13). Thefamilial-marriage metaphor used by the prophets is a vehicle forproclaiming God’s resolve to go beyond customary law andcultural expectations to reclaim that which is lost. A similarpicture of reclaiming and restoring is seen in Malachi. Oneinterpretation of Mal. 4:6 holds that it implicitly preserves aneschatological tradition of family disruption with a futurerestoration in view. The restored family in view is restored Israel.

Thechurch as the family of God.Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him.This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship,the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt.16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into thecommunity was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom,belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39;16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63;John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30;Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community waseventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the communityof his followers, God’s family—the church. See alsoAdoption.