1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, according to the promise of life that is in Christ Jesus,
2 To Timothy, my dear son: Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.
3 I thank God, whom I serve, as my forefathers did, with a clear conscience, as night and day I constantly remember you in my prayers. 4 Recalling your tears, I long to see you, so that I may be filled with joy. 5 I have been reminded of your sincere faith, which first lived in your grandmother Lois and in your mother Eunice and, I am persuaded, now lives in you also. 6 For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands. 7 For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline.
8 So do not be ashamed to testify about our Lord, or ashamed of me his prisoner. But join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God, 9 who has saved us and called us to a holy life--not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, 10 but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. 11 And of this gospel I was appointed a herald and an apostle and a teacher. 12 That is why I am suffering as I am. Yet I am not ashamed, because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him for that day.
13 What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. 14 Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you--guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.
15 You know that everyone in the province of Asia has deserted me, including Phygelus and Hermogenes.
16 May the Lord show mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, because he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chains. 17 On the contrary, when he was in Rome, he searched hard for me until he found me. 18 May the Lord grant that he will find mercy from the Lord on that day! You know very well in how many ways he helped me in Ephesus.
1 You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2 And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others. 3 Endure hardship with us like a good soldier of Christ Jesus. 4 No one serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs--he wants to please his commanding officer. 5 Similarly, if anyone competes as an athlete, he does not receive the victor's crown unless he competes according to the rules. 6 The hardworking farmer should be the first to receive a share of the crops. 7 Reflect on what I am saying, for the Lord will give you insight into all this.
8 Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from David. This is my gospel, 9 for which I am suffering even to the point of being chained like a criminal. But God's word is not chained. 10 Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory. 11 Here is a trustworthy saying: If we died with him, we will also live with him;
12 if we endure, we will also reign with him. If we disown him, he will also disown us;
13 if we are faithless, he will remain faithful, for he cannot disown himself.
The Ministry of Refreshing
2 Timothy 1:1-2:13
Sermon
by Various Authors
May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, for he often refreshed me; he was not ashamed of my chains ... (v. 16)
Meet Onesiphorus.
Onesiphorus was a friend of Saint Paul’s. We ought to think about him. We ought to imitate him.
Saint Paul writes about Onesiphorus in his second letter to Timothy. Paul’s letters make up about a third of the entire New Testament. They are theological treasuries. For sublime thought, for spiritual energy, for powerful theology, they are probably without equal in Christian literature.
But they are letters, and as with all letters, in some ways the most interesting parts are the personal touches. Often Paul had to write with disappointment of the many fair-weather friends who deserted him in time of trouble. Often Paul had to warn against enemies who were out to burn him and other Christians. But other times Paul could write of those persons who did him great kindnesses. One of these is Onesiphorus.
This is what Paul, in chains in a Roman prison, writes to Timothy about Onesiphorus:
You are aware that all who are in Asia turned away from me, and among them Phygelus and Herogenes. May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, for he often refreshed me; he was not ashamed of my chains, but when he arrived in Rome he searched for me eagerly and found
me - may the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that Day - and you well know all the service he rendered at Ephesus.
Timothy may have known, but we don’t know what service Onesiphorus rendered at Ephesus. We do know, however, that he "often refreshed" Paul in Rome.
Paul is one of the great men of history. Yet the less known man could and did minister to the greater man, refreshed him, helped restore his soul, gave him renewed strength for the struggle.
What sort of person was Onesiphorus? He had a record for service. His friendship wasn’t put off by the socially embarrassing, or perhaps even personally dangerous fact that Paul was in prison. Instead, he went out of his way eagerly to find his friend. What they talked about there in Paul’s cell, what word Onesiphorus had to say, we can only guess. But as a result of Onesiphorus’ visits, Paul felt brightened, cheered, rekindled: "He often refreshed me."
I think we can understand that. We all know activities, situations, and persons that drain off our energy. There are peopie whom to be with is an utterly exhausting experience. They exude a miasma that makes you wilt.
But if we are fortunate to have a friend like Onesiphorus, we also know people who build us up, who recharge our batteries. Then we may find ourselves saying, "The other day I was heavy-hearted," or, "I was low in spirit," or "I was weary," or any equivalent of confessing that we were in a spiritual prison, "and you, my friend, - perhaps not by any particular thing you said or did, but just by your Christian attitude of love and understanding, by your eagerly going out of your way to find me - you were the instrument by whom God restored my soul. You refreshed me. You helped me to make it through." And perhaps our friend will even say, "When did I help you? Our friend may not remember, but we do, with great gratitude. We thank God for sending us ministers of refreshment.
These are people like Onesiphorus. These are the spiritual Gunga Dins.
From Rudyard Kipling’s poem or from a movie, everyone remembers Gunga Din. Gunga Din was a water carrier attached to the British army in India. Gunga Din and his brothers were important parts of the fighting forces. In the heat of battle in that dry land, it was their job to carry the water around to thirsty men. Some of them displayed great courage as they performed their dangerous errands of mercy. A little imagination paints the scene: blazing sun, burning sand, gunsmoke, shells, bullets, wounded and dying men, and the water carriers. No wonder they were immortalized in poetry and song.
Spiritually, it’s not far from that scene to the scene Saint Mark describes at Golgotha, where Jesus on the cross was dying a lingering death by exposure to the sun’s blast and self-suffocation - I was about to say "an excruciating death," but we get that word excruciating from the word for cross; that’s exactly what it means. And Jesus cries out, "I thirst! I thirst!" And Saint Mark reports, "And one ran" - ran - to get something moist to hold to the parched lips of Jesus.
There ran the spiritual ancestor of Gunga Din and Onesiphorus and all the other ministers of refreshing. Of all that crowd who stood around the cross with vengeful, hate-filled hearts, or with uncaring curiosity, beholding Christ’s agony, here was one person who ran to do some little thing to relieve his thirst. If ever one small, anonymous act of kindness made someone blessed of God, surely that was it. "I was thirsty and you gave me drink." I love the person who that day ran and did that for my dying Lord.
The Bible reminds us constantly that God has all along been using spiritual water carriers in the ministry of refreshment, from the rock which gave the Hebrew children water on their toilsome way through the wilderness, to the seer’s vision of the river of life flowing from a sea like crystal surrounding the throne of God.
Who can forget the story of King David, parched from the heat of battle. Two soldiers crawled through no-man’s land to bring their beloved leader water. Humbled and lifted by the love of friends who would risk their lives to refresh him - and recognizing that such love had transformed that cup into an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace - David knew that he could never drink it for his own need. That water had become so pure that he could offer it only as a sacrifice to God. Was he still thirsty? His tongue and throat, yes, but that love had refreshed his spirit, restored his soul.
James Russell Lowell knew that it was the personal touch which transformed a cup of water into the Holy Grail - "The gift without the giver is bare." Onesiphorus went out of his way eagerly to seek Paul out. Whatever words Onesiphorus might have said, his self-giving alone would have lifted Paul’s spirit.
In Berthold Brecht’s play, The Good Woman of Setzuan, Wong, the water-seller, has a hard life. When water is scarce, he has to go a long and difficult way to fetch the water; when water is plentiful, he has no income. Shen Te, the "Good Woman," meets an aviator and falls in love. To celebrate her love, she wants to buy her flyer a cup of water, so she goes running to Wong in the rain. Wong says, bitterly, "Throw back your head and open your mouth and you’ll have all the water you need."
But Shen Te says tenderly:
I want your water, Wong
The water that has tired you so
The water that you carried all this way
The water that is hard to sell because it’s been raining.*
*Berthold Brecht, The Good Woman of Seizuan, Grove Press, Inc., New York, 1966, pp. 60, 61.
So we see how the mere substance of H20 alone is not enough, and that God has always used spiritual Gunga Dins and good persons in the personal ministry of refreshment.
It’s a major reason we’re in worship each Sunday. We find God to be the wellspring of living water who never fails to renew the strength of those who wait upon him.
The connection with the service of communion is clear. By the sacrifice he made of himself Jesus - our Servant Lord who taught us that whoever would be great among us should also be a servant - Jesus has transformed this cup into a sacrament of God’s love. We drink this cup - not water or even mere wine, but the blood, that is to say, the very person, the life of Christ, of love itself - in remembrance that Christ gave his life for us, and we are thankful. Our souls are restored.
If we love him, we will feed his sheep. Refreshed, we will become ministers of refreshment. It is an important assignment in the army of God. It is an act in which God bestows blessing.
Soon we’ll unite in this simple act. We’ll sip. With scarcely enough to moisten the lips, we’ll drink refreshment for our souls. It’s so much more than a mere ritual act! It’s a sacrament, brought to us by Christ’s sacrifice for our sakes to renew life within us for his sake and for the sake of his little ones.
Let me make a prayer for all of us as we commune. It’s simply this: that, as we are refreshed, God will grant us grace that we may become persons who refresh others who thirst. In our daily round of duties and activities, in our home life, may we become more sharply aware of the needs of those about us, of the painful if often hidden ways in which their souls may thirst after some word of concern, of understanding, of encouragement, of loyalty, of love. In the heat of life’s battle, may we bring the refreshing of God’s love.
May someone have cause to say of us, "He or she often refreshed me."
We may one day be surprised with joy to hear our Master say, "I was thirsty, and you gave me drink."
"Lord, when saw we thee thirsty and gave thee drink?"
"Inasmuch as you did it unto one of the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto me."
- Robert John Versteeg
CSS Publishing Company, Take, Eat and Drink, by Various Authors
In his final letter, Paul writes as an apostle of Christ Jesus by God’s will, adding “according to the promise of life that is in Christ Jesus” (1:1). So close to death, Paul holds fast to the hope of eternal life. He greets Timothy, his “dear son,” with “grace, mercy, and peace” from the Father and the Son (1:2).
Paul’s emotional thanksgiving that begins in 1:3 includes his memories, longings, and challenges to Timothy. As he prays, he remembers their close relationship and Timothy’s sincere faith that was passed down from his grandmother and mother (1:4–5). He reminds Timothy to serve boldly, lovingly, and diligently according to his God-given gifts (1:6–7). Rather than being ashamed of the Lord or of Paul, Timothy should join in suffering for the gospel as God empowers him (1:8), for God…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, according to the promise of life that is in Christ Jesus,
2 To Timothy, my dear son: Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.
3 I thank God, whom I serve, as my forefathers did, with a clear conscience, as night and day I constantly remember you in my prayers. 4 Recalling your tears, I long to see you, so that I may be filled with joy. 5 I have been reminded of your sincere faith, which first lived in your grandmother Lois and in your mother Eunice and, I am persuaded, now lives in you also. 6 For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands. 7 For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline.
8 So do not be ashamed to testify about our Lord, or ashamed of me his prisoner. But join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God, 9 who has saved us and called us to a holy life--not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, 10 but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. 11 And of this gospel I was appointed a herald and an apostle and a teacher. 12 That is why I am suffering as I am. Yet I am not ashamed, because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him for that day.
13 What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. 14 Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you--guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.
15 You know that everyone in the province of Asia has deserted me, including Phygelus and Hermogenes.
16 May the Lord show mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, because he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chains. 17 On the contrary, when he was in Rome, he searched hard for me until he found me. 18 May the Lord grant that he will find mercy from the Lord on that day! You know very well in how many ways he helped me in Ephesus.
1 You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2 And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others. 3 Endure hardship with us like a good soldier of Christ Jesus. 4 No one serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs--he wants to please his commanding officer. 5 Similarly, if anyone competes as an athlete, he does not receive the victor's crown unless he competes according to the rules. 6 The hardworking farmer should be the first to receive a share of the crops. 7 Reflect on what I am saying, for the Lord will give you insight into all this.
8 Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from David. This is my gospel, 9 for which I am suffering even to the point of being chained like a criminal. But God's word is not chained. 10 Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory. 11 Here is a trustworthy saying: If we died with him, we will also live with him;
12 if we endure, we will also reign with him. If we disown him, he will also disown us;
13 if we are faithless, he will remain faithful, for he cannot disown himself.
1:1–2 · Salutation: The apostle discerns that Timothy needs fortification beyond the words of 1 Timothy. The distinctive terms of this second greeting provide further strengthening for Paul’s protégé. Paul’s own call is by “the will of God” himself, and his call, like Timothy’s, serves the “promise of life that is in Christ Jesus.” In addition, here Paul calls Timothy “my dear son” (literally “my beloved son”). Timothy is thus reminded, first, that he ministers under an authority that he ought not to ignore; second, that he ministers for the sake of a goal (the promotion of God’s life-giving promises) that is worth living and dying for; and third, that he does not do so alone—he is much loved.
1:3–5 · Thanksgiving:In his first letter, Paul wrote without the normal prayer of thanks that he and other Hellenistic letter writers usually included. In that first letter, Paul seemed simply to want to get down to business. Now, sensing that Timothy’s position is more fragile and his resolve less solid than he originally thought, Paul prays. Paul thus describes Timothy’s ministry in the context of gratitude for the grand story line of covenant faithfulness that God has been working throughout the history of redemption. This includes Paul and Paul’s own family (now including Timothy) and Timothy’s own family. Timothy does not minister alone and in isolation. He stands in a long line of saints, and Paul’s nonstop prayers support him as well. Moreover, though Timothy seems to be crippled by his own fears, Paul wants to encourage him with what he finds touching about Timothy’s rich inward life: the tears he has shed in Paul’s presence and the knowledge that their reunion will bring Paul great joy. Paul has seen evidence of great faith at work in Timothy. He now appeals for more.
1:6–7 · First appeal: Rekindle the gift and be courageous:Timothy’s ministry in Ephesus is challenging. He is a young man (1Tim. 4:12) charged with the oversight of one of the largest and best-established churches in Paul’s mission. Paul has warned that strong, erring would-be leaders could emerge (Acts 20:30). Though Paul has written off by name two false teachers as being shipwrecked in faith (1Tim. 1:19–20), at least one of those two is still in Ephesus teaching that the resurrection has already taken place (2Tim. 2:17). Because Timothy is cowering at this challenge, Paul wants to strengthen his student’s faith to do battle.Thus, Paul reminds Timothy of the gift of the Spirit that came to him from God when he was set aside for ministry. If, as Paul says elsewhere, the Spirit’s flow in us can be quenched (1Thess. 5:19), so, too, can its fire be rekindled. Paul encourages Timothy to draw on the resource that is already within. God’s Spirit is not marked by timidity but by “power, love and self-discipline” (1:7).
In both biblical and extrabiblical literature, “timidity” (often translated “cowardice”) is an antonym of “courage” (see Josh. 1:9; Dio Chrysostom, Oration 23.8). While the other three Greek virtues (godliness, temperance, and justice) are stressed elsewhere in the Pastorals, the military virtue of “courage” dominates in 2Timothy. Paul begins by telling Timothy not to play the coward. Paul challenges him instead to be a “good soldier of Christ Jesus” (2:3), recalling a theme he introduced at 1Timothy 1:18: “wage the noble warfare” (NIV “fight the battle well”; cf. 1Tim. 6:12; 2Tim. 4:7). He explains cowardice’s opposite in several terms: first, “power” (God’s rule that will be manifest on the last day [2Tim. 4:1] and is on display now when God converts sinners [see 1:8 and 2:25]); second, “love” (the goal of ministry—1Tim. 1:5; 2Tim. 1:13); and third, “self-discipline” (the kind of self-restraint that gives God room to grant repentance—see 2:22–26).
Examples to Emulate and to Teach Others (1:8–2:13)
1:8–10 · Christ’s victory: A gospel worth suffering for:Courage will enable Timothy to join Paul and Jesus in standing for the truth. Just as the Lord himself testified before Pilate (despite the NIV’s “testimony about our Lord,” this “testimony of our Lord” is the same notion Paul described in 1Tim. 6:13), so must Timothy be ready to testify and suffer. Nor should Timothy be ashamed of his own spiritual mentor, despite Paul’s having to minister from a Roman prison. The apostle stresses the power of God on display in the gospel (1:8). Verses 9 and 10 virtually sing of the glory of the story he and Timothy have been given to tell. Paul highlights three things: God’s salvation comes from his own purpose and grace; this salvation has been designed according to God’s own timetable; and finally, Christ has destroyed death and brought to light life and immortality.
1:11–14 · Paul’s life: A life worth emulating: Paul has been called to serve this gospel as “a herald and an apostle and a teacher” (1:11). As a herald, he announces Christ’s lordship of the universe by virtue of his victory over sin and death. As an apostle, he establishes the foundation of Christian community. As a teacher, he instructs believers how to live in Christ (see also 1Tim. 2:7). Paul exposes himself to physical suffering and emotional humiliation because he knows God’s resolve to see salvation through to “that day”: the day of Christ’s triumphal return to complete the restoration of all things (see Phil. 1:6).Paul has delivered a “good deposit” that Timothy is to preserve by his own life of faith and love in Christ. This deposit is the sum of a “pattern of sound teaching” that Timothy is to teach others (see chap. 2), with the indwelling Holy Spirit’s help.
1:15–18 · One other life to emulate, contrasted with counterexamples:Sadly, not everyone in Paul’s circle is staying true to the apostle. Though there is surely some exaggeration in Paul’s saying that “everyone in the province of Asia” (where Ephesus is situated, and where Timothy is ministering) “has deserted me,” it certainly means that Timothy is serving a church with little backing from Paul’s supporters. Paul is offended enough by two of them to name them, Phygelus (who is otherwise unknown) and Hermogenes (who may be the person identified in the noncanonical, late-second-century Acts of Paul and Thecla as a coppersmith and Paul’s opponent).Paul is keen to present to Timothy the faithfulness of Ephesus’s own Onesiphorus. Paul prays God’s mercy for Onesiphorus, who has recently found the apostle in his Roman jail and ministered to him there. Paul reminds Timothy of the way Onesiphorus has served them in Ephesus. Onesiphorus’s lack of shame at Paul’s chains (the Greek phrase is a clever understatement) becomes yet another example for Timothy to follow.
2:1–7 · Second appeal: Teach others: Paul solidifies his appeal to Timothy with an emphatic, “You then, my son.” The positive, flip side of Paul’s earlier negative warning against timidity (2Tim. 1:7) lies here in his “be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus” (2:1). In these verses Paul comes to the point: Paul has taught Timothy so that Timothy can teach others, who in their turn can teach still others. Paul has carefully built the case for the urgency of the task: Timothy must fortify himself to fortify the church in Ephesus so that it can be a self-sustaining community. It becomes increasingly clear that Paul looks ahead to his own martyrdom and desires that Timothy come to him in Rome to comfort him. Thus, it is vital that Timothy rise to the urgent need: teach others who can tend the body in Ephesus.With considerable skill, Paul appeals to three familiar Hellenistic metaphors: soldier, athlete, and farmer (cf. 1Cor. 9:7, 24—see also, for example, Epictetus, Discourses 3.22.51–69; 4.8.35–40). Soldiers are loyal, athletes know their game, and farmers work hard. Crisply, Paul exhorts Timothy to apply these truths to his situation: Listen to me! Care about those who need you! Get to it!
2:8–13 · Remember Christ Jesus: First and last, the church’s message is “Jesus Christ, raised from the dead” as the initiator of a new age, and “descended from David” as the sum of all God’s promises in the past (2:8). God reclaims the whole universe through Christ and does so by way of Israel’s story.In the Greek, verses 8–10 make up a single sentence, beginning with Jesus’s resurrection and climaxing in believers’ final salvation in glory. To combat the false notion that the only resurrection to take place has already occurred (2:18), Paul reminds Timothy that Jesus’s resurrection brings the promise of his people’s resurrection. Between the beginning and end of this three-verse sentence, however, is language of suffering. Paul describes his chains, his ignoble status as a criminal (no longer under mere house arrest), but also his willingness to “endure everything.”The reality of Christ’s resurrection in the past and the certainty of believers’ resurrection in the future create in Paul a confidence that though his body may be “chained ... God’s word is not chained” (2:9; the NIV nicely brings out the similar Greek words translated “chain”). Because God’s word is unstoppable, Paul’s imprisonment provides another opportunity for God’s power to bring salvation to his people.
Paul hopes that Timothy will let his life take the same shape as Jesus’s and Paul’s. To that end, he invokes the last of the Pastoral Epistles’ five “trustworthy sayings.” Verses 11–13 are matchless in their poetic or hymnlike quality. Union with Christ in his death will bring life with him in resurrection (2:11; see also Rom. 6:8): now a cross, later a crown (2:12a; cf. Matt. 19:28). However, if on the last day we deny Christ, he will deny us (2:12b; see also Matt. 10:33). Paul uses an unusual and emotionally charged future tense in the “if” clause that begins, “If we disown him” (literally “if we will disown him”), indicating the unthinkability of the act. Paul is remembering those who have abandoned him in prison (2Tim. 1:15; 4:10). Others have abandoned Paul’s teaching (2:17–18). Paul fears the sum of their careers will amount to a fatal denial of Christ himself. Verse 13 contains the poetic punch line. Paul’s deepest hope is that Timothy will choose a different path from those faithless ones. He is most confident, though, that regardless of anyone else’s faithfulness or faithlessness, God himself will remain faithful. The poem’s last line about God’s not being able to disown himself has puzzled commentators. The effect is to ask Timothy and subsequent readers to ask themselves hard questions. Those whose ongoing faithlessness leads to final denial of the Savior will discover that it will be impossible for the Lord to acknowledge them. Those who repent, however, can take solace in knowing that God faithfully forgives his people’s failings.
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Salutation
After the long elaboration in the salutation to Titus (see disc. on Titus 1:1–4), Paul reverts to a more standard, brief form in this final letter to Timothy. Indeed, except for some slight modifications, these two verses are nearly identical to 1 Timothy 1:1–2. However, as in all his letters, these “slight” modifications reflect nuances of his changed circ*mstances and of his concerns in this letter.
1:1 It may seem somewhat surprising to us that Paul in such a personal letter should style himself an apostle of Christ Jesus. His reason for doing so probably differs slightly from 1 Timothy 1:1 (which see). There, it was to lend authority both to the letter and to Timothy. Here it may simply be habit; more likely, however, it reflects the urgent appeal found throughout the letter for loyalty to Paul and his gospel. Because the concern is not now to establish Timothy’s own authority, Paul also reverts to his more common by the will of God (cf. 1 and 2 Corinthians, Colossians, Ephesians), in lieu of “by order of God” in 1 Timothy. Apostleship, even for one who must suffer for it, is only and always by the will of God.
The next modifier, according to the promise of life that is in Christ Jesus, is the one major difference from the salutation in 1 Timothy. In part this reflects the language of the “faithful saying” in 1 Timothy 4:8. It is not at all surprising, given the nature of this letter with its more intensified eschatological outlook, that Paul should reflect on his apostleship in such eschatological terms at the outset. The promise of life is that which is “for the future” in 1 Timothy 4:8; but it is also ours in the present as we participate in the life that is in Christ Jesus. As with the resurrection and the Holy Spirit, present participation in life … in Christ is the “first fruit” (1 Cor. 15:20) or “down payment” (Eph. 1:14) of the promised fullness of life that is yet to be.
1:2 This verse exactly parallels 1 Timothy 1:2, except that dear son replaces “my true son in the faith.” Again, this reflects the altered circ*mstances. This letter is not for the church in Ephesus; hence no need exists to legitimatize Timothy before them. Timothy is now my dear (or “beloved”) son, as he has always been for Paul (see 1 Cor. 4:17). The appeal to these close ties will become a large part of this letter.
For the other matters in this verse, see the discussion on 1 Timothy 1:2.
Additional Note
1:1 The force of the words “that is in Christ Jesus,” has been blunted by the NEB to say, “whose promise of life is fulfilled in Christ Jesus,” and by Easton, et al., to say, “given by Christ Jesus.” See Barrett for a proper critique of the NEB and Kelly for a critique of Easton.
Thanksgiving
The common practice in the Hellenistic world was to begin letters with a formalized prayer-wish for the recipient’s general welfare, including good health (cf. 3 John 2). As with the salutation (see disc. on 1 Tim. 1:1–2), however, such forms in Paul’s hands become thoroughly Christianized. Although a formal prayer still can be found (e.g., Col. 1:9–14; Phil. 1:9–11), more often Paul has turned it into a thanksgiving or benediction (in nine of his previous letters, excepting Galatians, 1 Timothy, and Titus; see disc. on 1 Tim. 1:3–11, Titus 1:5–9).
This present thanksgiving is quite in keeping with the more personal nature of 2 Timothy; it also resembles the earlier thanksgivings, whose contents anticipate so much of their respective letters (see esp. 1 Cor. 1:4–9; Phil. 1:3–8). Paul is about to urge Timothy to loyalty (to himself) and perseverance (in the gospel), especially in the face of hardship. In so doing he will appeal to his (Paul’s) own example (e.g., 1:11–12; 2:9–10; 3:10–11), to their long association (e.g., 3:10–11), and to Timothy’s own spiritual history (e.g., 1:6–7, 13–14; 3:10–15). These are precisely the items that dominate the thanksgiving.
Thus, by way of thanksgiving, he reminds Timothy of his past loyalty (v. 4) and faith (v. 5) and of their common “roots” in the faith (vv. 3 and 5). From these reminders he will launch his initial appeal for steadfastness (vv. 6–14).
1:3 As a former Law-keeping Pharisee (Phil. 3:5), Paul would long ago have made it his habit to pray regularly. Such a practice was easily carried over to his Christian life so that he prayed night and day (cf. the requirement for widows in 1 Tim. 5:5). These prayers normally consisted of giving thanks to God for his recipients (as I constantly remember you in my prayers), because of something God had done in their lives (v. 5; cf. Rom. 1:8; 1 Cor. 1:4–7; Phil. 1:3–6; Col. 1:3–7; 1 Thess. 1:2–3; 2 Thess. 2:13; Philem. 4–5). The word constantly, which occurs in most of the thanksgivings, does not refer to unceasing prayer and thanksgiving (as implied in the KJV) but indicates that he always remembered Timothy in his regular times of prayer.
In mentioning God in this case, Paul adds a remarkable qualifier: whom I serve, as my forefathers did, with a clear conscience (for this last phrase, see disc. on 1 Tim. 1:5). The clause itself is not so unusual (cf. Rom. 1:9, “whom I serve with my whole heart in preaching the gospel of his Son,” NIV); but the final phrase is (lit., “from my forefathers,” which can mean as my forefathers did [NIV], or “[the God] of my forefathers” [NAB]). Because of Paul’s word order, the NIV is probably correct. But what could he possibly be trying to say? Most likely this prepares the way for the reminder to Timothy in verse 5, by suggesting that Paul’s service unto God stands in the true succession of the religion of the OT, that genuine continuity exists between the OT (cf. esp. 3:14–17) and his preaching of the gospel (cf. Acts 24:14; 26:6; Rom. 2:28–29; 4:9–17; 9:1–9; Gal. 3:6–9). The reason for such an emphasis here is perhaps related to the false teachers, who are also using the OT, but “falsely” so (cf. 1 Tim. 1:7; Titus 3:9). In any case, this theme will be repeated throughout the Epistle (1:9–10; 2:8, 19; 3:8, 14–17).
1:4 Verses 3–5 form a single sentence in the Greek, whose structural relationships are somewhat blurred by the NIV. The basic sentence reads: “I give thanks to God, … as I remember you always in my prayers” (v. 3), … because (or when) “I remember your sincere faith” (v. 5). Verse 4, therefore, reads as something of an aside. The mention of remembering Timothy “in his prayers” (v. 3) prompts in Paul a memory of another kind—their last parting (probably that referred to in 1 Tim. 1:3). One can hardly escape the sense of pathos. “When I remember you in my prayers,” Paul says, “I am filled with longing to see you, because I also am continually reminded of your tears when we last parted.”
Although this deviates slightly from the main thrust of the sentence, it nonetheless strikes a note that belongs to the ultimate reason for the letter—Paul’s loneliness in his final vigil and his desire for Timothy to join him, despite the unfinished work in Ephesus (hence 2:2; see 4:6–8, 9, 16, 21). Thus he longs to see him, so that he may be filled with joy.
1:5 With this clause Paul returns to the thanksgiving proper, now expressing the basis for it—God’s work in Timothy’s life. This work is expressed in terms of Timothy’s sincere (or perhaps better in these letters, “genuine”; see disc. on 1 Tim. 1:5) faith, which in this case means at least his genuine trust in God but also perhaps moves toward the idea of “faithfulness,” that is, his continuing steadfast in his faith. Paul regularly considers this quality in God’s people to be thankworthy (cf. 1 Thess. 1:3; 3:6–7; 2 Thess. 1:3; Rom. 1:8; Col. 1:4; Philem. 5).
Because this letter will basically be an appeal to Timothy to maintain his loyalty and steadfastness (to Christ, Paul, and the ministry of the gospel) in the face of suffering, he is therefore prompted to remind Timothy that the same faith he has—and is to be loyal to—was what first lived in your grandmother Lois and in your mother Eunice. That is, “Don’t lose heart, because just as my ministry has continuity with my forebears (v. 3), so does yours. Don’t forget your roots; they go way back, and your own faith is like that of your mother and grandmother.”
The mention of his maternal parentage is in keeping with the evidence of Acts 16:1, where we learn that Eunice was a Jewish Christian, whose husband was a Gentile. Paul’s appeal to her faith, therefore, although almost certainly referring to her faith as a believer in Christ, also reflects his view that such faith is the genuine expression of the Jewish heritage, that is, that faith in Christ is the true continuity with the religion of the OT (cf. v. 3). It should also be noted in passing that, the more personal the letter, the more often Paul mentions personal names (twenty-two in this letter; cf. Philemon, nine).
Finally, to register his concern one more time, he adds, I am persuaded it now lives in you also. This confidence in Timothy’s genuine faith becomes the springboard for the appeal that follows (1:6–2:13). Thus, as in other letters (esp. 1 Thessalonians, Romans, and Colossians), the thanksgiving not only sets out some of the themes of the letter but actually moves directly into the letter itself.
Additional Notes
For a collection of examples of the prayer-wish in the Hellenistic letters, see F. X. J. Exler (The Form of the Ancient Greek Letter of the Epistolary Papyri), pp. 102–11. For a collection of the letters themselves, see A. S. Hunt and C. C. Edgar, Select Papyri I, Loeb (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1932), pp. 268–395.
The best recent discussion of the Pauline thanksgivings is by P. T. O’Brien, Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul, NovT Suppl. 49 (Leiden: Brill, 1977), who, unfortunately, chooses not to include this one (p. 2). Although there are some linguistic features about the thanksgiving that are not Paul’s ordinary usage (these are conveniently set out by Kelly, p. 155), the whole is so Pauline that one should wonder how a pseudepigrapher could have so thoroughly grasped the spirit of the man, yet fail to use his precise language. Changes in Paul’s own linguistic patterns could be more easily accounted for.
Appeal to Loyalty Despite Hardship
This section forms the first part of an appeal—extending through 2:13—that urges Timothy to be steadfast and loyal in the face of increasing gains by the false teachers, on the one hand (2:16–18; 3:13; 4:3–4), and increasing defections of various kinds (1:15; 4:10–16) due to Paul’s (apparently political) imprisonment (1:8, 12; 2:9; 4:16–17), on the other. In light of these circ*mstances, he appeals for Timothy’s continued loyalty to his own Spirit-given ministry (vv. 6–7, 13–14; cf. 1 Tim. 1:18; 4:14), which means in turn to be loyal to Christ and his gospel (vv. 8a, 9–10) and to Paul in his imprisonment (vv. 8b, 11–12).
The argument begins and ends with an emphasis on the empowering of the Holy Spirit for Timothy’s ministry (vv. 6–7 and 13–14). Verse 8 sets the stage for the rest by its two-sided appeal: not to be ashamed of Christ or of Paul his prisoner but, on the contrary, to be ready to join with Paul in the present suffering. The basis for such an appeal is grounded in the gospel of Christ, who has given us hope by his abolition of death and revelation of life and immortality (vv. 9–10). Thus, do not be ashamed of Christ (v. 8a). Then he reminds Timothy of his (Paul’s) own ministry, as one who is not ashamed to suffer for Christ, because God can be fully trusted to keep safe what has been entrusted to him. Thus, do not be ashamed of me.
Examples of those who have deserted Paul (v. 15) and of one who was not ashamed of him (vv. 16–18) follow this first appeal. The second part of the appeal (2:1–13) takes up especially the theme of Timothy’s need for steadfastness as he takes his own part in the suffering.
1:6 As noted in the discussion on v. 5, Paul moves directly from the thanksgiving to the main concern of the letter. The for this reason refers to the genuine faith that Paul is persuaded really does reside in Timothy. Believing that he has such faith, Paul now reminds him (a verb chosen almost certainly because of the threefold “remember” in vv. 3–5) to fan into flame the gift. This verb is a metaphor for rekindling a waning fire. It does not necessarily imply an actual wavering or dying faith on Timothy’s part, but it does urge with very strong language that he fan into flame the gift that God gave him long ago at the time of his call, through the laying on of Paul’s hands.
The picture of Timothy that emerges from these two verses (6 and 7), and throughout the Epistle, coincides with what surfaces elsewhere (cf. 1 Tim. 4:12; 5:23; 1 Cor. 16:10–11)—that Timothy is both a younger and less forceful colleague. As in 1 Timothy (1:18 and 4:14), a part of Paul’s appeal, therefore, is to remind him of the spiritual gift (for ministry; Gk. charisma; see disc. on 1 Tim. 4:14) of God that was given to him at the time of his call (“through words of prophecy”; 1 Tim. 1:18; 4:14) and that was recognized by the laying on of hands. In 1 Timothy 4:14 (which see), where a part of the concern was to authenticate Timothy before the church, Paul mentions the laying on of hands by the elders. Here, where the interest is almost totally personal, the focus is on Paul’s own part in that call, thus appealing to their close personal ties. Note a similar appeal to Timothy’s beginnings in 1 Timothy 6:12–14.
1:7 Although the NIV’s translation of “spirit” in this verse with a lower case s is possible (since the definite article is absent in Greek) and follows the traditional English versions (KJV, RSV), it is most highly improbable and quite misses both the relationship of this sentence to verse 6 as well as Paul’s own usage and theology elsewhere. That Paul is referring not to some “spirit” (or attitude) that God has given us (him and Timothy, but ultimately all other believers who must equally persevere in the face of hardship), but to the Holy Spirit of God is made certain by several items: (a) the explanatory for that begins this sentence gives it the closest possible tie to verse 6; (b) the close relationship between charisma (“gift,” v. 6) and the Spirit (v. 7) is thoroughly Pauline (see on 1 Tim. 4:14); (c) the words power and love are especially attributed to the Spirit in Paul; and (d) there are close ties between this verse and 1 Timothy 4:14, where the “gifting” of Timothy is specifically singled out as the work of the Spirit.
Furthermore, the typical Pauline “not … but” contrast, especially the parallels in Romans 8:15 and 1 Corinthians 2:12, is determinative. In each case the difficulty arises from Paul’s first mentioning the negative contrast, which does not in fact fit the Holy Spirit very well (“of slavery,” “of the world,” and “of timidity”). But it is equally clear in each case that when Paul gets to the “but” clause, he intends the Holy Spirit. Thus Paul’s intent goes something like this: “For when God gave us his Spirit, it was not timidity that we received, but power, love, and self-discipline.”
Paul’s concern, of course, ties into what he has just said in verse 6. In light of the appeal to persevere in the face of hardship, he urges Timothy to “fan into flame the charisma from God,” namely, his giftedness for ministry. The basis for this appeal goes back to his original gift of the Spirit, given at conversion. In giving his Spirit to Timothy, God did not give him timidity—a translation that is probably too weak. The word, often appearing in battle contexts, suggests “cowardice” or the terror that overtakes the fearful in extreme difficulty (cf. Lev. 26:36; 2 Macc. 3:24). It is a particularly appropriate choice of words for this letter, given Timothy’s apparent natural proclivities and the suffering and hardship now facing him.
To the contrary, and in the face of present hardships, Paul reminds Timothy that the Spirit has endowed him with power (a thoroughgoing NT and Pauline understanding; cf. e.g., Acts 1:8; Rom. 15:13, 19; 1 Cor. 2:4), love (cf. Gal. 5:22; Rom. 5:5), and self-discipline (sōphronismos; a different word for “self-discipline” from that of Gal. 5:23). This is a cognate, and here probably a synonym, for the “soundmindedness” of Titus 2:2, 5, and elsewhere. In all likelihood Paul intended to call for a “wise head” in the face of the deceptive and unhealthy teaching of the errorists.
Thus Paul begins his appeal by reminding Timothy of his own “gift of the Spirit” for ministry, who in turn has given him the necessary power, love, and soundmindedness to carry out that ministry.
1:8 With the two imperatives of this verse (do not be ashamed, and join with me in suffering) we come to the heart of this first appeal. These imperatives are closely tied to what has preceded by the so (better, “therefore”). That is, for the very reason that “the Spirit God has given us” leads not to cowardice but “fills us with power” (not to mention also because of the close personal ties between them, vv. 3–6), Paul exhorts Timothy to further loyalty, both to the gospel and to Paul himself.
This appeal has its clear life-setting in Paul’s present imprisonment for the sake of the gospel (cf. 2:9). As will be articulated in 3:12, such suffering for the gospel has for Paul always been a part of the ongoing proclamation of the gospel (cf., e.g., 1 Thess. 1:6; 2:14; 3:4; 2 Cor. 4:7–15; Rom. 8:17; Col. 1:24; Phil. 1:12, 29). In Paul’s understanding this suffering is closely tied to Christ’s own suffering, both the physical pain of torture and the humiliation of the shamefulness of crucifixion. Only in this context can one accurately hear the two imperatives, which are actually the two sides of a single reality.
Determining a precise meaning for the expression do not be ashamed poses some difficulties. The word frequently refers to “deserved” humiliation or disgrace, but more often it is “undeserved” humiliation and, especially for the biblical writers, humiliation from which one hopes for divine vindication (e.g., Ps. 25:1–3). At other times it relates to the stigma or embarrassment of association with that which has shame. In this passage these latter two meanings seem to coalesce. There is a stigma to being associated with a crucified Messiah (thus a state criminal) and his (political) prisoner. Yet it is “undeserved humiliation” from which there will be vindication “on that Day” (see v. 12). Thus, Paul does not want Timothy to avoid the humiliation generated by his association with Christ (to testify about our Lord, or perhaps to be understood more objectively, “of the witness [gospel] about our Lord”) or by his association with me, his prisoner (when imprisoned for Christ, Paul was not in his own thinking a prisoner of the empire, but of Christ himself).
On the contrary (but), Paul exhorts Timothy, paradoxically, to join in the “humiliation”: Join with me in suffering (or perhaps, “take your part in suffering,” as GNB), but not just any suffering. It is suffering for the gospel, suffering that will be his both by his association with the gospel and by his own activities in its behalf (hence, v. 6: “fan into flame your gift of the Spirit for ministry”). Thus the two imperatives of this verse entreat Timothy to the three basic loyalties: to Christ (and his gospel), to Paul, and to his own ministry.
But again, aware of Timothy’s character and of the difficulties ahead, Paul adds the dimension of divine help: by the power of God (the same word as in v. 7). This mention of God launches Paul into a creedlike expression of the gospel itself (vv. 9–10; the first loyalty), which is followed in turn by Paul’s own example (vv. 11–12; the second loyalty), and a final exhortation to “guard the deposit” (vv. 13–14; cf. 1 Tim. 6:20; the third loyalty).
1:9–10 In a fashion typical of these letters, Paul supports his point with a semicreedal formulation, which gives a brief, and not necessarily complete, expression of the gospel, which is at the same time particularly adapted to the concerns of the present argument (see disc. on Titus 2:11–14 and 3:4–7). In this case the emphases are particularly fitting for one whose gift needs “fanning into flame” and who is being urged “not to be ashamed of the gospel but to take his part in the suffering.” (All of vv. 8–11 in fact are a single sentence in Gk.)
Having noted that Timothy’s taking his part in suffering can only be accomplished “by the power of God,” Paul emphasizes that this is the same God who saved us and called us, and that this saving act resided in God’s own gracious purpose … before the beginning of time, but was revealed historically as an expression of grace … through the appearing of … Christ, whose work in this instance is defined as destroying death and revealing immortality. Thus he braces Timothy’s resolve by emphasizing God’s sovereign grace and purpose to render death inoperative, and by insisting that this revelation resides in the very gospel for which Timothy is to “take his part in suffering”!
The formulation begins with a common theme in the PE: It is “God” who has saved us (see disc. on 1 Tim. 1:1; 2:3–4; 4:10; Titus 1:3; 2:10; 3:4–5). In a typically Pauline fashion, such salvation also constitutes our calling (see disc. on 1 Tim. 6:12; cf., e.g., 2 Thess. 2:13–14; 1 Cor. 1:9, 24, 26; Rom. 8:28–30). God both initiated and effected salvation. In this case the call is qualified as (literally) “a holy calling.” This is a Semitic construction whose meaning is not altogether certain. It could be a dative of means, “with a holy calling” (RSV, NASB), because it comes from a holy God. More likely it is a dative of interest, to a holy life (cf. esp. 1 Thess. 4:7) or “to be a holy people” (cf. NEB; cf. “called to be saints” or “God’s holy people,” 1 Cor. 1:2, etc.).
As in Titus 3:5 and elsewhere in Paul (e.g., Eph. 2:8–9), God’s saving act is based not on what we have done, but on his own purpose and grace. This is a thoroughly Pauline way of saying it (cf. Rom. 8:28–30), as are the descriptions of that purpose and grace that follow—although the stating of them is a bit convoluted. God’s saving us, Paul says to Timothy, is predicated on his purpose and grace, both of which, not just his grace, find expression (were given us) in Christ Jesus. Because he is a God of grace, he purposed our salvation in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time (cf. Titus 1:2), but only now has it been revealed through the appearing (epiphaneia; see disc. on Titus 2:11, 13; 3:4; cf. 1 Tim. 6:14) of our Savior, Christ Jesus (cf. Titus 1:4; 3:6). For this very Pauline view of things, see the discussion on Titus 1:2–3 (cf. 1 Cor. 2:7–10; Eph. 1:4).
Finally, and especially significantly for this context of bolstering Timothy’s resolve to take his share of the suffering, Paul describes the effect of this “manifestation”: He has destroyed death (“rendered death ineffectual,” Berkeley) and has brought life and immortality (lit., “life and incorruptibility,” cf. Rom. 2:7) to light. As usual in Paul, salvation has an eschatological outlook. But the immortality that is yet to be is in a sense already ours, because in his appearing (incarnation), and especially through the cross and resurrection, our last enemy, death, has already received its mortal wound. So his word to Timothy is plain: “Be steadfast; rekindle your gift; take your part in the suffering; for we are already among those who have overcome death through Christ.”
All of this has been brought to light, Paul notes, through the gospel; and just as the mention of “the power of God” at the end of verse 8 launched Paul into this creedlike statement of God’s saving activity, so now this mention of the gospel will, as often before, prompt him to restate his own role in proclaiming that gospel.
1:11–12 With this clause the sentence that began in verse 8 is brought to a close. Paul began with a twofold appeal for Timothy not to be ashamed either of the gospel of Christ or of Paul, Christ’s prisoner. Verses 9–10 then function both as a reminder of the content of that gospel—why he should not be ashamed of it—and as a bolster in the face of hardship. Having concluded by noting that God’s saving event, his Good News, was brought to light “through the gospel,” he now affirms his own role in this gospel, and he does so in order to make his next point (v. 12), that it is for the sake of the gospel, and his own role in proclaiming it, that he is now in prison—which is why Timothy should not be ashamed of him as well (v. 8).
Verse 11 almost repeats 1 Timothy 2:7 but lacks the insertion “I am not lying; I am telling the truth” and the phrase “of the Gentiles” (although this latter is added to the majority of later MSS). Thus his concern here is not with the solemn affirmation of his ministry to the Gentiles but simply with his appointment as a herald (see disc. on 1 Tim. 2:7) and an apostle and a teacher … of (lit., “for the sake of”) this gospel. The ordering of the three words makes it clear that the emphasis is not on his authority as an apostle, but on the gospel itself and his own relationship to it.
With verse 12 Paul ties his role as a messenger of the gospel (That is why; i.e., what is said in v. 11) to his present circ*mstances (I am suffering as I am, i.e., his imprisonment; cf. v. 9; 2:9). It is probably not his appointment or his apostleship that he has in mind as the reason; rather, it is the fulfilling of his commission as herald-apostle-teacher of the gospel that has resulted in his present trouble.
Since he is writing to Timothy so that, not only will he not retreat (“be ashamed”) under these circ*mstances, but he will also be prepared to take his own share of suffering (v. 8), Paul encourages him by noting his own response. I myself am not ashamed (cf. Rom. 1:16). But what does it mean for Paul to be not ashamed? It could mean “not ashamed of the gospel,” despite what has happened. More likely it means, “my imprisonment causes me no personal shame,” precisely because it is for Christ and his gospel. Furthermore, similar to the psalmists who hope for vindication from God in the time of their humiliation (e.g., Pss. 31:1–5; 69:9), Paul knows no shame in his imprisonment, because he knows the One (probably “God,” perhaps “Christ”) whom he has believed (in the context of this sentence “trusted” is to be preferred).
Considerable disagreement exists over the meaning of the rest of the sentence, which expresses Paul’s confidence in his ultimate vindication. Literally, the text reads: “And I am convinced that he is able to guard my deposit unto that day.” The problems are, first, whether “my deposit” is something God has entrusted to Paul or something Paul has entrusted to God and, second, to what the metaphor “deposit” refers.
Most contemporary scholars, convinced that the metaphor itself must have the same meaning here as in verse 14, understand it to refer to the “sound teaching” of verse 13—the gospel itself—that God has entrusted to Paul (v. 12), that Paul in turn has entrusted to Timothy (v. 14; cf. 1 Tim. 6:20) and that Timothy is likewise to entrust to others (2:2). As attractive as that alternative is, it is unfortunately based on a prior commitment to the meaning of the metaphor and does not take seriously enough the plain sense of the idiom guard what has been entrusted (“guard the deposit”). Since it is God who is here envisioned as guarding “my deposit,” the idiom demands that it is therefore something entrusted to God (as to Timothy in v. 14), not something God has entrusted to another that he yet continues to guard. The clearly eschatological force of for that day also supports this understanding.
What precisely the metaphor itself means is not certain. Very likely it refers either to Paul’s life or to his commitment to Christ and his gospel. But in either case the emphasis parallels that of verses 9–10. Just as the gospel announces a salvation that God in grace initiated and effected, and through which he rendered death ineffective, so also the same God can be trusted to guard … for the End the life that has been entrusted to his care.
1:13–14 In these final two verses Paul returns to the direct appeal to Timothy, but now with some slightly different nuances. The entreaty from verses 6–12 has been very personal and directly related to Paul’s present circ*mstances and his and Timothy’s personal relationship. But Paul has not forgotten the ongoing threat of the false teachers and the havoc they have been generating. The language of the two parallel imperatives of these verses indicates that they must be understood in this light (as v. 15 also seems to suggest).
The first imperative repeats the concern throughout the PE that Timothy keep as the pattern of sound teaching (see disc. on 1 Tim. 1:10). As always, the sound teaching is that which you heard from me (cf. 2:2, where the same wording appears; cf. also 3:10; 1 Tim. 4:6). Such a concern elsewhere always is expressed against the backdrop of the false teachers.
Although Paul’s intent in this sentence is clear enough, the actual wording is not (lit., “hold an example of sound words”). Probably this means that what Paul taught is to serve as a model for Timothy’s teaching (as most interpreters; but see the NEB and Moffatt for alternatives).
The final prepositional phrase, faith and love in Christ Jesus, is likewise not altogether clear. It seems certain that Timothy’s faith (not the faith) and love are products of his being in Christ Jesus (see disc. on 1 Tim. 1:14; cf. Gal. 5:22). But how this phrase relates to the verb presents a more difficult problem. The sense seems to go something like this: “Let what you have learned from me serve as your model for sound teaching, but let it do so as you yourself also model faith [or faithfulness] and love.”
The final imperative, guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you, parallels verse 13, but now in the language of 1 Timothy 6:20 (which see). “Timothy,” Paul urges, “keep safe what I have deposited with you; it is a sacred trust.” Since what was entrusted is described as good, it almost certainly refers to the “sound teaching” of the gospel. He must not allow it to be purloined or eroded by the false teachings. But for such a charge, Timothy is not to think of himself as on his own. He is to fulfill his responsibilities with the help of the Holy Spirit (see v. 7) who lives in us.
Thus the appeal has come full circle. It began by urging that Timothy fan into flame his gift of ministry, which was his through the power of the Spirit (vv. 6–7). Then Paul urged loyalty to the gospel and to himself, even though now a prisoner. After detailing the gospel and Paul’s own loyalty to it, with emphasis on God’s sovereignty, he returns to urge once more loyalty to his (Timothy’s) own ministry and to the gospel; and again he is to do so with the help of the Spirit. From here Paul will turn to some examples of disloyalty and of one who was especially loyal (to Paul in his imprisonment).
Additional Notes
1:6–7 Because of the close relationship between this appeal and the thanksgiving, modern editors have not all agreed on the best scheme of paragraphing. The paragraphing followed by this commentary (3–5, 6–12, 13–14), which differs from the NIV (vv. 3–7, 8–12, 13–14), adheres closely to Paul’s own sentencing. It is also followed by Kelly and NA26.
Although Paul clearly says “through the laying on of my hands” in v. 6, the evidence from 1 Tim. 1:18 and 4:14 suggests that it was by the Spirit (“through prophetic utterances”) that Timothy received his gift, and that it was accompanied by the laying on of hands. Therefore, the dia (“through”) is either attendant circ*mstance (so Barrett) or simply a “telescoped” expression (like “by faith” for “by grace through faith”).
Given the fully Pauline character of v. 7, it seems biased on Hanson’s part to say, “but the word the author uses here, sōphronismos, has a slight element of prudential ethic in it that is foreign to Paul’s way of thinking” (pp. 121–22). A similar thing could be said of the use of enkrateia (“self-discipline”) in Gal. 5:23, if one believed Paul did not write that letter.
1:8 For the concept of “ashamed/shame” in Paul (and the rest of the NT) see esp. H. C. Kee, “The Linguistic Background of ‘Shame’ in the New Testament,” in On Language, Culture, and Religion: In Honor of Eugene A. Nida, ed. M. Black and W. A. Smalley (The Hague: Mouton, 1974), pp. 133–47.
1:9–10 On the matter of these creedlike formulations in the PE, see disc. on Titus 2:11–14 and esp. 3:4–7. As with the Titus passages, there is nothing of the nature of a hymn here (despite Easton). The use of the word “liturgical” for these formulations (as Hanson) is likewise arguing for more than the data themselves suggest.
1:11–12 Given the context, the order of the three titles, and the fact that when Paul wants to assert his authority he emphasizes his apostleship, it seems to miss the point of vv. 11–12 rather widely to argue (as Hanson, p. 124): “The three titles given to Paul here are intended to enhance his sole authority in the churches which he founded.”
For arguments on both sides of the question of who has been entrusted with the deposit in v. 12, see Kelly or Bernard for “entrusted to God,” and W. Barclay “Paul’s Certainties VII. Our Security in God—2 Timothy i. 12” for “entrusted to Paul.”
1:13–14 See Bernard (p. 112) for a full presentation and good discussion of the alternative possibilities for understanding this sentence.
Examples of Disloyalty and Loyalty
At first sight this section may seem irrelevant to the appeal that surrounds it. It lacks any words of exhortation to Timothy (none of the second person singular imperatives that otherwise predominate in the letter); its content seems to have little in common with its context. Nonetheless, as with other such “digressions” in these letters (cf., e.g., 1 Tim. 1:12–17), this section is not without purpose. In this case the key to its significance lies in Onesiphorus’ not being ashamed of Paul’s imprisonment (cf. vv. 8 and 12). Apparently the mentioning of his imprisonment in verse 12, plus his appeal to Timothy to “guard” what has been “entrusted to” him (v. 14), reminded Paul, first, of many who had not kept that trust (v. 15), and, second, of one who in particular had not only not deserted but had gone out of his way to the share the “shame” of Paul’s imprisonment.
In this paragraph we sense the pain of Paul’s present situation and his loneliness, brought about both by what has happened in Ephesus (v. 15; cf. 2:14–3:9) and by his unfavorable circ*mstances in Rome (vv. 16–18; cf. 4:6–18). The paragraph, however, is not without its difficulties, especially in trying to reconstruct some of the historical matters to which it alludes.
1:15 Paul begins by reminding Timothy of something of which he was all too painfully aware. You know all about what’s going on in the province of Asia (lit., “in Asia,” which may in fact refer to the whole province, but includes at least Ephesus). But precisely because Timothy did know, we are left a bit in the dark as to what has happened—and when and where.
Paul says that everyone in … Asia has deserted him. Almost all are agreed that these deserters are in Asia at the time of writing. But everyone? Either this means that some Asians, including Onesiphorus, had come to Rome, and all but Onesiphorus had deserted him and returned home (so Bernard), or else (more likely) it means that the defections in Asia have been so staggering (Kelly, “the exaggeration [of] depression”) that even friends (presumably) from whom he would have expected more—including [perhaps led by] Phygelus and Hermogenes—have deserted him.
If this is how we are to understand “who” and “where,” then “when” probably has to do with events since the writing of 1 Timothy, perhaps a general “abandoning ship” at the news of Paul’s arrest (cf. Kelly). Paul himself would have been informed of it by Onesiphorus.
But what does it mean, have deserted me? If our reconstruction thus far is correct, then at least it means that they have abandoned their loyalty to Paul. If so, then for him that would mean they have also abandoned his gospel, since that is about the only way one could desert the apostle; and that is precisely how the same verb is used elsewhere in the PE (4:4; Titus 1:14; a different verb is used of the personal “desertions” in 4:10).
1:16–17 The mention of those from Asia who had deserted him prompts Paul to pray for mercy for the household of one who did not. This sudden bursting out in a wish-prayer (hardly intercession, as Kelly, but an expression of Paul’s desires for them; cf. 2 Thess. 3:16; Rom. 15:5) for the household of Onesiphorus (cf: 4:19) means that he is not now with them (otherwise Paul would have said “to Onesiphorus and his household”). The fact that Paul should begin his reminder about Onesiphorus in this way, by asking for present mercy for his household, and that at the end (v. 18a) he should ask for future mercy (on that Day) for Onesiphorus himself, suggests very strongly that Onesiphorus had died in the meantime. If so, it could only have increased Paul’s present pain and loneliness.
But the memory of Onesiphorus lingers on. His actions in Rome are a model of loyalty (for Timothy’s sake surely). He often refreshed me. In a culture in which imprisonment often involved self-sustenance, such “refreshment” probably included food as well as “cheering up.” Moreover, and the more significant reason for mentioning him at all, he was not ashamed of my chains. The “shame” in this case was hardly that of embarrassment. Here was a man who was willing to take the risk of regularly visiting one who was a state criminal and who would soon be condemned to die. Under such circ*mstances, desertions had been plentiful (see disc. on 4:16–17), but not so with Onesiphorus. Indeed, when he was in Rome, he searched hard [Gk., “he looked diligently”] for me until he found me. The implication is that Paul was not in a “public” prison and that finding him required a considerable effort on the part of Onesiphorus.
Paul’s point to Timothy is clear enough. “Don’t you be ashamed of the gospel or of me, Christ’s prisoner (v. 8). Some have (v. 15), but not Onesiphorus (vv. 16–17); so be like him.”
1:18 Having already entreated mercy for his household (v. 16a), presumably because of their loss, Paul now desires (again in the form of a wish-prayer) for Onesiphorus himself: may the Lord grant that he will find mercy from the Lord on that day! On that day, as in verse 12, can only refer to the Second Advent. Thus it is hard to escape the implication that Onesiphorus is now dead. Why else, one wonders, especially in light of verse 16, should Paul only wish him to find (a word play on Onesiphorus’ having “found” him; v. 17) mercy at the End?
Does this, then, countenance prayers for the departed? Many think so. However, before one builds Christian doctrine on such a text, one needs to be cautioned that such an idea is quite singular to this one, not totally certain, text and that it merely expresses Paul’s sentiment toward, or desire for, Onesiphorus. It is not, in fact, intercessory prayer (cf. the difference with Eph. 1:17, e.g.); rather, it is an acknowledgment that even one like Onesiphorus has only God’s mercy as his appeal.
Almost as an afterthought, Paul remembers that Timothy will easily recognize that Onesiphorus’ actions in Rome should come as no surprise. As Timothy would know very well, it was quite in keeping with the man. Timothy will recall in how many ways he helped Paul in Ephesus. One cannot be sure whether such “service” (Gk. word for “serving,” or “ministering”) was rendered much earlier when Paul and Timothy were together in Ephesus (cf. 1 Cor. 4:17 with 16:8), or whether it was during Timothy’s recent tenure (per 1 Timothy). In either case, it happened when Timothy was on hand to observe, and now Onesiphorus’ devoted service is being recalled—as a gentle prod to Timothy.
Additional Notes
Personal notes of the kind found in this paragraph create, as Kelly notes, “a particularly vivid impression of authenticity, and also special difficulties for any theory of pseudonymity” (p. 168). So much is this so that most scholars allow that the material here is probably authentic, even if they believe the letter is not (e. g., Barrett).
1:15 Spicq suggests that the phrase “all who are in Asia” may be a Semitism for “all who are from Asia,” thus implying that all other Asians in Rome abandoned Paul except Onesiphorus. However, that is a forced reading of the text, and one can make sense of it as it stands.
There are still other hypotheses about the historical circ*mstances behind this sentence. Barrett, e.g., tentatively suggests that it might reflect a time alluded to in 2 Cor. 1:8; Hendriksen submits that these people had been summoned to testify but did not come. Most of these suggestions see the desertion only as related to Paul’s imprisonment and, therefore, strictly in contrast to Onesiphorus. In fact, D-C make the surprising comment that the verb “cannot be understood to imply apostasy from the gospel, because of the comparatively mild terminology” (p. 106). But that seems to neglect too much evidence to the contrary. The overall context of 1:6–2:13, followed closely by 2:14–3:9, would seem to favor the reconstruction offered here.
1:16 For a formal consideration of the “wish-prayer” in Paul, see G. P. Wiles, Paul’s Intercessory Prayers, SNTSMS 24 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974), pp. 45–155.
Hendriksen (and others) properly cautions that one cannot be certain that Onesiphorus is dead, but his argument that Paul would have explicitly said so if “this hero” had died, is special pleading. He simply does not take seriously enough the abrupt nature of introducing Onesiphorus by wishing mercy for his household or that the prayer-wish of v. 18a interrupts the text (note how smoothly it reads without it) and can only be explained as a sudden wordplay on “find,” which then is expressed eschatologically precisely because he is now dead.
1:18 The prayer-wish literally reads: “May the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that day.” Several explanations for this awkward construction have been offered (see Kelly or Hanson). The most likely (adopted by Spicq, Kelly, Hanson, et al.) is that the first Lord refers to Christ (as in vv. 2 and 8 above, and ordinarily in Paul and the PE), and that the second refers to God and reflects the LXX.
The Appeal Renewed
After a brief “digression” in 1:15–18 that reminded Timothy of the disloyalty of “everyone in Asia,” with the noteworthy exception of Onesiphorus, Paul resumes the appeal to Timothy. With an emphatic, you then, in contrast to those in verse 15, Paul repeats the urgencies of 1:6–14: that he fulfill his trust and ministry (reflecting 1:6–7 and 13–14), in this instance by entrusting it to others (v. 2), and that he be ready to endure hardship (v. 3, reflecting the main concern of 1:8–12).
A series of three analogies (military, athletics, farming) reinforce the appeal to suffering and emphasize the need for wholehearted devotion to service (vv. 4–5) and the expectation of reward beyond the hardship (vv. 5–6). These emphases will be repeated in a different way in 2:8–13.
2:1 This opening imperative, which in a general way gathers up the concerns of 1:6–14 and anticipates those that follow (2:2–13), is tied to what has preceded with an emphatic su oun (you then). You then stands in contrast to the general defection of the Asians (1:15) but in keeping with the likes of an Onesiphorus. The oun is at least resumptive (“then”), perhaps consequential (“therefore”), and goes back to the imperatives of 1:13–14.
You, therefore (having already been urged to suffer and keep the trust, and now in the light of the Asians and Onesiphorus), be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. The imperative be strong (cf. 4:17; 1 Tim. 1:12; Rom. 4:20; Eph. 6:10; Phil. 4:13) is present tense (i.e., “keep on being”), passive voice, whose proper force is that one is being strengthened by God. The phrase in the grace can be either instrumental (“by means of the grace”) or locative (“in the grace,” so NIV). Though it is true that grace is the means by which we are saved and by which we are enabled to walk in God’s will, it is also true that that same grace is the sphere in which all of Christian life is lived (cf. Rom. 5:2). In light of the usage of this phrase in Ephesians 6:10 and elsewhere in the PE, Paul probably intends the latter. He wants Timothy to be strengthened by God himself as he stands in the grace that he has received. The source of such grace is to be found in Christ Jesus (cf. 1:13).
Thus Paul places the specific imperatives of this appeal (“Don’t be ashamed,” 1:8; “Take your share of suffering,” 1:8, 2:3; “Guard the deposit,” 1:14) within the context of this more general imperative of allowing God to strengthen him for his task of ministry. One should note the similarities with 1:6–7, 8c, and 14.
2:2 The first task he is to be strengthened for is tied closely to the imperatives of 1:13–14. Just as Timothy must “keep safe what has been entrusted to him,” so also he is now to entrust (the verb form of the noun “deposit” in 1:14; cf. 1 Tim. 6:20) them to reliable men who, in turn, will also be qualified to teach others.
What strikes one about this sentence is both its uniqueness in the PE and its apparent interruption in the flow of the argument (or appeal). It seems strange, therefore, that so many should see this singular text as the main point of all three letters. Paul, however, is not so much concerned about “apostolic succession” (a true anachronism), as he is with the gospel itself, in light of the reality that Timothy is being urged by this letter to leave Ephesus and join Paul in Rome (in his suffering; cf. 4:9, 21). Because Timothy must leave, he is to entrust the things he has heard Paul say to others. Those to whom he entrusts those teachings are to be reliable or trustworthy people (cf. 1 Tim. 1:12). The same adjective in the PE often means “believing” (cf. 1 Tim. 4:3, 10, 12; 6:2; Titus 1:6); but here, as with its usage in the phrase “here is a trustworthy saying” (2:11, etc.), the emphasis is on their reliable character, not their status—although the genuine elders of 1 Timothy 3:1–7 and 5:17–18 are probably in view.
What Timothy is to entrust to them also reflects 1:13–14: the things you have heard me say (lit., “what you heard from me,” precisely as in 1:13, so therefore probably implying “the sound teaching” mentioned there). This tie of the gospel to Paul’s own preaching is thoroughgoing in Paul, beginning as it does in his earliest letter (1 Thess. 2:13).
What is not clear in this sentence is the phrase in the presence of [dia, ordinarily “through”] many witnesses. If dia here means in the presence of (so Chrysostom [d. A.D. 407] and many others), it must refer to the time of Timothy’s coming to faith (cf. 1 Tim. 6:11–13). But it is difficult to understand the reason for such an emphasis, especially in light of 3:10–11, which makes a point of Timothy’s longstanding companionship with Paul. If dia means “through,” as seems more likely, it probably means not that Timothy himself heard Paul’s teachings as they were mediated through many witnesses, but that, as Timothy should well know, what Paul taught is also attested to by many others—a needed emphasis in light of the many defections in Ephesus. (Cf. the plural “from whom” in 3:14, which also would support this interpretation.)
2:3 With this imperative Paul returns to the second—and main—reason that Timothy needs “to be strengthened in the grace that is his in Christ,” namely, that he may, as Onesiphorus, “take his part in suffering.” Since this verb is an exact repetition from 1:8, this is by far the preferable translation to the endure hardship of the NIV (which has “join with me in suffering” in 1:8; cf. KJV, NEB). The verb (syn [“with”]-kako [“evil”]-paschō [“suffer”]) has to do with sharing suffering, not simply enduring difficulties, and is repeated by Paul (without the syn) in verse 9 of his own sufferings for the gospel.
On this occasion Paul qualifies the verb with an analogy from the military—like a good soldier of Christ Jesus. Military imagery is common in Paul (cf. 2 Cor. 10:3–5; Eph. 6:10–17; Philem. 2) and usually occurs in a context of struggling against opponents of his gospel (cf. 1 Tim. 1:18). While the imagery here may indeed reflect that concern (cf. 2:14–19), it more likely is a general metaphor for Timothy as a minister of the gospel, whose ministry has some analogies to the life of the soldier. By the very nature of his occupation, the soldier will often be called on to take his part in suffering.
2:4 The imagery of soldiering in verse 3 calls forth at this point a reflection on the metaphor itself, which in turn will lead to two further metaphors. In 1 Corinthians 9:7 Paul has previously used two of these metaphors; but there all three images make a singular point (ministers of the gospel have a right to expect support from those to whom they minister). Here the military metaphor makes a considerably different point (the need for perseverance), and the subsequent metaphors add yet a further nuance (the promise of eschatological reward); all of which looks forward to verses 11–13.
The metaphor itself propounds: No one serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs—he wants to please his commanding officer. One must be careful not to press images into meanings that differ from the author’s intent. Here the concern follows directly from verse 3, that Timothy is to “take his share in suffering.” Thus it is not a proscription against marriage or a call for separation from worldliness, as it has often been treated by Roman Catholics or Protestant Fundamentalists. Paul’s concern is singular: Timothy must give himself, even to the point of great suffering, to wholehearted devotion to his divine commanding officer. Indeed, it should be his desire to please him. Such a desire will mean obedience to the call to service, including suffering. The analogy does not negate “civilian affairs”; rather, it disallows “looking back” (cf. Luke 9:61–62) or hankering for an easier path (in this case defecting, as have so many others).
2:5 The analogy calling for wholehearted devotion to service in order to “please” his Lord, calls for the companion analogy of an athlete (cf. 1 Tim. 1:18 and 6:12) who does not receive the victor’s crown unless he competes according to the rules. The emphasis now is on his “obeying the rules” (lit., “compete lawfully”; Gk., nomimōs, as in 1 Tim. 1:8), which seems to reflect a similar concern to that in verse 4. But it is not totally clear what “according to the rules” means: either the rules of the contest or the rules of training (e.g., the Games required a ten-month period of strict discipline). It probably refers to the rules of the contest itself, since the concern is not with Timothy’s need for discipline as such but with his taking his share “in suffering.” The “noble contest” (cf. 1 Tim. 6:12), like the “noble war” (cf. 1 Tim. 1:18), requires wholehearted devotion to the task, as well as full compliance with the rules of the contest, which in this case includes suffering.
However, although the accent falls upon according to the rules, the metaphor also reflects the eschatological emphasis recurrent in this letter (see esp. vv. 11–13; 4:6–8; cf. 1:1, 12). The athlete who competes according to the rules, that is, “takes his part in suffering,” will in fact receive the victor’s crown (cf. 4:8). For a similar use of athletics imagery in Paul, see 1 Corinthians 9:24–27.
2:6 With yet a further image, farming, Paul reemphasizes, with the promise of eschatological reward, the point of wholehearted devotion, even if it calls for suffering. As with the analogy in verse 5, the emphasis here lies on the hardworking farmer; again the point refers back to verse 3 with its sharing in suffering.
But also as in verse 5, the imagery again accents the eschatological reward; he should be the first to receive a share of the crops. The point of his receiving the first share, therefore, is not about his making a living from the gospel (D-C, Hanson), which is totally foreign to the context, but about his final reward for being hardworking.
Thus, even though the military imagery does not precisely say so, each of the metaphors, besides calling Timothy to “take his share in suffering,” looks forward to the eschatological prize. As Barrett nicely puts it: “Beyond warfare is victory, beyond athletic effort a prize, and beyond agricultural labour a crop” (p. 102).
2:7 The compounding of metaphors in verses 4–6 has led Paul from the specific point of his imperative for Timothy to “take part in suffering” to an equal emphasis on the eschatological “prize.” These two emphases form the basic point of the rest of the appeal (vv. 8–13). But in order to get to that final paragraph, Paul calls on Timothy to reflect on what I am saying, that is, the point of the three metaphors, which Paul has given without including explanations.
Just in case Timothy might miss the point, Paul adds that the Lord will give you (not “may the Lord grant you”; cf. KJV, which is based on an inferior text) insight into all this. Thus everything is from the Lord, both the strengthening to stand in his grace (v. 1) and the ability to understand the need to share in suffering.
Additional Notes
2:2 Those who take the “church manual” approach to these letters, and especially those who would date the letters as later pseudepigraphs, see this imperative as a key to understanding all three letters. Here is “the author” betraying his post-Pauline concerns of preserving the pure gospel through properly trained and ordained ministers. But the singularity of this verse in these letters must not be overlooked. The interpretation offered in this commentary accounts both for its singularity and its place in the context of this Epistle.
2:3 On the use of the military and athletic metaphors in Paul, see J. N. Sevenster, Paul and Seneca, pp. 162–64; and V. C. Pfitzner, Paul and the Agon Motif, pp. 157–86. Here is a clear case of the “authentic” Paul reflecting imagery in common with such contemporaries as Seneca and Philo, yet using it in a uniquely Christian way. The usage here, as Pfitzner convincingly demonstrates, reflects Pauline usage, not Hellenism or Hellenistic Judaism. This fact should cause one to be more cautious in describing other such metaphors, unique to these Epistles, as un-Pauline.
2:5 For the information that participants in the Olympic Games had to swear an oath to Zeus to observe strict training for the ten months prior to the competition, see Pausanius, Descriptions of Greece 5.24.9 (Loeb, II, p. 529). Kelly sees the point as “arduous self-discipline,” but that seems to move too far afield from the thoroughgoing context of sharing in suffering.
2:6 D-C, followed by Hanson and others who see the letter as pseudepigraphic, think the point of both the athlete and the farmer metaphors is remuneration. But this misses the clear eschatological sense of the reward (see vv. 11–13 and 4:6–8) as well as the point of the metaphors in the present context. Such an interpretation is the result of their view of authorship and their subsequent fascination with the author’s “sources” (here, 1 Cor. 9:7 and 24–27) while paying little or no attention to the point of the metaphors in context. The meaning of the metaphors, they argue, is left for “the reader to find out for himself,” which is their interpretation of v. 7 (p. 108). It is arguable that an interpretation that makes good sense both of the details and the context is to be preferred to this procedure.
Basis for the Appeal
With this paragraph Paul brings to a fitting conclusion his long appeal for Timothy to remain loyal—even to the point of suffering. His loyalty is to be primarily to Christ and the gospel, but it will be evidenced by his loyalty to Paul, a prisoner because of the gospel, and by faithfulness to his own ministry (1:6–14). When this appeal resumed in 2:1, it especially picked up the theme of Timothy’s readiness to share in suffering for the gospel, reinforced by the promise of eschatological reward (vv. 4–6; cf. 1:12).
This present paragraph provides the theological basis for the appeal. Timothy is urged to remember Jesus Christ himself, whose resurrection and Davidic descent are to bring him confidence (v. 8). But this mention of Christ leads to yet another reminder of Paul’s imprisonment and the reasons for it (vv. 9–10). He then concludes with the fifth “faithful saying,” a quatrain, apparently from a hymn or poem, which both encourages endurance (line 2) and warns against its lack (line 3), but concludes on the high note of God’s faithfulness (line 4).
Thus the basic themes of the whole section are reiterated: Christ and his gospel, Paul’s present suffering, and an appeal, with a warning, for Timothy himself (and now including God’s people) to endure despite the suffering.
2:8 Although verse 7 was something of an afterthought to the three preceding analogies, the reminder that the Lord would enable him to understand prompts the next imperative: Remember (“bear in mind,” Kelly) Jesus Christ. This picks up the “memory” motif that recurs in this letter (1:4–5, 6; 3:14–15). Just as Paul had earlier reminded him of the faith of his forebears (1:5), of his own call and empowering for ministry (1:6–7), and of the “sound teaching” he had had modeled before him in Paul (1:13; cf. 1:9–10), so now he calls him to focus his attention on Christ himself.
In his “bearing in mind Jesus Christ,” Timothy is to focus on two realities: that he was raised from the dead and that he was descended from David (lit., “of David’s seed”). The reason for the first of these two qualifiers is easy enough to discern. Jesus Christ … raised [better, “risen”] from the dead is both the prime example of eschatological victory after death (hence reflecting on vv. 5–6, and thus an encouragement to one who is also suffering) and Timothy’s source of strength (i.e., he who conquered death through resurrection will “strengthen you” for your task and endurance). Furthermore, it also anticipates the exposure of the false teachers in verses 14–18, who, by arguing that the “resurrection [of believers] has already taken place,” are in effect denying the eschatological future that Paul is affirming (vv. 5–6, 10).
That the focus of Timothy’s remembering Jesus Christ is on his being the Risen One is further demonstrated from the first couplet in the hymn (vv. 11–12a): “if we died with him, we will also live with him; if we endure, we will also reign with him.” Since this is so, one wonders, then what is the point of the second qualifier, descended from David? Several options have been offered. On the basis of the similar combination in Romans 1:3–4, some have seen the whole as a piece of early creedal material and suggest that this phrase was included from the source, but without its having any necessary significance for the context. Others see it as reference to the Incarnation, with emphasis on Christ’s humanity, over against an alleged Gnosticism on the part of the opponents (but its use in Rom. 1:3 speaks against this). Most likely, as in other such references in the NT, the point is not so much Christ’s humanity as it is his being the fulfillment of God’s promise and his people’s expectations. If so, then it fits the theme of continuity with the past (see disc. on 1:3, 5; cf. 3:14–17), especially of Christ as the true fulfillment and visible expression of God’s faithfulness.
Together these two realities, Jesus Christ risen from the dead and Jesus Christ of the seed of David form a brief epitome of my gospel (cf. 1 Tim. 1:11; Rom. 2:16; 16:25, “not invented by me but entrusted to me,” Lock). It assures Timothy, and in verse 10 God’s people also, that he, and they, belong to something that God has been doing in history, culminating in Christ, and that they are the heirs of final eschatological salvation, also through Christ. Thus, “Be steadfast.”
2:9–10 Having called Timothy’s attention once again to Christ as the content of his gospel, Paul also once more reminds him that his (Paul’s) present suffering is in the service of that gospel. For which, Paul reminds him, I am suffering this present evil, even to the point (translating the preposition mechri) of being chained like a criminal, a clear indignity for one who was both a Roman citizen and innocent. The word criminal, which occurs in Luke 23:32–39 for the brigands who were crucified with Jesus, is an especially strong word, used for those “who commit gross misdeeds and serious crimes” (BAGD). It is clear from this sentence, as well as from 1:8, 16, and 4:16–18, that Paul’s imprisonment was a serious one, and that it was personally repugnant to him.
But his repugnance at his chains is immediately contrasted with God’s word that is not chained. They may stop the messenger, but they cannot stop the message. As Luther sang: “The body they may kill; God’s truth abideth still; His kingdom is forever.” And this, of course, is Paul’s concern for Timothy throughout the letter. “Take your share in suffering,” he urges him, “and above all, preach the word (4:2); for it is the word alone, the message of the gospel, that counts. They may imprison us and chain us, but they cannot chain our message” (cf. esp. Phil. 1:12–18).
Paul’s imprisonment, however, is not mentioned simply as a contrast to the unfettered word of God. As in Philippians 1:12–18, it is portrayed as being in behalf of that word and for the sake of the elect. Thus I endure everything—and by implication Timothy should too (cf. v. 12a). “God’s chosen people” would be an excellent translation of tous eklektous (the elect). Far too much ink has been spilled on the theological implications of this term, whether it refers to the “elect” who are already saved or to the “elect” but not yet saved. Such theologizing quite misses Paul’s point. Here again, as in Titus 1:1, 2:14, and many other places, Paul has appropriated OT language for God’s people and applied it to Christian believers. Furthermore, as in verse 8 above, the emphasis here falls on their continuity with the past, not their theological status.
The effect of his imprisonment for the sake of “God’s chosen people”—and the reason he is willing to endure everything—is that they too will obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus. It is not clear, just as in Colossians 1:24 and 2 Corinthians 1:6, how Paul understands the relationship between Christ’s sufferings, his own sufferings, and the people’s salvation. He certainly cannot mean that his suffering obtains salvation for them. More likely he means that his imprisonment will somehow “help on the work of the Gospel” (Barrett), by means of which God’s people obtain their salvation. But just how he understands his suffering to “help it on,” we are not told. In any event it is the gospel for which he suffers, not his suffering for the gospel, that ultimately brings their salvation; for after all it is in Christ Jesus, and through Paul only as secondary agent—as its messenger. As throughout these letters, and especially this one, salvation is primarily an eschatological reality: It comes with eternal glory. Thus he reminds Timothy—and now the people as well—that beyond present endurance awaits the eschatological prize (see disc. on vv. 4–6).
It should not go unnoticed that with these words Paul begins temporarily to look beyond Timothy to include God’s people, the chosen ones, who will, with Timothy and Paul, renounce the false teachings (2:14–21) and “endure unto eternal glory.”
2:11–13 As a way of wrapping up this segment of the argument (appeal), and thereby reinforcing the appeal itself (which now includes God’s people), Paul “cites” a fifth (and last) trustworthy (“faithful”) saying. On the formula itself, see the discussion on 1 Timothy 1:15 (cf. 1 Tim. 3:1; 4:10; Titus 3:8).
Because the saying in this instance begins with a connective gar (“for,” untranslated in the NIV), some have argued that the saying is actually verse 8 or 10 or that logos does not mean saying here but refers back to God’s word in verse 9 or that the “for” was an original part of a borrowed saying that was thus incorporated by Paul, but without meaning for the present context. However, the rhythmic balance of the four lines that follow gives them the clear character of a “saying” (perhaps an early Christian poem or hymn, more likely from Paul himself or from his churches). The gar is probably explanatory—and thus intentional—but does not refer to this is a trustworthy saying. Rather it goes back to all of the appeal in verses 1–10. “Take your share of suffering,” Paul says; “keep in mind your risen Lord,” he further reminds him, “because if we have died with him, we shall also live with him,” and so on.
The poetic nature of the saying can be easily seen. It is a quatrain of conditional sentences. Each protasis (“if”-clause) deals with the believers’ actions (all in the first person plural, the language of confession); each apodosis (“then”-clause) gives the results in terms of Christ, with the final apodosis having an additional explanatory coda. It may be that couplets are intended, since the first two lines deal with positive actions and the second two with negative. However, there is also a progression of tenses (past, present, future) and ideas in the first three lines, whereas the final line exhibits some remarkable shifts (both verbs are present; no also in the apodosis; a surprising turn to the apodosis).
The most likely interpretation of the first three lines is that they progress from Christian conversion (line 1) through perseverance and its eschatological prize (line 2) to a warning about the dire consequences of apostasy (line 3). Although there are considerable differences among scholars about line 4, it probably responds to line 3 as a word of hope. Our faithfulness or disloyalty cannot alter the greater reality of Christ’s faithfulness (to us, being implied).
Before examining each line, one should note that the language and thought of the whole is thoroughly Pauline—to the detail. If he did not compose it, then it was certainly composed in his churches. In the final analysis there is no reason to think that the man who wrote 1 Corinthians 13 and Romans 8:28–39 could not also have written this marvelous piece.
Line 1: If we died with him, we will also live with him. This clearly mirrors Romans 6:8 (cf. Col. 2:20; 3:1), and there is no reason to think that it means anything different here from what it does there. Using baptismal imagery, Paul is reflecting again on Christian conversion as a dying and rising with Christ. The future, we will also live with him, has primarily to do with life in Christ in the present (as it does in Rom. 6:8–11), although such language always has latent in it the thought of the eschatological fulfillment yet to be realized. After all, the present life with him is the result of his resurrection, the primary eschatological event that has already set the future in motion.
In the present context, however, the language of dying and living in Christ is perhaps also to be heard with the broader implications of Christian martyrdom. What was true figuratively at one’s baptism would also be true of a “baptism” of another kind. One might well guess that the implication of this was not lost on Timothy.
Line 2: If we endure, we will also reign with him. This line is the basic reason, along with its warning counterpart in line 3, for citing the saying. It speaks directly to the concern throughout the whole appeal (1:6–2:13) that Timothy remain loyal, even in the face of suffering. The verb to endure, although it clearly implies persevering, is especially used by NT writers of holding one’s ground patiently in trouble or affliction (cf. Mark 13:13; Rom. 12:12). That is certainly the sense here.
The apodosis also speaks directly to the context, namely, the promise of the eschatological victory alluded to in the three analogies in verses 4–6. To reign with Christ is a Pauline way of expressing the “eternal glory” that awaits those who are faithful to the end (cf. 1 Cor. 4:8; cf. also Rev. 3:21).
Line 3: If we disown [lit., “shall disown”] him, he will also disown us. With this line there is a shift to negative actions of believers. The content stands in clear contrast to line 2 as its opposite. Therefore, it also almost certainly presupposes the context of suffering and persecution (i.e., “being ashamed” of Christ in the time of trial). Thus it is both warning—to Timothy and “the elect” (v. 10; hence the future tense) and judgment—on those such as the Asians of 1:15 who have already deserted.
The language of this line precisely reflects the saying of Jesus found in Matthew 10:33 (par. Luke 12:9). Thus the subject in the apodosis changes from “we” to an emphatic he (Gk. demonstrative pronoun, “that one”).
Lines 2 and 3 together, therefore, form the basic reason for the citation: promise and warning attached to a call for endurance in the face of suffering and hardship.
Line 4: If we are faithless, he will remain faithful (cf. Rom. 3:3). This line is full of surprises, and it is also the one for which sharp differences of opinion exist regarding its interpretation. Some see it as a negative, corresponding to line 3. If we are faithless (i.e., if we commit apostasy), God must be faithful to himself and mete out judgment. Although such an understanding is possible, it seems highly improbable that this is what Paul himself intended. After all, that could have been said plainly. The lack of a future verb with the adverb “also,” as well as the fact that God’s faithfulness in the NT is always in behalf of his people, also tend to speak out against this view.
What seems to have happened is that, in a rather typical way (cf., e.g., 1 Cor. 8:3), Paul could not bring himself to finish a sentence as it began. It is possible for us to prove faithless; but Paul could not possibly say that God would then be faithless toward us. Indeed, quite the opposite. If we are faithless (and the context demands this meaning of the verb apistoumen, not “unbelieving,” as KJV, et al.), this does not in any way affect God’s own faithfulness to his people. This can mean either that God will override our infidelity with his grace (as most commentators) or that his overall faithfulness to his gracious gift of eschatological salvation for his people is not negated by the faithlessness of some. This latter seems more in keeping with Paul and the immediate context. Some have proved faithless, but God’s saving faithfulness has not been diminished thereby. So Timothy and the people should continue to endure that they might also reign with him. Thus all four lines cohere as an exposition of “the salvation that comes through Christ Jesus and brings eternal glory” (v. 10).
The final coda simply explains why the final apodosis stands as it does: because he cannot disown himself. To do so would mean that God had ceased to be. Hence eschatological salvation is for Paul ultimately rooted in the character of God.
With this great affirmation, in the context of equally severe warning, this first appeal to loyalty comes to a conclusion. The defections in Asia, the warnings in this text, plus the raising of his sights in verse 10 to include “the elect,” all coalesce to turn Paul’s attention one final time to the false teachers (see 1 Tim. 1:3–11, 18–20; 4:1–5; 6:3–10) and Timothy’s responsibilities (2:14–3:9).
Additional Notes
2:8 The unusual word order (for the PE) of Jesus before Christ, and esp. the appearance of the phrase “from David’s seed” in Ignatius of Antioch (ca. A.D. 110), have also contributed to the conviction that this is a segment of creedal formulation that has been borrowed both here and in Rom. 1:3–4. Although the word order is probably irrelevant (see Titus 1:1), the creedal nature of what is said is certainly possible. But it is highly unlikely that we are dealing with a fixed creed. Rather, a “common body of doctrine was beginning to crystallize into more or less conventional patterns and forms, and sometimes set types of verbal expression were becoming current, [but] the language still remained fairly fluid” (J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Creeds, pp. 23–24).
2:9–10 For a typical example of “too much ink spilt” on “who are the elect” in this passage that rather misses Paul’s point, see Hendriksen.
2:11–13 For a rather full discussion of the issues involved in this passage (what is the trustworthy saying; what is its extent and structure) as well as an extensive exegesis of its details, see G. W. Knight, The Faithful Sayings in the Pastoral letters, pp. 112–37. Knight and G. R. Beasley-Murray (Baptism in the New Testament, pp. 207–9) both argue that it is a baptismal hymn (but see J. D. G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit, pp. 169–70). Bernard probably comes closer to reality by seeing it as “a hymn on the glories of martyrdom.” But if one takes seriously the thoroughly Pauline nature of the poem, neither of these options is necessary. The hymn, in all of its parts, fits the context so well, that, whatever its origins or original setting, it now functions to inspire loyalty to Christ.
For an interpretation that sees line 1 as essentially reflecting martyrdom, see Hendriksen. But even he recognizes the difficulties that the aorist (past tense) verb, we died, presents for this view, so he spiritualizes the death as being to “worldly comfort, ease,” etc.
For examples of the “negative” understanding of line 4, see the comments by Bernard and Hendriksen. See Knight, pp. 126–31, for a more detailed refutation.
Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by Gordon D. Fee, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
The army of Israel was primarily a volunteer military force directed by God and his word. Deuteronomy 20 establishes the guidelines for warfare, Num. 1 describes organization, and Num. 2:17 highlights God’s strategic position as commander in the sacred event of war. Israelite warriors were men twenty years and older from the nation’s tribes, clans, and families. The Levites were appointed tabernacle caretakers and not counted in the census for military duties. The priest was responsible for addressing the nation prior to a battle and then leading the battle procession in connection with the ark of the covenant.
The Israelite army structure is not overly developed in the biblical material. Under God as commander in chief was the king, who then worked in connection with his commanders and officers to execute God’s will by means of a tribal confederation. Prior to the monarchy, God worked through Moses and Joshua to rally the men for battle. Samuel warned the nation that the king would abuse the volunteerism of the army and take their sons and make them render military service with his chariots and horses (1Sam. 8:1112). This warning was realized under the leadership of Solomon and Rehoboam. Army divisions included a list of family heads, commanders of thousands, commanders of hundreds, and their officers. In addition, a period of their service was noted (1Chron. 27).
Army size was not a matter of importance for success in battle. God as divine warrior led the nation in battle and determined the outcome in keeping with his sovereign purposes. Only a few Israelites were necessary to defeat thousands (Lev. 26:8; Deut. 32:8). The defeat of Pharaoh and his army in the exodus and the conquest provides the most dramatic premonarchy illustrations of God’s defiance of the numbers. During the monarchy, God orchestrated the defeat of the vast Aramean army with a smaller Israelite army (1Kings 20:27). On the other hand, when the Israelites were disobedient to the covenant, they would be put to flight (Josh. 7).
A Roman province in western Asia Minor, not to be confused with the modern designation for the larger continent. The exact boundaries are difficult to determine, but the region, formed in 133 130 BC, and since the time of Augustus ruled by proconsuls, included the older kingdoms of Mysia, Lydia, Caria, and part of Phrygia, as well as several islands. Paul and his companions enjoyed an especially successful mission in Asia (Acts 19:10, 22, 26–27; Rom. 16:5). He later wrote letters to Christians in Colossae and Ephesus (Ephesians; 1Timothy). Inscriptions attest to the wealth of many Ephesians. Through Timothy, Paul warns those pursuing wealth in the city (1Tim. 6:9–10; cf. Rev. 3:17). The apostle John eventually settled in Ephesus and later was exiled to the island of Patmos, where he wrote to the seven churches of Asia (Rev. 1:4–3:22).
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.
Birth and childhood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesus was probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’s death (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of a virginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governor Quirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place in Bethlehem (2:15). Both the census and the governorship at the time of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars. Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to either confirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must be determined on the basis of one’s view regarding the general reliability of the Gospel tradition.
On the eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keeping with the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus” (Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home of his parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel of Luke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth in strength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke also contains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Baptism, temptation, and start of ministry. After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke 3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instant ministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that the temptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Luke identify three specific temptations by the devil, though their order for the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine intervention after jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’s kingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation, quoting Scripture in response.
Matthew and Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum in Galilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13; Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirty years of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity or perhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of the Levites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning of Jesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples and the sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Galilean ministry. The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and around Galilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ first teaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30); the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for his calling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection and suffering.
All the Gospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in his Galilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke 5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioning of the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers is recorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministry is the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke 6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, in particular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synoptics focus on healings and exorcisms.
During Jesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with his identity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority (Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family (3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner of Beelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesus told parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growing kingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humble beginnings (4:1–32).
The Synoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful. No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority or ability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized many demons (5:1–13), raised the dead (5:35–42), fed five thousand (6:30–44), and walked on water (6:48–49).
In the later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew and traveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are not written with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns to Galilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fear resolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee, where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ disciples with lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed the Pharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents (7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demanding a sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, who confessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus did provide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesus withdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician woman requested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans had long resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality that allotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere “crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,” Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-mute man in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’ travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The city was the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judean ministry. Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry as he resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually led to his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem into three phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27). The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of the journey. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, and the demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem (Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45; Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journey toward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvation and judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase of the journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are the main themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Social conflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposte interactions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel (Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomic feathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who had little value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16; Luke 18:15–17).
Passion week, death, and resurrection. Each of the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with the crowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark 11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Luke describes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during which Jesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
In Jerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17). Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “began looking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segment of Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’ authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions (12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation (12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s own destruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, Judas Iscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’ arrest (14:10–11).
At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a new covenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29; Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned the disciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark 14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and later he prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agony and submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42; Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial, crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15; Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18). Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission by making disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8) and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return (Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
An innate awareness of wrong, with an inclination toward thinking and acting rightly. The OT describes moral awareness as a willingness to obey God’s revealed will (Deut. 30:14; Ps. 1:12; Prov. 1:7). People are not presented as morally perfect, but, to the degree of their knowledge, they are expected to act rightly (Gen. 4:1–16; 1Sam. 25:31). Abimelek, king of Gerar, appeals to ignorance because of Abraham’s deception (Gen. 20:1–7). Job appeals to the purity of his conscience (Job 27:6).
Headgear signifying honor, victory, power, or authority. A crown was worn by monarchs in the ancient world to designate their royal power, often including a golden headband with precious stones in it, as well as a turban.
There are two important types of crowns in the OT: the priestly and the royal. A royal crown first appears with Saul (2Sam. 1:10) and is worn by monarchs after him, including David (2Sam. 12:30; 1Chron. 20:2; see also Pss. 21:3; 132:18) and Joash (2Kings 11:12; 2Chron. 23:11). The book of Exodus depicts a crownlike turban to which is affixed a golden “sacred emblem” bearing the inscription “Holy to the Lord,” which is to be worn by the high priest (Exod. 28:3637; 29:6; see also, e.g., 39:30; Lev. 8:9).
Zechariah 6:11–14 looks to a future messiah, “the Branch,” who will be both priest and king, thus wearing a priestly and royal crown. Before his crucifixion, Jesus’ tormentors place on his head a mock crown made of thorns (Matt. 27:29; Mark 15:17; John 19:2, 5). In the book of Revelation both godly and satanic figures wear crowns: the elders in heaven (4:4, 10), the rider of the white horse (6:2), the locusts from the Abyss (9:7), the woman clothed with the sun (12:1), the dragon and the beast (12:3; 13:1), the one “like a son of man” (14:14), and Christ himself (19:12).
The second king of Israel (r. 1010970 BC), founder of a dynasty that continued with his son Solomon (r. 970–931 BC), who ruled all of Israel; subsequently the remaining “sons of David” ruled the southern kingdom, Judah, until 586 BC.
Human kingship is a late development in Israel, but a number of ancient texts anticipate the establishment of the institution (Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:14–20) and specifically the rise of a king from Judah (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:17). Thus, it is surprising that the first king of Israel is not from Judah, but from Benjamin. When the people ask Samuel for a king, he anoints Saul (1Sam. 8–12), who proves to be a tremendous disappointment. He forfeits the establishment of his dynasty when he shows a lack of confidence in God by rashly offering prebattle sacrifices (13:13–14). God then rejects Saul as king because he does not execute God’s full judgment against the Amalekites as he knows he should (15:23).
Eventually Saul’s moment of judgment comes. Saul’s final battle is against the Philistines, the major foreign force still inside the borders of the promised land. Both Saul and Jonathan meet their end on Mount Gilboa, and David sings songs that express his sadness over their deaths (1Sam. 31–2Sam. 1).
Even with Saul out of the way, David’s rise to kingship is not easy. He is immediately crowned king of Judah (2Sam. 2:1–7), but the northern tribes choose to follow Ish-Bosheth, the son of Saul. War erupts between the two kingdoms. Eventually, though, the powerful general Abner abandons his support of Saul’s son, sealing the end of that dynasty. Ish-Bosheth is killed by his own men, and soon David becomes king over all Israel (5:1–5).
David’s kingship leads to significant victories that, in essence, complete the conquest of Canaan by finally subduing all the internal enemies. His men take the city of Jerusalem from the Jebusites, and he makes it his capital (2Sam. 5:6–16). He also defeats the Philistines, who have been a thorn in the side of Israel for years (2Sam. 5:17–25; for other victories, see 8:1–14). In celebration, David brings the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2Sam. 6).
The David narrative reaches its apex when God enters into a covenant with him that establishes his dynasty (2Sam. 7; 1Chron. 17). After David dies, his son will succeed him, and indeed his dynasty lasts for many hundreds of years (see below).
David is a good king, but not a perfect king. A turning point in his reign comes in 2Sam. 11. Up to this point, David has been content with what God has given him. He does not grasp for anything that does not belong to him. However, when he sees the beautiful Bathsheba bathing, he sends messengers to bring her to his house, where the two have sexual intercourse and she becomes pregnant. In an attempt to conceal this sin of adultery, he orders the death of her husband, Uriah the Hittite. Thus, he adds the crime of murder to that of adultery.
David thinks that the sin is secret, but nothing is hidden from God, who sends his prophet Nathan to confront David (2Sam. 12; cf. Ps. 51). The difference between Saul and David is not that the latter is perfect but rather that David, as opposed to Saul, repents when he sins. Thus, God allows his reign to continue. Even so, David feels the consequences of his sin. First, the son that Bathsheba bears from her illicit union with David is struck with illness and dies. And ever afterward, David’s family life is troubled, with great impact on the political life of Israel. Son is pitted against son (Amnon and Absalom [2Sam. 13]), as well as son against father (Absalom and David [2Sam. 15–18]). Absalom temporarily deposes his father from the throne, but David eventually regains the kingship, though at the cost of the heartbreaking loss of his son.
Even at the very end, there is conflict within David’s house. When David has grown old, another son, Adonijah, attempts to take the throne, with support from powerful people such as Joab and Abiathar. At the instigation of Bathsheba and Nathan, however, David places the son of his choosing, Solomon, on the throne (1Kings 1). David then dies after a reign of forty-one years, seven in Hebron and the rest over all Israel (1Kings 2:10–12).
David’s greatest legacy is the dynasty that bears his name. Beginning with Solomon, however, his successors do not continue his spiritual legacy. Although a number of kings do some good, only Hezekiah (r. 727–698 BC) and Josiah (r. 639–609 BC) are given unqualified approval. Eventually, the Davidic rule comes to an end in Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians (586 BC). But God is not done with his redemptive purposes, and his promise to David is that he will have a ruler on the throne “forever” (2Sam. 7:16). The NT recognizes that Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of this promise. He is the greater son of David, the one who is the Christ or Messiah, the anointed king. Jesus is the one who reigns forever in heaven. The life and the rule of David foreshadow the messianic rule of Jesus Christ.
The Jewish mother of Timothy, Eunice was a Christian believer from Lystra in Asia Minor whose unnamed husband was Greek (Acts 16:1). Paul credits both Eunice and Timothy’s grandmother Lois for instilling faith in his young disciple (2Tim. 1:5).
Faith in the context of the OT rests on a foundation that the person or object of trust, belief, or confidence is reliable. Trust in Yahweh is expressed through loyalty and obedience. The theme of responsive obedience is emphasized in the Torah (Exod. 19:5). In the later history of Israel, faithfulness to the law became the predominant expression of faith (Dan. 1:8; 6:10). OT faith, then, is a moral response rather than abstract intellect or emotion.
Faith is a central theological concept in the NT. In relational terms, faith is foremost personalized as the locus of trust and belief in the person of Jesus Christ.
In the Gospels, Jesus is spoken of not as the subject of faith (as believing in God), but as the object of faith. In the Synoptic Gospels, faith is seen most often in connection with the ministry of Jesus. Miracles, in particular healings, are presented as taking place in response to the faith of the one in need of healing or the requester. In the Gospel of John, faith (belief) is presented as something that God requires of his people (6:2829).
In the book of Acts, “faith/belief” is used to refer to Jews and Gentiles converting to following the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and becoming part of the Christian community. The book correlates faith in Christ closely with repentance (Acts 11:21; 19:18; 20:21; 26:18).
Paul relates faith to righteousness and justification (Rom. 3:22; 5:11; Gal. 3:6). In Ephesians faith is shown as instrumental in salvation: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” (2:8).
In Hebrews, faith is described as “being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (11:1). Faith thus is viewed as something that can be accomplished in the life of the believer—a calling of God not yet tangible or seen. To possess faith is to be loyal to God and to the gospel of Jesus Christ despite all obstacles. In the Letter of James, genuine works naturally accompany genuine faith. Works, however, are expressed in doing the will of God. The will of God means, for example, caring for the poor (James 2:15–16).
In 1Peter, Christ is depicted as the broker of faith in God (1:21), whereas in 2Peter and Jude faith is presented as received from God (2Pet. 1:1). In the Letters of John “to believe” is used as a litmus test for those who possess eternal life: “You who believe in the name of the Son of God, ... you have eternal life” (1John 5:13).
For the biblical Israelites and their ancestors, agriculture was one of the primary expressions of subsistence in their economy and life. The priority of agricultural pursuits for Israel’s worldview is indicated in the fact that it was among the first mandates given by God to man in the garden (Gen. 1:2829).
The primary produce of the biblical farmer included cereals (wheat, barley, millet), legumes (beans, peas), olives, and grapes. Less predominant crops included nuts (almonds, walnuts, pistachios), herbs (cumin, coriander, sesame), and vegetables (cucumbers, onions, greens). The production of the various crops was largely limited to certain geographic regions of Israel (such as the coastal plain or the plains of Moab) because much of the land was ill suited for agriculture, being rocky and arid.
The actual craft of agriculture involved the three steps of sowing, reaping, and threshing/production. The fields typically were plowed following the first autumn rains, and sowing lasted about two months. Harvest season lasted seven months in all. Cereal products went through the process of threshing, whereas fruits were immediately produced into wine or dried. The practice of threshing the grains mostly took place on threshing floors located adjacent to the fields. The threshing floors were designed as a circle, generally twenty-five to forty feet in diameter. Typically animals such as donkeys or oxen were driven around the floor as the grains were fed into their paths and subsequently crushed. The resulting broken husks were then thrown into the air, allowing the wind to carry away the chaff and producing a separated grain that could then be cleaned and processed for home use.
Besides playing a significant role in the practical matters of life, agricultural practices found numerous applications in the images and ideals of the biblical writers (Judg. 8:2; 9:8–15; Ezek. 17:6–10). The medium could be used to express both blessings and curses. Several texts point to the cursing of agricultural endeavors as a punishment from God. Ceremonial defilement was a possibility if proper methodology in sowing seeds was not followed (Lev. 19:19; Deut. 22:9). Similarly, Yahweh’s assessment of Israel’s failure to uphold the covenant commitments could lead to disease, locust attacks, crop failure, and total loss of the land (Deut. 28:40; Joel 1:4; Amos 7:1). Conversely, agricultural bounty and blessings were also a part of covenant stipulations. Indeed, many of the offerings themselves were centered on agriculture (Lev. 2; Num. 18:8–32). Even the Sabbath rest itself was extended to matters of agriculture and care for the land (Lev. 25:1–7). Finally, the covenant saw some of the greatest benefits of life before Yahweh as being blessed through agricultural bounty (Deut. 28:22; Amos 9:13). In a few cases, agricultural imagery cut both ways. For instance, the vine was an image that could express judgment, care, and restoration in both Judaism and Christianity (Isa. 5:1–8; John 15:1–11). Despite the link between agricultural realities and the covenant, the Scriptures are very careful to distinguish Israel from the fertility cults of its Canaanite neighbors (1Kings 18:17–40; Hos. 2:8–9). This distinction also seems to have found expression in certain NT texts (1Cor. 6:15–20).
Fasting, often linked with prayer, was one avenue of appeal to God in the face of crises, both national and personal. Moses ascended to Mount Sinai and was with God forty days and nights without eating bread or drinking water, both before and after the Israelites’ sin with the golden calf (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 9:818). David fasted when his son was dying (2Sam. 12:15–23). Esther called all the Jews of Susa to fast for three days before she ventured before the king (Esther 4:15–17). Joel called the people to repentance and fasting as the land was devastated by a locust plague (Joel 1:13–14; 2:12). Forty days of fasting, an echo of Moses’ experience, prepared Jesus to face the devil’s temptations (Matt. 4:1–11 pars.).
The OT prophets criticized Israelites who presumed that their religious obligations were met simply by fasting (Isa. 58:1–10; Zech. 7:1–5). When asked why his disciples did not fast and pray, Jesus indicated that sometimes fasting is inappropriate (Matt. 9:14–17 pars.). Luke recorded an addition to Jesus’ statement about new wine in old wineskins: “No one after drinking old wine wants the new, for they say, ‘The old is better’” (Luke 5:39), perhaps suggesting that the accumulation of fasting practices was “new wine” and they ought simply to observe the Day of Atonement.
People in the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin. Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family was the source of people’s status in the community and provided the primary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.
Marriage and divorce. Marriage in the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between two families, arranged by the bride’s father or a male representative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’s price.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction but also an expression of family honor. Only the rich could afford multiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself was celebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.
The primary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to produce a male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. The concept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs, especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.
Marriage among Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jews sought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev. 18:617). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew. Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainly outside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness. Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romans did practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinship group (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategic alliances between families.
Greek and Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. In Jewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorce proceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release her and repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (in particular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Sira comments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to the father (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictive use of divorce than the OT (Mark 10:1–12).
Children and parenting. Childbearing was considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman and her entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to this blessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, and specifically their husbands.
Children were of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. An estimated 60percent of the children in the first-century Mediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.
Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting style based on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and evil tendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent evil tendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The main concern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty. Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stage children were taught to accept the total authority of the father. The rearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girls were taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so that they could help with household tasks.
Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak of fidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT, the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In their overall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to in familial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod. 4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16; 64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).
The church as the family of God. Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship, the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into the community was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was eventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18). Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the community of his followers, God’s family—the church. See also Adoption.
The word “Gentiles” is often used to translate words meaning “nations” or “peoples.”
In general, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. God chose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:68; 10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership in the covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becoming part of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).
The OT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessing through Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping the law, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. The law is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenant that God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5; 20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6; 10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss. 119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).
Such law/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OT understanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel, the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in and through Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3; 17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specifically involves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]). Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subject to Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16; 14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed by Israel’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel, serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fear Israel’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5; 60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic. 7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages further elucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in the God of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer. 12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations “flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentile participation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa. 2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).
Situating Jesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentile sensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread across the Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God of Israel in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentiles experience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.
Some Christians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought that Gentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God of Israel’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’s opponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from God and his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13; 1Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation, especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin, lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32; Eph. 4:17–19; 1Thess. 4:5; 1Pet. 1:14, 18).
However, various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keep the law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’s ultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, has replaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and his death and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ by the Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true, redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheriting God’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25; 8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7; Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentiles attain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightly before God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30; 1Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1Thess. 4:3–8). Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles with respect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.
Debates about Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for these issues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocal saying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and some other NT writings.
The tangible presence of God, experienced as overwhelming power and splendor. The main Hebrew word referring to glory, kabod, has the root meaning “heavy” (1Sam. 4:18), which in other contexts can mean “intense” (Exod. 9:3; NIV: “terrible”), “wealthy” (i.e., “heavy in possessions” [Gen. 13:2]), and “high reputation” (Gen. 34:19; NIV: “most honored”). When used of God, it refers to his person and his works. God reveals his glory to Israel and to Egypt at the crossing of the sea (Exod. 14:4, 1719). He carefully reveals his glory to Moses after Israel’s sin with the golden calf in order to assure him that he will not abandon them (33:12–23).
In the NT the glory of God is made real in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14; Heb. 1:3). He is, after all, the very presence of God. When he returns on the clouds, he will fully reveal God’s glory (Matt. 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27).
The English word “gospel” translates the Greek word euangelion, which is very important in the NT, being used seventy-six times. The word euangelion (eu= “good,” angelion= “announcement”), in its contemporary use in the Hellenistic world, was not the title of a book but rather a declaration of good news. Euangelion was used in the Roman Empire with reference to significant events in the life of the emperor, who was thought of as a savior with divine status. These events included declarations at the time of his birth, his coming of age, and his accession to the throne. The NT usage of the term can also be traced to the OT (e.g., Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1), which looked forward to the coming of the Messiah, who would bring a time of salvation. This good news, which is declared in the NT, is that Jesus has fulfilled God’s promises to Israel, and now the way of salvation is open to all.
Grace is the nucleus, the critical core element, of the redemptive and sanctifying work of the triune God detailed throughout the entire canon of Scripture. The variegated expressions of grace are rooted in the person and work of God, so that his graciousness and favor effectively demonstrated in every aspect of the created realm glorify him as they are shared and enjoyed with one another.
The biblical terminology informing an understanding of grace defines it as a gift or a favorable reaction or disposition toward someone. Grace is generosity, thanks, and good will between humans and from God to humans. Divine expressions of grace are loving, merciful, and effective. The biblical texts provide a context for a more robust understanding of divine gift. The overall redemptive-historical context of grace is the desire of the eternal God to bring glory to himself through a grace-based relationship with his creation. The Creator-Redeemer gives grace, and the recipients of grace give him glory.
A messenger commissioned to deliver a proclamation on behalf of a royal personage or God. King Nebuchadnezzar’s herald announces that all subjects must worship a golden statue or else be thrown into a blazing furnace (Dan. 3:4). God instructs Habakkuk to record his oracle regarding the future destruction of Babylon on a tablet so that it might be delivered by a herald (Hab. 2:2). Paul was appointed as an apostle and a herald of the gospel to the Gentiles (1Tim. 2:7; 2Tim. 1:11).
An apostacized believer whom Paul names while writing from prison (2Tim. 1:15). Paul claims that Hermogenes, Phygelus, and everyone else in the province of Asia have deserted him. Paul’s disappointment with Hermogenes is mentioned in the context of his exhortation not to be ashamed of suffering for the sake of the gospel.
Holiness is an attribute of God and of all that is fit for association with him. God alone is intrinsically holy (Rev. 15:4). God the Father is holy (John 17:11), as is the Son (Acts 3:14), while “Holy” is the characteristic designation of God’s Spirit (Ps. 51:11; Matt. 1:18). God’s name is holy (Luke 1:49), as are his arm (Ps. 98:1), ways (Ps. 77:13), and words (Ps. 105:42).
With reference to God himself, holiness may indicate something like his uniqueness, and it is associated with attributes such as his glory (Isa. 6:3), righteousness (Isa. 5:16), and jealousy—that is, his proper concern for his reputation (Josh. 24:19).
God’s dwelling place is in heaven (Ps. 20:6), and “holy” functions in some contexts as a virtual equivalent for heavenly (11:4). God’s throne is holy (47:8), and the angels who surround it are “holy ones” (89:5; cf. Mark 8:38).
A corollary of God’s holiness is that he must be treated as holy (Lev. 22:32)—that is, honored (Lev. 10:3), worshiped (Ps. 96:9), and feared (Isa. 8:13).
While “holy” is sometimes said to mean “set apart,” this does not appear to be its core meaning, though it is an associated notion (Lev. 20:26; Heb. 7:26). Holiness, as applied to people and things, is a relational concept. They are (explicitly or implicitly) holy “to the Lord” (Exod. 28:36), never “from” something.
The symbolic representation of God’s heavenly palace, the tabernacle (Exod. 40:9), and later the temple (1Chron. 29:3), and everything associated with them, are holy and the means whereby God’s people in the OT may symbolically be brought near to God. For God to share his presence with anything or anyone else, these too must be holy (Lev. 11:4445; Heb. 12:14).
The OT system of worship involved the distinction between unclean and clean, and between common and holy, and the means of effecting a transition to a state of cleanness or holiness (Lev. 10:10). People, places, and items may be made holy by a process of consecration or sanctification, whether simply by God’s purifying presence (Exod. 3:5) or by ritual acts (Exod. 19:10; 29:36).
God’s faithful people are described as holy (Exod. 19:6; 1Pet. 2:9). In the OT, this is true of the whole people of God at one level, and of particular individuals at another. Thus, kings (Ps. 16:10), prophets (2Kings 4:9), and in particular priests (Lev. 21:7) are declared to be holy. While the OT witnesses to some tension between the collective holiness of Israel and the particular holiness of its designated leaders (Num. 16:3), the latter were intended to act as models and facilitators of Israel’s holiness.
For Christians, God is the creator of the cosmos and the redeemer of humanity. He has revealed himself in historical acts—namely, in creation, in the history of Israel, and especially in the person and work of Jesus Christ. There is only one God (Deut. 6:4); “there is no other” (Isa. 45:5). Because “God is spirit” (John 4:24), he must reveal himself through various images and metaphors.
The OT refers to God by many names. One of the general terms used for God, ’el (which probably means “ultimate supremacy”), often appears in a compound form with a qualifying word, as in ’el ’elyon (“God Most High”), ’el shadday (“God Almighty”), and ’el ro’i (“the God who sees me” or “God of my seeing”). These descriptive names reveal important attributes of God and usually were derived from the personal experiences of the people of God in real-life settings; thus, they do not describe an abstract concept of God.
The most prominent personal name of God is yahweh (YHWH), which is translated as “the Lord” in most English Bibles. At the burning bush in the wilderness of Horeb, God first revealed to Moses his personal name in sentence form: “I am who I am” (Exod. 3:1315). Though debated, the divine name “YHWH” seems to originate from an abbreviated form of this sentence. Yahweh, who was with Moses and his people at the time of exodus, is the God who was with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Jesus’ testimony, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” is identified as the God “of the living” (Matt. 22:32). Hence, the name “Yahweh” is closely tied to God’s self-revelation as the God of presence and life.
Many of God’s attributes are summarized in Exod. 34:6–7: “The Lord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”
The Christian God of the Bible is the triune God. God is one but exists in three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19). The Son is one with the Father (John 10:30); the Holy Spirit is one with God (2Sam. 23:2–3). All three share the same divine nature; they are all-knowing, holy, glorious, and called “Lord” and “God” (Matt. 11:25; John 1:1; 20:28; Acts 3:22; 5:3–4; 10:36; 1Cor. 8:6; 2Cor. 3:17–18; 2Pet. 1:1). All three share in the same work of creation (Gen. 1:1–3), salvation (1Pet. 1:2), indwelling (John 14:23), and directing the church’s mission (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 16:6–10; 14:27; 13:2–4).
The OT cryptically mentions Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2Kings 2:112) ascending into heaven without passing through death or Sheol. Otherwise, mortality is presented as part of the universal human condition, a result of Adam and Eve’s disobedience (Gen. 2:17; 5:1–32).
In the creation story, God warns Adam that if he eats from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, he will die that very day (Gen. 2:17). But despite eating from the tree, Adam lives on physically for almost a millennium (Gen. 5:5), and so this sin-begotten death describes separation from God. Jesus will overcome this separation at the cross (Luke 23:43; cf. Matt. 10:28 par.). For those who trust this work—believe in his name—death is already overcome because they are reconciled with God. Life is no longer bound, as it were, to brain activity, but rather is unbound in the immortal being of God. By reconciling others to God, Jesus is able to promise eternal life (John 3:15, 36; 5:24). Indeed, John writes his Gospel to advance this promise (20:31).
Three NT assertions need to be taken into account in ascertaining biblical perspectives on immortality: (1)God is immortal (Rom. 1:23; 1Tim. 1:17); (2)God alone is immortal (1Tim. 6:16); (3)God grants immortality to those who seek him (Rom. 2:7; 1Cor. 15:53–54; 2Tim. 1:10). These assertions are important in distinguishing immortality from the idea of the continued existence of some part of the human makeup after the death of the body. The word “immortality” should be reserved to refer to the existence of body and soul together for eternity. Human beings, therefore, do not intrinsically possess immortality; it must be granted by God.
God begins his creation with light, which precedes the creation of sun, moon, and stars and throughout Scripture is an unqualified good (Gen. 1:35, 15–18; Exod. 10:23; 13:21). In the ancient world, people rarely traveled at night and usually went to bed soon after sunset. The only light in the home was a small oil lamp set on a stand, which burned expensive olive oil. Light is a biblical synonym for life (Job 3:20; John 8:12). Seeing the light means living (Ps. 49:19; see also Job 33:30). Conversely, darkness is often a symbol of adversity, disaster, and death (Job 30:26; Isa. 8:22; Jer. 23:12; Lam. 3:2).
John, who offers perhaps the most profound meditations on light, claims that God is light (1John 1:5). The predicate appropriates the intrinsic beauty of light, a quality that draws people’s hearts back to the author of beauty. For the apostle, light represents truth and signifies God’s will in opposition to the deception of the world (John 1:9; 12:46). Light stands for purity and signifies God’s holiness as opposed to the unrighteousness of the world (John 3:19–21). Light is where God is, and it radiates from the place of fellowship between God and his creation (John 1:7).
The devout Jewish Christian maternal grandmother of Timothy. Paul praises her faith as a legacy to both her daughter Eunice and her grandson (2Tim. 1:5).
Mercy is a distinguishing characteristic of the nature of God. God is called “the Father of mercies” (2Cor. 1:3 NRSV [NIV: “Father of compassion”]). God is “rich in mercy” (Eph. 2:4; cf. 2Sam. 24:14; Dan. 9:9). God’s mercy was demonstrated in his covenantal faithfulness to his people (1Kings 8:2324; Mic. 7:18–20). God redeemed the oppressed Israelites from slavery under Pharaoh because of his mercy, which was stirred when he heard their groaning and cry for help.
Jesus Christ lived a life full of mercy. He is, in a sense, the bodily manifestation of God’s mercy. Jesus expressed deep mercy whenever he saw the sick and the lost. The writers of the Gospels describe Jesus’ demonstrations of mercy when he healed the blind, the lame, the deaf, the leprous, the demon-possessed, and the dead (Matt. 9:36; 14:14; 20:34; Mark 1:41; 5:19; 6:34; 8:2; Luke 7:13; John 11:33). Jesus especially had compassion on the crowds, who did not have a spiritual leader, and he compared them to “sheep without a shepherd” (Matt. 9:36).
What is the proper response to God’s mercy and compassion? God expects believers to show the same kind of mercy toward other people. One of the best examples is the parable of the unmerciful servant (Matt. 18:23–35).
An early Christian disciple who, in the context of Paul’s exhortation to Timothy not to be ashamed of the gospel or of his “chains” (2Tim. 1:8, 16), is praised as an example worthy of imitation (1:1618). Onesiphorus (his name means “profit bringer”) is commended for diligently and courageously seeking out Paul in prison and for his many acts of kindness to Paul and the church at Ephesus. Paul’s prayer for God’s mercy is directed not to Onesiphorus but to his household, suggesting that he was not with them at the time of writing (1:16; 4:19).
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.
In comparing modern society to that of biblical times, it is important to acknowledge what is distinctive about prisons in many modern societies. Prisons serve multiple functions, including imposing incarceration as punishment for crimes committed, segregating dangerous criminals from the larger population, deterring crime by imposing a negative incentive, and rehabilitating offenders so that they can eventually return to society. In many cases where modern law imposes incarceration as the penalty for crime, ancient and biblical law imposed economic penalties (such as fines), corporal punishment (beatings), and capital punishment (death). In addition, many of the biblical references to prisons and prisoners involve what in modern society would be considered political rather than criminal incarceration.
The story of Joseph prominently features an Egyptian prison. Joseph was falsely put in prison for the crime of molesting his master’s wife (Gen. 39:1920), while his companions were imprisoned for the otherwise unspecified crime of causing offense to the king (40:1). As this story illustrates, the sentences were not of a predetermined duration, and release depended on the goodwill of the king (Gen. 40:13), a situation in which Paul also found himself hundreds of years later during Roman times (Acts 24:27). When Joseph imprisoned his brothers, it was on a presumption of guilt for the crime of espionage (Gen. 42:16). In Roman times, in contrast, certain prisoners had a right to be put on trial eventually, if not quickly (Acts 25:27; see also 16:37). Imprisonment could also be imposed for failure to pay a debt (Matt. 18:30). Joseph kept Simeon in prison as a guarantee that his brothers would fulfill a prior agreement (Gen. 42:19, 24). In addition to specialized dungeons, prisoners could also be confined in houses (Jer. 37:15; Acts 28:16) and pits (Zech. 9:11).
In both Testaments, release from prison is a symbol of God’s salvation. The theme is prominent in the psalms, as in Ps. 146:7: “The Lord sets prisoners free” (see also Pss. 68:6; 107:10; 142:7). In Acts 12:7 Peter is freed from prison by a divinely sent messenger. Paul wrote a number of letters from prison and identified himself as a prisoner of Christ (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10; 2Tim. 1:8; Philem. 1). Some texts refer in mythological terms to a prison that confines spirits or Satan (1Pet. 3:19; Rev. 20:7).
A technical term for “promise” does not appear in the OT, but its concept is present throughout Scripture. God unfolds the history of redemption by employing the idea of promises. The writers of the NT repeatedly assert that Jesus Christ has fulfilled God’s promises in the OT (e.g., Luke 24:4448; 1Cor. 15:3–8).
Most remarkable is the promise that God made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Gen. 12:1–3; 13:14–17; 17:4–8; 22:17–18; 26:1–5; 28:13–15). God called Abraham in order to give him three specific blessings: the land, descendants, and the channel of blessing among the nations. As a sign of his promise, God made a covenant of circumcision with Abraham and his descendants (17:10–14). With Isaac (26:1–5) and Jacob (28:13–15), God repeatedly reconfirmed the promise made to Abraham. At the time of the exodus and later the settlement in Canaan, God’s promise to Abraham was partially fulfilled by multiplying his descendants into millions and by giving them the promised land.
The central message of the NT is that God’s promises in the OT are fulfilled with the coming of Jesus Christ. Matthew’s numerous citation formulas are evidence of this theme. In Luke 4:16–21 Jesus pronounces the fulfillment of Isaiah’s promise (about the Messiah’s ministry [Isa. 61:1–3]) in his own life. The book of Acts specifically states that Jesus’ suffering and resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit are the fulfillment of the OT promises (2:29–31; 13:32–34). Jesus’ identity both as the descendant of David (Acts 13:23) and as the prophet like Moses (Acts 3:21–26; cf. Deut. 18:15–18) is also regarded as the fulfillment of the OT.
Paul’s view of God’s promises is summarized in this statement: “For no matter how many promises God has made, they are ‘Yes’ in Christ” (2Cor. 1:20). According to Rom. 1:2–3, Paul regards the gospel as the message that God “promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding his Son.” In Rom. 4 Abraham’s faith is described in terms of his trust in God’s promises, which leads to his righteousness. He is presented as our model of faith in God’s promises. The famous phrase “according to the Scriptures” in 1Cor. 15:3–4 is, in a sense, understood by Paul as the fulfillment of God’s promises regarding Christ’s death and resurrection.
In the NT, God makes new promises based on the work of Christ, including the final resurrection and the second coming of Christ (John 5:29; 11:25–26; 1Cor. 15:48–57; 2Cor. 4:14; 1Thess. 4:13–18). Furthermore, the message of the gospel is presented as multiple promises, including eternal life, the fullness of life in Christ, the forgiveness of sins, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the peace of God, the knowledge of God, and the joy of God (Matt. 28:18–20; John 3:16; 10:10; 14:16, 27; 16:20–24; 17:25–26; Phil. 4:4–9; 1John 1:9).
Rome began as a city-state but soon became a transcontinental empire reaching over parts of Europe, Africa, and Asia. Rome emerged as the most dominant force in the Mediterranean after it defeated Carthage in the Second Punic War (218201 BC). Thereafter, Rome began to expand its control and power over the various Hellenistic city-states in the east, including Macedonia, Illyria, and Asia Minor. By the mid-first century AD, Rome had also conquered or annexed Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Cyrene, Gaul, Spain, North Africa, and Armenia.
The transition from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire took place under the Roman emperors beginning with Julius Caesar (100–44 BC), who, after crossing the Rubicon and defeating Pompey, was proclaimed dictator perpetuus (“dictator for life”). The period after Julius Caesar’s assassination (44 BC) was a time of political upheaval as Rome was marred by a series of civil wars. The first was between Octavius and Antony against Caesar’s assassins Brutus and Cassius. This climaxed in the Battle of Philippi (42 BC), which the former allies of Julius Caesar won. The second was between Octavius and Antony, where Antony and Cleopatra were defeated at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC, leaving Octavius as the undisputed leader of Rome.
Octavius was given the honorific name “Augustus” by the senate. His reign (31 BC–AD 14) marked a period of consolidation, reorganization, and renewal of the Roman Empire. Augustus embarked on an empire-wide policy of fiscal rationalization, developed a constitutional settlement for Rome, centralized his military authority over the various provinces, and had Julius Caesar deified. What is most significant about Augustus is that it is with his reign that the Roman Empire essentially began. He was the emperor at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1).
Tiberius, Augustus’s adopted heir, reigned in the years AD 14–37. He was a highly successful military general, but as emperor he was remembered as being gloomy and melancholic. It was during the reign of Tiberius that Jesus conducted his ministry in Palestine.
Tiberius was succeeded by his adopted grandson Caligula, who reigned in the years AD 37–41. Caligula was the son of the popular Roman general Germanicus, who died in Antioch in AD 19. Historical sources are not favorably disposed toward Caligula, who was remembered as a malevolent tyrant given to self-aggrandizement and sexual perversity. In AD 39/40 Caligula departed from imperial policy that permitted emperor worship in the east and veneration of deceased emperors in Rome, and he often appeared dressed as a god in public and demanded worship as a living god. During this time he deposed Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, on suspicion of consorting with Parthia (Josephus, Ant. 18.7). Caligula also ordered that his statue be placed in the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple (Philo, Embassy 203). Petronius, the governor of Syria, knowing that such an act would lead to civil war, refused to comply and appealed to Caligula to reverse the order. In response, Caligula sent an order to Petronius that he commit suicide. Fortunately, news of Caligula’s assassination by a conspiracy involving the praetorian guard and senators reached Petronius first.
Claudius, Caligula’s uncle, reigned in the years AD 41–54, and his rule was defined by numerous public works, a reordering of the judicial system, a torrid series of marriages, the conquest of Britain, and a number of attempted coups by the Roman senate. In AD 49 he expelled the Jews from Rome because of disputes about a certain “Chrestus,” probably Christ (cf. Acts 18:2). No one is sure whether Claudius was murdered or died of old age, but he remained a sharp contrast to the brutal excesses of Caligula and Nero.
Nero, the stepson of Claudius, reigned in the years AD 54–68. The early period of his rule was marked by cultural endeavors and diplomatic efforts. The later years were, in contrast, distinguished by tyranny and self-aggrandizement. There was a Jewish revolt against Rome in Judea (AD 66–70) during Nero’s reign, and Vespasian was sent to pacify the territory. According to ancient sources, Nero accused Christians of starting the fire of Rome in AD 64 and subjected them to the cruelest of punishments, including crucifixion, being thrown to wild animals, and even being burned alive. It probably was during this time that the apostles Peter and Paul were martyred in Rome. Nero eventually was declared a public enemy by the Roman senate, and he committed suicide before he could be captured in AD 68. There arose a “Nero redivivus” legend, whereby many hoped or feared that Nero had not died in AD 68 but had fled to Parthia and would return to Rome in order to destroy it (Sib.Or. 4.119–24; 5.137–41, 361–96), and this arguably stands behind the imagery of Rev. 13:3; 17:8–11.
The suicide of Nero left a power vacuum in Rome, and AD 69 saw no less than four emperors ascend the throne: Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and finally Vespasian. Galba was governor of Hispania Tarraconensis and was invited to become emperor by the senate, but he was killed by the praetorian guard after they were bribed by the praetor Otho. Otho himself committed suicide after his forces were defeated by Vitellius, the commander of the legions on the Rhine. Vitellius became emperor, but he was fiscally irresponsible and murdered many of his rivals. The legions in the Danube, Egypt, Syria, and Judea had declared Vespasian emperor and marched on Rome. Vespasian controlled the grain supplies to Rome from Egypt and had a superior force. Vitellius’s forces were defeated at Bedriacum, and Vitellius went into hiding but eventually was killed in Rome. Vespasian was declared emperor by the senate, and so began the Flavian dynasty, which restored order after the chaos of civil war.
The Flavians ruled in the years AD 69–96. Vespasian (r. AD 69–79) consolidated the empire after its year of strife and instituted new taxes, such as the fiscus judaicus, a war reparation tax placed on all Jews and paid to the temple of Jupiter in lieu of the Jerusalem temple tax. Vespasian was succeeded by his sons Titus (r. AD 79–81) and Domitian (r. AD 81–96). When Vespasian sailed to Rome from Judea, Titus was left in charge of the siege of Jerusalem, which he completed and celebrated in a triumph in Rome in AD 72. This triumph is memorialized in the Arch of Titus, which depicts Roman soldiers bringing the vessels of the temple to Rome as part of the booty taken. Later Roman writers regarded Domitian as a malevolent and malicious tyrant (e.g., Tacitus, Suetonius), but this probably is an exaggeration caused partly by a desire to highlight the greatness of succeeding emperors such as Nerva and Trajan. It probably was during the reign of Domitian that some Christians in Asia Minor were being persecuted for their failure to worship the emperor, as depicted in the book of Revelation.
The birth of the church and the growth of Christianity took place within the wider social, religious, and cultural context of the Greco-Roman world. The politics and power of the Roman Empire provide the backdrop for the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:1), and since Rome was considered to be the center of the world, it was necessary that Paul himself testify to Jesus Christ there (Acts 19:21). The history, literature, and cultural background of Rome form an important background to the NT and should be studied along with the history and literature of Judaism during the time of Jesus and the apostles. Although the Romans were the primary threat to the survival of Christians in the ancient world, after the conversion of Constantine in the fourth century AD, they became the primary means by which Christianity spread to the rest of Europe and western Asia.
“Salvation” is the broadest term used to refer to God’s actions to solve the plight brought about by humankind’s sinful rebellion and its consequences. It is one of the central themes of the entire Bible, running from Genesis through Revelation.
In many places in the OT, salvation refers to being rescued from physical rather than spiritual trouble. Fearing the possibility of retribution from his brother Esau, Jacob prays, “Save me, I pray, from the hand of my brother Esau” (Gen. 32:11). The actions of Joseph in Egypt saved many from famine (45:57; 47:25; 50:20). Frequently in the psalms, individuals pray for salvation from enemies that threaten one’s safety or life (Pss. 17:14; 18:3; 70:1–3; 71:1–4; 91:1–3).
Related to this usage are places where the nation of Israel and/or its king were saved from enemies. The defining example of this is the exodus, whereby God delivered his people from their enslavement to the Egyptians, culminating in the destruction of Pharaoh and his army (Exod. 14:1–23). From that point forward in the history of Israel, God repeatedly saved Israel from its enemies, whether through a judge (e.g., Judg. 2:16; 3:9), a king (2Kings 14:27), or even a shepherd boy (1Sam. 17:1–58).
But these examples of national deliverance had a profound spiritual component as well. God did not save his people from physical danger as an end in itself; it was the necessary means for his plan to save them from their sins. The OT recognizes the need for salvation from sin (Pss. 39:8; 51:14; 120:2) but, as the NT makes evident, does not provide a final solution (Heb. 9:1–10:18). One of the clearest places that physical and spiritual salvation come together is Isa. 40–55, where Judah’s exile from the land and prophesied return are seen as the physical manifestation of the much more fundamental spiritual exile that resulted from sin. To address that far greater reality, God announces the day when the Suffering Servant would once and for all take away the sins of his people (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
As in the OT, the NT has places where salvation refers to being rescued from physical difficulty. Paul, for example, speaks of being saved from various physical dangers, including execution (2Cor. 1:8–10; Phil. 1:19; 2Tim. 4:17). In the midst of a fierce storm, Jesus’ disciples cry out, “Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!” (Matt. 8:25). But far more prominent are the places in the Gospels and Acts where physical healings are described with the verb sōzō, used to speak of salvation from sin. The healing of the woman with the hemorrhage (Mark 5:25–34), the blind man along the road (Luke 18:35–43), and even the man possessed by a demon (Luke 8:26–39), just to name a few, are described with the verb sōzō. The same verb, however, is also used to refer to Jesus forgiving someone’s sins (Luke 7:36–50) and to his mission to save the lost from their sins (Luke 19:10). Such overlap is a foretaste of the holistic salvation (physical and spiritual) that will be completed in the new heaven and earth (Rev. 21–22). The NT Epistles give extensive descriptions of how the work of Jesus Christ saves his people from their sins.
In the 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.
While in the OT suffering is regularly an indication of divine displeasure (Lev. 26:1636; Deut. 28:20–68; Ps. 44:10–12; Isa. 1:25; cf. Heb. 10:26–31), in the NT it becomes the means by which blessing comes to humanity.
The Bible often shows that sinfulness results in suffering (Gen. 2:17; 6:5–7; Exod. 32:33; 2Sam. 12:13–18; Rom. 1:18; 1Cor. 11:27–30). Job’s friends mistakenly assume that he has suffered because of disobedience (Job 4:7–9; 8:3–4, 20; 11:6). Job passionately defends himself (12:4; 23:10), and in the final chapter of the book God commends Job and condemns his friends for their accusations (42:7–8; cf. 1:1, 22; 2:10). The writer makes clear that suffering is not necessarily evidence of sinfulness. Like Job’s friends, Jesus’ disciples assume that blindness is an indication of sinfulness (John 9:1–2). Jesus rejects this simplistic notion of retributive suffering (John 9:3, 6–7; cf. Luke 13:1–5).
The NT writers reveal that Jesus’ suffering was prophesied in the OT (Mark 9:12; 14:21; Luke 18:31–32; 24:46; Acts 3:18; 17:3; 26:22–23; 1Pet. 1:11; referring to OT texts such as Ps. 22; Isa. 52:13–53:12; Zech. 13:7). The Lord Jesus is presented as the answer to human suffering: (1)Through the incarnation, God’s Son personally experienced human suffering (Phil. 2:6–8; Heb. 2:9; 5:8). (2)Through his suffering, Christ paid the price for sin (Rom. 4:25; 3:25–26), so that believers are set free from sin (Rom. 6:6, 18, 22) and helped in temptation (Heb. 2:18). (3)Christ Jesus intercedes for his suffering followers (Rom. 8:34–35). (4)Christ is the example in suffering (1Pet. 2:21; 4:1; cf. Phil. 3:10; 2Cor. 1:5; 4:10; 1Pet. 4:13), and though he died once for sins (Heb. 10:12), he continues to suffer as his church suffers (Acts 9:4–5). (5)Christ provides hope of resurrection (Rom. 6:5; 1Cor. 15:20–26; Phil. 3:10–11) and a future life without suffering or death (Rev. 21:4).
The NT writers repeatedly mention the benefits of suffering, for it has become part of God’s work of redemption. The suffering of believers accompanies the proclamation and advancement of the gospel (Acts 5:41–42; 9:15–16; 2Cor. 4:10–11; 6:2–10; Phil. 1:12, 27–29; 1Thess. 2:14–16; 2Tim. 1:8; 4:5) and results in salvation (Matt. 10:22; 2Cor. 1:6; 1Thess. 2:16; 2Tim. 2:10; Heb. 10:39), faith (Heb. 10:32–34, 38–39; 1Pet. 1:7), the kingdom of God (Acts 14:22), resurrection from the dead (Phil. 3:10–11), and the crown of life (Rev. 2:10). It is an essential part of the development toward Christian maturity (Rom. 5:3–4; 2Cor. 4:11; Heb. 12:4; James 1:3–4; 1Pet. 1:7; 4:1).
Suffering is associated with knowing Christ (Phil. 3:10); daily inward renewal (2Cor. 4:16); purity, understanding, patience, kindness, sincere love, truthful speech, the power of God (2Cor. 4:4–10); comfort and endurance (2Cor. 1:6); obedience (Heb. 5:8); blessing (1Pet. 3:14; 4:14); glory (Rom. 8:17; 2Cor. 4:17); and joy (Matt. 5:12; Acts 5:41; 2Cor. 6:10; 12:10; James 1:2; 1Pet. 1:6; 4:13). Other positive results of Christian suffering include perseverance (Rom. 5:3; James 1:3), character and hope (Rom. 5:4), strength (2Cor. 12:10), and maturity and completeness (James 1:4). Present suffering is light and momentary when compared to future glory (Matt. 5:10–12; Acts 14:22; Rom. 8:18; 2Cor. 4:17; Heb. 10:34–36; 1Pet. 1:5–7; 4:12–13).
Throughout the Bible, believers are instructed to help those who suffer. The OT law provides principles for assisting the poor, the disadvantaged, and the oppressed (Exod. 20:10; 21:2; 23:11; Lev. 19:13, 34; 25:10, 35; Deut. 14:28–29; 15:1–2; 24:19–21). Jesus regularly taught his followers to help the poor (Matt. 5:42; 6:3; 19:21; 25:34–36; Luke 4:18; 12:33; 14:13, 21). It is believers’ responsibility to show mercy (Matt. 5:7; 9:13), be generous (Rom. 12:8; 2Cor. 8:7; 1Tim. 6:18), mourn with mourners (Rom. 12:15), carry other’s burdens (Gal. 6:1–2), and visit prisoners (Matt. 25:36, 43). See also Servant of the Lord.
First Timothy, along with 2Timothy and Titus, is known as one of the apostle Paul’s Pastoral Epistles. These letters have earned this designation because they were addressed to pastors and deal with particular problems that they were facing in their respective churches. This letter was addressed to Timothy, whom Paul affectionately called “my son,” most likely because the apostle had led him to faith in Christ (1:18; cf. 1:2). At Paul’s urging, Timothy took on the role of providing leadership to the church in Ephesus (1:3), which had been infiltrated by false teachers (1:34). Paul wrote this letter to Timothy, instructing him to rebuke the false teachers in the church and to fight the good fight of faith (1:18). The apostle concisely summarized the major theme of this letter by saying, “I am writing you these instructions so that ... you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth” (3:14–15).
Treasure was stored in the Jerusalem temple and palace (Josh. 6:24) and was collected from the spoils of war (Josh. 6:19), from offerings (2Kings 12:4; Mark 12:41), and from royal gifts (2Kings 12:18; 1Chron. 29:3). The temple treasury contained gold, silver, other metals, and precious stones (1Chron. 29:8). Treasuries also housed written records (Ezra 6:1). Treasure was stored in the small rooms that surrounded the sanctuary (1Chron. 28:12; see also Jer. 38:11) and was guarded by Levites (1Chron. 9:26). Several treasurers are named (1Chron. 9:26; 26:20, 22; 2Chron. 25:24). The Ethiopian eunuch who met Philip was a treasurer in the court of the Kandake (Acts 8:27). The treasury funded repairs to the temple (2Kings 12:7; Ezra 7:20).
Invading kings frequently raided the temple treasury, including Shishak of Egypt (1Kings 14:26), Jehoash of Israel (2Kings 14:14), and finally Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (2Kings 24:13; Dan. 1:2), as foretold by Jeremiah (Jer. 15:13). On other occasions, the kings of Judah drew money from the treasury to make tribute payments to foreign rulers (1Kings 15:18; 2Kings 12:18; 16:8; 18:15). “Treasury” can also refer to a private account (Prov. 8:21).
Jesus taught that his followers should store up their treasures in heaven and not on earth (Matt. 6:1921). Earthly treasures will be destroyed over time or perhaps even stolen. In this vein, he urged the rich young ruler to sell his possessions so he might have “treasure in heaven” (Matt. 19:21).
The accomplishment of God’s purposes. This was most clearly expressed by Jesus’ prayer, “Not my will, but yours be done” (Luke 22:42). Jesus stipulated in the Gospel of John that he was pursuing not his own will but that of God (5:19, 30; 6:38). God’s will is revealed in creation (Rev. 4:11), Scripture (2Pet. 1:2021), his standards (Ezra 10:11; Rom. 12:1–2; 1Thess. 4:3), his calling (1Cor. 1:1), and his purpose (Isa. 46:10).
“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:1617; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).
The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.
The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).
The Bible has much to say about works, and an understanding of the topic is important because works play a role in most religions. In the most generic sense, “works” refers to the products or activities of human moral agents in the context of religious discussion. God’s works are frequently mentioned in Scripture, and they are always good. His works include creation (Gen. 2:23; Isa. 40:28; 42:5), sustenance of the earth (Ps. 104; Heb. 1:3), and redemption (Exod. 6:6; Ps. 111:9; Rom. 8:23). Human works, therefore, should be in alignment with God’s works, though obviously of a different sort. Works in the Bible usually reflect a moral polarity: good or evil, righteous or unrighteous, just or unjust. The context of the passage often determines the moral character of the works (e.g., Isa. 3:10–11; 2Cor. 11:15).
Important questions follow from the existence of works and their moral quality. Do good works merit God’s favor or please him? Can good works save at the time of God’s judgment? When people asked Jesus, “What must we do to do the works God requires?” he answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent” (John 6:28–29). Without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). The people from the OT commended in Heb. 11 did their works in the precondition of faith. Explicitly in the NT and often implicitly in the OT, faith is the condition for truly good works. God elects out of his mercy, not out of human works (Rom. 9:12, 16; Titus 3:5; cf. Rom. 11:2). Works not done in faith, even if considered “good” by human standards, are not commendable to God, since all humankind is under sin (Rom. 3:9) and no person is righteous or does good (Rom. 3:10–18; cf. Isa. 64:6). Works cannot save; salvation is a gift to be received by faith (Eph. 2:8–9; 2Tim. 1:9; cf. Rom. 4:2–6). Even works of the Mosaic law are not salvific (Rom. 3:20, 27–28; Gal. 2:16; 3:2; 5:4). Good works follow from faith (2Cor. 9:8; Eph. 2:10; 1Thess. 1:3; James 2:18, 22; cf. Acts 26:20). The works of those who have faith will be judged, but this judgment appears to be related to rewards, not salvation (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 2Cor. 5:10; cf. Rom. 14:10; 1Cor. 3:13–15).
Worship of God is a critical dimension of both Testaments. One might argue that it is the very goal for which Israel and the church were formed.
The living God is the sole object of worship. He delights in the satisfying joy that his children find in him. The nature of worship is not about servant entertainment or passive observation; it is an active acknowledgment of God’s worth in a variety of humble ways.
A genuine selfless focus on the person and work of God brings about a humble response that affects one’s posture, generates works of service, and stirs up a healthy attitude of fear and respect. Knowledge of God is the foundational element in worship. God is worshiped for who he is and what he does. He is the Eternal One (Ps. 90:1; 1Tim. 1:17), unique in every way (Isa. 44:8); he is God alone (Deut. 6:4). He is distinguished by his self-existence, the self-reliant quality of his life (Exod. 3:14; Deut. 32:30). The psalmist calls God’s people to shout joyfully to their good, loving, eternal, and faithful Creator (Ps. 100).
God is worshiped as the Creator of all life. This magnificent creative work of God, declared in the opening of Genesis, is a critical focus in worship (Ps. 95:6; Rom. 1:25; Rev. 4:11). Along with this is the companion declaration that God is the redeemer. The redemptive work of God is celebrated in the Song of Moses (Exod. 15:118) and in the Song of the Redeemed (Rev. 14:3).
Worship is also associated with the royal aspects of God’s character. It was the desire of the magi to find Jesus the king and worship him (Matt. 2:1–2). The final scenes of history will be characterized by humble submission to and worship of the King of kings (1Tim. 6:15; Rev. 17:14; 19:16; cf. Rev. 15:3–4). The psalms often draw the reader’s attention to God’s royal character as a basis for worship (Pss. 45:11; 98:6).
Finally, God is worshiped as the Lord of his covenant relationship with the nation of Israel. This covenant theme and metaphor summarize the varied aspects of God’s character and his relationship with Israel. The God who brought Israel into a covenant relationship is to be sincerely and exclusively worshiped (2Kings 17:35, 38; cf. Deut. 31:20). These confessional statements about the character of God are a glorious weight that moves believers to prostrate themselves, to have an attitude of awe and respect, and to obediently serve.
Direct Matches
.A person from whom a person or group has descended in eithera physical or a spiritual sense. For Israel, the concept of one’sancestors and their God was of great significance in determining bothidentity and religious practice. Biblical concepts such as covenantand promise primarily found expression in the OT in terms of theancestral agreements established with God (Deut. 6:10; 9:5; 29:13;30:20; cf. Gen. 12:1–7). The effect of ancestors on one’sspiritual condition could have either positive or negativeimplications (Exod. 3:13; Josh. 24:14–15; 2 Tim. 1:5; Heb.11). The people of Israel are portrayed as suffering judgment bothfor their sins and for those of their ancestors, but also they couldfind repentance and hope because of the same relationships (Zech.1:4–6; Mal. 1:1–5).
Thereare thirteen primary genealogical lists in the OT and two in the NT,although there are numerous passages that include more limitedlineages to identify an individual. Genealogical lists could alsofunction to engender a notion of commonality of relationship outsidesingle family lines, such as when extended family genealogies aregiven (Gen. 10; 25:12–18; 36:1–30). For priests andkings, it was of utmost importance to be able to establish ancestralidentity. This necessity may have played a role in at least twodiscussions of Jesus. His genealogical lists in both Matt. 1 and Luke3 established his claim to the line of David, and his spiritualancestry in the person of Melchizedek in Heb. 7 granted him superiorstatus to the priesthood of Levi.
Worshipof ancestors, or the related but distinct cult of the dead, wascommon in nearly every culture with which Israel interacted and mayhave even found expression in popular practice among Israelites, asevidenced by the apparent leaving of gifts at several tomb locationsthroughout Palestine (cf. Ezek. 43:7–9). However, the biblicalrecord is consistent throughout that such practices were prohibited.Among laws centered on the topic of ancestral worship wererestrictions on consulting the dead at all (Deut. 18:11), givingofferings to the dead (Deut. 26:14), self-laceration for the dead(Deut. 14:1; Jer. 16:6), and seeking ancestors to foretell the future(Isa. 8:19; 65:4–8).
A title designating members of the group of twelve disciples(Matt. 10:2–4; Mark 3:16–19; Luke 6:13–16) whor*ceived Jesus’ teaching (Luke 17:5) and to whom he grantedauthority (Mark 6:7, 30; Luke 9:1, 10). Matthias later replaced JudasIscariot (Acts 1:24). These apostles provided leadership to the earlychurch in Jerusalem (Acts 15:6), performed miracles (Acts 2:43;2 Cor. 12:12), and faced persecution (Acts 5:18) as theytestified to Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 4:33; 5:32). Broaderusage of the term includes witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection(1 Cor. 15:7), James the brother of Jesus (Gal. 1:19), Barnabasand Paul (Acts 14:14), and possibly Silas (1 Thess. 2:6) andAndronicus and Junias/Junia (Rom. 16:7). Paul regularly speaks of hiscalling in apostolic terms (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor.1:1; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1;Titus 1:1), while Peter similarly self-identifies (1 Pet. 1:1;2 Pet. 1:1). The word is once used of Jesus himself (Heb. 3:1).
Worn around the neck, gold chains were a symbol of honor(Gen. 41:42; Prov. 1:9; Dan. 5:7). The temple and its furniture weredecorated with chain-like ornamentation (2 Chron. 3:5); similarmotifs are found also in non-Yahwistic cultic paraphernalia (Isa.40:19).
Prisoners(Ps. 107:10; Acts 12:6; 16:26; 21:33; Heb. 11:36) and war captives(Isa. 45:14; Jer. 40:1) were bound with chains, by the hands (Jer.40:4) or neck (Isa. 52:2). In one case, the Bible records anunsuccessful attempt to confine a demon-possessed man with chains(Mark 5:3–4). Paul often mentions the chains of hisimprisonment (Phil. 1:7, 13–17; Col. 4:3; 2 Tim. 2:9;Philem. 10, 13), once referring to himself paradoxically as an“ambassador in chains” (Eph. 6:20).
AtLachish four links of an iron chain were found. Extrabiblical recordsof the siege of Lachish suggest that such a chain was lowered fromthe city walls in an attempt to foul the Assyrian battering ram.
The NT begins with the claim that Jesus is the “son” or descendant of King David, presupposing the significance of the biblical narrative about the kings of Israel for understanding the gospel (Matt. 1:1, 6; see also Rom. 1:3; 2Tim. 2:8). The epithet also creates an almost immediate conflict with Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1–2), who was given the title “King of the Jews” by the Roman senate in 40 BC, although he was not a Jew. Herod unsuccessfully attempts to kill the infant king, but Jesus finally is executed by the Roman prefect Pontius Pilate as “King of the Jews” (Matt. 27:37 pars.).
Greco-Roman and Jewish Backgrounds
The conflict between the king and the child somewhat parallels a more extensive Greco-Roman motif. Virgil, in his Fourth Bucolic, offers a vision of a golden age to attend the birth of a child king. (Christians in the Middle Ages interpreted his poem as a prophecy of Christ’s birth.) The threat upon Jesus’ life also resembles Herodotus’s account of Cyrus: King Astyages has a dream vision that the magi interpret to be a prophecy that the child of his daughter will eventually rule in his place. He commands Harpagus, his most faithful servant, to take the male child, “adorned for its death,” and kill him. Overcome with emotion, Harpagus pawns the child off to a cowherd, Mitradates, who is instructed to lay the child “in the most desolate part of the mountains.” When Mitradates’s wife sees the beauty of the child, she pleads for his life and devises a plan to switch her stillborn child with Cyrus. They then raise Cyrus under a pseudonym as their own (Herodotus, Hist. 1.107–30). Interestingly, the prophet Isaiah refers to Cyrus as the Lord’s “messiah” or “anointed” (Isa. 45:1), a uniquely positive role for a non-Israelite king. By God’s power, Cyrus will free the exiles (Isa. 45:13).
In the OT, God promises David, the king of Israel, an eternal reign for his “offspring” (2Sam. 7:12–16). After the fall of the Davidic monarchy, the prophets reiterate the promise in visions of God’s future salvation (Isa. 55:3; Hos. 3:5; Amos 9:11; Mic. 4:8; 5:1–5 [cited in Matt. 2:5–6]; Zech. 3:8). By the first century, “son of David” had become a popular messianic title, signifying a warrior who would free the Jews from Roman oppression and establish an everlasting kingdom. Although not viewed as a supernatural being, the Davidic messiah, some claimed, would be without sin, ruling with perfect wisdom, justice, mercy, and power—different from his predecessors. He would restore the ancient tribal divisions and regather the Diaspora, Jews living outside Judea and Galilee. The nations (non-Jews) would pay him homage (see Psalms of Solomon).
Jesus’ Kingship
The popular Jewish emphasis on a violent overthrow of Rome probably explains why in the Gospels Jesus himself does not emphasize his kingship in his ministry, except for the explicit fulfillment of Zechariah’s prophecy of a humble king riding into Jerusalem on a donkey (Matt. 21:1–9 pars.; cf. Zech. 9:9; see also Isa. 62:11). However, following his resurrection and final instructions to his disciples, Jesus ascends to the right hand of the Father (Luke 24:50–51; Acts 1:6–11; 2:33–36), a coronation ceremony foretold in the psalms (Pss. 2; 110). He presently reigns from heaven (Rev. 1:5; cf. Matt. 28:18), but he will return to make his authority explicit on earth, which includes the dispensing of justice (2Thess. 1:5–12). His rule is present, however, in the lives of those who obey him and wherever the Holy Spirit is manifested. Through his ministry, the God of Israel comes near so as to once again exercise sovereign power on behalf of God’s people. For Christians, Jesus alone is Lord and Savior (Phil. 3:20). Paul presents Jesus as the “Savior of all people” (1Tim. 4:10). This title was given to the Roman emperors. (The preamble to a decree by the council of the province of Asia describes Augustus as “the father who gives us happy life; the savior of all mankind.”)
The Western church has largely maintained a distinction between two spheres of authority: political and ecclesiastical. Hosius, bishop of Cordova (AD 296–357), wrote to Emperor Constantius, “For into your hands God has put the kingdom; the affairs of his Church he has committed to us.... We are not permitted to exercise an earthly rule; and you, Sire, are not authorized to burn incense.” Paul affirms the continuing role of government despite the overarching lordship of Jesus Christ, who preferred to speak of the kingdom of God, a restored theocracy that incorporates yet transcends the Davidic covenant (Rom. 13:1–7; cf. John 18:36). But this process does begin a delegitimizing of all contrary claims to authority and will lead to their complete withdrawal. For this reason, the kingdom of God cannot be separated from the political, economic, and religious conflicts taking place in Roman Palestine in the first century and wherever similar conflicts occur today.
Headgear signifying honor, victory, power, or authority. Acrown was worn by monarchs in the ancient world to designate theirroyal power, often including a golden headband with precious stonesin it, as well as a turban.
Thereare two important types of crowns in the OT: the priestly and theroyal. A royal crown first appears with Saul (2 Sam. 1:10) andis worn by monarchs after him, including David (2 Sam. 12:30;1 Chron. 20:2; see also Pss. 21:3; 132:18) and Joash (2 Kings11:12; 2 Chron. 23:11). Jeremiah 13:18 warns of a day when theroyal crowns of Judah will be taken away, signifying the monarchy’sfall from power. Esther wears a Persian royal crown (Esther 1:11;2:17), as does Mordecai (8:15).
Thebook of Exodus depicts a crownlike turban to which is affixed agolden “sacred emblem” bearing the inscription “Holyto the Lord,” which is to be worn by the high priest (Exod.28:36–37; 29:6; see also, e.g., 39:30; Lev. 8:9).
Zechariah6:11–14 looks to a future messiah, “the Branch,”who will be both priest and king, thus wearing a priestly and royalcrown. Before his crucifixion, Jesus’ tormentors place on hishead a mock crown made of thorns (Matt. 27:29; Mark 15:17; John 19:2,5). In the book of Revelation both godly and satanic figures wearcrowns: the elders in heaven (4:4, 10), the rider of the white horse(6:2), the locusts from the Abyss (9:7), the woman clothed with thesun (12:1), the dragon and the beast (12:3; 13:1), the one “likea son of man” (14:14), and Christ himself (19:12).
Crownssymbolize human honor (Ps. 8:5; Prov. 4:9; Heb. 2:7, 9) and kinglypower (Ps. 89:39), as well as the loss of such glory (Job 19:9; Ezek.21:26) and its ultimate renewal in eternal life (1 Pet. 5:4).Similarly, crowns often represent eternal salvation (Ps. 149:4; James1:12; Rev. 2:10). Paul even calls his converts his “crown”(Phil. 4:1; 1 Thess. 2:19). The figure of a crownlike garland,the prize for victory in Greco-Roman athletic games, signifies theChristian’s final enjoyment of eternal bliss (1 Cor. 9:25;2 Tim. 2:5; 4:8). Crowns portray divine blessings, including joy(Isa. 35:10; 51:11), love (Ps. 103:4), and beauty, the last of whichsymbolizes divine restoration after judgment (Isa. 61:3). God is evenportrayed as the crown of his people (Isa. 28:5). In addition, acrown stands for several human features, such as wealth (Prov. 14:24)and pride (Isa. 28:1, 3).
Death is commonly defined as the end of physical life,wherein the normal biological processes associated with life (such asrespiration) cease. This definition, however, does not adequatelyencompass the varied nuances associated with death in the Bible.
TheBeginning of Death
Deathis introduced in the Bible as the penalty for transgressing theprohibition against eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of goodand evil—a contrast to Mesopotamia, where death was part of thedivine design of human beings. In Gen. 2:16–17 God tells thefirst man, “When you eat from [the fruit of the tree] you willcertainly die.” The consequences of eating provide a usefulbasis for discussing the nature of death from a biblical perspective.
First,as is apparent from the subsequent narrative, neither the man nor thewoman experiences physical, biological death immediately after eatingthe fruit. In this way, Gen. 2–3 reflects the common biblicalnotion that death refers to more than just biological death, pointingto the more significant aspect of death that embodies alienation andseparation from the source of life, God. The point is presupposed byJesus when he offers life to those who are dead (John 5:24), and byPaul when he proclaims that before Christ all were dead in their sinsand transgressions (Eph. 2:1, 5). It is also reflected in the commonpunishment prescribed in the Pentateuch whereby offenders were cutoff from the people (Gen. 17:14; Exod. 12:15, 19; 30:38; cf. Gen.9:11; Exod. 9:15). Within Gen. 2–3, death arrives with loss ofaccess to the tree of life in the garden. Biologically, the first manand woman may continue to live for a while outside the garden, buttheir fate is sealed when they are cut off from the garden and theintimate fellowship with the Creator that had been enjoyed therein.
Second,the strong implication of Gen. 2:16–17 is that human beings, asoriginally created, were not subject to death (see also Rom. 5:12;6:23; 1Cor. 15:21). This does not mean that they were immortalin the same manner as God (cf. 1Tim. 6:16), but rather thatthey were contingently immortal: they were not subject to death butsustained by their relationship to the life-giving God through theprovision of the tree of life (cf. Rev. 2:7; 22:2, 14). Once theywere cut off from the source of life, death ensued.
Theaccount of the arrival of death in Gen. 3, however, tells us littleabout how death affected animals, since the Bible consistentlypresents a predominantly human focus. While Eccles. 3:21 affirmshuman ignorance over the relative postmortem fate of humans andanimals, little else is said on the matter. Similarly, it is notentirely clear whether death is introduced as a punishment for sinfor humans only (and so whether animals could have died prior to thefall) or whether animals were perceived as sharing in immortalityprior to the fall.
Deathin the Old Testament
Deathis frequently depicted negatively throughout the OT. Aside from itsinitial presentation as a divine punishment for sin, it is presentedas that which seeks out and devours life and is terrifying (Pss.18:4–5; 55:4; Prov. 30:15–16; Hab. 2:5). For the authorof Ecclesiastes, death is that which ultimately undermines anypossible value that life may otherwise have (e.g., Eccles. 9:3). Thetragedy of death, in the OT, is that it results in separation, fromGod (as noted above in the context of Gen. 2–3) and frompeople. The psalms, for example, frequently cite the finality andprofundity of death’s effects (e.g., Pss. 6:5; 88:5; 115:17;cf. Isa. 38:18). Even those few passages that appear to present deathmore positively (e.g., Job 3:13, 17) ultimately serve to highlightthe appalling circ*mstances of the speaker’s life rather thanany blessed state of the dead (for a similar idea in the NT, seeRev.9:6).
TheOT does, however, depict death as the natural end of life, and a gooddeath as one that arrives only after a long and prosperous life. SoAbraham (Gen. 25:8), Isaac (Gen. 35:29), and Job (Job 42:16–17)are said to live long lives before they die. Furthermore, somepassages refer to the person being “gathered to his people,”suggesting some form of reunion with previous generations in death,presumably in Sheol, although the location and state of the dead arenever explicated. Isaiah can even include the idea of death withinlanguage used to describe the ideal future world (Isa. 65:20).
Althoughthere are no laws relating to the manner in which the bodies of thedead were to be handled, all the descriptive indicators show thatburial was normative, often in a family tomb or plot (e.g., Gen. 23;cf. 1Kings 13:22). Indeed, the importance of an appropriateburial is apparent in Ecclesiastes’ comment that a stillbornchild is better off than someone who lives a long life but receivesno burial (Eccles. 6:3) and in the prophets’ presentation ofthose not buried as being accursed (Jer. 8:2; 14:16;16:4).
Lifeafter Death in the Old Testament
Beliefin some form of postmortem existence was common in many parts of theancient world. In Egypt, an elaborate set of beliefs relating to thestate of those who had died included the possibility of an ongoingexistence that could even surpass what one may have experiencedbefore death (although such an opportunity was a reasonableexpectation only for the upper classes, while the general populationprobably had more modest expectations of the nature of theirexistence in the afterlife). By way of contrast, Mesopotamian beliefsdepicted a far darker and more troubling afterlife for all but thevery few whose lives and deaths were sufficiently blessed to ensurethem some degree of postmortem comfort. For the remainder, there waslittle hope for any positive experience following death.
TheOT, however, has little to say about the state of those who havedied. The widespread belief in some form of continued existencebeyond biological death in the ancient world suggests that, in theabsence of contrary data in the Bible, the people of Israel probablyassumed that some aspect of a person persisted beyond death.Furthermore, there are hints that this may have been the case, suchas the raising of Samuel’s shade by the medium at Endor (1Sam.28), the escape from death of Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2Kings2:11), the revivification of the body dropped on Elisha’s bones(2Kings 13:21), and expressions used to refer to death such as“gathered to his people” (Gen. 25:8, 17; 35:29; 49:29;Num. 27:13; Deut. 32:50; cf. Gen. 47:30; Deut. 31:16). The dead(sometimes referred to by the term repa’im, “shades/spiritsof the dead”) were thought to dwell in Sheol, generallydescribed as under the earth (e.g., Ezek. 31:14). Beyond this, thereare prophetic expectations that God will ultimately destroy death(e.g., Isa. 25:8), and that God does not take pleasure in anyone’sdeath (Ezek. 18:23, 32).
Deathin the New Testament
TheNT continues, and in some places expands upon, the negative view ofdeath presented in the OT. The notion that death is a consequence ofand punishment for the sinful state that imprisons all humanity isstated emphatically (e.g., Rom. 3:23; 6:23) and reinforced by thenotion that, although biologically alive, sinful humans are dead intheir sin and so incapable of reviving themselves (Eph. 2:1). Death,according to Paul, is the last enemy (1Cor. 15:26), and yet todie is gain (Phil. 1:21–24) because it heralds being withChrist, which, explains Paul, “is better by far” thanbeing alive in this body in this world.
Centralto both the message of the Bible and to the significance of death inthe Bible is the death of the Messiah, God’s Son. Jesus’death provides the basis for countering the consequences of theoriginal rebellion against God by the first couple (2Cor.5:21). Consequently, Paul could write that Jesus’ death itselfdestroyed death (2Tim. 1:10). Furthermore, the life that Jesusoffers—eternal life—is available to the believer in thepresent (John 3:36; 5:24), prior to the time when death is ultimatelyabolished, such that Jesus could assert that all those who believe inhim will live even though they die (John 11:25–26).
TheNT expands somewhat on the details relating to the state of the deadfrom the OT. For one thing, the existence of an afterlife is clearlypresented. Furthermore, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke16:19–31) reflects a more comprehensive understanding of theexistence of distinctions among those who have died, such that therich man is said to be suffering in Hades (Gk. hadēs, used inthe LXX to translate Heb. she’ol in the OT), while Lazarus isfar off with Abraham and being comforted. Although there is a dangerin reading too much into a parable, the detail appears to reflectsomething of the expanded understanding of the afterlife among somein Jesus’ day.
TheNT makes several references to a “second death” (Rev.2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8; cf. Jude 12). The expression refers to thestate of eternal judgment under God’s wrath, a death from whichthere will be no escape. But those who remain faithful to Christ willnot experience this second death (Rev. 20:6), and in their dwellingplace with God, the new Jerusalem, death will be no more (21:4).
(1)Thedregs or residue, used metaphorically to speak of people’sremaining impurities (Ezek. 24:6, 11–12). (2)An amount of money or other valuable entrusted to another (Matt.25:27; Luke 19:23; 2 Tim. 1:14) or used as a down payment. In threeinstances in the NT the Greek word arrabōn is used to refer tothe Holy Spirit as the deposit that guarantees what is still to come(2Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph. 1:13–14). The last of thesepassages notes that the deposit of the Spirit in view is theredemption of God’s people, their future inheritance.
(1)Thedregs or residue, used metaphorically to speak of people’sremaining impurities (Ezek. 24:6, 11–12). (2)An amount of money or other valuable entrusted to another (Matt.25:27; Luke 19:23; 2 Tim. 1:14) or used as a down payment. In threeinstances in the NT the Greek word arrabōn is used to refer tothe Holy Spirit as the deposit that guarantees what is still to come(2Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph. 1:13–14). The last of thesepassages notes that the deposit of the Spirit in view is theredemption of God’s people, their future inheritance.
The giving of gifts in the Bible has several nuances. It can refer to a goodwill gift or a peace offering given to a friend or relative (Prov. 18:16; 21:14). Thus, when Jacob seeks to make peace with his brother Esau, he sends gifts to him before they meet (Gen. 32:13; 33:10). Similarly, when Abigail intercedes with David on behalf of Nabal, she gives David a gift (1Sam. 25:27).
Ezekiel 46:17 illustrates that some gifts are regulated if they came from an inheritance. There are several references in the NT to the gifts of one local church to another (Acts 11:30; 1Cor. 16:3; 2Cor. 8:12, 20; 9:5; Phil. 4:17). The giving of these gifts has a positive effect for both those in need and those who give the gift.
Gifts are a traditional part of bridal arrangements in the Bible. Thus, Shechem requests to know the bride-price and gift when he asks for Dinah as his wife (Gen. 34:11–12). Likewise, Pharaoh gives a captured city as a dowry for his daughter’s marriage to Solomon (1Kings 9:16).
Gifts are integral in honoring another in hospitality and in approaching someone about a service. Israel instructs his sons to take gifts to Pharaoh when they go to purchase food (Gen. 43:11). It is customary to bring a gift to a man of God or prophet when asking for advice or prophetic insight (1Sam. 9:7; 1Kings 13:7; 2Kings 5:15; 8:8–9). People bring Solomon gifts when they seek an audience with him (1Kings 10:25). Additionally, gifts are part of the process of establishing a treaty (1Kings 15:19; 2Kings 16:8; 20:12).
Of course, gifts can be used for ignoble purposes as well. David sends a gift to Uriah in an effort to cover up his own sin (2Sam. 11:8).
Sacrifices of every type are conceived of as a gift to the deity with the intent of seeking favor or making restitution for sin (Lev. 22:18; Num. 31:52). Even mandatory offerings and dedicated land are considered gifts under the notion that God, as the Creator, owns all (Ezek. 45:16; 48:12, 20). This idea of giving a gift to God demonstrates the cost involved in approaching the deity. Interestingly, the priests and Levites who are associated with the sacrifices are described as a gift from God to the rest of the people (Num. 18:6–7).
The intentions behind the gift are important to God. Jesus states that one cannot be giving gifts to God and simultaneously holding on to contention with another in the community of faith (Matt. 5:23–24). Jesus commands that thankfulness to God be followed with the prescribed sacrifice (Matt. 8:4). Yet, an unwillingness to help others should not be hidden behind an ostentatious dedication to giving to God (Matt. 15:5; Mark 7:11). Likewise, Jesus warns against being overly legalistic about gifts and their benefit (Matt. 23:18–19).
On a fundamental level, gift giving has its origin in the gracious nature of God. God is the giver of all good gifts (James 1:17). He gives children to mothers (Gen. 30:20). A good life and reward for work are also gifts from God (Eccles. 3:13; 5:19). Jesus describes himself as a gift of God (John 4:10). Likewise, the Holy Spirit is God’s gift (Acts 1:4; 2:38; 11:17) and cannot be purchased with money (Acts 8:20). This gift of the Holy Spirit is given to Jew and Gentile alike (Acts 10:45).
Both grace and salvation are gifts from God (Rom. 5:15–17; 6:23; Eph. 2:8; 3:7; Heb. 6:4; 1Pet. 3:7). Finally, spiritual gifts are part of God’s good gifts (Rom. 1:11). These gifts are meant to help the church so that nothing needed for ministry is lacking in the body of Christ (Rom. 12:6; 1Cor. 1:7; 7:7; 1Tim. 4:14; 2Tim. 1:6; 1Pet. 4:10). Spiritual gifts are all governed by the greatest gift, that of love (1Cor. 13:2; 14:1).
The giving of gifts in the Bible has several nuances. It can refer to a goodwill gift or a peace offering given to a friend or relative (Prov. 18:16; 21:14). Thus, when Jacob seeks to make peace with his brother Esau, he sends gifts to him before they meet (Gen. 32:13; 33:10). Similarly, when Abigail intercedes with David on behalf of Nabal, she gives David a gift (1Sam. 25:27).
Ezekiel 46:17 illustrates that some gifts are regulated if they came from an inheritance. There are several references in the NT to the gifts of one local church to another (Acts 11:30; 1Cor. 16:3; 2Cor. 8:12, 20; 9:5; Phil. 4:17). The giving of these gifts has a positive effect for both those in need and those who give the gift.
Gifts are a traditional part of bridal arrangements in the Bible. Thus, Shechem requests to know the bride-price and gift when he asks for Dinah as his wife (Gen. 34:11–12). Likewise, Pharaoh gives a captured city as a dowry for his daughter’s marriage to Solomon (1Kings 9:16).
Gifts are integral in honoring another in hospitality and in approaching someone about a service. Israel instructs his sons to take gifts to Pharaoh when they go to purchase food (Gen. 43:11). It is customary to bring a gift to a man of God or prophet when asking for advice or prophetic insight (1Sam. 9:7; 1Kings 13:7; 2Kings 5:15; 8:8–9). People bring Solomon gifts when they seek an audience with him (1Kings 10:25). Additionally, gifts are part of the process of establishing a treaty (1Kings 15:19; 2Kings 16:8; 20:12).
Of course, gifts can be used for ignoble purposes as well. David sends a gift to Uriah in an effort to cover up his own sin (2Sam. 11:8).
Sacrifices of every type are conceived of as a gift to the deity with the intent of seeking favor or making restitution for sin (Lev. 22:18; Num. 31:52). Even mandatory offerings and dedicated land are considered gifts under the notion that God, as the Creator, owns all (Ezek. 45:16; 48:12, 20). This idea of giving a gift to God demonstrates the cost involved in approaching the deity. Interestingly, the priests and Levites who are associated with the sacrifices are described as a gift from God to the rest of the people (Num. 18:6–7).
The intentions behind the gift are important to God. Jesus states that one cannot be giving gifts to God and simultaneously holding on to contention with another in the community of faith (Matt. 5:23–24). Jesus commands that thankfulness to God be followed with the prescribed sacrifice (Matt. 8:4). Yet, an unwillingness to help others should not be hidden behind an ostentatious dedication to giving to God (Matt. 15:5; Mark 7:11). Likewise, Jesus warns against being overly legalistic about gifts and their benefit (Matt. 23:18–19).
On a fundamental level, gift giving has its origin in the gracious nature of God. God is the giver of all good gifts (James 1:17). He gives children to mothers (Gen. 30:20). A good life and reward for work are also gifts from God (Eccles. 3:13; 5:19). Jesus describes himself as a gift of God (John 4:10). Likewise, the Holy Spirit is God’s gift (Acts 1:4; 2:38; 11:17) and cannot be purchased with money (Acts 8:20). This gift of the Holy Spirit is given to Jew and Gentile alike (Acts 10:45).
Both grace and salvation are gifts from God (Rom. 5:15–17; 6:23; Eph. 2:8; 3:7; Heb. 6:4; 1Pet. 3:7). Finally, spiritual gifts are part of God’s good gifts (Rom. 1:11). These gifts are meant to help the church so that nothing needed for ministry is lacking in the body of Christ (Rom. 12:6; 1Cor. 1:7; 7:7; 1Tim. 4:14; 2Tim. 1:6; 1Pet. 4:10). Spiritual gifts are all governed by the greatest gift, that of love (1Cor. 13:2; 14:1).
For Christians, God is the creator of the cosmos and theredeemer of humanity. He has revealed himself in historicalacts—namely, in creation, in the history of Israel, andespecially in the person and work of Jesus Christ. There is only oneGod (Deut. 6:4); “there is no other” (Isa. 45:5). Because“God is spirit” (John 4:24), he must reveal himselfthrough various images and metaphors.
Imageryof God
God’scharacter and attributes are revealed primarily through the use ofimagery, the best and most understandable way to describe themysterious nature of God. Scripture employs many images to describeGod’s being and character. Some examples follow here.
Godis compared to the father who shows compassion and love to hischildren (Ps. 103:13; Rom. 8:15). The father image is also used bythe prophets to reveal God’s creatorship (Isa. 64:8). Jesuspredominantly uses the language of “Father” in referenceto God (Mark 8:38; 13:32; 14:36), revealing his close relationshipwith the Father. God is also identified as the king of Israel evenbefore the Israelites have a human king (1Sam. 10:19).
ThePsalter exalts Yahweh as the king, acknowledging God’ssovereignty and preeminence (Pss. 5:2; 44:4; 47:6–7; 68:24;74:12; 84:3; 95:3; 145:1). God is metaphorically identified as theshepherd who takes care of his sheep, his people, to depict hisnature of provision and protection (Ps. 23:1–4). The image ofthe potter is also employed to describe the nature of God, whocreates his creatures according to his will (Jer. 18:6; Rom.9:20–23). In Hos. 2:4–3:5 God is identified as thelong-suffering husband of the adulterous wife Israel. In the settingof war, God is depicted as the divine warrior who fights against hisenemy (Exod. 15:3).
Godis also referred to as advocate (Isa. 1:18), judge (Gen. 18:25), andlawgiver (Deut. 5:1–22). The image of the farmer is alsofrequently adopted to describe God’s nature of compassionatecare, creation, providence, justice, redemption, sanctification, andmore (e.g., Isa. 5:1–7; John 15:1–12). God is oftenreferred to as the teacher (Exod. 4:15) who teaches what to do, asdoes the Holy Spirit in the NT (John 14:26). The Holy Spirit isidentified as the counselor, the helper, the witness, and the guide(John 14:16, 26; 15:26). God is often metaphorically compared tovarious things in nature, such as rock (Ps. 18:2, 31, 46), light (Ps.27:1), fire (Deut. 4:24; 9:3), lion (Hos. 11:10), and eagle (Deut.32:11–12). In particular, the Davidic psalms employ many imagesin nature—rock, fortress, shield, horn, and stronghold (e.g.,Ps. 18:2)—to describe God’s perfect protection.
Last,anthropomorphism often is employed to describe God’sactivities. Numerous parts of the human body are used to speak ofGod: face (Num. 6:25–26), eyes (2Chron. 16:9), mouth(Deut. 8:3), ears (Neh. 1:6), nostrils (Exod. 15:8), hands (Ezra7:9), arms (Deut. 33:27), fingers (Ps. 8:3), voice (Exod. 15:26),shoulders (Deut. 33:12), feet (Ps. 18:9), and back (Exod. 33:21–22).
Namesand Attributes of God
TheOT refers to God by many names. One of the general terms used forGod, ’el (which probably means “ultimate supremacy”),often appears in a compound form with a qualifying word, as in ’el’elyon (“God Most High”), ’el shadday (“GodAlmighty”), and ’el ro’i (“the God who seesme” or “God of my seeing”). These descriptive namesreveal important attributes of God and usually were derived from thepersonal experiences of the people of God in real-life settings;thus, they do not describe an abstract concept of God.
Themost prominent personal name of God is yahweh (YHWH), which istranslated as “the Lord” in most English Bibles. At theburning bush in the wilderness of Horeb, God first revealed to Moseshis personal name in sentence form: “I am who I am”(Exod. 3:13–15). Though debated, the divine name “YHWH”seems to originate from an abbreviated form of this sentence. Yahweh,who was with Moses and his people at the time of exodus, is the Godwho was with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Jesus’testimony, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the Godof Jacob” is identified as the God “of the living”(Matt. 22:32). Hence, the name “Yahweh” is closely tiedto God’s self-revelation as the God of presence and life. (Seealso Names of God.)
Manyof God’s attributes are summarized in Exod. 34:6–7: “TheLord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger,abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands,and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leavethe guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their childrenfor the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”Below are further explanations of some of the representativeattributes of God.
Holiness.The moral excellence of God is the attribute that underlies all otherattributes. Thus, all God’s attributes can be modified by theadjective holy: holy love, holy justice, holy mercy, holyrighteousness, holy compassion, holy wisdom, and so forth. God is theonly supremely holy one (1Sam. 2:2; Rev. 15:4). God’sname is also holy; those who profane God’s name are condemnedas guilty (Exod. 20:7; Lev. 22:32). God is depicted as the one whohas concern for his holy name, which the Israelites profaned amongthe nations; God actively seeks to restore the holiness of hisdefiled name (Ezek. 36:21–23). God’s holiness is revealedby his righteous action (Isa. 5:16). Not only is God holy, but alsohe expects his people to be holy (Lev. 11:45; 19:2). All thesacrificial codes of Leviticus represent the moral requirements ofholiness for the worshipers. Because of God’s character ofholiness, he cannot tolerate sin in the lives of people, and hebrings judgment to those who do not repent (Hab. 1:13).
Loveand justice.Because “God is love,” no one reaches the true knowledgeof God without having love (1John 4:8). Images of the fatherand the faithful husband are frequently employed to portray God’slove (Deut. 1:31; Jer. 31:32; Hos. 2:14–20; 11:1–4).God’s love was supremely demonstrated by the giving of his onlySon Jesus Christ for his people (John 3:16; Rom. 5:7–8; 1John4:9–10). God expects his people to follow the model of Christ’ssacrificial love (1John 3:16).
God’sjustice is the foundation of his moral law and his ways (Deut. 32:4;Job 34:12; Ps. 9:16; Rev. 15:3). It is also seen in his will (Ps.99:4). God loves justice and acts with justice (Ps. 33:5). God’sjustice is demonstrated in judging people according to theirdeeds—punishing wickedness and rewarding righteousness (Ezek.18:20; Ps. 58:11; Rev. 20:12–13). God establishes justice byupholding the cause of the oppressed (Ps. 103:6) and by vindicatingthose afflicted (1Sam. 25:39). God is completely impartial inimplementing justice (Job 34:18–19). As with holiness, Godrequires his people to reflect his justice (Prov. 21:3).
Godkeeps a perfect balance between the attributes of love and justice.God’s love never infringes upon his justice, and vice versa.The cross of Jesus Christ perfectly shows these two attributes in oneact. Because of his love, God gave his only Son for his people;because of his justice, God punished his Son for the sake of theirsins. The good news is that God’s justice was satisfied by thework of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:25–26).
Righteousnessand mercy.God’s righteousness shows his unique moral perfection. God’snature, actions, and laws display his character of righteousness(Pss. 19:8–9; 119:137; Dan. 9:14). “Righteousness andjustice” are the foundation of God’s throne (Ps. 89:14).God’s righteousness was especially demonstrated in the work ofJesus Christ (Rom. 3:21–22). God’s righteousness willultimately be revealed in his final judgment (Rev. 19:2; 20–22;cf. Ps. 7:11).
TheEnglish word “mercy” renders various words in theoriginal languages: in Hebrew, khesed, khanan, rakham; in Greek,charis, eleos, oiktirmos, splanchnon. English Bibles translate thesevariously as “mercy,” “compassion,” “grace,”“kindness,” or “love.” The word “mercy”is chosen here as a representative concept (cf. Ps. 86:15). God’smercy is most clearly seen in his act of forgiving sinners. In thePsalter, “Have mercy on me” is the most common form ofexpression when the psalmist entreats God’s forgiveness (Pss.41:4, 10; 51:1). God’s mercy is shown abundantly to his chosenpeople (Eph. 2:4–8). Because of his mercy, their sins areforgiven (Mic. 7:18), their punishments are withheld (Ezra 9:13), andeven sinners’ prayers are heard (Ps. 51:1; Luke 18:13–14).God is “the Father of mercies” (2Cor. 1:3 NRSV).
Godkeeps a perfect balance between righteousness and mercy. Hisrighteousness and mercy never infringe upon each other, nor does oneoperate at the expense of the other. God’s abundant mercy isshown to sinners through Jesus Christ, but if they do not repent oftheir sins, his righteous judgment will be brought upon them.
Faithfulness.God’s faithfulness is revealed in keeping the covenant that hemade with his people. God “is the faithful God, keeping hiscovenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him andkeep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). God is faithful to hischaracter, his name, and his word (Neh. 9:8; Ps. 106:8; 2Tim.2:13; Heb. 6:13–18). God’s faithfulness is clearly seenin fulfilling his promise (Josh. 23:14). God showed his faithfulnessby fulfilling all the promises that he made to Abraham (Gen. 12:2–3;Rom. 9:9; Gal. 4:28; Heb. 6:13–15), by having Solomon build thetemple that he promised to David (2Sam. 7:12–13; 1Kings8:17–21), and by sending his people into exile in Babylon andreturning them to their homeland (Jer. 25:8–11; Dan. 9:2–3).God’s faithfulness was ultimately demonstrated by sending JesusChrist, as was promised in the OT (Luke 24:44; Acts 13:32–33;1Cor. 15:3–8).
Goodness.Jesus said, “No one is good—except God alone” (Mark10:18). God demonstrates his goodness in his actions (Ps. 119:68), inhis work of creation (1Tim. 4:4), in his love (Ps. 86:5), andin his promises (Josh. 23:14–15).
Patience.God is “slow to anger” (Exod. 34:6; Num. 14:18), which isa favorite expression for his patience (Neh. 9:17; Pss. 86:15; 103:8;Joel 2:13). God is patient with sinful people for a long time (Acts13:18). Because of his patient character, he delays punishment (Isa.42:14). For instance, God was patient with his disobedient prophetJonah and also with the sinful people of Nineveh (Jon. 3:1–10).The purpose of God’s patience is to lead people towardrepentance (Rom.2:4).
Godof the Trinity
TheChristian God of the Bible is the triune God. God is one but existsin three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt.28:19). The Son is one with the Father (John 10:30); the Holy Spiritis one with God (2Sam. 23:2–3). All three share the samedivine nature; they are all-knowing, holy, glorious, and called“Lord” and “God” (Matt. 11:25; John 1:1;20:28; Acts 3:22; 5:3–4; 10:36; 1Cor. 8:6; 2Cor.3:17–18; 2Pet. 1:1). All three share in the same work ofcreation (Gen. 1:1–3), salvation (1Pet. 1:2), indwelling(John 14:23), and directing the church’s mission (Matt.28:18–20; Acts 16:6–10; 14:27; 13:2–4).
Grace is the nucleus, the critical core element, of theredemptive and sanctifying work of the triune God detailed throughoutthe entire canon of Scripture. The variegated expressions of graceare rooted in the person and work of God, so that his graciousnessand favor effectively demonstrated in every aspect of the createdrealm glorify him as they are shared and enjoyed with one another.
Thebiblical terminology informing an understanding of grace defines itas a gift or a favorable reaction or disposition toward someone.Grace is generosity, thanks, and goodwill between humans and from Godto humans. Divine expressions of grace are loving, merciful, andeffective. The biblical texts provide a context for a more robustunderstanding of divine gift. The overall redemptive-historicalcontext of grace is the desire of the eternal God to bring glory tohimself through a grace-based relationship with his creation. TheCreator-Redeemer gives grace, and the recipients of grace give himglory.
OldTestament
Genesis.The grace of the creation narratives is summarized with the repeateduse of the term “good” (Gen. 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25,31). God is good, and he made a good creation with abundant gifts forAdam and Eve to enjoy. When Adam and Eve rebelled against God, herighteously judged and graciously provided for an ongoingrelationship. God clothed the naked Adam and Eve (3:21) and announcedthat the seed of the woman would yield a redeemer (3:15).
Gracein the postcreation narratives (Gen. 4–6) is focused onindividuals. God looked with favor on Abel and his offering (4:4),and Noah found grace in God’s eyes (6:8). God looked at and hadregard for the offering of Abel (Gen. 4). Jacob confessed to Esauthat God graced him with descendants and with possessions (33:5).
Graceand graciousness also characterize interaction between individuals.The Jacob and Esau exchange uses grace vocabulary for the gift andthe disposition of grace. Jacob invited Esau to accept his gift if hehad a favorable disposition toward him (Gen. 33:11). The covenant sonJoseph received favorable treatment from the prison warden because ofhis disposition toward him (39:21).
Exodus.The exodus narrative recounts how the seed of Abraham multiplies, isredeemed, and then is given the law, which defines the relationshipof God to Israel. All these events are tied to the gracious promisesthat God made to Abraham and his descendants (Gen. 12; 15; 17; seealso Gen. 21; 27).
Thegrace associated with the redemption of Israel from Egypt iscelebrated in the song of Exod. 15. God’s victory over theEgyptian army and his covenant fidelity to the patriarchs are thesong’s themes. Moses and the Israelites sing because God heardIsrael’s groaning; he remembered his covenant with Abraham andlooked on Israel with concern (2:24). God made Egypt favorablydisposed toward Israel (3:21) and parted the sea for Israel to escape(11:3; 12:36). The confession “He is my God ... myfather’s God” ties together major sections of redemptivehistory and affirms the constancy of God’s grace throughout theperiods (15:2). God’s tenacious covenant loyalty (khesed) tothe nation and his covenant grace (15:13) to Israel cannot bemerited.
Thegiving of the law in Exod. 20 is prefaced by a gracious and powerfulpresentation of God to the nation in Exod. 19. In the organizationand development of Exod. 19–20, grace themes emerge. The graceassociated with redemption and covenant life is marked in Exod. 19.God took Israel from Egyptian bondage, redeemed it, and brought thenation to himself (19:4). Through this action, the nation will becomea special treasure, a holy nation, a kingdom of priests (19:5–6).In sum, Israel exists because God created, loved, and redeemed it.
Second,the Decalogue of Exod. 20 follows upon the redemption effected byGod, defining how Israel will relate to its God. In this sense, lawis viewed as a gift that expresses the divine will. When compared andcontrasted with ancient Near Eastern laws, Torah reflects the graceof God’s character and his genuine concern for the poor,slaves, aliens, and widows. In addition, there is a grace ethic thatmotivates obedience to the law. The motivational statements in theDecalogue in Exod. 20 relate to the grace of redemption (v.2),the righteousness of God (vv. 4–7), the creation work of God(vv. 8–11), and long life (v.12).
Exodus32–34 is a key passage that links the covenant with graceterminology. This section begins with the story of the golden calf(chap. 32) and ends with the account of Moses’ radiant face(34:29–35). The grace terminology is observed in 33:19; 34:6–7.The context of 33:19 involves Moses meeting with God face-to-face.According to 33:12–17, Moses wanted to know who would be leftafter the purge of 33:5. He acknowledged God’s favor in hislife and wondered who else might enjoy it. Moses reminded God thatthe nation was his people (33:13). The grace of this account is God’sassurance of his presence with Israel and the unmerited purposefulexpression of his grace.
Exodus34:6–7 employs a series of adjectives in a grace confessionalstatement. This statement arises out of God’s instructions toMoses to cut two new tablets of stone like the first ones (34:1; seealso 24:12), which were broken after the incident of the golden calf(32:19). God descended in a cloud, stood with Moses, and proclaimedhis name to him (34:5). The rhetoric of the passage emphasizes thespeech of God, who defines himself in connection with covenantmaking. God is merciful and gracious, long-suffering, anddistinguished by steadfast love.
Graceand covenant loyalty.These key passages are foundational for understanding the grace andsteadfast loyalty of God expressed in the subsequent events ofcovenant history. Grace and khesed are expressed in connection withcovenant curse implementation (Num. 14:18; Hos. 4:1; 6:4, 6), in theoverall structure of Deuteronomy (5:10; 7:9, 12), in the Davidiccovenant (2Sam. 7:15; 1Chron. 17:13), in the future hopeof Israel (Isa. 54:8), in restoration (Jer. 32:18), in the newcovenant (Jer. 31:31), and in exile (Dan. 9:4).
Toround out the OT discussion, we may note that covenant siblings wereto be gracious and loyal in their ongoing relationships with oneanother. The book of Ruth illustrates covenant grace in action (2:2,10, 13). In addition, grace is to be expressed toward the poor (Prov.28:8), the young and the old (Deut. 28:50), and those who suffer (Job19:21).
NewTestament
TheNT focus of grace is developed in keeping with the foundation laid inthe OT. The triune God is the center and source of grace: it is thegrace of God (Rom. 1:7), the Spirit of grace (Heb. 10:29), and thegrace of Christ (John 1:17). The grace of God revealed in the OT isunveiled uniquely in the person and work of Christ.
TheGospel of John.The canonical development of the grace theme between the Testamentsis explained in the opening chapter of John’s Gospel. JesusChrist is the Word, who was with God, who is God, and who created theworld (John 1:1–3). Christ then became flesh and dwelled amongus (1:14). In doing so, he made known the glory of God to us. At thispoint in the development of chapter 1, John connects Christ (theWord) with the adjectives describing God in Exod. 34:6 to affirm thatChrist has the very same virtues that God has. The assertion in John1:17 that Jesus is full of grace and truth parallels the statement inExod. 34:6 of God’s steadfast love and faithfulness. In Christwe are able to see the glory that Moses hoped to see in God (John1:18). Christ is both the message and the messenger of grace andtruth.
TheEpistles and Acts.The NT Epistles develop the “full of grace and truth”statement about Christ (John 1:14) in several ways. The grace andtruth found in Christ are given to his servants (1Cor. 1:4) andare a reason for praise (2Cor. 8:9; Gal. 1:6, 15; Eph. 4:7;1Tim. 1:2; 2Tim. 2:1). This grace from Christ iseffective in bringing about redemption and sustaining a life ofgodliness. Ephesians 2:8–9 is the classic statement affirmingthat God’s favor is the source of salvation. Paul makes thispoint by repeating “it is by grace” in 2:5, 8 andclarifying the grace of salvation with the “it is the gift ofGod” statement in 2:8. This design of salvation celebrates theincomparable riches of Christ’s grace and the expression of hiskindness to us (cf. Eph. 1:7). Salvation is devoid of human merit,gifts, or favor (2:8). Keeping the law as a means of entrance into arelationship with God and as a means of gaining favor with God isantithetical to the nature of grace. God’s favor expressed topeople in salvation is an expression of his sovereign will.
Romans5 declares many of the same themes found in Eph. 2. In Rom. 5 Paulcontrasts the action and result of Adam’s transgression withthe obedience of Christ. Salvation is God’s grace and giftbrought by the grace of one man, Jesus Christ (v.15). The giftand grace of Christ brought about justification.
Theeffective operation of God’s grace in salvation is illustratedin the historical narratives of Acts. The men involved in the heateddebate of the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:2) affirmed the salvation ofthe Gentiles by grace after hearing the report of Barnabas and Paul(15:12). Those in Achaia (18:27) are another illustration of aneffective operation of grace.
Thegrace of God that saves is also the grace that sanctifies. Titus 2:11declares that redemptive grace instructs the redeemed to say no to alife of ungodliness. The instructional nature of grace is highlightedin the development of the Titus 2 context. The teacher in 2:1–10,15 is Titus, who is to nurture godly people. There is a change ofinstructors in 2:11, with grace now teaching. Redemptive grace worksin harmony with sanctifying grace to provide for godly living.
Accordingto Titus 3:8, those who trust in the generosity of God’s graceshould devote themselves to doing what is good. By God’s grace,justified sinners will find their delight and satisfaction in thepromises of God for a life of persevering godliness.
Gracealso functions as an enablement for life and ministry. Paul oftenrehearses this feature of grace in his letters. In Rom. 1:5 Paultestifies about the grace associated with a commission to be anapostle. When reflecting on his role in the church, he affirms thatby God’s grace he has been able to lay a foundation (1Cor.3:10). Paul’s testimony in 1Cor. 15:10 demonstrates theessential role of grace in making him who he is and effectivelyenabling what he does. Giving is also viewed as an exercise of grace(2Cor. 8:7) reflecting the grace received by individualbelievers. This gift of grace for life and ministry is somehowrecognizable. Peter, James, and John recognized it in Paul (Gal.2:9). It was upon the apostles (Acts 4:33), and it was seen in thechurch of Antioch (11:23).
Giventhe source and the effective nature of grace, one can understand theappropriateness of appealing to grace in greetings and salutations(Rom. 1:7; 16:20; Gal. 1:3; 6:18).
Commongrace.Finally, grace does operate beyond the context of the elect and thework of salvation and sanctification. Theologians define this as“common grace.” God’s sending rain and givingcreatures intellectual and artistic abilities are expressions ofcommon grace.
God puts Adam in the garden of Eden to literally “guard”it (Heb. shamar, Gen. 2:15; NIV “take care of it”), buton account of sin he must be removed. God places cherubim to guardagainst intruders (cf. 1Sam. 26:15; Song 5:7; Isa. 21:11), toguard the way to the tree of life (Gen. 3:24). God “preserves”the faithful (Ps. 31:23) and “guards” their lives (Prov.24:12) from trouble (Ps. 32:7), from violent people (Ps. 140:1, 4),and from the enemy’s plan (Ps. 64:1). The noun mishmeretderives from shamar and is found in both military (2Sam. 20:3;Neh. 7:3; Isa. 21:8) and cultic (Num. 8:26; 1Chron. 9:27; Ezek.40:46) contexts.
Severalverbs are used in the NT to render the sense “to guard.”Most pertinent is phylassō, which is used of “guarding”prisoners (Luke 8:29; Acts 12:4; 28:16) and personal property (Luke2:8; 11:21; Acts 22:20). Paul exhorts Timothy to guard the deposit offaith entrusted to him (1Tim. 6:20; 2Tim. 1:12), andpeople are encouraged to guard themselves against covetousness (Luke12:15), idols (1John 5:21), and lawlessness (2Pet. 3:17).God also serves as a guard who safely delivers his people (John17:12; 2Pet. 2:5) and promises to protect them from the evilone (2Thess. 3:3).
A messenger commissioned to deliver a proclamation on behalfof a royal personage or God. King Nebuchadnezzar’s heraldannounces that all subjects must worship a golden statue or else bethrown into a blazing furnace (Dan. 3:4). God instructs Habakkuk torecord his oracle regarding the future destruction of Babylon on atablet so that it might be delivered by a herald (Hab. 2:2). Paul wasappointed as an apostle and a herald of the gospel to the Gentiles(1Tim. 2:7; 2Tim. 1:11).
An apostacized believer whom Paul names while writing fromprison (2Tim. 1:15). Paul claims that Hermogenes, Phygelus, andeveryone else in the province of Asia have deserted him. Paul’sdisappointment with Hermogenes is mentioned in the context of hisexhortation not to be ashamed of suffering for the sake of thegospel.
The quality of being not mortal, living forever. The OTcryptically mentions Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2Kings2:1–12) ascending into heaven without passing through death orSheol. Otherwise, mortality is presented as part of the universalhuman condition, a result of Adam and Eve’s disobedience (Gen.2:17; 5:1–32).
Eventually,two solutions were embraced. Some Jews appropriated the Hellenisticconcept of the immortal soul. But this is not clearly taught in theBible, which furthermore claims that only God has the power to bestowimmortality (e.g., Pss. 49; 73). The modern Western mind often viewsdeath as a sudden happening, the ceasing of brain functions, whereasother cultures regard dying as a process advancing from the moment ofbirth and continuing beyond the grave. In the creation story, Godwarns Adam that if he eats from the tree of the knowledge of good andevil, he will die that very day (Gen. 2:17). But despite eating fromthe tree, Adam lives on physically for almost a millennium (Gen.5:5), and so this sin-begotten death describes separation from God.Jesus will overcome this separation at the cross (Luke 23:43; cf.Matt. 10:28 par.). For those who trust this work—believe in hisname—death is already overcome because they are reconciled withGod. Life is no longer bound, as it were, to brain activity, butrather is unbound in the immortal being of God. By reconciling othersto God, Jesus is able to promise eternal life (John 3:15, 36; 5:24).Indeed, John writes his Gospel to advance this promise (20:31).
ThreeNT assertions need to be taken into account in ascertaining biblicalperspectives on immortality: (1)God is immortal (Rom. 1:23;1Tim. 1:17); (2)God alone is immortal (1Tim. 6:16);(3)God grants immortality to those who seek him (Rom. 2:7;1Cor. 15:53–54; 2Tim. 1:10). These assertions areimportant in distinguishing immortality from the idea of thecontinued existence of some part of the human makeup after the deathof the body. The word “immortality” should be reserved torefer to the existence of body and soul together for eternity. Humanbeings, therefore, do not intrinsically possess immortality; it mustbe granted by God.
Thisdistinction, however, does not in any way negate the abundantbiblical evidence that the human soul or spirit continues in someform after the death of the body. In the OT, that continuation isusually conceived of as a vague, shadowy existence in a place called“Sheol.” In the NT, for the Christian, that continuationis envisioned as being in the presence of Christ (2Cor. 5:8;Phil. 1:23). But immortality is the eternal life of body and soultogether. Whatever view one takes of the eternal state of the wicked,their existence should not be regarded as one of immortality. Rather,it is the “second death” (Rev. 21:8).
The quality of being not mortal, living forever. The OTcryptically mentions Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2Kings2:1–12) ascending into heaven without passing through death orSheol. Otherwise, mortality is presented as part of the universalhuman condition, a result of Adam and Eve’s disobedience (Gen.2:17; 5:1–32).
Eventually,two solutions were embraced. Some Jews appropriated the Hellenisticconcept of the immortal soul. But this is not clearly taught in theBible, which furthermore claims that only God has the power to bestowimmortality (e.g., Pss. 49; 73). The modern Western mind often viewsdeath as a sudden happening, the ceasing of brain functions, whereasother cultures regard dying as a process advancing from the moment ofbirth and continuing beyond the grave. In the creation story, Godwarns Adam that if he eats from the tree of the knowledge of good andevil, he will die that very day (Gen. 2:17). But despite eating fromthe tree, Adam lives on physically for almost a millennium (Gen.5:5), and so this sin-begotten death describes separation from God.Jesus will overcome this separation at the cross (Luke 23:43; cf.Matt. 10:28 par.). For those who trust this work—believe in hisname—death is already overcome because they are reconciled withGod. Life is no longer bound, as it were, to brain activity, butrather is unbound in the immortal being of God. By reconciling othersto God, Jesus is able to promise eternal life (John 3:15, 36; 5:24).Indeed, John writes his Gospel to advance this promise (20:31).
ThreeNT assertions need to be taken into account in ascertaining biblicalperspectives on immortality: (1)God is immortal (Rom. 1:23;1Tim. 1:17); (2)God alone is immortal (1Tim. 6:16);(3)God grants immortality to those who seek him (Rom. 2:7;1Cor. 15:53–54; 2Tim. 1:10). These assertions areimportant in distinguishing immortality from the idea of thecontinued existence of some part of the human makeup after the deathof the body. The word “immortality” should be reserved torefer to the existence of body and soul together for eternity. Humanbeings, therefore, do not intrinsically possess immortality; it mustbe granted by God.
Thisdistinction, however, does not in any way negate the abundantbiblical evidence that the human soul or spirit continues in someform after the death of the body. In the OT, that continuation isusually conceived of as a vague, shadowy existence in a place called“Sheol.” In the NT, for the Christian, that continuationis envisioned as being in the presence of Christ (2Cor. 5:8;Phil. 1:23). But immortality is the eternal life of body and soultogether. Whatever view one takes of the eternal state of the wicked,their existence should not be regarded as one of immortality. Rather,it is the “second death” (Rev. 21:8).
Imprisonmentof Criminals
Incomparing modern society to that of biblical times, it is importantto acknowledge what is distinctive about prisons in many modernsocieties. Prisons serve multiple functions, including imposingincarceration as punishment for crimes committed, segregatingdangerous criminals from the larger population, deterring crime byimposing a negative incentive, and rehabilitating offenders so thatthey can eventually return to society. In many cases where modern lawimposes incarceration as the penalty for crime, ancient and biblicallaw imposed economic penalties (such as fines), corporal punishment(beatings), and capital punishment (death). In addition, many of thebiblical references to prisons and prisoners involve what in modernsociety would be considered political rather than criminalincarceration.
Thestory of Joseph prominently features an Egyptian prison. Joseph wasfalsely put in prison for the crime of molesting his master’swife (Gen. 39:19–20), while his companions were imprisoned forthe otherwise unspecified crime of causing offense to the king(40:1). As this story illustrates, the sentences were not of apredetermined duration, and release depended on the goodwill of theking (Gen. 40:13), a situation in which Paul also found himselfhundreds of years later during Roman times (Acts 24:27). When Josephimprisoned his brothers, it was on a presumption of guilt for thecrime of espionage (Gen. 42:16). In Roman times, in contrast, certainprisoners had a right to be put on trial eventually, if not quickly(Acts 25:27; see also 16:37). Imprisonment could also be imposed forfailure to pay a debt (Matt. 18:30). Joseph kept Simeon in prison asa guarantee that his brothers would fulfill a prior agreement (Gen.42:19, 24). In addition to specialized dungeons, prisoners could alsobe confined in houses (Jer. 37:15; Acts 28:16) and pits (Zech. 9:11).
PoliticalImprisonment
Ina number of biblical stories individuals are imprisoned for what wewould today describe as political or ideological reasons. Samson wasimprisoned by the Philistines in retaliation for the havoc that hehad wreaked in their land and probably to prevent further incidents(Judg. 16:21). While in prison, Samson was enslaved. SeveralIsraelite and Judean kings were imprisoned by their Mesopotamianoverlords for offenses ranging from failure to pay taxes to revolt,including Hoshea (2Kings 17:4), Jehoiachin (2Kings25:27–29), Manasseh (2Chron. 33:11), and Zedekiah (Jer.52:11). In some cases, the imprisonment of such elites was brutal andinvolved torture (2Chron. 33:11; Jer. 52:11), though Jehoiachinwas later released from prison and allowed to live out his captivityin some comfort (2Kings 25:27–29).
Inthe NT, individuals were also imprisoned for such crimes. Barabbaswas imprisoned by the Roman government of Judea for participating inan insurrection (Mark 15:7). Saul of Tarsus imprisoned a number ofChristians, apparently without what we would today recognize as anycriminal offense (Acts 8:3). Peter was imprisoned by Herod forpolitical gain (Acts 12:4). Paul and Silas were imprisoned fordisturbing the peace of Philippi (Acts 16:23).
Imprisonmentof Prophets
Aspecial case of political incarceration is the imprisonment ofprophets. From the point of view of the biblical writers, prophetswere imprisoned for speaking the truth to a powerful person who didnot want to hear it. From the point of view of those in power,imprisoning dissenters was an important way of suppressing opinionsthat could undermine the regime. In some cases, the imprisonment ofdissenters or troublemakers was a prelude to execution (John theBaptist and Jesus). The practice of imprisonment instead of immediateexecution may reflect the ambivalent attitude of rulers towardcontroversial prophets: they could not be allowed to move aboutfreely in society, but they had some status or right as prophet thatprevented their execution. In some cases, prophets managed toconfront a king without being punished, suggesting that there was acertain level of tolerance for them even when they were notsupportive of royal power, a tolerance that might have contributed tothe use of imprisonment instead of execution.
Ahabimprisoned Micaiah son of Imlah after he delivered an unfavorableoracle (1Kings 22:27). Similarly, Asa imprisoned Hanani theseer (2Chron. 16:10). These kings may have hoped that suchtreatment would coerce better news in the future. Jeremiah (Jer.37:15) and John the Baptist (Mark 6:17) were also imprisoned fordelivering unwelcome messages to those in power.
TheologicalSignificance
Inboth Testaments, release from prison is a symbol of God’ssalvation. The theme is prominent in the psalms, as in Ps. 146:7:“The Lord sets prisoners free” (see also Pss. 68:6;107:10; 142:7). In Acts 12:7 Peter is freed from prison by a divinelysent messenger. Paul wrote a number of letters from prison andidentified himself as a prisoner of Christ (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10;2Tim. 1:8; Philem. 1). Some texts refer in mythological termsto a prison that confines spirits or Satan (1Pet. 3:19; Rev.20:7).
Laying hands on someone/something has two literal uses andtwo with symbolic significance. (1)Literally, to take something(e.g., Exod. 22:8–11; Esther 9:10–16; Matt. 26:51; Luke9:62) or someone—that is, to make an arrest (e.g., Neh. 13:21;Matt. 26:50; Mark 14:46; Luke 20:19; 21:12; 22:53; John 7:30, 44;Acts 4:3; 5:18; 12:1; 21:27). (2)Literally, to lay hands onpersons (or things) so as to hurt or destroy them (e.g., Gen. 22:12;37:22; 1Sam. 22:17; 24:5–13; 26:9–23; Job 1:12;9:33; Isa. 11:14; Jer. 15:6; Ezek. 39:21). (3)Laying a handover one’s mouth as a symbolic gesture of amazement (Mic. 7:16)or humility (Job 40:4). (4)A gesture to symbolize the transferof something from one person to another. Transfer symbolismapplications include the transfer of representative identity insacrificing (e.g., Exod. 29:10–19; Lev. 1:4; 16:21; Num.8:10–12; 2Chron. 29:23–24), of authority incommissioning (ordination) (e.g., Num. 27:18–23; Deut. 34:9;Acts 6:6; 13:3), of blessing (e.g., Gen. 48:13–20; Matt.19:13–15), of life and health (e.g., Matt. 8:3, 15; 9:18, 25,29; 20:34; Mark 6:5; 7:32–33; 8:22–26; 16:18; Luke 4:40;7:14; 13:13; 22:51; Acts 8:17; 9:12, 17; 28:8), and of the HolySpirit and spiritual gifting (Acts 8:17–19; 9:17; 19:6; 1Tim.4:14; 2Tim. 1:6).
Threeadditional things should be noted about this transfer symbolism.First, the laying on of hands is symbolic rather than purelycausative. This is evidenced when Jesus and the apostles creditfaith, and not mere touch, for healings (e.g., Matt. 9:22, 29–30;Luke 17:19; Acts 3:12–16; 14:9; cf. Matt. 13:58), when healingsoccur from a distance (e.g., Matt. 8:5–13; 15:21–28; John4:46–54) and/or with no apparent touch involved (e.g., Matt.8:28–34; 9:1–8, 32–33; 12:22; 17:14–21; Mark1:23–28; Luke 17:11–19; John 5:1–9; 11:1–44;Acts 5:15; 9:32–35, 40–41; 14:8–10; 16:18), whenthe Holy Spirit comes upon people without touch (e.g., Acts10:44–45), and when Peter strongly rebukes Simon Magus forassuming that the Holy Spirit is dispensed by mere touch (Acts8:17–24).
Second,the early church used the laying on of hands for commissioning churchworkers (Acts 6:6), missionaries (Acts 13:3),and elders (Acts 14:23 [the Greek word used for “appointing,”cheirotoneō, is derivedfrom the words for “extend,” teinō, and “hand,”cheir; cf. 2Cor. 8:19). Since the act was conducted by apostles(Acts 6:6), by prophets and teachers (Acts 13:1–3), byPaul and Barnabas (Acts 14:23; 2Tim. 1:6), and by church elders(1Tim. 4:14), we may conclude that the early church had noestablished hierarchy for ordination.
Third,the NT has some guidelines for commissioning Christian workers (cf.Heb. 6:2). Church leaders have weighty responsibilities (Acts 20:28;1Tim. 3:1–13; 5:17; Titus 1:5–9; 1Pet.5:1–4), so it is not surprising that a church elder/overseermust not be a recent convert (1Tim. 3:6) or hastily ordained(1Tim. 5:22), and that a deacon must first be tested (1Tim.3:10).
The devout Jewish Christian maternal grandmother of Timothy.Paul praises her faith as a legacy to both her daughter Eunice andher grandson (2Tim. 1:5).
In the NT the most common word used for “minister”is diakonos (e.g., 2Cor. 3:6), and for “ministry,”diakonia (e.g., 1Cor. 16:15 [NIV: “service”]).These words function as umbrella terms for NT writers to describe thewhole range of ministries performed by the church. They can describeeither a special ministry performed by an official functionary(1Cor. 3:5) or one performed by any believer (Rev. 2:19). Inthe early church, ministry was based not on institutional hierarchiesbut on services performed (1Tim. 3:1–13).
Theministry of Jesus.The church’s mind-set flows out of the way in which Jesusunderstood his ministry. He described his ministry pattern as that ofserving (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; John 13:4–17). Thus, hecalled his disciples to follow a model of leadership in the newcommunity that did not elevate them above others (Matt. 20:20–28;23:8–12; cf. 1Pet. 5:3).
Jesus’ministry provides the paradigm for the ministry of the church. The NTwriters describe the threefold ministry of Jesus as preaching,teaching, and healing (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; Mark 1:14, 21–22, 39;Acts 10:36–38). The disciples carried on the earthly ministryof Jesus by the power of the Spirit. They too engaged in preaching,teaching, and healing (Matt. 10:7–8; 28:19–20).
Theministry of the church.The church, because it is the body of Christ, continues theseministry responsibilities. In 1Pet. 4:10–11 is a summaryof the overarching ministries of the church, which include speakingthe words of God and serving. As a priesthood of believers (Exod.19:4–6; 1Pet. 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:5–6), individualmembers took responsibility for fulfilling the various tasks ofservice. Thus, all Christians are called to minister (Rom. 15:27;Philem. 13; 1Pet. 2:16). Even when a member strayed, it wasanother believer’s responsibility to confront that waywardperson and, if necessary, involve others in the body to help (Matt.18:15–20).
Althoughministry was the responsibility of all believers, there were thosewith special expertise whom Christ and the church set apart forparticular leadership roles (Eph. 4:11–12). Christ set apartApollos and Paul for special ministries (1Cor. 3:5; Eph. 3:7).The church called on special functionaries to carry out specificministries. For example, the early church appointed seven individualsto serve tables (Acts 6:2). They appointed certain ones to carry therelief fund collected for the Jerusalem Christians (2Cor. 8:19,23). As special functionaries, Paul, Apollos, Timothy, Titus, theelders, as well as others accepted the responsibility of teaching andpreaching and healing for the whole church.
Allthe ministries of the church, whether performed by believers ingeneral or by some specially appointed functionary, were based ongifts received from God (Rom. 12:1–8; 1Cor. 12:4–26).God gave individuals the abilities necessary to perform works ofservice (Acts 20:24; Eph. 4:11; Col. 4:17; 1Tim. 1:12; 1Pet.4:11). The NT, however, makes it clear that when it comes to one’srelationship and spiritual status before God, all Christians areequal. Yet in equality there is diversity of gifts and talents. Paulidentifies some gifts given to individuals for special positions:apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers (Eph. 4:11).The description here is of special ministry roles that Christ callscertain individuals to fulfill based on the gifts given to them. Theones fulfilling these roles did not do all the ministry of the churchbut rather equipped the rest of the body to do ministry (Eph.4:12–13). No one can boast in the gifts given to him or herbecause those gifts were given for ministry to others (1Cor.4:7). Thus, gifts lead to service, and in turn service results inleadership.
Itbecomes the responsibility of those who lead to equip others forministry. When others are equipped for ministry, they in turnminister and edify the whole body (Eph. 4:15–16; 2Tim.2:1–2). The goal of all ministry, according to Paul, is tobuild up a community of believers until all reach maturity in Christ(Rom. 15:15–17; 1Cor. 3:5–4:5; Eph. 4:12–16;1Thess. 2:19–20).
An early Christian disciple who, in the context of Paul’sexhortation to Timothy not to be ashamed of the gospel or of his“chains” (2Tim. 1:8, 16), is praised as an exampleworthy of imitation (1:16–18). Onesiphorus (his name means“profit bringer”) is commended for diligently andcourageously seeking out Paul in prison and for his many acts ofkindness to Paul and the church at Ephesus. Paul’s prayer forGod’s mercy is directed not to Onesiphorus but to hishousehold, suggesting that he was not with them at the time ofwriting (1:16; 4:19).
A man who “turned away from” Paul (2Tim.1:15 NASB) in the latter years of Paul’s life. Phygelus andHermogenes were two of many people from the province of Asia whodeserted Paul. The apostle also names Demas in the same letter as adeserter (2Tim. 4:10).
Imprisonmentof Criminals
Incomparing modern society to that of biblical times, it is importantto acknowledge what is distinctive about prisons in many modernsocieties. Prisons serve multiple functions, including imposingincarceration as punishment for crimes committed, segregatingdangerous criminals from the larger population, deterring crime byimposing a negative incentive, and rehabilitating offenders so thatthey can eventually return to society. In many cases where modern lawimposes incarceration as the penalty for crime, ancient and biblicallaw imposed economic penalties (such as fines), corporal punishment(beatings), and capital punishment (death). In addition, many of thebiblical references to prisons and prisoners involve what in modernsociety would be considered political rather than criminalincarceration.
Thestory of Joseph prominently features an Egyptian prison. Joseph wasfalsely put in prison for the crime of molesting his master’swife (Gen. 39:19–20), while his companions were imprisoned forthe otherwise unspecified crime of causing offense to the king(40:1). As this story illustrates, the sentences were not of apredetermined duration, and release depended on the goodwill of theking (Gen. 40:13), a situation in which Paul also found himselfhundreds of years later during Roman times (Acts 24:27). When Josephimprisoned his brothers, it was on a presumption of guilt for thecrime of espionage (Gen. 42:16). In Roman times, in contrast, certainprisoners had a right to be put on trial eventually, if not quickly(Acts 25:27; see also 16:37). Imprisonment could also be imposed forfailure to pay a debt (Matt. 18:30). Joseph kept Simeon in prison asa guarantee that his brothers would fulfill a prior agreement (Gen.42:19, 24). In addition to specialized dungeons, prisoners could alsobe confined in houses (Jer. 37:15; Acts 28:16) and pits (Zech. 9:11).
PoliticalImprisonment
Ina number of biblical stories individuals are imprisoned for what wewould today describe as political or ideological reasons. Samson wasimprisoned by the Philistines in retaliation for the havoc that hehad wreaked in their land and probably to prevent further incidents(Judg. 16:21). While in prison, Samson was enslaved. SeveralIsraelite and Judean kings were imprisoned by their Mesopotamianoverlords for offenses ranging from failure to pay taxes to revolt,including Hoshea (2Kings 17:4), Jehoiachin (2Kings25:27–29), Manasseh (2Chron. 33:11), and Zedekiah (Jer.52:11). In some cases, the imprisonment of such elites was brutal andinvolved torture (2Chron. 33:11; Jer. 52:11), though Jehoiachinwas later released from prison and allowed to live out his captivityin some comfort (2Kings 25:27–29).
Inthe NT, individuals were also imprisoned for such crimes. Barabbaswas imprisoned by the Roman government of Judea for participating inan insurrection (Mark 15:7). Saul of Tarsus imprisoned a number ofChristians, apparently without what we would today recognize as anycriminal offense (Acts 8:3). Peter was imprisoned by Herod forpolitical gain (Acts 12:4). Paul and Silas were imprisoned fordisturbing the peace of Philippi (Acts 16:23).
Imprisonmentof Prophets
Aspecial case of political incarceration is the imprisonment ofprophets. From the point of view of the biblical writers, prophetswere imprisoned for speaking the truth to a powerful person who didnot want to hear it. From the point of view of those in power,imprisoning dissenters was an important way of suppressing opinionsthat could undermine the regime. In some cases, the imprisonment ofdissenters or troublemakers was a prelude to execution (John theBaptist and Jesus). The practice of imprisonment instead of immediateexecution may reflect the ambivalent attitude of rulers towardcontroversial prophets: they could not be allowed to move aboutfreely in society, but they had some status or right as prophet thatprevented their execution. In some cases, prophets managed toconfront a king without being punished, suggesting that there was acertain level of tolerance for them even when they were notsupportive of royal power, a tolerance that might have contributed tothe use of imprisonment instead of execution.
Ahabimprisoned Micaiah son of Imlah after he delivered an unfavorableoracle (1Kings 22:27). Similarly, Asa imprisoned Hanani theseer (2Chron. 16:10). These kings may have hoped that suchtreatment would coerce better news in the future. Jeremiah (Jer.37:15) and John the Baptist (Mark 6:17) were also imprisoned fordelivering unwelcome messages to those in power.
TheologicalSignificance
Inboth Testaments, release from prison is a symbol of God’ssalvation. The theme is prominent in the psalms, as in Ps. 146:7:“The Lord sets prisoners free” (see also Pss. 68:6;107:10; 142:7). In Acts 12:7 Peter is freed from prison by a divinelysent messenger. Paul wrote a number of letters from prison andidentified himself as a prisoner of Christ (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10;2Tim. 1:8; Philem. 1). Some texts refer in mythological termsto a prison that confines spirits or Satan (1Pet. 3:19; Rev.20:7).
Imprisonmentof Criminals
Incomparing modern society to that of biblical times, it is importantto acknowledge what is distinctive about prisons in many modernsocieties. Prisons serve multiple functions, including imposingincarceration as punishment for crimes committed, segregatingdangerous criminals from the larger population, deterring crime byimposing a negative incentive, and rehabilitating offenders so thatthey can eventually return to society. In many cases where modern lawimposes incarceration as the penalty for crime, ancient and biblicallaw imposed economic penalties (such as fines), corporal punishment(beatings), and capital punishment (death). In addition, many of thebiblical references to prisons and prisoners involve what in modernsociety would be considered political rather than criminalincarceration.
Thestory of Joseph prominently features an Egyptian prison. Joseph wasfalsely put in prison for the crime of molesting his master’swife (Gen. 39:19–20), while his companions were imprisoned forthe otherwise unspecified crime of causing offense to the king(40:1). As this story illustrates, the sentences were not of apredetermined duration, and release depended on the goodwill of theking (Gen. 40:13), a situation in which Paul also found himselfhundreds of years later during Roman times (Acts 24:27). When Josephimprisoned his brothers, it was on a presumption of guilt for thecrime of espionage (Gen. 42:16). In Roman times, in contrast, certainprisoners had a right to be put on trial eventually, if not quickly(Acts 25:27; see also 16:37). Imprisonment could also be imposed forfailure to pay a debt (Matt. 18:30). Joseph kept Simeon in prison asa guarantee that his brothers would fulfill a prior agreement (Gen.42:19, 24). In addition to specialized dungeons, prisoners could alsobe confined in houses (Jer. 37:15; Acts 28:16) and pits (Zech. 9:11).
PoliticalImprisonment
Ina number of biblical stories individuals are imprisoned for what wewould today describe as political or ideological reasons. Samson wasimprisoned by the Philistines in retaliation for the havoc that hehad wreaked in their land and probably to prevent further incidents(Judg. 16:21). While in prison, Samson was enslaved. SeveralIsraelite and Judean kings were imprisoned by their Mesopotamianoverlords for offenses ranging from failure to pay taxes to revolt,including Hoshea (2Kings 17:4), Jehoiachin (2Kings25:27–29), Manasseh (2Chron. 33:11), and Zedekiah (Jer.52:11). In some cases, the imprisonment of such elites was brutal andinvolved torture (2Chron. 33:11; Jer. 52:11), though Jehoiachinwas later released from prison and allowed to live out his captivityin some comfort (2Kings 25:27–29).
Inthe NT, individuals were also imprisoned for such crimes. Barabbaswas imprisoned by the Roman government of Judea for participating inan insurrection (Mark 15:7). Saul of Tarsus imprisoned a number ofChristians, apparently without what we would today recognize as anycriminal offense (Acts 8:3). Peter was imprisoned by Herod forpolitical gain (Acts 12:4). Paul and Silas were imprisoned fordisturbing the peace of Philippi (Acts 16:23).
Imprisonmentof Prophets
Aspecial case of political incarceration is the imprisonment ofprophets. From the point of view of the biblical writers, prophetswere imprisoned for speaking the truth to a powerful person who didnot want to hear it. From the point of view of those in power,imprisoning dissenters was an important way of suppressing opinionsthat could undermine the regime. In some cases, the imprisonment ofdissenters or troublemakers was a prelude to execution (John theBaptist and Jesus). The practice of imprisonment instead of immediateexecution may reflect the ambivalent attitude of rulers towardcontroversial prophets: they could not be allowed to move aboutfreely in society, but they had some status or right as prophet thatprevented their execution. In some cases, prophets managed toconfront a king without being punished, suggesting that there was acertain level of tolerance for them even when they were notsupportive of royal power, a tolerance that might have contributed tothe use of imprisonment instead of execution.
Ahabimprisoned Micaiah son of Imlah after he delivered an unfavorableoracle (1Kings 22:27). Similarly, Asa imprisoned Hanani theseer (2Chron. 16:10). These kings may have hoped that suchtreatment would coerce better news in the future. Jeremiah (Jer.37:15) and John the Baptist (Mark 6:17) were also imprisoned fordelivering unwelcome messages to those in power.
TheologicalSignificance
Inboth Testaments, release from prison is a symbol of God’ssalvation. The theme is prominent in the psalms, as in Ps. 146:7:“The Lord sets prisoners free” (see also Pss. 68:6;107:10; 142:7). In Acts 12:7 Peter is freed from prison by a divinelysent messenger. Paul wrote a number of letters from prison andidentified himself as a prisoner of Christ (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10;2Tim. 1:8; Philem. 1). Some texts refer in mythological termsto a prison that confines spirits or Satan (1Pet. 3:19; Rev.20:7).
The historical origins of Christianity need to be set against Jewish history, beliefs, and culture in Palestine and the eastern Mediterranean, but they also need to be set in the context of the wider Greco-Roman world that was dominated politically and militarily by the Roman Empire.
From Republic to Empire
Rome began as a city-state but soon became a transcontinental empire reaching over parts of Europe, Africa, and Asia. Rome emerged as the most dominant force in the Mediterranean after it defeated Carthage in the Second Punic War (218–201 BC). Thereafter, Rome began to expand its control and power over the various Hellenistic city-states in the east, including Macedonia, Illyria, and Asia Minor. By the mid-first century AD, Rome had also conquered or annexed Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Cyrene, Gaul, Spain, North Africa, and Armenia.
The transition from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire took place under the Roman emperors beginning with Julius Caesar (100–44 BC), who, after crossing the Rubicon and defeating Pompey, was proclaimed dictator perpetuus (“dictator for life”). The period after Julius Caesar’s assassination (44 BC) was a time of political upheaval as Rome was marred by a series of civil wars. The first was between Octavius and Antony against Caesar’s assassins Brutus and Cassius. This climaxed in the Battle of Philippi (42 BC), which the former allies of Julius Caesar won. The second was between Octavius and Antony, where Antony and Cleopatra were defeated at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC, leaving Octavius as the undisputed leader of Rome.
Octavius was given the honorific name “Augustus” by the senate. His reign (31 BC–AD 14) marked a period of consolidation, reorganization, and renewal of the Roman Empire. Augustus embarked on an empire-wide policy of fiscal rationalization, developed a constitutional settlement for Rome, centralized his military authority over the various provinces, and had Julius Caesar deified. Writers and artists of the era heralded Augustus’s reign as a time of unprecedented peace and security—peace from civil war and security from the Germanic tribes in the north and the Parthian Empire in the east. Worship of the emperor became more frequent especially in the Roman East, although Augustus did not permit it in Rome. What is most significant about Augustus is that it is with his reign that the Roman Empire essentially began. He was the emperor at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1). It was under Trajan (AD 98–117), however, that the Roman Empire expanded to its largest area, encompassing parts of Britain and Persia.
Emperors (AD 14–98)
Tiberius, Augustus’s adopted heir, reigned in the years AD 14–37. He was a highly successful military general, but as emperor he was remembered as being gloomy and melancholic. Tiberius even went into a self-imposed exile for a time, leaving the praetorian prefect Sejanus in charge until Tiberius finally had him executed for treason. It was during the reign of Tiberius that Jesus conducted his ministry in Palestine.
Tiberius was succeeded by his adopted grandson Caligula, who reigned in the years AD 37–41. Caligula was the son of the popular Roman general Germanicus, who died in Antioch in AD 19. Historical sources are not favorably disposed toward Caligula, who was remembered as a malevolent tyrant given to self-aggrandizement and sexual perversity. In AD 39/40 Caligula departed from imperial policy that permitted emperor worship in the east and veneration of deceased emperors in Rome, and he often appeared dressed as a god in public and demanded worship as a living god. During this time he deposed Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, on suspicion of consorting with Parthia (Josephus, Ant. 18.7). Caligula also ordered that his statue be placed in the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple (Philo, Embassy 203). Petronius, the governor of Syria, knowing that such an act would lead to civil war, refused to comply and appealed to Caligula to reverse the order. In response, Caligula sent an order to Petronius that he commit suicide. Fortunately, news of Caligula’s assassination by a conspiracy involving the praetorian guard and senators reached Petronius first.
Claudius, Caligula’s uncle, reigned in the years AD 41–54, and his rule was defined by numerous public works, a reordering of the judicial system, a torrid series of marriages, the conquest of Britain, and a number of attempted coups by the Roman senate. In AD 49 he expelled the Jews from Rome because of disputes about a certain “Chrestus,” probably Christ (cf. Acts 18:2). No one is sure whether Claudius was murdered or died of old age, but he remained a sharp contrast to the brutal excesses of Caligula and Nero.
Nero, the stepson of Claudius, reigned in the years AD 54–68. The early period of his rule was marked by cultural endeavors and diplomatic efforts. The later years were, in contrast, distinguished by tyranny and self-aggrandizement. There was a Jewish revolt against Rome in Judea (AD 66–70) during Nero’s reign, and Vespasian was sent to pacify the territory. According to ancient sources, Nero accused Christians of starting the fire of Rome in AD 64 and subjected them to the cruelest of punishments, including crucifixion, being thrown to wild animals, and even being burned alive. It probably was during this time that the apostles Peter and Paul were martyred in Rome. Nero eventually was declared a public enemy by the Roman senate, and he committed suicide before he could be captured in AD 68. There arose a “Nero redivivus” legend, whereby many hoped or feared that Nero had not died in AD 68 but had fled to Parthia and would return to Rome in order to destroy it (Sib.Or. 4.119–124; 5.137–141, 361–396), and this arguably stands behind the imagery of Rev. 13:3; 17:8–11.
The suicide of Nero left a power vacuum in Rome, and AD 69 saw no less than four emperors ascend the throne: Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and finally Vespasian. Galba was governor of Hispania Tarraconensis and was invited to become emperor by the senate, but he was killed by the praetorian guard after they were bribed by the praetor Otho. Otho himself committed suicide after his forces were defeated by Vitellius, the commander of the legions on the Rhine. Vitellius became emperor, but he was fiscally irresponsible and murdered many of his rivals. The legions in the Danube, Egypt, Syria, and Judea had declared Vespasian emperor and marched on Rome. Vespasian controlled the grain supplies to Rome from Egypt and had a superior force. Vitellius’s forces were defeated at Bedriacum, and Vitellius went into hiding but eventually was killed in Rome. Vespasian was declared emperor by the senate, and so began the Flavian dynasty, which restored order after the chaos of civil war.
The Flavians ruled in the years AD 69–96. Vespasian (r. AD 69–79) consolidated the empire after its year of strife and instituted new taxes, such as the fiscus judaicus, a war reparation tax placed on all Jews and paid to the temple of Jupiter in lieu of the Jerusalem temple tax. Vespasian was succeeded by his sons Titus (r.AD 79–81) and Domitian (r. AD 81–96). When Vespasian sailed to Rome from Judea, Titus was left in charge of the siege of Jerusalem, which he completed and celebrated in a triumph in Rome in AD 72. This triumph is memorialized in the Arch of Titus, which depicts Roman soldiers bringing the vessels of the temple to Rome as part of the booty taken. Later Roman writers regarded Domitian as a malevolent and malicious tyrant (e.g., Tacitus, Suetonius), but this probably is an exaggeration caused partly by a desire to highlight the greatness of succeeding emperors such as Nerva and Trajan. It probably was during the reign of Domitian that some Christians in Asia Minor were being persecuted for their failure to worship the emperor, as depicted in the book of Revelation.
Table 7. Roman Emperors (31 BC–AD 117)
31 BC-AD 14 – Augustus
AD 14-37 – Tiberius
AD 37-41 – Caligula
AD 41-54 – Claudius
AD 54-68 – Nero
AD 68-69 – Galba
AD 69 – Otho
AD 69 – Vitellius
AD 69-79 – Vespasian
AD 79-81 – Titus
AD 81-96 – Domitian
AD 96-98 – Nerva
AD 98-117 – Trajan
Military
Military expeditions expanded Rome’s control of foreign territories and safeguarded its borders from incursion, most threateningly from the Germanic tribes east of the Rhine River and north of the Danube River and from the Parthian (=Neo-Persian) Empire east of the Euphrates River. A Roman legion consisted of around six thousand men, including cavalry. Under Tiberius, there were twenty-five legions stationed across the empire: eight on the Rhine, three in Spain, two in Egypt, four in Syria, two in Africa, and six in the Danube region. In terms of command structures, the legions were under the control of certain regional commands by men of consular rank, including two on the Rhine, one in Spain, one in Syria, and three in the Balkans (Tacitus, Ann. 4.5). These were among the most powerful persons outside the ruling family and could be kingmakers or contenders during times of civil war. A legion was divided into ten cohorts and commanded by a legate, usually of senatorial rank. Units of one hundred were commanded by centurions, and service in the legions was set at between twenty and twenty-five years. Upon recruitment, the soldier swore an oath of loyalty to the emperor (sacramentum) that was renewed annually. During times of peace, Roman soldiers could perform a number of civil tasks relating to taxation, building projects, and policing.
Centurions are mentioned several times in the NT (e.g., Matt. 8:5; Mark 15:39; Acts 10:1; 21:32; 27:1). There is a mention of a “legion” of demons that oppressed the Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:9), and Jesus refers to the possibility of the Father sending him “legions” of angels (Matt. 26:53). Military terminology is very apparent in Paul’s letters, where he refers to fighting armor (Rom. 13:11–13; 2Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:10–18), compares commitment to Christ to military service (2Tim. 2:4), refers to his coworkers as “soldiers” or “fellow soldiers” (Phil. 2:25; Philem. 2; 2Tim. 2:3), and likens ministerial remuneration to a soldier being paid his salarium (1Cor. 9:7).
Culture and Religion
One of the primary reasons for Rome’s rise and dominance, militarily and culturally, was its capacity to absorb other peoples and even other gods into its constituency and pantheon. Its constantly growing pantheon, application of the rule of law, and superior military force made Rome what it was: a melting pot of all cultures and a Romanizer of other cultures.
Roman society was heavily stratified, but social mobility, upward and downward, was possible. Wealth, marriage, education, and military exploits were the primary means to social advancement. The senatorial class represented the wealthy nobility of Rome and provided the primary cohort of civil and military administrators. The equestrian class (or “knights,” as they are sometimes called) were a larger group of less wealthy Roman citizens. Decurions were members of civil councils in provincial cities who often acted as magistrates and were leaders of local communities. The plebeians represented the general citizenry of Rome, who, until the time of Tiberius, had some power in electing officials. Finally, there were freedmen, who were ex-slaves usually in a relationship with their former master, and also slaves, who were regarded as little more than property.
The ancient Roman religions focused on the numen, the somewhat impersonal divine power associated with certain localities. From the third century BC, Greek deities were assimilated and Romanized, so that Zeus became Jupiter, and Vesta was identified as Hestia. The Capitoline Hill was crowned with a temple that was dedicated around 500 BC to Jupiter, Minerva, and Juno. These were the principal gods of Rome, although others were added to the pantheon as the Romans conquered other peoples and adopted their gods. Other gods also received greater honor, such as the goddess Pax, the personification of peace (based on the Greek goddess Eirene); Vespasian built and dedicated a temple in her honor in Rome in AD 75. The Roman emperor was the Pontifex Maximus and supreme high priest of Rome and the empire. In the mid- to late first century AD, the fastest-growing religion was the imperial cult, the worship of (usually) deceased Roman emperors. This cult became popular in the eastern Mediterranean cities, where worship of rulers was commonplace, but was regarded with indifference in Rome.
Religions and philosophies from all over the known world eventually made their way to Rome. Egyptian rites and religions gained followings, Mithraism acquired currency within the ranks of the military and among public servants, Judaism entered Rome probably with the Hasmonean delegation sent there around 139 BC, and Christianity came to Rome probably during the late 30s and early 40s of the first century AD through Jewish pilgrims visiting the east and through Judean immigration to Rome. Many Roman intellectuals lamented the fact that so many foreign superstitions had found their way to Rome, and that Roman peoples found them more attractive than their own state religion. Roman religion was largely controlled by the state through a set calendar and the appointment of priests and vestal virgins. It was practiced in public and in the home. As such, religious life was very much intertwined with social and political life. Roman religion engendered the need for its citizens to act with pietas, the honoring of one’s obligations to the gods, and with religio, which designated appropriate scruples and rites in the presence of the gods.
Summary
The birth of the church and the growth of Christianity took place within the wider social, religious, and cultural context of the Greco-Roman world. The politics and power of the Roman Empire provide the backdrop for the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:1), and since Rome was considered to be the center of the world, it was necessary that Paul himself testify to Jesus Christ there (Acts 19:21). The history, literature, and cultural background of Rome form an important background to the NT and should be studied along with the history and literature of Judaism during the time of Jesus and the apostles. Although the Romans were the primary threat to the survival of Christians in the ancient world, after the conversion of Constantine in the fourth century AD, they became the primary means by which Christianity spread to the rest of Europe and western Asia. See also Roman Law.
Self-control involves the willingness to submit to theboundaries of nature, society, and family that God places in theworld to bring about order and harmony in relationships. Theself-restraint of an individual’s thoughts, words, and actionsreflects the ordered discipline of God’s creation (Gen. 1–3;8:22; Prov. 6:6–8). Discipline of the self is essential to livea productive life in community (Prov. 25:28).
“Self-control”is one of the terms that Luke uses to summarize Paul’s messageto Felix (Acts 24:25). God’s people must exercise self-control(1Thess. 5:6; 2Tim. 1:7; 2Pet. 1:6). Ultimately,self-control is a gift, a fruit that comes from being in submissionto God’s Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).
Although the events narrated in the NT took place during atime of peace in the Roman Empire, Roman soldiers were a fixture inJudea, and they appear in a number of stories: the centurion whoseservant Jesus healed (Matt. 8:5–13; Luke 7:1–10); thesoldiers who tortured and executed Jesus (Matt. 27; Mark 15; Luke 23;John 19) and guarded his tomb (Matt. 28:4); the God-fearing centurionCornelius (Acts10); and the Roman garrison in Jerusalem (Acts21:27–40). Soldiers also guarded prisoners (Acts 12:1–10;23; 27:1–2, 31–32, 42–44; 28:16). In several placesPaul writes of Christian workers as soldiers (1Cor. 9:7; Eph.6:10–17; Phil. 2:25; 2Tim. 2:3–4; Philem. 1:2).
The Bible has much to say about suffering. While in the OTsuffering is regularly an indication of divine displeasure (Lev.26:16–36; Deut. 28:20–68; Ps. 44:10–12; Isa. 1:25;cf. Heb. 10:26–31), in the NT it becomes the means by whichblessing comes to humanity.
TheBible often shows that sinfulness results in suffering (Gen. 2:17;6:5–7; Exod. 32:33; 2Sam. 12:13–18; Rom. 1:18;1Cor. 11:27–30). Job’s friends mistakenly assumethat he has suffered because of disobedience (Job 4:7–9; 8:3–4,20; 11:6). Job passionately defends himself (12:4; 23:10), and in thefinal chapter of the book God commends Job and condemns his friendsfor their accusations (42:7–8; cf. 1:1, 22; 2:10). The writermakes clear that suffering is not necessarily evidence of sinfulness.Like Job’s friends, Jesus’ disciples assume thatblindness is an indication of sinfulness (John 9:1–2). Jesusrejects this simplistic notion of retributive suffering (John 9:3,6–7; cf. Luke 13:1–5).
Theprayers of suffering people are expressed in the sixteen communal andthirty-seven individual laments in the book of Psalms. Within thelaments the writers describe their problems, express feelings, makerequests, ask questions (“How long, Lord?” [13:1]; “Whyhave you forsaken me?” [22:1]), and lodge complaints againstGod (“My eyes fail, looking for my God [69:3]), enemies (“Youhave made us an object of derision to our neighbors, and our enemiesmock us” [80:6]), and even themselves (“I am a worm andnot a man” [22:6]).
TheNT writers reveal that Jesus’ suffering was prophesied in theOT (Mark 9:12; 14:21; Luke 18:31–32; 24:46; Acts 3:18; 17:3;26:22–23; 1Pet. 1:11; referring to OT texts such as Ps.22; Isa. 52:13–53:12; Zech. 13:7). The Lord Jesus is presentedas the answer to human suffering: (1)Through the incarnation,God’s Son personally experienced human suffering (Phil. 2:6–8;Heb. 2:9; 5:8). (2)Through his suffering, Christ paid the pricefor sin (Rom. 4:25; 3:25–26), so that believers are set freefrom sin (Rom. 6:6, 18, 22) and helped in temptation (Heb. 2:18).(3)Christ Jesus intercedes for his suffering followers (Rom.8:34–35). (4)Christ is the example in suffering (1Pet.2:21; 4:1; cf. Phil. 3:10; 2Cor. 1:5; 4:10; 1Pet. 4:13),and though he died once for sins (Heb. 10:12), he continues to sufferas his church suffers (Acts 9:4–5). (5)Christ provideshope of resurrection (Rom. 6:5; 1Cor. 15:20–26; Phil.3:10–11) and a future life without suffering or death (Rev.21:4).
Thereare many NT examples of suffering believers (John 15:20–21;Acts 4:3; 5:18; 7:57–60; 8:1–3; 12:1–5; 14:19;16:22–24; 18:17; 2Cor. 6:4–5, 8–10; Heb.10:32; 1Pet. 5:9; Rev. 2:10). Suffering is part of God’splan for his people (Acts 9:16; 1Thess. 3:2–4) and ispart of what it means to be a follower of Christ Jesus (Acts 14:22;Rom. 8:17; Phil. 1:29; 1Pet. 2:21; 4:12).
TheNT writers repeatedly mention the benefits of suffering, for it hasbecome part of God’s work of redemption. The suffering ofbelievers accompanies the proclamation and advancement of the gospel(Acts 5:41–42; 9:15–16; 2Cor. 4:10–11;6:2–10; Phil. 1:12, 27–29; 1Thess. 2:14–16;2Tim. 1:8; 4:5) and results in salvation (Matt. 10:22; 2Cor.1:6; 1Thess. 2:16; 2Tim. 2:10; Heb. 10:39), faith (Heb.10:32–34, 38–39; 1Pet. 1:7), the kingdom of God(Acts 14:22), resurrection from the dead (Phil. 3:10–11), andthe crown of life (Rev. 2:10). It is an essential part of thedevelopment toward Christian maturity (Rom. 5:3–4; 2Cor.4:11; Heb. 12:4; James 1:3–4; 1Pet. 1:7; 4:1).
Sufferingis associated with knowing Christ (Phil. 3:10); daily inward renewal(2Cor. 4:16); purity, understanding, patience, kindness,sincere love, truthful speech, the power of God (2Cor. 4:4–10);comfort and endurance (2Cor. 1:6); obedience (Heb. 5:8);blessing (1Pet. 3:14; 4:14); glory (Rom. 8:17; 2Cor.4:17); and joy (Matt. 5:12; Acts 5:41; 2Cor. 6:10; 12:10; James1:2; 1Pet. 1:6; 4:13). Other positive results of Christiansuffering include perseverance (Rom. 5:3; James 1:3), character andhope (Rom. 5:4), strength (2Cor. 12:10), and maturity andcompleteness (James 1:4). Present suffering is light and momentarywhen compared to future glory (Matt. 5:10–12; Acts 14:22; Rom.8:18; 2Cor. 4:17; Heb. 10:34–36; 1Pet. 1:5–7;4:12–13).
Throughoutthe Bible, believers are instructed to help those who suffer. The OTlaw provides principles for assisting the poor, the disadvantaged,and the oppressed (Exod. 20:10; 21:2; 23:11; Lev. 19:13, 34; 25:10,35; Deut. 14:28–29; 15:1–2; 24:19–21). Jesusregularly taught his followers to help the poor (Matt. 5:42; 6:3;19:21; 25:34–36; Luke 4:18; 12:33; 14:13, 21). It is believers’responsibility to show mercy (Matt. 5:7; 9:13), be generous (Rom.12:8; 2Cor. 8:7; 1Tim. 6:18), mourn with mourners (Rom.12:15), carry other’s burdens (Gal. 6:1–2), and visitprisoners (Matt. 25:36, 43). See also Servant of the Lord.
Understanding many aspects of education in Israel during OT times and, to a lesser extent, into the NT period is extraordinarily difficult. Many studies draw quite specific conclusions based on very slender evidence and inferences drawn from supposed parallels with neighboring societies, inferences themselves beset by uncertainties. Therefore, conclusions are necessarily tentative at many points. Furthermore, it is reasonable to expect that things did not remain constant through history, and that what can be reliably discerned for one period may not accurately reflect the situation in other times.
Education encompasses several areas of life in the biblical world. Aside from academic education (relating to literacy and numeracy), there was moral and religious education, military education, and vocational training. These are not all distinct; those whose vocation lay in diplomatic circles or within the royal court as scribes would have received academic education, while those living in the country and working a farm would have had little opportunity to access such knowledge.
Old Testament
Settings for education. There were three primary arenas of education in OT times: home, school, and temple.
Home. The most important setting for education in OT times was the home (Deut. 4:9; 6:7; 11:19). Both parents were expected to play a role in a child’s education (Prov. 1:8; 6:20; 23:22; 31:1). Sons generally were trained in their father’s vocation, and such training took the form of an apprenticeship (1Sam. 16:11; 2Kings 4:18); girls learned from their mothers as they undertook their work on a daily basis (Exod. 35:25–26; 2Sam. 13:8).
In part, the extent of home education is tied to the question of the extent of formal schooling in ancient Israel. As noted below, the nature and extent of schools is unclear, and if (as the evidence seems to suggest) schools were virtually nonexistent outside the royal court, then the home ultimately would have been the locus of any academic education received by children and the source of any widespread literacy and numeracy in the community. The frequent use of father/son language in Proverbs, however, need not imply an exclusively familial context for the instruction contained therein, as there is evidence from Egypt that such language was used between teacher and student.
School. The existence, nature, and extent of schools in OT times is extensively debated and ultimately uncertain. The first explicit reference to a school is found in the second century BC in Sir. 51:23. The virtual silence of the OT on the topic may reflect either that schools were absent in ancient Israel or that their existence was somehow of little interest and so warranted little reflection by biblical authors. In any case, it is likely that some form of school for scribes and those training to work in government existed in the vicinity of the royal court, as they did in Mesopotamia and Egypt. These did not form a comprehensive national schooling system for young children but were more specifically targeted to the few individuals who aimed to become scribes or advisers.
Outside the Bible there exist a number of inscriptions that could suggest the existence of schools in Israel prior to the exile. These include abecedaries (lists of the letters of the alphabet written out, usually as practice exercises or as examples), words written out several times, lists of month names, and possible exercises in reading foreign languages, among others.
There is also extensive evidence of schools in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and probably also Ugarit from an early date (cf. Acts 7:22). Whether their existence supports the existence of schools in Israel is unclear. Egypt and Mesopotamia had large and complex bureaucracies necessary to administer their kingdoms, and they employed writing systems far more difficult to master than Hebrew. In addition, mathematical texts reflect a concern with numeracy within the schools of these kingdoms, for which there is no clear evidence in ancient Israel.
The sages and scribes appear to be the primary source for the material supposedly employed in schools. Ecclesiastes 12:9 identifies one of the tasks of the sages as teaching the people, and some claim that Proverbs functioned as a textbook within a school setting. Indeed, Prov. 4:5; 17:16 speak of the “buying” (Heb. qanah) of knowledge, interpreted by some as a reference to teachers paid for providing tuition. Again, the context in which such tuition may have taken place is uncertain.
Temple. Priests were also involved in some teaching (1Sam. 2:21, 26). According to 2Chron. 17:7–9, King Jehoshaphat sent five officials, nine Levites, and two priests to teach the people of Judah from the Book of the Law, a point that stresses both the importance of the task and the probable failure of the home setting to adequately convey this instruction, at least by the late fifth century BC.
Types of education. In OT times four types of education can be discerned: moral and religious, academic, vocational, and military.
Moral and religious education. The Bible stresses the importance of moral and religious education above all other forms (Exod. 10:2; 12:26; 13:8; Deut. 4:9; 6:7, 20–21; 32:7, 46).
Academic education. The extent of literacy and numeracy in ancient Israel is difficult to ascertain. Rudimentary numeracy almost certainly was widespread and learned within the home and in the course of vocational training when necessary. Many among the population also appear to have been at least capable of reading and writing names or other simple texts (Deut. 6:9; 11:20; Judg. 8:14).
Vocational training. Most commonly, boys followed in their father’s vocation and thus learned through observation and participation. Under some circ*mstances, however, children served apprenticeships under the tutelage of others, such as was apparently the case for prophetic schools (2Kings 2:7; 4:38; 6:1–2; Amos 7:14–15).
Military training. There are clear indications that kings recruited mercenaries to form the most important part of their army (e.g., 1Sam. 22:2; 25:13). These mercenaries were paid and likely had received some formal training, but the nature of that training is nowhere explained. In addition to these elite forces, all able-bodied men apparently were considered eligible for military service when the need arose (2Chron. 25:5). So, for example, the elite troops were responsible for staging the attack (2Sam. 11:14–17; 12:26), while the remainder of the army served as reinforcements where necessary (2Sam. 12:29). The use of chariots (under David and Solomon) would have required some training, as would the wielding of various weapons (swords, spears, bows, and slings). Ultimately, however, there are only allusions to such training (e.g., Judg. 3:2; 2Sam. 22:35).
Educational methods. Throughout the ancient Near East there is evidence that corporal punishment played a significant role in education. There is a somewhat comical text from Mesopotamia that relates a day in the life of a student who receives physical punishment for virtually everything he does. Similarly, the book of Proverbs highlights the importance of discipline in raising and training children (e.g., 13:24; 22:15; 29:15, 17). Nonetheless, Proverbs uses “the rod” as a means to signify discipline as a whole without necessarily endorsing corporal punishment as the only or even the primary means of discipline. This is apparent because Proverbs contrasts the rod not with other, lesser forms of discipline but rather with no discipline at all. Thus, although there is evidence that corporal punishment was used extensively (and probably excessively [see Sir. 30]), Proverbs endorses a more nuanced approach to disciplining children.
Academic, religious, and moral education also involved the use of various techniques that facilitated learning. These included the use of poetry or poetic couplets (common in wisdom literature and in psalms), numerical sayings (e.g., Ps. 62:11; Prov. 6:16), and acrostics, as well as the celebration of feasts and memorials at various times throughout the year.
New Testament
Greco-Roman education. Greek education developed from about the fourth century BC and spread throughout the Mediterranean region, adopted with minor modification by the Romans. The curriculum was dominated by sports and a focus on literacy, with little place given to religious education (although philosophy was taught and did bear some religious traits). Education in the Greco-Roman world was expensive, and its provision was a parental responsibility, which tended to restrict formal education to the elite.
At about the age of fifteen, boys could move from elementary schooling to the gymnasium, where they received intellectual and physical training. Some in the Corinthian church may have received such an education, a possibility raised by Paul’s terminology in 1Corinthians that reflects educational language: his claim to be father of the Corinthian household (4:14–21); sporting imagery (esp. 9:24–27); language of nursing and nature (3:1–4); agricultural imagery (3:5–9); his threat to come with a rod (4:21), which could be related to the rod of correction; the term grammateus (1:20), which may refer to the gymnasium instructor; reference to writing (4:6); and talk of removing the marks of circumcision (7:18).
Education in Israel. One Jewish tradition states that in AD 63 the high priest Joshua benGamla decreed that every town should appoint a schoolteacher for the education of children of six or seven years of age. This, together with the existence of Sirach’s school more than two centuries earlier, indicates that some form of schooling existed within Israel in the first century AD.
Although some Jews throughout the ancient world received a standard Hellenistic education, others reacted against the influence of Hellenism and sought to educate their children within the Scriptures and Jewish tradition. The DSS refer to the importance placed on study of the Torah (1QS 6:6–7). There were also rabbinic schools that focused on such teaching.
By NT times, synagogues were well established. Although determining precisely what took place within the synagogues is difficult, indications are that the focus on Scripture and its exposition played an important role in teaching both its importance and the appropriate way to interpret it. Teaching, however, was not confined to synagogues or the temple, as is amply demonstrated by the frequency with which Jesus is described as teaching in a variety of settings. Nonetheless, the temple itself did appear to serve as a center for religious education, as is reflected in the account of the twelve-year-old Jesus’ interactions with the teachers at the temple (Luke 2:41–51). Jesus’ own teaching was remarkable, however, in that it was delivered with authority (Matt. 7:29; Mark 1:22; Luke 4:32).
Education in the church. Paul highlights one of the prerequisites for being an overseer of a church as the ability to teach, stressing the importance of the NT church as a place of learning (1Tim. 3:2; 2Tim. 2:2, 24). This teaching involved a familiarity with right doctrine in order to avoid being led astray, an exemplary life that modeled godly behavior for all to see, and the maturity required to apply discipline when necessary.
One of Paul’s faithful companions who proved himself asa valuable coworker (e.g., 1Cor. 4:17; 16:10; Phil. 2:19–24).Many think that Timothy responded to Paul’s preaching duringthe first missionary journey, explaining the frequent references toTimothy as Paul’s “son” (1Cor. 4:17; Phil.2:22; 1Tim. 1:2; 2Tim. 1:2). Paul circumcised Timothybecause he had a Greek father and Jewish mother. He ministered withPaul from the second missionary journey (Acts 16) to late in Paul’slife (2Timothy), probably about twenty years. Timothy is notmentioned in much of Acts 16, an expression of Luke’s deferenceto the most prominent members of the missionary team, Paul and Silas.In Acts 19:22 Luke refers to Timothy as Paul’s “helper,”one who serves. This designation and Luke’s silence in Acts 16,however, should not be taken to mean that Timothy, who clearly has asubordinate role to Paul, had menial roles and functions.
Titlesand ministry assignments demonstrate Timothy’s important rolein Pauline mission. Paul calls Timothy a “brother”(2Cor. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1Thess. 3:2; Philem. 1), “myco-worker” (Rom. 16:21), a “co-worker in God’sservice” (1Thess. 3:2 [textual variant: “servant ofGod”]), and “servant of Christ Jesus” with Paul(Phil. 1:1) and refers to him metaphorically as a “soldier”and “hardworking farmer” (2Tim. 2:3, 6). Paulprobably includes Timothy among the “apostles of Christ”in 1Thess. 2:6, a reference to his role as a qualifiedambassador of the gospel, not as an apostle in the technical sense.Paul sent Timothy out on ministry assignments to difficult places(e.g., Thessalonica and Corinth [see 1–2Timothy]).
Apparently,Timothy worked alongside Paul a great deal of the time and was wellrespected in many locations, because Paul identifies Timothy ascosender of six letters: 2Corinthians, Philippians, Colossians,1Thessalonians, 2Thessalonians, and Philemon. He was alsowith Paul during the writing of Romans and 1Corinthians.Mentioned as released from prison in Heb. 13:23, he was anacquaintance of the author of Hebrews.
The Bible has much to say about works, and an understandingof the topic is important because works play a role in mostreligions. In the most generic sense, “works” refers tothe products or activities of human moral agents in the context ofreligious discussion. God’s works are frequently mentioned inScripture, and they are always good. His works include creation (Gen.2:2–3; Isa. 40:28; 42:5), sustenance of the earth (Ps. 104;Heb. 1:3), and redemption (Exod. 6:6; Ps. 111:9; Rom. 8:23). Humanworks, therefore, should be in alignment with God’s works,though obviously of a different sort. Works in the Bible usuallyreflect a moral polarity: good or evil, righteous or unrighteous,just or unjust. The context of the passage often determines the moralcharacter of the works (e.g., Isa. 3:10–11; 2Cor. 11:15).
Importantquestions follow from the existence of works and their moral quality.Do good works merit God’s favor or please him? Can good workssave at the time of God’s judgment? When people asked Jesus,“What must we do to do the works God requires?” heanswered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one hehas sent” (John 6:28–29). Without faith it is impossibleto please God (Heb. 11:6). The people from the OT commended in Heb.11 did their works in the precondition of faith. Explicitly in the NTand often implicitly in the OT, faith is the condition for truly goodworks. God elects out of his mercy, not out of human works (Rom.9:12, 16; Titus 3:5; cf. Rom. 11:2). Works not done in faith, even ifconsidered “good” by human standards, are not commendableto God, since all humankind is under sin (Rom. 3:9) and no person isrighteous or does good (Rom. 3:10–18; cf. Isa. 64:6). Workscannot save; salvation is a gift to be received by faith (Eph. 2:8–9;2Tim. 1:9; cf. Rom. 4:2–6). Even works of the Mosaic laware not salvific (Rom. 3:20, 27–28; Gal. 2:16; 3:2; 5:4). Goodworks follow from faith (2Cor. 9:8; Eph. 2:10; 1Thess.1:3; James 2:18, 22; cf. Acts 26:20). The works of those who havefaith will be judged, but this judgment appears to be related torewards, not salvation (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 2Cor. 5:10; cf.Rom. 14:10; 1Cor. 3:13–15).
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
2 Timothy 1:1-2:13
is mentioned in the definition.
Death is commonly defined as the end of physical life,wherein the normal biological processes associated with life (such asrespiration) cease. This definition, however, does not adequatelyencompass the varied nuances associated with death in the Bible.
TheBeginning of Death
Deathis introduced in the Bible as the penalty for transgressing theprohibition against eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of goodand evil—a contrast to Mesopotamia, where death was part of thedivine design of human beings. In Gen. 2:16–17 God tells thefirst man, “When you eat from [the fruit of the tree] you willcertainly die.” The consequences of eating provide a usefulbasis for discussing the nature of death from a biblical perspective.
First,as is apparent from the subsequent narrative, neither the man nor thewoman experiences physical, biological death immediately after eatingthe fruit. In this way, Gen. 2–3 reflects the common biblicalnotion that death refers to more than just biological death, pointingto the more significant aspect of death that embodies alienation andseparation from the source of life, God. The point is presupposed byJesus when he offers life to those who are dead (John 5:24), and byPaul when he proclaims that before Christ all were dead in their sinsand transgressions (Eph. 2:1, 5). It is also reflected in the commonpunishment prescribed in the Pentateuch whereby offenders were cutoff from the people (Gen. 17:14; Exod. 12:15, 19; 30:38; cf. Gen.9:11; Exod. 9:15). Within Gen. 2–3, death arrives with loss ofaccess to the tree of life in the garden. Biologically, the first manand woman may continue to live for a while outside the garden, buttheir fate is sealed when they are cut off from the garden and theintimate fellowship with the Creator that had been enjoyed therein.
Second,the strong implication of Gen. 2:16–17 is that human beings, asoriginally created, were not subject to death (see also Rom. 5:12;6:23; 1Cor. 15:21). This does not mean that they were immortalin the same manner as God (cf. 1Tim. 6:16), but rather thatthey were contingently immortal: they were not subject to death butsustained by their relationship to the life-giving God through theprovision of the tree of life (cf. Rev. 2:7; 22:2, 14). Once theywere cut off from the source of life, death ensued.
Theaccount of the arrival of death in Gen. 3, however, tells us littleabout how death affected animals, since the Bible consistentlypresents a predominantly human focus. While Eccles. 3:21 affirmshuman ignorance over the relative postmortem fate of humans andanimals, little else is said on the matter. Similarly, it is notentirely clear whether death is introduced as a punishment for sinfor humans only (and so whether animals could have died prior to thefall) or whether animals were perceived as sharing in immortalityprior to the fall.
Deathin the Old Testament
Deathis frequently depicted negatively throughout the OT. Aside from itsinitial presentation as a divine punishment for sin, it is presentedas that which seeks out and devours life and is terrifying (Pss.18:4–5; 55:4; Prov. 30:15–16; Hab. 2:5). For the authorof Ecclesiastes, death is that which ultimately undermines anypossible value that life may otherwise have (e.g., Eccles. 9:3). Thetragedy of death, in the OT, is that it results in separation, fromGod (as noted above in the context of Gen. 2–3) and frompeople. The psalms, for example, frequently cite the finality andprofundity of death’s effects (e.g., Pss. 6:5; 88:5; 115:17;cf. Isa. 38:18). Even those few passages that appear to present deathmore positively (e.g., Job 3:13, 17) ultimately serve to highlightthe appalling circ*mstances of the speaker’s life rather thanany blessed state of the dead (for a similar idea in the NT, seeRev.9:6).
TheOT does, however, depict death as the natural end of life, and a gooddeath as one that arrives only after a long and prosperous life. SoAbraham (Gen. 25:8), Isaac (Gen. 35:29), and Job (Job 42:16–17)are said to live long lives before they die. Furthermore, somepassages refer to the person being “gathered to his people,”suggesting some form of reunion with previous generations in death,presumably in Sheol, although the location and state of the dead arenever explicated. Isaiah can even include the idea of death withinlanguage used to describe the ideal future world (Isa. 65:20).
Althoughthere are no laws relating to the manner in which the bodies of thedead were to be handled, all the descriptive indicators show thatburial was normative, often in a family tomb or plot (e.g., Gen. 23;cf. 1Kings 13:22). Indeed, the importance of an appropriateburial is apparent in Ecclesiastes’ comment that a stillbornchild is better off than someone who lives a long life but receivesno burial (Eccles. 6:3) and in the prophets’ presentation ofthose not buried as being accursed (Jer. 8:2; 14:16;16:4).
Lifeafter Death in the Old Testament
Beliefin some form of postmortem existence was common in many parts of theancient world. In Egypt, an elaborate set of beliefs relating to thestate of those who had died included the possibility of an ongoingexistence that could even surpass what one may have experiencedbefore death (although such an opportunity was a reasonableexpectation only for the upper classes, while the general populationprobably had more modest expectations of the nature of theirexistence in the afterlife). By way of contrast, Mesopotamian beliefsdepicted a far darker and more troubling afterlife for all but thevery few whose lives and deaths were sufficiently blessed to ensurethem some degree of postmortem comfort. For the remainder, there waslittle hope for any positive experience following death.
TheOT, however, has little to say about the state of those who havedied. The widespread belief in some form of continued existencebeyond biological death in the ancient world suggests that, in theabsence of contrary data in the Bible, the people of Israel probablyassumed that some aspect of a person persisted beyond death.Furthermore, there are hints that this may have been the case, suchas the raising of Samuel’s shade by the medium at Endor (1Sam.28), the escape from death of Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2Kings2:11), the revivification of the body dropped on Elisha’s bones(2Kings 13:21), and expressions used to refer to death such as“gathered to his people” (Gen. 25:8, 17; 35:29; 49:29;Num. 27:13; Deut. 32:50; cf. Gen. 47:30; Deut. 31:16). The dead(sometimes referred to by the term repa’im, “shades/spiritsof the dead”) were thought to dwell in Sheol, generallydescribed as under the earth (e.g., Ezek. 31:14). Beyond this, thereare prophetic expectations that God will ultimately destroy death(e.g., Isa. 25:8), and that God does not take pleasure in anyone’sdeath (Ezek. 18:23, 32).
Deathin the New Testament
TheNT continues, and in some places expands upon, the negative view ofdeath presented in the OT. The notion that death is a consequence ofand punishment for the sinful state that imprisons all humanity isstated emphatically (e.g., Rom. 3:23; 6:23) and reinforced by thenotion that, although biologically alive, sinful humans are dead intheir sin and so incapable of reviving themselves (Eph. 2:1). Death,according to Paul, is the last enemy (1Cor. 15:26), and yet todie is gain (Phil. 1:21–24) because it heralds being withChrist, which, explains Paul, “is better by far” thanbeing alive in this body in this world.
Centralto both the message of the Bible and to the significance of death inthe Bible is the death of the Messiah, God’s Son. Jesus’death provides the basis for countering the consequences of theoriginal rebellion against God by the first couple (2Cor.5:21). Consequently, Paul could write that Jesus’ death itselfdestroyed death (2Tim. 1:10). Furthermore, the life that Jesusoffers—eternal life—is available to the believer in thepresent (John 3:36; 5:24), prior to the time when death is ultimatelyabolished, such that Jesus could assert that all those who believe inhim will live even though they die (John 11:25–26).
TheNT expands somewhat on the details relating to the state of the deadfrom the OT. For one thing, the existence of an afterlife is clearlypresented. Furthermore, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke16:19–31) reflects a more comprehensive understanding of theexistence of distinctions among those who have died, such that therich man is said to be suffering in Hades (Gk. hadēs, used inthe LXX to translate Heb. she’ol in the OT), while Lazarus isfar off with Abraham and being comforted. Although there is a dangerin reading too much into a parable, the detail appears to reflectsomething of the expanded understanding of the afterlife among somein Jesus’ day.
TheNT makes several references to a “second death” (Rev.2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8; cf. Jude 12). The expression refers to thestate of eternal judgment under God’s wrath, a death from whichthere will be no escape. But those who remain faithful to Christ willnot experience this second death (Rev. 20:6), and in their dwellingplace with God, the new Jerusalem, death will be no more (21:4).
The historical origins of Christianity need to be set against Jewish history, beliefs, and culture in Palestine and the eastern Mediterranean, but they also need to be set in the context of the wider Greco-Roman world that was dominated politically and militarily by the Roman Empire.
From Republic to Empire
Rome began as a city-state but soon became a transcontinental empire reaching over parts of Europe, Africa, and Asia. Rome emerged as the most dominant force in the Mediterranean after it defeated Carthage in the Second Punic War (218–201 BC). Thereafter, Rome began to expand its control and power over the various Hellenistic city-states in the east, including Macedonia, Illyria, and Asia Minor. By the mid-first century AD, Rome had also conquered or annexed Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Cyrene, Gaul, Spain, North Africa, and Armenia.
The transition from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire took place under the Roman emperors beginning with Julius Caesar (100–44 BC), who, after crossing the Rubicon and defeating Pompey, was proclaimed dictator perpetuus (“dictator for life”). The period after Julius Caesar’s assassination (44 BC) was a time of political upheaval as Rome was marred by a series of civil wars. The first was between Octavius and Antony against Caesar’s assassins Brutus and Cassius. This climaxed in the Battle of Philippi (42 BC), which the former allies of Julius Caesar won. The second was between Octavius and Antony, where Antony and Cleopatra were defeated at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC, leaving Octavius as the undisputed leader of Rome.
Octavius was given the honorific name “Augustus” by the senate. His reign (31 BC–AD 14) marked a period of consolidation, reorganization, and renewal of the Roman Empire. Augustus embarked on an empire-wide policy of fiscal rationalization, developed a constitutional settlement for Rome, centralized his military authority over the various provinces, and had Julius Caesar deified. Writers and artists of the era heralded Augustus’s reign as a time of unprecedented peace and security—peace from civil war and security from the Germanic tribes in the north and the Parthian Empire in the east. Worship of the emperor became more frequent especially in the Roman East, although Augustus did not permit it in Rome. What is most significant about Augustus is that it is with his reign that the Roman Empire essentially began. He was the emperor at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1). It was under Trajan (AD 98–117), however, that the Roman Empire expanded to its largest area, encompassing parts of Britain and Persia.
Emperors (AD 14–98)
Tiberius, Augustus’s adopted heir, reigned in the years AD 14–37. He was a highly successful military general, but as emperor he was remembered as being gloomy and melancholic. Tiberius even went into a self-imposed exile for a time, leaving the praetorian prefect Sejanus in charge until Tiberius finally had him executed for treason. It was during the reign of Tiberius that Jesus conducted his ministry in Palestine.
Tiberius was succeeded by his adopted grandson Caligula, who reigned in the years AD 37–41. Caligula was the son of the popular Roman general Germanicus, who died in Antioch in AD 19. Historical sources are not favorably disposed toward Caligula, who was remembered as a malevolent tyrant given to self-aggrandizement and sexual perversity. In AD 39/40 Caligula departed from imperial policy that permitted emperor worship in the east and veneration of deceased emperors in Rome, and he often appeared dressed as a god in public and demanded worship as a living god. During this time he deposed Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, on suspicion of consorting with Parthia (Josephus, Ant. 18.7). Caligula also ordered that his statue be placed in the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple (Philo, Embassy 203). Petronius, the governor of Syria, knowing that such an act would lead to civil war, refused to comply and appealed to Caligula to reverse the order. In response, Caligula sent an order to Petronius that he commit suicide. Fortunately, news of Caligula’s assassination by a conspiracy involving the praetorian guard and senators reached Petronius first.
Claudius, Caligula’s uncle, reigned in the years AD 41–54, and his rule was defined by numerous public works, a reordering of the judicial system, a torrid series of marriages, the conquest of Britain, and a number of attempted coups by the Roman senate. In AD 49 he expelled the Jews from Rome because of disputes about a certain “Chrestus,” probably Christ (cf. Acts 18:2). No one is sure whether Claudius was murdered or died of old age, but he remained a sharp contrast to the brutal excesses of Caligula and Nero.
Nero, the stepson of Claudius, reigned in the years AD 54–68. The early period of his rule was marked by cultural endeavors and diplomatic efforts. The later years were, in contrast, distinguished by tyranny and self-aggrandizement. There was a Jewish revolt against Rome in Judea (AD 66–70) during Nero’s reign, and Vespasian was sent to pacify the territory. According to ancient sources, Nero accused Christians of starting the fire of Rome in AD 64 and subjected them to the cruelest of punishments, including crucifixion, being thrown to wild animals, and even being burned alive. It probably was during this time that the apostles Peter and Paul were martyred in Rome. Nero eventually was declared a public enemy by the Roman senate, and he committed suicide before he could be captured in AD 68. There arose a “Nero redivivus” legend, whereby many hoped or feared that Nero had not died in AD 68 but had fled to Parthia and would return to Rome in order to destroy it (Sib.Or. 4.119–124; 5.137–141, 361–396), and this arguably stands behind the imagery of Rev. 13:3; 17:8–11.
The suicide of Nero left a power vacuum in Rome, and AD 69 saw no less than four emperors ascend the throne: Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and finally Vespasian. Galba was governor of Hispania Tarraconensis and was invited to become emperor by the senate, but he was killed by the praetorian guard after they were bribed by the praetor Otho. Otho himself committed suicide after his forces were defeated by Vitellius, the commander of the legions on the Rhine. Vitellius became emperor, but he was fiscally irresponsible and murdered many of his rivals. The legions in the Danube, Egypt, Syria, and Judea had declared Vespasian emperor and marched on Rome. Vespasian controlled the grain supplies to Rome from Egypt and had a superior force. Vitellius’s forces were defeated at Bedriacum, and Vitellius went into hiding but eventually was killed in Rome. Vespasian was declared emperor by the senate, and so began the Flavian dynasty, which restored order after the chaos of civil war.
The Flavians ruled in the years AD 69–96. Vespasian (r. AD 69–79) consolidated the empire after its year of strife and instituted new taxes, such as the fiscus judaicus, a war reparation tax placed on all Jews and paid to the temple of Jupiter in lieu of the Jerusalem temple tax. Vespasian was succeeded by his sons Titus (r.AD 79–81) and Domitian (r. AD 81–96). When Vespasian sailed to Rome from Judea, Titus was left in charge of the siege of Jerusalem, which he completed and celebrated in a triumph in Rome in AD 72. This triumph is memorialized in the Arch of Titus, which depicts Roman soldiers bringing the vessels of the temple to Rome as part of the booty taken. Later Roman writers regarded Domitian as a malevolent and malicious tyrant (e.g., Tacitus, Suetonius), but this probably is an exaggeration caused partly by a desire to highlight the greatness of succeeding emperors such as Nerva and Trajan. It probably was during the reign of Domitian that some Christians in Asia Minor were being persecuted for their failure to worship the emperor, as depicted in the book of Revelation.
Table 7. Roman Emperors (31 BC–AD 117)
31 BC-AD 14 – Augustus
AD 14-37 – Tiberius
AD 37-41 – Caligula
AD 41-54 – Claudius
AD 54-68 – Nero
AD 68-69 – Galba
AD 69 – Otho
AD 69 – Vitellius
AD 69-79 – Vespasian
AD 79-81 – Titus
AD 81-96 – Domitian
AD 96-98 – Nerva
AD 98-117 – Trajan
Military
Military expeditions expanded Rome’s control of foreign territories and safeguarded its borders from incursion, most threateningly from the Germanic tribes east of the Rhine River and north of the Danube River and from the Parthian (=Neo-Persian) Empire east of the Euphrates River. A Roman legion consisted of around six thousand men, including cavalry. Under Tiberius, there were twenty-five legions stationed across the empire: eight on the Rhine, three in Spain, two in Egypt, four in Syria, two in Africa, and six in the Danube region. In terms of command structures, the legions were under the control of certain regional commands by men of consular rank, including two on the Rhine, one in Spain, one in Syria, and three in the Balkans (Tacitus, Ann. 4.5). These were among the most powerful persons outside the ruling family and could be kingmakers or contenders during times of civil war. A legion was divided into ten cohorts and commanded by a legate, usually of senatorial rank. Units of one hundred were commanded by centurions, and service in the legions was set at between twenty and twenty-five years. Upon recruitment, the soldier swore an oath of loyalty to the emperor (sacramentum) that was renewed annually. During times of peace, Roman soldiers could perform a number of civil tasks relating to taxation, building projects, and policing.
Centurions are mentioned several times in the NT (e.g., Matt. 8:5; Mark 15:39; Acts 10:1; 21:32; 27:1). There is a mention of a “legion” of demons that oppressed the Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:9), and Jesus refers to the possibility of the Father sending him “legions” of angels (Matt. 26:53). Military terminology is very apparent in Paul’s letters, where he refers to fighting armor (Rom. 13:11–13; 2Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:10–18), compares commitment to Christ to military service (2Tim. 2:4), refers to his coworkers as “soldiers” or “fellow soldiers” (Phil. 2:25; Philem. 2; 2Tim. 2:3), and likens ministerial remuneration to a soldier being paid his salarium (1Cor. 9:7).
Culture and Religion
One of the primary reasons for Rome’s rise and dominance, militarily and culturally, was its capacity to absorb other peoples and even other gods into its constituency and pantheon. Its constantly growing pantheon, application of the rule of law, and superior military force made Rome what it was: a melting pot of all cultures and a Romanizer of other cultures.
Roman society was heavily stratified, but social mobility, upward and downward, was possible. Wealth, marriage, education, and military exploits were the primary means to social advancement. The senatorial class represented the wealthy nobility of Rome and provided the primary cohort of civil and military administrators. The equestrian class (or “knights,” as they are sometimes called) were a larger group of less wealthy Roman citizens. Decurions were members of civil councils in provincial cities who often acted as magistrates and were leaders of local communities. The plebeians represented the general citizenry of Rome, who, until the time of Tiberius, had some power in electing officials. Finally, there were freedmen, who were ex-slaves usually in a relationship with their former master, and also slaves, who were regarded as little more than property.
The ancient Roman religions focused on the numen, the somewhat impersonal divine power associated with certain localities. From the third century BC, Greek deities were assimilated and Romanized, so that Zeus became Jupiter, and Vesta was identified as Hestia. The Capitoline Hill was crowned with a temple that was dedicated around 500 BC to Jupiter, Minerva, and Juno. These were the principal gods of Rome, although others were added to the pantheon as the Romans conquered other peoples and adopted their gods. Other gods also received greater honor, such as the goddess Pax, the personification of peace (based on the Greek goddess Eirene); Vespasian built and dedicated a temple in her honor in Rome in AD 75. The Roman emperor was the Pontifex Maximus and supreme high priest of Rome and the empire. In the mid- to late first century AD, the fastest-growing religion was the imperial cult, the worship of (usually) deceased Roman emperors. This cult became popular in the eastern Mediterranean cities, where worship of rulers was commonplace, but was regarded with indifference in Rome.
Religions and philosophies from all over the known world eventually made their way to Rome. Egyptian rites and religions gained followings, Mithraism acquired currency within the ranks of the military and among public servants, Judaism entered Rome probably with the Hasmonean delegation sent there around 139 BC, and Christianity came to Rome probably during the late 30s and early 40s of the first century AD through Jewish pilgrims visiting the east and through Judean immigration to Rome. Many Roman intellectuals lamented the fact that so many foreign superstitions had found their way to Rome, and that Roman peoples found them more attractive than their own state religion. Roman religion was largely controlled by the state through a set calendar and the appointment of priests and vestal virgins. It was practiced in public and in the home. As such, religious life was very much intertwined with social and political life. Roman religion engendered the need for its citizens to act with pietas, the honoring of one’s obligations to the gods, and with religio, which designated appropriate scruples and rites in the presence of the gods.
Summary
The birth of the church and the growth of Christianity took place within the wider social, religious, and cultural context of the Greco-Roman world. The politics and power of the Roman Empire provide the backdrop for the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:1), and since Rome was considered to be the center of the world, it was necessary that Paul himself testify to Jesus Christ there (Acts 19:21). The history, literature, and cultural background of Rome form an important background to the NT and should be studied along with the history and literature of Judaism during the time of Jesus and the apostles. Although the Romans were the primary threat to the survival of Christians in the ancient world, after the conversion of Constantine in the fourth century AD, they became the primary means by which Christianity spread to the rest of Europe and western Asia. See also Roman Law.
Ancient Ephesus was located on the western coast of AsiaMinor (modern-day Turkey). This cosmopolitan and multiethnic seaportcity of some quarter of a million people was one of the largest andmost important cities in the Roman Empire. Ephesus experiencedtremendous growth during the reign of Caesar Augustus, who elevatedthe city to the capital of the province of Asia. The city became acenter of international trade (because of its location), of finance(the main treasury for the tax collectors in Asia), and ofcommunications (the base for a group of Roman military couriers).
Ephesusitself was an impressive place, featuring modern roads, a businessmarket, a civic center, expensive homes, public baths, a stadium, agymnasium, temples to various gods and emperors, a concert hall, animpressive library, and much more. Two particular landmarks wouldhave stood out to visitors. First was a theater that seated almosttwenty-five thousand people. This is the place where the silversmithDemetrius led the crowd to riot in opposition to Paul (see Acts19:23–41). Second was the temple of Artemis, a structure aboutfour times as large as the Parthenon in Athens. The building measured130 meters by 70 meters and contained 127 columns that were 2 metersin diameter and 20 meters high. The temple served as the mostimportant financial institution in Asia. Many ancient lists includedthe temple of Artemis as one of the seven wonders of the ancientworld.
Religiously,Artemis was the most important deity to the people of Ephesus. Atleast two major festivals were held in honor of Artemis, in which theEphesians celebrated with competitions and religious processions. Thecity also featured other religions and cults, including worship ofthe Roman emperor. There were several temples dedicated to emperorsat Ephesus, including one to Domitian (likely the emperor whenRevelation was written), built around AD 89–90. The city wasalso a center for the practice of magic and occult arts. In Acts19:18–19 we read about new Christians turning away from thepractice and burning their magic books (worth “fifty thousanddrachmas”—i.e., the wages for fifty thousand days ofwork).
Theapostle Paul’s ministry in Asia was strongly connected toEphesus (see Acts 18–20). After serving the church in Corinthfor nearly two years (18:11), Paul went to Ephesus accompanied byPriscilla and Aquila, the couple who later instructed Apollos(18:26). Paul reasoned with the Jews in the synagogue for a shorttime before leaving for Antioch (18:19–22). On his thirdmissionary tour, Paul came to Ephesus (18:24; 19:1), where he sharedthe gospel of Jesus Christ with twelve disciples of John the Baptist(19:1–7). He taught in the synagogue for three months, butlater he moved to the lecture hall of Tyrannus, where he ministeredfor two years with tremendous results (Acts 19:8–20; cf. 1Cor.16:8). When conversions to Christ hurt sales of Artemis idols, thelocal silversmiths started a riot in the theater against theChristians (Acts 19:23–41; cf. 1Cor. 15:32). Paul thenleft Ephesus for Macedonia (Acts 20:1) and spent the winter inCorinth. On his return trip to Jerusalem, he stopped in nearbyMiletus, where he met with the Ephesian elders (20:16–38). Paulmade it to Jerusalem but was arrested and eventually transferred toRome. Many think that Paul wrote the Letter to the Ephesians fromRome (AD 60–62). Paul’s coworkers Timothy (1Tim.1:3), Onesiphorus (2Tim. 1:18), and Tychicus (2Tim. 4:12)are associated with his ministry in Ephesus.
Earlychurch tradition says that the apostle John lived in Ephesus towardthe end of his life. Also, the church in Ephesus received the firstof the letters to the seven churches of Asia (Rev. 1:11; 2:1–7).The church in Ephesus was commended for its perseverance anddoctrinal purity but faulted for abandoning its first love. Those whoovercame were promised access to the tree of life in paradise, animage contrasting with the sacred tree shrine in the temple ofArtemis.
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).
Understanding many aspects of education in Israel during OT times and, to a lesser extent, into the NT period is extraordinarily difficult. Many studies draw quite specific conclusions based on very slender evidence and inferences drawn from supposed parallels with neighboring societies, inferences themselves beset by uncertainties. Therefore, conclusions are necessarily tentative at many points. Furthermore, it is reasonable to expect that things did not remain constant through history, and that what can be reliably discerned for one period may not accurately reflect the situation in other times.
Education encompasses several areas of life in the biblical world. Aside from academic education (relating to literacy and numeracy), there was moral and religious education, military education, and vocational training. These are not all distinct; those whose vocation lay in diplomatic circles or within the royal court as scribes would have received academic education, while those living in the country and working a farm would have had little opportunity to access such knowledge.
Old Testament
Settings for education. There were three primary arenas of education in OT times: home, school, and temple.
Home. The most important setting for education in OT times was the home (Deut. 4:9; 6:7; 11:19). Both parents were expected to play a role in a child’s education (Prov. 1:8; 6:20; 23:22; 31:1). Sons generally were trained in their father’s vocation, and such training took the form of an apprenticeship (1Sam. 16:11; 2Kings 4:18); girls learned from their mothers as they undertook their work on a daily basis (Exod. 35:25–26; 2Sam. 13:8).
In part, the extent of home education is tied to the question of the extent of formal schooling in ancient Israel. As noted below, the nature and extent of schools is unclear, and if (as the evidence seems to suggest) schools were virtually nonexistent outside the royal court, then the home ultimately would have been the locus of any academic education received by children and the source of any widespread literacy and numeracy in the community. The frequent use of father/son language in Proverbs, however, need not imply an exclusively familial context for the instruction contained therein, as there is evidence from Egypt that such language was used between teacher and student.
School. The existence, nature, and extent of schools in OT times is extensively debated and ultimately uncertain. The first explicit reference to a school is found in the second century BC in Sir. 51:23. The virtual silence of the OT on the topic may reflect either that schools were absent in ancient Israel or that their existence was somehow of little interest and so warranted little reflection by biblical authors. In any case, it is likely that some form of school for scribes and those training to work in government existed in the vicinity of the royal court, as they did in Mesopotamia and Egypt. These did not form a comprehensive national schooling system for young children but were more specifically targeted to the few individuals who aimed to become scribes or advisers.
Outside the Bible there exist a number of inscriptions that could suggest the existence of schools in Israel prior to the exile. These include abecedaries (lists of the letters of the alphabet written out, usually as practice exercises or as examples), words written out several times, lists of month names, and possible exercises in reading foreign languages, among others.
There is also extensive evidence of schools in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and probably also Ugarit from an early date (cf. Acts 7:22). Whether their existence supports the existence of schools in Israel is unclear. Egypt and Mesopotamia had large and complex bureaucracies necessary to administer their kingdoms, and they employed writing systems far more difficult to master than Hebrew. In addition, mathematical texts reflect a concern with numeracy within the schools of these kingdoms, for which there is no clear evidence in ancient Israel.
The sages and scribes appear to be the primary source for the material supposedly employed in schools. Ecclesiastes 12:9 identifies one of the tasks of the sages as teaching the people, and some claim that Proverbs functioned as a textbook within a school setting. Indeed, Prov. 4:5; 17:16 speak of the “buying” (Heb. qanah) of knowledge, interpreted by some as a reference to teachers paid for providing tuition. Again, the context in which such tuition may have taken place is uncertain.
Temple. Priests were also involved in some teaching (1Sam. 2:21, 26). According to 2Chron. 17:7–9, King Jehoshaphat sent five officials, nine Levites, and two priests to teach the people of Judah from the Book of the Law, a point that stresses both the importance of the task and the probable failure of the home setting to adequately convey this instruction, at least by the late fifth century BC.
Types of education. In OT times four types of education can be discerned: moral and religious, academic, vocational, and military.
Moral and religious education. The Bible stresses the importance of moral and religious education above all other forms (Exod. 10:2; 12:26; 13:8; Deut. 4:9; 6:7, 20–21; 32:7, 46).
Academic education. The extent of literacy and numeracy in ancient Israel is difficult to ascertain. Rudimentary numeracy almost certainly was widespread and learned within the home and in the course of vocational training when necessary. Many among the population also appear to have been at least capable of reading and writing names or other simple texts (Deut. 6:9; 11:20; Judg. 8:14).
Vocational training. Most commonly, boys followed in their father’s vocation and thus learned through observation and participation. Under some circ*mstances, however, children served apprenticeships under the tutelage of others, such as was apparently the case for prophetic schools (2Kings 2:7; 4:38; 6:1–2; Amos 7:14–15).
Military training. There are clear indications that kings recruited mercenaries to form the most important part of their army (e.g., 1Sam. 22:2; 25:13). These mercenaries were paid and likely had received some formal training, but the nature of that training is nowhere explained. In addition to these elite forces, all able-bodied men apparently were considered eligible for military service when the need arose (2Chron. 25:5). So, for example, the elite troops were responsible for staging the attack (2Sam. 11:14–17; 12:26), while the remainder of the army served as reinforcements where necessary (2Sam. 12:29). The use of chariots (under David and Solomon) would have required some training, as would the wielding of various weapons (swords, spears, bows, and slings). Ultimately, however, there are only allusions to such training (e.g., Judg. 3:2; 2Sam. 22:35).
Educational methods. Throughout the ancient Near East there is evidence that corporal punishment played a significant role in education. There is a somewhat comical text from Mesopotamia that relates a day in the life of a student who receives physical punishment for virtually everything he does. Similarly, the book of Proverbs highlights the importance of discipline in raising and training children (e.g., 13:24; 22:15; 29:15, 17). Nonetheless, Proverbs uses “the rod” as a means to signify discipline as a whole without necessarily endorsing corporal punishment as the only or even the primary means of discipline. This is apparent because Proverbs contrasts the rod not with other, lesser forms of discipline but rather with no discipline at all. Thus, although there is evidence that corporal punishment was used extensively (and probably excessively [see Sir. 30]), Proverbs endorses a more nuanced approach to disciplining children.
Academic, religious, and moral education also involved the use of various techniques that facilitated learning. These included the use of poetry or poetic couplets (common in wisdom literature and in psalms), numerical sayings (e.g., Ps. 62:11; Prov. 6:16), and acrostics, as well as the celebration of feasts and memorials at various times throughout the year.
New Testament
Greco-Roman education. Greek education developed from about the fourth century BC and spread throughout the Mediterranean region, adopted with minor modification by the Romans. The curriculum was dominated by sports and a focus on literacy, with little place given to religious education (although philosophy was taught and did bear some religious traits). Education in the Greco-Roman world was expensive, and its provision was a parental responsibility, which tended to restrict formal education to the elite.
At about the age of fifteen, boys could move from elementary schooling to the gymnasium, where they received intellectual and physical training. Some in the Corinthian church may have received such an education, a possibility raised by Paul’s terminology in 1Corinthians that reflects educational language: his claim to be father of the Corinthian household (4:14–21); sporting imagery (esp. 9:24–27); language of nursing and nature (3:1–4); agricultural imagery (3:5–9); his threat to come with a rod (4:21), which could be related to the rod of correction; the term grammateus (1:20), which may refer to the gymnasium instructor; reference to writing (4:6); and talk of removing the marks of circumcision (7:18).
Education in Israel. One Jewish tradition states that in AD 63 the high priest Joshua benGamla decreed that every town should appoint a schoolteacher for the education of children of six or seven years of age. This, together with the existence of Sirach’s school more than two centuries earlier, indicates that some form of schooling existed within Israel in the first century AD.
Although some Jews throughout the ancient world received a standard Hellenistic education, others reacted against the influence of Hellenism and sought to educate their children within the Scriptures and Jewish tradition. The DSS refer to the importance placed on study of the Torah (1QS 6:6–7). There were also rabbinic schools that focused on such teaching.
By NT times, synagogues were well established. Although determining precisely what took place within the synagogues is difficult, indications are that the focus on Scripture and its exposition played an important role in teaching both its importance and the appropriate way to interpret it. Teaching, however, was not confined to synagogues or the temple, as is amply demonstrated by the frequency with which Jesus is described as teaching in a variety of settings. Nonetheless, the temple itself did appear to serve as a center for religious education, as is reflected in the account of the twelve-year-old Jesus’ interactions with the teachers at the temple (Luke 2:41–51). Jesus’ own teaching was remarkable, however, in that it was delivered with authority (Matt. 7:29; Mark 1:22; Luke 4:32).
Education in the church. Paul highlights one of the prerequisites for being an overseer of a church as the ability to teach, stressing the importance of the NT church as a place of learning (1Tim. 3:2; 2Tim. 2:2, 24). This teaching involved a familiarity with right doctrine in order to avoid being led astray, an exemplary life that modeled godly behavior for all to see, and the maturity required to apply discipline when necessary.
First Timothy, along with 2Timothy and Titus, is knownas one of the apostle Paul’s Pastoral Epistles. These lettershave earned this designation because they were addressed to pastorsand deal with particular problems that they were facing in theirrespective churches. This letter was addressed to Timothy, whom Paulaffectionately called “my son,” most likely because theapostle had led him to faith in Christ (1:18; cf. 1:2). At Paul’surging, Timothy took on the role of providing leadership to thechurch in Ephesus (1:3), which had been infiltrated by false teachers(1:3–4). Paul wrote this letter to Timothy, instructing him torebuke the false teachers in the church and to fight the good fightof faith (1:18). The apostle concisely summarized the major theme ofthis letter by saying, “I am writing you these instructions sothat ... you will know how people ought to conductthemselves in God’s household, which is the church of theliving God, the pillar and foundation of the truth” (3:14–15).
Authorshipand Date
Theauthenticity of the Pastoral Epistles has been questioned more thanthat of any of Paul’s other letters. This is due to differencesin style and theology as well as the difficulty in establishing theirplace in the travels of Paul in Acts. The letters, it is presumed,were written by a disciple of Paul after his death and were meant tobe a “testament” honoring the memory of Paul.
Despitethese claims, there is not enough evidence to overturn Paulineauthorship. Differences in theology can be accounted for by thedifferent circ*mstances addressed. Stylistic differences may havearisen from Paul’s use of an amanuensis (scribe) to write theletter, a common practice in the ancient world (see Rom. 16:22). Interms of their time of writing, the Pastorals were likely writtenafter Paul’s first Roman imprisonment and so after thenarrative of Acts. Paul expected to be released (Phil. 1:25; 2:24),and it is likely that his Jewish accusers never made the long andarduous trip from Jerusalem to Rome.
Evidencein support of Pauline authorship can also be found: (1)The manypersonal comments to Timothy (cf. 2Tim. 4:13) show that theletters are either authentic, or blatant forgeries, not “testaments”honoring the memory of Paul. (2)All of Paul’s keytheological themes appear in the Pastorals. (3)Paul makesnegative statements about himself that a disciple writing to honorPaul is unlikely to have made, for example, referring to himself asthe “worst” of sinners (1Tim. 1:15).
FirstTimothywas likely written between AD 63 and 66, after Paul’s releasefrom his first imprisonment in Rome (AD 62–63; cf. 3:14; Acts28:30–31).
Recipient
Timothycame from the city of Lystra in Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). Hisfather was Greek and his mother Jewish (Acts 16:1). Eunice, hismother, and Lois, his grandmother, brought him up under the influenceof the Jewish religion (2Tim. 1:5; 3:14–15). Timothygained a good reputation among the local believers, so Paul added himto his missionary team (Acts 16:2–3). He accompanied Paulduring his second and third missionary journeys (Acts 16:3; 17:14;18:5; 19:22; 20:4). Paul listed Timothy as the coauthor or cosenderin several of his letters (2Cor. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Col. 1:1;1Thess. 1:1; 2Thess. 1:1; Philem. 1) and included him inthe greetings that he sent to the church in Rome (Rom. 16:21). Inaddition, the apostle sent his protégé as a messengerto Thessalonica (1Thess. 3:1–6), Corinth (1Cor.4:17; 16:10), and Philippi (Phil. 2:19, 23). Because Timothy was bynature shy and timid, Paul had to exhort him to use his gifts and toboldly carry out his ministry (1Cor. 16:10; 1Tim. 4:12;5:23; 2Tim. 1:6–7).
Backgroundand Occasion
Duringhis third missionary journey, Paul warned the Ephesian church thatfalse teachers would arise from their midst (Acts 20:30). After hisfirst imprisonment in Rome (cf. Acts 28:16, 20, 30), the apostleaccompanied Timothy to Ephesus (1Tim. 1:3). They discoveredthat certain teachers were spreading “false doctrines” inthe church. According to 1Timothy, these false teachingsincluded a morbid interest in myths, old wives’ tales, andgenealogies. Some were promoting controversies, meaningless talk,incorrect teaching of the law, abstinence from marriage and certainfoods, and ungodly gossip (1:3–7; 4:3, 7; 5:13; 6:4–5).These false teachers also attempted to secure financial gain bypromoting their doctrines (6:3–5). Paul hoped to visit Ephesusagain (3:14), but in the meantime he wrote this letter instructingTimothy and the church leadership to correct these problems (1:3–4;3:15).
Paul’sinstructions to Timothy were not only to defend the church from falseteachers but also to give guidelines on the proper behavior for menand women in the church (2:1–15). He gave Timothy standards forselecting godly leaders (3:1–16) and practical advice ondealing with various age groups in the church (5:1–20).Throughout the book Paul exhorts his young protégé andthe church to lead a holy life (1:18; 2:8–15; 4:12–16;6:6–8, 11–14, 20).
Outline
I.Introduction (1:1–2)
II.Warning about False Teachers and Exhortation to Keep the Faith(1:3–20)
A.False teaching and false teachers of the law (1:3–11)
B.Paul, an example of God’s grace (1:12–17)
C.Exhortation to keep the faith in the midst of apostasy (1:18–20)
III.Prayer and Proper Behavior in the Church (2:1–15)
A.Prayer in the church (2:1–7)
B.Men and women in the worship service (2:8–15)
IV.Qualifications for Church Leaders (3:1–16)
A.Qualifications for elders (3:1–7)
B.Qualifications for deacons (3:8–13)
C.The purpose behind Paul’s instructions (3:14–16)
V.Correction of False Teaching (4:1–16)
A.Apostasy and false teaching (4:1–5)
B.Exhortation to confront apostasy (4:6–16)
VI.Responsibility toward Various Groups in the Church (5:1–6:19)
A.Relating to men and women in the church (5:1–2)
B.Responsibility toward widows (5:3–16)
C.Responsibilities toward elders (5:17–25)
D.Responsibility of slaves toward their masters (6:1–2)
E.Contrasting corrupt teachers with true godliness (6:3–10)
F.Pursuing the life of faith (6:11–16)
G.Instructing the wealthy (6:17–19)
VII.Closing Admonition and Benediction (6:20–21)
(1)Thedregs or residue, used metaphorically to speak of people’sremaining impurities (Ezek. 24:6, 11–12). (2)An amount of money or other valuable entrusted to another (Matt.25:27; Luke 19:23; 2 Tim. 1:14) or used as a down payment. In threeinstances in the NT the Greek word arrabōn is used to refer tothe Holy Spirit as the deposit that guarantees what is still to come(2Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph. 1:13–14). The last of thesepassages notes that the deposit of the Spirit in view is theredemption of God’s people, their future inheritance.
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).
Imprisonmentof Criminals
Incomparing modern society to that of biblical times, it is importantto acknowledge what is distinctive about prisons in many modernsocieties. Prisons serve multiple functions, including imposingincarceration as punishment for crimes committed, segregatingdangerous criminals from the larger population, deterring crime byimposing a negative incentive, and rehabilitating offenders so thatthey can eventually return to society. In many cases where modern lawimposes incarceration as the penalty for crime, ancient and biblicallaw imposed economic penalties (such as fines), corporal punishment(beatings), and capital punishment (death). In addition, many of thebiblical references to prisons and prisoners involve what in modernsociety would be considered political rather than criminalincarceration.
Thestory of Joseph prominently features an Egyptian prison. Joseph wasfalsely put in prison for the crime of molesting his master’swife (Gen. 39:19–20), while his companions were imprisoned forthe otherwise unspecified crime of causing offense to the king(40:1). As this story illustrates, the sentences were not of apredetermined duration, and release depended on the goodwill of theking (Gen. 40:13), a situation in which Paul also found himselfhundreds of years later during Roman times (Acts 24:27). When Josephimprisoned his brothers, it was on a presumption of guilt for thecrime of espionage (Gen. 42:16). In Roman times, in contrast, certainprisoners had a right to be put on trial eventually, if not quickly(Acts 25:27; see also 16:37). Imprisonment could also be imposed forfailure to pay a debt (Matt. 18:30). Joseph kept Simeon in prison asa guarantee that his brothers would fulfill a prior agreement (Gen.42:19, 24). In addition to specialized dungeons, prisoners could alsobe confined in houses (Jer. 37:15; Acts 28:16) and pits (Zech. 9:11).
PoliticalImprisonment
Ina number of biblical stories individuals are imprisoned for what wewould today describe as political or ideological reasons. Samson wasimprisoned by the Philistines in retaliation for the havoc that hehad wreaked in their land and probably to prevent further incidents(Judg. 16:21). While in prison, Samson was enslaved. SeveralIsraelite and Judean kings were imprisoned by their Mesopotamianoverlords for offenses ranging from failure to pay taxes to revolt,including Hoshea (2Kings 17:4), Jehoiachin (2Kings25:27–29), Manasseh (2Chron. 33:11), and Zedekiah (Jer.52:11). In some cases, the imprisonment of such elites was brutal andinvolved torture (2Chron. 33:11; Jer. 52:11), though Jehoiachinwas later released from prison and allowed to live out his captivityin some comfort (2Kings 25:27–29).
Inthe NT, individuals were also imprisoned for such crimes. Barabbaswas imprisoned by the Roman government of Judea for participating inan insurrection (Mark 15:7). Saul of Tarsus imprisoned a number ofChristians, apparently without what we would today recognize as anycriminal offense (Acts 8:3). Peter was imprisoned by Herod forpolitical gain (Acts 12:4). Paul and Silas were imprisoned fordisturbing the peace of Philippi (Acts 16:23).
Imprisonmentof Prophets
Aspecial case of political incarceration is the imprisonment ofprophets. From the point of view of the biblical writers, prophetswere imprisoned for speaking the truth to a powerful person who didnot want to hear it. From the point of view of those in power,imprisoning dissenters was an important way of suppressing opinionsthat could undermine the regime. In some cases, the imprisonment ofdissenters or troublemakers was a prelude to execution (John theBaptist and Jesus). The practice of imprisonment instead of immediateexecution may reflect the ambivalent attitude of rulers towardcontroversial prophets: they could not be allowed to move aboutfreely in society, but they had some status or right as prophet thatprevented their execution. In some cases, prophets managed toconfront a king without being punished, suggesting that there was acertain level of tolerance for them even when they were notsupportive of royal power, a tolerance that might have contributed tothe use of imprisonment instead of execution.
Ahabimprisoned Micaiah son of Imlah after he delivered an unfavorableoracle (1Kings 22:27). Similarly, Asa imprisoned Hanani theseer (2Chron. 16:10). These kings may have hoped that suchtreatment would coerce better news in the future. Jeremiah (Jer.37:15) and John the Baptist (Mark 6:17) were also imprisoned fordelivering unwelcome messages to those in power.
TheologicalSignificance
Inboth Testaments, release from prison is a symbol of God’ssalvation. The theme is prominent in the psalms, as in Ps. 146:7:“The Lord sets prisoners free” (see also Pss. 68:6;107:10; 142:7). In Acts 12:7 Peter is freed from prison by a divinelysent messenger. Paul wrote a number of letters from prison andidentified himself as a prisoner of Christ (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10;2Tim. 1:8; Philem. 1). Some texts refer in mythological termsto a prison that confines spirits or Satan (1Pet. 3:19; Rev.20:7).
Imprisonmentof Criminals
Incomparing modern society to that of biblical times, it is importantto acknowledge what is distinctive about prisons in many modernsocieties. Prisons serve multiple functions, including imposingincarceration as punishment for crimes committed, segregatingdangerous criminals from the larger population, deterring crime byimposing a negative incentive, and rehabilitating offenders so thatthey can eventually return to society. In many cases where modern lawimposes incarceration as the penalty for crime, ancient and biblicallaw imposed economic penalties (such as fines), corporal punishment(beatings), and capital punishment (death). In addition, many of thebiblical references to prisons and prisoners involve what in modernsociety would be considered political rather than criminalincarceration.
Thestory of Joseph prominently features an Egyptian prison. Joseph wasfalsely put in prison for the crime of molesting his master’swife (Gen. 39:19–20), while his companions were imprisoned forthe otherwise unspecified crime of causing offense to the king(40:1). As this story illustrates, the sentences were not of apredetermined duration, and release depended on the goodwill of theking (Gen. 40:13), a situation in which Paul also found himselfhundreds of years later during Roman times (Acts 24:27). When Josephimprisoned his brothers, it was on a presumption of guilt for thecrime of espionage (Gen. 42:16). In Roman times, in contrast, certainprisoners had a right to be put on trial eventually, if not quickly(Acts 25:27; see also 16:37). Imprisonment could also be imposed forfailure to pay a debt (Matt. 18:30). Joseph kept Simeon in prison asa guarantee that his brothers would fulfill a prior agreement (Gen.42:19, 24). In addition to specialized dungeons, prisoners could alsobe confined in houses (Jer. 37:15; Acts 28:16) and pits (Zech. 9:11).
PoliticalImprisonment
Ina number of biblical stories individuals are imprisoned for what wewould today describe as political or ideological reasons. Samson wasimprisoned by the Philistines in retaliation for the havoc that hehad wreaked in their land and probably to prevent further incidents(Judg. 16:21). While in prison, Samson was enslaved. SeveralIsraelite and Judean kings were imprisoned by their Mesopotamianoverlords for offenses ranging from failure to pay taxes to revolt,including Hoshea (2Kings 17:4), Jehoiachin (2Kings25:27–29), Manasseh (2Chron. 33:11), and Zedekiah (Jer.52:11). In some cases, the imprisonment of such elites was brutal andinvolved torture (2Chron. 33:11; Jer. 52:11), though Jehoiachinwas later released from prison and allowed to live out his captivityin some comfort (2Kings 25:27–29).
Inthe NT, individuals were also imprisoned for such crimes. Barabbaswas imprisoned by the Roman government of Judea for participating inan insurrection (Mark 15:7). Saul of Tarsus imprisoned a number ofChristians, apparently without what we would today recognize as anycriminal offense (Acts 8:3). Peter was imprisoned by Herod forpolitical gain (Acts 12:4). Paul and Silas were imprisoned fordisturbing the peace of Philippi (Acts 16:23).
Imprisonmentof Prophets
Aspecial case of political incarceration is the imprisonment ofprophets. From the point of view of the biblical writers, prophetswere imprisoned for speaking the truth to a powerful person who didnot want to hear it. From the point of view of those in power,imprisoning dissenters was an important way of suppressing opinionsthat could undermine the regime. In some cases, the imprisonment ofdissenters or troublemakers was a prelude to execution (John theBaptist and Jesus). The practice of imprisonment instead of immediateexecution may reflect the ambivalent attitude of rulers towardcontroversial prophets: they could not be allowed to move aboutfreely in society, but they had some status or right as prophet thatprevented their execution. In some cases, prophets managed toconfront a king without being punished, suggesting that there was acertain level of tolerance for them even when they were notsupportive of royal power, a tolerance that might have contributed tothe use of imprisonment instead of execution.
Ahabimprisoned Micaiah son of Imlah after he delivered an unfavorableoracle (1Kings 22:27). Similarly, Asa imprisoned Hanani theseer (2Chron. 16:10). These kings may have hoped that suchtreatment would coerce better news in the future. Jeremiah (Jer.37:15) and John the Baptist (Mark 6:17) were also imprisoned fordelivering unwelcome messages to those in power.
TheologicalSignificance
Inboth Testaments, release from prison is a symbol of God’ssalvation. The theme is prominent in the psalms, as in Ps. 146:7:“The Lord sets prisoners free” (see also Pss. 68:6;107:10; 142:7). In Acts 12:7 Peter is freed from prison by a divinelysent messenger. Paul wrote a number of letters from prison andidentified himself as a prisoner of Christ (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10;2Tim. 1:8; Philem. 1). Some texts refer in mythological termsto a prison that confines spirits or Satan (1Pet. 3:19; Rev.20:7).
In the NT the most common word used for “minister”is diakonos (e.g., 2Cor. 3:6), and for “ministry,”diakonia (e.g., 1Cor. 16:15 [NIV: “service”]).These words function as umbrella terms for NT writers to describe thewhole range of ministries performed by the church. They can describeeither a special ministry performed by an official functionary(1Cor. 3:5) or one performed by any believer (Rev. 2:19). Inthe early church, ministry was based not on institutional hierarchiesbut on services performed (1Tim. 3:1–13).
Theministry of Jesus.The church’s mind-set flows out of the way in which Jesusunderstood his ministry. He described his ministry pattern as that ofserving (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; John 13:4–17). Thus, hecalled his disciples to follow a model of leadership in the newcommunity that did not elevate them above others (Matt. 20:20–28;23:8–12; cf. 1Pet. 5:3).
Jesus’ministry provides the paradigm for the ministry of the church. The NTwriters describe the threefold ministry of Jesus as preaching,teaching, and healing (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; Mark 1:14, 21–22, 39;Acts 10:36–38). The disciples carried on the earthly ministryof Jesus by the power of the Spirit. They too engaged in preaching,teaching, and healing (Matt. 10:7–8; 28:19–20).
Theministry of the church.The church, because it is the body of Christ, continues theseministry responsibilities. In 1Pet. 4:10–11 is a summaryof the overarching ministries of the church, which include speakingthe words of God and serving. As a priesthood of believers (Exod.19:4–6; 1Pet. 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:5–6), individualmembers took responsibility for fulfilling the various tasks ofservice. Thus, all Christians are called to minister (Rom. 15:27;Philem. 13; 1Pet. 2:16). Even when a member strayed, it wasanother believer’s responsibility to confront that waywardperson and, if necessary, involve others in the body to help (Matt.18:15–20).
Althoughministry was the responsibility of all believers, there were thosewith special expertise whom Christ and the church set apart forparticular leadership roles (Eph. 4:11–12). Christ set apartApollos and Paul for special ministries (1Cor. 3:5; Eph. 3:7).The church called on special functionaries to carry out specificministries. For example, the early church appointed seven individualsto serve tables (Acts 6:2). They appointed certain ones to carry therelief fund collected for the Jerusalem Christians (2Cor. 8:19,23). As special functionaries, Paul, Apollos, Timothy, Titus, theelders, as well as others accepted the responsibility of teaching andpreaching and healing for the whole church.
Allthe ministries of the church, whether performed by believers ingeneral or by some specially appointed functionary, were based ongifts received from God (Rom. 12:1–8; 1Cor. 12:4–26).God gave individuals the abilities necessary to perform works ofservice (Acts 20:24; Eph. 4:11; Col. 4:17; 1Tim. 1:12; 1Pet.4:11). The NT, however, makes it clear that when it comes to one’srelationship and spiritual status before God, all Christians areequal. Yet in equality there is diversity of gifts and talents. Paulidentifies some gifts given to individuals for special positions:apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers (Eph. 4:11).The description here is of special ministry roles that Christ callscertain individuals to fulfill based on the gifts given to them. Theones fulfilling these roles did not do all the ministry of the churchbut rather equipped the rest of the body to do ministry (Eph.4:12–13). No one can boast in the gifts given to him or herbecause those gifts were given for ministry to others (1Cor.4:7). Thus, gifts lead to service, and in turn service results inleadership.
Itbecomes the responsibility of those who lead to equip others forministry. When others are equipped for ministry, they in turnminister and edify the whole body (Eph. 4:15–16; 2Tim.2:1–2). The goal of all ministry, according to Paul, is tobuild up a community of believers until all reach maturity in Christ(Rom. 15:15–17; 1Cor. 3:5–4:5; Eph. 4:12–16;1Thess. 2:19–20).
The letters of 1Timothy, 2Timothy, and Titus arereferred to as the Pastoral Letters (or Pastoral Epistles). This namereflects that these letters are directed to persons serving withpastoral responsibilities. They might be better called “missionaryletters,” since Timothy and Titus were serving in missionarysettings. But the traditional name “Pastorals” has beenused since the eighteenth century.
Authorship.Since the nineteenth century, many scholars have questioned thePauline authorship of these letters for several reasons. First,critics of Pauline authorship stress the differences in vocabularyand style from the other Pauline Letters. Indeed, the Pastorals doinclude some terminology that separates them from the rest of thePaulines. However, arguments based upon vocabulary and style aresomewhat subjective. Some who favor Pauline authorship suggest thepossible use of a secretary as a reason for style differences in thePastorals. Others suggest that the Pastorals are simply too short tomake much of vocabulary or style studies.
Asecond reason for questioning Pauline authorship has to do with thefact that the letters address elements not known until the secondcentury. Critics suggest that the heresy refuted in the letters andthe organizational features of the churches associated with thePastorals better fit the second century than a time when Paul wasalive. The heresy in the Pastorals has gnostic tendencies, andgnosticism is not known to have been fully developed until the secondcentury. Thus, some have suggested the letters were not written inthe first century. However, the problems in the Pastorals may reflectelements of gnosticism without implying that the heresy was fullydeveloped. The arguments about church organization seem to miss theemphasis of these letters. Paul did write about church offices suchas deacon and elder, but his focus seems to be on the gifts andcharacter of the individuals in leadership positions of the churchrather than on describing the function of the offices. The book ofActs demonstrates that the position of elder existed in at least someof the Pauline churches (14:23; 20:17). Therefore, Pauline authorshipis not ruled out by these arguments.
Scholarsalso question the Pauline authorship of these letters because ofproposed doctrinal differences. They allege that the Pastorals do notemphasize key Pauline doctrines. Also, at times in the Pastorals theauthor appears to argue for an existing body of teaching to bedefended (1Tim. 4:6), which, it is argued, reflects a latertime frame. However, Paul’s arguments are often driven by thecontext of the audience to whom he is writing, and claiming to knowwhat Paul would have written seems highly speculative.
Finally,the events of the Pastorals do not fit with Paul’s journeysdescribed in Acts. Opponents of Pauline authorship of the Pastoralssuggest that the discrepancy is related to a second-century writer.Those who defend Pauline authorship of these letters suggest thatPaul was released from the Acts 28 imprisonment and later imprisonedagain in Rome. Thus, references to Paul’s travels cannot beplaced within the description of Paul’s life in Acts becausethey happened at a later date.
Scholarswho oppose Pauline authorship of these letters argue for pseudonymousauthorship, normally by an associate of Paul at some point in thesecond century. The early church, however, typically opposed theacceptance of pseudonymous writings into the NT. One need not appealto pseudonymity when dealing with the Pastorals if Paul was releasedfrom his first Roman imprisonment and later imprisoned there again.
Audience.These letters are addressed to Paul’s companions Timothy andTitus while they were at Ephesus and Crete respectively. Paulencouraged Timothy to stop the false teaching in Ephesus (1Tim.1:3–4), and 1Timothy is filled with encouragement forTimothy to instruct the people in Ephesus about right living andbelief (3:14–15; 4:11; 6:2). The Second Letter to Timothyfocuses more on Timothy and his ministry than does the first letter(2Tim. 1:6–8, 13; 2:1; 4:1–2). Titus was written tohelp Paul’s companion as he appointed elders and set thingsright in Crete (Titus 1:5).
Ineach of the Pastorals, Paul encouraged and instructed his friends tobe faithful in the ministry given to them.
The letters of 1Timothy, 2Timothy, and Titus arereferred to as the Pastoral Letters (or Pastoral Epistles). This namereflects that these letters are directed to persons serving withpastoral responsibilities. They might be better called “missionaryletters,” since Timothy and Titus were serving in missionarysettings. But the traditional name “Pastorals” has beenused since the eighteenth century.
Authorship.Since the nineteenth century, many scholars have questioned thePauline authorship of these letters for several reasons. First,critics of Pauline authorship stress the differences in vocabularyand style from the other Pauline Letters. Indeed, the Pastorals doinclude some terminology that separates them from the rest of thePaulines. However, arguments based upon vocabulary and style aresomewhat subjective. Some who favor Pauline authorship suggest thepossible use of a secretary as a reason for style differences in thePastorals. Others suggest that the Pastorals are simply too short tomake much of vocabulary or style studies.
Asecond reason for questioning Pauline authorship has to do with thefact that the letters address elements not known until the secondcentury. Critics suggest that the heresy refuted in the letters andthe organizational features of the churches associated with thePastorals better fit the second century than a time when Paul wasalive. The heresy in the Pastorals has gnostic tendencies, andgnosticism is not known to have been fully developed until the secondcentury. Thus, some have suggested the letters were not written inthe first century. However, the problems in the Pastorals may reflectelements of gnosticism without implying that the heresy was fullydeveloped. The arguments about church organization seem to miss theemphasis of these letters. Paul did write about church offices suchas deacon and elder, but his focus seems to be on the gifts andcharacter of the individuals in leadership positions of the churchrather than on describing the function of the offices. The book ofActs demonstrates that the position of elder existed in at least someof the Pauline churches (14:23; 20:17). Therefore, Pauline authorshipis not ruled out by these arguments.
Scholarsalso question the Pauline authorship of these letters because ofproposed doctrinal differences. They allege that the Pastorals do notemphasize key Pauline doctrines. Also, at times in the Pastorals theauthor appears to argue for an existing body of teaching to bedefended (1Tim. 4:6), which, it is argued, reflects a latertime frame. However, Paul’s arguments are often driven by thecontext of the audience to whom he is writing, and claiming to knowwhat Paul would have written seems highly speculative.
Finally,the events of the Pastorals do not fit with Paul’s journeysdescribed in Acts. Opponents of Pauline authorship of the Pastoralssuggest that the discrepancy is related to a second-century writer.Those who defend Pauline authorship of these letters suggest thatPaul was released from the Acts 28 imprisonment and later imprisonedagain in Rome. Thus, references to Paul’s travels cannot beplaced within the description of Paul’s life in Acts becausethey happened at a later date.
Scholarswho oppose Pauline authorship of these letters argue for pseudonymousauthorship, normally by an associate of Paul at some point in thesecond century. The early church, however, typically opposed theacceptance of pseudonymous writings into the NT. One need not appealto pseudonymity when dealing with the Pastorals if Paul was releasedfrom his first Roman imprisonment and later imprisoned there again.
Audience.These letters are addressed to Paul’s companions Timothy andTitus while they were at Ephesus and Crete respectively. Paulencouraged Timothy to stop the false teaching in Ephesus (1Tim.1:3–4), and 1Timothy is filled with encouragement forTimothy to instruct the people in Ephesus about right living andbelief (3:14–15; 4:11; 6:2). The Second Letter to Timothyfocuses more on Timothy and his ministry than does the first letter(2Tim. 1:6–8, 13; 2:1; 4:1–2). Titus was written tohelp Paul’s companion as he appointed elders and set thingsright in Crete (Titus 1:5).
Ineach of the Pastorals, Paul encouraged and instructed his friends tobe faithful in the ministry given to them.
Theterm “predestination” means “to determine or decidesomething beforehand.” Some form of the Greek verb proorizō(“to determine beforehand”)occurs six times in the NT (Acts 4:28; Rom. 8:29, 30; 1Cor.2:7; Eph. 1:5, 11). It is practically synonymous with the concept offoreordination and is closely related to divine foreknowledge (Acts2:23; Rom. 8:29; 1Pet. 1:1–2, 20). Various Scripturesindicate that God the Father is the one who predestines (John17:6–10; Rom. 8:29; Eph. 1:3–5; 1Pet. 1:2).
Thespecific objects of predestination are humans, angels, and theMessiah. These divine predeterminations occurred before the creationof the world and were motivated by the love of God (Eph. 1:4–5).In regard to humans, this means that in eternity past, God determinedthat some individuals would be the recipients of his salvation.However, this determination does not rule out the necessity of humanchoice, responsibility, and faith. The decision to predestine someindividuals for salvation was based not upon anything good or bad inthe recipients, but solely on God’s good pleasure and accordingto his holy, wise, and eternal purpose (Isa. 46:10; Acts 13:48; Rom.11:33).
Predestinationas Part of God’s Larger Plan
Thescope of God’s plan. Predestinationis a part of God’s all-encompassing eternal plan (Isa.40:13–14; Rom. 11:34; Eph. 1:11). Several terms express God’splan. Among these are his “decree” (Ps. 2:7), “eternalpurpose” (Eph. 3:11), “foreknowledge” (Acts 2:23),and “will” (Eph. 1:9, 11). God’s plan involves allthings that come to pass, including major and insignificant events,direct and indirect causes, things appointed and things permitted. Ittherefore encompasses both good and evil (Ps. 139:16; Prov. 16:4;Isa. 14:24–27; 22:11; 37:26–27; 46:9–10; Acts 2:23;4:27–28; Eph. 1:11; 2:10).
Theinclusion of evil in the plan of God does not mean that he condones,authorizes, or commits moral evil. The apostle John stresses that Godis light and that there is no darkness in him at all (1John1:5). He is absolutely holy and cannot be charged with the commissionof sin (Hab. 1:13). When addressing the topic of God’s plan andpurpose, the biblical authors are careful to distinguish betweendivine causation and human responsibility. Both fall under thepurview of God’s plan. There is divine certainty about whatwill happen, but moral agents are never under compulsion to commitevil (see Acts 4:28; Rom. 9:11; 1Cor. 2:7; 11:2; Heb. 2:5,10–16; 1Pet. 1:2, 20; 2Pet. 3:17). For example,when Luke refers to the greatest miscarriage of justice in thehistory of the world, the crucifixion of Christ, he indicates that itwas predestined by God, but the moral turpitude of the act isattributed to “wicked men” (Acts 2:23). The dual natureof such events is aptly reflected in Joseph’s statement to hisbrothers who sold him into slavery: “You meant evil against me,but God meant it for good” (Gen. 50:20 NASB).
Whereasthe all-encompassing plan of God relates to his sovereign controlover all things, predestination appears to be restricted primarily tocertain divine decisions affecting humans, angels, and the Messiah(Isa. 42:1–7; Acts 2:23; 1Tim. 5:21; 1Pet. 1:20;2:4). With reference to humans, Paul states, “In him we werealso chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him whoworks out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will”(Eph. 1:11). Some scholars limit predestination to those things “inhim,” thus linking this work of God to his purpose insalvation. Others argue that the following phrase, “who worksout everything in conformity with the purpose of his will,”demonstrates that all things fall under the purview of God’scontrolling and guiding purpose (Eph. 1:11). It seems best to see thephrase “in him” as indicating the sphere in whichbelievers are chosen and the term “predestinated” as onecrucial aspect of the greater plan of God.
Divineforeknowledge and election. Sometheologians argue that election and predestination are merely basedupon God’s foreknowledge of those who will believe in him.Although God surely knows all those who will believe, the term“foreknowledge” connotes much more than simply knowingahead of time who will come to faith. It means that God hassovereignly chosen to know some individuals in such an intimate waythat it moved him to predestine them to eternal life (Rom. 8:29).Whereas the term “election” refers to God’ssovereign choice of those individuals, “predestination”looks forward toward the goal of that selection. Both predestinationand election occur in eternity past (Eph. 1:4–5).
Thepurpose of predestination. Whereaselection refers to God’s choice of individuals, predestinationlooks toward the purpose and goal of that choice. NT believers aredesignated as chosen by God and appointed to eternal life (Acts13:48; Eph. 1:4). The express purpose is that they be adopted as hischildren (Eph. 1:5) and, as beloved children, become “conformedto the image of his Son” (Rom. 8:29). The idea is that thosewhom God has chosen are predestined in view of the purpose that hedesires to fulfill in them, that of becoming his children who areconformed to the image of his Son. The ultimate purpose behind thisplan is to bring glory to God (Eph. 1:5–6, 11–12).
Predestinationand Reprobation
Inhis plan, God has chosen some individuals, nations, groups, andangels to fulfill special purposes, implying that other individuals,nations, groups, and angels have not been selected for those samepurposes (2Thess. 2:13; 2Tim. 2:10; 1Pet. 1:2).With regard to God’s choice in salvation, this has led sometheologians to argue that those not chosen for salvation are bydefault chosen for eternal damnation. They maintain thatpredestination applies not only to individuals whom God plans tosave, but also to those whom he does not plan to save (Prov. 16:4;Matt. 26:23–24; Rom. 9:10–13, 17–18, 21–22;2Tim. 2:20; 1Pet. 2:8; 2Pet. 2:3, 9; Jude 4; Rev.13:8; 20:15). This is sometimes called “reprobation.” Thebelief in the combined concepts of election and reprobation has beencalled “double predestination.”
Whilesome scholars in the history of the church have argued that God isjust as active in determining the reprobate as he is the elect,others have pointed out that God’s condemnation of the nonelectis based solely upon their sin and unbelief. A real distinctionexists in the level of divine involvement with regard to the destinyof one class as compared with the other. God does not appear to havethe same relationship to every event or thing in his creation. Thedegree of divine causation in each case differs. Scripture recognizesa difference between God’s direct working and his permissivewill. In this view, God directly chooses some to be saved; however,he does not choose the others to be damned but rather passes them by,allowing them to continue on their own way and eventually suffer thejust punishment that their sins deserve.
Whicheverview one takes, it seems that the Scripture does not teachreprobation in the same way it teaches predestination leading toeternal life. Whereas the assignment to eternal death is a judicialact taking into account a person’s sin, predestination untoeternal life is purely an act of God’s sovereign grace andmercy not taking into account any actions by those chosen. Carryingthe teaching of reprobation to the extreme threatens to view God ascapricious, which clearly is not scriptural (1John 1:5).
Predestinationand Human Responsibility
Godwas in no way obligated or morally impelled to choose or predestineanyone to eternal life. His determination not to choose everyone inno way impinges upon his holy and righteous character (Rom. 9:13). Onthe contrary, justice would demand that all receive the punishmentthat they have rightly earned for their sins (Rom. 3:23; 6:23).Therefore, the predestination of some to become like his Son requiredthat God exercise grace and mercy in providing for the cleansing oftheir sin, which he accomplished through the sacrifice of his belovedSon, Jesus Christ (Acts 2:23).
God’spredetermined plan does not force individuals to respond inpredetermined ways, either to accept him or to reject him. In the onecase, the sinner is drawn by God to himself but must also choose toplace trust in Christ (John 6:37, 44). Even in the radicalintervention of God in the life of Saul on the road to Damascus,where the divine call was indeed overpowering, Saul was givenopportunity to respond either positively or negatively. In the caseof those who are headed for eternal judgment, God’s working isnot fatalistic or mechanistic in the sense that a person may want tochoose God but God’s predetermined plan will not allow such aresponse. To the contrary, all are invited to come to Christ (Matt.11:28; John 3:16). The apostle John clarifies, “Whoever comesto me I will never drive away” (John 6:37 [cf. Matt. 11:28]).Those who do not come to God refuse to do so by their own volition(Matt. 23:37; John 5:40). They are not merely unable to come to Godbut unwilling to do so (John 5:40; 6:65; Rom. 3:11). The NT teachesthat Christ died for their sins (John 3:16), pleadingly warns them torepent, and cites their transgressions as the reason for theircondemnation (1Pet. 2:8; 2Pet. 2:21–22; Jude 8–16).When all aspects of the issue are considered, there is indeed amystery that lies outside the boundaries of our comprehensionregarding God’s sovereign working and human choice.
A literary device whereby an author writes under a name otherthan his or her own (a pseu-donym) or a book is deliberately assignedto a fictitious author (pseudepigraphy). In the case of ancientJewish practice, the name borrowed was usually that of some famousworthy of the past (e.g., Enoch, Ezra), with the aim of bolsteringthe credentials of the book to which the name was attached. This is acommon phenomenon in the Apocrypha (e.g., 2Esdras, Baruch,Epistle of Jeremiah). It is even more common in the large collectionof Second Temple texts now known as the Pseudepigrapha (e.g.,1Enoch, Odes of Solomon, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs).(See also Pseudepigrapha.)
Scholarscontinue to debate the morality of pseudonymity and whether it isproper for a pseudonymous book to be placed within the canon ofScripture. Some excuse pseudonymity as a mere stylistic device orexplain it as a culturally accepted convention. Others put a positivespin on the phenomenon, and so, for example, claim that in thePastoral Epistles literate disciples of Paul sought to apply hisideas to newly developing situations in the years following hisdeath. Some argue that such deception for a good cause is legitimatebecause it helped to gain a hearing for orthodox teaching. Otherstotally reject pseudepigraphy, viewing it as little better thandeception and forgery and thus unworthy of literature viewed asinspired by God. The last approach seems to be most consistent with ahigh view of Scripture.
Overthe last two hundred years a number of biblical books have beenidentified by some scholars as pseudonymous, notably Daniel in theOT, and in the NT six letters in the Pauline corpus—Ephesians,Colossians, 2Thessalonians, and the Pastoral Epistles (1–2Timothy, Titus)—together with 2Peter and Jude.
OldTestament
Certainlyone mark of Jewish apocalyptic works is pseudonymity, and the book ofDaniel is often viewed by critical scholars as no exception to thisrule. It is difficult, however, to see how the name “Daniel”would have served to give the OT book named after him the desiredauthority, which is a major motivation for attaching a pseudonym.
Apartfrom the book itself, we essentially know nothing about this Daniel,whom it describes as living in Babylonia during the exile. In thebook of Ezekiel we have two references to a Daniel (Ezek. 14:14, 20).In this passage the prophet says that when the land sins against God,“even if these three men—Noah, Daniel and Job—werein it, they could save only themselves by their righteousness.”There is, in addition, the further reference in Ezek. 14:16 to “thesethree men,” obviously referring to the same three men. Ezekielspeaks of these three men as embodiments of righteousness, but thefact that this Daniel figure is placed between two ancients (Noah andJob) suggests that he too is a figure of antiquity, not acontemporary of Ezekiel.
Ezekiel28:3 taunts the king of Tyre: “Are you wiser than Daniel? Is nosecret hidden from you?” Here “Daniel” (the Hebrewtext at Ezek. 28:3 actually reads “Danel”) obviously is aproverbial figure of wisdom, and this implies that he may have beenwell known in Tyre and therefore could well have beenSyro-Phoenician. There is in fact a “Danel” figurementioned in Ugaritic literature (before 1200 BC). On the other hand,the Daniel of the book of Daniel is not a patriarch like Enoch, Noah,and Job, nor is he a famous figure like Ezra or the assistant to aprophet, as Baruch was to Jeremiah. Daniel is known only through thebook that bears his name. In other words, the usual motivationexplaining the use of a pseudonym does not apply to the canonicalbook of Daniel.
Also,the closing up and sealing of the book (Dan. 8:26; 12:4) is no meredevice necessitated by using as a pseudonym the name of a mansupposedly living in the time of Cyrus. Rather, the sealing signifiesthat much of the content of the later chapters of the book will beunderstood only when the predicted events begin to take place at afuture time, with the book placing Daniel (its presumed author) inthe sixth century BC.
NewTestament
ThePastoral Epistles.With regard to the Pastoral Epistles, all three letters claim to beauthored by the apostle Paul (1Tim. 1:1; 2Tim. 1:1; Titus1:1). In seeking to determine the time of composition within achronology of Paul’s ministry, they must be dated toward theend of his life (in the case of 2Timothy, perhaps only shortlybefore his death) and after the close of the book of Acts, whichconcludes with the apostle’s arrival in Rome (Acts 28). In hisletter to the Romans, Paul anticipates a future mission to Spain(Rom. 15:23–29), but the Pastoral Epistles imply that hereturned to the east. Ephesus and Crete are the presumed locations ofhis coworkers Timothy and Titus (see 1Tim. 1:3; Titus 1:5). Onthis supposition, these letters arise from a further mission thereand a second (and final) imprisonment. The fact that Acts saysnothing about this is no evidence against the supposition.
Itis not necessary to view the mundane ecclesiastical arrangements ofthe Pastoral Epistles as inconsistent with a charismatic model ofleadership in other Pauline letters (note the address to “overseersand deacons” in Phil. 1:1). We know from Acts 14:23; 20:17–38that Paul appointed elders in the churches that he founded. Thetheological differences between the Pastoral Epistles and earlierPauline compositions should not be overemphasized. The stress laidupon “the faith” and “sound teaching” isexactly what might be expected if Paul anticipated his imminentremoval from the scene.
Theother alternative is the theory that after Paul’s death,members of a Pauline school (Timothy? Luke? Onesimus?) continued tosupply letters under his name, addressing contemporary church issuesin the guise of Paul, hoping to guarantee the legacy of the greatapostle. Some scholars go as far as to assert that an admirer of Paulcombined genuine Pauline fragments within a fictitious framework. Theearliest listing of Paul’s letters is that of Marcion (c. AD140), and he fails to mention the Pastoral Epistles. That omissionmay be explained in various ways. There is no evidence, however, thatanyone in the early church (orthodox or heterodox) who knew of theletters doubted their authenticity.
Ephesiansand Colossians.There is some textual uncertainty with regard to the words “inEphesus” in Eph. 1:1, making it possible that the letter wasoriginally a circular letter written by Paul to more than one church.The letter mentions no one by name except Tychicus (Eph. 6:21), whocarried the letter (perhaps to different churches in turn). This isenough to explain its more general orientation than some otherPauline letters, and any supposed theological “development”is not beyond the likely boundaries of Paul’s expansive mind(e.g., his teaching on the church). The use of the “in Christ”formula in Ephesians is not substantially different from how Paulhandles it elsewhere. The letter’s twofold structure ofdoctrinal exposition followed by practical instruction fits a commonPauline epistolary pattern. Indeed, F.F. Bruce refers to thisletter as “the quintessence of Paulinism.”
Ina number of ways Colossians and Ephesians share a common outlook. TheJewish Christian proto-gnostic false teaching combated in Colossiansis not referred to in other Pauline letters, but it may have been alocal Colossian variant. The letter is explicitly attributed to Paul,at both the beginning and the end (Col. 1:1; 4:18). Arguments aboutauthorship based on style and unusual vocabulary are notoriouslyslippery and inconclusive. The high Christology of cosmic dimensionsin Col. 1:15–20; 2:9–10, 15 is also present in undisputedPauline letters (cf. Phil. 2:9–11). The obvious relationship ofColossians to the little letter to Philemon (e.g., Col. 4:9, 17; cf.Philem. 2, 12) is one of the strongest arguments in favor of thePauline authorship of the former. Any theory of pseudepigraphy turnsCol. 4:7–17, with its many names, into fanciful and freeinvention with little real purpose. Also, we might wonder why a laterauthor chose to write under the name of Paul to a church that Paulhimself did not found.
SecondThessalonians.Some view the futuristic timetable provided in 2Thess. 2:1–12as moving beyond Paul, with the world’s end not yet in sight,for the writer teaches that certain things have to happen before thereturn of Christ, whereas in 1Thess. 4:13–5:11 Paul has anearer end in view. In both letters, however, the apostle is seekingto dampen the wrong kind of apocalyptic excitement. In2Thessalonians, it is clear that Paul knows a tradition ofJesus’ teaching about the future, such as also found in Mark13, so that there is nothing unreasonably “late” in theviews expressed.
Thesubstantial overlap in material between 1Thessalonians and2Thessalonians is not evidence of the labors of a laterdisciple and imitator of Paul. It is highly ironic that some scholarssuggest 2Thessalonians is not a genuine letter of Paul: theletter itself condemns a fake letter supposedly from him that claimsthat the day of the Lord is already past (2Thess. 2:2), and theoriginal letter included a final greeting written in Paul’s ownhand (2Thess. 3:17).
SecondPeter and Jude.As for 2Peter, it was not as well known in the early church as1Peter, and some (according to Origen) were hesitant to acceptit. Its author claims to be a witness to the transfiguration (2Pet.1:16–18). Such personal allusions need not be attributed to alater writer who was trying too hard to show that he was Simon Peter.The obvious connection of 2Pet. 1:14 to what is recorded inJohn 21 does not prove that the writer was dependent on that chapter.
Theremarkable parallels between 2Peter and Jude show that one isdependent upon the other, though scholars are not unanimous aboutwhich letter was prior. We cannot rule out that Peter would use andadapt the writings of a less prominent leader such as Jude. Judemakes use of apocryphal books, but neither in Jude nor in 2Peterdo arguments against the particular brand of false teaching require asecond-century (postapostolic) dating.
A literary device whereby an author writes under a name otherthan his or her own (a pseu-donym) or a book is deliberately assignedto a fictitious author (pseudepigraphy). In the case of ancientJewish practice, the name borrowed was usually that of some famousworthy of the past (e.g., Enoch, Ezra), with the aim of bolsteringthe credentials of the book to which the name was attached. This is acommon phenomenon in the Apocrypha (e.g., 2Esdras, Baruch,Epistle of Jeremiah). It is even more common in the large collectionof Second Temple texts now known as the Pseudepigrapha (e.g.,1Enoch, Odes of Solomon, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs).(See also Pseudepigrapha.)
Scholarscontinue to debate the morality of pseudonymity and whether it isproper for a pseudonymous book to be placed within the canon ofScripture. Some excuse pseudonymity as a mere stylistic device orexplain it as a culturally accepted convention. Others put a positivespin on the phenomenon, and so, for example, claim that in thePastoral Epistles literate disciples of Paul sought to apply hisideas to newly developing situations in the years following hisdeath. Some argue that such deception for a good cause is legitimatebecause it helped to gain a hearing for orthodox teaching. Otherstotally reject pseudepigraphy, viewing it as little better thandeception and forgery and thus unworthy of literature viewed asinspired by God. The last approach seems to be most consistent with ahigh view of Scripture.
Overthe last two hundred years a number of biblical books have beenidentified by some scholars as pseudonymous, notably Daniel in theOT, and in the NT six letters in the Pauline corpus—Ephesians,Colossians, 2Thessalonians, and the Pastoral Epistles (1–2Timothy, Titus)—together with 2Peter and Jude.
OldTestament
Certainlyone mark of Jewish apocalyptic works is pseudonymity, and the book ofDaniel is often viewed by critical scholars as no exception to thisrule. It is difficult, however, to see how the name “Daniel”would have served to give the OT book named after him the desiredauthority, which is a major motivation for attaching a pseudonym.
Apartfrom the book itself, we essentially know nothing about this Daniel,whom it describes as living in Babylonia during the exile. In thebook of Ezekiel we have two references to a Daniel (Ezek. 14:14, 20).In this passage the prophet says that when the land sins against God,“even if these three men—Noah, Daniel and Job—werein it, they could save only themselves by their righteousness.”There is, in addition, the further reference in Ezek. 14:16 to “thesethree men,” obviously referring to the same three men. Ezekielspeaks of these three men as embodiments of righteousness, but thefact that this Daniel figure is placed between two ancients (Noah andJob) suggests that he too is a figure of antiquity, not acontemporary of Ezekiel.
Ezekiel28:3 taunts the king of Tyre: “Are you wiser than Daniel? Is nosecret hidden from you?” Here “Daniel” (the Hebrewtext at Ezek. 28:3 actually reads “Danel”) obviously is aproverbial figure of wisdom, and this implies that he may have beenwell known in Tyre and therefore could well have beenSyro-Phoenician. There is in fact a “Danel” figurementioned in Ugaritic literature (before 1200 BC). On the other hand,the Daniel of the book of Daniel is not a patriarch like Enoch, Noah,and Job, nor is he a famous figure like Ezra or the assistant to aprophet, as Baruch was to Jeremiah. Daniel is known only through thebook that bears his name. In other words, the usual motivationexplaining the use of a pseudonym does not apply to the canonicalbook of Daniel.
Also,the closing up and sealing of the book (Dan. 8:26; 12:4) is no meredevice necessitated by using as a pseudonym the name of a mansupposedly living in the time of Cyrus. Rather, the sealing signifiesthat much of the content of the later chapters of the book will beunderstood only when the predicted events begin to take place at afuture time, with the book placing Daniel (its presumed author) inthe sixth century BC.
NewTestament
ThePastoral Epistles.With regard to the Pastoral Epistles, all three letters claim to beauthored by the apostle Paul (1Tim. 1:1; 2Tim. 1:1; Titus1:1). In seeking to determine the time of composition within achronology of Paul’s ministry, they must be dated toward theend of his life (in the case of 2Timothy, perhaps only shortlybefore his death) and after the close of the book of Acts, whichconcludes with the apostle’s arrival in Rome (Acts 28). In hisletter to the Romans, Paul anticipates a future mission to Spain(Rom. 15:23–29), but the Pastoral Epistles imply that hereturned to the east. Ephesus and Crete are the presumed locations ofhis coworkers Timothy and Titus (see 1Tim. 1:3; Titus 1:5). Onthis supposition, these letters arise from a further mission thereand a second (and final) imprisonment. The fact that Acts saysnothing about this is no evidence against the supposition.
Itis not necessary to view the mundane ecclesiastical arrangements ofthe Pastoral Epistles as inconsistent with a charismatic model ofleadership in other Pauline letters (note the address to “overseersand deacons” in Phil. 1:1). We know from Acts 14:23; 20:17–38that Paul appointed elders in the churches that he founded. Thetheological differences between the Pastoral Epistles and earlierPauline compositions should not be overemphasized. The stress laidupon “the faith” and “sound teaching” isexactly what might be expected if Paul anticipated his imminentremoval from the scene.
Theother alternative is the theory that after Paul’s death,members of a Pauline school (Timothy? Luke? Onesimus?) continued tosupply letters under his name, addressing contemporary church issuesin the guise of Paul, hoping to guarantee the legacy of the greatapostle. Some scholars go as far as to assert that an admirer of Paulcombined genuine Pauline fragments within a fictitious framework. Theearliest listing of Paul’s letters is that of Marcion (c. AD140), and he fails to mention the Pastoral Epistles. That omissionmay be explained in various ways. There is no evidence, however, thatanyone in the early church (orthodox or heterodox) who knew of theletters doubted their authenticity.
Ephesiansand Colossians.There is some textual uncertainty with regard to the words “inEphesus” in Eph. 1:1, making it possible that the letter wasoriginally a circular letter written by Paul to more than one church.The letter mentions no one by name except Tychicus (Eph. 6:21), whocarried the letter (perhaps to different churches in turn). This isenough to explain its more general orientation than some otherPauline letters, and any supposed theological “development”is not beyond the likely boundaries of Paul’s expansive mind(e.g., his teaching on the church). The use of the “in Christ”formula in Ephesians is not substantially different from how Paulhandles it elsewhere. The letter’s twofold structure ofdoctrinal exposition followed by practical instruction fits a commonPauline epistolary pattern. Indeed, F.F. Bruce refers to thisletter as “the quintessence of Paulinism.”
Ina number of ways Colossians and Ephesians share a common outlook. TheJewish Christian proto-gnostic false teaching combated in Colossiansis not referred to in other Pauline letters, but it may have been alocal Colossian variant. The letter is explicitly attributed to Paul,at both the beginning and the end (Col. 1:1; 4:18). Arguments aboutauthorship based on style and unusual vocabulary are notoriouslyslippery and inconclusive. The high Christology of cosmic dimensionsin Col. 1:15–20; 2:9–10, 15 is also present in undisputedPauline letters (cf. Phil. 2:9–11). The obvious relationship ofColossians to the little letter to Philemon (e.g., Col. 4:9, 17; cf.Philem. 2, 12) is one of the strongest arguments in favor of thePauline authorship of the former. Any theory of pseudepigraphy turnsCol. 4:7–17, with its many names, into fanciful and freeinvention with little real purpose. Also, we might wonder why a laterauthor chose to write under the name of Paul to a church that Paulhimself did not found.
SecondThessalonians.Some view the futuristic timetable provided in 2Thess. 2:1–12as moving beyond Paul, with the world’s end not yet in sight,for the writer teaches that certain things have to happen before thereturn of Christ, whereas in 1Thess. 4:13–5:11 Paul has anearer end in view. In both letters, however, the apostle is seekingto dampen the wrong kind of apocalyptic excitement. In2Thessalonians, it is clear that Paul knows a tradition ofJesus’ teaching about the future, such as also found in Mark13, so that there is nothing unreasonably “late” in theviews expressed.
Thesubstantial overlap in material between 1Thessalonians and2Thessalonians is not evidence of the labors of a laterdisciple and imitator of Paul. It is highly ironic that some scholarssuggest 2Thessalonians is not a genuine letter of Paul: theletter itself condemns a fake letter supposedly from him that claimsthat the day of the Lord is already past (2Thess. 2:2), and theoriginal letter included a final greeting written in Paul’s ownhand (2Thess. 3:17).
SecondPeter and Jude.As for 2Peter, it was not as well known in the early church as1Peter, and some (according to Origen) were hesitant to acceptit. Its author claims to be a witness to the transfiguration (2Pet.1:16–18). Such personal allusions need not be attributed to alater writer who was trying too hard to show that he was Simon Peter.The obvious connection of 2Pet. 1:14 to what is recorded inJohn 21 does not prove that the writer was dependent on that chapter.
Theremarkable parallels between 2Peter and Jude show that one isdependent upon the other, though scholars are not unanimous aboutwhich letter was prior. We cannot rule out that Peter would use andadapt the writings of a less prominent leader such as Jude. Judemakes use of apocryphal books, but neither in Jude nor in 2Peterdo arguments against the particular brand of false teaching require asecond-century (postapostolic) dating.
The historical origins of Christianity need to be set against Jewish history, beliefs, and culture in Palestine and the eastern Mediterranean, but they also need to be set in the context of the wider Greco-Roman world that was dominated politically and militarily by the Roman Empire.
From Republic to Empire
Rome began as a city-state but soon became a transcontinental empire reaching over parts of Europe, Africa, and Asia. Rome emerged as the most dominant force in the Mediterranean after it defeated Carthage in the Second Punic War (218–201 BC). Thereafter, Rome began to expand its control and power over the various Hellenistic city-states in the east, including Macedonia, Illyria, and Asia Minor. By the mid-first century AD, Rome had also conquered or annexed Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Cyrene, Gaul, Spain, North Africa, and Armenia.
The transition from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire took place under the Roman emperors beginning with Julius Caesar (100–44 BC), who, after crossing the Rubicon and defeating Pompey, was proclaimed dictator perpetuus (“dictator for life”). The period after Julius Caesar’s assassination (44 BC) was a time of political upheaval as Rome was marred by a series of civil wars. The first was between Octavius and Antony against Caesar’s assassins Brutus and Cassius. This climaxed in the Battle of Philippi (42 BC), which the former allies of Julius Caesar won. The second was between Octavius and Antony, where Antony and Cleopatra were defeated at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC, leaving Octavius as the undisputed leader of Rome.
Octavius was given the honorific name “Augustus” by the senate. His reign (31 BC–AD 14) marked a period of consolidation, reorganization, and renewal of the Roman Empire. Augustus embarked on an empire-wide policy of fiscal rationalization, developed a constitutional settlement for Rome, centralized his military authority over the various provinces, and had Julius Caesar deified. Writers and artists of the era heralded Augustus’s reign as a time of unprecedented peace and security—peace from civil war and security from the Germanic tribes in the north and the Parthian Empire in the east. Worship of the emperor became more frequent especially in the Roman East, although Augustus did not permit it in Rome. What is most significant about Augustus is that it is with his reign that the Roman Empire essentially began. He was the emperor at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1). It was under Trajan (AD 98–117), however, that the Roman Empire expanded to its largest area, encompassing parts of Britain and Persia.
Emperors (AD 14–98)
Tiberius, Augustus’s adopted heir, reigned in the years AD 14–37. He was a highly successful military general, but as emperor he was remembered as being gloomy and melancholic. Tiberius even went into a self-imposed exile for a time, leaving the praetorian prefect Sejanus in charge until Tiberius finally had him executed for treason. It was during the reign of Tiberius that Jesus conducted his ministry in Palestine.
Tiberius was succeeded by his adopted grandson Caligula, who reigned in the years AD 37–41. Caligula was the son of the popular Roman general Germanicus, who died in Antioch in AD 19. Historical sources are not favorably disposed toward Caligula, who was remembered as a malevolent tyrant given to self-aggrandizement and sexual perversity. In AD 39/40 Caligula departed from imperial policy that permitted emperor worship in the east and veneration of deceased emperors in Rome, and he often appeared dressed as a god in public and demanded worship as a living god. During this time he deposed Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, on suspicion of consorting with Parthia (Josephus, Ant. 18.7). Caligula also ordered that his statue be placed in the holy of holies in the Jerusalem temple (Philo, Embassy 203). Petronius, the governor of Syria, knowing that such an act would lead to civil war, refused to comply and appealed to Caligula to reverse the order. In response, Caligula sent an order to Petronius that he commit suicide. Fortunately, news of Caligula’s assassination by a conspiracy involving the praetorian guard and senators reached Petronius first.
Claudius, Caligula’s uncle, reigned in the years AD 41–54, and his rule was defined by numerous public works, a reordering of the judicial system, a torrid series of marriages, the conquest of Britain, and a number of attempted coups by the Roman senate. In AD 49 he expelled the Jews from Rome because of disputes about a certain “Chrestus,” probably Christ (cf. Acts 18:2). No one is sure whether Claudius was murdered or died of old age, but he remained a sharp contrast to the brutal excesses of Caligula and Nero.
Nero, the stepson of Claudius, reigned in the years AD 54–68. The early period of his rule was marked by cultural endeavors and diplomatic efforts. The later years were, in contrast, distinguished by tyranny and self-aggrandizement. There was a Jewish revolt against Rome in Judea (AD 66–70) during Nero’s reign, and Vespasian was sent to pacify the territory. According to ancient sources, Nero accused Christians of starting the fire of Rome in AD 64 and subjected them to the cruelest of punishments, including crucifixion, being thrown to wild animals, and even being burned alive. It probably was during this time that the apostles Peter and Paul were martyred in Rome. Nero eventually was declared a public enemy by the Roman senate, and he committed suicide before he could be captured in AD 68. There arose a “Nero redivivus” legend, whereby many hoped or feared that Nero had not died in AD 68 but had fled to Parthia and would return to Rome in order to destroy it (Sib.Or. 4.119–124; 5.137–141, 361–396), and this arguably stands behind the imagery of Rev. 13:3; 17:8–11.
The suicide of Nero left a power vacuum in Rome, and AD 69 saw no less than four emperors ascend the throne: Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and finally Vespasian. Galba was governor of Hispania Tarraconensis and was invited to become emperor by the senate, but he was killed by the praetorian guard after they were bribed by the praetor Otho. Otho himself committed suicide after his forces were defeated by Vitellius, the commander of the legions on the Rhine. Vitellius became emperor, but he was fiscally irresponsible and murdered many of his rivals. The legions in the Danube, Egypt, Syria, and Judea had declared Vespasian emperor and marched on Rome. Vespasian controlled the grain supplies to Rome from Egypt and had a superior force. Vitellius’s forces were defeated at Bedriacum, and Vitellius went into hiding but eventually was killed in Rome. Vespasian was declared emperor by the senate, and so began the Flavian dynasty, which restored order after the chaos of civil war.
The Flavians ruled in the years AD 69–96. Vespasian (r. AD 69–79) consolidated the empire after its year of strife and instituted new taxes, such as the fiscus judaicus, a war reparation tax placed on all Jews and paid to the temple of Jupiter in lieu of the Jerusalem temple tax. Vespasian was succeeded by his sons Titus (r.AD 79–81) and Domitian (r. AD 81–96). When Vespasian sailed to Rome from Judea, Titus was left in charge of the siege of Jerusalem, which he completed and celebrated in a triumph in Rome in AD 72. This triumph is memorialized in the Arch of Titus, which depicts Roman soldiers bringing the vessels of the temple to Rome as part of the booty taken. Later Roman writers regarded Domitian as a malevolent and malicious tyrant (e.g., Tacitus, Suetonius), but this probably is an exaggeration caused partly by a desire to highlight the greatness of succeeding emperors such as Nerva and Trajan. It probably was during the reign of Domitian that some Christians in Asia Minor were being persecuted for their failure to worship the emperor, as depicted in the book of Revelation.
Table 7. Roman Emperors (31 BC–AD 117)
31 BC-AD 14 – Augustus
AD 14-37 – Tiberius
AD 37-41 – Caligula
AD 41-54 – Claudius
AD 54-68 – Nero
AD 68-69 – Galba
AD 69 – Otho
AD 69 – Vitellius
AD 69-79 – Vespasian
AD 79-81 – Titus
AD 81-96 – Domitian
AD 96-98 – Nerva
AD 98-117 – Trajan
Military
Military expeditions expanded Rome’s control of foreign territories and safeguarded its borders from incursion, most threateningly from the Germanic tribes east of the Rhine River and north of the Danube River and from the Parthian (=Neo-Persian) Empire east of the Euphrates River. A Roman legion consisted of around six thousand men, including cavalry. Under Tiberius, there were twenty-five legions stationed across the empire: eight on the Rhine, three in Spain, two in Egypt, four in Syria, two in Africa, and six in the Danube region. In terms of command structures, the legions were under the control of certain regional commands by men of consular rank, including two on the Rhine, one in Spain, one in Syria, and three in the Balkans (Tacitus, Ann. 4.5). These were among the most powerful persons outside the ruling family and could be kingmakers or contenders during times of civil war. A legion was divided into ten cohorts and commanded by a legate, usually of senatorial rank. Units of one hundred were commanded by centurions, and service in the legions was set at between twenty and twenty-five years. Upon recruitment, the soldier swore an oath of loyalty to the emperor (sacramentum) that was renewed annually. During times of peace, Roman soldiers could perform a number of civil tasks relating to taxation, building projects, and policing.
Centurions are mentioned several times in the NT (e.g., Matt. 8:5; Mark 15:39; Acts 10:1; 21:32; 27:1). There is a mention of a “legion” of demons that oppressed the Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:9), and Jesus refers to the possibility of the Father sending him “legions” of angels (Matt. 26:53). Military terminology is very apparent in Paul’s letters, where he refers to fighting armor (Rom. 13:11–13; 2Cor. 6:7; Eph. 6:10–18), compares commitment to Christ to military service (2Tim. 2:4), refers to his coworkers as “soldiers” or “fellow soldiers” (Phil. 2:25; Philem. 2; 2Tim. 2:3), and likens ministerial remuneration to a soldier being paid his salarium (1Cor. 9:7).
Culture and Religion
One of the primary reasons for Rome’s rise and dominance, militarily and culturally, was its capacity to absorb other peoples and even other gods into its constituency and pantheon. Its constantly growing pantheon, application of the rule of law, and superior military force made Rome what it was: a melting pot of all cultures and a Romanizer of other cultures.
Roman society was heavily stratified, but social mobility, upward and downward, was possible. Wealth, marriage, education, and military exploits were the primary means to social advancement. The senatorial class represented the wealthy nobility of Rome and provided the primary cohort of civil and military administrators. The equestrian class (or “knights,” as they are sometimes called) were a larger group of less wealthy Roman citizens. Decurions were members of civil councils in provincial cities who often acted as magistrates and were leaders of local communities. The plebeians represented the general citizenry of Rome, who, until the time of Tiberius, had some power in electing officials. Finally, there were freedmen, who were ex-slaves usually in a relationship with their former master, and also slaves, who were regarded as little more than property.
The ancient Roman religions focused on the numen, the somewhat impersonal divine power associated with certain localities. From the third century BC, Greek deities were assimilated and Romanized, so that Zeus became Jupiter, and Vesta was identified as Hestia. The Capitoline Hill was crowned with a temple that was dedicated around 500 BC to Jupiter, Minerva, and Juno. These were the principal gods of Rome, although others were added to the pantheon as the Romans conquered other peoples and adopted their gods. Other gods also received greater honor, such as the goddess Pax, the personification of peace (based on the Greek goddess Eirene); Vespasian built and dedicated a temple in her honor in Rome in AD 75. The Roman emperor was the Pontifex Maximus and supreme high priest of Rome and the empire. In the mid- to late first century AD, the fastest-growing religion was the imperial cult, the worship of (usually) deceased Roman emperors. This cult became popular in the eastern Mediterranean cities, where worship of rulers was commonplace, but was regarded with indifference in Rome.
Religions and philosophies from all over the known world eventually made their way to Rome. Egyptian rites and religions gained followings, Mithraism acquired currency within the ranks of the military and among public servants, Judaism entered Rome probably with the Hasmonean delegation sent there around 139 BC, and Christianity came to Rome probably during the late 30s and early 40s of the first century AD through Jewish pilgrims visiting the east and through Judean immigration to Rome. Many Roman intellectuals lamented the fact that so many foreign superstitions had found their way to Rome, and that Roman peoples found them more attractive than their own state religion. Roman religion was largely controlled by the state through a set calendar and the appointment of priests and vestal virgins. It was practiced in public and in the home. As such, religious life was very much intertwined with social and political life. Roman religion engendered the need for its citizens to act with pietas, the honoring of one’s obligations to the gods, and with religio, which designated appropriate scruples and rites in the presence of the gods.
Summary
The birth of the church and the growth of Christianity took place within the wider social, religious, and cultural context of the Greco-Roman world. The politics and power of the Roman Empire provide the backdrop for the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:1), and since Rome was considered to be the center of the world, it was necessary that Paul himself testify to Jesus Christ there (Acts 19:21). The history, literature, and cultural background of Rome form an important background to the NT and should be studied along with the history and literature of Judaism during the time of Jesus and the apostles. Although the Romans were the primary threat to the survival of Christians in the ancient world, after the conversion of Constantine in the fourth century AD, they became the primary means by which Christianity spread to the rest of Europe and western Asia. See also Roman Law.
Many of the letters, or epistles, in the Bible includesalutations consisting of expressions of goodwill from the sender tothe recipient. Salutations can be found at the beginning and end ofthe NT Epistles. While the salutation itself was not the invention ofthe authors of the NT Epistles, the form has been adapted in thisliterature to express explicitly Christian theological content.
Thesimplest form of salutation found in the NT is simply “Greetings,”which appears in James 1:1, as well as in the letter sent fromJerusalem to Antioch (Acts 15:23) and the letter of Claudius Lysiasto Felix (Acts 23:26). See also the examples of secularcorrespondence in Ezra 4:17; 7:12; Dan. 4:1.
Mostof the letters bearing the name of Paul begin with the greeting“Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the LordJesus Christ” (Rom. 1:7) or a slight variation thereof (1Cor.1:3; 2Cor. 1:2; Eph. 1:2; Phil. 1:2; Col. 1:2; 1Thess.1:1; 2Thess. 1:2; Titus 1:4; Philem. 3). The salutation in Gal.1:3–5 is a theological expansion of Paul’s standardsalutation. The salutations in 1Tim. 1:2 and 2Tim. 1:2include “Grace, mercy, and peace.”
Thesalutation of the Petrine letters is “Grace and peace be yoursin abundance” (1Pet. 1:2; 2Pet. 1:2). Salutationsare also found in 2John 3; Jude 2; Rev. 1:4–5. Hebrews,1John, and 3John do not begin with salutations.
Ina number of cases, salutatory remarks function to close the letternear its end, often in connection with individual greetings. See Rom.16:20; 1Cor. 16:21–24; 2Cor. 13:14; Gal. 6:18; Eph.6:23–24; Phil. 4:23; Col. 4:18; 1Thess. 5:28; 2Thess.3:16–18; 1Tim. 6:21; 2Tim. 4:22; Titus 3:15;Philem. 25; 1Pet. 5:14.
Paul’s second letter to Timothy is one of his three PastoralEpistles (together with 1Timothy and Titus). In this letter theapostle reminds Timothy of his call to ministry, encourages him toendure suffering for the sake of the gospel, exhorts him to pursuepersonal godliness, warns him of false teachers and evil persons, andurges him to give himself completely to the ministry of the word. Inshort, Paul exhorts his protégé to fulfill hisministry. The overall message of the book can be summed up in Paul’scall for Timothy to be a “good soldier of Christ Jesus”(2:3) who fights the “good fight” of faith (4:7). In thebenediction, Paul’s use of the plural “Grace be with youall” indicates that the apostle’s words are directed notonly to Timothy but also to the whole church (4:22).
Recipient
SeeTimothy, First Letter to.
Authorshipand Date
Thebook of Acts closes with Paul experiencing house arrest in Romearound AD 62/63. By the time he wrote his first letter to Timothy, hehad already been freed from that imprisonment (cf. Acts 28:30–31;1Tim. 3:14). However, when he wrote 2Timothy, he wasagain in prison, but this time he was bound in chains, facingprosecution, and aware of his impending execution (2Tim. 1:8,16; 2:9; 4:6, 16). The second letter to Timothy was written duringthis period of his second imprisonment in Rome, just prior to hisexecution in about AD 67. Paul identifies himself as an apostle andthe author of 2Timothy in the first verse of the letter. (Onthe disputed authorship of the Pastoral Epistles, see Timothy, FirstLetter to.)
Backgroundand Occasion
Atthe time of writing, Paul was languishing in prison. In this secondletter to Timothy, he notifies the church that the preliminary phaseof his trial has already taken place, and that many colleagues whohave been unwilling to stand by his side have deserted him. Othersapparently left him for ministry purposes. Luke alone remained withPaul, who was facing what he thought to be his imminent execution(4:6–8, 10–16).
Paulwrote this letter for the following reasons:
1.Hewas lonely and wanted to see Timothy (1:4; 4:9, 21).
2.Duringthe reign of the emperor Nero, persecutions had broken out. Paulwanted to encourage Timothy and the church to remain true to Christand be prepared to suffer for the sake of the gospel (1:8; 2:3,11–12).
3.Paulwanted to warn Timothy and the church about false teachers and evilpersons (1:14; 2:14, 16–18, 23; 3:1–9, 13; 4:3–4).
4.Paulwanted to encourage Timothy to fulfill his ministry (1:6–8,13–14; 2:1–3, 14–15, 22–24; 3:14; 4:5).
5.Paulwanted to instruct the church through this letter to Timothy. Heemploys the plural form of “you” in 4:22b, indicatingthat his words were addressed not only to Timothy but also to thewhole church.
6.Paulwanted to communicate to Timothy and the church his impendingexecution (4:6–8).
Outline
I.Introduction (1:1–2)
II.The Exhortation to Persevere in Ministry in Spite of Persecution(1:3–2:13)
A.Thanksgiving for Timothy and encouragement to boldly employ his gift(1:3–7)
B.Encouragement for Timothy to suffer for the gospel without shame(1:8–12)
C.Paul’s exhortation for Timothy to be faithful in his ministry(1:13–14)
D.Examples of faithfulness and desertion (1:15–18)
E.An exhortation to perseverance and promise of reward (2:1–13)
III.The Behavior Expected from a Servant of God (2:14–26)
A.A call to accurately teach the word and to avoid worldly teachings(2:14–19)
B.Exhortation to personal purity in life and ministry (2:20–22)
C.Instruction to be gentle when correcting those in error (2:23–26)
IV.Warning about the Coming Apostasy (3:1–4:5)
A.Characteristics of people in the last days (3:1–9)
B.A reminder of Paul’s example and the value of the Scriptures(3:10–16)
C.Paul’s charge to be faithful in preaching in view of the comingapostasy (4:1–5)
V.Paul’s Personal Situation (4:6–18)
A.Paul’s impending execution, his faithfulness and reward (4:6–8)
B.The faithfulness of Paul’s friends and the unfaithfulness ofhis enemies (4:9–16)
C.The faithfulness of the Lord (4:17–18)
VI.Closing Greetings (4:19–22)
Since the early apologists’ first attempts to defendthe Christian faith against contemporary Greco-Roman philosophers,explanations of God’s sovereignty have found support fromPlatonic, Neoplatonic, and Aristotelian categories. This unfortunate“marriage” pushed theologians to identify God’spower in static and absolute categories that explained God as unmovedand impassible. God’s sovereign will must be perfect and cannotbe affected by the world or by human suffering. In his perfection,God is necessarily apatheia (Aristotle), beyond joy or sorrow(Plato). This notion led medieval and Reformation theologians toassert that Jesus suffered in his human nature, but not in his divinenature. To protect God’s integrity (incapability ofcorruption), the biblical emphasis on God’s passionateinvolvement with his creation and people (e.g., Isa. 34:2; Zeph.3:17) was squelched.
Christianspeculation on God’s sovereignty followed the Neoplatonicprinciple of plenitude, in which the created universe is little morethan the divine being’s necessary overflow of temporaldiversity. God’s perfection requires the unlimitedactualization of all possibilities. For Augustine, this meant thatall human experience is foreclosed in God’s eternity; forAnselm, it gave an ontological argument for God’s existence;for Abelard, it meant that God cannot do or leave undone anythingother than what he has done; for Beza (Calvinism), doublepredestination was a given; for Schleiermacher, humanself-consciousness had its roots in the divine being; for Tillich, a“God above God” was the ground of all being; and we couldadd many others. “Sovereignty,” in these delineations,expresses the necessary manifestation of God’s perfection andabsolute power.
Thebiblical language of sovereignty does not parallel such logic.Broadly speaking, the Bible describes sovereignty as God’sdivine authority to rule his creation in general and Israel inparticular. He is the Lord of all creation and the King of Israel. Heis almighty (sovereign) to accomplish his purpose, which is torestore his kingdom on earth through Christ (1Tim. 6:14–15),to whom he now has given all authority (Matt. 28:18). Rather than analoof divinity of perfection, God is presented in the Bible asintensely personal and superbly engaged in the affairs of hiscreation. He remains outside his creation as its supreme, infiniteCreator (transcendence), while allowing his love to instruct both hisjustice and his power (immanence). He creates not because thenecessity of his perfection requires it but rather out of sovereignfreedom and love. He is both protective of his position as Lord ofcreation and concerned for his people’s welfare (Deut.6:13–19). His sovereignty displays his moral character (Exod.15:11–18) while demanding reciprocal love and relationalobedience from his people.
Assovereign, God has power and rule that are above all other powers andrulers (Pss. 22:28; 103:19; Dan. 5:21). His providential care for allcreation exhibits his loving kingship and confirms his essentialgoodness. God’s sovereignty affirms that human life has meaningand purpose; he does not leave us alone to create our own happiness,nor are we subject to whatever misery presses upon us (1Chron.29:11). Rather than an indivisible attribute, God’s power issubject to his control and expresses itself relationally. This samerelationality lies behind the biblical understanding of God’swill and unchangeable character (James 1:17; cf. Ps. 102:25–27;Isa. 40:8). As a comparison of 1Sam. 15:11 with 15:29 shows,God’s sovereignty does not militate against his freedom tochange his mind. Rather, God remains unchangeably faithful and trueto his character even when humans prove faithless and false (2Tim.2:13).
Thisrelational quality of God’s sovereignty is rooted in histriunity. His existence is coexistence as Father, Son, and HolySpirit. This makes love the distinctive mark of his sovereignty. Thedoctrine of the Trinity safeguards against metaphysicalunderstandings of God that make light of his self-revelation inChrist. Opposite the self-expanding god of philosophicalspeculations, the biblical God manifests his sovereignty through theself-limiting and self-denying Christ (Phil. 2:5–11), whor*veals God’s absolute power as the servant of his absolutelove.
Self-control involves the willingness to submit to theboundaries of nature, society, and family that God places in theworld to bring about order and harmony in relationships. Theself-restraint of an individual’s thoughts, words, and actionsreflects the ordered discipline of God’s creation (Gen. 1–3;8:22; Prov. 6:6–8). Discipline of the self is essential to livea productive life in community (Prov. 25:28).
“Self-control”is one of the terms that Luke uses to summarize Paul’s messageto Felix (Acts 24:25). God’s people must exercise self-control(1Thess. 5:6; 2Tim. 1:7; 2Pet. 1:6). Ultimately,self-control is a gift, a fruit that comes from being in submissionto God’s Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23).
A title designating members of the group of twelve disciples(Matt. 10:2–4; Mark 3:16–19; Luke 6:13–16) whor*ceived Jesus’ teaching (Luke 17:5) and to whom he grantedauthority (Mark 6:7, 30; Luke 9:1, 10). Matthias later replaced JudasIscariot (Acts 1:24). These apostles provided leadership to the earlychurch in Jerusalem (Acts 15:6), performed miracles (Acts 2:43;2 Cor. 12:12), and faced persecution (Acts 5:18) as theytestified to Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 4:33; 5:32). Broaderusage of the term includes witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection(1 Cor. 15:7), James the brother of Jesus (Gal. 1:19), Barnabasand Paul (Acts 14:14), and possibly Silas (1 Thess. 2:6) andAndronicus and Junias/Junia (Rom. 16:7). Paul regularly speaks of hiscalling in apostolic terms (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor.1:1; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1;Titus 1:1), while Peter similarly self-identifies (1 Pet. 1:1;2 Pet. 1:1). The word is once used of Jesus himself (Heb. 3:1).
The biblical writers proclaim that only one God exists, yetthey also refer to three persons as “God.” The Father,the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all God. Furthermore, these threepersons relate to one another as self-conscious individuals. Jesusprays to the Father (John 17). The Father speaks from heavenconcerning the Son (Matt. 3:17; Luke 3:22). Jesus vows to send theSpirit as “Advocate” after his ascension, and he will dowhat Jesus himself did while he was among us (John 16:7–8). Thechallenge of Christian theology, therefore, is to formulate adoctrine of God that captures all these elements, each of whichsurfaces in both Testaments.
OldTestament
Inthe OT, evidence for the Trinity appears mostly at the implicitlevel. Yahweh is called “Father” in Isaiah (63:16; 64:8),Jeremiah (3:4, 19; 31:9), and Malachi (2:10). Isaiah declares, “Butyou are our Father, though Abraham does not know us or Israelacknowledge us; you, Lord, are our Father, our Redeemer from of oldis your name” (Isa. 63:16). Yahweh identifies himself as“Father” implicitly when he claims Israel as his “son”(Hos. 11:1), and the same principle applies to Ps. 2:7, where Goddeclares to his anointed, “You are my son; today I have becomeyour father.” These cases do not compare in numbers with the NTevidence, but a person thought of as “God the Father”certainly appears in the OT.
Messianictexts of the OT introduce us to God the Son. In Isa. 9:6 a “childis born” who will be called “Wonderful Counselor, MightyGod, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” The day of“Immanuel,” or “God with us,” is foreshadowedin Isa. 7:14 (cf. Matt. 1:22), while Isa. 40:3–5 anticipatesthe appearance of the Lord “in the wilderness” (cf. Matt.3:3). Daniel sees “one like a son of man, coming with theclouds of heaven” being given “authority, glory andsovereign power” (Dan. 7:13–14). In Ps. 110:1 Yahweh saysto David’s “Lord,” “Sit at my right handuntil I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”
Similarly,the OT seems to distinguish the Spirit of God from Yahweh whileimplying the Spirit’s own personality. Genesis 1:2 makes thatcase, as does Exod. 31:3, where Yahweh fills Bezalel with the “Spiritof God” (cf. Exod. 35:31; Num. 11:29). In 1Sam. 16:14 acontrast is made between the “Spirit of the Lord” thatleaves Saul and an “evil spirit from the Lord” thattorments him; also we find a repentant David pleading that God wouldnot take away his “Holy Spirit” (Ps. 51:11). The Spiritcan be put on persons by God, with the result that they prophesy(Isa. 61:1; Joel 2:28–29) and do what pleases him (Ezek.36:26–27). In the OT, therefore, we see two persons (the Sonand the Holy Spirit) who are both God and also distinguishable fromone to whom they answer and by whom they are sent.
NewTestament
TheNT contains abundant evidence for “God the Father,” oftenbecause of Jesus’ teaching. The “Father” appearsseveral times in the Sermon on the Mount (e.g., Matt. 5:16; 6:6–9,14, 18, 26, 32; 7:11). Matthew 7:21 stands out because of Jesus’reference to “my Father who is in heaven,” by which heidentifies himself as the Son (see also Matt. 15:13; 16:17; 18:10;and Luke 24:49). Paul’s greetings normally come from God theFather and the Lord Jesus Christ, as seen in Rom. 1:7: “Graceand peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ”(also 1Cor. 1:3; 2Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:1–3; 1Tim.1:2; 2Tim. 1:2). Paul introduces the Father and the Son in1Cor. 8:6: “For us there is but one God, the Father, fromwhom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord,Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live”(see also 1Cor. 15:24; 2Cor. 11:31; Eph. 1:3; Phil.2:22). Other significant texts include Heb. 1:5; 1Pet. 1:2–3;in the latter, the scattered believers are those “who have beenchosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through thesanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ andsprinkled with his blood.... Praise be to the Godand Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!” The NT evidence for “Godthe Father” is clear.
Biblicaltexts that point to the deity of Christ supply evidence for thesecond claim: the Son is God. Some of the texts listed above say asmuch, but one can take this case further. In context, John’sprologue refers to Jesus as the “Word” and proclaims thathe was “with God” and “was God” (John 1:1).Jesus also relates to the Father in ways that imply his own deity, ashe declares in John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.”After significant doubting, Thomas confesses the deity of Christ inJohn 20:28: “My Lord and my God!” NT passages thatidentify Jesus as the “Son of God” point to his deity, asPeter does in Matt. 16:16: “You are the Messiah, the Son of theliving God.” Even demons identify Jesus as the Son. They callout, “What do you want with us, Son of God? ...Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?”(Matt. 8:29; cf. Mark 5:7). The so-called Christ Hymn of Phil. 2:6–11puts Jesus on the level with God, saying that he did not consider“equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.”The author of Hebrews declares that Jesus is “the radiance ofGod’s glory and the exact representation of his being”(1:3). Colossians 1:15–16 says that Jesus is the “imageof the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation” and theone by whom “all things were created,” and Col. 1:19states that “God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell inhim.” According to Titus 2:13, Jesus is “our great Godand Savior.” The entire sequence of Rev. 4–5 highlightsthe deity of Christ, culminating in the praise “To him who sitson the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory andpower, for ever and ever!” as both the Enthroned One and theLamb are worshiped as God (5:13–14).
TheNT writers underscore both the deity and the distinctive personalityof the Holy Spirit. Jesus is conceived in Mary’s womb by theSpirit’s power (Matt. 1:18–20), and when Jesus isbaptized, the Spirit descends upon him as a dove (Matt. 3:16; Mark1:10). Jesus drives out demons by the Spirit, and one dare not speakagainst the Spirit when he does so (Matt. 12:28–32). Luke’sGospel puts added emphasis on the ministry of the Spirit, as we alsosee in Acts. He empowers various people to praise and prophesy (Luke1:41, 67) and to be witnesses for Christ (Acts 1:8; 2:4, 17–18,38). Sinners can lie to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3, 9), and the HolySpirit bears witness along with the apostles to the risen Christ(5:32). In John’s Gospel, the Spirit becomes the counselor andteacher of the disciples, reminding them of their Lord’sinstructions (John 14:26; 16:13). The Spirit brings assurance ofsonship (Rom. 8:16) and helps disciples when they pray (8:26). Thisperson even knows the very thoughts of God (1Cor. 2:11).Accordingly, the Great Commission requires baptism in the name of theFather, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19). All three membersof the Trinity have a part in the advancement of the kingdom, theSpirit no less than the Father and the Son.
Relationshipsbetween Father, Son, and Spirit
Theevidence considered thus far demonstrates that three persons arecalled “God” in Scripture: the Father, the Son, and theHoly Spirit. But the Scriptures also point to a chain of command intheir relationship to one another. The Son obeys the Father, and theSpirit proceeds from the Father and the Son to apply the work of thecross to the church. This “functional subordination” ofthe Son to the Father, some might argue, would follow simply from theanalogy chosen by God to reveal himself to us. The “Son”would obey his “Father,” not vice versa, though theyshare a common dignity as God, just as a human father and son share acommon humanity. But the NT writers expressly tell us that theyrelate to each other in this way. In Matt. 11:27 (cf. Luke 10:22)Jesus announces, “All things have been committed to me by myFather” (cf. John 3:35; 5:22). The latter transfers authorityto the former as his subordinate. The Father even (for a season)knows more than the Son regarding the last days: “About thatday or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,but only the Father” (Matt. 24:36), though he also dignifiesthe Son: “For the Father loves the Son and shows him all hedoes” (John 5:20). The Son’s commitment to please hisheavenly Father is a prominent theme of the NT, as Jesus declares inJohn 5:19: “The Son can do nothing by himself; he can do onlywhat he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does theSon also does.” No text brings out this dependence of the Sonupon the Father more clearly than Heb. 5:7–8, where the Son issaid to have “offered up prayers and petitions with ferventcries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he washeard because of his reverent submission. Son though he was, helearned obedience from what he suffered.” It is debated bytheologians whether this functional subordination relates only to theperiod of the Son’s earthly ministry, or whether it is aneternal subordination.
TheSpirit, though equal in personality and dignity with the Father andthe Son, proceeds from them to apply the work of the cross andempower the church for ministry. In John 14:26 Jesus says, “TheAdvocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, willteach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said toyou.” In John 15:26 Jesus announces that he also sends theSpirit out: “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to youfrom the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from theFather—he will testify about me.” The Spirit only conveyswhat he has received: “He will not speak on his own; he willspeak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come”(John 16:13). The same “chain of command” appears in John16:15, where Jesus says, “All that belongs to the Father ismine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what he willmake known to you.”
TrinitarianHeresies
TheFather, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are God, while beingdistinguishable persons. The Son obeys the Father; and these twopersons of the Trinity send out the Holy Spirit to implement ourdeliverance from sin. A defensible explanation of the Trinity willrespect all these dynamics, taking special care not to illustratethem with misleading images or simply lapse into various forms ofpolytheism. One of the earliest heresies of the church came fromMarcion, a second-century theologian who distinguished the Father ofJesus from the supposedly vindictive God of the OT, which leaves uswith more than one God. Later came the heresies of modalism andsubordinationism (or Arianism). Modalists claimed that the persons ofthe Trinity are no more than guises worn by the one person of God.One minute God is the Father, the next he is the Son or the HolySpirit. Subordinationists such as Arius (died AD 336) went beyond thefunctionality of the NT’s chain of command, arguing that theSon and the Holy Spirit are not themselves God but are essentiallysubordinate to him. Jehovah’s Witnesses have fallen into thislatter error, suggesting that Jesus is “a god” but notthe Creator God.
Theseearly heresies pressed the church to refine its understanding of theTrinity. In his response to Marcion’s error, Tertullian coinedprecise language to describe the persons of the Godhead, so thatGod’s “threeness” and “oneness” arepreserved. He used the Latin term trinitas to describe the ChristianGod and argued that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit sharethe same “substance.” The Son (also, then, the HolySpirit) is not simply of “like substance” (Gk.hom*oiousios) with God the Father, but rather is “consubstantial”(Gk. hom*oousios) with him: the Son is God, and so is the Holy Spirit.The Nicene Creed of AD 325 incorporated this explanation and, in sodoing, also set aside the idea that either the Son or the Holy Spiritwas created by God, as the Arian heresy requires. Nicaea alsorejected adoptionism, which regards Jesus as a man whom God promotedby endowing him with supernatural powers.
Eachof these heresies—plus, say, the strict monotheism ofIslam—attempts to relieve the tension seen among the claimsthat constitute the Trinity; however, orthodox Christians willremember that tensions and paradoxes are not automaticcontradictions. No philosopher or theologian has ever expresslydemonstrated that the Trinity entails logical nonsense, andChristianity’s detractors carry the burden of proof in thiscase. It is one thing to allege that an idea is contradictory, andquite another thing to show with an argument that it is so. On thepositive side, the Trinity must remain a central doctrine of thechurch because it affects all the others, especially the entire workof redemption. If God is not triune, then Jesus is not God; and if heis not God, then he cannot save us, nor can we worship him as ourLord. The sacrifice that he offers for our sin would not, in thatcase, be supremely valuable. Consider also the application to us ofwhat Christ has done. If the Holy Spirit is not God, then he cannotspeak for God as one who knows perfectly his thoughts and gives usthe word of God, our Bible. Scripture indicates that God is triune,and sinners need him to be so.
Showing
1
to
50
of428
results
1. Gospel Grandmothers
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
United Church has a tradition. They were known for supporting their pastors very well. Any pastor who has ever served at United will verify the truth of this tradition. Pastors, for example, consider it a privilege to serve in this congregation deep in the heart of Texas. Pastor Mike Snyder surely did. Pastor Mike, as everyone called him, had had a kind of love affair with this congregation throughout his nine years of service at United. The feeling was mutual. The people of United felt uniquely blessed by him as well.
It was not much of a surprise, therefore, when the church board at United decided to hold a special evening meeting to honor and celebrate the ministry of Pastor Mike Snyder. Someone on the board had found out that this year was the 25th anniversary of Pastor Snyder's ordination. Everyone agreed immediately that there should be a party, a Texas-style party to honor their pastor's 25 years of ordained ministry. And so it was.
The party for Pastor Snyder's anniversary was held on a hot Texas summer night. Just about the whole congregation turned out for it. Choirs sang their favorite numbers. The younger children recited verses of Bible stories they had learned. One of the members of the high school youth group spoke on their behalf. Many adults spoke as well. There was a representative of the women's organization, the men's club, the church board and just about every other group at United.
In their speeches people took care not to paint Pastor Snyder as some kind of perfect saint. It wasn't that Pastor Snyder's ministry with them was without fault. In fact, they knew his faults pretty well. There were some well-timed jokes concerning the fact that Pastor Snyder often neglected his own family in order to get all the ministry done at United. "You have to find more time for your own family," said the woman from the women's organization. Other jokes teased Pastor Snyder about the short fuse on his temper. They reminded him gently to put a lid on it!
And so the party went on. Words of thanksgiving and praise were spoken. So were words of caution and concern. And now it was time for Pastor Snyder's response. Jimmie Jones, chair of the church board, invited the pastor to the podium. "One of the things you've done best among us," said Jimmie, "is to help bring faith to life. We'd like to know who helped you. Who helped you to faith, Pastor Mike?"
"My grandmother," said Pastor Snyder without hesitation. "I believe that my grandmother had a tremendous shaping power over my life of faith even though I never knew her. She died eight years before I was born. But I heard the stories. I heard stories of how she headed up the Sunday school until she died. I heard stories of how she was the pioneer in seeing to it that the English language was introduced into her congregation of immigrants. I heard many stories of her faith."
"I can't explain it but I have always felt that my call to the ministry was a call to fulfill my grandmother's legacy. In some mysterious way I feel that her vision of Christian service has been passed along to me. She is, in a very special way, my 'gospel grandmother.' I'll bet many people here tonight can name a 'gospel grandmother' who has helped to lead you to faith. I thank God, we should all thank God, for our grandmothers in the faith!"
2. ATHLETE
Illustration
Stephen Stewart
1 Corinthians 9:25 - "Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable."
2 Timothy 2:5 - "An athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules."
Beginning long before written history, athletics of one kind or another have been found among primitive peoples in all parts of the world. Carvings made in ancient Egypt and other lands show men in a variety of athletic sports and games. But athletics had their real beginnings in ancient Greece.
Among the Greeks, the fullest possible development of both body and mind was a cherished ideal. The Greeks’ admiration for beautifully developed bodies set them apart from all other peoples. A large part of every boy’s education was conducted in the gymnasium, where he learned to wrestle, run, jump, and throw the discus and the javelin.
The most outstanding athletes competed in the Olympic, Pythian, Isthmian, and Nemean games. Winners won great honor not only for themselves but for their cities. Crowns of the wild olive were the only prizes awarded at the national games, but the cities rewarded their athletes generously.
Athletic games were introduced into Rome from Greece, and in the sixth century A.D. they supplanted the contests of the gladiators, professional performers who fought to the death. But most of the champions were Greeks.
However, professional athletes do not seem to have been known in early times, although 2 Samuel 2:14, "Let the young men arise and play before us" implies the existence of tournaments on the amateur level. We do know that a large tournament of various events was held every five years at Tyre.
But it is in the intertestamental and New Testament times that we find the most explicit references to them. Herod the Great awarded valuable prizes to the winners of chariot races and wrestling matches. The gymnasium which Herod built at Caesarea was a constant source of resentment to the Jews, as well as the earlier attempt at Hellenization by Antiochus IV. In the Greek games, the athletes competed naked, and the Jews found that many of their young men were refusing to have their sons circumcised because of this habit. Also, to the Jew, this glorification of the body was a sin.
Paul, however, having been brought up in an atmosphere in which athletics were so important, makes many references to athletic contests. He might have viewed such contests at Corinth and Antioch, and he uses them to compare the athlete to the good Christian.
Of course, the obvious comparison is with today’s athlete. If you are aware of the strenuous and rigorous training schedules required of athletes, such as those training for the Olympic teams, and such, you know that athletics is hard work, not just play. And that’s what St. Paul says the Christian life is, too!
3. FARMER
Illustration
Stephen Stewart
Jeremiah 14:4 - "Because of the ground which is dismayed, since there is no rain in the land, the farmers are ashamed, they cover their heads."
2 Timothy 2:6 - "It is the hard-working farmer who ought to have the first share of the crops."
James 5:7 - "Be patient, therefore, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. Behold, the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, being patient over it until it receives the early and the late rain."
Palestine was one of the world’s earliest agricultural centers. By 7500 B.C., the land was irrigated, and farming was good. The Israelites learned to farm from the Canaanites, and they built their villages near their fields where they worked all day. In later times, these villages grew into walled towns. Much of the farming was done on hillsides, and as a result, terracing came into practice quite early.
Among the chief crops in ancient Palestine were wheat, rice, barley, oats, rye, beans, peas, lettuce, celery, cabbage, beets, turnips, mustard, radishes, onions, flax, cotton, and many others. But it wasn’t easy. The land was rocky and the farmer was often threatened by such things as ants, caterpillars, field mice, tares, wind, hail, and so on. Fallowing, which means to plow, but not plant, was practiced every seven years to enrich the soil, control weeds, and furnish food for the poor, since whatever grew of itself was given to them.
The farm season opened in November after the early October rains, and the Gezer Calendar marks the program of a Palestinian farmer in this way:
"his two months are (olive) harvest;
his two months are grain-planting;
his two months are planting;
his month is hoeing up of flax;
his month is barley harvest;
his month is harvest and festivity;
his two months are vine-tending;
his month is summer-fruit."
The farmer’s plow was a forked branch with an attached piece of sharp metal. During the time of Saul, the Philistines monopolized iron, and Hebrew farmers were forced to go to the Philistines to have their plows sharpened. A plank or a fa*ggot of thorns served as a harrow.
Planting was done simply by broadcasting it or by a kind of funnel fixed to the plow, called a seed-pipe. Harvesting was accomplished by grasping a small tuft of grain in the left hand and cutting it with a sickle held in the right hand. The short-handed sickle was made with flint until about 1100 B.C. when iron became common.
Sheaves were bound into bundles and taken to the threshing floor. There the farmer beat the ripe grain with a staff or rod. Threshing floors were usually situated outside the village. Using pitchforks, the farmer winnowed the grain by tossing it into the wind. The grain was then sifted through screen trays, stored, and transported to market.
The dry season, extending from mid-May until mid-October, gave the farmer some of his greatest problems. This lack of water explains the many cisterns found in Palestine. Many regulations and customs pertain to agriculture:
1. It was forbidden to move boundaries.
2. It was forbidden to mix different kinds of seed.
3. It was forbidden to yoke animals of different species together.
4. Permission to glean fields was given to the poor.
5. The sides of a field were uncut to benefit the poor.
6. It was forbidden to turn back for a forgotten sheaf.
7. Passers-by were authorized to pluck ears.
Land was measured by the yoke - that is, the area that a pair of oxen could plough in a day. The value of the land was fixed according to whatever was planted in it. Now, of course, I don’t have to spell out the comparable occupation today. Although the methods have certainly changed, the occupation hasn’t, and it is still as vital a one as it has ever been.
4. The Easiest Part of Being a Mother Is Giving Birth
Illustration
Erma Bombeck
For the first four or five years after I had children, I considered motherhood a temporary condition - not a calling. It was a time of my life set aside for exhaustion and long hours. It would pass. Then one afternoon with three kids in tow, I came out of the supermarket pushing a cart (with four wheels that went in opposite directions) when my toddler son got away from me.
Just outside the door, he ran toward a machine holding bubble gum in a glass dome. In a voice that shattered glass, he shouted, "Gimme! Gimme!" I told him I would gimme him what-for if he didn't stop shouting and get in the car. As I physically tried to pry his body from around the bubble gum machine, he pulled the entire thing over. Glass and balls of bubble gum went all over the parking lot. We had now attracted a crowd. Donna Reed would have brushed away his tears and granted him absolution on the spot. I wasn't Donna Reed. I told him he would never see another cartoon as long as he lived, and if he didn't control his temper he was going to be making license plates for the state. He tried to stifle his sobs as he looked around at the staring crowd. Then he did something that I was to remember the rest of my life. In his helpless quest for comfort, he turned to the only one he trusted his emotions with - me. He threw his arms around my knees and held on for dear life. I had humiliated him, chastised him and berated him, but I was still all he had. That single incident defined my role. I was a major force in this child's life. Sometimes we forget how important stability is to a child. I've always told mine, "The easiest part of being a mother is giving birth. The hardest part is showing up for it each day."
This is traditionally the day when children give something back to their mothers for all the spit they produced to wash dirty faces, all the old gum their mothers held in their hands, all the noses and fannies that were wiped, and all the bloody knees that were "made well" with a kiss. This is the day mothers are rewarded for washing all those sheets in the middle of the night, driving kids to school when they missed the bus and enduring all the football games in the rain. It's appreciation day for making them finish something, not believing them when they said, "I hate you," and for sharing their good times and their bad times. Their cards probably won't reflect it, but what they are trying to say is "Thank you for showing up."
5. Unconventional Mother’s Day Gifts
Illustration
This Mother's Day take a moment to think of all the mothers in the world who are in need. There are millions of women in the world living on less than a dollar a day. There are women in this country who are wondering how they are going to feed or diaper their children from day to day. There are children who need medical attention that their parents may not be able to afford. Anyone who has ever had to worry about such things can deeply sympathize. For those of us who have escaped such worries, we can only imagine the level of instinctive stress that uncertainty can provoke.
There are many ways to celebrate Mother's Day, but here are a few unconventional suggestions that will prove to your own mother that she did a good job raising you. How about dropping off a box of diapers and/or a case of formula to a local food bank or women's shelter? If you have some baby furniture or clothing that your own children have outgrown, how about donating that stuff to a local charity? Does our local hospital have a fund for children who need care? Are there doctors in our community or city who volunteer in clinics overseas who might need supplies? There are countless ways to help support Moms locally and globally. Let your own Mom know that you were thinking about her and all of the many things she provided for you along the way…and that you did a good deed in honor of her. It will make her proud.
6. Influence of Mothers
Illustration
Many scholars have concluded that you cannot really understand John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist movement, unless you understand his mother Susanna Wesley. She was so instrumental in his life that she inevitably affected the movement and its direction. Americans know that Abraham Lincoln led this nation through perhaps its time of greatest crisis; but who was it that made Abraham Lincoln the man that he was? I know what Lincoln thought. He said it was his mother.
I would submit to you this morning that there is not a person sitting here that in one, five, ten, a thousand different ways has not been forever influenced by their mother. I firmly believe that you cannot understand who a person is and what motivates them until you understand their past. And you cannot understand a person's past without understanding the source that co-created that person along with God—their parents.
7. All Those Preliminaries
Illustration
In an old Peanuts strip, Peppermint Patty and Violet are reflecting on being a grandmother. After Patty declares that she would like to be a grandmother, Violet agrees and says it would be nice because all they have to do is "sit and rock" (not quite the case, is it?) The girls then decide that the trouble with being a grandmother is that first you have to be a wife and then a mother…and Violet sighs, "I know it…it's all those preliminaries that get me!"
8. Who Am I? – Mother
Illustration
A teacher gave her class of second graders a lesson on the magnet and what it does. The next day in a written test, she included this question: "My full name has six letters. The first one is M. I pick up things. What am I?" When the test papers were turned in, the teacher was astonished to find that almost 50 percent of the students answered the question with the word Mother.
9. A Good Mom
Illustration
Andrew M. Greeley
Once upon a time there was a Mom, who tried her best to be a good Mom and to be fair with all her children. Her children, like all children, didn't really appreciate this and were always telling her she did more for one or the other of them than she did for all of them. "You love her (him) more than you do me", was an oft heard refrain from one or the other. Though the Mom felt bad about her children's reaction, she just continued to do the best she could to keep them all satisfied. She encouraged their individual talents, seeing them as God-given gifts that needed her encouragement. When they reached adulthood and were out on their own, each one doing his or her own thing, she often wondered if she could have done something else to discourage sibling rivalry.
Imagine her surprise one Mother's Day, when she was well up in years, when each child told a story about a time when she made them feel so loved that they were able to take the necessary steps to succeed in some project. They said that these memories have been a powerful force in their everyday lives and in how they try to parent their children. They ended their storytelling by singing "A Mother's Love is a Blessing!"
10. Why God Made Moms…
Illustration
"Why God made moms" answers given by 2nd grade school children to the following questions.
Why did God make mothers?
1. She's the only one who knows where the scotch tape is.
2. Mostly to clean the house.
3. To help us out of there when we were getting born.
How did God make mothers?
1. He used dirt, just like for the rest of us.
2. Magic plus super powers and a lot of stirring.
3. God made my Mom just the same like he made me. He just used bigger parts.
What ingredients are mothers made of?
1. God makes mothers out of clouds and angel hair and everything nice in the world and one dab of mean.
2. They had to get their start from men's bones. Then they mostly use string, I think.
Why did God give you your mother and not some other mom?
1. We're related.
2. God knew she likes me a lot more than other people's moms like me.
What kind of little girl was your mom?
1. My mom has always been my mom and none of that other stuff.
2. I don't know because I wasn't there, but my guess would be pretty bossy.
3. They say she used to be nice.
What did mom need to know about dad before she married him?
1. His last name.
2. She had to know his background. Like is he a crook? Does he get drunk on beer?
3. Does he make at least $800 a year? Did he say NO to drugs and YES to chores?
Why did your Mom marry your dad?
1. My dad makes the best spaghetti in the world. And my Mom eats alot.
2. She got too old to do anything else with him.
3. My grandma says that Mom didn't have her thinking cap on.
Who's the boss at your house?
1. Mom doesn't want to be boss, but she has to because dad's such a goof ball.
2. Mom. You can tell by room inspection. She sees the stuff under the bed.
3. I guess Mom is, but only because she has a lot more to do than dad.
What's the difference between moms and dads?
1. Moms work at work and work at home, and dads just go to work at work.
2. Moms know how to talk to teachers without scaring them.
3. Dads are taller and stronger, but moms have all the real power 'cause that's who you got to ask if you want to sleep over at your friend's.
4. Moms have magic, they make you feel better without medicine.
What does your Mom do in her spare time?
1. Mothers don't do spare time.
2. To hear her tell it, she pays bills all day long.
What would it take to make your Mom perfect?
1. On the inside she's already perfect. Outside, I think some kind of plastic surgery.
2. Diet. You know, her hair. I'd diet, maybe blue.
If you could change one thing about your Mom, what would it be?
1. She has this weird thing about me keeping my room clean. I'd get rid of that.
2. I'd make my Mom smarter. Then she would know it was my sister who did it and not me.
3. I would like for her to get rid of those invisible eyes on her back of her head.
11. A Call for Help
Illustration
Dennis Marquardt adapted
A woman telephoned a friend and asked how she was feeling, "Terrible," came the reply over the wire, "my head's splitting and my back and legs are killing me. The house is a mess, and the kids are simply driving me crazy." Very sympathetically the caller said, "Listen, go and lie down, I'll come over right away and cook lunch for you, clean up the house, and take care of the children while you get some rest. By the way, how is Sam?" "Sam?" the complaining housewife gasped. "Who is Sam?" "My heavens," exclaimed the first woman, "I must have dialed the wrong number." There was a long pause. "Are you still coming over?" the harried mother asked hopefully.
12. The Value of the Job - Motherhood
Illustration
Being a mother is a demanding job. As a matter of fact, according to a recent report from Salary.com, a website dedicated to researching average salaries for various jobs and industries,reports stay-at-home moms would earn an average of $162,581 annually, including overtime, if they received a paycheck. Women who work a full-time 40 hour a week job could expect an additional $85,939 for the work done at home. Among the jobs the stay-at-home moms reported to Salary.com were day-care center teacher, van driver, housekeeper, cook, chief executive officer, computer operator, nurse and general maintenance worker.
These are all jobs that are fairly easy to appoint a dollarvalue but like those MasterCard advertisem*nts there are many "priceless" aspects to the job: the hug that comes at just the right time, the crust cut off the sandwich in just the right way, the reassuring laugh that reminds us not to take ourselves too seriously, and the countless other little things that we celebrate on Mother's Day.
13. One Day Is Not Enough
Illustration
While it is wonderful that we set aside one day to especially honor mothers, let us reflect for a moment on all of the things mothers do for us. First of all, they bring us into the world through a biological miracle that is amazing, but certainly not easy. Then they spend the next two decades preparing meals, solving problems, kissing boo-boos, helping us learn everything from how to brush our teeth to how to navigate the difficulties of the "real world." They spend the rest of their lives fretting and worrying about us. They care for us in a way that is beyond words. They sacrifice for us in ways beyond words. Even after they have passed on, and Mother's Day can be especially difficult for those of us who have lost mothers, their influence is so powerful that it stays with us always. I propose that one day is not enough. One day is nice, but it is not enough.
So while we take this day to especially honor mothers, let us think of it as a planning day. How can we honor our mothers, grandmothers, mother-in-laws, and aunts each and every day? How can we recognize their special contributions to our lives every day? Let us take a moment to jot down five ways we can truly honor mothers, from our own mothers to the young mothers in this congregation, to the mothers who might be missing their grown up kids, to mothers who may have passed away. (Give a few moments to allow individuals to jot down their list. You may provide a few moments at the end of the sermon or at the end of the service to return to these lists and allow people to share their ideas with each other.) Now, let us make a commitment to honor these women every day of the year because one day is not enough!
14. A Mother’s Prayer
Illustration
If I live in a house of spotless beauty with everything in its place, but have not love, I am a housekeeper--not a homemaker. If I have time for waxing, polishing, and decorative achievements, but have not love, my children learn cleanliness - not godliness. Love leaves the dust in search of a child's laugh. Love smiles at the tiny fingerprints on a newly cleaned window. Love wipes away the tears before it wipes up the spilled milk. Love picks up the child before it picks up the toys. Love is present through the trials. Love reprimands, reproves, and is responsive. Love crawls with the baby, walks with the toddler, runs with the child, then stands aside to let the youth walk into adulthood. Love is the key that opens salvation's message to a child's heart. Before I became a mother I took glory in my house of perfection. Now I glory in God's perfection of my child.
As a mother, there is much I must teach my child, but the greatest of all is love.
15. Mothers and Father’s Get Short Changed
Illustration
Mothers and Fathers -- you think you're special? You think you're being honored, having one day out of the year dedicated to you?
Consider this: Egg salad gets a whole week. As do pickles, pancakes, pickled peppers, split pea soup, clowns, carpenter ants and aardvarks. Peanut butter (March), chickens (September) and oatmeal (January) each rate an entire month.
Mothers and fathers can draw solace from the fact that along with themselves, such national treasures as the rubber eraser and moles also merit only a single day of recognition.
16. The Writing on the Wall: A Poem for Mother’s Day
Illustration
A simple poem has been circulating on the Internet by an unknown author. It speaks of unconditional love in a beautiful way:
A weary mother returned from the store,
Lugging groceries through the kitchen door.
Awaiting her arrival was her eight-year-old son,
Eager to relay what his younger brother had done.
"While I was out playing and Dad was on a call,
T.J. took his crayons and wrote on the wall!
It's on the new paper you just hung in the den.
I told him you'd be mad at having to do it again."
She let out a moan and furrowed her brow.
"Where is your little brother right now?"
She emptied her arms and with a purposeful stride,
She marched to his closet where he had gone to hide.
She called his full name as she entered his room.
He trembled with fear--he knew that meant doom!
For the next ten minutes, she ranted and raved
About the expensive wallpaper and how she had saved.
Lamenting all the work it would take to repair,
She condemned his actions and total lack of care.
The more she scolded, the madder she got,
Then stomped from his room, totally distraught!
She headed for the den to confirm her fears.
When she saw the wall, her eyes flooded with tears.
The message she read pierced her soul with a dart.
It said, "I love Mommy," surrounded by a heart.
Well, the wallpaper remained, just as she found it,
With an empty picture frame hung to surround it.
A reminder to her, and indeed to all,
Take time to read the handwriting on the wall.
17. A New Command on Mother's Day
Illustration
On this day when we're trying to show our loving appreciation for all that love we've received from the special person called "Mom," it is so fitting that we hear Jesus say what he said here in our text: "A new command I give you: Love one another." Actually, Jesus' command to love one another is appropriate for any day of the year, but it does take on special meaning on a day like today since included in that command to love, are those special ladies who brought us into this world and loved us in a way that only a mother can.
18. The Wild Goose
Illustration
Mickey Anders
Celtic Christians chose, not the dove, but the wild goose as a symbol representing the Holy Spirit. It sounds strange to us, but it has a long tradition in Ireland.
While the Roman Church imagined the Holy Spirit in the form of a peaceful, graceful dove, the Ancient Celts understood the Holy Spirit to be like a wild goose. When you hear of the Spirit descending like a heavenly dove on you, you hear harps and strings softly playing and get a peaceful feeling. The image of the Holy Spirit as dove has become so familiar and domesticated an image we pay little attention.
The image of a wild goose descending upon you is a different matter altogether. A wild goose is one noisy, bothersome bird. I like this image of the Holy Spirit as a wild goose because it jars us out of our complacency. We need such an image to correct our overly safe and overly sweet image of the Spirit. One preacher friend asked, "How many times can you sing 'There's a Sweet, Sweet Spirit in This Place' without your blood sugar reaching diabetic levels?"
When the Spirit comes in the Bible, it never seems to be sweet or safe. God's Spirit called the prophets to speak to Israel in words that were bold and sometimes dangerous. Ezekiel saw a vision of God's Spirit blowing through a valley of dry bones and bringing them to life. John the Baptist dressed in camel's hair and eating wild locusts proclaimed, "I baptize you with water but he who comes after me will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire." Paul gave this advice to young Timothy, "For this reason I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you through the laying on of my hands; for God did not give us a spirit of cowardice, but rather a spirit of power and of love and of self-discipline" (2 Timothy 1:6-7).
Neither safe nor tame, the Spirit inspired Paul to proclaim, "There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28).
It was this wild Goose that Jesus referred to when he preached his first sermon and quoted Isaiah, saying, "For the Spirit of the Lord is upon me for he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor, to proclaim release to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of God's favor" (Luke 4:18).
19. If There's No Gardener, There's No Garden!
Illustration
Steven R. Covey
A. Roger Merrill, in the best-selling book First Things First, tells the story of a business consultant friend who was moving into his new home. He decided to hire a friend to landscape the grounds. This friend had a doctorate in horticulture and she was extremely bright and knowledgeable.
"Fred had a great vision for the grounds, but because he was very busy and traveled a lot, he kept emphasizing to [his friend] the need to create his garden in a way that would require little or no maintenance on his part." He said automatic sprinklers were an absolute necessity; he was always on the lookout for laborsaving devices and any other ways of cutting time.
Finally, his friend said, "Fred, I can see what you're saying. But there's one thing you need to deal with before we go any further. If there's no gardener, there's no garden!"
20. Honor through Your Life
Illustration
R.E. Lybrand
Whether we want it to be this way or not, the way we live is a reflection upon our parents. So, if you really want to honor your mother, you should live in a way that she will be proud of. You must live an honorable life.
One day, several convicts were in a prison library flipping through a merchandise catalog. On one of the pages there was the picture of a lovely home. One of the prisoners said, "Man, I sure wish I could give my mother a house like that to live in." Another prisoner pointed to the nice car that was pictured in front of the house and said, "No, I'd rather give my ma a car like that, so she could come to see me once in a while."
Then the two men noticed their friend, Bill, just staring blankly at the magazine, so they asked him to say what he would like to give his mother. After thinking for a few minutes, he looked at them with tears in his eyes and said, in a sorrowful tone, "I wish I could give my mother a more honorable son." That young man was grieving about the fact that his dishonorable life and actions had dishonored his mother.
21. Beauty Beyond the Pitfalls
Illustration
Unknown
This is a Mothers' Day sermon. I'm preaching without apology and with appreciation for that time - honored institution without the benefit of which we wouldn't be here!
Every Mother's Day sermon I've run across starts with an explanation - this one's no exception. As ministers, we're reminded not to get too sentimental about motherhood because:
- for some, motherhood is an accident, and not always a welcome one;
- for some, biological motherhood isn't possible;
- for some, mothers weren't all that nice;
- for some, motherhood under the very best of circ*mstances is still less than a bed of roses and a primrose path.
If I can take some liberties with poet Wilhelm Busch's words, I'd have to say: "(Mutter) werden ist nitch schwer; (Mutter) sein dagegen sehr." (To become a (mother) is not so difficult; on the other hand, being a (mother) is very much so!)
So, with all those qualifications, why bother with Mothers' Day at all? I'll tell you why -because for all its stumbling blocks, pitfalls and broken dreams, for all the soiled diapers, soiled wallpaper and spoiled plans, we're talking about a beautiful ideal, a natural part of God's creative plan to bring love and caring to light. Motherhood is a constant demand for the gift of love and caring.
22. A Mother Who Lived Her Faith
Illustration
Marian Wright Edelman
"I feel I am the luckiest child in the world to have had a mother and father who lived, rather than just preached, their faith and family values," claims Marian Wright Edelman. Through her parents' example, she learned that being honest was more important than being honored. She learned first-hand that faith was safer and more enduring than fame.
Marian was the youngest of five children. Her father was a Baptist preacher who, Marian says, "lived every day the faith he preached on Sunday." He was an example for her and her brothers and sisters as well as for their community. Marian's mother worked in the background but exhibited that same practical faith. Her mother kept both their home and the church running smoothly.
The children worried how their mother would manage after their father died. "My mother did not miss a beat," Marian proudly states, "in assuming either the family or church leadership mantle." Her brother Harry assumed his father's pulpit while her mother continued as church organist and fund-raiser. She lived out "our father's legacy of service in and outside the home," Marian reflects.
Marian's mother prospered by giving and led by serving. After her husband died, Mrs. Wright opened her home for 12 foster children. She continued to operate the Wright Home for the Aged, located behind the church, until she died. This selfless woman cooked three meals a day for senior citizens, some of whom were younger than she was. Finally, her family convinced her to hire a cook. This remarkable woman kept up her community and church work until a few weeks before her death because, as she told her children many times, "I did not promise the Lord that I was going part of the way. I promised him I was going all the way until he tells me otherwise."
23. An Unsung Hero
Illustration
Stephen M. Crotts
One unsung hero of the Bible is Onesiphorus. He is forever known as a minister to the minister, the one who kept the Apostle Paul on his feet. In 2 Timothy 1:15-18, Paul confided, "You are aware that all who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes. May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, for he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chains, but when he arrived in Rome, he searched for me earnestly and found me - may the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that day - and you well know all the service he rendered at Ephesus." Just listen to the action verbs:
He often refreshed me.
He was not ashamed.
He searched for me.
He found me.
He rendered service.
May we be that sort of person to one another, and especially to our prophets!
24. The One I Loved the Most
Illustration
Donald J. Shelby
Journalist Bill Ritter tells of a TV interview that once caught his attention. The person being interviewed was a heroic mother who had single-handedly raised a large family. In spite of all the frustrations, disappointments and obstacles, she had persevered and every one of her children had made remarkable achievements, not only in their schooling but also in their vocation. It was an inspiring story worth celebrating, for it revealed the heights and depths of human greatness. During the interview, the mother was asked her secret by the reporter who said, 'I suppose you loved all your children equally, making sure that all got the same treatment?'
"The mother replied, 'I loved them. I loved them all, each one of them, but not equally. I loved the one the most that was down until he was up. I loved the one the most that was weak until she was strong. I loved the one the most that was hurt until he was healed. I loved the one the most that was lost until she was found."'
25. Am I Loved?
Illustration
Paul Sweet
I had a professor in Childhood Development who said, "All it would take to have a perfect world is just one generation of perfect parents." I believed that until mid-life, when I saw several nearly perfect parents who had terrible children. But the concept is generally true--we learn to love because we were loved first. We love, according to the Bible, because God loved us first.
We all need to be loved. And we grow up testing whether we are indeed loved. One of the basic questions of our youth is, "Am I loved?" It is asked in the back seat of a car. It is asked at a party. It is asked with defiance at home. It is asked with incomplete homework at school. It is asked when drugs are offered around in friendship groups. It is asked when a gang leader suggests an initiation rite. "By this you know you are loved…."
Everyone here today, mothers or not, needs to ask, "How am I demonstrating love?" Is it in a way that others can experience?
26. The Most Important Job in the World
Illustration
James W. Moore
Dr. Tony Campolo is a well-known and highly-respected, inspirational speaker. Years ago Tony Campolospent much of his time traveling around the world on speaking tours.
Meanwhile, his wife, Peggy, choseto stay home and give herself and all that she has to the "Bringing Up" of their two children, Bart and Lisa.On those rare occasions when Peggy didtravel with Tony, she foundherself engaged in conversations with some of the most accomplished, impressive, influential, sophisticated people in the world.
After one such trip, Peggy told Tony that sometimes as she visits with these powerful people… she finds herself feeling intimidated and sometimes even questioning her own self-worth. Tony said to her: "Well, honey, why don't you come up with something you could say when you meet people that will let them know that you strongly value what you do and you feel that it is dramatically, urgent and crucial and important.
Not long after that, Theywere at a party… when a woman said to Peggy in a rather condescending tone, "Well, my dear, what do you do?" Tony Campolo heard his wife say: "I am nurturing two hom*o Sapiens into the dominant values of the Judaeo-Christian tradition in order that they might become instruments for the transformation of the social order into the kind of eschatological utopia God envisioned from the beginning of time."
And the other woman said: "O, my, I'm just a lawyer."
I like that story because it reminds us that there are a lot of important jobs in the world today but not one of them is more important than the job of being a mother.
27. Qualities Needed In All Moms
Illustration
Brett Blair
A panel of experts was asked to complete some sentences about their moms. What made them experts was the one thing they all had in common. They were all kindergarteners. Even though these are the words of 6 year olds I think the qualities they recognized in their moms are they qualities needed in all moms. Here are the sentences and the answers:
My mom is best at: "feeding the dog," "making my bed," "driving," "cleaning," "running," "riding a two-wheeler," "watering the garden."
If I had enough money, I'd buy her: "flowers," "a car," "a necklace," "a brand-new fan," "a kitten," "a diamond ring," "a big pack of bubble gum."
It makes me feel good inside when Mom says: "I love you," "good job," "dinnertime!" "You look handsome," "I'll buy you something."
My mom is as pretty as a -- "butterfly," "ballerina," "mouse," "princess," "my brothers," "goose," "gold ring," "a clean horse."
By the way, one of the most memorable comments from the children on Father's Day was: Daddy gets tired out from: "chasing mommy."
Is It Well With Your Family?
28. Whose Boy Are You?
Illustration
Brett Blair
One of the great preachers of our time is Dr. Fred Craddock. Craddock tells a story about vacationing with his wife one summer in Gatlinburg, Tennessee. One night they found a quiet little restaurant, where they looked forward to a private meal. While they were waiting for their food, they noticed a distinguished looking, white-haired man moving from table to table, visiting with the guests. Craddock leaned over and whispered to his wife, "I hope he doesn't come over here." He didn't want anyone intruding on their privacy. But sure enough, the man did come over to their table. "Where you folks from?" he asked in a friendly voice.
"Oklahoma," Craddock answered.
"Splendid state, I hear, although I've never been there," the stranger said. "What do you do for a living?"
"I teach homiletics at the graduate seminary of PhillipsUniversity," Craddock replied.
"Oh, so you teach preachers how to preach, do you? Well, I've got a story to tell you." And with that, the gentleman pulled up a chair and sat down at the table with Craddock and his wife.
Dr. Craddock said he groaned inwardly and thought to himself, "Oh, no! Here comes another preacher story! It seems like everybody has at least one."
The man stuck out his hand. "I'm Ben Hooper," he said. "I was born not far from here across the mountains. My mother wasn't married when I was born, so I had a pretty hard time. When I started to school, my classmates had a name for me, and it wasn't a very nice name. I used to go off by myself at recess and lunch time because the things they said to me cut me so deep. What was worse was going to town on Saturday afternoons and feeling like every eye was burning a hole through me, wondering just who my father was.
"When I was about 12 years old, a new preacher came to our church. I would always go in late and slip out early. But one day the preacher said the benediction so fast I got caught and to walk out with the crowd. I could feel every eye in the church on me. Just about the time I got to the door I felt a big hand on my shoulder. I looked up and the preacher was looking right at me. ‘Who are you, son? Whose boy are you?' he asked. I felt this big weight coming down on me. It was like a big black cloud. Even the preacher was putting me down. But as he looked down at me, studying my face, he began to smile a big smile of recognition. ‘Wait a minute!' he said. ‘I know who you are. I see the family resemblance now. You are a child of God.' With that he slapped me across the rump and said, ‘Boy, you've got a great inheritance. Go and claim it.'
The old man looked across the table at Fred Craddock and said, "Those were the most important words anybody ever said to me, and I've never forgotten them." With that, he smiled shook hands with Craddock and his wife, and moved on to another table to greet old friends.
And as he walked away, Craddock – a native Tennesseean himself – remembered from his studies of Tennessee history that on two occasions the people of Tennessee had elected to the office of governor men who had been born out of wedlock. One of them was a man named Ben Hooper.
29. Mother's Can Be Shrewd
Illustration
Brett Blair
Former president Jimmy Carter spoke at Southern Methodist University and related an incident that occurred after he left the Whitehouse. A woman reporter came to Plains, Georgia, to interview his mother in relation to an article about Mr. Carter and his family. His mother really didn't want to be interviewed, but was being gracious. So when the reporter knocked at her door, Mrs. Carter invited her in. The reporter asked some hard questions and actually was rather aggressive and rude.
"I want to ask you a question," she said. "Your son ran for the presidency on the premise that he would always tell the truth. Has he ever lied?"
Mrs. Carter said, "I think he's truthful; I think you can depend on his word."
The reporter again asked if he had ever lied in his entire life.
His mother said, "Well, I guess maybe he's told a little white lie."
"Ah, see there!" the reporter exclaimed. "He's lied! If he told a white lie, he has lied."
The reporter was still not satisfied and asked, "What is a white lie?" Lillian Carter said, "It's like a moment ago when you knocked on the door and I went to the door and said I was glad to see you."
30. Parenting
Illustration
Brett Blair
It is in the home that we first develop our sense of who we are. Every child has a right to a secure, happy home life. Every child has a right to the love and nurture of his or her parents.
Akin to identity is the question of self-worth. Dr. James Dobson, author of several excellent books on raising children cautions us that, "A child can learn to doubt his worth at home even when he is deeply loved by his parents! Destructive ideas find their way into his thinking process, leading him to conclude that he is ugly or incredibly stupid or that he has already proved himself to be a hopeless failure in life."
The famous Psychiatrist Dr. Alfred Adler had an experience when a young boy which illustrates just how powerful such a belief can be upon behavior and ability. He got off to a bad start in arithmetic and his teacher became convinced that he was "dumb in mathematics." The teacher then advised the parents of this "fact" and told them not to expect too much of him. They too were convinced. Alder passively accepted the evaluation they had placed upon him. And his grades in arithmetic proved they had been correct. One day, however, he had a sudden flash of insight and thought he saw how to work a problem the teacher had put on the board, and which none of the other pupils could work. He announced as much to the teacher. She and the whole class laughed. Whereupon, he became indignant, strode to the blackboard, and worked the problem much to their amazement. In doing so, he realized that he could understand arithmetic. He felt a new confidence in his ability, and went on to become a good math student.
We need to encourage our children. We need not only to surround them with love but we need to help them feel competent as persons.
I wish every one of us had inscribed on the walls of our home the words of Dorothy Law Nolte's work, "Children Learn What They Live," and then kept this constantly before us in our daily activities.
- If a child lives with criticism, he learns to condemn.
- If a child lives with hostility, he learns to fight.
- If a child lives with ridicule, he learns to be shy.
- If a child lives with shame, he learns to feel guilty.
- If a child lives with fear, he learns to be apprehensive.
- If a child lives with pity, he learns to feel sorry for himself.
- If a child lives with jealousy, he learns to feel guilty.
But...
- If a child lives with encouragement, he learns confidence.
- If a child lives with tolerance, he learns to be patient.
- If a child lives with praise, he learns to appreciate.
- If a child lives with security, he learns to have faith.
- If a child lives with acceptance, he learns to love.
- If a child lives with friendship, he learns joy.
- If a child lives with approval, he learns to like himself.
- If a child lives with recognition, he learns to have goals.
- If a child lives with fairness, he learns justice.
- If a child lives with honesty, he learns truth.
- If a child lives with sincerity, he learns to have faith in himself and those around him.
- If a child lives with love, he learns that the world is a wonderful place.
31. My Mother Taught Me…
Illustration
- My mother taught me TO APPRECIATE A JOB WELL DONE. "If you're going to kill each other, do it outside. I just finished cleaning."
- My mother taught me RELIGION. "You better pray that will come out of the carpet."
- My mother taught me about TIME TRAVEL. "If you don't straighten up, I'm going to knock you into the middle of next week!"
- My mother taught me LOGIC. "Because I said so, that's why."
- My mother taught me MORE LOGIC. "If you fall out of that swing and break your neck, you're not going to the store with me."
- My mother taught me FORESIGHT. "Make sure you wear clean underwear, in case you're in an accident."
- My mother taught me IRONY. "Keep crying, and I'll give you something to cry about."
- My mother taught me about the science of OSMOSIS. "Shut your mouth and eat your supper."
- My mother taught me about CONTORTIONISM. "Will you look at that dirt on the back of your neck!"
- My mother taught me about STAMINA. "You'll sit there until all that spinach is gone."
- My mother taught me about WEATHER. "This room of yours looks as if a tornado went through it."
- My mother taught me about HYPOCRISY. "If I told you once, I've told you a million times. Don't exaggerate!"
- My mother taught me the CIRCLE OF LIFE. "I brought you into this world, and I can take you out."
- My mother taught me about BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION. "Stop acting like your father!"
- My mother taught me about ENVY. "There are millions of less fortunate children in this world who don't have wonderful parents like you do."
- My mother taught me about ANTICIPATION. "Just wait until we get home."
- My mother taught me about RECEIVING. "You are going to get it when you get home!"
- My mother taught me MEDICAL SCIENCE. "If you don't stop crossing your eyes, they are going to freeze that way."
- My mother taught me ESP. "Put your sweater on; don't you think I know when you are cold?"
- My mother taught me HUMOR. "When that lawn mower cuts off your toes, don't come running to me."
- My mother taught me HOW TO BECOME AN ADULT. "If you don't eat your vegetables, you'll never grow up."
- My mother taught me GENETICS. "You're just like your father."
- My mother taught me about my ROOTS. "Shut that door behind you. Do you think you were born in a barn?"
- My mother taught me WISDOM. "When you get to be my age, you'll understand."
- And my favorite: My mother taught me about JUSTICE. "One day you'll have kids, and I hope they turn out just like you!"
32. The "Potential" Monarch
Illustration
Michael P. Green
“What’s it like to know you will one day wear the crown of England?” An American news reporter put that question to Prince Charles. Without hesitation, Charles replied, “Rough!” The future king expanded on this by describing the almost unbelievable discipline needed to groom a person for the throne. He had to become fluent in a number of languages, master history, mathematics, and the sciences, become expert in heraldry, diplomacy, and protocol, as well as serve in the military. Almost every waking moment has been devoted to his grooming. “It’s still rough,” said the potential monarch. “I really don’t have a life of my own.”
Normally we think of a prince as growing up with a silver spoon in his mouth and a kingdom for his playground. But it makes more sense to realize that an heir has to be groomed for the task ahead of him.
We, too, are destined to reign—with Christ. Now we are being groomed for the task.
Note: This illustrations is from 1982. No one could have anticipated that Charles would still not be king into the 2020s. It's a lesson on how uncertain is the future.
33. What’s a Good Mother Like?
Illustration
King Duncan
Judith Viorst once wrote an essay based on interviews she had with children. The subject was "What's a good mother like?"
Viorst reports that the children expected their mother to get angry from time to time. "She has to," said Ted, "or she'll faint from holding it in."
"But it's best to remember," said Randy, "that when your mother starts to act real weird, you have to look scared and serious. Don't giggle. When mommies are mad, they get madder if you giggle."
"My mommy got so mad," said Megan, "that she yanked the plate off the table and all the mashed potatoes flew into the air."
"And why," Viorst asked, pretending she'd never heard of such shocking behavior, "why would a mother do a thing like that?"
"Well," said Megan, "she told my older brother, Mike, he's 11 years old, to eat the potatoes on his plate and he said ‘Later.' And then she told him again to eat the potatoes and Mike said ‘Soon.' And then she told him he had better eat those potatoes right now and he said, ‘In a minute.' And then she stood up and Mike finally took a bite and told her, ‘How can I eat them? They're cold!'"
It's not easy being a Mom.
34. Oh, Now I Understand
Illustration
King Duncan
C. S. Lewis once said that the most frequently spoken word in heaven would be, "OH." As in, "Oh, now I understand." Or, "Oh, now I see what God's plan was." Or, "Oh, now I see the reason for the trial I went through."
We do not have that luxury in this world. We walk by faith, not by knowledge. But one day it will be revealed to us. We will be in the presence of the Father and the Son and the Spirit. How can we be in the presence of all three at the same time? It beats me, but as St. Paul says in another place, "I know whom I have believed and I am persuaded that He is able to guard until that Day what has been entrusted to me."
35. I Step Out on the Word of God
Illustration
King Duncan
Poet Maya Angelou recalls the struggles of her grandmother living through the great depression. She remembers a lot of things about her grandmother: her wisdom, her stature. But it was her grandmother's faith that Maya remembers most. Clasping her hands behind her back her grandmother would look up into the distant sky and say, "I will step out on the word of God."
The great depression was a difficult time for everyone, but "especially so for a single black woman in the South tending her crippled son and two grandchildren." But when faced with mountainous burdens, Maya's grandmother would face the sky and say, "I will step out on the word of God."
"She would look up as if she could will herself into the heavens," Maya writes. And because of her grandmother, Maya Angelou grew up knowing that the word of God had power. And now, today, whenever she experiences the injustices of this world, Maya remembers the great faith of her grandmother. God gives us spiritual armor to protect us from the evil we face daily: He gives us truth, righteousness, the willingness to speak up for Christ, and, most importantly, faith.
36. Jerry's Faith
Illustration
John E. Sumwalt
In the Lutheran parochial school I attended as a child I was taught to fear God, and that I risked punishment for sin. When I was 17 years old, my younger sister died of a brain tumor, and I began to question everything that I had been taught. I could not understand how God could allow this. Her death left me confused and angry. I became more of a doubter than a believer. I came to the conclusion that I could only believe in myself. I pushed myself, I worked hard; I became an over-achiever and eventually a workaholic. This program propelled me to financial success, but it was accompanied by personal failure. I learned that the love of money can bring financial gains that are accompanied by personal loss.
I became an empty person. I couldn't stand success and began to self-destruct. I lost everything, my friends, those who had pretended to be my friends and my family. It was all like an unbelievable soap opera -- and before it was over I learned quite a bit about the judicial system, the Mafia, extortion and revenge. There were times when I feared for my life and for the lives of the members of my family. It was the kind of situation that causes one to think about taking his own life.
But I wasn't ready for that option. The love I had for my children gave me courage and made me determined to try again. I wanted to be a believer in something bigger than myself, but it was difficult. It would take a miracle. I carefully planned a comeback. I wanted to be successful again and not make some of the same mistakes. The task seemed monumental.
In the process I met an independent preacher named Andy. He worked for me on a part-time basis and we soon became friends. He wasn't pushy with his religion, so I decided to go to one of his church services on a Wednesday night. It was quite unusual to say the least. Wednesday night was testimony night. The opening song service was quite an experience. The songs had beautiful melodies and were easy to sing. When they sang songs like "He Touched Me" and "O, How I Love Jesus," I noticed that many had tears in their eyes as they sang with great feeling. I felt touched by this, and quite uncomfortable. The testimonies that followed were as impressive to me as the song service. People spoke about what God had done for them, how God answered prayer and healed them. Was this real? Do they know a different God than I do, I wondered? It was all so confusing.
I didn't know if I could believe it, but I went back to observe more. I knew these people had something I didn't have. I guess it was a simple faith in God. It seemed like a good way to live, but I still wondered if it was real. If there was no God, I think we would have to invent one to keep our sanity. I tried to keep an open mind on the subject. I found myself reading the Bible because I was hungry for truth.
One Saturday night my mother called to tell me that my grandmother was gravely ill. I needed strength to face this so I went to church the next morning before going to the hospital to see her. That morning Andy spoke of the healing power of Jesus. I cornered him after church and said, "Andy, are you sure he heals today?" He was sure. I marked several of the healing promises in my Bible and then I went to the hospital. As I entered the waiting room, I saw that many of my relatives were there to pay their last visit to Grandma. The pastor of her church was about to get on the elevator after praying with her. I stopped him for a brief talk. I said, "Don't you believe God has the ability to heal people?" He assured me he believed that God does have the power to heal, but he added that we all have a time to die. I knew he was right, but a voice in the back of my mind said, "Prove me and know that I am God."
I followed my cousin and his wife into Grandma's room in the intensive care unit. When I spoke to Grandma she regained consciousness, and her smile told me that she was pleased to see her oldest grandson. I got right to the point. "Grandma, do you want me to pray that God will heal you?" She agreed. The four of us held hands and I prayed for her healing. It was a special moment. The nurses and other members of the hospital staff who were present stood with tears in their eyes. When I finished I had a feeling that Grandma was healed. My cousin's wife knew it, also. Grandma fell into a deep sleep. When we went out to the waiting room, my relatives were talking about Grandma being ready to pass away. The doctor had told them that she would not live through the day. I said, "Grandma is not going to die today. She is healed." I went home and then back to the church for the Sunday evening service.
On Monday morning my mother called to tell me that Grandma had made a complete recovery. I said, "What did the doctor have to say about this recovery?" She answered, "He said it was a miracle." I believe God knew just what I needed. I had the audacity to take God at his word, and God cared enough not to let me make a fool of myself.
Author's Note: Gerald Wagner shared this story of his grandmother's healing with a new member class in our church in the Spring of 1990. It is printed here in his own words. Mr. Wagner, an independent semi-truck driver, lives in Kenissha, Wisconsin.
37. Be Afraid of Not Living
Illustration
Maxie Dunnam
Are you afraid of dying? Listen to the poet Elsie Robinson.
“Do not be afraid of dying -- rather be afraid of not living. Do not grieve for loss by death, grieve instead for lack of life. Do not worry about facing death. Worry rather about dodging life . . . death is not the hard thing; life is the hard thing ... death can only lay you low, but life can show you up!...It is not hard to die; any fool can; every fool must die someday. But it is extremely hard to live. It takes a strong and brave, understanding person to be willing to live each day and not merely exist. You shudder and say to yourself, ‘I will die someday.’ But you’re wrong. You die every day and every day you take your choice between living and dying; between getting on and going on.”
It takes no courage to die, but it takes enormous courage to say, “I choose to live -- regardless of the cost.”
38. Essential Facts of Life
Illustration
Staff
Naturalist Henry David Thoreau is often noted for his statement that most men "live lives of quiet desperation." In an attempt to avoid that kind of existence, he lived alone from 1845 to 1847 in the woods of Walden Pond, Massachusetts. In 1854, he published his experiences in the book Walden. He wrote, "I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived. I did not wish to live what was not life, living is so dear..."
39. God Leads a Pretty Sheltered Life
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
Billions of people were scattered on a great plain before God's throne. Some of the groups near the front talked heatedly--not with cringing shame, but with belligerence. "How can God judge us?" said one. "What does He know about suffering?" snapped a brunette. She jerked back a sleeve to reveal a tattooed number from a Nazi concentration camp. "We endured terror, beatings, torture, death!" In another group a black man lowered his collar. "What about this?" he demanded, showing an ugly rope burn. "Lynched for no crime but being black! We have suffocated in slave ships, been wrenched from loved ones, toiled till death gave release." Far out across the plain were hundreds of such groups. Each had a complaint against God for the evil and suffering He permitted in His world. How lucky God was to live in heaven where there was no weeping, no fear, no hunger, no hatred! Indeed, what did God know about what man had been forced to endure in this world? "After all, God leads a pretty sheltered life," they said.
So each group sent out a leader, chosen because he had suffered the most.
There was a Jew, an African American, an untouchable from India, an illegitimate, a person from Hiroshima, and one from a Siberian slave camp. In the center of the plain they consulted with each other. At last they were ready to present their case. It was rather simple: before God would be qualified to be their judge, He must endure what they had endured. Their decision was that God should be sentenced to live on earth-as a man!
But because He was God, they set certain safeguards to be sure He could not use His divine powers to help Himself: Let Him be born a Jew. Let the legitimacy of His birth be doubted, so that none would know who is really His father. Let Him champion a cause so just, but so radical, that it brings down upon Him the hate, condemnation, and efforts of every major traditional and established religious authority to eliminate Him. Let Him try to describe what no man has ever seen, tasted, heard, or smelled-let Him try to communicate God to men. Let Him be betrayed by His dearest friends. Let Him be indicted on false charges, tried before a prejudiced jury, and convicted by a cowardly judge. Let Him see what it is to be terribly alone and completely abandoned by every living thing. Let Him be tortured and let Him die! Let Him die the most humiliating death--with common thieves.
As each leader announced his portion of the sentence, loud murmurs of approval went up from the great throngs of people. But when the last had finished pronouncing sentence, there was a long silence. No one uttered another word. No one moved. For suddenly all knew ... God had already served His sentence.
40. HERALD
Illustration
Stephen Stewart
Daniel 3:4 - "And the herald proclaimed aloud, ‘You are commanded, O peoples, nations, and languages.’ "
How often have we heard on our radios or television screens that the President’s press secretary has made such and such a statement? Or perhaps you are associated with a company that employs a public relations man to present a picture of the company to the buying public. Well, in its biblical sense, both a press secretary and a public relations man can be considered as heralds.
The herald was an officer of the court - in fact, in most instances he was a very high ranking individual indeed. In reading 2 Kings 18:18, we find that Sennacherib’s envoy, who was himself a high ranking official, was received only by the master of the palace, the secretary and the king’s herald. And there is no indication that he was at all affronted by this reception committee, so it must have been an appropriate and customary one!
From the root meaning of the work in Hebrew, we find that the herald is a man who calls, names, reminds, reports. And that very neatly sums up the herald’s duties. He made state and royal proclamations public, and he carried ceremonial messages between princes and powers. The Greek loan word which is used in our text comes from a word which means "one who proclaims." So, you see, his duties were rather obvious, but extremely important. It just didn’t do for the king to make his own announcements. It wasn’t done that way. It had to be done through a herald, and I suppose they were just as susceptible to making errors as we are today. Although, I should imagine, with somewhat more dire consequences! If the President’s press secretary makes an error in a statement, he can always retract it through the news media. But the ancient herald had no such option. He got it right the first time - or else.
And our modern day press secretaries and P.R. men have one other distinct advantage over their ancient counterparts. Today a man can whisper into a microphone, and his words will still carry over the airwaves. But the herald had to have a very loud voice, and had to virtually shout his proclamation!
We are, perhaps, familiar with the idea of heralds from the Christmas carol HARK THE HERALD ANGELS SING, which illustrates perfectly what I have been saying. The herald angels were making a proclamation - an announcement - a message from God to man. They were proclaiming the birth of the new King. The most marvelous announcement the world has ever received!
41. The Cross Has Always Caused Problems
Illustration
Richard J. Fairchild
A Pastor on Northern Vancouver Island wrote to online study group this message:"I'm having difficulty with the Gospel this week; what is thiscross that I am to take up, and what am I to deny in followingJesus?" Another Pastor, a student minister in the United States wrote:“I find this a hard gospel text because it talks about suffering rather than joy.”
The cross has always caused problems to people. Brutal and barbaric - the cross was a tool of political power for the Romans. They maintained their power because of the fear of death on the cross. When one was condemned by the state, the condemned literally had to "take up his cross" and carry it to the public place where he was to be crucified. It was part of the humiliation process, the mechanism of socialcontrol for which crucifixion was invented.
The cross was an instrument of suffering and shame - and no more so than among the Children of Israel - where the scriptures themselves declare: "cursed is anyone who hangs on a tree". To die on a cross was a sign that one died cut off from God, and cut off from the people of God - a sign that the person was rejected. And of course in the case of Jesus this was very true.
42. Plastic Hearts
Illustration
King Duncan
A seven-year-old girl wrote Dr. Michael DeBakey, the famed heart surgeon in Houston, Texas, a note that asked this question, “Does a plastic heart have love in it?”
Dr. DeBakey replied: “Yes, a plastic heart has love in it, a great deal of love. The love in a plastic heart comes from many people who love other people, and don’t want them to die. So these people work all day and often all night to build a heart that will make people live longer.
“If you think of how much love there would be in hundreds of hearts, then that is how much love there is in a plastic heart.”
43. The Masada Mentality
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
Archibald Rutledge tells the story that as a young boy he was always catching and caging wild things. He particularly loved the sound of the mockingbird, so he decided to catch one and keep it so he could hear it sing any time.
He found a very young mockingbird and placed it in a cage outside his home. On the second day he saw a mother bird fly to the cage and feed the young bird through the bars. This pleased young Archibald. But then the following morning he found the little bird was dead.
Later young Arch was talking to the renowned ornithologist Arthur Wayne, who told him, "A mother mockingbird, finding her young in a cage, will sometimes take it poisonous berries. She evidently thinks it better for one she loves to die rather than live in captivity."
44. Dying of a Broken Heart
Illustration
Maxie Dunnam
Loneliness is the number one physical killer in America today. That’s what Dr. James Lynch, medical researcher at Johns Hopkins, contends. He has written a book entitled, The Broken Heart.
Using actuarial tables from ten years of research, Dr. Lynch tells us that those who live alone -- single, widowed, or divorced -- have premature death rates from two to ten times higher than individuals who live with others. Living alone, he says, does not necessarily produce loneliness, but the two are often related.
Among divorced people, suicide is five times higher and fatal car accidents four times higher.
People who live alone visit physicians more frequently than do married people and stay in hospitals twice as long for identical illnesses.
What does all this say? Dr. Lynch convincingly argues that loneliness produces physical illness and that people literally die of a broken heart.
What lonely person do you know for whom you may be the preventive medicine of hope and life?
45. A Life of Despair
Illustration
Brett Blair
Two of his daughters and a son-in-law committed suicide. Three of his children died of malnutrition. Marx felt no obligation to earn a living, but instead lived by begging from Engels. He fathered an illegitimate child by his maidservant. He drank heavily. He was a paid informer of the Austrian police, spying on revolutionaries. Though Marx and his wife were poor, he kept investing in the stock market where he constantly lost. His wife left him twice, but returned. When she died, he didn't attend her funeral. His correspondence with Engels was full of obscenities. His favorite daughter, Eleanor, with her father's approval, married Edward Eveling, a man who advocated blasphemy and worshiped Satan. Daughter Eleanor committed suicide, poisoning herself with cyanide. Karl Marx died in despair.
Laura Marx, Karl's other daughter committed suicide together with her husband on25 November 1911. The coupledecided they had nothing left to give to the movement to which they had devoted their lives. Laura was 66 and her husband Paul Lafargue was 69. In their suicide letter, which Paul wrote,they explained why they committed suicide.It reads:
"Healthy in body and mind, I end my life before pitiless old age which has taken from me my pleasures and joys one after another; and which has been stripping me of my physical and mental powers, can paralyse my energy and break my will, making me a burden to myself and to others. For some years I had promised myself not to live beyond 70; and I fixed the exact year for my departure from life. I prepared the method for the execution of our resolution, it was a hypodermic of cyanide acid. I die with the supreme joy of knowing that at some future time, the cause to which I have been devoted for forty-five years will triumph. Long live Communism! Long Live the international socialism!"
Vladimir Lenin was one of the speakers at the funeral. He would later write the following to his wife: "If one cannot work for the Party any longer, one must be able to look truth in the face and die like the Lafargues."
Is it any wonder things ended this way for the Marx family?When you look at the tenets of Marxism, where else would you end up but in despair? Listen to these 10 basic principles:
- Abolition of private property
- A heavy progressiveincome tax.
- Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
- Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
- State control of banks.
- State controlof communication and the press.
- State owned businesses.
- Equal liability of all to work, establishingindustrial armies
- Equal distribution of the populace over the country.
- Combination of education with industrial production.
What is there left to live for? This world would lead to the despair that caused the Marx family to take their lives. They stand in contrast to the Greatest Commandment to love God and love your neighbor and to the admonitionof the Beatitudes. Christianity frees and affirms; Marxism controls and demands. It's life or death isn't it? It's God's offer to the Israelites: I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live
46. Would We Be Ready?
Illustration
Michael L. Sherer
In our day, it's more likely than ever that some folks who live around us will raise eyebrows to think that we look for something on the other side of death. So what! Some folks have always raised their eyebrows about anything which called for taking a faith leap. But consider the alternative! I'd rather be prepared to go to dinner with a host who might forget to come, than sleep through everything and wake up in the dark, or find myself hoofing it down to K-Mart for an oil-flask-refill, trying to hedge my bets, while the host arrived and closed the door without me.
The pastor of one Florida congregation, who has made an outreach program famous, uses one question which offends some people by its tone. He asks: "If you should die tonight, why should God let you into his heaven?"
The question is worth asking. For those of us who live in the grace of God, who celebrate his "Yes!" to us each day we live, a better-focused version of the question might be, "If we knew we'd die tonight, could we be ready to face God?"
47. SOLDIER
Illustration
Stephen Stewart
1 Samuel 4:10 - "So the Philistines fought, and Israel was defeated, and they fled, every man to his home; and there was a very great slaughter, for there fell of Israel thirty thousand foot soldiers."
Acts 12:18 - "Now when day came, there was no small stir among the soldiers over what had become of Peter."
Before Saul there was no regular Israelite army, but, when a need arose, the tribes would gather together, each tribe with its own banner, and rally to the cause. And when the situation had been resolved, they would go back to their own homes. But with the establishment of the monarchy, a standing army became a necessity.
Saul started this army by choosing permanent warriors to serve him, and David later increased this force and began to pay the soldiers wages. Before this time, soldiers had lived off the land or were provided for by their families. Saul had also started the practice of recruiting mercenaries, from any tribe or people. Any likely looking man was a probable choice. Again, David followed in Saul’s footsteps and added more and more mercenaries to his army.
The Jewish soldiers were taught that they were engaged in a holy war and often the concept of "herem" - complete destruction of the enemy and his possessions - was required. During the Maccabean wars, charms were carried for protection by Jewish soldiers.
After a victory, unless it was a holy war with the herem imposed, the soldiers divided the booty, with special shares going to the officers. This was the most ancient of all customs connected with war. This is one of the more obvious advantages to being an officer!
Men from twenty to fifty were eligible to serve in the army, whose basic corps was the infantry. The military tactics employed included sieges, ambushes, raids, and surprise night attacks. In the actual battle, the first line of defense was a line of shield-bearing spearsmen. Behind this front line were archers who, besides carrying bows and arrows, carried a sword and buckler. Most battles resulted in hand-to-hand fighting. On campaign, the soldiers lived in camps and slept in tents.
Today’s soldier has more sophisticated weapons at his disposal, and his mode of transportation and communication are infinitely better, but in the ultimate moment, he is one with his soldier brothers of the past - the soldier faces death at every moment! And he must be prepared to accept that fact.
48. Rule the World with Laughter
Illustration
Staff
A fishing enthusiast was relaxing by a lake when he was approached by a nosy local. After a moment's thought, the local asked, "Hey there! You fishing?"
The angler gave him a sideways glance and replied, "Nope."
"Then what are you doin' with the fishing pole?" asked the local.
"Oh, I just like to drown worms."
I've drown a few worms in my time. Sometimes, life does not give us what we want. We face situations in which our expectations are unmet. When things don't work out exactly right, our first impulse usually is to gnash our teeth or ask to see the manager. If we can stop for a moment, step back, and take a creative look at the situation, we might be able to find something funny in even the most frustrating situation. As Mahatma Gandhi once said: "If I had no sense of humor, I should long ago have committed suicide."
That's a pretty strong statement, but it points to an important truth. Laughter is a coping mechanism. It helps us to survive. Joan Rivers, the funny lady who has had to struggle at times to find anything funny in her life, says: "Laughter sometimes comes out of very private tears." This is true. Very few of the famous comedians of our time had extremely comfortable, happy childhoods. Somehow, they gained the insight, wisdom, and grace to laugh in spite of the state of their lives. As George Santayana has said, "There is no cure for birth and death save to enjoy the interval."
To enjoy that interval, we need to step outside of ourselves and see our lives as important, but not serious. God gave us the ability to endure any hardship. Sometimes we endure it with tears and heartbreak; sometimes we endure it with numbness and the passage of time. The wisest course of all is to have a chuckle along the way.
49. God’s Plan for Renewal
Illustration
George Bass
For Jesus, God had a plan for the recovery and renewal of all people on earth, and his mission was - he believed and staked his life on this - to initiate that plan to bring in the fullness of the kingdom of God.
If Alvin Toffler, author of The Third Wave, is right, we need that kind of hope more than ever. In the face of chaos all over the world, Toffler insists that we are going through something more drastic than temporary hardship. He believes that we are suffering the "birth pains of a new civilization." Arthur Coxe's verse sounds so contemporary:
We are living, we are dwelling, in a grand and awful time,
In an age on ages telling to be living is sublime.
Hark! the waking up of nations; God and Magog to the fray.
Hark! what soundeth? ‘Tis creation groaning for its latter day.
Hope in God helps us to make sense out of the senseless turn of events in our time, in all time, because hope enables us to endure and to press on in the face of present and impending tragedies, doesn't it? When life confuses us and confounds us, when it seems to make no sense at all, the God who started it all and created all living things, lets us get a glimpse of his glory and power and hope is born in us again.
50. Heavenly Service
Illustration
Keith Wagner
There was once a blacksmith who worked hard at his trade. The day came for him to die. God sent his angel to the smith, but to the angel's surprise, the smith refused to go. He pleaded with the angel that he was the only blacksmith in the village and it was time for all his neighbors to begin their planting and sowing. He would be needed. The blacksmith did not want to appear to be ungrateful and was looking forward to having a place in God's kingdom, but could he put it of for a while? The angel went and made the blacksmith's case before God. And God agreed. Sometime later, after the harvest, the angel returned to bring the blacksmith to heaven. But again the smith requested that his return to God be delayed. "A neighbor of mine is seriously ill and it's time for the harvest. A number of us are trying to save his crops so that his family won't be destitute. Please tell God I am grateful for his blessings to me. But could you come for me later?" And the angel returned to heaven.
Well, it got to be a pattern. Every time the angel would come to bring the faithful blacksmith to heaven, the smith would shake his head and explain to the angel that he was still needed by someone on earth. Finally, the blacksmith grew very old and weary and so he prayed to God to send his angel to bring him to heaven. Immediately the angel appeared. "If you still want to take me home, I'm ready to live forever in God's kingdom." The angel laughed and looked at the blacksmith with delight and surprise. "Where do you think you have been these years?"
Showing
1
to
50
of
428
results
- Greg Locke plans to move church amid longstanding community noise complaints
- This week in Christian history: John Sung dies, Evangelical Alliance formed, Diet of Odense
- Bishop IV Hilliard's Texas megachurch lists $15M mansion for sale
- Executive pastor resigns from Cross Timbers Church weeks after Josiah Anthony stepped down
- Wycliffe Bible Translators missionary died by suicide at Chicago airport, police say
- Actors Cameron & BJ Arnett on discipleship, spiritual accountability and ‘The Forge’
- Tim Tebow on battling spiritual warfare in fight against human trafficking: 'Overcome the world'
- Spanish judge halts assisted suicide of 23 year old after father's request
- Supreme Court stops Biden's Title IX rules allowing boys in girls' sports
- Montana Supreme Court rules parental notification for abortion law unconstitutional
- Bangladesh’s Religious Minorities Want Peace Amid Country’s Turmoil
- New Zealand Uncovers Historic Abuse in Church-Run Institutions
- Died: Timothy Dudley-Smith, Who Turned Metrical Poetry into Hundreds of Hymns
- After Pastor Led 400 to Starve, Some Kenyan Christians Open to Church Restrictions
- In Zimbabwe, Secular Education Is Overtaking Historic Mission Schools
- Philly Pastor: Church Parking Can Be a ‘Stumbling Block’ in the Bike Lane
- Died: Patricia Gundry, Evangelical Feminist Who Wanted Women to Be Free
- Some Churches Lose Coverage as Insurers Hit by a Wave of Storm Claims
- The Olympics’ Most Iconic Photo Has a Christian Message
- Died: Doris Brougham, Missionary Who Taught English to Taiwan
- Donald Trump's Easter Prayer Was a Mishap Without Teleprompter, "Something Something Heaven"
- Indian American Muslim group cancels parade participation amid float controversy
- J.D. Vance's Hat Trick of Election Recklessness: Insulting German-, Irish- & Italian-Americans
- 27 Atheist Musicians Who are Vocal About Not Believing
- Kim Kardashian's lookalike daughter Chicago steals the show in new family photo
- People Without Meaningful Lives Seek Power Over Others
- People Shared 50 Shocking Facts About Their Friends They Only Found Out Years Into The Friendship
- Australian News Corp exec apologises for doing Nazi salute
- MAGA has a Catholic gender gap problem — and it could spell trouble for Trump
- New York's India Day Parade will not remove controversial Hindu tribute
- Church of England Dropping Word 'Church' to be More 'Modern'
- Map Shows the Most Religious US States
- American Young Women Stop Attending Church
- A Quick Bible Study Vol. 230: Psalm Summer - Part 4
- The Atrocity Known as 'Catholics for Kamala'
- How a Persecuted Religious Group Grew Into a Global Movement
- Hagar and Ishmael as Main Characters
- Infant Loss Is Tragic and Complex. Abortion Bans Made it Worse
- On Inner Detachment
- It's Tu B'Av – Spread the Love, Yes Even this Year
