1 Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God. 2 Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things. 3 For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God. 4 When Christ, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with him in glory.
5 Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. 6 Because of these, the wrath of God is coming. 7 You used to walk in these ways, in the life you once lived. 8 But now you must rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips. 9 Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices 10 and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator. 11 Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.
12 Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. 13 Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. 14 And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity.
15 Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful. 16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God. 17 And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.
Spiderman: Saved To Serve
Colossians 3:1-4, 12-17
Sermon
by Billy D. Strayhorn
When I was a teenager two events happened, not too far apart either, which were catastrophic to everything I held near and dear. My allowance at the time was $3.00 a week. Not a whole lot, I know, but the median income in 1965 was only $6,800.
Now, I supplemented my allowance by mowing two yards in the neighborhood for $5.00 each. I was saving as much of the money as possible to buy a 5 speed English racer that I had fallen in love with at the local bicycle shop.
I had allotted $1.00 of my weekly allowance for comic books and another $1.00 for my favorite hamburgers, White Castles. White Castle hamburgers, bellybombers, or sliders depending on the part of the area you were from are very similar to Krystal Hamburgers found all over the Southeast.
At the time Comic books and White Castle Hamburgers were only 12 cents and I could get eight of each. In one month all of that changed. Comics went up to 15 cents apiece and White Castles went up to 14 cents. It was horrible. I had never had to face the cost of living increase before. Now I could only buy six comic books and seven bellybombers.
That also meant I had to be a little more discriminating in my comic book purchases. No more Archie comics or anything like Archie. I had to concentrate on the serious comics like Superman, Batman, and the relatively new one, Spiderman. It was a hard choice but it had to be done.
As I was thinking about Spiderman and his purpose in life, which we'll get to in a minute, I couldn't help but think of this passage from Paul's letter to the Colossians.
Colossians 3:1-4, 12-17 (NRSV)
[1] So if you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.
[2] Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth,
[3] for you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.
[4] When Christ who is your life is revealed, then you also will be revealed with him in glory.
[12] As God's chosen ones, holy and beloved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience.
[13] Bear with one another and, if anyone has a complaint against another, forgive each other; just as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive.
[14] Above all, clothe yourselves with love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony.
[15] And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in the one body. And be thankful.
[16] Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly; teach and admonish one another in all wisdom; and with gratitude in your hearts sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs to God.
[17] And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.
This morning we're going to be looking at the similarities between Saul enemy of the early church who becomes Paul chief evangelist of the early church and Peter Parker the nerdy teenager who becomes Spiderman.
I. Saul and Peter Parker
A. Spider-Man was first introduced in the comic Amazing Fantasy #15 (August 1962). Peter Parker, a Senior at Midtown High School, receives his powers when bitten by a radioactive spider in a science demonstration. This bite endowed him with the proportional strength and agility of a spider along with a keen "spider sense". After discovering these powers Peter hires an agent and tries to make some money in television. One night he had the chance to catch a burglar fleeing from the T.V. studio, but he refused because he didn't think he should try and be a hero. A few days later the aforementioned burglar killed his Uncle Ben. That night, as Spider-Man, Peter apprehends the murderer of his beloved uncle but is plagued with guilt, thinking that if he would have stopped the burglar when he first saw him his Uncle Ben would still be alive.
During his time of turmoil Peter remembers something Uncle Ben once told him, "With great power, comes great responsibilities." Peter took this to heart and decided he should use his extraordinary powers for good instead for selfish reasons. Hence the ongoing theme of our favorite Spidey stories, a regular guy with amazing powers and enormous responsibilities.
"With great power comes great responsibility."
B. Now look at Saul. Briefly he was one of the Pharisees. A Pharisee among Pharisees. He was well respected in his circle but apparently had this thing about Jesus and his followers. He thought they were preaching blasphemy and so he saddled up and got ready to take them out. His first victim, recorded in Scripture is Stephen. Saul couldn't even dare to sully his hands as they stoned him to death but stood by, holding the cloaks and gloating.
But then, on his way to Damascus to arrest even more of these upstart Christians, Saul is bitten, not by a radioactive spider but by Jesus himself. There on the road, Jesus appears before Saul and asks, "Why are you persecuting my church?" Saul is blinded and the only way he can regain his sight is to visit Ananias. Now when Jesus tells Ananias who's coming, he doesn't want to have any part of it. But he does, Saul visits Ananias, who touches Saul's eyes and the scales which cause his blindness fall away. He can see again. His life is changed, and he begins to preach Jesus. "And him crucified."
Saul becomes Paul when the Jews, obviously those who sent him out with warrants, see what a powerful preacher and teacher Paul really is. They plot to kill him in Damascus but he escapes. But he doesn't quit preaching. "With great power comes great responsibility."
C. Two unlikely leaders and heroes. Whoever hear of a nerdy teenager becoming a Superhero? And whoever heard a a bounty hunter becoming the most influential preacher of his day? I believe it's because they were "Saved To Serve."
II. Saved To Serve
A. Of all the disciples, Paul maybe the one who exemplifies best that's it's not all about what's up hear in the head. It's not just about knowledge and belief. But rather our faith is all about what's in here, the heart and how our heart guides all that we do so that the love of God in Christ emanates through everything we do. We aren't saved so we can feel good about ourselves. Just like Paul and Peter Parker, we're "Saved To Serve."
You see, it really is like Uncle Ben told Peter, "With great power comes great responsibility."
Sermons.com editorial note: Uncle Ben didn't saythis, though it is commonly thought he did. It actually comes from the last panel ofAmazing Fantasy #15, the first appearnce of spiderman back in 1961. The line is at the top of that panel as a commentary. Here's thatpanel:
You and I have received the greatest power of all time. We've been forgiven. Jesus willingly gave his life on the cross for our sins. We have received redemption through his saving act on the cross. Not only that but at Pentecost, we were given the Power of God's Holy Spirit, the power and presence of the Risen Christ with us each and every day. The Holy Spirit empowers us to live like Christ. It empowers us to be bold in our faith. It empowers us to speak God's word like Paul.
We have been give great power. "With great power comes great responsibility."
B. In Spiderman 2 there's a great scene. Peter has confessed his complicity in Uncle Ben's death. The guilt has been eating at him left and right. Aunt May forgives him. Shortly afterwards, Aunt May tells Peter that she is moving, and when Peter asks why she did not tell him, she says that she can take care of herself. Peter approaches Aunt May and says, "Listen, about my last visit..." But Aunt May interrupts and tells him that all is forgiven and forgotten, and adds, "But you made a brave move in telling me the truth, and I'm proud of you." She tells him that she loves him, and they embrace.
The young boy from across the street, Henry, is helping Aunt May move. He asks Peter if he is the one who takes pictures of Spiderman. Peter says, "I used to."
Henry asks where Spiderman has gone, and Peter tells him, "He quit. He wanted to try other things."
With hope in his eyes, Henry asks, "But he'll be back, right?" Peter replied, "I don't know." Henry, dejected, turns to go.
Aunt May steps up and says, "You'll never guess who he wants to be Spiderman."
Peter asks, "Why"
Aunt May says, "He knows a hero when he sees one. There are too few characters flying around like that, saving old girls like me. Lord knows, kids like Henry need a hero. Courageous, self-sacrificing people, setting examples for all of us. Everybody loves a hero." She explains how the public applauds the heroic. "I believe there's a hero in all of us that keeps us honest, gives us strength, makes us noble, who finally allows us to die with pride. Even though sometimes we have to be steady and give up the things we want the most even our dreams. Spiderman did that for Henry. He wonders where he's gone. He needs him."
Aunt May is right, people look up to valiant heroes. The purpose of a hero is to set an example of discipline and right behavior. Heroes right wrongs and set the captives free. Heroes are self-sacrificing. They offer others strength in the face of adversity. They are leaders, inspiring others into discipleship.
For centuries people have depicted Jesus merely as a meek, well-spoken teacher; good man, but hardly a hero. Yet, as I said when we began this series, Jesus is the true Hero. Our response to His sacrifice must be action. We are saved to serve. (1)
C. Fred Craddock tells a story about a friend of his, Oswald Goultor, who for years was a missionary to China.. He was under house arrest for three years and would be released if he promise to go home. He promised. The missionary society which sent him, wired him the money for a the trip home. He took a ship. He had to go down to India to catch the ship and when he was in the coastal city, he heard about a lot a Jews sleeping in a barn lofts. They'd been denied entrance into every country in the world, except that one. And they had gone inland to sleep in barn lofts.
It was Christmas and Oswald Goulter went around to those Jews and said, "It's Christmas, Merry Christmas."
They said, "We're Jews."
He said, "I know, but it's Christmas."
They said, "We don't observe Christmas. We're not followers of Christ. We're Jews."
He said, "I know, but what would you like for Christmas?"
"We don't keep Christmas."
"I know, but what if you like? If somebody gave you something for Christmas, what would you like?"
They said, "Well we'd like some good German pastry."
"Good!" And off he went looking for German pastry, which he found. After cashing his passage check, he took boxes of German pastries to these Jews living in barn lofts and said, "Merry Christmas." Then he wired the missionary society and said, "I need a ticket home."
When that story was told, there was a young seminarian sitting in the front row, and he was absolutely incensed and said to Dr. Goulter, "Why did you do that? Though don't believe in Jesus." And Dr. Goulter said, "But I do. I do." (2)
That's the whole concept of "Saved To Serve" in a nutshell.
Conclusion
Paul and Peter Parker both shared something that changed them forever. Not special powers. Not amazing abilities but the both experienced redemption and forgiveness. Uncle Ben's death haunted the character of Peter Parker until he confessed to his Aunt May and she forgave him.
And guilt over Stephen's death and all of his vitriolic accusations against the followers of Jesus must have haunted Paul until that day the scales were removed from his eyes and he realized he was forgiven. They both experienced redemption. They both experienced forgiveness. And in so doing received new life. A life that was empowered for good. They were "Saved To Serve" because "With great power comes great responsibility."
You and I have been "Saved To Serve." Once we've experienced the redemption and forgiveness of Jesus, we can never be the same. Nor should we want to be.
Martin Luther King, Jr. Once said, "Everybody can be great. Because anybody can serve. You don't have to have a college degree to serve. You don't have to make your subject and your verb agree to serve.... You only need a heart full of grace. A soul generated by love."
You and I have been "Saved To Serve" because "With great power comes great responsibility."
1. www.movieministry.com
2. Fred B. Craddock, Craddock Stories, (Chalice Press, St. Louis, MO, 2001) pp 141-142
3. Leadership-Vol. 17, #4
CSS Publishing Company, Inc., From the Pulpit, by Billy D. Strayhorn
After condemning the false teaching, Paul reminds the Colossians about their new life in Christ. Colossians 3:1–4 serves as the theological foundation for the more practical instructions that follow. Because they have participated with Christ in his death and…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
1 Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God. 2 Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things. 3 For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God. 4 When Christ, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with him in glory.
5 Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. 6 Because of these, the wrath of God is coming. 7 You used to walk in these ways, in the life you once lived. 8 But now you must rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips. 9 Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices 10 and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator. 11 Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.
12 Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. 13 Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. 14 And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity.
15 Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful. 16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God. 17 And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.
3:1–4 · Paul described the death and resurrection of Christ in 2:12, and in 2:20–23 he detailed the ramifications of Christ’s death for believers. Now in 3:1–4 he expands on the implications of Christ’s resurrection. Both 2:20 and 3:1 begin with the same Greek phrase translated “if” or “since,” suggesting that the instructions are two sides of the same coin. Just as the death of Christ demolished once and for all the world’s wisdom and values, so, too, the resurrection of Christ confirms the future glory awaiting the saints. The gospel message must embrace both aspects of the cross—its past victory over sin and the future glory when Christ returns. Flanked by these two realities, the believer perseveres faithfully. Paul now turns his attention to this present, in-between time with instructions on life as God’s chosen people (see 3:12).
Paul pushes the believers to make Christ’s return and future glory a beacon that guides their steps in the dark and depraved world. The vision that should capture the Colossians’ imagination is one of Christ now seated at God’s right hand. This picture has deep roots in earliest Christianity, drawing on Psalm 110:1: “The Lord says to my lord: ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.’ ” Mark 12:36 (and parallel passages); Acts 2:34–35; and Hebrews 1:13 cite it directly. Allusions to the verse are numerous. The force of the verb “to set” that Paul uses in 3:2 carries the sense of forging a perspective, permanently reshaping a mindset, and fixing a sustained opinion. The Colossians have died in Christ (in baptism 2:12) to the nonsense promoted by the philosophy and now must go forward daily living out that new reality. In Christ, believers have confidence that they will enjoy glory with Christ (see Col. 4:4; see also Rom. 8:18).
3:5–9 · Paul exhorts the Colossians to “put to death” all that is connected to this world (3:5). Does this statement contradict what he insisted on in 3:3, that they have died, and their life is now hidden in Christ? No, for in 3:5 Paul elaborates how this death in Christ can be actualized in their daily lives. What died in Christ was the power of sin, the irresistibleness of it that hooks people like a fish on a line and then reels them in. Paul declares that as Christians, the Colossians no longer need take the bait of sin. Freed from that compulsion, believers can reject all those behaviors that alienate them from each other and from God.
The first grouping of sins (3:5) spotlights sexual improprieties, listed in order from the most to the least visible. He begins with public sexual immorality, rampant in the ancient pagan world. He moves from behaviors to attitudes, including greed, which focuses on satiating physical desires. Paul concludes that if you trace back from the behavior to the mindset that led to it, you will find idolatry at the core. Paul argues that the inward focus on satisfying physical passions amounts to placing oneself at the center instead of God. Paul insists that to effect a change at the public, behavioral level, one has to ultimately kill that which led to it all—idolatry. As with weeds in the garden, merely snapping off the shoots will not make permanent changes. The gardener must dig out the roots for any lasting results.
A second list of sins pivots on anger. Once again Paul moves from the most public demonstration of anger—rage—to the more subtle forms of anger, such as slander. In all cases, what comes from the mouth sullies the person. Paul is quite concerned about lying. We talk about “little white lies” not hurting anyone, but for Paul truth telling should be characteristic of those who live in Christ, who is God’s truth to us. Since we image Christ, the fully human being, we must be truthful. By following his charge against lying with the emphatic claim that social, racial, and ethnic differences should not divide the people of God, Paul reveals that lying is not simply a private matter but could infect the entire community. It denies the reality that believers have removed (a one-time act) their old self and put on (again, a one-time act) their new self. Paul is probably referring to their baptism (see Col. 2:12).
3:10–17 · Paul promises that the believer’s new self is being renewed “in knowledge in the image of its Creator” (3:10). A similar sentiment is expressed in Romans 12:2, where the believers are to renounce this world and be transformed by renewing their minds (see also 2Cor. 4:16). Genesis 1:26–27 speaks of humankind being made in God’s image, but later sin destroys that perfection (Gen. 3:6–19). Colossians 1:15 insists that Christ is the image of the invisible God, and Paul’s claim in 3:10 indicates that, in Christ, humanity has been restored to fullness and completeness. Today we tend to read such passages as referring primarily to the individual, but Paul was clearly thinking of the entire church, because he goes on to describe the body of Christ as one, not disparate ethnic and social groups. Unlike the philosophy, which stressed private visions and competitive asceticism, Paul stresses the unity of the Christian community.
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
The Ethical Dimensions of the Christian Life
Chapter three begins what normally is called the “ethical section” of the epistle. This follows a general trend in Paul’s epistles in which he first deals with the theological issues and then builds his ethics upon that foundation (cf. Rom. 12:1ff.; Gal. 5:1ff.; Eph. 4:1ff.; Phil. 4:1ff.).
It is quite common to discuss this characteristic as the indicative and the imperative of Paul’s theology. Basically, it is the “you are” and the “you ought” of the Christian life. In some ways this concept comes across as a paradox in Paul’s thought. On the one hand, he can say that, by virtue of his or her position in Christ, the believer is “dead to sin,” “light in the Lord,” “a new creature,” and so forth. But then on the other hand, Paul says, “Now become what you are,” that is, live as if you were dead to sin, light in the Lord, new creatures.
This tension between the indicative and the imperative, of belonging spiritually to the age to come but living temporally in this present age, is a striking feature of Paul’s theology (cf. Rom. 6:1–4, 11, 12, 13; 8:9–17; 13:14; 1 Cor. 6:8–11, 19, 20; 2 Cor. 5:17–21; Gal. 5:24, 25; Eph. 4:1–6; 4:22–5:20; Col. 1:9–15; 3:1–4). This third chapter of Colossians illustrates this principle by stating that the believers “have been raised with Christ” but then are summoned to set their hearts “on things above” (3:1); they have died with Christ (2:20; 3:3) but are subsequently told to “put to death” certain vices (3:5). The language of “putting off” (3:9; cf. Eph. 4:22) and “putting on” (3:10; Eph. 4:24) carries a similar message.
This relationship between theology and ethics, or the indicative and the imperative, often is developed around the sacrament of baptism (cf. disc. on 2:11–15). This truth becomes obvious when one considers the consequences of dying and rising with Christ. Since baptism is the founding of a new existence, the Christian life must manifest that change by a corresponding ethical life. The true meaning of baptism, in other words, needs to be lived out in the life of each believer.
This close relationship between baptism and ethics accounts for the numerous associations of the ethical exhortations in Colossians and Ephesians with the baptismal event. It also is quite natural to find baptismal and ethical language in close proximity, because baptism was the occasion for ethical instruction.
The preceding discussion provides a context for understanding 3:1ff., because Paul uses the baptismal event as a means of developing an ethical pattern for his readers. From his previous discussion (2:11–15), they would know that he had baptism in mind when he says “you died” (2:20; 3:3) and “you have been raised with Christ” (2:12; 3:1).
Paul discusses the believer’s ethical life in a series of relationships that include Christ (3:1–8); the local church (3:9–17); the family (3:18–21); one’s vocation (3:22–4:1); and society in general (4:2–6). Although these sections contain no specific references to the false teaching in the community, there can be no doubt that an understanding of and obedience to these ethical admonitions will fortify the congregation against the false teachings they have heard and assist them to fulfill their mission before God.
Additional Notes
For a helpful discussion of this concept, see W. D. Dennison, “Indicative and Imperative: The Basic Structure of Pauline Ethics,” CTJ 14 (1979), pp. 55–78.
Although general divisions between the theological and the practical nature of the epistles may be helpful, they are somewhat superficial, because Paul frequently combines theological and ethical truths throughout his epistles. V. P. Furnish, for example, has shown that the ethical instruction in Paul’s letters is not restricted to the closing sections (Theology and Ethics in Paul [Nashville: Abingdon, 1968]).
The Heavenly Life
3:1 As with a number of other “ethical” sections (cf. 3:5; Rom. 12:1; Eph 4:1), Paul begins with the word “therefore” (oun). The NIV since, then, has the similar effect of tying Paul’s ethical instruction and theological thought together. These believers have been raised with Christ. On the basis of that fact they are to set their hearts on the things above. The verb set is a strong imperative and is a good translation of zēteō, which means to seek, examine, or search something out with the desire to possess. Those things above, both here and in 3:2, are not identified. They may be the virtues of the Christian life that Paul commends in 3:12–16 in contrast to the “earthly” things mentioned in 2:20–23 and 3:5–9 (cf. Phil. 3:19).
Above (i.e., heaven, cf. GNB), where Christ is seated at the right hand, should not be understood as some geographic place in the cosmos. The language here, as elsewhere (Matt. 6:20; Eph. 1:3; 2:6; 3:10), is figurative rather than literal; it designates a quality of existence, not a place of being. By above, Paul means that unseen realm of spiritual reality, the eternal world in contrast to a world that is earthly and transitory.
Through baptism into Christ, the believer participates in that spiritual and eternal realm in which Christ has been exalted and enthroned (Eph. 1:20; Phil. 2:9–11). This reminds the Colossians that they already share this exaltation with Christ. It is not merely a future inheritance, because “God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 2:6).
3:2–4 In addition to setting their hearts they are to set their minds on heavenly things. To keep one’s mind fixed is to be intent and determined to do something (the RSV has “seek” at 3:1 and “set” at 3:2; the NIV uses set in both verses). Basically, the message is that, since the Colossians have set their minds on heavenly things, they are to keep holding on to that perspective and not to the things to which they have already died. Since the resemblance to 2:20 is so striking, Paul obviously has those legalistic rituals in mind (2:21–23) as well as the vices enumerated in 3:5–9. This, too, is a good example of the indicative and imperative in Colossians. In 2:20 Paul stated: “you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world”; in 3:3–4, there is a similar development of thought in that something that was hidden is revealed. The new life that the believer receives in Christ is hidden, that is, it is a mystery that one cannot fully explain or physically display. But the true nature of that life will not remain a secret, because it is indissolubly bound to Christ and will be revealed at his return. This interpretation, which takes life in the sense of quality or essence, is preferred to the view that looks to the return of Christ as the time when those who are saved and thus belong to God will be identified.
Additional Notes
3:1 For a helpful discussion on this section, see C. F. D. Moule, “The New Life in Colossians,” RevExp 70 (1973), pp. 481–93.
3:2 If Colossians addresses a Gnostic view of the universe, then “heaven” or “the things above” would be understood in a literal or topographical way. In the ascent of the soul the Gnostics hoped to leave behind all earthly or material things in order to return to an existence in heaven (see Schweizer, p. 175).
The Vices of the Old Life
3:5 The imperative tone that characterized 3:1–2 (“set,” “keep”) is picked up again in 3:5, but this time in a negative way: Put to death, therefore.… This list of prohibitions belongs to a category of vices that are scattered throughout the NT (cf. Matt. 15:19; Mark 7:21, 22; Rom. 1:24, 26, 29–32; 13:13; 1 Cor. 5:10–13; 6:9–10; 2 Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:19–21; Eph. 4:31; 5:3–5; Col. 3:5, 8; 1 Tim. 1:9, 10; 6:4–5; 2 Tim. 3:2–5; Titus 3:3; 1 Pet. 2:1; 4:3, 4; Jude 8, 16; Rev. 9:20, 21; 21:8; 22:15). Later, in 3:12, Paul mentions a list of virtues that a Christian is to “put on.” This, too, belongs to a catalog—of virtue (Matt. 5:3–11; 2 Cor. 6:6, 7; Gal. 5:22, 23; Eph. 6:14–17; Phil. 4:8; Col. 3:12; 1 Tim. 3:2, 3; 6:11; Titus 1:7, 8; James 3:17; 2 Pet. 1:5–7).
Of all the lists of vices and virtues in the NT, the lists in Colossians, Ephesians, and 1 Peter are the most similar. Scholars who have researched these “catalogs” have concluded that the lists that appear in these three epistles belong to a traditional body of instructional material of the early church and would have been passed on to new Christians on the occasion of their baptism. But even though Colossians, Ephesians, and 1 Peter contain a significant amount of baptismal language and theology, they probably were not written solely for that occasion and should not be regarded as baptismal tracts.
The command (imperative) put to death is a clear reference to the “death” that these believers have already experienced in baptism. They now are called upon to appropriate that death by removing all earthly desires from their life. The Greek uses the term “earthly members” (ta melē ta epi tēs gēs) because it was believed that such vices were located in certain parts of the body. In Romans 6:13 Paul uses the same word when he says: “Do not offer the parts [ta melē] of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body [ta melē] to him as instruments of righteousness.”
The list in this verse includes five vices that are related to sexual sins. As such, they are manifestations of evil desires and are harmful to other people. Sexual immorality (p*rneia) includes all kinds of unlawful sexual behavior, including deviations (1 Cor. 5:1, 10; 6:9; 2 Cor. 12:21; Gal. 5:19; Eph. 5:3; 1 Thess. 4:3; 1 Tim. 1:9, 10) such as prostitution and fornication. Impurity (akatharsia) is almost synonymous with p*rneia and is used in the NT to describe immoral intent as well as the practice of sexual vices.
Lust (pathos), in this context, probably implies some kind of sexual passion, that is, passion or lust that leads to sexual sin. Its counterpart, evil desires (epithymian kakēn), is used for the desire of something that is forbidden but is pursued in order to satisfy one’s desires. Galatians 5:16, for example, says “Live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires [epithymia] of the sinful nature.”
The last vice to be mentioned is greed (pleonexia), or covetousness (RSV), literally, a desire to have more, to appropriate another’s possessions. Since the NT has many warnings against this sin (cf. Mark 7:22; Rom. 1:29; 1 Cor. 6:10; Eph. 5:3), it is not clear whether its occurrence here is linked with sexual immorality or with all areas of life. Both ideas could be in the apostle’s mind. The parenthetical which is idolatry, paralleled in Ephesians 5:5, underscores the idea that greed, along with the other vices, is an illicit evil desire (1 Cor. 5:10, 11; 6:9; Gal. 5:20). Greed is idolatry because it leads one to focus attention and affection on things other than God. This can happen in sexual life as well as with material things. The solution to such idolatry has already been given: “Set your hearts … set your minds” on heavenly things! In other words, give Christ preeminence in your ethical life as well.
3:6 Lest anyone minimize the seriousness of these vices, Paul reminds his readers of the wrath of God (cf. the footnote: The NIV rightly omits “those who are disobedient” because of poor textual evidence. Its inclusion probably is due to Eph. 5:6.). God’s judgment upon these sins is widely attested throughout Scripture (Rom. 1:18–32; 1 Cor. 5:10, 11; 6:9, 10; 1 Thess. 4:3–6).
3:7 Before the Colossians became Christians their lives were characterized by such evil passions. They already have been reminded that at that time they were “spiritually dead” in their sins (2:13) and lived as though they belonged to the world (2:20; cf. Eph. 2:1–3). Their whole pagan way of life had been one of enslavement to evil powers as well as to evil passions. Fortunately, a wonderful change has taken place in them in Christ (the indicative); as a result, they are called upon to demonstrate this new life ethically (the imperative).
3:8 Paul exhorts those who have been raised with Christ to manifest a new attitude toward sin. What was true of sexual sins applies equally to sins of speech: But now, that is, as Christians (cf. the “once you were” and the “now you are” in Eph. 2:3, 11–19), you must rid yourselves of all such things as these. The word apothesthe, “rid yourselves of” (RSV, “put off, away”), is part of the clothing imagery that Paul uses in connection with the old and the new life. One’s sins are like an old garment that is taken off and discarded so that a new one can be put on (2:11; 3:10, 12; Eph. 4:22, 24). Such language accounts for a custom in many churches when candidates for baptism by immersion “put off” their old, ordinary clothes and “put on” white robes to symbolize their new or resurrected life in Christ.
The sins that affect social relationships can be divided into two categories: Anger (orgē), rage (thymos), and malice (kakios) are sins that can be internalized; they may or may not be expressed in overt action, although either way they clearly are wrong (Matt. 5:22–30). The other sins are those that are verbalized: No slander (blasphēmia) and filthy language (aischrologia) from your lips.
3:9 Lying, although it may not belong to the list of the other five vices, certainly fits the context as a verbal sin as well as causing grievous damage to personal relationships, particularly within the body of Christ. Here, as in 3:5–8, Paul reminds them that this sin also belonged to their former way of life and has been put off in baptism (cf. Rom. 13:12–14; Gal. 3:27, 28).
Additional Notes
3:5 One of the most recent discussions on the vices and virtues in the NT, particularly in their application to Colossians, is by Cannon, pp. 51–94. Other helpful studies include B. S. Easton, “New Testament Ethical Lists,” JBL 51 (1932), pp. 1–12; Schweizer, ‘Traditional Ethical Patterns in the Pauline and Post-Pauline Letters and Their Development (Lists of vices and the Housetables),” in Text and Interpretation: Studies in the New Testament Presented to Matthew Black, ed. E. Best and R. McL. Wilson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), pp. 195–209.
The Virtues of the New Life
3:10 The NIV clarifies that the new self is the new being which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator. Behind this verse one can anticipate a serious question that the Colossians must have had concerning their new life in Christ: “How can I live out ethically for Christ what I have become sacramentally in Christ?” Paul himself was well aware of the tension between the indicative and the imperative, between his status in Christ and the process still to be accomplished (Rom. 7). He knew that in this life the believer is continually being called upon to become in reality what he or she is in fact.
But how, one may ask, is this seemingly impossible task to be accomplished? How can a person make the right choices? Who will give this new self the necessary ability and strength? The answer, says Paul, lies in the activity of God: the new self … is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator (cf. Rom. 8:29). These words recall Genesis 1:27, which states that originally human beings were created in the image—that is, moral and spiritual likeness—of God and at that point had the ability to choose between good and evil. In the Fall, however, that image was destroyed. But the good news of the gospel is that now, in Christ, God is at work restoring that lost image. This restoration or re-creation is not mankind’s work at all; it is not a process of giving up some vices and accepting a few virtues. This new self is God’s doing! To express this process the Greek uses a present passive participle (anakainoumenon) to indicate that renewal is continuous (the present) and that it has an outside source (the passive, the new self which is being renewed).
In light of Paul’s christological teaching in the epistle, one may have expected him to refer to a renewal in Christ’s image, or to the second Adam, as he does elsewhere in his writings (Rom. 5:12–21; 8:29; 1 Cor. 15:45–49; 2 Cor. 3:18). Perhaps they are one and the same for Paul, since earlier he referred to Christ as “the image of the invisible God” (1:15). The purpose of this renewal, he adds, is to bring you to a full knowledge of himself. The believers need to become aware of God in order to do his will (cf. 1:9); God’s presence in Christ will enable them to make the right moral decisions.
3:11 At first glance the thoughts in this verse do not appear to fit the context of the ethical life that Paul has been describing. However, the NIV preserves the continuity of thought by translating the Greek particle hopou, which commonly denotes place (“where”) as here—that is, within a new or renewed humankind. In other words, the consequence of being in Christ, of putting off the sins that exploit and divide humanity, of being renewed after the image of God, is the obliteration of all racial (Greek or Jew), religious (circumcised or uncircumcised), cultural (barbarian, Scythian), and social (slave or free) distinctions.
The creation of a new humanity (the church as the body of Christ) is one of the wonderful truths of the gospel. Ephesians 2:11–22 is the most extensive commentary on how Christ broke down the “wall” that separated Jews and Gentiles (cf. also Rom. 2:25–29; 4:9–12; Gal. 5:6). Even the maligned slave and the most primitive pagan (Scythian) are unified in Christ. At the foot of the cross the ground is level!
Though Paul is stating a general theological truth in this verse, there is no doubt that he has the church in Colossae in mind. What is true universally is true locally as well. That congregation probably was a mixture of all kinds and classes of people. However, those distinctions no longer have any significance when it is realized that Christ is everything and that he dwells in all people (Christ is all and is in all). Paul had a similar message for the Corinthians (1 Cor. 12:13) and the Galatians (3:26–28).
3:12 Verses 12–17 are a continuation of Paul’s discussion of those who are baptized. He already has dealt with the negative side by showing that those who have died to their old life are to put off those vices that characterized them as pagans. In this section, Paul turns to the positive side by listing a number of virtues that are to characterize their new or resurrected life. The therefore indicates that what follows is linked to the previous ideas on the new self (3:10, 11).
There are several features of this list of virtues that are worth noting: First, as already explained, this list is part of a body of traditional material that was transmitted in the early church (cf. disc. on 3:5). The language “put on” (clothe yourselves) shows that this belongs to the context of baptismal instructions. Second, these virtues are very similar to the “fruit of the Spirit” mentioned in Galatians 5:22, 23. Three of the “fruit” (compassion, kindness, humility) are directly in the list, while “love” and “peace” are picked up in 3:14 and 3:15 respectively.
A third characteristic of these virtues is that they are “godly qualities,” which are used to describe either God or Christ. Many references in the NT, for example, talk about the mercy or compassion (Rom. 12:1; 2 Cor. 1:3), kindness (Rom. 2:4; 11:22; Eph. 2:7), humility (Phil. 2:5–11), meekness (2 Cor. 10:1), and long-suffering (Rom. 2:4; 9:22) of God and Jesus. The application of these virtues to the Christian would follow naturally from the call to imitation, union, or likeness with Christ. Believers are to act toward one another as God and Jesus act toward them.
Fourth, these virtues are social in nature, that is, they describe attitudes and actions that are important for healthy personal relationships. As the Christian has emptied (put off) his or her life of harmful and selfish vices, he or she now is instructed to fill (put on) that void with virtues that have the well-being of others as their prime goal. These virtues are lived out in the context of the local church (body, 3:15) where the Colossians are members with each other (3:13, 16). Their relationships with each other, including worship (3:16, 17), should bear witness that they are new people in Christ.
In verse 12, the believers are identified as God’s chosen people, literally, the hagioi, “saints,” “holy ones” (1:2). This was made possible, Paul tells his readers, because of God’s love and election. Their status had nothing to do with their own striving; it was God’s choosing. All three concepts (saints, love, election) are reminiscent of OT descriptions of Israel but are taken over and applied to the new Israel, the church (cf. 1 Pet. 2:9).
The Colossians are instructed to put on a number of virtues: Compassion is a translation of two Greek words, splanchna and oiktirmos, literally translated as “bowels of mercy” (KJV) because the bowels, or inner viscera, of a person were regarded as the seat of emotions. As such, the term denoted compassion that comes authentically from the heart and that is translated into corresponding action toward another person.
Kindness (chrēstotēs), with such corresponding concepts as goodness, generosity, or courtesy, describes an individual whose life and relationship with others are gracious and empathetic—genuinely concerned for the feelings of others. Humility (tapeinophrosynē), when properly directed (i.e., not false humility), is a spirit of modesty and disregard for status. It is that quality of Christ that best describes his willingness to become incarnate and suffer for humanity (Phil. 2:5–11).
Gentleness (prautēs), which appears in the RSV as “meekness,” sometimes has been taken as a sign of weakness, particularly by the Greeks. In the NT, however, it is a disposition characterized by gentleness, consideration, and submissiveness—just the opposite of arrogance, rebellion, and violence. Patience (makrothymia) is a passive virtue, amplified by additional concepts such as endurance (cf. 1:11), forbearance, and steadfastness. In personal relationships, it is the grace of one who may have the right to retaliate but who chooses to exercise patience instead.
3:13 There are bound to be conflicts (grievances) within the church. When this occurs, says Paul, bear with each other forgive … one another. Tolerance and forgiveness should not be regarded as two additional virtues but rather as explanations of how gentleness and patience are to be exercised in the body. To be tolerant is to be patiently forbearing of others with the idea of forgiving them. Paul appeals to his readers’ experience of forgiveness in Christ. They are to forgive because of and according to the example of the Lord.
3:14 And over all these virtues put on love. Paul still has the list of virtues in mind that the Christian is to “put on.” Love is the crown of all these virtues; it is the final outer garment which binds them all together in perfect unity (lit., “the bond of perfectness”). The idea here is similar to Ephesians 4:2–3 and 15–16, where love is the manifestation of new life in Christ and what leads to maturity and unity in his body. Such love removes all feelings of anger, hatred, or an unforgiving spirit (cf. Rom. 13:8–10; Gal. 5:14).
3:15 The peace of Christ has a twofold application. Since it comes from him, it provides an inner peace for each believer; it is to rule (lit., brabyein means “to arbitrate,” “to control”), to guide in the decisions that he or she makes. Those at peace with themselves will be at peace with others; it enables individuals to be united into a single body. The “grievances” (3:13) that members have against each other are settled when Christ’s peace rules in their midst. In the context of the indicative and the imperative, the meaning of Paul’s admonition could be stated this way: By virtue of being reconciled to God by Christ you are at peace (the indicative; cf. Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:14; Col. 1:20); now live out that peace (the imperative) in your personal and corporate life.
And be thankful: Thanksgiving (cf. 1:12; 2:7), which is basically a response to the grace of God, is mentioned three times in verses 15–17. Thus, rather than a final admonition in the preceding list of virtues, it serves as a summons to articulate that response in corporate worship and everyday living.
The Expressions of True Worship
3:16 Here is a verse loaded with important truths. Paul has just spoken about the peace of Christ that is to rule in the believers’ hearts (3:15). Now he turns to another aspect of Christ, namely, the word of Christ. This phrase, taken as an objective genitive in Greek, means the words about Christ, that is, the gospel.
The word of Christ is to dwell within the believer and can do so either richly or feebly. Although the gospel certainly is “rich” in meaning, content, and so on, the Greek adverb richly definitely is intended to characterize the manner in which Christ’s message is to inhabit the believer: Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly.
The indwelling word will manifest itself in two ways: First, the Colossians are exhorted to teach and admonish one another with all wisdom. This is a pedagogical process (cf. 1:28) in which all members share responsibility. In light of Paul’s ministry as a teacher and Epaphras’ as a transmitter of tradition, this verse should not be taken to imply a deficiency in these church leaders.
The second manifestation of the word of Christ is in worship. Considerable research has gone into analyzing the different components mentioned, so it is not unusual for commentators to suggest that psalms (psalmois) may have their heritage in the Old Testament; hymns (hymnois) could include psalms but may be more Christian songs of praise to God or Christ; spiritual songs (ōdais) may be musical compositions originating from ecstatic utterances under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (cf. 1 Cor. 14:16).
On the basis of this passage and a similar one in Ephesians 5:19, it is not possible to establish distinctions with any precision, even though there is a certain diversity about the three. It does help one to appreciate both the richness of Christian hymnody even at this early stage of the church’s life and the function of music within the context of worship. When such music is grounded in the word of God (i.e., doctrinal in content), it definitely serves a teaching and instructional function within the body.
Singing is to be expressed in a spirit of gratitude. Music may edify the members of a congregation, but its primary function is to render thanks to God. The word translated gratitude is charis, not the more common eucharistia. charis can also mean “grace,” and with the inclusion of the article (en tē chariti), Paul may be referring to the grace of God. When Christians sing “in the grace,” they sing by virtue of the grace of God which is theirs. (The NIV rightly uses God rather than “Lord,” which has weaker manuscript evidence and probably represents an attempt to harmonize it with Eph. 5:19.)
3:17 Although this verse follows Paul’s thoughts on corporate worship, it is intended to be universal in scope. The apostle has been listing a number of virtues and suggesting patterns of conduct that are to regulate life within the community. But it is obvious that he cannot make a detailed list of vices and virtues to cover every aspect of life. To do so would mean reverting to the type of Pharisaism that Jesus so vehemently condemned in the Gospels, or patterning his gospel after the heretics at Colossae, with all their rules and regulations (2:8–23).
Rather than a directory of rules, Paul leaves an important principle with his readers: Everything they do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus. They were baptized into that name and thus stand under the authority of Christ. Their ethical life—in word or deed—is to manifest that fact. In other words, the best testimony of a meaningful baptism is an obedient life.
Finally, do it … giving thanks to God the Father through him. The Christian lives out his or her obedience to Christ, not under compulsion as a duty, but in freedom with thanksgiving. What a striking contrast to the enslaving rules and regulations of the false teachers! The Christian’s praise is offered to God through Christ. Once again, Paul reminds his readers that Christ is the only mediator to God.
Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by Arthur G. Patzia, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
The words “wrath” and “anger” are used in Bible translations for a variety of Hebrew and Greek words that refer to the disposition of someone (including God) toward persons (including oneself [Gen. 45:5]) or situations considered to be seriously displeasing. There may be degrees of anger (Zech. 1:15), and it may be accompanied by other sentiments such as distress (Gen. 45:5), hatred (Job 16:9), jealousy (Rom. 10:19), grief (Mark 3:5), and vengeance (Mic. 5:15).
Anger may be a proper response to sin or a sin-distorted world, as seen in, for example, Moses’ reaction to the golden calf (Exod. 32:19). Paul envisages an anger that does not necessarily involve sin (Eph. 4:26). Jesus is said to display anger at the willful stubbornness of his contemporaries (Mark 3:5), and his response to the mourning for Lazarus (John 11:33) might be rendered as “outrage,” an anger directed not so much at the mourners as at the ugliness of death, the consequence of sin, and with thoughts, perhaps, of his own impending death necessitated by this fallen world.
On the other hand, a display of anger may be the result of distorted perceptions or values (Gen. 4:56). A tendency to anger in oneself needs to be kept in check (James 1:19) and in others needs to be handled prudently (Prov. 15:1). Unchecked, anger may lead to violence and murder (Gen. 49:6). In several NT lists anger is associated with such other sinful behavior as quarreling, jealousy, selfishness, slander, malice, gossip, conceit, strife, idolatry, sorcery, and bitterness (2Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:20; Eph. 4:31; Col. 3:8).
In Ps. 76:10 NLT (cf. ESV, NASB, NRSV) God is said to cause human anger to bring him praise (but see NIV, NET, where it is God’s wrath against human beings that brings him praise). Perhaps an instance of this is seen in Rom. 13:4–5, where the wrath of the civil authority serves to maintain justice under God.
Any contemptuous expression that rejects God’s authority and questions his nature. Blasphemers include wicked enemies who mock God (Pss. 10:3, 13; 74:18), and God’s people who reject the authority of his word (Isa. 1:4; 5:24).
This provides the foundation for the NT material. When the Pharisees wrongfully attributed Jesus’ power to drive out demons to Beelzebul, Jesus declared that every sin and blasphemy would be forgiven, even speaking a word against the Son of Man, but not blaspheming or speaking against the Holy Spirit (Matt. 12:2232). The Spirit’s work was evident in the powerful demonstration they had seen. To attribute Jesus’ work to Satan was a complete affront to the majesty of God.
Stephen was accused of speaking words of blasphemy against Moses and God (Acts 6:11), and Saul of Tarsus, in his vendetta against Christians, went from one synagogue to another trying to force early Christians to blaspheme (Acts 26:11). Later, knowing that he was “the worst of sinners,” he acknowledged that he was a “blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man” (1Tim. 1:13–16). Knowing the seriousness of the offense, Paul declared that he handed Hymenaeus and Alexander over to Satan so they would be taught not to blaspheme (1Tim. 1:20).
The source of all blasphemy will make its appearance in the final eschatological confrontation: on the heads of the beast will be a blasphemous name (Rev. 13:1; cf. 17:3), and it will utter blasphemy against God, his temple, and his people (13:5, 6). Paul describes this same scenario in 2Thess. 2:3–4, where “the man of lawlessness” sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God. Finally, when the bowls of wrath are poured out on the earth, those who refuse to repent will curse God (Rev. 16:9, 11, 21), the final blasphemy.
A bond typically represents a close relationship in Scripture. It can carry positive or negative connotations, as do related words such as “bondage.” In the sense of “chains,” bonds literally hold a slave to the master or a prisoner to the jail. God’s exiled people are likewise said to be held in bonds, from which he will rescue them (Jer. 30:8). Spiritually speaking, “bond” may describe the firm covenant relationship between God and his people (Jer. 2:20; 5:5; Ezek. 20:37). In the new covenant, believers are freed from bondage to sin and become Christ’s bondspeople (Rom. 6:1622). This relationship with Christ in turn joins Christians to one another; in Ephesians this unity is called “the bond of peace” (4:3).
There are numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized as following a servant-master model. These included service to the monarchy (2Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in the temple (1Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also see extensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:111; Lev. 25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concerned with the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelines for their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaves who had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of six years. On the seventh year, known also as the Sabbath Year, they were to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent away empty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s “threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slaves also had certain rights that gave them special privileges and protection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, were allowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays (Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their master permanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also, severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death (Exod. 21:20–21).
Slavery was very common in the first century AD, and there were many different kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in an extended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they might choose to sell themselves into this situation (1Pet. 2:18–25). Although slavery was a significant part of society in the first century AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery. Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obedience for slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25; 1Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1Pet. 2:18–21). Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves (Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned by the apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1Tim. 1:10–11).
Jesus embodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled the role of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servant predicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in the Gospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve (Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5). Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the very nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).
The special relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured in the servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’s letters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses not so much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegiance and honor owed to Christ Jesus.
An approximate literal meaning of Hebrew and Greek terms used to refer to the seat of the emotions (sometimes translated as “intestines” or “stomach”). The literal meaning is apparent in a few passages (Ezek. 7:19; 2Chron. 21:1519; Jon. 1:17; Acts 1:18). More often the terms are used to refer to a variety of strong emotions (Jer. 31:20; Lam. 1:20; 2Cor. 6:12; Phil. 1:8; Philem. 7). Elsewhere the words refer to the womb or are related to progeny (Gen. 25:23; 2Sam. 16:11; Isa. 49:1).
The choice or selection of a person or group, especially God’s determination of who will be saved.
On occasion, the language of being “elect” is used as a description of Christ, or perhaps even a title. Isaiah, in one of his Servant Songs, gives a description that is probably best taken as a veiled reference to Christ in his unique relationship with the Father: “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen [or ‘elect’] one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations” (Isa. 42:1). There is similar usage in the NT, where Jesus is described in 1Pet. 2:6 (using a quotation from Isa. 28:16): “For in Scripture it says: ‘See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen [or “elect”] and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.’”
Many times the word “elect” is used in Scripture as a synonym for believers. For example, Jesus speaks of the future time when “he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other” (Matt. 24:31).
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.
Birth and childhood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesus was probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’s death (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of a virginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governor Quirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place in Bethlehem (2:15). Both the census and the governorship at the time of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars. Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to either confirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must be determined on the basis of one’s view regarding the general reliability of the Gospel tradition.
On the eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keeping with the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus” (Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home of his parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel of Luke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth in strength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke also contains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Baptism, temptation, and start of ministry. After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke 3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instant ministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that the temptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Luke identify three specific temptations by the devil, though their order for the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine intervention after jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’s kingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation, quoting Scripture in response.
Matthew and Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum in Galilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13; Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirty years of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity or perhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of the Levites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning of Jesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples and the sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Galilean ministry. The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and around Galilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ first teaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30); the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for his calling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection and suffering.
All the Gospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in his Galilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke 5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioning of the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers is recorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministry is the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke 6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, in particular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synoptics focus on healings and exorcisms.
During Jesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with his identity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority (Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family (3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner of Beelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesus told parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growing kingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humble beginnings (4:1–32).
The Synoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful. No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority or ability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized many demons (5:1–13), raised the dead (5:35–42), fed five thousand (6:30–44), and walked on water (6:48–49).
In the later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew and traveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are not written with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns to Galilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fear resolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee, where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ disciples with lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed the Pharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents (7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demanding a sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, who confessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus did provide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesus withdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician woman requested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans had long resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality that allotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere “crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,” Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-mute man in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’ travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The city was the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judean ministry. Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry as he resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually led to his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem into three phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27). The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of the journey. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, and the demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem (Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45; Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journey toward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvation and judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase of the journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are the main themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Social conflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposte interactions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel (Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomic feathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who had little value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16; Luke 18:15–17).
Passion week, death, and resurrection. Each of the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with the crowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark 11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Luke describes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during which Jesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
In Jerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17). Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “began looking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segment of Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’ authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions (12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation (12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s own destruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, Judas Iscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’ arrest (14:10–11).
At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a new covenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29; Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned the disciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark 14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and later he prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agony and submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42; Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial, crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15; Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18). Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission by making disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8) and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return (Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
The custom of cutting the foreskin of the male genitalia as a religious rite. Egyptians practiced circumcision, as did the Ammonites, Edomites, Moabites, and nomadic Arabians (Jer. 9:2526). Philistines, Assyrians, and Gentiles in general were uncircumcised (Judg. 14:3; Ezek. 32:17–32; Eph. 2:11).
Circumcision is first mentioned in the Bible as a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gen. 17:10). God commanded that every male be circumcised at eight days old (Gen. 17:12; cf. 21:4; Lev. 12:3; Luke 1:59; 2:21). Circumcision was required for a male to participate in the Passover (Exod. 12:48) or worship in the temple (Ezek. 44:9; cf. Acts 21:28–29).
Metaphorically, circumcision goes beyond the physical sign (Rom. 2:28). Ultimately, the enemies of God, whether circumcised or not, will be slain and laid in the grave with the uncircumcised (Ezek. 32:32). Physical circumcision is of no avail if the heart remains “uncircumcised” (Jer. 9:25–26; cf. Rom. 2:25). Circumcision of the heart is accomplished when one loves God completely (Deut. 10:16; 30:6; Jer. 4:4; Rom. 2:29), but uncircumcised ears are disobedient (Acts 7:51). The circumcision accomplished by Christ occurs when the sinful nature is rejected (Col. 2:11). In him neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value; what counts “is faith expressing itself through love” (Gal. 5:6).
Controversy began in the NT church over whether Gentile believers should be circumcised (Acts 15:1–12). Evidently, a group existed that demanded circumcision (Acts 15:1; Titus 1:10). Paul argued that circumcision was not essential to Christian faith and fellowship (Gal. 6:15; Col. 3:11).
Love for those who suffer. The OT often refers to God’s compassion, especially toward those who, because of their sinfulness, deserve the opposite treatment. In Exod. 33:19 Yahweh takes pity on the Israelites after they have rebelled, making an idol for themselves and praising it for their deliverance. He renews his covenant with them, but he reminds them of his sovereignty in doing so: “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion” (cf. Rom. 9:15).
The NT points to God’s compassion at significant junctures in the Gospels and the Epistles. Jesus himself has compassion for the crowds who “were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd” (Matt. 9:36). He takes pity on the crowds, healing their sick and feeding them miraculously (14:1421; cf. 15:32). The same connection between compassion and healing occurs in Matt. 20:34; Mark 1:41, this time on an individual level. The apostle Paul underscores this attribute of God, raising it to a title of sorts. The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is “the Father of compassion and the God of all comfort” (2Cor. 1:3). James says that the Lord is “full of compassion and mercy” (5:11), and John depicts God as one who will wipe away every tear caused by persecution and trial (Rev. 7:17; 21:4). Because God is always dealing with broken sinners, his compassion for them coincides with his love (see Ps. 145:8); and this rescuing of the guilty sets an example for his people. They must go and do likewise, loving the unlovely, unwise, and even unrighteous.
Israel shared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. This worldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon the primeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having four rims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rims were sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters. God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth and shaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:1213).
Israel’s promised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen. 13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing, fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orienting points for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise, “flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27). Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity and judgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationship with God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; this could ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits” people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).
For Israel, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen. 15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithful obedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1Kings 2:1–4). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen. 18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was the supreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance” to give (1Sam. 26:19; 2Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). The Levites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did the other tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20; Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter and to occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3). Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when they accused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing with milk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however, no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance” (Josh. 13:1).
People in the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin. Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family was the source of people’s status in the community and provided the primary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.
Marriage and divorce. Marriage in the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between two families, arranged by the bride’s father or a male representative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’s price.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction but also an expression of family honor. Only the rich could afford multiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself was celebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.
The primary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to produce a male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. The concept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs, especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.
Marriage among Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jews sought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev. 18:617). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew. Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainly outside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness. Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romans did practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinship group (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategic alliances between families.
Greek and Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. In Jewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorce proceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release her and repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (in particular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Sira comments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to the father (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictive use of divorce than the OT (Mark 10:1–12).
Children and parenting. Childbearing was considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman and her entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to this blessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, and specifically their husbands.
Children were of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. An estimated 60percent of the children in the first-century Mediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.
Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting style based on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and evil tendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent evil tendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The main concern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty. Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stage children were taught to accept the total authority of the father. The rearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girls were taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so that they could help with household tasks.
Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak of fidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT, the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In their overall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to in familial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod. 4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16; 64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).
The church as the family of God. Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship, the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into the community was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was eventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18). Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the community of his followers, God’s family—the church. See also Adoption.
Biblically speaking, to forgive is less about changing feelings (emotions) and more about an actual restoration of a relationship. It is about making a wrong right, a process that usually is both costly and painful. To capture the biblical sense, the English word “pardon” may prove more helpful.
Forgiveness expresses the character of the merciful God, who eagerly pardons sinners who confess their sins, repent of their transgressions, and express this through proper actions. Forgiveness is never a matter of a human right; it is exclusively a gracious expression of God’s loving care. Human need for forgiveness stems from actions arising from their fallen nature. These actions (or nonactions), whether done deliberately or coincidentally, destroy people’s relationship with God and can be restored only by God’s forgiving mercy (Eph. 2:1).
Under the Mosaic covenant, sin placed offenders under God’s wrath among the ungodly. Rescue from this fate could be obtained by God’s forgiveness alone, which was attained through repentance and sacrifice. Although sacrifice was necessary to express true repentance, it is a mistake to consider it a payment that could purchase God’s forgiveness (1Sam. 15:22; Prov. 21:3; Eccles. 5:1; Hos. 6:6). The forgiveness of God remains his free, undeserved gift.
Although the sacrificial system is done away with, or rather completed, through Christ (Heb. 10:12), NT teaching continues to recognize conditions for forgiveness. Since forgiveness restores relationship, the offender remains involved and must desire the restoration (Luke 13:3; 24:47; Acts 2:38). God does not grant his forgiveness without consideration of the offending party.
Jesus expresses this most clearly in the parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15:1124). The son rebels against his father, squanders his wealth, and violates their relationship. The gracious and loving father remains willing to restore the relationship, but the reunion does not occur until the prodigal replaces rebellion with repentance; then, before he can even utter his sorrow, the eager father welcomes him back to a restored relationship. God remains free to forgive or not forgive, but, because of God’s nature and mercy, sinners can rest assured of God’s relationship-restoring forgiveness when they seek it in repentance. The forgiveness that God grants is full and restores things to an “as before” situation (cf. Ps. 103:12; Jer. 31:34), a point that the older son in the parable (Luke 15:25–32), who exemplifies religious self-righteousness, did not comprehend.
The 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).
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.
Physiologically, the heart is an organ in the body, and in the Bible it is also used in a number of metaphors.
Metaphorically, the heart refers to the mind, the will, the seat of emotions, or even the whole person. It also refers to the center of something or its inner part. These metaphors come from the heart’s importance and location.
Mind. The heart refers to the mind, but not the brain, and in these cases does not involve human physiology. It is a metaphor, and while the neurophysiology of the heart may be interesting in its own right, it has no bearing on this use of language. Deuteronomy 6:5 issues the command to love God with all one’s heart, soul, and strength. When the command is repeated in the Gospels, it occurs in three variations (Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). Common to all three is the addition of the word “mind.” The Gospel writers want to be sure that the audience hears Jesus adding “mind,” but this addition is based on the fact that the meaning of the Hebrew word for “heart” includes the mind.
The mental activities of the metaphorical heart are abundant. The heart is where a person thinks (Gen. 6:5; Deut. 7:17; 1Chron. 29:18; Rev. 18:7), where a person comprehends and has understanding (1Kings 3:9; Job 17:4; Ps. 49:3; Prov. 14:13; Matt. 13:15). The heart makes plans and has intentions (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Prov. 20:5; 1Chron. 29:18; Jer. 23:20). One believes with the heart (Luke 24:25; Acts 8:37; Rom. 10:9). The heart is the site of wisdom, discernment, and skill (Exod. 35:34; 36:2; 1Kings 3:9; 10:24). The heart is the place of memory (Deut. 4:9; Ps. 119:11). The heart plays the role of conscience (2Sam. 24:10; 1John 3:2021).
It is often worth the effort to substitute “mind” for “heart” when reading the Bible in order to grasp the mental dimension. For example, after telling the Israelites to love God with all their heart, Moses says, “These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts” (Deut. 6:6). Reading it instead as “be on your mind” changes our perspective, and in this case the idiom “on your mind” is clearer and more accurate. The following verses instruct parents to talk to their children throughout the day about God’s words. In order for parents to do this, God’s requirements and deeds need to be constantly on their minds, out of their love for him. Similarly, love for God and loyalty are expressed by meditation on and determination to obey his law (Ps. 119:11, 112). The law is not merely a list of rules; it is also a repository of a worldview in which the Lord is the only God. To live consistently with this truth requires careful, reflective thought.
Emotions and attitude. The heart, as the seat of emotion, is associated with a number of feelings and sentiments, such as gladness (Exod. 4:14; Acts 2:26), hatred (Lev. 19:17), pride (Deut. 8:14), resentment (Deut. 15:10), dread (Deut. 28:67), sympathy (Judg. 5:9), love (Judg. 16:15), sadness (1Sam. 1:8; John 16:6), and jealousy and ambition (James 3:14). The heart is also the frame of reference for attitudes such as willingness, courage, and desire.
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.
In the OT, humility often refers to people of low social status, the disenfranchised, and those who suffer oppression and poverty (e.g., Prov. 22:2223; Amos 2:7; Zech. 7:10). Scripture sometimes associates those socially marginalized with the ethical dimension of humility, thus making the social status equivalent to a subjective spiritual quality (Pss. 22:26; 37:11–17; 146:7–9; Zeph. 3:11–13). Social humiliation, however, does not necessarily lead to humility as a virtue. In a number of instances in the OT, the two remain distinct. In its subjective quality, humility involves submission to one in authority, usually to God (Exod. 10:3; Deut. 8:2–3, 16; Ps. 119:67, 71, 75). On some occasions humility is related to the act of repentance before God (e.g., Zeph. 2:1–3). When paired with “fear of the Lord,” humility implies a person who lives in a posture of pious submission before God (Prov. 15:31–33; 22:4).
Such is the case with Moses, whom the writer of Numbers describes in the following way: “Now Moses was a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth” (Num. 12:3). Moses’ humility in this situation is displayed in his intimate relationship with, and by his submissive attitude toward, the sovereign God (12:4–9).
In the NT, Christians take Christ as their model of humility (Matt. 11:29; Phil. 2:6–11). The NT writers also call on Christians to humble themselves before God (James 4:10; 1Pet. 5:5–6) as well as others, including their enemies (Rom. 12:14–21; Phil. 2:3).
An image or likeness of a deity, whether carved from wood, molded from metal, or even formed in one’s mind.
In contrast to other ancient religions, the Bible rejects worship of all images as incompatible with worship of God. This includes images of Yahweh, since he is transcendent and cannot be represented by anything in creation. As Moses reminded Israel, they saw no form at Sinai but only heard God’s voice (Deut. 4:12). No form can adequately represent Yahweh, as he is incomparable. The Bible similarly forbids worshiping images of other deities because it elevates them to the status reserved for God alone. Thus, the second commandment prohibits making and worshiping idols in the image of anything found in heaven, on earth, or in the water (Exod. 20:45).
By NT times, idol worship was no longer a problem for Jews, but it remained an important issue for the growing church because many believers came from idolatrous backgrounds. Thus, the apostles included idolatry in lists of sins to be judged, warned their readers to flee from it, and addressed eating food sacrificed to idols. Indicating that idolatry went beyond worship of images, they linked it with the love of money (Matt. 6:24) and greed (Col. 3:5). The NT authors believed that their readers could turn from idols to worship the true and living God, praised them for doing so, and looked to the time when all idol worship would cease.
A holy God wants a holy people. He had described the nation of Israel as holy (cf. Exod. 19:56) but also wanted them to live holy lives and grow increasingly holy. Holiness came, in part, by keeping the law; an important part of the law was the concept of cleanness.
Cleanness does not refer to good hygiene, nor is it synonymous with morality, since a person could be unclean and still righteous. Cleanness allowed the OT believer to live a holy life and enabled that person to be made increasingly holy by “Yahweh, your sanctifier” (NIV: “the Lord, who makes you holy,” Lev. 20:8; cf. 21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 16, 32; 31:13). Impurity traveled along four channels: sexuality (various discharges; e.g., nocturnal emission, menstruation, childbirth), diet (e.g., eating certain types of animals), disease (e.g., skin diseases, mildew), and death (i.e., contact with animal or human corpses). Impurities occurring naturally and unavoidably in the course of life (e.g., menstruation) were tolerated, representing no danger to the person or community as long as they were promptly addressed. Other impurities had to be avoided at all costs or else grave consequences would result to the person and community.
One prohibited impurity arose from eating food declared off-limits by God. All meat had to be thoroughly bled before being eaten (Gen. 9:3–4; Lev. 17:10–14; Deut. 12:16, 23). Edible land animals must both have a completely divided hoof and chew the cud (Lev. 11:3; Deut. 14:6), while water creatures had to have both fins and scales (Lev. 11:9; Deut. 14:9). Most birds were acceptable for food (exceptions are given in Lev. 11:13–19; Deut. 14:11–18), as were most insects (Lev. 11:20–23; Deut. 14:19–20) and some crawling animals (Lev. 11:29–31, 41–42).
Why did God declare certain things clean and others unclean? Some suggest that the distinction is arbitrary; the rules are given as a test of obedience. Others argue that the original audience knew of reasons now lost to us. Still others believe that God was protecting his people from disease. It is true that certain kinds of meat improperly prepared can transmit disease, but not all laws can be explained this way. Some believe that God identified things as clean because they represented a state of normalcy (e.g., fish normally propel themselves with fins, so those lacking fins are abnormal and thus unclean). A related view considers things as clean or unclean based on what they symbolized. So, for example, God identified objects as unclean if they were associated with death (e.g., vultures, corpses) because he is for life. Here again, it is difficult to explain all the laws by appeal to normalcy or symbolism.
Ceremonial cleansing is not just a topic in the OT; it appears in the opening chapters of the Gospels. Mary underwent the required purification rituals after Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:22–24), and Jesus “cleansed” people from leprosy, instructing them to carry out the Mosaic purification rituals (Matt. 8:2–4; Mark 1:40–42; Luke 5:12–14; 17:11–19; cf. Matt. 10:8; 11:5; Luke 4:27; 7:22).
In one of his confrontations with the Pharisees, Jesus signaled a departure from how these laws had been practiced. He announced, “Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them” (Mark 7:15), to which Mark adds an explanation: “In saying this, Jesus declared all foods ‘clean’” (7:19). Peter’s rooftop vision in Acts 10 reflects this same perspective, as do the church’s decision regarding Gentile conversion (Acts 15) and Paul’s comments to the church at Rome (Rom. 14:14, 20–21).
A collection of 150 poems. They are the hymnbook of the OT period, used in public worship. Psalms contains songs of different lengths, types, and dates. The earliest psalm (Ps. 90) is attributed to Moses (mid-second millennium BC), while the content of Ps. 126 and Ps. 137 points to the latest periods of the OT (mid-first millennium BC). They continue to be used as a source of public worship and private devotion.
Although the psalms are not theological essays, readers can learn about God and their relationship with God from these poems. The book of Psalms is a bit like a portrait gallery of God, using images to describe who he is and the nature of our relationship with him. Some examples include God as shepherd (Ps. 23), king (Ps. 47), warrior (Ps. 98), and mother (Ps. 131), and the list could be greatly expanded. Each one of these picture images casts light on the nature of God and also the nature of our relationship with God. After all, the aforementioned psalms explicitly or implicitly describe God’s people as sheep, subjects, soldiers, and children.
In the OT, wisdom is a characteristic of someone who attains a high degree of knowledge, technical skill, and experience in a particular domain. It refers to the ability that certain individuals have to use good judgment in running the affairs of state (Joseph in Gen. 41:33; David in 2Sam. 14:20; Solomon in 1Kings 3:9, 12, 28). It can also refer to the navigational skills that sailors use in maneuvering a ship through difficult waters (Ps. 107:27). Furthermore, wisdom includes the particular skills of an artisan (Exod. 31:6; 35:35; 1Chron. 22:15 16). In all these cases, wisdom involves the expertise that a person acquires to accomplish a particular task. In these instances “wisdom” is an ethically neutral term, or at least that dimension is not emphasized. The wise are those who have mastered a certain skill set in their field of expertise.
The uniqueness of the OT wisdom literature (Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, etc.) is that it highlights the moral dimension of wisdom. Here “wisdom” refers to developing expertise in negotiating the complexities of life and managing those complexities in a morally responsible way that honors God and benefits both the community and the individual. Although it is difficult to pin down a concise definition, one can gain a better understanding of wisdom by investigating two important dimensions: wisdom as a worldview, and the traits of a person who is considered to be wise.
Who is wise? First, the wise are those involved in a lifelong process of character development. They manifest the virtues of righteousness, justice, and equity (Prov. 1:3; 2:9). The embodiment of these virtues culminates in the description of the woman of noble character at the conclusion of Proverbs (31:10–31). She exhibits self-control, patience, care, diligence, discipline, humility, generosity, honesty, and fear of the Lord (cf. James 3:13–18). She is the epitome of wisdom in its maturity and the model that all should emulate.
Second, the wise know the value of words and how to use them. They know when to speak, what to say, and how to say it (Job 29:21–22; Prov. 15:23; 25:11; Eccles. 3:7; 12:9–10). Wisdom and the wise place a premium on the power of words.
Third, the wise place great importance on relationships and on interaction with others. The wise person is the one who is open to the give-and-take of relationships (Prov. 27:5–6, 17, 19). Such a person develops the humility necessary to receive correction and criticism from others. Hearing criticism and changing wrong behavior are integral to wisdom (3:1–11). The wise appreciate insightful criticism because it helps them live life more productively (15:12). Wisdom is, ultimately, relational.
Fourth, the wise person develops the art of discernment (Prov. 1:2, 4–6). The sage is equipped with the ability to think critically. The very quality of wisdom itself invites the re-forming and rethinking of ideas. Sages are not interested in pat answers (26:4–5). Proverbs 16:1–9 throws a wrench in the conventional cogs of wisdom, claiming that although humans make their plans, God has the final say. Both Job and Ecclesiastes go head to head with conventional beliefs, probing more deeply into the complexities of life and the relationship between human and divine. No easy answers exist here. In contrast, fools do not use their mental faculties. They view wisdom as a commodity, a matter of learning some techniques, accepting certain beliefs, and memorizing a few proverbs (17:16). The wise, however, know that wisdom involves the art of critical thinking and interacting with others.
Fifth, and most fundamental, the wise person takes a God-centered focus toward life. Wisdom literature affirms, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Prov. 9:10; cf. Prov. 1:7; Job 28:28; Eccles. 12:13). That this is the beginning step in the process of gaining wisdom means that one who misses this step can proceed no further along the path to wisdom. The fear of the Lord is to wisdom as the letters of the alphabet are to forming words. The wise gain wisdom by being in relationship with the Lord (Prov. 3:5–8). The fear of the Lord is the beginning as well as the culmination of wisdom.
Wisdom is a highly prized quality, superior to might and power (Prov. 25:15; Eccles. 9:13–16), and one must diligently seek it (Prov. 2:1–5). Yet in the end, wisdom is a gift that only God can give (Prov. 2:6–8; 1Kings 3:9).
“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:1617; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).
The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.
The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).
Despite tendencies to downplay the reality of God’s anger (God is classically described as “without passions”), if we are to do justice to both Testaments, we must allow the language of Scripture to stand, where God often is said to be angry with individuals or nations, including Israel. Although God is changeless (Mal. 3:6), he interacts in a personal way with a time-bound world. The Bible writers intend us to understand that there is something in God’s anger to which human anger is analogous, though God’s anger is not identical to ours (Hos. 11:9). God’s anger is not an automatic response; he can restrain it (Ps. 78:38). God is said to be characteristically slow to become angry; that is, his anger is a deliberate response (Exod. 34:6, a text with numerous echoes) and may also be short-lived (Ps. 30:5; Mic. 7:18).
God’s anger against Israel in the wilderness is noteworthy (Heb. 3:10, 17). The apostasy with the golden calf (Exod. 32:1012), the complaining (Num. 11:1, 33), and the failure to enter the promised land following the report of the spies (Num. 32:10–11) all provoke God to anger. Failure to heed God’s word (Zech. 7:12) or that of his prophets (2Chron. 36:16), neglect of his worship (2Chron. 29:6–8), and intermarriage with idolaters (Ezra 9:14) are behaviors that incur the wrath of God.
God’s anger is directed against individuals, particularly for failures of leadership, as with Moses (Exod. 4:14; Deut. 1:37) and Solomon (1Kings 11:9–11). God’s anger often is directed against the Israelite and Judean kings, not just those who committed idolatry (2Chron. 25:15), but even those who are faithful in most respects, for their failure to remove the idolatrous high places (2Kings 23:19).
Picking up on the warning that God’s anger will be directed against those who do not pay homage to God’s appointed king (Ps. 2:5, 12), Jesus declares that disobedience to God’s Son brings upon one the wrath of God (John 3:36), which evidently is not incompatible with his love for the world (3:16). According to Rom. 4:15, God’s wrath is a consequence of the law; that is, the law, giving concrete expression to the character of God, brings culpability for transgression. God’s wrath is revealed against all forms of ungodliness and its tendency to suppress the truth (Rom. 1:18). Those who demonstrate their disobedience to God or his truth will be subjected to his anger (Rom. 2:8; Eph. 5:6; Col. 3:6).
The judgment that follows as a consequence of God’s anger being aroused takes the form of the withholding of God’s covenant favor (Ps. 95:11; Isa. 54:8) or the implementation of his covenant curses (Deut. 29:27), specifically through drought (Deut. 11:17), plague (Ps. 78:50), the sword (Ps. 78:62), and deliverance into the hands of enemies (2Kings 13:3), leading to exile (2Chron. 6:36). God’s anger can be depicted in various forms of cosmic upheaval or the undoing of creation (2Sam. 22:8–16; Ps. 18:7; Jer. 4:26). God’s anger is beyond human ability to endure (Ps. 76:7), such that hiding in Sheol is considered preferable (Job 14:13).
God’s wrath becomes particularly associated with a coming day of wrath at the end of the age, when God’s justice will be powerfully displayed (Dan. 8:19; Zeph. 2:3; Luke 21:23; Rom. 2:5; Rev. 6:17).
The NT brings to fulfillment these forms of mediation in presenting the ultimate remedy for God’s wrath in the person and work of Jesus Christ (Rom. 5:9; 1Thess. 1:10; 5:9). The use of “propitiation” language (Rom. 3:25; Heb. 2:17; 1John 2:2), though its significance is disputed, is classically understood in terms of the need for God’s wrath to be satisfied. In that case, it is specifically the cross of Christ that ultimately deals with God’s righteous anger against sinners.
Direct Matches
The words “wrath” and “anger” areused in Bible translations for a variety of Hebrew and Greek wordsthat refer to the disposition of someone (including God) towardpersons (including oneself [Gen. 45:5]) or situations considered tobe seriously displeasing. There may be degrees of anger (Zech. 1:15),and it may be accompanied by other sentiments such as distress (Gen.45:5), hatred (Job 16:9), jealousy (Rom. 10:19), grief (Mark 3:5),and vengeance (Mic. 5:15).
Angermay be a proper response to sin or a sin-distorted world, as seen in,for example, Moses’ reaction to the golden calf (Exod. 32:19).Paul envisages an anger that does not necessarily involve sin (Eph.4:26). Jesus is said to display anger at the willful stubbornness ofhis contemporaries (Mark 3:5), and his response to the mourning forLazarus (John 11:33) might be rendered as “outrage,” ananger directed not so much at the mourners as at the ugliness ofdeath, the consequence of sin, and with thoughts, perhaps, of his ownimpending death necessitated by this fallen world.
Onthe other hand, a display of anger may be the result of distortedperceptions or values (Gen. 4:5–6). A tendency to anger inoneself needs to be kept in check (James 1:19) and in others needs tobe handled prudently (Prov. 15:1). Unchecked, anger may lead toviolence and murder (Gen. 49:6). In several NT lists anger isassociated with such other sinful behavior as quarreling, jealousy,selfishness, slander, malice, gossip, conceit, strife, idolatry,sorcery, and bitterness (2Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:20; Eph. 4:31;Col. 3:8).
InPs. 76:10 NLT (cf. ESV, NASB, NRSV) God is said to cause human angerto bring him praise (but see NIV, NET, where it is God’s wrathagainst human beings that brings him praise). Perhaps an instance ofthis is seen in Rom. 13:4–5, where the wrath of the civilauthority serves to maintain justice under God.
An epithet used by Luke and Paul to signify someone whospeaks a foreign, unintelligible language (Acts 28:2, 4 [NIV:“islanders”]; 1 Cor. 14:11; cf. Ps. 113:1 LXX [114:1MT]). The Greek term, barbaros, occurs six times in the NT, all ofthem rendered as “barbarian” by the KJV, whereasmore-recent versions tend to use terms such as “foreigner”(though see Rom. 1:14 NRSV; Col. 3:11 NRSV, NIV). However, such termsperhaps miss the negative connotation. The word itself isonomatopoeic, representing the unintelligible sound of a languageforeign to the hearer: bar-bar-bar. The basis for such a distinctionwas partly overcome at Pentecost (Acts 2:1–36). The term couldalso be used more generally for a member of another nation, which,before Christ, had not been included in God’s covenant (Rom.1:14). Paul also mentions, as a class of barbarian, the Scythians(Col. 3:11), who had a bad reputation among Romans and Jews (2 Macc.4:47; 3 Macc. 7:5). Their depiction by Herodotus is particularlyterrifying: a nomadic people north of the Black Sea (and thereforenot far from the Colossians in Asia Minor) who never washed and whodrank the blood of the first enemy killed in battle, making napkinsof the scalps and drinking bowls from skulls of the vanquished (Hist.4.19, 46, 64–65, 75). Paul maintains that deeply engrainedcultural evil can be overcome in Christ (Col. 3:1–11; see alsoGal. 3:28). In subsequent centuries, missionaries were phenomenallysuccessful in reaching the barbarian tribes.
The custom of cutting the foreskin of the male genitalia as a religious rite. The earliest attestation of circumcision is on depictions of West Semitic Syrian warriors unearthed in Syria and Egypt and dating to the third millennium BC. In addition, an Egyptian stela describing a ceremony in which 120 were circumcised has been dated to the twenty-third century BC. Egyptians practiced circumcision, as did the Ammonites, Edomites, Moabites, and nomadic Arabians (Jer. 9:25–26). Philistines, Assyrians, and Gentiles in general were uncircumcised (Judg. 14:3; Ezek. 32:17–32; Eph. 2:11).
Circumcision is first mentioned in the Bible as a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gen. 17:10). God commanded that every male be circumcised at eight days old (Gen. 17:12; cf. 21:4; Lev. 12:3; Luke 1:59; 2:21). Circumcision was required for a male to participate in the Passover (Exod. 12:48) or worship in the temple (Ezek. 44:9; cf. Acts 21:28–29).
Simeon and Levi used circumcision as a ruse to obtain revenge for the rape of their sister Dinah (Gen. 34:13–31). Zipporah redeemed Moses by circumcising her son on their journey back to Egypt (Exod. 4:24–26). At Gilgal, Joshua circumcised the sons of the Israelites who had disbelieved that God could bring them into the Promised Land (Josh. 5:2–8). The sons had not been circumcised during the journey through the wilderness (5:7). Saul demanded a dowry of one hundred Philistine foreskins before David could marry his daughter Michal (1 Sam. 18:25). David doubled the bride-price by providing two hundred (18:27).
Metaphorically, circumcision goes beyond the physical sign (Rom. 2:28). Ultimately, the enemies of God, whether circumcised or not, will be slain and laid in the grave with the uncircumcised (Ezek. 32:32). Physical circumcision is of no avail if the heart remains “uncircumcised” (Jer. 9:25–26; cf. Rom. 2:25). Circumcision of the heart is accomplished when one loves God completely (Deut. 10:16; 30:6; Jer. 4:4; Rom. 2:29), but uncircumcised ears are disobedient (Acts 7:51). The circumcision accomplished by Christ occurs when the sinful nature is rejected (Col. 2:11). In him neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value; what counts “is faith expressing itself through love” (Gal. 5:6).
Controversy began in the NT church over whether Gentile believers should be circumcised (Acts 15:1–12). Evidently, a group existed that demanded circumcision (Acts 15:1; Titus 1:10). Paul argued that circumcision was not essential to Christian faith and fellowship (Gal. 6:15; Col. 3:11).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Love for those who suffer. If we love others by denyingourselves for their sake, so that they might please God and liveabundantly, we show them compassion by doing this when they are inpain. We respond with friendship, healing, and encouragement justwhen others might keep their distance. The compassionate person alsoturns sin-sick people away from evil, longing to see Christ formed intheir character and life. Accordingly, compassion, like love ingeneral, is an active force. It does not merely “feel someone’spain”; it gets involved whenever and wherever possible.
CompassionShown by God
TheOT often refers to God’s compassion, especially toward thosewho, because of their sinfulness, deserve the opposite treatment. InExod. 33:19 Yahweh takes pity on the Israelites after they haverebelled, making an idol for themselves and praising it for theirdeliverance. He renews his covenant with them, but he reminds them ofhis sovereignty in doing so: “I will have mercy on whom I willhave mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will havecompassion” (cf. Rom. 9:15). No one deserves God’s mercy,yet the people often receive it, even when suffering from deservedharm. In the book of Judges, Israel’s history cycles from sinand wrath to compassion and deliverance, thus emphasizing Yahweh’spatience and love. The people “wouldn’t listen to theirjudges; they prostituted themselves to other gods—worshipedthem!” but God later “was moved to compassion when heheard their groaning because of those who afflicted and beat them”(2:17–18 MSG). David’s plea for mercy in Ps. 51 relies onYahweh’s compassion for the self-destructive sinner: “Havemercy on me, O God, according to your unfailing love; according toyour great compassion blot out my transgressions” (v. 1).In fact, God’s tendency to show mercy appalls Jonah, whocomplains, “Isn’t this what I said, Lord, when I wasstill at home? . . . I knew that you are a gracious andcompassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God whor*lents from sending calamity” (Jon. 4:2). Isaiah 40–66dwells frequently on this aspect of God’s nature (e.g.,49:10–15; 54:7–10; 63:7, 15).
TheNT points to God’s compassion at significant junctures in theGospels and the Epistles. Jesus himself has compassion for the crowdswho “were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd”(Matt. 9:36). He takes pity on the crowds, healing their sick andfeeding them miraculously (14:14–21; cf. 15:32). The sameconnection between compassion and healing occurs in Matt. 20:34; Mark1:41, this time on an individual level. The apostle Paul underscoresthis attribute of God, raising it to a title of sorts. The Father ofour Lord Jesus Christ is “the Father of compassion and the Godof all comfort” (2 Cor. 1:3). James says that the Lord is“full of compassion and mercy” (5:11), and John depictsGod as one who will wipe away every tear caused by persecution andtrial (Rev. 7:17; 21:4). Because God is always dealing with brokensinners, his compassion for them coincides with his love (see Ps.145:8); and this rescuing of the guilty sets an example for hispeople. They must go and do likewise, loving the unlovely, unwise,and even unrighteous.
CompassionRequired by God
BecauseGod loves the suffering person, even those with self-inflictedwounds, he calls upon his people to show similar compassion. Parentsought to show compassion toward their own children, as 1 Kings3:26; Ps. 103:13 imply (cf. Ezek. 16:5). No one must keep a debtor’sgarment in pledge, Yahweh says, “because that cloak is the onlycovering your neighbor has. What else can they sleep in? When theycry out to me, I will hear, for I am compassionate” (Exod.22:27). According to Hos. 6:6, a familiar verse quoted by Jesus, Godrequires compassion: “For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, andacknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings” (cf. Matt.12:7). Micah 6:8 draws the same contrast between outward formalismand genuine righteousness, including displays of compassion: “Hehas shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord requireof you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with yourGod.” Given the OT emphasis on the compassion of God, we mighthave expected it to become Israel’s duty as well, though it issometimes withheld in judgment (see Deut. 7:5–6; 13:8; 19:13;Ps. 109:12).
TheNT also portrays mercy or compassion as a duty. Matthew 5:7 is afamiliar example: “Blessed are the merciful, for they will beshown mercy.” Of course if Jesus demonstrates compassion towardthose who suffer, we ought to do so as well. In 2 Cor. 1 the“Father of compassion” comforts us (v. 3) “sothat we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort weourselves receive from God” (v. 4). Ephesians 4:32 is adirect command that associates compassion with mercy toward sinners:“Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving eachother, just as in Christ God forgave you.” The comfort given tous by Christ sets the tone for each believer in Phil. 2: if there isany “tenderness and compassion” in him (v. 1), wemust follow his example. Similarly, we must “clothe [ourselves]with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience”(Col. 3:12). Peter makes the same connection between humility andcompassion: “Finally, all of you, be like-minded, besympathetic, love one another, be compassionate and humble”(1 Pet. 3:8).
TheBible connects compassion and mercy with humility for understandablereasons, given the common association of distress and dishonor. Wewant always to keep up appearances, since others might be affected byour own troubles and the troubled company we keep. Suffering peopleare burdensome and sometimes unlovely. Their sins may provide a readyexcuse to keep one’s distance, but just as God the Savior hasshown us compassion, we must love others when they hurt.
A word that appears in the KJV and also in the Douay-RheimsBible (an English translation of the Latin Vulgate), translating theGreek word epithymia, and is generally, and incorrectly, understoodas lust. More accurately, it describes an intense desire foranything, and it is not limited to sexual desire, as the contemporarydefinition of lust implies. Furthermore, there are some significantdifferences between Catholic and Protestant theological definitionsof concupiscence. Most simply put, Catholics tie their understandingof concupiscence to the concept of the inclination to sin, butconcupiscence itself is not sin. Protestants, on the other hand,generally tie concupiscence to their understanding of original sin;that is, concupiscence is original sin. Outside of theologicalconversation the word has fallen out of general public use.
Oneuse of the term in the KJV occurs in Rom. 7:8, where Paul discussesthe relationship between sin and the law. These verses in Romans arenotoriously difficult for interpreters to explain, but in 7:8 Paulsays that sin, which was defined by the commandment (Paul here meansthe Torah or Hebrew Bible), produced concupiscence (NIV: “coveting”).For Paul, sin is a force that becomes active only when the law ismade known, because without the law, Paul says, sin is dead.
TheKJV uses the term again in Col. 3:5 in another Pauline discussionabout sin. In this passage Paul encourages his readers to “setyour minds on things above” rather than on “earthlythings.” Continuing in this line of reasoning, Paul says thathis readers are to “put to death” a list of things,including concupiscence (NIV: “evil desires”).
Thelast use of the term by the KJV is in 1 Thess. 4:5, where Paulagain admonishes his readers to live a holy life and to avoidconcupiscence (NIV: “passionate lust”).
TheDouay-Rheims Bible does not use the term in 1 Thess. 4:5, but itdoes (in addition to Rom. 7:8; Col. 3:5) in Rom. 7:7; James 1:14–15;2 Pet. 1:4; 1 John 2:17.
A word that appears in the KJV and also in the Douay-RheimsBible (an English translation of the Latin Vulgate), translating theGreek word epithymia, and is generally, and incorrectly, understoodas lust. More accurately, it describes an intense desire foranything, and it is not limited to sexual desire, as the contemporarydefinition of lust implies. Furthermore, there are some significantdifferences between Catholic and Protestant theological definitionsof concupiscence. Most simply put, Catholics tie their understandingof concupiscence to the concept of the inclination to sin, butconcupiscence itself is not sin. Protestants, on the other hand,generally tie concupiscence to their understanding of original sin;that is, concupiscence is original sin. Outside of theologicalconversation the word has fallen out of general public use.
Oneuse of the term in the KJV occurs in Rom. 7:8, where Paul discussesthe relationship between sin and the law. These verses in Romans arenotoriously difficult for interpreters to explain, but in 7:8 Paulsays that sin, which was defined by the commandment (Paul here meansthe Torah or Hebrew Bible), produced concupiscence (NIV: “coveting”).For Paul, sin is a force that becomes active only when the law ismade known, because without the law, Paul says, sin is dead.
TheKJV uses the term again in Col. 3:5 in another Pauline discussionabout sin. In this passage Paul encourages his readers to “setyour minds on things above” rather than on “earthlythings.” Continuing in this line of reasoning, Paul says thathis readers are to “put to death” a list of things,including concupiscence (NIV: “evil desires”).
Thelast use of the term by the KJV is in 1 Thess. 4:5, where Paulagain admonishes his readers to live a holy life and to avoidconcupiscence (NIV: “passionate lust”).
TheDouay-Rheims Bible does not use the term in 1 Thess. 4:5, but itdoes (in addition to Rom. 7:8; Col. 3:5) in Rom. 7:7; James 1:14–15;2 Pet. 1:4; 1 John 2:17.
Contrary to common uses of the word “forgiveness,”which are highly influenced by modernity’s interest inpsychology, the biblical concept identifies forgiveness as atheological issue to be understood in relational categories.Biblically speaking, to forgive is less about changing feelings(emotions) and more about an actual restoration of a relationship. Itis about making a wrong right, a process that usually is both costlyand painful. To capture the biblical sense, the English word “pardon”may prove more helpful.
Terminology
Principally,God forgives by removing the guilt from transgressors and therebyreleasing them from their deserved penalty. The OT term kipper speaksto the covering of sin (Deut. 21:8; Ps. 78:38; Jer. 18:23), and itsuse in connection with sacrifice signifies the idea of atonement.Like salakh, it communicates exclusively God’s forgiveness ofhumans (Num. 30:5; Amos 7:2). The term nasa’ refers to theremoval of guilt, God lifting the burden of sin from the sinner(Exod. 32:32; Num. 14:19), but it also can be used of forgivenessbetween humans (Gen. 50:17).
Inthe NT, verbs such as aphiēmi (noun aphesis) and apolyōconnote the idea of sending away or releasing, whereas (epi)kalyptōexpresses the idea of covering. Other terms, such as paresis(“passing over” [Rom. 3:25]) further extend the idea ofGod’s forgiveness: debt is canceled; God is exercising hisforbearing love. Paul’s preferred term is charizomai, whichunderscores the close correlation between grace and forgiveness (Rom.8:32; Eph. 4:32; Col. 2:13; 3:13).
God’sForgiveness
Forgivenessexpresses the character of the merciful God, who eagerly pardonssinners who confess their sins, repent of their transgressions, andexpress this through proper actions. Forgiveness is never a matter ofa human right; it is exclusively a gracious expression of God’sloving care. Human need for forgiveness stems from actions arisingfrom their fallen nature. These actions (or nonactions), whether donedeliberately or coincidentally, destroy people’s relationshipwith God and can be restored only by God’s forgiving mercy(Eph. 2:1).
Underthe Mosaic covenant, sin placed offenders under God’s wrathamong the ungodly. Rescue from this fate could be obtained by God’sforgiveness alone, which was attained through repentance andsacrifice. Although sacrifice was necessary to express truerepentance, it is a mistake to consider it a payment that couldpurchase God’s forgiveness (1Sam. 15:22; Prov. 21:3;Eccles. 5:1; Hos. 6:6). The forgiveness of God remains his free,undeserved gift.
Althoughthe sacrificial system is done away with, or rather completed,through Christ (Heb. 10:12), NT teaching continues to recognizeconditions for forgiveness. Since forgiveness restores relationship,the offender remains involved and must desire the restoration (Luke13:3; 24:47; Acts 2:38). God does not grant his forgiveness withoutconsideration of the offending party.
Jesusexpresses this most clearly in the parable of the prodigal son (Luke15:11–24). The son rebels against his father, squanders hiswealth, and violates their relationship. The gracious and lovingfather remains willing to restore the relationship, but the reuniondoes not occur until the prodigal replaces rebellion with repentance;then, before he can even utter his sorrow, the eager father welcomeshim back to a restored relationship. God remains free to forgive ornot forgive, but sinners can rest assured of God’srelationship-restoring forgiveness when they seek it in repentance.The forgiveness that God grants is full and restores things to an “asbefore” situation (cf. Ps. 103:12; Jer. 31:34), a point thatthe older son in the parable (Luke 15:25–32), who exemplifiesreligious self-righteousness, did not comprehend.
HumanForgiveness
Thebiblical description of forgiveness between humans is rooted in thistheological understanding and articulates a clear analogy betweendivine and human forgiveness. Human relationship with God provides apattern for their relationship to each other (Matt. 5:23–24;6:12, 14–15). They forgive because they have been forgiven(Luke 7:41–47; Col. 3:13). If, or when, their forgiveness ofothers remains absent, it questions, or even jeopardizes, their ownrelationship with God (Matt. 18:22–35).
Again,since forgiveness is a theological matter, the one being wrongedremains obligated to work for the restoration of the relationshipeven if the wrongdoer does not repent. The one wronged should seek towin the offender back by showing mercy and eagerness to forgive aslearned from God (Rom. 12:19–20). There is no formula for thisGod-inspired forgiveness and no limit to its zeal. Jesus met Peter’ssuggestion that the offer of forgiveness could be exhausted with anunequivocal no (Matt. 18:21–22). The offended must offerforgiveness every time the wrongdoer asks for it (Luke 17:3–4).
Mostradical is the biblical mandate to forgive enemies. The OT oftenfollows the common ancient Near Eastern notion that enemies areexpressions of foreign deities, whom their own god(s) desires todestroy. It was therefore unimaginable that Israel (or Yahweh) shouldforgive a pagan god (e.g., Ps. 137:8–9). Jesus transforms thisthinking and makes forgiveness a Christian duty (Matt. 5:43–48;cf. Rom. 12:20).
A song of worship and praise to God. The NIV only uses theword once in the OT, in Ps. 40:3, referring to a “hymn ofpraise” to God. The Hebrew word behind this phrase is tehillah,which is common in the OT and is elsewhere translated simply as“praise,” especially in the psalms. Psalms were part ofIsrael’s worship, and so such “hymns of praise” toGod are more common than the English suggests.
Thecontent of these hymns is not laid out for modern readers, but itinvolves things such as thanksgiving, gratitude, or generally givingGod due recognition for who he is (e.g., Ps. 66:2) and what he hasdone (e.g., 106:2, 12).
Inthe NT, the word occurs only a handful of times in the NIV, and thereis very little indication what these hymns were about. Here too,generally we can say that a hymn is a particular type of song ofpraise to God.
InMatt. 26:30; Mark 14:26, Jesus and the disciples sang a hymn at theconclusion of the Lord’s Supper. Since this meal was patternedafter the Passover, it is likely that one or more of the Hallelpsalms (Pss. 111–118) were sung. (“Hallel” means“praise” in Hebrew and is related to tehillah). The Greekword behind this use in the Gospels, hymneō, is the origin ofthe English word “hymn.” In Acts 16:25 Paul and Silassang hymns at midnight while in prison, although we are told nothingabout their content.
In1 Cor. 14:26 Paul is instructing his readers about orderly worship.According to the NIV, one of the elements of worship includes hymns,although the Greek word here is psalmos (the word used to refer tothe book of Psalms in Luke 20:42; 24:44; Acts 1:20; 13:30), which theKJV renders there as “psalm.” There is certainlysignificant overlap between hymns and psalms, since both involvepraising God, but evidently there is some distinction too, as can beseen in Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16, where Paul makes a distinctionbetween “psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit.”Perhaps these terms do not reflect clearly marked categories inPaul’s mind. In Eph. 5:19 all three are directed to God “from[the] heart,” and in Col. 3:16 they are sung with “gratitude,”both of which reflect the use of psalms in the OT.
Biblicalscholars also refer to other portions of the Bible as “hymns,”even though the word is not used. The Song of Moses (Exod. 15:1–18)and the Song of Hannah (1Sam. 2:1–10) are sometimescalled “hymns” simply as a convenient designation(although Hannah’s is more a prayer). The same goes for Mary’ssong, the Magnificat (Luke 1:46–55), which clearly is modeledafter Hannah’s song, and Zechariah’s song, the Benedictus(Luke 1:68–79), which reflects OT prophetic poems. Elsewherebiblical scholars detect the possibility of fragments of preexisting“hymns” that were incorporated into the NT (e.g., Phil.2:6–11). This suggests to some that there was some hymn-writingactivity in the early church.
An image or likeness of a deity, whether carved from wood,molded from metal, or even formed in one’s mind. Although idolsare not strictly equivalent to the gods they represent—evenpagans recognized that idols are only the physical medium throughwhich a spirit reveals itself—the Bible does not distinguishbetween worshiping idols, worshiping other gods, or worshiping Yahwehthrough images.
Incontrast to other ancient religions, the Bible rejects worship of allimages as incompatible with worship of God. This includes images ofYahweh, since he is transcendent and cannot be represented byanything in creation. As Moses reminded Israel, they saw no form atSinai but only heard God’s voice (Deut. 4:12). No form canadequately represent Yahweh, as he is incomparable. The Biblesimilarly forbids worshiping images of other deities because itelevates them to the status reserved for God alone. Thus, the secondcommandment prohibits making and worshiping idols in the image ofanything found in heaven, on earth, or in the water (Exod. 20:4–5).
Idolatryis regularly likened to spiritual adultery or prostitution because itmarks a breakdown of God’s covenant relationship with hispeople (Deut. 31:16; Ps. 106:36–39; Hos. 4:12–19). Thiscorresponds to the fact that idol worship often included culticprostitution and fertility rites. Prophets and psalmists alikeridiculed idols as things fashioned by human hands that were unableto see, hear, or otherwise help those who made them. Rather, these“gods” depended on humans for transportation andprotection (Ps. 115:4–8; Isa. 40:19–20; 44:9–20).Idolaters were warned that they would become as worthless as thethings they worshiped. While declaring that idols amount to nothing,both Testaments nevertheless consider them spiritually dangerous.This is because idols lead people away from properly worshipingYahweh and expose them to demonic influences.
Despiteits warnings against idolatry, the Bible records that Israelregularly failed to keep itself pure. Right after God’s supremerevelation at Sinai, Aaron led the nation in making and worshiping agolden calf (Exod. 32). The book of Judges shows how society hadbecome degraded to the point that a man, Micah, and a tribe, Dan,engaged in idol worship (Judg. 17–18). When the monarchy wasdivided after Solomon’s rule, Jeroboam revived calf worship topreserve the loyalty of his people (1Kings 12:25–33).Both historical and prophetic books cite idolatry as a major reasonfor the exile.
ByNT times, idol worship was no longer a problem for Jews, but itremained an important issue for the growing church because manybelievers came from idolatrous backgrounds. Thus, the apostlesincluded idolatry in lists of sins to be judged, warned their readersto flee from it, and addressed eating food sacrificed to idols.Indicating that idolatry went beyond worship of images, they linkedit with the love of money (Matt. 6:24) and greed (Col. 3:5). The NTauthors believed that their readers could turn from idols to worshipthe true and living God, praised them for doing so, and looked to thetime when all idol worship would cease.
That humankind has been created in the image of God indicatesits unique status above the animals because of a special similaritywith God. This status authorizes humankind to rule the earth andrequires respect toward people. The particulars of what the phrase“image of God” means have been understood in many ways.
Thephrase is rather rare. It first appears in Gen. 1:26–27, andthe same or similar phrases occur in five more verses (Gen. 5:1, 3;9:6; 1Cor. 11:7; James 3:9) that refer back to it. The NT alsorefers to Christ as the image of God and to believers becoming likethe image of Christ.
UnderstandingGenesis 1:26–27
Thismakes Gen. 1:26–27 the starting point for understanding thephrase. Several factors come into play: the contrast with thecreation of animals on the same day; the connection with humankindruling the other creatures; other elements of the broader context;the meaning of the words “image” (tselem) and “likeness”(demut); the meaning of the preposition “in”; and themeaning and use of images in the ancient Near East.
Inthe immediately preceding context, animals are made “accordingto their kinds,” whereas humans are made “in the image ofGod.” The context directly following also makes a distinctionbetween the two, granting humans rule, or dominion, over the animals.Being in the image of God certainly involves what makes humans uniquein contrast to the rest of the animal kingdom.
Thehistory of interpretation of the phrase “image of God” islong and voluminous. Just about anything from the broader contextthat seems important to the interpreter might be selected as the keymeaning; or whatever philosophical system is dominant at the timewhen the interpreter writes might be tapped as the “obvious”explanation of what being in the image of God means; or perhaps theinsights of a particular academic discipline or systematictheological system might be given preference. Thus, the meaning ofbeing created in the image of God has been associated with manythings, such as language, eternal soul, rationality, relationality,being male and female (often compared to the Trinity), physicalappearance, dominion, and personhood. The wide variety is possiblebecause the text of Scripture does not spell it out, and the optionsseem reasonable to their various proponents as explaining theuniqueness of humanity, something that clearly serves the context.
Althoughmany of these insights may be reasonable and relevant, it can beproblematic to select one as the key element. For example, to supportthe suggestion that being in the image of God means walking erect ontwo feet, one could point out that (1)humankind’s“walking” is in the broader context, (2)humanbeings “walking” with God uniquely contrasts to thecirc*mstances of other animals, and (3)standing erect on twofeet is a dominance move in the animal kingdom. But this is unlikelyto be convincing to anyone, for good reason. And the many optionsoffered by interpreters often look equally out of place fromanother’s perspective. For example, the text emphasizes thatGod created them “male and female,” a unity with adifference. God is a trinity, a unity with a difference. Is this,then, the image of God? Someone might point out that the animals arealso male and female, and that the text does not necessarily have theTrinity in view (there are other explanations for the plural “us”in Gen. 1:26, which many consider better explanations).
Studyingthe words “image” and “likeness” does notquickly clarify the issue. “Image” normally refers to astatue, typically of a god. And “likeness” normallyrefers to similar physical appearance. The true God is a spirit,lacking a particular physical form, and he forbids making a statue ofhimself. If the three-dimensional human physique is not the point,what remains of the terms “image” and “likeness”is simply some notion of similarity. It is this vagueness that haspromoted diverse understandings.
Thepreposition “in” is also much discussed, for it mightmean “in” or “as.” Thus humanity is perhapsmade in a like appearance to God, or in an unspecified similarity toGod. Or humanity has been created as God’s image on the earth.The first emphasizes what humanity is (being), the second whathumanity is to do (function). Yet the two, being and function,certainly are related, so the difference between them may beoverstated.
Thesurrounding cultures of the ancient Near East made images of theirgods. They believed not that the statue actually was the god butrather that it invoked the presence of the god and represented thegod to the people as a central location for interaction. TheBabylonian word for “image” is similar to the Hebrew andalso usually refers to a statue or artistic representation. It issometimes used figuratively about a king being the image of a god.And in Egypt we find the idea that humanity is the image of gods.This conceptual backdrop aligns with an understanding that being inthe image of God relates to the function of ruling.
Additionally,the phrase “and let them rule over” occurs in a sequencethat can indicate purpose or result. Thus, the passage may berendered, “Let us make man as our image, as our likeness, sothat they may rule.” That is, God set up human beings with adistinct nature for a distinct task, which he expressly includes whenblessing them (Gen. 1:28). We might still infer from generalrevelation some of the details that are relevant to that uniqueness,but we should avoid elevating them in importance.
OtherBiblical Passages
Thepassages that refer back to Gen. 1:26–27 emphasize honor andrespect for human individuals. Humans are to dominate the earth, notone another. They should not kill one another; otherwise they becomesubject to the death penalty (Gen. 9:6), and they should not curseothers but instead treat them with honor (James 3:9). But the motifhas no real prominence other than being in the beginning of theBible. After Gen. 9:6, the OT does not use the phrase “image ofGod.” The concept of human rule appears (e.g., Ps. 8), but theexpression “image of God” is more a subpoint under alarger topic than it is a heading for biblical teaching.
Inthe NT, Jesus is twice identified by the Greek equivalent to theHebrew phrase “image of God” (2Cor. 4:4; Col.1:15). Especially in the context of Col. 1:15, the emphasis is onChrist’s deity and so part of a different topic, despite thesimilar wording. The two verses about believers that refer to thelikeness of God and the image of the Creator (Col. 3:10; Eph. 4:24)deal with moral behavior and the sanctification of the believer (cf.Rom. 8:29; 2Cor. 3:18). Although they do not directly refer toGen. 1, they do address the common metaphor that humankind, bysinning, marred its imaging of God. To be conformed to the image ofChrist restores how humanity images God in the world.
The word “kindness” is used to translate theHebrew term khesed (Gen. 40:14) and the Greek wordschrēstotēs (Col. 3:12) and philanthrōpia (Acts 28:2).Because of the richness of its meaning, khesed is difficult tocapture in English. The word is translated in a variety of ways,including “kindness,” “loving-kindness,”“loyalty,” “steadfast love,”“mercy,” “commitment.” God embodies kindness(Exod. 34:6; Ps. 103:8; Hos. 2:19). Humans are also called on toreflect this quality of kindness in their relationships with others(1Sam. 20:8; Mic. 6:8; Zech. 7:9).
Inthe NT, God is described as displaying kindness toward humans (Rom.11:22; Titus 3:4; 1Pet. 2:3), even the selfish and ungrateful(Luke 6:36). God pours out kindness on humans in order to lead themto repentance (Rom. 2:4). Christians are to demonstrate kindness evenwhen others are unkind and vengeful (Prov. 25:21–22; Matt.5:43–48; Rom. 12:17–21).
Onediscovers what practicing kindness looks like by observing the wordsassociated with it in Scripture. Kindness involves putting awayanger, bitterness, and slander; being tenderhearted and forgiving;and imitating God (Eph. 4:31–5:2); it finds company withcompassion, humility, meekness, and patience (Col. 3:12); it isassociated with patience, holiness of spirit, and genuine love(2Cor. 6:6).
A theologically significant concept for the apostle Paul. Heused the Greek word melos (“member” or “body part”)in two contexts. First, Paul identified Christians as members ofChrist’s body (Rom. 12:4–5; 1Cor. 12:27; Eph.5:30). Just as all the members of the human body are critical to itsfunctioning, all Christians, whether apparently significant or not,are critical to the church’s functioning (1Cor.12:12–27). Second, Paul spoke of members of the body asinstruments that could be presented either for good or for evil (Rom.6:13, 19; Col. 3:5). In the non-Christian, these members are home tothe “sinful passions” (Rom. 7:5), and the “law ofsin” within the members can hold prisoner even the Christian(7:23).
An ethnic group that inhabited the northern and easternshores of the Black Sea. The term is also used more generically torefer to a nomadic people who rode on horseback, herded sheep andcattle, and moved from one seasonal pasture to another on the steppesfrom the Black Sea to what is now southern Russia. They often wereemployed as military mercenaries by Near Eastern powers.
Scythiansare mentioned in Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, and Greek literaturefrom the seventh century BC to the first century AD, after which timethey appear to fade from history. Some earlier biblical scholarsassociated Scythians with the horse-riding nation that would bringdestruction from the north (Jer. 4:29; 5:15–17; 6:22–26;50:41–42; Zeph. 1:2–18), although more recent scholarsnormally identify this foe as the Babylonians.
Scythianswere renowned for savagery, caricatured as rude and rough, andtreated with contempt by outsiders. The Greek word skythizōmeans “to drink immoderately” and also “to shavethe head” because of the Scythian practice of scalping theirdead enemies. Josephus describes them as “little better thanwild beasts” (Ag.Ap. 2.269).
Scythiansare mentioned in 2Macc. 4:47; 3Macc. 7:5; 4Macc.10:7. The only reference to them in the NT is in Col. 3:11, wherethey are coupled with barbarians. There is no evidence of aparticular problem with Scythians at Colossae, but Paul wishes topoint out that there is no place within the church for racial,ethnic, or social contempt.
There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin;hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, orportrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of thedriving forces of the entire Bible.
Sinin the Bible
OldTestament.Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’scommandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. WhenAdam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete.They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaveswere inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with theirattempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent,Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).
Inthe midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways thatsin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised toput hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of thewoman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blowupon the offspring of the woman, the offspring ofthe womanwould defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequatecovering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implicationis that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adamand Eve, covering their sin.
InGen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on fulldisplay. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able toeradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humansgathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make aname for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them toscatter across the earth (11:1–9).
Inone sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holyGod satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationshipwith human beings without compromising his justice? The short answeris: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), whoeventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemedthem from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought themto Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated onobedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant wasthe sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided asa means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrificesmade for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year toatone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement thehigh priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies andsprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took asecond goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people ofIsrael, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them onthe head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness....The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barrenregion; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev.16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinfulpeople, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.
Despitethese provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke itscovenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under thereign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people,including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder(2Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wivesand concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods(1Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israeland Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry becamerampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judahin 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised toraise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as aguilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
AfterGod’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that thegreat prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, wereat hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remainedunder foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell ofSolomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Beforelong, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning awayfrom him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administrationof the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failedto properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).
NewTestament.During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longingfor God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last,when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it wasrevealed that he would “save his people from their sins”(Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, Johnthe Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism ofrepentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereasboth Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to bethe obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation(Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13;Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also theSuffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45;cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrathof God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. Withhis justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify allwho are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). Whatneither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, JesusChrist did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).
Afterhis resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers beganproclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus didand calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one ofyou, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”(Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness,they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned againstthem (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believerscontinue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal.5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23).The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the newheaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse(Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).
Aseven this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesisto Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’splot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative;it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved inorder for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.
Definitionand Terminology
Definitionof sin. Althoughno definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of theconcept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conformto God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action,orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered thatGod’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character,so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather isa personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited toactions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen.4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature ashuman beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.
Terminology.TheBible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying themis not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and useof the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one ofthe following four categories.
1.Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator andruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’sself-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankindfoolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom.1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows tohumans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31).Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodlinessor impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa.9:17; 1Pet. 4:18).
2.Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from thelawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass”picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or thecrossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42;Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’slaw, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45;Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violatinghis statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result isguilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’slaw is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectivelyfeels guilt.
3.Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what isgood. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what isgood (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contraststhe upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could alsoinclude here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speakof perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequentmention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievousdeparture from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27;1Cor. 5:1–11).
4.Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individualhad to be in a state of purity before him. While a person couldbecome impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating womanwas impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity”clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek.24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Althoughit is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, inother places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7;Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).
Metaphors
Inaddition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible usesseveral metaphors or images to describe it. The following four areamong the more prominent.
Missingthe mark.In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin”have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sinis reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that aperson simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it isthat he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9;Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional ornot, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num.15:30).
Departingfrom the way.Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in thewisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of therighteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19).Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways,but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18).Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed bytheir own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).
Adultery.Since God’s relationship with his people is described as amarriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32),it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness asadultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous womanvividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them ofspiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52).When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate inidolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1Cor.6:12–20; 10:1–22).
Slavery.Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clearthat Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture ofits far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7;49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to thosewho do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything thatpleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic powerthat is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare(Rom. 7:7–25).
Scopeand Consequences
Sindoes not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage alongwith it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.
Scope.The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As aresult of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist humanefforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen.3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under theweight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2Chron.36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation aswell (Rom. 8:19–22).
Sinaffects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions,motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom.3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “totaldepravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful asthey could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is taintedby sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as asinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societalstructures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economicmarkets, to name but a few.
Consequences.Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’sneighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sinhas consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level.Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen.2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty inGod’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, andsubjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20;5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict betweenindividuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breedsmistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closestrelationships.
Conclusion
Nosubject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding ofsin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As thePuritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ willnot be sweet.”
A song of worship and praise to God. The NIV only uses theword once in the OT, in Ps. 40:3, referring to a “hymn ofpraise” to God. The Hebrew word behind this phrase is tehillah,which is common in the OT and is elsewhere translated simply as“praise,” especially in the psalms. Psalms were part ofIsrael’s worship, and so such “hymns of praise” toGod are more common than the English suggests.
Thecontent of these hymns is not laid out for modern readers, but itinvolves things such as thanksgiving, gratitude, or generally givingGod due recognition for who he is (e.g., Ps. 66:2) and what he hasdone (e.g., 106:2, 12).
Inthe NT, the word occurs only a handful of times in the NIV, and thereis very little indication what these hymns were about. Here too,generally we can say that a hymn is a particular type of song ofpraise to God.
InMatt. 26:30; Mark 14:26, Jesus and the disciples sang a hymn at theconclusion of the Lord’s Supper. Since this meal was patternedafter the Passover, it is likely that one or more of the Hallelpsalms (Pss. 111–118) were sung. (“Hallel” means“praise” in Hebrew and is related to tehillah). The Greekword behind this use in the Gospels, hymneō, is the origin ofthe English word “hymn.” In Acts 16:25 Paul and Silassang hymns at midnight while in prison, although we are told nothingabout their content.
In1 Cor. 14:26 Paul is instructing his readers about orderly worship.According to the NIV, one of the elements of worship includes hymns,although the Greek word here is psalmos (the word used to refer tothe book of Psalms in Luke 20:42; 24:44; Acts 1:20; 13:30), which theKJV renders there as “psalm.” There is certainlysignificant overlap between hymns and psalms, since both involvepraising God, but evidently there is some distinction too, as can beseen in Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16, where Paul makes a distinctionbetween “psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit.”Perhaps these terms do not reflect clearly marked categories inPaul’s mind. In Eph. 5:19 all three are directed to God “from[the] heart,” and in Col. 3:16 they are sung with “gratitude,”both of which reflect the use of psalms in the OT.
Biblicalscholars also refer to other portions of the Bible as “hymns,”even though the word is not used. The Song of Moses (Exod. 15:1–18)and the Song of Hannah (1Sam. 2:1–10) are sometimescalled “hymns” simply as a convenient designation(although Hannah’s is more a prayer). The same goes for Mary’ssong, the Magnificat (Luke 1:46–55), which clearly is modeledafter Hannah’s song, and Zechariah’s song, the Benedictus(Luke 1:68–79), which reflects OT prophetic poems. Elsewherebiblical scholars detect the possibility of fragments of preexisting“hymns” that were incorporated into the NT (e.g., Phil.2:6–11). This suggests to some that there was some hymn-writingactivity in the early church.
Evil, malicious talk or lies intended to defame or destroyanother person or another’s reputation (Pss. 31:13; 50:20;Ezek. 22:9). Both Testaments frequently condemn the sin of slander.Mosaic law forbade it (Lev. 19:16), and the ninth of the TenCommandments specifically condemns bearing “false testimony”(Exod. 20:16). Slandering was an especially malicious act, withaccompanying consequences (Prov. 30:10), and was viewed as a crimeworthy of God’s displeasure or punishment (Pss. 101:5; 140:11).Paul includes slander among destructive ways of relating and speakingto one another (Rom. 1:30; 2Tim. 3:3; cf. 2Cor. 12:20;Eph. 4:31; Col. 3:8). The great accuser and slanderer of God and hispeople is Satan (Gen. 3:4–5; Job 1:9–11; 2:4–5;Zech. 3:1). There is no truth in him; he is a liar and the father oflies (John 8:44).
The custom of cutting the foreskin of the male genitalia as a religious rite. The earliest attestation of circumcision is on depictions of West Semitic Syrian warriors unearthed in Syria and Egypt and dating to the third millennium BC. In addition, an Egyptian stela describing a ceremony in which 120 were circumcised has been dated to the twenty-third century BC. Egyptians practiced circumcision, as did the Ammonites, Edomites, Moabites, and nomadic Arabians (Jer. 9:25–26). Philistines, Assyrians, and Gentiles in general were uncircumcised (Judg. 14:3; Ezek. 32:17–32; Eph. 2:11).
Circumcision is first mentioned in the Bible as a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Gen. 17:10). God commanded that every male be circumcised at eight days old (Gen. 17:12; cf. 21:4; Lev. 12:3; Luke 1:59; 2:21). Circumcision was required for a male to participate in the Passover (Exod. 12:48) or worship in the temple (Ezek. 44:9; cf. Acts 21:28–29).
Simeon and Levi used circumcision as a ruse to obtain revenge for the rape of their sister Dinah (Gen. 34:13–31). Zipporah redeemed Moses by circumcising her son on their journey back to Egypt (Exod. 4:24–26). At Gilgal, Joshua circumcised the sons of the Israelites who had disbelieved that God could bring them into the Promised Land (Josh. 5:2–8). The sons had not been circumcised during the journey through the wilderness (5:7). Saul demanded a dowry of one hundred Philistine foreskins before David could marry his daughter Michal (1 Sam. 18:25). David doubled the bride-price by providing two hundred (18:27).
Metaphorically, circumcision goes beyond the physical sign (Rom. 2:28). Ultimately, the enemies of God, whether circumcised or not, will be slain and laid in the grave with the uncircumcised (Ezek. 32:32). Physical circumcision is of no avail if the heart remains “uncircumcised” (Jer. 9:25–26; cf. Rom. 2:25). Circumcision of the heart is accomplished when one loves God completely (Deut. 10:16; 30:6; Jer. 4:4; Rom. 2:29), but uncircumcised ears are disobedient (Acts 7:51). The circumcision accomplished by Christ occurs when the sinful nature is rejected (Col. 2:11). In him neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value; what counts “is faith expressing itself through love” (Gal. 5:6).
Controversy began in the NT church over whether Gentile believers should be circumcised (Acts 15:1–12). Evidently, a group existed that demanded circumcision (Acts 15:1; Titus 1:10). Paul argued that circumcision was not essential to Christian faith and fellowship (Gal. 6:15; Col. 3:11).
“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to thespeech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of theseuses, God desires to make himself known to his people. Thecommunication of God is always personal and relational, whether hespeaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address anindividual directly (Gen. 2:16–17; Exod. 3:14). The prophetsand the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatestrevelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who iscalled the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).
Theprimary focus of this article is the written form of the word of God,the Bible. The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternalobject of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119),and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word isparticularized and intimately connected with God himself by means ofthe 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). Ourunderstanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms andcontexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found inPsalm 119.
Theologyof the Word
Fromthe perspective of many systematic theologians, the word of God isdefined with several essential labels. The word is the specialrevelation of God to humans—specifically, truth communicatedfrom God to his human creatures by supernatural intervention,including a disclosure of his mind and will, his attributes, and hisredemptive plans. This revealed word is inspired. Inspiration is anact of the Holy Spirit of God whereby he superintended the biblicalauthors so that they composed the canonical books of Scripture.Inspiration is verbal and plenary in that it extends to every part ofthe Bible and includes the choice of words used by the authors.
Theword of God is inerrant, free from error in every matter addressed,and infallible, true in every matter addressed. The locus ofinspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility is the original manuscriptsand not the translations. A translation is reliable when itaccurately reflects the meaning of the inspired originals (Matt.5:18; cf. John 10:35; 17:17; 2Tim. 3:16; 2Pet. 1:21). Andfinally, the word is authoritative. Because the Bible is the divinelyinspired word of God reliably composed in the originals withouterror, it is binding upon people in their relationship with their Godas well as their relationships with their fellow human beings.Biblical authority derives from the eternal character of the divineauthor and the revelatory content of the Scriptures.
Psalm119
Akey OT text extolling the word is Psalm 119 (cf. Pss. 1; 19). Thewriter glorifies God, his word, and his divine directions to peopleby means of an acrostic format that covers the subject of Torahmeditation. Eight synonyms are used for the “word” in thepsalm. The eight are translated in the NIV as “words”(v.57), “promise” (v.58), “statutes”(v.59), “commands” (v.60), “law”(v.61), “laws” (v.62), “precepts”(v.63), and “decrees” (v.64).
ThePs. 119 word vocabulary informs us that God has pierced the darknessof our existence with the light of his word to make himself known tous. The word is his word spoken to us and preserved for us. The psalmalso instructs us that the word is the will of God. When God piercedour darkness, he lit the path of freedom for us with his word. Hedescribed himself, defined righteousness, declared his love,announced his promises, and issued his warnings. Finally, thevocabulary establishes the authority of his word in our lives.Directions, commandments, laws, charges, and divine will ring withthe sound of authority. The word of God is an authoritativeproclamation from God to us that must be obeyed, that must be sought,that cannot be ignored.
Finally,Ps. 119 makes an intimate connection between the content of the word,things spoken, and the author of the things spoken. This connectionbetter enables us to understand the “Word” as the personof Jesus Christ in John 1. The progressive development of verses 1–2of Ps. 119 intimately connects the law of God, his statutes, and him,the one sought with all the heart. Verses 89–96 emphasize thedurability and eternality of the word in keeping with the eternalcharacter of God. In verse 114 the writer parallels God as refugewith putting hope in his word. Here the writer intimately connectsGod as a refuge with his word. In the Hebrew text “you”and “your word” stand side by side. In verses 137–44the writer aligns the righteous God with a righteous word. Accordingto verses 105, 130, 135, God and God’s word give light. Thelife-giving quality of the word and the Lord are proclaimed in verse93. Just as God is to be feared, so is his word (vv. 63, 120).
TheWord of God
Thetheme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT,accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and Godhimself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord JesusChrist (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh andblood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. Thesovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in thevision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains ourlives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a justjudgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt.25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).
The words “wrath” and “anger” areused in Bible translations for a variety of Hebrew and Greek wordsthat refer to the disposition of someone (including God) towardpersons (including oneself [Gen. 45:5]) or situations considered tobe seriously displeasing. There may be degrees of anger (Zech. 1:15),and it may be accompanied by other sentiments such as distress (Gen.45:5), hatred (Job 16:9), jealousy (Rom. 10:19), grief (Mark 3:5),and vengeance (Mic. 5:15).
Angermay be a proper response to sin or a sin-distorted world, as seen in,for example, Moses’ reaction to the golden calf (Exod. 32:19).Paul envisages an anger that does not necessarily involve sin (Eph.4:26). Jesus is said to display anger at the willful stubbornness ofhis contemporaries (Mark 3:5), and his response to the mourning forLazarus (John 11:33) might be rendered as “outrage,” ananger directed not so much at the mourners as at the ugliness ofdeath, the consequence of sin, and with thoughts, perhaps, of his ownimpending death necessitated by this fallen world.
Onthe other hand, a display of anger may be the result of distortedperceptions or values (Gen. 4:5–6). A tendency to anger inoneself needs to be kept in check (James 1:19) and in others needs tobe handled prudently (Prov. 15:1). Unchecked, anger may lead toviolence and murder (Gen. 49:6). In several NT lists anger isassociated with such other sinful behavior as quarreling, jealousy,selfishness, slander, malice, gossip, conceit, strife, idolatry,sorcery, and bitterness (2Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:20; Eph. 4:31;Col. 3:8).
InPs. 76:10 NLT (cf. ESV, NASB, NRSV) God is said to cause human angerto bring him praise (but see NIV, NET, where it is God’s wrathagainst human beings that brings him praise). Perhaps an instance ofthis is seen in Rom. 13:4–5, where the wrath of the civilauthority serves to maintain justice under God.
Despite tendencies to downplay the reality of God’sanger (God is classically described as “without passions”),if we are to do justice to both Testaments, we must allow thelanguage of Scripture to stand, where God often is said to be angrywith individuals or nations, including Israel. Although God ischangeless (Mal. 3:6), he interacts in a personal way with atime-bound world. The Bible writers intend us to understand thatthere is something in God’s anger to which human anger isanalogous, though God’s anger is not identical to ours (Hos.11:9). God’s anger is not an automatic response; he canrestrain it (Ps. 78:38). God is said to be characteristically slow tobecome angry; that is, his anger is a deliberate response (Exod.34:6, a text with numerous echoes) and may also be short-lived (Ps.30:5; Mic. 7:18).
God’sanger against Israel in the wilderness is noteworthy (Heb. 3:10, 17).The apostasy with the golden calf (Exod. 32:10–12), thecomplaining (Num. 11:1, 33), and the failure to enter the promisedland following the report of the spies (Num. 32:10–11) allprovoke God to anger. Failure to heed God’s word (Zech. 7:12)or that of his prophets (2Chron. 36:16), neglect of his worship(2Chron. 29:6–8), and intermarriage with idolaters (Ezra9:14) are behaviors that incur the wrath of God.
God’sanger is directed against individuals, particularly for failures ofleadership, as with Moses (Exod. 4:14; Deut. 1:37) and Solomon(1Kings 11:9–11). God’s anger often is directedagainst the Israelite and Judean kings, not just those who committedidolatry (2Chron. 25:15), but even those who are faithful inmost respects, for their failure to remove the idolatrous high places(2Kings 23:19).
Pickingup on the warning that God’s anger will be directed againstthose who do not pay homage to God’s appointed king (Ps. 2:5,12), Jesus declares that disobedience to God’s Son brings uponone the wrath of God (John 3:36), which evidently is not incompatiblewith his love for the world (3:16). According to Rom. 4:15, God’swrath is a consequence of the law; that is, the law, giving concreteexpression to the character of God, brings culpability fortransgression. God’s wrath is revealed against all forms ofungodliness and its tendency to suppress the truth (Rom. 1:18). Thosewho demonstrate their disobedience to God or his truth will besubjected to his anger (Rom. 2:8; Eph. 5:6; Col. 3:6).
Apervasive metaphor for anger is that of a burning fire (Deut. 32:22;Ps. 89:46; Isa. 66:15) along with associated images of smoke (Ps.18:8) and smelting metal (Ezek. 22:20, 22). Other images are thewinepress (Isa. 63:3; Rev. 14:19), drinking from a vessel (Isa.51:22; Rev. 14:10), and a tempest (Ezek. 13:13).
Thejudgment that follows as a consequence of God’s anger beingaroused takes the form of the withholding of God’s covenantfavor (Ps. 95:11; Isa. 54:8) or the implementation of his covenantcurses (Deut. 29:27), specifically through drought (Deut. 11:17),plague (Ps. 78:50), the sword (Ps. 78:62), and deliverance into thehands of enemies (2Kings 13:3), leading to exile (2Chron.6:36). God’s anger can be depicted in various forms of cosmicupheaval or the undoing of creation (2Sam. 22:8–16; Ps.18:7; Jer. 4:26). God’s anger is beyond human ability to endure(Ps. 76:7), such that hiding in Sheol is considered preferable (Job14:13).
God’swrath becomes particularly associated with a coming day of wrath atthe end of the age, when God’s justice will be powerfullydisplayed (Dan. 8:19; Zeph. 2:3; Luke 21:23; Rom. 2:5; Rev. 6:17).
Subjectionto God’s anger may evoke the cry “How long?” (Pss.79:5; 80:4). While God’s mercy cannot be taken for granted,since his anger against some may be final as an expression of hisjustice (Jer. 30:24; Rom. 12:19), God’s anger may be assuagedor averted through humbling oneself (2Chron. 12:7) and anappeal to God for mercy (Ps. 106:23; Hab. 3:2), by repentance(2Chron. 29:10; Ezra 10:14; Jon. 3:9), by zealous action toroot out evil (Num. 25:11), and by the faithful ministry of God’sappointed servants (Num. 1:53; 18:5).
TheNT brings to fulfillment these forms of mediation in presenting theultimate remedy for God’s wrath in the person and work of JesusChrist (Rom. 5:9; 1Thess. 1:10; 5:9). The use of “propitiation”language (Rom. 3:25; Heb. 2:17; 1John 2:2), though itssignificance is disputed, is classically understood in terms of theneed for God’s wrath to be satisfied. In that case, it isspecifically the cross of Christ that ultimately deals with God’srighteous anger against sinners.
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
Colossians 3:1-17
is mentioned in the definition.
The visible and bodily ascent of Jesus from earth to heavenconcluding his earthly ministry, which then continued through thepromised Holy Spirit, given at Pentecost.
Adetailed historical account of the ascension is given only by Luke(Luke 24:51; Acts 1:4–11 [cf. Mark 16:19, in the longer endingto Mark’s Gospel]). The event, however, was anticipated inJohn’s Gospel (John 6:62; 20:17).
Theascension is frequently implied throughout the NT by reference to thecomplex of events that began with the death of Jesus and ended withhis session at the right hand of God in glory. Paul writes of thedivine-human Christ’s ascent to the heavenly realms as thebeginning of his supreme cosmic reign in power (Eph. 1:20–23)and as the basis for holy living (Col. 3:1–4; 1 Tim.3:16). In Hebrews, the ascension is a crucial stage that marks offthe completed work of Jesus on earth, in which he offered himself asthe perfect and final sacrifice for sin (9:24–26), from hiscontinuing work in heaven as our great high priest, which isdescribed in terms of sympathy (4:14–16) and intercession(7:25). Peter makes the most direct reference to the ascension,explaining that Jesus, who suffered, is resurrected and “hasgone into heaven” (1 Pet. 3:22). Therefore, just as Jesus,the righteous sufferer, was vindicated by God, so too will his peoplewho suffer for doing good.
Paulunderstands the OT as predicting Christ’s ascension (Eph.4:7–10; cf. Ps. 68:18) and containing incidents that in someway prefigure it (2 Kings 2:11–12).
Theascension is significant for at least three reasons. First, Christ’sdeath could not have full effect until he entered the heavenlysanctuary. From heaven he acts as advocate and communicates tobelievers through the Holy Spirit all the gifts and blessings that hedied on the cross to gain (Heb. 4:14–16; 1 John 2:1).Second, glorified humanity is now in God’s presence,guaranteeing that we likewise will be raised up with body and soul toshare the glory yet to be revealed (John 14:2; 17:24; Eph. 2:4–6).Third, the ascension previews the manner of Christ’s secondcoming (Acts 1:11). Jesus’ ascension was followed by hisenthronement in heaven, where he reigns (1 Cor. 15:25) and fromwhich he will physically return in the same glorified body as judge(Luke 21:27). See also Advent, Second; Second Coming.
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
The word “kindness” is used to translate theHebrew term khesed (Gen. 40:14) and the Greek wordschrēstotēs (Col. 3:12) and philanthrōpia (Acts 28:2).Because of the richness of its meaning, khesed is difficult tocapture in English. The word is translated in a variety of ways,including “kindness,” “loving-kindness,”“loyalty,” “steadfast love,”“mercy,” “commitment.” God embodies kindness(Exod. 34:6; Ps. 103:8; Hos. 2:19). Humans are also called on toreflect this quality of kindness in their relationships with others(1Sam. 20:8; Mic. 6:8; Zech. 7:9).
Inthe NT, God is described as displaying kindness toward humans (Rom.11:22; Titus 3:4; 1Pet. 2:3), even the selfish and ungrateful(Luke 6:36). God pours out kindness on humans in order to lead themto repentance (Rom. 2:4). Christians are to demonstrate kindness evenwhen others are unkind and vengeful (Prov. 25:21–22; Matt.5:43–48; Rom. 12:17–21).
Onediscovers what practicing kindness looks like by observing the wordsassociated with it in Scripture. Kindness involves putting awayanger, bitterness, and slander; being tenderhearted and forgiving;and imitating God (Eph. 4:31–5:2); it finds company withcompassion, humility, meekness, and patience (Col. 3:12); it isassociated with patience, holiness of spirit, and genuine love(2Cor. 6:6).
Colossians is a letter sent by Paul to a church in Colossaewhen he was in prison. The letter was Paul’s first directcontact with the church, which may have been started by one of hismissionary associates, Epaphras (Col. 1:7). Epaphras was fromColossae (4:12), a city of Asia Minor located in the Lycus Valley,known for its fertile soil and green pastures. Some commentatorssuggest that Epaphras also started churches in Hierapolis andLaodicea (4:13), neighboring cities in the valley that were situatedaround the Lycus River about ten miles apart. Colossae was a freecity located on the main Roman road that ran from Ephesus and Sardistoward the east, and it was populated by native Phrygians, as well asGreeks, Romans, and Jews. More than likely, the church was foundedduring Paul’s extended ministry in Ephesus, where persons fromthe region heard Paul’s gospel and from where Paul sentmissionary associates such as Epaphras into the surrounding cities(Acts 19). Tychicus, the letter carrier (Col. 4:7–8), was alsoone of Paul’s associates from the same region; he decided toaccompany Paul to Macedonia after the team left Ephesus (Acts 20:4).
Theclose association of these churches in Asia Minor and the time framewhen the letters were written may explain why Paul’s letter tothe Colossians is so similar in content to his letter to theEphesians. Paul was in prison (probably in Rome) when he sent both ofthese letters (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10, 18). The instructions regardingTychicus, the carrier for both letters, are identical, nearlyverbatim (Eph. 6:21–22; Col. 4:7–8). The letters sharethe same outline, following some of the same themes, especiallytoward the end, where Paul gives instructions regarding thehousehold. An affinity also exists between Colossians and Philemon, aletter sent to the patron of one of the house churches in Colossae.Most of the names mentioned by Paul appear in both letters: Timothy,Onesimus, Archippus, Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke(Col. 1:1; 4:9–17; Philem. 1, 10, 23–24). Paul was alsoin prison, along with Epaphras, at the time he sent his letter toPhilemon. All of this indicates that these letters were written aboutthe same time, from the same place, to the same region. Why did Paulsend three letters to the same region, especially since letterproduction was so expensive? Why not send one letter to the entireregion (like Galatians), to be read by all the house churches?Obviously, the problems of each church were so different that theyrequired a separate authoritative word from their apostle.
QuestionablePractices in Colossae
TheColossians were doing several things that Paul found troublesome, aswe learn from Col. 2. They were judging each other for not keepingcertain dietary regulations and holy days (2:16). Some were claimingsuperiority through personal worship experiences that involvedvisions of angels (2:18). Some subscribed to strict discipline of thehuman body, punishing themselves through various acts ofself-abasem*nt in order to curb fleshly appetites (2:23) and enhancetheir worship experiences (2:18). It seems that many of them weretrying to live by an expanded version of the divine command given inthe story of Adam, Eve, and the forbidden fruit: “Do nothandle! Do not taste! Do not touch!” (2:21). Paul recognizedthat all these claims and rules had the “appearance of wisdom”but in reality were nothing more than traditions based on“self-imposed” religion, and that such ascetic practiceswere useless in denying fleshly appetites (2:22–23). Where didthe Colossians get all these strange ideas that led to such bizarrebehavior?
Pauldescribed the false teaching as an imprisoning “through hollowand deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and theelemental spiritual forces” in opposition to the teachings ofChrist (2:8). Because the Colossian church was made up primarily ofGentile converts (1:27), many interpreters argue that the problemsresulted from the meshing of the gospel with local, pagan ways. ThePhrygians were known for their fascination with magical rituals, theability to manipulate the powers (earth, wind, fire, spirits, angels,often referred to as “elementary principles of the world”)for human purposes. Paul’s description of the false teaching asa “hollow and deceptive philosophy” based on the “humantradition” may also reveal the influence of Greek ideas andRoman ways in the church. The Greeks operated with a dualisticworldview of spirit versus flesh, leading some philosophers to arguethat punishing the body ensured purity of the soul. Furthermore, theRomans believed that the gods had given them power to rule the world,bringing fertility to the lands of conquered peoples. WorshipingCaesar brought economic rewards to devoted subjects of the empire. Inother words, all this talk in the Colossian letter about power andsovereignty, philosophy and self-discipline was Paul’s way ofdealing directly with the root of the problem: the syncretism ofpagan ways and the gospel according to Paul.
Someinterpreters believe that all these peculiar teachings derive notfrom pagan religions but rather from Judaism. After all, Paul’sreferences to observing the Sabbath, keeping commandments, andangelic worship point toward a Jewish context. Paul also affirmedthat his Gentile converts were “circumcised with a circumcisionnot performed by human hands” (2:11), perhaps revealing hisconcern that Jewish ways were creeping into his Gentile church. Heeven put the church on notice, identifying those among “thecircumcision” (Jews) who were trustworthy ministers of thegospel (he mentions only three, Barnabas, John Mark, and Jesus calledJustus [4:10–11]). The implication, of course, was to ignorethe rest of “the circumcision.” But if the troublemakersin Colossae were Jewish opponents of Paul, how does one explain allthe mystical and ascetic elements of this false teaching? Some arguethat the expression “worship of angels” was not anidolatrous practice of venerating angelic beings. Instead, the phraseshould be translated “angelic worship,” implying thatsome Colossians claimed to have been transported to heaven and joinedthe angels in worship of God. This may have been similar to theexperiences of an obscure form of Judaism: Jewish mystics who claimedto preserve esoteric revelations through out-of-body experiences ofheavenly visions and auditions (see Paul’s description in2 Cor. 12:1–7). Furthermore, the strict dietary code andsexual ethic of Jewish law were often interpreted by first-centurypagans as promoting an ascetic lifestyle. In other words, Paul wascountering a more cryptic branch of Judaism that flourished in aregion known for its affinity for the mysterious.
Outlineand Content
I.Introduction (1:1–14)
A.Greeting (1:1–2)
B.Thanksgiving (1:3–8)
C.Prayer (1:9–14)
II.The Person and Work of Christ (1:15–23)
III.Paul’s Role in Christ’s Mission to the Gentiles(1:24–2:5)
IV.False Teaching versus the Work of Christ (2:6–23)
V.Instructions on Life in Christ
A.In the church (3:1–17)
B.In the home (3:18–4:1)
VI.Generic Exhortations (4:2–6)
VII.Specific Instructions (4:7–9)
VIII.Final Greetings (4:10–17)
IX.Paul’s Signature (4:18)
Whateverthe source of the false teaching referred to in Colossians, Paulattempts to correct the misbehavior of his Gentile converts bybuilding an argument that the work of Christ is all-sufficient. Paulbegins the letter by describing the person and work of Christ incosmic terms (1:15–23). Next he recounts his role in themission of Christ to bring the riches of the kingdom to Gentiles(1:24–2:5). After reminding the Colossians of their receptionof the gospel, Paul juxtaposes the deceptive practices of the falseteaching with the evidence of the work of Christ in them (2:6–23).Then he gives a number of instructions on what life in Christ issupposed to look like: in the church (3:1–17) and in the home(3:18–4:1). He concludes the letter with generic exhortations(4:2–6), specific instructions (4:7–9), and greetings(4:10–17). Finally, Paul signs the letter, obviously written bya secretary, with the simple request: “Remember my chains”(4:18)—a curious signature that makes the argument of hisletter even more appealing.
ThePower and Peace of Christ’s Kingdom
Itis ironic that Paul chose to describe the work of Christ in suchgrandiose terms, picturing him as a mighty ruler over all creation,even while the apostle was in prison—an undeniable sign ofRoman sovereignty. In Col. 1, in some of the loftiest language Paulever used to describe Christ’s kingdom authority, the apostlereminds his converts that the Lord is “the image of theinvisible God, the firstborn over all creation” (v. 15),an obvious reference to Christ’s deity. Then Paul piles on theattributes, presenting Christ as the creator of all things, evenangelic creatures (v. 16), the sustainer of all things (v. 17),the head of the church, the eternal one, the guarantor of theresurrection (v. 18), the fullness of God (v. 19), thereconciler of all things—the one who made peace with theenemies of God through his blood on the cross (vv. 20–22).Despite Paul’s circ*mstances and what Rome may claim, theapostle holds fast to the irrepressible sovereignty of Christ’skingdom, displayed by Paul’s perseverance in the midst ofsuffering and the full assurance that every Colossian believer is“fully mature in Christ” (vv. 22–29). Indeed, allthe treasures of Christ’s kingdom—love, knowledge,wisdom, discipline—are to be found in the life of his converts(2:1–5), unless someone “deludes” them intothinking otherwise.
Paul’srhetorical strategy of extolling the power of Christ’s kingdommakes perfect sense in light of the false teaching that was plaguingthe Colossian church. Apparently, the Colossians were persuaded tofeel inadequate about their faith, vulnerable to the imposition oflegalistic standards that ensured victory over fleshly indulgences.To counter his opponents, Paul unpacks the significance of theincarnation and the cross (2:9–15). Because Christ was God inflesh (in whom “all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodilyform” [v. 9]), his death on the cross was a cosmic eventthat defeated all the powers that oppose God. Using military imagery,Paul argues that Christ canceled every debt against humanity when henailed all “decrees” (even Caesar’s) to the cross.In that singular act of sacrifice, Christ disarmed the foes of God,humiliating them publicly by making a spectacle of them, triumphingover all powers (v. 15)—something that Caesar loved to doafter successful military campaigns. Therefore, if Christ’svictory over all powers has been secured through his death, and sincehe rules as the firstborn of the dead (resurrection) over allcreation, and since the Colossians are “fully mature in Christ”(1:28) because of their faith in him, then no pretense ofself-abasem*nt or angelic visions can diminish what Christ has doneand will continue to do in the lives of Paul’s converts inColossae. Christ is all they needed to overcome the powers.
InCol. 3, Paul tells how the Colossians draw upon the power of Christwhen they “set [their] minds on things above, not on earthlythings” (v. 2). The things on the earth are “sexualimmorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed” (v. 5).Paul believes that his converts died with Christ (“hidden withChrist in God” [v. 3]) and therefore had set aside allthese idolatrous practices when they put on the “new self,”being conformed to the image of Christ (vv. 8–10). This renewalwill be found in all believers, regardless of ethnicity (v. 11),and will result in peace for all. Indeed, Paul sees the “peaceof Christ” as the undeniable evidence of his reign exhibited inthe hearts of those who believe (vv. 12–15). And what wouldthat peace look like? Believers will be patient, forgiving oneanother with hearts full of compassion, kindness, humility,gentleness, and love resulting in unity (vv. 12–14). Theirworship of God will be characterized by songs of thankfulness andadmonition, receiving the word with wisdom (v. 16). In theirhomes husbands, wives, and children will model deference and love,and masters and slaves will seek justice and fairness, as if theywere serving Christ (3:18–4:1). The Colossians will be devotedto prayer, will treat outsiders fairly, and will be known for alwaysspeaking graceful words (4:2–6). In other words, where Caesar’sempire has promoted Roman peace by enforcing Roman law in provinces,cities, and households, Paul believes that the peace of Christ willrule the hearts of his subjects, establishing a kingdom of love andunity, in word and deed, in the home as well as the church. So, inhis final greetings, Paul talks about faithful slaves and belovedsiblings as sources of encouragement in the ever-expanding work ofthe kingdom of God (4:7–17), making his simple request,“Remember my chains” (4:18), sound more like an act ofdefiance than a pitiful plea.
Colossians is a letter sent by Paul to a church in Colossaewhen he was in prison. The letter was Paul’s first directcontact with the church, which may have been started by one of hismissionary associates, Epaphras (Col. 1:7). Epaphras was fromColossae (4:12), a city of Asia Minor located in the Lycus Valley,known for its fertile soil and green pastures. Some commentatorssuggest that Epaphras also started churches in Hierapolis andLaodicea (4:13), neighboring cities in the valley that were situatedaround the Lycus River about ten miles apart. Colossae was a freecity located on the main Roman road that ran from Ephesus and Sardistoward the east, and it was populated by native Phrygians, as well asGreeks, Romans, and Jews. More than likely, the church was foundedduring Paul’s extended ministry in Ephesus, where persons fromthe region heard Paul’s gospel and from where Paul sentmissionary associates such as Epaphras into the surrounding cities(Acts 19). Tychicus, the letter carrier (Col. 4:7–8), was alsoone of Paul’s associates from the same region; he decided toaccompany Paul to Macedonia after the team left Ephesus (Acts 20:4).
Theclose association of these churches in Asia Minor and the time framewhen the letters were written may explain why Paul’s letter tothe Colossians is so similar in content to his letter to theEphesians. Paul was in prison (probably in Rome) when he sent both ofthese letters (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10, 18). The instructions regardingTychicus, the carrier for both letters, are identical, nearlyverbatim (Eph. 6:21–22; Col. 4:7–8). The letters sharethe same outline, following some of the same themes, especiallytoward the end, where Paul gives instructions regarding thehousehold. An affinity also exists between Colossians and Philemon, aletter sent to the patron of one of the house churches in Colossae.Most of the names mentioned by Paul appear in both letters: Timothy,Onesimus, Archippus, Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke(Col. 1:1; 4:9–17; Philem. 1, 10, 23–24). Paul was alsoin prison, along with Epaphras, at the time he sent his letter toPhilemon. All of this indicates that these letters were written aboutthe same time, from the same place, to the same region. Why did Paulsend three letters to the same region, especially since letterproduction was so expensive? Why not send one letter to the entireregion (like Galatians), to be read by all the house churches?Obviously, the problems of each church were so different that theyrequired a separate authoritative word from their apostle.
QuestionablePractices in Colossae
TheColossians were doing several things that Paul found troublesome, aswe learn from Col. 2. They were judging each other for not keepingcertain dietary regulations and holy days (2:16). Some were claimingsuperiority through personal worship experiences that involvedvisions of angels (2:18). Some subscribed to strict discipline of thehuman body, punishing themselves through various acts ofself-abasem*nt in order to curb fleshly appetites (2:23) and enhancetheir worship experiences (2:18). It seems that many of them weretrying to live by an expanded version of the divine command given inthe story of Adam, Eve, and the forbidden fruit: “Do nothandle! Do not taste! Do not touch!” (2:21). Paul recognizedthat all these claims and rules had the “appearance of wisdom”but in reality were nothing more than traditions based on“self-imposed” religion, and that such ascetic practiceswere useless in denying fleshly appetites (2:22–23). Where didthe Colossians get all these strange ideas that led to such bizarrebehavior?
Pauldescribed the false teaching as an imprisoning “through hollowand deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and theelemental spiritual forces” in opposition to the teachings ofChrist (2:8). Because the Colossian church was made up primarily ofGentile converts (1:27), many interpreters argue that the problemsresulted from the meshing of the gospel with local, pagan ways. ThePhrygians were known for their fascination with magical rituals, theability to manipulate the powers (earth, wind, fire, spirits, angels,often referred to as “elementary principles of the world”)for human purposes. Paul’s description of the false teaching asa “hollow and deceptive philosophy” based on the “humantradition” may also reveal the influence of Greek ideas andRoman ways in the church. The Greeks operated with a dualisticworldview of spirit versus flesh, leading some philosophers to arguethat punishing the body ensured purity of the soul. Furthermore, theRomans believed that the gods had given them power to rule the world,bringing fertility to the lands of conquered peoples. WorshipingCaesar brought economic rewards to devoted subjects of the empire. Inother words, all this talk in the Colossian letter about power andsovereignty, philosophy and self-discipline was Paul’s way ofdealing directly with the root of the problem: the syncretism ofpagan ways and the gospel according to Paul.
Someinterpreters believe that all these peculiar teachings derive notfrom pagan religions but rather from Judaism. After all, Paul’sreferences to observing the Sabbath, keeping commandments, andangelic worship point toward a Jewish context. Paul also affirmedthat his Gentile converts were “circumcised with a circumcisionnot performed by human hands” (2:11), perhaps revealing hisconcern that Jewish ways were creeping into his Gentile church. Heeven put the church on notice, identifying those among “thecircumcision” (Jews) who were trustworthy ministers of thegospel (he mentions only three, Barnabas, John Mark, and Jesus calledJustus [4:10–11]). The implication, of course, was to ignorethe rest of “the circumcision.” But if the troublemakersin Colossae were Jewish opponents of Paul, how does one explain allthe mystical and ascetic elements of this false teaching? Some arguethat the expression “worship of angels” was not anidolatrous practice of venerating angelic beings. Instead, the phraseshould be translated “angelic worship,” implying thatsome Colossians claimed to have been transported to heaven and joinedthe angels in worship of God. This may have been similar to theexperiences of an obscure form of Judaism: Jewish mystics who claimedto preserve esoteric revelations through out-of-body experiences ofheavenly visions and auditions (see Paul’s description in2 Cor. 12:1–7). Furthermore, the strict dietary code andsexual ethic of Jewish law were often interpreted by first-centurypagans as promoting an ascetic lifestyle. In other words, Paul wascountering a more cryptic branch of Judaism that flourished in aregion known for its affinity for the mysterious.
Outlineand Content
I.Introduction (1:1–14)
A.Greeting (1:1–2)
B.Thanksgiving (1:3–8)
C.Prayer (1:9–14)
II.The Person and Work of Christ (1:15–23)
III.Paul’s Role in Christ’s Mission to the Gentiles(1:24–2:5)
IV.False Teaching versus the Work of Christ (2:6–23)
V.Instructions on Life in Christ
A.In the church (3:1–17)
B.In the home (3:18–4:1)
VI.Generic Exhortations (4:2–6)
VII.Specific Instructions (4:7–9)
VIII.Final Greetings (4:10–17)
IX.Paul’s Signature (4:18)
Whateverthe source of the false teaching referred to in Colossians, Paulattempts to correct the misbehavior of his Gentile converts bybuilding an argument that the work of Christ is all-sufficient. Paulbegins the letter by describing the person and work of Christ incosmic terms (1:15–23). Next he recounts his role in themission of Christ to bring the riches of the kingdom to Gentiles(1:24–2:5). After reminding the Colossians of their receptionof the gospel, Paul juxtaposes the deceptive practices of the falseteaching with the evidence of the work of Christ in them (2:6–23).Then he gives a number of instructions on what life in Christ issupposed to look like: in the church (3:1–17) and in the home(3:18–4:1). He concludes the letter with generic exhortations(4:2–6), specific instructions (4:7–9), and greetings(4:10–17). Finally, Paul signs the letter, obviously written bya secretary, with the simple request: “Remember my chains”(4:18)—a curious signature that makes the argument of hisletter even more appealing.
ThePower and Peace of Christ’s Kingdom
Itis ironic that Paul chose to describe the work of Christ in suchgrandiose terms, picturing him as a mighty ruler over all creation,even while the apostle was in prison—an undeniable sign ofRoman sovereignty. In Col. 1, in some of the loftiest language Paulever used to describe Christ’s kingdom authority, the apostlereminds his converts that the Lord is “the image of theinvisible God, the firstborn over all creation” (v. 15),an obvious reference to Christ’s deity. Then Paul piles on theattributes, presenting Christ as the creator of all things, evenangelic creatures (v. 16), the sustainer of all things (v. 17),the head of the church, the eternal one, the guarantor of theresurrection (v. 18), the fullness of God (v. 19), thereconciler of all things—the one who made peace with theenemies of God through his blood on the cross (vv. 20–22).Despite Paul’s circ*mstances and what Rome may claim, theapostle holds fast to the irrepressible sovereignty of Christ’skingdom, displayed by Paul’s perseverance in the midst ofsuffering and the full assurance that every Colossian believer is“fully mature in Christ” (vv. 22–29). Indeed, allthe treasures of Christ’s kingdom—love, knowledge,wisdom, discipline—are to be found in the life of his converts(2:1–5), unless someone “deludes” them intothinking otherwise.
Paul’srhetorical strategy of extolling the power of Christ’s kingdommakes perfect sense in light of the false teaching that was plaguingthe Colossian church. Apparently, the Colossians were persuaded tofeel inadequate about their faith, vulnerable to the imposition oflegalistic standards that ensured victory over fleshly indulgences.To counter his opponents, Paul unpacks the significance of theincarnation and the cross (2:9–15). Because Christ was God inflesh (in whom “all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodilyform” [v. 9]), his death on the cross was a cosmic eventthat defeated all the powers that oppose God. Using military imagery,Paul argues that Christ canceled every debt against humanity when henailed all “decrees” (even Caesar’s) to the cross.In that singular act of sacrifice, Christ disarmed the foes of God,humiliating them publicly by making a spectacle of them, triumphingover all powers (v. 15)—something that Caesar loved to doafter successful military campaigns. Therefore, if Christ’svictory over all powers has been secured through his death, and sincehe rules as the firstborn of the dead (resurrection) over allcreation, and since the Colossians are “fully mature in Christ”(1:28) because of their faith in him, then no pretense ofself-abasem*nt or angelic visions can diminish what Christ has doneand will continue to do in the lives of Paul’s converts inColossae. Christ is all they needed to overcome the powers.
InCol. 3, Paul tells how the Colossians draw upon the power of Christwhen they “set [their] minds on things above, not on earthlythings” (v. 2). The things on the earth are “sexualimmorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed” (v. 5).Paul believes that his converts died with Christ (“hidden withChrist in God” [v. 3]) and therefore had set aside allthese idolatrous practices when they put on the “new self,”being conformed to the image of Christ (vv. 8–10). This renewalwill be found in all believers, regardless of ethnicity (v. 11),and will result in peace for all. Indeed, Paul sees the “peaceof Christ” as the undeniable evidence of his reign exhibited inthe hearts of those who believe (vv. 12–15). And what wouldthat peace look like? Believers will be patient, forgiving oneanother with hearts full of compassion, kindness, humility,gentleness, and love resulting in unity (vv. 12–14). Theirworship of God will be characterized by songs of thankfulness andadmonition, receiving the word with wisdom (v. 16). In theirhomes husbands, wives, and children will model deference and love,and masters and slaves will seek justice and fairness, as if theywere serving Christ (3:18–4:1). The Colossians will be devotedto prayer, will treat outsiders fairly, and will be known for alwaysspeaking graceful words (4:2–6). In other words, where Caesar’sempire has promoted Roman peace by enforcing Roman law in provinces,cities, and households, Paul believes that the peace of Christ willrule the hearts of his subjects, establishing a kingdom of love andunity, in word and deed, in the home as well as the church. So, inhis final greetings, Paul talks about faithful slaves and belovedsiblings as sources of encouragement in the ever-expanding work ofthe kingdom of God (4:7–17), making his simple request,“Remember my chains” (4:18), sound more like an act ofdefiance than a pitiful plea.
(1) Onegifted with insight into human nature and the ability to discern thewise response in complex situations. Daniel became a counselor in theroyal court of Babylon, and because of his knowledge of God, hebecame distinguished for his superior counsel (Dan. 1:20; 5:11–12).Isaiah prophesied that the Spirit of wisdom and understanding wouldrest on the Messiah (11:2). Possessing the Spirit and knowledge ofScripture (Heb. 4:12) makes believers competent counselors (Rom.15:14; Col. 3:16). (2) Arendering of the Greek word paraklētos in John 14:16, 26; 15:26;16:7 (RSV). See also Advocate; Paraclete.
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
Devotion or service that is improper. Worship, whether falseor true, generally consists of two aspects that are distinct but notnecessarily separate: (1)the performance of certain rituals,including sacrifice, circumcision, baptism, and so forth; (2)theattitudes and activities that reflect devotion to a person or object.The first aspect shows worship as ritual, consisting of formal,regulated elements. The second aspect shows worship as devotion,consisting of a life of piety. False worship occurs when a worshiperfails in one or both of these aspects.
Formsof False Worship
TheBible describes false worship occurring in three different ways:(1)the worshiper demonstrates devotion to anything other thanGod, (2)the worshiper performs a ritual contrary to itsinstructed observance, and (3)the worshiper performs a ritualwhile leading a life of unrepentant disobedience to God.
Themost severe form of false worship is when a worshiper demonstratesdevotion to anything other than God. This type of false worship mayinclude worship as ritual in which a rite or ceremony is performeddirectly for another god. Some rituals are specifically mentioned inthe Bible: passing children through fire (2Kings 16:3; 17:17;21:6), consorting with shrine prostitutes (esp. Hos. 4:14), andoffering sacrifices to idols (esp. Lev. 17:7). This type of falseworship may also include attitudes and actions that demonstrate ahigher degree of devotion to something other than the true God. Thisdevotion may be to another god or object, even material wealth (cf.Col. 3:5, where Paul equates greed with idolatry).
Thesecond form of false worship involves performing a ritual contrary toits instructed observance. At Mount Sinai, God gives a code of lawsthat regulate the practice of making sacrifices and offerings,confining them to certain personnel (priests and Levites), certaincirc*mstances (cleanness), certain animals or plants (depending onthe sacrifice and the wealth of the offerer), certain times(Passover, Day of Atonement), and a certain location (tent ofmeeting, later the temple). On occasion, the law requires death asthe penalty for failure to observe the rituals correctly (Exod.30:20–38; Lev. 10:1–3; 16:2). This type of false worshipis basically limited to the OT because of the highly regulated andritualistic nature of Israel’s worship. Although the NTcontains rituals of worship, there is no indication of a censuredmethod of observation, only of an improper attitude (1Cor.11:27–33).
Thethird form of false worship involves performing a ritual while livinga life of unrepentant disobedience to God. The Bible addresses thistype of false worship in several passages (1Sam. 15:22; Isa. 1;Amos 4–5; Mic. 6). They demonstrate that even if the ritual isperformed correctly and toward the true God rather than another god,a sinful lifestyle of the worshiper will invalidate the worship.Worship is not automatically accepted simply because it is performedin the right way by the right official at the right time for theright God; it has ethical demands (esp. Isa. 1:11–23; Jer.14:7–10; Amos 4:4–13; 5:21–27). The prophets makeit clear that God not only rejects worship from wicked, unrepentantworshipers but also abhors it (esp. Isa. 1:11–23; Amos5:21–27).
Ritualand Ethical Aspects of False Worship
Regardlessof the form of false worship, God takes it seriously. Ritual andethical aspects of worship are both important. The deaths of Nadaband Abihu provide a good example of the importance of the ritualaspects of worship; they died because they performed a ritualcontrary to its prescribed manner (Lev. 10:1). The text does notconnect their death to some ethical failing but rather states thatthey profaned God by their ritual disobedience (cf. 10:1–3).
Onother occasions, the lack of proper ritual observance accompaniesserious ethical failings. For instance, Hophni and Phinehas committedtwo great transgressions. First, they performed the sacrificescontrary to regulation for their selfish gain, falling short bothritually and ethically. Second, they committed acts of fornication atthe place of worship (1Sam. 2:13–17, 22). The judgmentupon them was a result of both transgressions. Malachi rebukes theIsraelites of his day because the animals that they brought forsacrifice, being diseased or disabled, were unacceptable according toregulation (Mal. 1:7–14). The ritual transgression revealedtheir lack of devotion to God, which was reflected in their ethicalfailings as well (2:8–12).
Onthe other hand, the Bible emphasizes the priority of the ethicalaspects of worship over the ritual. When Saul does not wait forSamuel as Samuel commanded him but instead makes an offering beforeSamuel arrives, Samuel rebukes Saul because of his disobedience toSamuel’s instruction (delivered as a word of the Lord), notbecause of his method for carrying out the ritual (1Sam.15:22). When Jeremiah speaks of the covenant at Mount Sinai, heemphasizes God’s demand for devotion instead of the ritualobservances (Jer. 7:22–23).
Otherpassages show that proper worship is possible even without a ritualelement. Micah defines proper worship without ritual elements, butpurely in ethical terms (Mic. 6:8). When asked about the proper placeof worship, Jesus tells the Samaritan woman that the location isirrelevant, only that worship must occur in spirit and truth (John4:19–24).
Idolatry
Themost serious and most widespread form of false worship is idolatry.In a technical sense, idolatry is creating a physical representationof a deity. In a more general sense, idolatry involves any sign ofdevotion to anything other than the one true God. Idolatry in the OTconsists of both making an image of God and making images of otherdeities. Both practices are forbidden in the Ten Commandments, whichare a succinct presentation of God’s ethical demands. Theincident of the golden calf is a paradigmatic case of idolatry.Israel created a physical representation of the God who brought themup from Egypt (Exod. 32:1–8). Jeroboam followed this example byerecting two golden calves in Israel, again as images of the God whobrought Israel up from Egypt (1Kings 12:25–33). Althoughthese cases involve an image of God, idolatry is usually closelyconnected with the worship of other gods (1Kings 14:9; 2Kings17:7–12; 22:17). Idolatry is one of the main reasons for theexile of both the northern and the southern kingdoms (2Kings17:7–12; Isa. 2:8–22; Jer. 1:14–16).
The common experience/sharing of something with someone else.In the NT, the most common Greek word group to express this idea hasthe root koin- (“common”), with the cognate verbkoinōneō, noun koinōnia, and adjective koinos. But theconcept of fellowship extends well beyond this single word family andfinds expression in a variety of different contexts.
Fellowshipbetween the Members of the Trinity
TheGospel of John makes several claims about the fellowship that themembers of the Trinity have experienced with each other from alleternity. Jesus claims, “I and the Father are one”(10:30) and “It is the Father, living in me, who is doing hiswork” (14:10). Regarding the Holy Spirit, Jesus says, “Hewill glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what hewill make known to you. All that belongs to the Father is mine”(16:14–15). The Son has even shared in the Father’s gloryfrom before the creation of the world (17:5). Within the unity of theGodhead, the individual members experience perfect fellowship as theyshare in the fullness of deity.
Fellowshipbetween Jesus and Outcasts
Duringhis earthly ministry, Jesus modeled God’s love for themarginalized by associating with them. Such fellowship often took theform of sharing meals with outcasts such as tax collectors andsinners (Mark 2:15–17; Luke 5:29–32; 7:36–50;19:1–10), a practice that provoked sharp criticism from thePharisees (Luke 15:1–2). In Luke 15:3–32, Jesus tellsthree parables in response to such criticism. These parables indicatethat his fellowship with sinners demonstrates God’s love forthe lost and the joy that comes from restored fellowship with God.Such table fellowship served as a foretaste of the eschatologicalmessianic banquet, when all of God’s people (Jew and Gentilealike) will eat together in the kingdom of God as the fellowship ofthe forgiven (Matt. 8:11; Luke 13:29–30; Rev. 19:6–9).
Fellowshipbetween Believers and God
Theclose and intimate fellowship that the members of the Trinityexperience with one another is something that Jesus prays for hispeople to experience themselves (John 17:20–26). He asks thatbelievers “may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I amin you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that youhave sent me” (17:21). Just as the Father is in Jesus and Jesusis in the Father, believers are described as being in both the Fatherand the Son. The stated purpose for such fellowship is twofold: thatthe world may know and believe that the Father has sent the Son, andthat the Father loves believers even as he has loved the Son (17:21,23). Central to this fellowship between God and believers is thesharing of the glory that the Father and the Son experience (17:22).Jesus expresses similar truths in John 15:1–11 when he speaksof himself as the true vine and his followers as the branches whomust remain in him because “apart from me you can donothing”(v.5).
Althoughfellowship with God is something that Christ has purchased for hispeople through his death and resurrection, it can be broken by sin inthe believer’s life: “If we claim to have fellowship withhim and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out thetruth” (1John 1:6). When sin does break a believer’sfellowship with God, we are reassured, “If we confess our sins,he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify usfrom all unrighteousness” (1:9). This restoration of fellowshipis based on the work of Jesus to plead our case before theFather(2:1).
Paulfrequently speaks of the believer’s fellowship with Christ,even though he rarely uses the word “fellowship” to speakof this reality. It is God who calls the believer into fellowshipwith Christ (1Cor. 1:9), but such fellowship involves both the“power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings,becoming like him in his death” (Phil. 3:10). When believerscelebrate the Lord’s Supper, they are participating in the bodyand blood of Christ (1Cor. 10:16–17). Far morefrequently, Paul expresses the concept of fellowship with Christ byhis use of the phrase “with Christ.” Believers have beencrucified, buried, raised, clothed, and seated in the heavenly realmswith Christ (Rom. 6:4–9; 2Cor. 13:4; Gal. 2:20–21;Eph. 2:5–6; Col. 2:12–13; 3:1–4). They also sharein the inheritance that Christ has received from the Father (Rom.8:16–17) and one day will reign with him (2Tim.2:12).
Fellowshipbetween Believers and Others
Thefellowship that believers have with one another is an extension oftheir fellowship with God. John wrote, “We proclaim to you whatwe have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us.And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ”(1John 1:3). Just as walking in darkness falsifies a believer’sclaim to fellowship with God, so also walking in the light isnecessary for fellowship with other believers (1:6–7). Paulstrikes a similar note when he says, “Do not be yoked togetherwith unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have incommon? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmonyis there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer have incommon with an unbeliever?” (2Cor. 6:14–15). Thepoint is not to avoid all contact with unbelievers (cf. 1Cor.5:9–10), but rather that the believer is so fundamentallyidentified with Christ that to identify with unbelievers should beavoided.
Becausethey are joined to Christ by faith, believers share a wide variety ofexperiences and blessings with each other. In the broadest sense,they share in the gospel and its blessings (1Cor. 9:23; Phil.1:5–7; Philem. 6; 2Pet. 1:4), especially the Spirit(2Cor. 13:13–14; Phil. 2:1). But the most common sharedexperience is suffering. When believers suffer because of theiridentification with Christ, they are said to share in Christ’ssuffering (Phil. 3:10; 1Pet. 4:13). In addition to thisvertical element, there is a horizontal aspect. Because believers areunited in one body (1Cor. 12:12–13; Eph. 4:4–6),when one believer suffers, the entire body shares in that suffering(2Cor. 1:7; Heb. 10:33; Rev. 1:9).
Fromthe earliest days of the church, believers found very tangible waysto demonstrate that their fellowship was rooted in their common faithin Jesus. Immediately after Pentecost, “they devoted themselvesto the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking ofbread and to prayer.... All the believers weretogether and had everything in common” (Acts 2:42–44).This common experience led believers to voluntarily sell theirpossessions and share with any who had a need (2:45; 4:32). Thismeeting of very practical needs was motivated by a common experienceof God’s abundant generosity in freely giving his Son (Rom.8:32). The self-sacrificial sharing of resources became a staple ofthe early church (Rom. 12:13; Gal. 6:6; 1Tim. 6:18) andprovided an opportunity for Paul to demonstrate the unity of thechurch when he collected money from Gentile churches to alleviate thesuffering of Jewish Christians in Judea (Rom. 15:26–27; 2Cor.8–9).
Conclusion
Biblicalfellowship is not merely close association with other believers. TheNT emphasizes what believers share in Christ rather than whom theyshare it with. True biblical fellowship between believers is anoutworking of their fellowship with God through the gospel.
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
An image or likeness of a deity, whether carved from wood,molded from metal, or even formed in one’s mind. Although idolsare not strictly equivalent to the gods they represent—evenpagans recognized that idols are only the physical medium throughwhich a spirit reveals itself—the Bible does not distinguishbetween worshiping idols, worshiping other gods, or worshiping Yahwehthrough images.
Incontrast to other ancient religions, the Bible rejects worship of allimages as incompatible with worship of God. This includes images ofYahweh, since he is transcendent and cannot be represented byanything in creation. As Moses reminded Israel, they saw no form atSinai but only heard God’s voice (Deut. 4:12). No form canadequately represent Yahweh, as he is incomparable. The Biblesimilarly forbids worshiping images of other deities because itelevates them to the status reserved for God alone. Thus, the secondcommandment prohibits making and worshiping idols in the image ofanything found in heaven, on earth, or in the water (Exod. 20:4–5).
Idolatryis regularly likened to spiritual adultery or prostitution because itmarks a breakdown of God’s covenant relationship with hispeople (Deut. 31:16; Ps. 106:36–39; Hos. 4:12–19). Thiscorresponds to the fact that idol worship often included culticprostitution and fertility rites. Prophets and psalmists alikeridiculed idols as things fashioned by human hands that were unableto see, hear, or otherwise help those who made them. Rather, these“gods” depended on humans for transportation andprotection (Ps. 115:4–8; Isa. 40:19–20; 44:9–20).Idolaters were warned that they would become as worthless as thethings they worshiped. While declaring that idols amount to nothing,both Testaments nevertheless consider them spiritually dangerous.This is because idols lead people away from properly worshipingYahweh and expose them to demonic influences.
Despiteits warnings against idolatry, the Bible records that Israelregularly failed to keep itself pure. Right after God’s supremerevelation at Sinai, Aaron led the nation in making and worshiping agolden calf (Exod. 32). The book of Judges shows how society hadbecome degraded to the point that a man, Micah, and a tribe, Dan,engaged in idol worship (Judg. 17–18). When the monarchy wasdivided after Solomon’s rule, Jeroboam revived calf worship topreserve the loyalty of his people (1Kings 12:25–33).Both historical and prophetic books cite idolatry as a major reasonfor the exile.
ByNT times, idol worship was no longer a problem for Jews, but itremained an important issue for the growing church because manybelievers came from idolatrous backgrounds. Thus, the apostlesincluded idolatry in lists of sins to be judged, warned their readersto flee from it, and addressed eating food sacrificed to idols.Indicating that idolatry went beyond worship of images, they linkedit with the love of money (Matt. 6:24) and greed (Col. 3:5). The NTauthors believed that their readers could turn from idols to worshipthe true and living God, praised them for doing so, and looked to thetime when all idol worship would cease.
An image or likeness of a deity, whether carved from wood,molded from metal, or even formed in one’s mind. Although idolsare not strictly equivalent to the gods they represent—evenpagans recognized that idols are only the physical medium throughwhich a spirit reveals itself—the Bible does not distinguishbetween worshiping idols, worshiping other gods, or worshiping Yahwehthrough images.
Incontrast to other ancient religions, the Bible rejects worship of allimages as incompatible with worship of God. This includes images ofYahweh, since he is transcendent and cannot be represented byanything in creation. As Moses reminded Israel, they saw no form atSinai but only heard God’s voice (Deut. 4:12). No form canadequately represent Yahweh, as he is incomparable. The Biblesimilarly forbids worshiping images of other deities because itelevates them to the status reserved for God alone. Thus, the secondcommandment prohibits making and worshiping idols in the image ofanything found in heaven, on earth, or in the water (Exod. 20:4–5).
Idolatryis regularly likened to spiritual adultery or prostitution because itmarks a breakdown of God’s covenant relationship with hispeople (Deut. 31:16; Ps. 106:36–39; Hos. 4:12–19). Thiscorresponds to the fact that idol worship often included culticprostitution and fertility rites. Prophets and psalmists alikeridiculed idols as things fashioned by human hands that were unableto see, hear, or otherwise help those who made them. Rather, these“gods” depended on humans for transportation andprotection (Ps. 115:4–8; Isa. 40:19–20; 44:9–20).Idolaters were warned that they would become as worthless as thethings they worshiped. While declaring that idols amount to nothing,both Testaments nevertheless consider them spiritually dangerous.This is because idols lead people away from properly worshipingYahweh and expose them to demonic influences.
Despiteits warnings against idolatry, the Bible records that Israelregularly failed to keep itself pure. Right after God’s supremerevelation at Sinai, Aaron led the nation in making and worshiping agolden calf (Exod. 32). The book of Judges shows how society hadbecome degraded to the point that a man, Micah, and a tribe, Dan,engaged in idol worship (Judg. 17–18). When the monarchy wasdivided after Solomon’s rule, Jeroboam revived calf worship topreserve the loyalty of his people (1Kings 12:25–33).Both historical and prophetic books cite idolatry as a major reasonfor the exile.
ByNT times, idol worship was no longer a problem for Jews, but itremained an important issue for the growing church because manybelievers came from idolatrous backgrounds. Thus, the apostlesincluded idolatry in lists of sins to be judged, warned their readersto flee from it, and addressed eating food sacrificed to idols.Indicating that idolatry went beyond worship of images, they linkedit with the love of money (Matt. 6:24) and greed (Col. 3:5). The NTauthors believed that their readers could turn from idols to worshipthe true and living God, praised them for doing so, and looked to thetime when all idol worship would cease.
An image or likeness of a deity, whether carved from wood,molded from metal, or even formed in one’s mind. Although idolsare not strictly equivalent to the gods they represent—evenpagans recognized that idols are only the physical medium throughwhich a spirit reveals itself—the Bible does not distinguishbetween worshiping idols, worshiping other gods, or worshiping Yahwehthrough images.
Incontrast to other ancient religions, the Bible rejects worship of allimages as incompatible with worship of God. This includes images ofYahweh, since he is transcendent and cannot be represented byanything in creation. As Moses reminded Israel, they saw no form atSinai but only heard God’s voice (Deut. 4:12). No form canadequately represent Yahweh, as he is incomparable. The Biblesimilarly forbids worshiping images of other deities because itelevates them to the status reserved for God alone. Thus, the secondcommandment prohibits making and worshiping idols in the image ofanything found in heaven, on earth, or in the water (Exod. 20:4–5).
Idolatryis regularly likened to spiritual adultery or prostitution because itmarks a breakdown of God’s covenant relationship with hispeople (Deut. 31:16; Ps. 106:36–39; Hos. 4:12–19). Thiscorresponds to the fact that idol worship often included culticprostitution and fertility rites. Prophets and psalmists alikeridiculed idols as things fashioned by human hands that were unableto see, hear, or otherwise help those who made them. Rather, these“gods” depended on humans for transportation andprotection (Ps. 115:4–8; Isa. 40:19–20; 44:9–20).Idolaters were warned that they would become as worthless as thethings they worshiped. While declaring that idols amount to nothing,both Testaments nevertheless consider them spiritually dangerous.This is because idols lead people away from properly worshipingYahweh and expose them to demonic influences.
Despiteits warnings against idolatry, the Bible records that Israelregularly failed to keep itself pure. Right after God’s supremerevelation at Sinai, Aaron led the nation in making and worshiping agolden calf (Exod. 32). The book of Judges shows how society hadbecome degraded to the point that a man, Micah, and a tribe, Dan,engaged in idol worship (Judg. 17–18). When the monarchy wasdivided after Solomon’s rule, Jeroboam revived calf worship topreserve the loyalty of his people (1Kings 12:25–33).Both historical and prophetic books cite idolatry as a major reasonfor the exile.
ByNT times, idol worship was no longer a problem for Jews, but itremained an important issue for the growing church because manybelievers came from idolatrous backgrounds. Thus, the apostlesincluded idolatry in lists of sins to be judged, warned their readersto flee from it, and addressed eating food sacrificed to idols.Indicating that idolatry went beyond worship of images, they linkedit with the love of money (Matt. 6:24) and greed (Col. 3:5). The NTauthors believed that their readers could turn from idols to worshipthe true and living God, praised them for doing so, and looked to thetime when all idol worship would cease.
There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin;hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, orportrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of thedriving forces of the entire Bible.
Sinin the Bible
OldTestament.Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’scommandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. WhenAdam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete.They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaveswere inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with theirattempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent,Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).
Inthe midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways thatsin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised toput hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of thewoman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blowupon the offspring of the woman, the offspring ofthe womanwould defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequatecovering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implicationis that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adamand Eve, covering their sin.
InGen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on fulldisplay. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able toeradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humansgathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make aname for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them toscatter across the earth (11:1–9).
Inone sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holyGod satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationshipwith human beings without compromising his justice? The short answeris: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), whoeventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemedthem from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought themto Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated onobedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant wasthe sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided asa means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrificesmade for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year toatone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement thehigh priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies andsprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took asecond goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people ofIsrael, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them onthe head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness....The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barrenregion; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev.16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinfulpeople, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.
Despitethese provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke itscovenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under thereign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people,including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder(2Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wivesand concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods(1Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israeland Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry becamerampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judahin 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised toraise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as aguilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
AfterGod’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that thegreat prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, wereat hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remainedunder foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell ofSolomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Beforelong, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning awayfrom him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administrationof the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failedto properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).
NewTestament.During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longingfor God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last,when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it wasrevealed that he would “save his people from their sins”(Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, Johnthe Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism ofrepentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereasboth Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to bethe obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation(Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13;Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also theSuffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45;cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrathof God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. Withhis justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify allwho are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). Whatneither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, JesusChrist did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).
Afterhis resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers beganproclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus didand calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one ofyou, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”(Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness,they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned againstthem (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believerscontinue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal.5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23).The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the newheaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse(Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).
Aseven this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesisto Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’splot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative;it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved inorder for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.
Definitionand Terminology
Definitionof sin. Althoughno definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of theconcept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conformto God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action,orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered thatGod’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character,so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather isa personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited toactions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen.4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature ashuman beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.
Terminology.TheBible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying themis not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and useof the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one ofthe following four categories.
1.Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator andruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’sself-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankindfoolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom.1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows tohumans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31).Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodlinessor impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa.9:17; 1Pet. 4:18).
2.Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from thelawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass”picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or thecrossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42;Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’slaw, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45;Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violatinghis statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result isguilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’slaw is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectivelyfeels guilt.
3.Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what isgood. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what isgood (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contraststhe upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could alsoinclude here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speakof perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequentmention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievousdeparture from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27;1Cor. 5:1–11).
4.Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individualhad to be in a state of purity before him. While a person couldbecome impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating womanwas impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity”clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek.24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Althoughit is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, inother places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7;Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).
Metaphors
Inaddition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible usesseveral metaphors or images to describe it. The following four areamong the more prominent.
Missingthe mark.In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin”have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sinis reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that aperson simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it isthat he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9;Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional ornot, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num.15:30).
Departingfrom the way.Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in thewisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of therighteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19).Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways,but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18).Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed bytheir own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).
Adultery.Since God’s relationship with his people is described as amarriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32),it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness asadultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous womanvividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them ofspiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52).When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate inidolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1Cor.6:12–20; 10:1–22).
Slavery.Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clearthat Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture ofits far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7;49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to thosewho do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything thatpleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic powerthat is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare(Rom. 7:7–25).
Scopeand Consequences
Sindoes not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage alongwith it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.
Scope.The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As aresult of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist humanefforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen.3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under theweight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2Chron.36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation aswell (Rom. 8:19–22).
Sinaffects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions,motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom.3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “totaldepravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful asthey could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is taintedby sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as asinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societalstructures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economicmarkets, to name but a few.
Consequences.Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’sneighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sinhas consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level.Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen.2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty inGod’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, andsubjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20;5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict betweenindividuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breedsmistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closestrelationships.
Conclusion
Nosubject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding ofsin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As thePuritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ willnot be sweet.”
The Petrine phrase “inner self” (lit., “hiddenperson of the heart” [1Pet. 3:4]) is nearly identicalwith the Pauline phrase “inner being.” There are threereferences to this inner person in Paul’s writings. Two ofthese clearly refer to a Christian as opposed to a non-Christian(2Cor. 4:16; Eph. 3:16); one is unclear (Rom. 7:22). Ratherthan import the meaning from the first two into Romans 7:22, weshould seek the broader semantic meaning of the phrase. It is theimmaterial aspects of humanity—mind, spirit—indistinction from the outward person, which wastes away (2Cor.4:16). In this inner sphere the Holy Spirit does his renewing andsaving work (Eph. 3:16). Thus, we must distinguish between “innerperson” and “new person” (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10),which does seem to have a soteriological sense, because the formermay still be corrupt, vain, and alienated from the life of God (Eph.4:18).
The Petrine phrase “inner self” (lit., “hiddenperson of the heart” [1Pet. 3:4]) is nearly identicalwith the Pauline phrase “inner being.” There are threereferences to this inner person in Paul’s writings. Two ofthese clearly refer to a Christian as opposed to a non-Christian(2Cor. 4:16; Eph. 3:16); one is unclear (Rom. 7:22). Ratherthan import the meaning from the first two into Romans 7:22, weshould seek the broader semantic meaning of the phrase. It is theimmaterial aspects of humanity—mind, spirit—indistinction from the outward person, which wastes away (2Cor.4:16). In this inner sphere the Holy Spirit does his renewing andsaving work (Eph. 3:16). Thus, we must distinguish between “innerperson” and “new person” (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10),which does seem to have a soteriological sense, because the formermay still be corrupt, vain, and alienated from the life of God (Eph.4:18).
The concept of justice pervades the Bible, especially, thoughnot exclusively, the OT. The key biblical terms that convey thisconcept include mishpat, tsedeq/tsedaqah, yashar in the OT and thedik- word group in the NT (whose noun and verb forms are translatedrespectively as “righteous” and “justify” ortheir respective cognates). The biblical concept of justice is anembodiment of two contemporary concepts: righteousness and justice.The former designates compliance with the divine norm, while thelatter emphasizes conformity to a societal standard of what is rightand equitable. Focusing exclusively on the latter hinders the correctunderstanding of justice in the biblical sense. Additionally, thebiblical understanding of this concept is encumbered by the use ofdiffering English terms to translate the same Hebrew or Greek terms.
Mishpatand Tsedaqah
Mishpatinherently encompasses the idea of judicial activism consisting inthe provision of standard criteria (legislation, instructions,directives) for conduct and adjudication, and/or the actualarbitration between parties with the goal of ascertaining culpabilityor otherwise and administering the requisite sanctions or acquittal.Tsedaqah, on the other hand, emphasizes the established norm of justorder for right conduct both in the larger society and forindividuals. Whereas mishpat emphasizes the action that seeks toestablish or enforce right patterns of behavior for the common good,tsedaqah stresses the practice (or lack thereof) of such a norm insociety, or between individuals, or an individual’s compliancewith such a norm.
Whenused in combination as a hendiadys (or word pair), these two termssignify an inherent requirement for conformity to an established norm(whether in the religious sphere or in civil society) or therequirement of loyalty or right conduct between individuals. To theperson who stands to benefit from this norm, it approximates a right(i.e., a claim). Conversely, implicit duty is placed upon the personwho ensures the conformity to such an established norm. This fact isbetter appreciated when we reckon with the covenantal nature ofrequirements for justice in the ancient world, in which both partieshave both claim and responsibility. Broadly speaking, this conceptalso implies good governance, which accrues order to life and commonbenefits to all members of the community.
Thisidea is exemplified even in passages that do not use this precisephraseology (mishpat utsedaqah). Judah’s widoweddaughter-in-law, Tamar, had an inherent right to be provided with a(kinsman-redeemer) husband to raise up progeny for her deceasedhusband, while Judah had the incumbent duty of giving her in leviratemarriage to his surviving son. When Judah failed to execute his duty,Tamar entrapped him into an incestuous relationship, from which sheconceived. When condemned to die for adultery in a clannish courtsetting, Tamar revealed the identity of her unborn child’sfather, to which Judah responded by saying, “She is morerighteous than I, since I wouldn’t give her to my son Shelah”(Gen. 38:26). That is, she acted more in conformity to the norm thanhe did. In another instance, Yahweh, while challenging the Judeansconcerning their loyalty to him in a covenant lawsuit setting, asks,“A son honors his father, and a slave his master. If I am afather, where is the honor due me? If I am a master, where is therespect due me?” (Mal. 1:6). It is Yahweh’s right asfather and master to receive honor and respect, while it is theirduty to give him both.
Godas the Source and Model of Justice
Tobe just, then, implies conformity to that which is right—yashar(the standard or norm). In Scripture, this standard is the revealeddivine will and character. Compliance to it is often expressed inbiblical narrative as doing what is “right [or good] in theLord’s sight” (Deut. 6:18; 12:28; 1Kings 14:8;22:43), while its antithesis is doing what is “evil in the eyesof the Lord” (Judg. 2:11; 1Kings 11:6; 14:22) or doingwhat some human figure(s) “saw fit” (Deut. 12:8; Judg.17:6; 21:25).
Therefore,the source of justice is God himself. It flows from his essentialcharacter as one who is both just and righteous, whose actions areflawless, perfect, upright, and just (Deut. 32:4; 1Sam. 12:7;2Sam. 22:31; Job 37:23; Ps. 89:14). God is the righteouslawgiver, hence the one who establishes the norm for right conduct(Deut. 4:4–8; Ps. 19:7–9). He requires justice of all hiscreatures (cf. Gen. 9:5–6; Exod. 21:12, 28–29). God alsojudges righteously (Gen. 18:25; 1Kings 8:32; Ps. 9:4, 9; Jer.9:24) and defends and vindicates the weak and oppressed (Deut. 10:18;Ps. 103:6). The responsibility of maintaining justice in the humancommunity, however, he delegates to its leaders, such as civilmagistrates or political officials, and requires them to execute thisresponsibility with integrity, equity, and impartiality (Deut.1:16–17; 16:18–20; Ps. 82:2–4; Prov. 31:8–9;John 7:24; 1Pet. 2:13–14). God’s requirement ofjustice in the human community is not limited to its leaders only; itis incumbent upon everyone therein (Ps. 15:1–5; Mic. 6:8; Zech.7:9; 8:17; Matt. 23:23).
Executingjustice requires doing all that is essential to bring about thedivine order implicit in creation and explicit in revealed truth, toproduce harmony in all relationships in which humankind is involved(divine-human, human-human, and human-nature). This has the twofoldresult of restraining evil and advancing the benefits of just livingwithin the human society. Thus, the fruits of justice are to be seenin all spheres of human life, such as spirituality (2Cor.5:17–21), morality and ethics (Phil. 4:8; Col. 3:5–9;Titus 2:11–13), social justice (Exod. 22:21–24; Isa.56:1; Amos 2:6–7; Ezek. 22:7–29; James 2:1–9), andeconomic justice (Amos 5:11; 8:4–6; James 5:1–6), as wellas in the environment (Deut. 20:19–20; Pss. 96:9–13;104:1–31; Eccles. 2:5–6; Rom. 8:19–22).
Additionally,the outworking of justice produces (re)distribution and retribution.Distribution means that those blessed materially share of theirblessings with those in need (Deut. 15:1–15; Ps. 112:5–9;Prov. 28:27; Isa. 58:1–11; 2Cor. 8–9). Retributionrelates to the vindication and deliverance of the oppressed andjudgment on the wicked (1Sam. 2:7–10; Job 36:5–10;Ps. 72:4; Luke 4:17–20). This is both attested in biblicalIsrael’s experience (Isa. 1:17–20; 5:1–9; Jer.5:26–29; Mic. 2:1–3) and is being anticipated at thefinal judgment (Isa. 66:24; Dan. 12:1–3; Matt. 25:31–46;2Thess. 1:5–10). The vindicated obtain God’s loveand grace, while the judged receive his justice. Justice and love,therefore, are the two sides of God’s holiness.
The word “kindness” is used to translate theHebrew term khesed (Gen. 40:14) and the Greek wordschrēstotēs (Col. 3:12) and philanthrōpia (Acts 28:2).Because of the richness of its meaning, khesed is difficult tocapture in English. The word is translated in a variety of ways,including “kindness,” “loving-kindness,”“loyalty,” “steadfast love,”“mercy,” “commitment.” God embodies kindness(Exod. 34:6; Ps. 103:8; Hos. 2:19). Humans are also called on toreflect this quality of kindness in their relationships with others(1Sam. 20:8; Mic. 6:8; Zech. 7:9).
Inthe NT, God is described as displaying kindness toward humans (Rom.11:22; Titus 3:4; 1Pet. 2:3), even the selfish and ungrateful(Luke 6:36). God pours out kindness on humans in order to lead themto repentance (Rom. 2:4). Christians are to demonstrate kindness evenwhen others are unkind and vengeful (Prov. 25:21–22; Matt.5:43–48; Rom. 12:17–21).
Onediscovers what practicing kindness looks like by observing the wordsassociated with it in Scripture. Kindness involves putting awayanger, bitterness, and slander; being tenderhearted and forgiving;and imitating God (Eph. 4:31–5:2); it finds company withcompassion, humility, meekness, and patience (Col. 3:12); it isassociated with patience, holiness of spirit, and genuine love(2Cor. 6:6).
The word “kindness” is used to translate theHebrew term khesed (Gen. 40:14) and the Greek wordschrēstotēs (Col. 3:12) and philanthrōpia (Acts 28:2).Because of the richness of its meaning, khesed is difficult tocapture in English. The word is translated in a variety of ways,including “kindness,” “loving-kindness,”“loyalty,” “steadfast love,”“mercy,” “commitment.” God embodies kindness(Exod. 34:6; Ps. 103:8; Hos. 2:19). Humans are also called on toreflect this quality of kindness in their relationships with others(1Sam. 20:8; Mic. 6:8; Zech. 7:9).
Inthe NT, God is described as displaying kindness toward humans (Rom.11:22; Titus 3:4; 1Pet. 2:3), even the selfish and ungrateful(Luke 6:36). God pours out kindness on humans in order to lead themto repentance (Rom. 2:4). Christians are to demonstrate kindness evenwhen others are unkind and vengeful (Prov. 25:21–22; Matt.5:43–48; Rom. 12:17–21).
Onediscovers what practicing kindness looks like by observing the wordsassociated with it in Scripture. Kindness involves putting awayanger, bitterness, and slander; being tenderhearted and forgiving;and imitating God (Eph. 4:31–5:2); it finds company withcompassion, humility, meekness, and patience (Col. 3:12); it isassociated with patience, holiness of spirit, and genuine love(2Cor. 6:6).
Godthe Worker
Abiblical theology of work starts with God as the creator of allthings. In the OT, the verb bara’ (“to create”) isused only with God as subject. The first verb in the Bible (Gen.1:1), it occurs also in many other texts that describe Godaccomplishing what only God can do. Other terms such as yatsar (“toform, fashion”) and ’asah (“to make, do”) areused numerous times throughout the OT with either God or humans assubjects.
Thesethree terms reinforce the portrayal of God as worker in Gen. 1–2(cf. Isa. 45:7). God creates light and darkness; sky and earth; sun,moon, and stars; land and sea; plant and animal life; andhumankind—in sum, all that is. He forms the “man”(Heb. ’adam) from the dust of the ground, bringing him to lifeby breathing into him the breath of life.
Elsewherein the OT God is said to build, build up, or rebuild/restore (Heb.banah [e.g., Pss. 102:16; 147:2; Jer. 24:6; Amos 9:11]).Interestingly, God takes a rib from the man, which he then makes(lit., “builds into” [Heb. banah+ le]) a woman(Gen. 2:22). He founds (Heb. kun) the earth (Isa. 45:18) andstretches out (Heb. natah) the heavens (Zech. 12:1). Further, wisdomis God’s “craftsman” (Heb. ’amon), takingpart in the world’s creation (Prov. 8:30). The NT revealsChrist as the one through whom God creates all things (John 1:1–3;Col. 1:16). This brief sketch suggests the range of ways in whichGod’s work is described.
HumanLabor
Ideally,work is performed as service to God (Col. 3:17, 22–24). Work isone way we express the divine image. God’s creation mandate tofill, subdue, and rule the earth implies work (Gen. 1:26–28),and God places the man in the garden “to work it and take careof it” (Gen. 2:15). The importance of work for human dignity aswell as survival undergirds the laws of gleaning that make provisionfor the poor to gather their own food (e.g., Deut. 24:19–22).The expansion of human technologies and occupations (mela’kah[see Exod. 12:16]) reflects that dignity and God’s own diverseworkmanship. Job 28 celebrates human industry and achievement whilesubordinating all to the prevailing value of wisdom, rooted in “thefear of the Lord.” Given the indispensable role of work withinthe limits of human life, diligence is commended (Eccles. 3:9–10),idleness condemned (Prov. 10:4; 12:24; 21:5; 2Thess. 3:6–10).Work is essentially God’s good gift to us in creation.
Butwork now has negative aspects. In response to Adam’s sin, Godcurses the ground, introducing “painful toil” into thework cycle (Gen. 3:17–19; 5:29). We now eke out our living byhardship, finding frustration instead of bounty—a lifelongreminder that we are made of dust and will return to dust. The bookof Ecclesiastes echoes this note of futility and raises sharpquestions about the lasting value of human labor (1:2–3, 14;2:4–11, 17–23; 3:9; 4:4–6; 8:16–17). Sin anddeath haunt the unfolding occupations in Gen. 4, and the episode ofthe tower of Babel in Gen. 11 signals God’s judgment on humanpretension (cf. James 4:13–16). Excessive toil (workaholism) isa pitfall, not a virtue, for it expresses reliance on self ratherthan on God, who builds, protects, and gives rest (Ps. 127:1–2).Oppressive, unjust working conditions are cause for lament, and theyincur God’s judgment (Exod. 5:6–19; Prov. 14:31; James5:4–6).
Thus,Israel’s labor policy is to reflect God’s covenantfaithfulness, generosity, and concern for the vulnerable. Moses’law places limits on employers/masters to protect employees, slaves,and foreign workers from exploitation. The primary limit is God’scommand that Israel keep the Sabbath holy by a complete cessation oflabor (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15). This moveprioritizes God’s covenant above human labor and sets a rhythmof work and rest. Exodus grounds the Sabbath in God’s rest fromhis work of creation on the seventh day. Deuteronomy ties it toIsrael’s history of slavery in Egypt and deliverance by God; bykeeping the Sabbath, Israel shows gratitude to God and guards againstreplicating Egypt’s oppressive policies.
Exodus31–32 portrays work in its best and worst lights. The properinterplay of work and rest is seen in chapter 31, which narrates thedivinely empowered work on the tabernacle, followed by a strongreminder to keep the Sabbath as a “sign” between God andIsrael. In contrast, chapter 32 portrays artisanship put to the worstuse, the making of a golden idol. Aaron fashions gold with a tool andmakes the calf image, but later he tells Moses, “I threw [theirgold jewelry] into the fire, and out came this calf!” (32:24).This remark anticipates the prophets’ later mockery ofidol-makers (e.g., Isa. 44:9–20) and raises the issue ofpersonal responsibility for the outcome of one’s labor: Aaronseeks to avoid being implicated in Israel’s idolatry byconcealing his own role in the project.
Publiclabor issues increase in complexity when Israel adopts human kingshipand engages in international trade (e.g., 1Sam. 8; 1Kings9:15–23). Babylon deals a decisive blow to Judah’sstatehood by deporting leaders and skilled workers. Many of theseestablish such viable, productive new lives in Babylon that whenCyrus later allows the exiled Judeans to return, they choose toremain.
TheNT assumes the legitimacy of work and adopts the OT’s view thatwithin proper limits work is a good gift of God. Jesus, however, hascome to do his Father’s “work” (John 5:16–18),which entails calling some people away from their normal occupationsto follow him, as well as a new approach to Sabbath observance (Mark2:21–27; 3:4). These moves signal the urgency and newness ofthe kingdom of God. Consequently, the apostles are “co-workersin God’s service” (1Cor. 3:9), and Christians are“God’s handiwork” (Eph. 2:10). In light of theresurrection, we offer to God work (Gk. ergon) and labor (Gk. kopos),not in futility but in hope (1Cor. 15:58; cf. Rev. 14:13).
Colossians is a letter sent by Paul to a church in Colossaewhen he was in prison. The letter was Paul’s first directcontact with the church, which may have been started by one of hismissionary associates, Epaphras (Col. 1:7). Epaphras was fromColossae (4:12), a city of Asia Minor located in the Lycus Valley,known for its fertile soil and green pastures. Some commentatorssuggest that Epaphras also started churches in Hierapolis andLaodicea (4:13), neighboring cities in the valley that were situatedaround the Lycus River about ten miles apart. Colossae was a freecity located on the main Roman road that ran from Ephesus and Sardistoward the east, and it was populated by native Phrygians, as well asGreeks, Romans, and Jews. More than likely, the church was foundedduring Paul’s extended ministry in Ephesus, where persons fromthe region heard Paul’s gospel and from where Paul sentmissionary associates such as Epaphras into the surrounding cities(Acts 19). Tychicus, the letter carrier (Col. 4:7–8), was alsoone of Paul’s associates from the same region; he decided toaccompany Paul to Macedonia after the team left Ephesus (Acts 20:4).
Theclose association of these churches in Asia Minor and the time framewhen the letters were written may explain why Paul’s letter tothe Colossians is so similar in content to his letter to theEphesians. Paul was in prison (probably in Rome) when he sent both ofthese letters (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10, 18). The instructions regardingTychicus, the carrier for both letters, are identical, nearlyverbatim (Eph. 6:21–22; Col. 4:7–8). The letters sharethe same outline, following some of the same themes, especiallytoward the end, where Paul gives instructions regarding thehousehold. An affinity also exists between Colossians and Philemon, aletter sent to the patron of one of the house churches in Colossae.Most of the names mentioned by Paul appear in both letters: Timothy,Onesimus, Archippus, Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke(Col. 1:1; 4:9–17; Philem. 1, 10, 23–24). Paul was alsoin prison, along with Epaphras, at the time he sent his letter toPhilemon. All of this indicates that these letters were written aboutthe same time, from the same place, to the same region. Why did Paulsend three letters to the same region, especially since letterproduction was so expensive? Why not send one letter to the entireregion (like Galatians), to be read by all the house churches?Obviously, the problems of each church were so different that theyrequired a separate authoritative word from their apostle.
QuestionablePractices in Colossae
TheColossians were doing several things that Paul found troublesome, aswe learn from Col. 2. They were judging each other for not keepingcertain dietary regulations and holy days (2:16). Some were claimingsuperiority through personal worship experiences that involvedvisions of angels (2:18). Some subscribed to strict discipline of thehuman body, punishing themselves through various acts ofself-abasem*nt in order to curb fleshly appetites (2:23) and enhancetheir worship experiences (2:18). It seems that many of them weretrying to live by an expanded version of the divine command given inthe story of Adam, Eve, and the forbidden fruit: “Do nothandle! Do not taste! Do not touch!” (2:21). Paul recognizedthat all these claims and rules had the “appearance of wisdom”but in reality were nothing more than traditions based on“self-imposed” religion, and that such ascetic practiceswere useless in denying fleshly appetites (2:22–23). Where didthe Colossians get all these strange ideas that led to such bizarrebehavior?
Pauldescribed the false teaching as an imprisoning “through hollowand deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and theelemental spiritual forces” in opposition to the teachings ofChrist (2:8). Because the Colossian church was made up primarily ofGentile converts (1:27), many interpreters argue that the problemsresulted from the meshing of the gospel with local, pagan ways. ThePhrygians were known for their fascination with magical rituals, theability to manipulate the powers (earth, wind, fire, spirits, angels,often referred to as “elementary principles of the world”)for human purposes. Paul’s description of the false teaching asa “hollow and deceptive philosophy” based on the “humantradition” may also reveal the influence of Greek ideas andRoman ways in the church. The Greeks operated with a dualisticworldview of spirit versus flesh, leading some philosophers to arguethat punishing the body ensured purity of the soul. Furthermore, theRomans believed that the gods had given them power to rule the world,bringing fertility to the lands of conquered peoples. WorshipingCaesar brought economic rewards to devoted subjects of the empire. Inother words, all this talk in the Colossian letter about power andsovereignty, philosophy and self-discipline was Paul’s way ofdealing directly with the root of the problem: the syncretism ofpagan ways and the gospel according to Paul.
Someinterpreters believe that all these peculiar teachings derive notfrom pagan religions but rather from Judaism. After all, Paul’sreferences to observing the Sabbath, keeping commandments, andangelic worship point toward a Jewish context. Paul also affirmedthat his Gentile converts were “circumcised with a circumcisionnot performed by human hands” (2:11), perhaps revealing hisconcern that Jewish ways were creeping into his Gentile church. Heeven put the church on notice, identifying those among “thecircumcision” (Jews) who were trustworthy ministers of thegospel (he mentions only three, Barnabas, John Mark, and Jesus calledJustus [4:10–11]). The implication, of course, was to ignorethe rest of “the circumcision.” But if the troublemakersin Colossae were Jewish opponents of Paul, how does one explain allthe mystical and ascetic elements of this false teaching? Some arguethat the expression “worship of angels” was not anidolatrous practice of venerating angelic beings. Instead, the phraseshould be translated “angelic worship,” implying thatsome Colossians claimed to have been transported to heaven and joinedthe angels in worship of God. This may have been similar to theexperiences of an obscure form of Judaism: Jewish mystics who claimedto preserve esoteric revelations through out-of-body experiences ofheavenly visions and auditions (see Paul’s description in2 Cor. 12:1–7). Furthermore, the strict dietary code andsexual ethic of Jewish law were often interpreted by first-centurypagans as promoting an ascetic lifestyle. In other words, Paul wascountering a more cryptic branch of Judaism that flourished in aregion known for its affinity for the mysterious.
Outlineand Content
I.Introduction (1:1–14)
A.Greeting (1:1–2)
B.Thanksgiving (1:3–8)
C.Prayer (1:9–14)
II.The Person and Work of Christ (1:15–23)
III.Paul’s Role in Christ’s Mission to the Gentiles(1:24–2:5)
IV.False Teaching versus the Work of Christ (2:6–23)
V.Instructions on Life in Christ
A.In the church (3:1–17)
B.In the home (3:18–4:1)
VI.Generic Exhortations (4:2–6)
VII.Specific Instructions (4:7–9)
VIII.Final Greetings (4:10–17)
IX.Paul’s Signature (4:18)
Whateverthe source of the false teaching referred to in Colossians, Paulattempts to correct the misbehavior of his Gentile converts bybuilding an argument that the work of Christ is all-sufficient. Paulbegins the letter by describing the person and work of Christ incosmic terms (1:15–23). Next he recounts his role in themission of Christ to bring the riches of the kingdom to Gentiles(1:24–2:5). After reminding the Colossians of their receptionof the gospel, Paul juxtaposes the deceptive practices of the falseteaching with the evidence of the work of Christ in them (2:6–23).Then he gives a number of instructions on what life in Christ issupposed to look like: in the church (3:1–17) and in the home(3:18–4:1). He concludes the letter with generic exhortations(4:2–6), specific instructions (4:7–9), and greetings(4:10–17). Finally, Paul signs the letter, obviously written bya secretary, with the simple request: “Remember my chains”(4:18)—a curious signature that makes the argument of hisletter even more appealing.
ThePower and Peace of Christ’s Kingdom
Itis ironic that Paul chose to describe the work of Christ in suchgrandiose terms, picturing him as a mighty ruler over all creation,even while the apostle was in prison—an undeniable sign ofRoman sovereignty. In Col. 1, in some of the loftiest language Paulever used to describe Christ’s kingdom authority, the apostlereminds his converts that the Lord is “the image of theinvisible God, the firstborn over all creation” (v. 15),an obvious reference to Christ’s deity. Then Paul piles on theattributes, presenting Christ as the creator of all things, evenangelic creatures (v. 16), the sustainer of all things (v. 17),the head of the church, the eternal one, the guarantor of theresurrection (v. 18), the fullness of God (v. 19), thereconciler of all things—the one who made peace with theenemies of God through his blood on the cross (vv. 20–22).Despite Paul’s circ*mstances and what Rome may claim, theapostle holds fast to the irrepressible sovereignty of Christ’skingdom, displayed by Paul’s perseverance in the midst ofsuffering and the full assurance that every Colossian believer is“fully mature in Christ” (vv. 22–29). Indeed, allthe treasures of Christ’s kingdom—love, knowledge,wisdom, discipline—are to be found in the life of his converts(2:1–5), unless someone “deludes” them intothinking otherwise.
Paul’srhetorical strategy of extolling the power of Christ’s kingdommakes perfect sense in light of the false teaching that was plaguingthe Colossian church. Apparently, the Colossians were persuaded tofeel inadequate about their faith, vulnerable to the imposition oflegalistic standards that ensured victory over fleshly indulgences.To counter his opponents, Paul unpacks the significance of theincarnation and the cross (2:9–15). Because Christ was God inflesh (in whom “all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodilyform” [v. 9]), his death on the cross was a cosmic eventthat defeated all the powers that oppose God. Using military imagery,Paul argues that Christ canceled every debt against humanity when henailed all “decrees” (even Caesar’s) to the cross.In that singular act of sacrifice, Christ disarmed the foes of God,humiliating them publicly by making a spectacle of them, triumphingover all powers (v. 15)—something that Caesar loved to doafter successful military campaigns. Therefore, if Christ’svictory over all powers has been secured through his death, and sincehe rules as the firstborn of the dead (resurrection) over allcreation, and since the Colossians are “fully mature in Christ”(1:28) because of their faith in him, then no pretense ofself-abasem*nt or angelic visions can diminish what Christ has doneand will continue to do in the lives of Paul’s converts inColossae. Christ is all they needed to overcome the powers.
InCol. 3, Paul tells how the Colossians draw upon the power of Christwhen they “set [their] minds on things above, not on earthlythings” (v. 2). The things on the earth are “sexualimmorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed” (v. 5).Paul believes that his converts died with Christ (“hidden withChrist in God” [v. 3]) and therefore had set aside allthese idolatrous practices when they put on the “new self,”being conformed to the image of Christ (vv. 8–10). This renewalwill be found in all believers, regardless of ethnicity (v. 11),and will result in peace for all. Indeed, Paul sees the “peaceof Christ” as the undeniable evidence of his reign exhibited inthe hearts of those who believe (vv. 12–15). And what wouldthat peace look like? Believers will be patient, forgiving oneanother with hearts full of compassion, kindness, humility,gentleness, and love resulting in unity (vv. 12–14). Theirworship of God will be characterized by songs of thankfulness andadmonition, receiving the word with wisdom (v. 16). In theirhomes husbands, wives, and children will model deference and love,and masters and slaves will seek justice and fairness, as if theywere serving Christ (3:18–4:1). The Colossians will be devotedto prayer, will treat outsiders fairly, and will be known for alwaysspeaking graceful words (4:2–6). In other words, where Caesar’sempire has promoted Roman peace by enforcing Roman law in provinces,cities, and households, Paul believes that the peace of Christ willrule the hearts of his subjects, establishing a kingdom of love andunity, in word and deed, in the home as well as the church. So, inhis final greetings, Paul talks about faithful slaves and belovedsiblings as sources of encouragement in the ever-expanding work ofthe kingdom of God (4:7–17), making his simple request,“Remember my chains” (4:18), sound more like an act ofdefiance than a pitiful plea.
This prayer, found but not named as such in Matt. 6:9–13;Luke 11:2–5 (see also Did. 8.2, which follows the Mattheanversion), is a version of the Jewish Qaddish prayer revised aroundthe theme of the kingdom of God and is a paradigmatic model of prayergiven by Jesus to his followers.
Jesusand Prayer
Prayerwas a key element of Jewish piety and devotion to God. It was a largepart of meetings in synagogues, annual festivals, worship in thetemple, and daily recitals of the words of the law. Jesus isremembered as withdrawing into lonely and desolate places for timesof prayer (Mark 1:35; 6:46), most poignantly in the garden ofGeth-semane (Mark 14:32–42 pars.). Jesus’ time in thewilderness probably was a time of prayer and fasting as well (Mark1:12–13 pars.). Besides the Lord’s Prayer, another prayerof Jesus celebrates God’s revelation to the disciples aftertheir short itinerant mission (Matt. 11:25–26// Luke10:21).
Theevangelist Luke emphasizes Jesus at prayer more than any other Gospelwriter. Luke’s Gospel portrays Jesus as praying at his baptism(3:21), prior to his selection of the Twelve (6:12–13), priorto Peter’s confession of him as Messiah (9:18), at histransfiguration (9:28–29), prior to his teaching on the Lord’sPrayer (11:1), for Peter (22:32), and twice while on the cross(23:34, 46). Jesus also taught much about prayer, concerning how hisdisciples are or are not to pray and how to show genuine devotion inthe kingdom community without hypocrisy (Mark 11:24–25; Matt.5:44// Luke 6:28; Matt. 6:5–8; Luke 11:5–13;18:1–14; 21:36).
Inthe Fourth Gospel, Jesus’ prayers underscore the unique natureof the relationship between the Father and the Son (John 11:41–42;12:27–28). Jesus’ high priestly prayer for the disciplesconcerns their preservation and the role of the Holy Spirit in theirlives (17:1–26). A distinctive characteristic of Jesus’prayers is that God is addressed by the Aramaic word abba (“father”),and this became common in early Christian worship (Rom. 8:15; Gal.4:6).
TheLord’s Prayer: Matthew and Luke
TheLord’s Prayer takes distinct forms in Matthew and in Luke (seetable 2). The differences in the two prayers might be attributable toJesus teaching two different versions. More likely, Matthew and Lukeboth knew the prayer from a common source (written or oral), andMatthew’s version is a more liturgical elaboration of Luke’sshorter and more “original” version. Matters arecomplicated somewhat by the fact that later Christian scribes had apropensity for harmonizing the two prayers and sometimes amended themin their respective manuscripts. Both prayers agree that (1)Godis the Holy Father, (2)the kingdom is yet to come in itsfullness, (3)followers of Jesus depend on God for their dailyprovisions, (4)followers of Jesus depend on God forforgiveness, (5)which is reciprocated in the forgiveness ofothers, and include (6)the supplication that God not let themfall into the final tribulation.
Table2. The Lord’s Prayer in Matthew and Luke
Matthew6:9-13….Luke 11:2-4
OurFather in heaven,….Father,
hallowedbe your name,….hallowed be your name,
yourkingdom come,….your kingdom come.
yourwill be done, on earth as it is in heaven….
Giveus today our daily bread….Give us each day our daily bread.
Andforgive us our debts,….Forgive us our sins,
aswe also have forgiven our debtors….for we also forgiveeveryone who sins against us.
Andlead us not into temptation,….And lead us not into temptation.
Butdeliver us from the evil one….
Foryour is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen. [addedin some later manuscripts; see NIV mg.]….
TheLord’s Prayer: The Petitions
Theprayer can be broken up into a number of petitions. First is thepetition addressed to God as Father and self-sanctifier. God isinvoked as Father, and his name represents both his character as aloving father and his authority as the master over all creation. Theprayer is theocentric, and it reads literally “let your name besanctified,” which is a plea that God’s holiness willbecome more and more evident. The Lord’s Prayer is not somekind of “I want” list, but rather a burst of praiseexpressing the hope that God’s sheer goodness and Godness willbe acknowledged by all.
Thesecond petition is for God to finally establish his kingdom. The“kingdom of God” is more akin to God’s reign, rule,or government. It is referred to rarely in the OT (e.g., Dan. 2:44;Obad. 21); much more prominent is the theme of God as “king.”In many of the psalms God already is king of Israel and the nations(e.g., Pss. 93–99), and yet the prophets could look forward tothe day when Yahweh would again show himself to be king preciselythrough his deliverance of Israel, which would be the ultimateexpression of the kingly power (e.g., Isa. 52:7; Zech. 14:9). Theprayer for the coming of the kingdom of God is a prayer for God toestablish his reign or rule in its final and full manifestation onearth. Although the kingdom was partially present during Jesus’ministry by virtue of his exorcisms and healings (e.g., Mark 1:15;Luke 11:20), it still awaits its final consummation. Matthew’sversion has “on earth as it is in heaven” and mayindicate a millennial view of the kingdom as supplanting earthlykingdoms, resulting in the transformation of the present age. Thepetition does not promote escapism from the world but rather pointstoward its eventual redemption and transformation by the gloriouspower of heaven becoming a reality upon the earth.
Thirdis the petition for daily provision of physical needs. The “dailybread” petition looks to God as the provider and caregiver ofhis people. Elsewhere in the Sermon on the Mount/Plain, Jesuspreaches dependence on God as a means of escaping the worry and lureof wealth and money (Matt. 6:25–33// Luke 12:22–34).Bread was a powerful symbol for sustenance and life (e.g., Prov.22:9; Lam. 2:12; John 6:35, 48; Sir. 29:21; 34:25). The petitionassumes that God is interested in the most mundane aspects of humanexistence, and that he gives what is needed, not always what iswanted. God sustains his people in their hour of need as proof of hisfatherly care and compassion.
Fourthis the petition for divine forgiveness in coordination with mutualforgiveness among the community of Jesus’ followers. The prayerdoes not ask God to forgive persons who then in turn forgive others;rather, in reverse, the prayer implies that God forgives in the sameway that humans forgive each other (Matthew) or on the basis ofhumans forgiving each other (Luke). The role of mutual forgivenesswithin the new covenant community is spelled out clearly by Paul inColossians: “Bear with each other and forgive one another ifany of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lordforgave you” (Col. 3:13).
Fifthis the petition to be spared eschatological tribulation and themalevolence of Satan. The word peirasmos can mean “testing,”“trial,” “temptation,” or even “tribulation”or “ordeal.” The prayer could constitute a plea for helpin the face of personal trials and struggles in the believer’slife and in the journey of discipleship (e.g., 1Cor. 10:13;James 1:2), or it could denote a request to be kept from theeschatological ordeal that will precede the final and fullestablishment of the kingdom of God(e.g., Mark 14:36, 38; Rev. 3:10). Importantly, what is feared inthis prayer is not experiencing the peirasmos but rather succumbingto it—the fear of failure. In addition, the prayer asks to bedelivered from ho ponēros, “evil,” or (more likely)“the evilone” (cf. Matt. 5:39)—that is, the devil or Satan. Godtests his people to strengthen them and prove their faithfulness,while Satan tempts people to subdue and destroy them. This prayeracknowledges the fragility and helplessness of the human state in theface of human, spiritual, and cosmic evil. The prayer seeksliberation from evil in the coming reign of God’seschatological kingdom.
TheLord’s Prayer: The Theology
Thetheological framework, ethical exhortation, and social dynamicscreated or presupposed by the prayer are as follows.
First,God is the Father of the followers of Jesus. This is axiomatic in theGospels and is repeated by the Christian prayer that addresses Godthe Father as “Abba” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6).
Second,an overarching importance is attached to the kingdom of God as thecontext in which all prayer is prayed. The tension of the prayer—thevery fact of needs and the threat of continuing perils—existsonly because God’s plan to restore Israel and renew creationhas not yet been put into full effect. God’s kingdom has brokeninto the world through the work of the Son of God and the giving ofthe Holy Spirit, and yet it still awaits a final consummation, whenGod is “all in all” (1Cor. 15:28) and finallyrepossesses the world for himself. The prayer presupposes the “now”and the “not yet” of God’s saving action andbalances prayers of triumph and lament in light of currenttemptations and the coming victory of God.
Third,in this prayer salvation not only is spiritual (understood as goingto heaven when one dies) but also involves the physical well-being ofa person and healthy relationships within the believing community.Just as God is concerned with physical human needs, so should humansbe with their fellow humans. If human beings forgive, then God alsoforgives them. Human relations are to mirror the values of heaven andthe vision of the kingdom.
Fourth,the world order currently exists in partial subjugation to evilpowers opposed to God’s rule, which is simply part of the diresituation of “this age.” The prayer presupposes anapocalyptic worldview characterized by dualism (God/Satan, good/evil,present/future, etc.), the necessity of encountering and perseveringagainst evil, and divine intervention to put the world order rightand replace it with the kingdom of God.
Fifth,discipleship involves a variety of traits and characteristics. Thisprayer depicts the disciple as trusting and as exhibiting faith inGod’s purpose and plan. The prayer presumes that disciplescling to God in dependence upon him in their day-to-day need. Theprayer assumes that disciples try to imitate God in reflectinggoodness, love, holiness, and peace in their respective communities.The prayer also admonishes endurance in the face of trials andpersistence (not repetitiveness) in the discipline of prayer.
Sixth,although the prayer does not have an explicit Christology, one can befound implicitly. It seems implied that Jesus is a mediator betweenthe Father and the disciples, and that he possesses an important rolein the final manifestation of the kingdom. It is, after all, thedisciples of Jesus who are promised a special place in the kingdomand a special relationship with the God of Israel.
Summary
TheLord’s Prayer has remained a common thread in the devotionallife of followers of Jesus for two millennia because it is simple,memorable, poignant, and yet profound. It is not the prayer of anelite few; it belongs to all who cry out to God as Father and see theway to God in Jesus Christ, the exalted Lord and Messiah of Israel.As teachings of Jesus hold immeasurable significance for the life,faith, praxis, and serviceof his followers, this prayerencapsulates a motif of Jesus’ own mission: God as king andthelove of God for his own people.
In the OT, meditation is primarily focusing on the will ofGod, verbally repeating God’s commandments: one “meditateson his law day and night” (Ps. 1:2). To Joshua, God says, “keepthis Book of the Law always on your lips; meditate on it day andnight, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it.Then you will be prosperous and successful” (Josh. 1:8). Thecommand presupposes that transformative knowledge must be broughtinto the horizon of consciousness and remain there. The fruit ofmastering a meditative technique is not revelation of the deepermysteries of reality, as it is in other religious systems, but ratheris God’s graceful response to open-hearted obedience. Being aprophet was not a self-designation but a calling. By the firstcentury, meditation had become a part of prayer. The Essenes remainedsilent for an hour before reciting their prayers (Josephus, J.W.2.128, 130, 133). To maintain focus (what the later rabbis callkavanah), Jewish men wore phylacteries and tassels. Phylacteries aresmall leather boxes strapped to the left forearm and the foreheadduring prayer (see Let. Aris. 158–159). Inside the boxes werecopies of the Shema (Deut. 6:4–9; 11:13–21; Exod.13:1–10, 11–16) written on parchment. Tassels were blueand were attached to the four corners of a cloak (Num. 15:37–39;Deut. 22:12). Jesus wore tassels (Matt. 9:20; 14:36). Paul exhortshis readers to meditate upon the humility of Jesus’ historicalministry but also to reflect upon the exalted Christ (Phil. 2:5;3:15, 19; 4:2; Col. 3:2).
In the most basic sense, a priest is mediator between God andhumanity. Although there are hints in Gen. 1–2 that Adam andEve performed a priestly role in the garden, when the OT speaks ofthe priesthood, it most frequently refers to those involved in theservice of the tabernacle or temple under the Mosaic covenant. Butbefore the formal institution of the Mosaic covenant, God commandedMoses to tell the people of Israel, “If you obey me fully andkeep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasuredpossession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me akingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:5–6). Godintends all Israel to be a conduit of his presence to a lost andrebellious world. The rest of the Pentateuch indicates that Israelwas to do this in three ways: (1)practice the law of God as anexample of his holiness; (2)proclaim the mighty deeds of God asa testimony to his power; (3)preserve the word of God as ademonstration of his faithfulness. This, then, was the responsibilityof each Israelite individually and corporately as a people.
Asthe OT unfolds, Israel clearly fails to live up to this loftycalling. But the prophet Isaiah looks forward to a day when God’sredeemed people “will be called priests of the Lord, you willbe named ministers of our God” (Isa. 61:6). This will happen asa result of the Spirit-anointed figure who brings good news to thepoor and the year of God’s favor (Isa. 61:1–4). Jesusclaims that his life, ministry, and death are the fulfillment of thispromise (Luke 4:16–21), which suggests that now is the timethat God’s people can rightly be said to be “priests ofthe Lord.”
Thisconclusion is confirmed in 1Pet. 2:4–10. In the midst ofseveral quotations of and allusions to OT passages, Peter takes upthe language of Exod. 19:6 when he says to believers, “You area chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’sspecial possession, that you may declare the praises of him whocalled you out of darkness into his wonderful light” (v.9).What Israel failed to be because of its persistent rebellion againstGod, believers are. But believers are not a royal priesthood becausethey are somehow better than Israel; they are a royal priesthoodbecause they are united to Jesus Christ. Peter emphasizes this whenearlier in the passage he refers to believers as living stones “beingbuilt into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offeringspiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ”(v.5). Because Jesus is the great high priest who offered hisown blood for the sins of his people (Heb. 9:11–14), believersmust “continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—thefruit of lips that openly profess his name. And do not forget to dogood and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God ispleased” (Heb. 13:15–16).
Thereare at least three practical ramifications of the priesthood ofbelievers. First, each believer is to be a channel through whichGod’s presence and character are made known in this world.Second, everything that the believer does, even down to eating anddrinking, should be done to reflect the character and glory of God(1Cor. 10:31; Col. 3:17). Third, each believer has a role toplay in the advancement of God’s kingdom.
In the most basic sense, a priest is mediator between God andhumanity. Although there are hints in Gen. 1–2 that Adam andEve performed a priestly role in the garden, when the OT speaks ofthe priesthood, it most frequently refers to those involved in theservice of the tabernacle or temple under the Mosaic covenant. Butbefore the formal institution of the Mosaic covenant, God commandedMoses to tell the people of Israel, “If you obey me fully andkeep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasuredpossession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me akingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:5–6). Godintends all Israel to be a conduit of his presence to a lost andrebellious world. The rest of the Pentateuch indicates that Israelwas to do this in three ways: (1)practice the law of God as anexample of his holiness; (2)proclaim the mighty deeds of God asa testimony to his power; (3)preserve the word of God as ademonstration of his faithfulness. This, then, was the responsibilityof each Israelite individually and corporately as a people.
Asthe OT unfolds, Israel clearly fails to live up to this loftycalling. But the prophet Isaiah looks forward to a day when God’sredeemed people “will be called priests of the Lord, you willbe named ministers of our God” (Isa. 61:6). This will happen asa result of the Spirit-anointed figure who brings good news to thepoor and the year of God’s favor (Isa. 61:1–4). Jesusclaims that his life, ministry, and death are the fulfillment of thispromise (Luke 4:16–21), which suggests that now is the timethat God’s people can rightly be said to be “priests ofthe Lord.”
Thisconclusion is confirmed in 1Pet. 2:4–10. In the midst ofseveral quotations of and allusions to OT passages, Peter takes upthe language of Exod. 19:6 when he says to believers, “You area chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’sspecial possession, that you may declare the praises of him whocalled you out of darkness into his wonderful light” (v.9).What Israel failed to be because of its persistent rebellion againstGod, believers are. But believers are not a royal priesthood becausethey are somehow better than Israel; they are a royal priesthoodbecause they are united to Jesus Christ. Peter emphasizes this whenearlier in the passage he refers to believers as living stones “beingbuilt into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offeringspiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ”(v.5). Because Jesus is the great high priest who offered hisown blood for the sins of his people (Heb. 9:11–14), believersmust “continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—thefruit of lips that openly profess his name. And do not forget to dogood and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God ispleased” (Heb. 13:15–16).
Thereare at least three practical ramifications of the priesthood ofbelievers. First, each believer is to be a channel through whichGod’s presence and character are made known in this world.Second, everything that the believer does, even down to eating anddrinking, should be done to reflect the character and glory of God(1Cor. 10:31; Col. 3:17). Third, each believer has a role toplay in the advancement of God’s kingdom.
The restoration of a relationship from a state of hostilityto one of peace. As such, the concept is far more common than thenumber of specific references might suggest. The Bible speaks ofreconciliation on three levels: (1)God and humanity; (2)humanbeings with one another; and (3)God and creation.
Godand Humanity
Theneed for reconciliation between God and humanity begins when Adam andEve rebel against God. What has been a relationship of intimatefellowship becomes one of fear and mistrust as Adam and Eve’ssin brings God’s judgment (Gen. 3:14–19). But in themidst of judgment is the cryptic promise of a descendant of the womanwho will crush the serpent and end the estrangement between God andhumanity (3:15). The rest of the OT gives glimpses of whatreconciliation will be like. God gives the sacrificial system as ameans to deal with sin and restore fellowship with him (Lev. 1–7;16). Despite Israel’s sin, God pursues reconciliation withIsrael like a husband chases after a wayward wife (Hos. 1–3).Israel’s hope for reconciliation is often expressed in terms ofa desire for peace. Although Aaron’s benediction asks God togive peace to his people in the present (Num. 6:24–26), God’speople look forward to the day when a covenant of peace will beestablished through the Suffering Servant and announced to the endsof the earth (Isa. 52–54).
Whatis largely hinted at in the OT is stated explicitly in the NT. Paulin particular explains how believers are reconciled to God and theconsequences of that reconciliation. God, not humanity, has taken theinitiative. Even though we were sinners subject to God’s wrath,alienated from God and enemies in thought and act, Christ died for us(Rom. 5:6–11; Col. 1:21). As the last Adam, Christ has removedthe barrier that our sinful rebellion had created between God andhumanity by taking the punishment for our sin. Thus reconciliation isa gift that God offers to humanity (Rom. 5:11), not something that wedo to appease God. Because God has reconciled us to himself throughChrist, he has entrusted us with the ministry of reconciliation(2Cor. 5:19). Using his people as ambassadors, God appeals tohumanity to be reconciled through the work of Christ, whom, thoughsinless, God made sin for us “so that in him we might becomethe righteousness of God” (2Cor. 5:20–21). God’spurpose in reconciliation is to present the believer “holy inhis sight, without blemish and free from accusation” (Col.1:22). The result of reconciliation is the joy that comes from beingat peace with God (Rom. 5:1–2, 11). In view of this, Paul’sfrequent greeting “grace and peace” in his letters takeson new light as his desire for believers to experience the reality oftheir reconciliation to God.
HumanBeings with One Another
Reconciliationbetween God and humanity makes it possible for people truly to bereconciled to one another. Even the natural hostility between Jew andGentile has been overcome by the work of Christ. Through the cross,Christ “destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility,by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands andregulations” (Eph. 2:14–15). As a result, Jew and Gentilehave been brought together in one body as fellow citizens of God’skingdom who stand on equal footing before God (Eph. 2:16–22).
Asevidence of being reconciled to God, believers are called to pursuereconciliation with others: “If it is possible, as far as itdepends on you, live at peace with everyone” (Rom. 12:18).Pursuing reconciliation with others is so important that Jesus warnshis followers that failure to do so can cause a rift in their ownfellowship with God. That is why in the Lord’s Prayer God’speople are to pray, “Forgive us our sins, for we also forgiveeveryone who sins against us” (Luke 11:4). Since God hasforgiven us for our rebellion against him, we ought to forgive otherswho have wronged us (Col. 3:13). Believers are even instructed toseek reconciliation with others before entering the presence of God(Matt. 5:23–24).
Godand Creation
Drawingupon the prophetic hope of the OT, the NT also speaks of a cosmicreconciliation. Through Christ, God is pleased “to reconcile tohimself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, bymaking peace through his blood, shed on the cross” (Col. 1:20).By this Paul does not mean the salvation of everyone, but rather thatthe reconciling work of Jesus is the means by which God restores thecreated order to peace. Whereas the first Adam’s sin brought acurse upon creation, Christ, as the last Adam, has brought peace thatwill culminate in new heavens and a new earth free from the effectsof sin and death (Isa. 65:17; Rev. 21–22). It is there that Godwill dwell with his people forever in perfect harmony (Rev. 21:2–5).
The term “salvation” is the broadest one used torefer to God’s actions to solve the plight brought about byhumankind’s sinful rebellion and its consequences. It is one ofthe central themes of the entire Bible, running from Genesis throughRevelation.
OldTestament
Inmany places in the OT, salvation refers to being rescued fromphysical rather than spiritual trouble. Fearing the possibility ofretribution from his brother Esau, Jacob prays, “Save me, Ipray, from the hand of my brother Esau” (Gen. 32:11). Theactions of Joseph in Egypt saved many from famine (45:5–7;47:25; 50:20). Frequently in the psalms, individuals pray forsalvation from enemies that threaten one’s safety or life (Pss.17:14; 18:3; 70:1–3; 71:1–4; 91:1–3).
Relatedto this usage are places where the nation of Israel and/or its kingwere saved from enemies. The defining example of this is the exodus,whereby God delivered his people from their enslavement to theEgyptians, culminating in the destruction of Pharaoh and his army(Exod. 14:1–23). From that point forward in the history ofIsrael, God repeatedly saved Israel from its enemies, whether througha judge (e.g., Judg. 2:16; 3:9), a king (2Kings 14:27), or evena shepherd boy (1Sam. 17:1–58).
Butthese examples of national deliverance had a profound spiritualcomponent as well. God did not save his people from physical dangeras an end in itself; it was the necessary means for his plan to savethem from their sins. The OT recognizes the need for salvation fromsin (Pss. 39:8; 51:14; 120:2) but, as the NT makes evident, does notprovide a final solution (Heb. 9:1–10:18). One of the clearestplaces that physical and spiritual salvation come together is Isa.40–55, where Judah’s exile from the land and prophesiedreturn are seen as the physical manifestation of the much morefundamental spiritual exile that resulted from sin. To address thatfar greater reality, God announces the day when the Suffering Servantwould once and for all take away the sins of his people (Isa.52:13–53:12).
NewTestament
Asin the OT, the NT has places where salvation refers to being rescuedfrom physical difficulty. Paul, for example, speaks of being savedfrom various physical dangers, including execution (2Cor.1:8–10; Phil. 1:19; 2Tim. 4:17). In the midst of a fiercestorm, Jesus’ disciplescry out, “Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!”(Matt. 8:25). But far more prominent are the places in the Gospelsand Acts where physical healings are described with the verb sōzō,used to speak of salvation from sin. The healing of the woman withthe hemorrhage (Mark 5:25–34), the blind man along the road(Luke 18:35–43), and even the man possessed by a demon (Luke8:26–39), just to name a few, are described with the verb sōzō.The same verb, however, is also used to refer to Jesus forgivingsomeone’ssins (Luke 7:36–50) and to his mission to save the lost fromtheir sins (Luke 19:10). Such overlap is a foretaste of the holisticsalvation (physical and spiritual) that will be completed in the newheaven and earth (Rev. 21–22). The NT Epistles give extensivedescriptions of how the work of Jesus Christ saves his people fromtheir sins (see below).
Components
Inseveral passages (e.g., Rom. 5:1–11; Eph. 2:1–10; Titus3:4–7) “salvation” is clearly a summary term forthe totality of what God has done for his people in and throughChrist. Salvation is such a rich and multifaceted work of God that ittakes a variety of terms to bring out its fullness. “Regeneration”refers to the new life that God imparts, bringing a person fromspiritual death to spiritual life (John 3:3–8; Eph. 2:4–7;Titus 3:4–7). “Justification” speaks of Goddeclaring a person not guilty in his court of law on the basis ofChrist’s sacrificial death and life of perfect obedience (Rom.3:21–5:12; Gal. 2:14–21). “Atonement”describes Christ’s payment for sin and resulting forgiveness(Rom. 3:21–26; Heb. 2:17). “Redemption” capturesthe reality of God paying the price to bring his people out of theirslavery to sin and into the freedom of the Spirit (Gal. 4:1–7;5:1). “Reconciliation” refers to God turning hardenedrebels and enemies into his friends (Rom. 5:10–11; 2Cor.5:18–21; Col. 1:20–22). “Adoption” extendsthat reality into the astonishing truth that God makes those whom hereconciles not just his friends but his sons and daughters (Rom.8:14–25; Gal. 4:1–7). In “sanctification” Godsets his people apart for his special purposes and progressivelychanges them into the image of Christ (1Cor. 1:30 ESV, NRSV,NASB; cf. Rom. 8:29). The final component is “glorification,”when God brings to completion the work of salvation by granting hispeople resurrection bodies, removing every last stain of sin, death,and the curse and placing them in a new heaven and earth (Rom. 8:30;1Cor. 15:35–57; Rev. 21–22).
Prepositionsof Salvation
Anotherway that the Bible fills out the nature of salvation is through thevarious prepositions connected to it. The prepositions in thefollowing list are among the more significant.
From.Since the basic idea of salvation is rescue from danger, it is notsurprising that Scripture describes that from which believers aresaved. David cries out to God, “Save me from all mytransgressions” (Ps. 39:8). Salvation from sin is possible onlythrough Jesus, for it is he who “will save his people fromtheir sins” (Matt. 1:21). Reflecting on the work of Jesus onthe cross, Paul claims that because of the sacrificial death ofChrist believers are saved from God’s wrath (Rom. 5:9–10).At the same time, the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus savedpeople from their slavery to sin (Rom. 6:1–11). As a result ofthese and other things from which Christ has saved people, on the dayof Pentecost Peter exhorts his audience to be saved “from thiscorrupt generation” (Acts 2:40). Thus, the unanimous testimonyof Scripture is that believers have been saved from their sin and itsconsequences.
To/into.Believers are saved not merely from something; they are saved to/intocertain states or conditions. Whereas they were once slaves,believers have now been saved “into the freedom and glory ofthe children of God” (Rom. 8:21 [cf. Gal. 5:1]). Through thecross God “has rescued us from the dominion of darkness andbrought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves” (Col. 1:13).Another way of stating this reality is to speak of the peace intowhich believers now have been brought as a result of Christ’swork on their behalf (John 14:27).
By.Scripture frequently uses the preposition “by” to expressthe instrument of salvation. Stated negatively, “It is not bysword or spear that the Lord saves” (1Sam. 17:47). In thebroadest sense, believers are saved from their sins by the gospel(1Cor. 15:1–2). More specifically, salvation is by thegrace of God (Eph. 2:5, 8). The preposition “by” can alsoexpress the agent of salvation. A distinguishing feature of Israelwas that it was saved from its enemies by God (Deut. 33:29; Isa.45:17). The same thing is meant when Scripture speaks of God savinghis people by his right hand (Ps. 17:7) or his name (Ps. 54:1).
Through.The consistent testimony of the Bible is that salvation comes throughfaith (e.g., Eph. 2:8–9). Through faith, believers have beenjustified (Rom. 3:22; 5:1–2) and made children of God (Gal.3:26). It is not righteousness based on the law that matters, “butthat which is through faith in Christ” (Phil. 3:9). Theremarkable actions of God’s people throughout history have beenaccomplished through faith (Heb. 11:1–40).
In.Especially in Paul’s writings the various components ofsalvation (see above) are modified with the phrase “in Christ”or “in him.” Believers are chosen (Eph. 1:4), redeemed(Eph. 1:7), justified (Gal. 2:17), and sanctified (1Cor. 1:2)in Christ. Indeed, God has blessed believers “in the heavenlyrealms with every spiritual blessing in Christ” (Eph. 1:3).
With.Many of the components of salvation that believers experience aresaid to happen “with Christ.” Believers are united withChrist in his death, burial, and resurrection (Rom. 6:4–11;Gal. 2:20). With Christ, believers have been made alive, raised up,and seated in the heavenly realms (Eph. 2:4–6; Col. 2:13).Because of their union with Christ, believers share in hisinheritance (Rom. 8:16–17; Gal. 3:29; 1Pet. 1:4). Eventhe very life of the believer is said to be currently “hiddenwith Christ in God” (Col. 3:3).
Tensesof Salvation
TheBible speaks of salvation in the past, present, and future tenses.Pointing to a definitive experience in the past, Paul tells believersthat “in this hope we were saved” (Rom. 8:24). Yet he canalso speak of himself and other believers as those “who arebeing saved” (1Cor. 1:18; 2Cor. 2:15), pointing toa process that is ongoing. Just a few sentences after assuringbelievers that they have been justified already (Rom. 5:1–2),he can still say that believers will “be saved from God’swrath” through Christ (Rom. 5:9–10).
Theuse of these three tenses reflects the “already and not yet”dynamic of salvation. Through the obedience, death, resurrection, andascension of Jesus, God has rescued his people from their sins. Butthe final and complete realization of all the benefits of salvationmust still await the return of Christ and the establishment of a newheaven and earth (Rev. 19–22).
Conclusion
Withouta proper understanding of humankind’s plight as a result of itsrebellion, the Bible’s repeated emphasis on salvation makeslittle sense. Because sin is humanity’s greatest problem,salvation is humanity’s greatest need. Given the breadth,width, and depth of what God has done to save his people from theirsins through Jesus Christ, it is no wonder that the author of Hebrewsasks, “How shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation?”(2:3).
Clothing serves not only the utilitarian function of protecting the body from the elements (1 Tim. 6:8; James 2:15–16) but also a number of socially constructed functions, such as identifying the status of the wearer (James 2:2–3) and expressing cultural values such as modesty and beauty. The full range of such functions is attested in the Bible, and clothing plays a prominent symbolic role in a number of texts. Evidence concerning Israelite and other ancient clothing comes not only from the Bible but also from reliefs, pottery decorations, incised ivories, and, to a limited extent, textile fragments recovered in archaeological excavations.
In biblical lands most clothing was made from the wool of sheep or goats. More expensive articles (such as the garments of priests and aristocrats) could be made from linen, a textile made from the plant fiber flax. Other items, such as sandals, belts, and undergarments, were made from leather. Biblical law forbade the mixture of woolen and linen fibers in Israelite clothing (Deut. 22:11).
Articles of Clothing
A number of specific articles of clothing can be identified in the Bible. Egyptian and Mesopotamian pictures suggest that in OT times each nation was known for a distinctive costume or hairstyle. Some notion of how Israelite costume was perceived, at least that of royalty, may be derived from the depiction of the northern king Jehu (842–814 BC) and his retinue on the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III. In this image Israelites are depicted wearing softly pointed caps, pointed shoes, and fringed mantles.
In OT Israel, men wore an undergarment or loincloth held in place by a belt. This loincloth could be made of linen (Jer. 13:1) or leather (2 Kings 1:8). Over this was worn an ankle-length woolen robe or tunic. The tunic of Joseph, traditionally rendered as his “coat of many colors” (Gen. 37:3 KJV, following the LXX), is perhaps better described not as colorful but as “long-sleeved” (see also 2 Sam. 13:18 NASB). The corresponding garments worn by women were similar in appearance, though sufficiently distinct that cross-dressing could be prohibited (Deut. 22:5).
Outside the tunic were worn cloaks (Exod. 22:25–26), sashes (Isa. 22:21), and mantles (1 Kings 19:19). A crafted linen sash was a marketable item (Prov. 31:24), whereas a rope belt was a poor substitute (Isa. 3:24). Both Elijah and John the Baptist wore a belt of leather (2 Kings 1:8; Matt. 3:4; Mark 1:6).
The characteristic garment of the elite was a loose-fitting, wide-sleeved, often elegantly decorated royal robe (Heb. me’il ). This garment was worn by priests (Exod. 28:4), nobility, kings, and other highly placed members of Israelite society, such as Samuel (1 Sam. 15:27–28), Jonathan (1 Sam. 18:4), Saul (1 Sam. 24:4), David (1 Chron. 15:27), David’s daughter Tamar (2 Sam. 13:18), and Ezra (Ezra 9:3).
In the NT, the inner garment was the tunic (chitōn), and the outer garment was the cloak (himation). This distinction lies behind the famous command of Jesus: “From one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either” (Luke 6:29 ESV). The Gospel of John reports that the tunic taken from Jesus at the time of his death was made seamlessly from a single piece of cloth (John 19:23).
Footwear consisted of leather sandals attached to the feet by straps (John 1:27). Sandals were removed as a sign of respect in the presence of deity (Exod. 3:5; Josh. 5:15). The exchange of footwear also played a role in formalizing various legal arrangements (Ruth 4:7–8; see also Deut. 25:9).
Special Functions of Clothing
According to Genesis, the first humans lived initially without clothing or the shame of nakedness (Gen. 2:25). After eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve realized that they were naked and fashioned clothing from leaves (3:7). Later, God made “garments of skin” for Adam and his wife (3:21). The significance of this story and the meaning of the divinely fashioned garments have a long history of interpretation going back to antiquity. Clearly, however, the story illustrates that a basic function of clothing is to cover nakedness—a motif that soon after this story is featured again in the story of Noah and his sons (9:21–23).
Rebekah’s ploy to secure the birthright for her son Jacob involved disguising him in the clothing of his brother Esau (Gen. 27:15; see also Saul’s use of disguise in 1 Sam. 28:8). This tale illustrates how especially in a culture in which individuals owned what would, by modern standards, be considered a limited amount of clothing, clothing itself became an extension of the individual’s identity. In the same way, Jacob himself later was tricked into thinking that one of his own sons was dead, based on the identification of an article of clothing (Gen. 37:31–33). That Isaac could detect Esau’s distinctive smell on his clothing may also indicate the infrequency with which garments were changed and laundered (Gen. 27:27; see also Matt. 10:10). So closely was clothing identified with its owner that a garment could be used as collateral or a pledge, though biblical law regulates this practice for humanitarian reasons (Exod. 22:26). Perhaps because the production of clothing was labor intensive, making clothes for someone was sometimes considered an act of intimacy or an expression of love, so that descriptions of this aspect of clothing in the Bible are quite poignant (see 1 Sam. 2:19; Acts 9:39). When clothing wore out, it was discarded and replaced (Ps. 102:26; Isa. 51:6; Luke 12:33). During the forty years in the wilderness, as a special provision to the Israelites, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Deut. 8:4; 29:5; Neh. 9:21).
Clothing was an emblem not only of one’s identity but also of one’s office. Thus, when the authority of Elijah passed to his disciple Elisha, Elisha received his master’s cloak or mantle (2 Kings 2:13–14; see also Isa. 22:21). Examples of this function are multiplied when we consider the significance of clothing in symbolizing the role of priests in ancient Israel (e.g., Exod. 29:5–9; 39:27–31). The story of Tamar illustrates that the status of certain women was expressed by their clothing, including that of the prostitute (Gen. 38:15) and the widow (Gen. 38:14, 19).
Biblical texts reveal a rich gestural language involving clothing. In several biblical accounts, spreading the corner of one’s garment over a woman appears as a courtship or marriage ritual (Ruth 3:9; Ezek. 16:8). Giving garments as gifts was a way of honoring or elevating the recipient (Gen. 45:22; Judg. 14:12; Ezek. 16:10; Dan. 5:7), including royal investiture (Pss. 45:8; 93:1; 104:1). The guards who tortured Jesus prior to his crucifixion made light of his status as “king” by dressing him in a royal purple robe (Luke 23:11; John 19:2–3). Grasping someone’s garment, especially its hem, signified entreaty (1 Sam. 15:27–28; Zech. 8:23; Mark 5:27–28). Tearing one’s garments was a way of expressing despair or repentance (Gen. 37:29; Josh. 7:6; Judg. 11:35) or of lodging an especially strong protest (Num. 14:6; Matt. 26:65; Acts 14:14). In some cases, the tearing clothing was accompanied by the act of donning sackcloth and ashes, which signified a further degree of self-humiliation or mourning (Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 19:1; Matt. 11:21; in Jon. 3:8 animals are included as well, perhaps to comic effect). In such instances, shoes and headwear were also removed (2 Sam. 15:30; Isa. 20:2; Ezek. 24:17). A number of these customs can be understood in terms of the correlation of nakedness with shame, and clothing with honor. Military captives often were stripped naked as a form of humiliation (Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:10; Amos 2:16). In Luke 8:27 Jesus encounters a demon-possessed man who neither lived in a house nor wore clothing. In this case, the lack of clothing represents the full measure of human degradation.
Clothing stands symbolically for attributes such as righteousness and salvation (Job 29:14; Ps. 132:9; Isa. 61:10), the resurrection (1 Cor. 15:53–54; 2 Cor. 5:2–4), glory and honor (Job 40:10), union with Christ (Rom. 13:14; Gal. 3:27), compassion and other virtues (Col. 3:12; 1 Pet. 5:5), and purity (Rev. 3:18).
A song of worship and praise to God. The NIV only uses theword once in the OT, in Ps. 40:3, referring to a “hymn ofpraise” to God. The Hebrew word behind this phrase is tehillah,which is common in the OT and is elsewhere translated simply as“praise,” especially in the psalms. Psalms were part ofIsrael’s worship, and so such “hymns of praise” toGod are more common than the English suggests.
Thecontent of these hymns is not laid out for modern readers, but itinvolves things such as thanksgiving, gratitude, or generally givingGod due recognition for who he is (e.g., Ps. 66:2) and what he hasdone (e.g., 106:2, 12).
Inthe NT, the word occurs only a handful of times in the NIV, and thereis very little indication what these hymns were about. Here too,generally we can say that a hymn is a particular type of song ofpraise to God.
InMatt. 26:30; Mark 14:26, Jesus and the disciples sang a hymn at theconclusion of the Lord’s Supper. Since this meal was patternedafter the Passover, it is likely that one or more of the Hallelpsalms (Pss. 111–118) were sung. (“Hallel” means“praise” in Hebrew and is related to tehillah). The Greekword behind this use in the Gospels, hymneō, is the origin ofthe English word “hymn.” In Acts 16:25 Paul and Silassang hymns at midnight while in prison, although we are told nothingabout their content.
In1 Cor. 14:26 Paul is instructing his readers about orderly worship.According to the NIV, one of the elements of worship includes hymns,although the Greek word here is psalmos (the word used to refer tothe book of Psalms in Luke 20:42; 24:44; Acts 1:20; 13:30), which theKJV renders there as “psalm.” There is certainlysignificant overlap between hymns and psalms, since both involvepraising God, but evidently there is some distinction too, as can beseen in Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16, where Paul makes a distinctionbetween “psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit.”Perhaps these terms do not reflect clearly marked categories inPaul’s mind. In Eph. 5:19 all three are directed to God “from[the] heart,” and in Col. 3:16 they are sung with “gratitude,”both of which reflect the use of psalms in the OT.
Biblicalscholars also refer to other portions of the Bible as “hymns,”even though the word is not used. The Song of Moses (Exod. 15:1–18)and the Song of Hannah (1Sam. 2:1–10) are sometimescalled “hymns” simply as a convenient designation(although Hannah’s is more a prayer). The same goes for Mary’ssong, the Magnificat (Luke 1:46–55), which clearly is modeledafter Hannah’s song, and Zechariah’s song, the Benedictus(Luke 1:68–79), which reflects OT prophetic poems. Elsewherebiblical scholars detect the possibility of fragments of preexisting“hymns” that were incorporated into the NT (e.g., Phil.2:6–11). This suggests to some that there was some hymn-writingactivity in the early church.
Godthe Worker
Abiblical theology of work starts with God as the creator of allthings. In the OT, the verb bara’ (“to create”) isused only with God as subject. The first verb in the Bible (Gen.1:1), it occurs also in many other texts that describe Godaccomplishing what only God can do. Other terms such as yatsar (“toform, fashion”) and ’asah (“to make, do”) areused numerous times throughout the OT with either God or humans assubjects.
Thesethree terms reinforce the portrayal of God as worker in Gen. 1–2(cf. Isa. 45:7). God creates light and darkness; sky and earth; sun,moon, and stars; land and sea; plant and animal life; andhumankind—in sum, all that is. He forms the “man”(Heb. ’adam) from the dust of the ground, bringing him to lifeby breathing into him the breath of life.
Elsewherein the OT God is said to build, build up, or rebuild/restore (Heb.banah [e.g., Pss. 102:16; 147:2; Jer. 24:6; Amos 9:11]).Interestingly, God takes a rib from the man, which he then makes(lit., “builds into” [Heb. banah+ le]) a woman(Gen. 2:22). He founds (Heb. kun) the earth (Isa. 45:18) andstretches out (Heb. natah) the heavens (Zech. 12:1). Further, wisdomis God’s “craftsman” (Heb. ’amon), takingpart in the world’s creation (Prov. 8:30). The NT revealsChrist as the one through whom God creates all things (John 1:1–3;Col. 1:16). This brief sketch suggests the range of ways in whichGod’s work is described.
HumanLabor
Ideally,work is performed as service to God (Col. 3:17, 22–24). Work isone way we express the divine image. God’s creation mandate tofill, subdue, and rule the earth implies work (Gen. 1:26–28),and God places the man in the garden “to work it and take careof it” (Gen. 2:15). The importance of work for human dignity aswell as survival undergirds the laws of gleaning that make provisionfor the poor to gather their own food (e.g., Deut. 24:19–22).The expansion of human technologies and occupations (mela’kah[see Exod. 12:16]) reflects that dignity and God’s own diverseworkmanship. Job 28 celebrates human industry and achievement whilesubordinating all to the prevailing value of wisdom, rooted in “thefear of the Lord.” Given the indispensable role of work withinthe limits of human life, diligence is commended (Eccles. 3:9–10),idleness condemned (Prov. 10:4; 12:24; 21:5; 2Thess. 3:6–10).Work is essentially God’s good gift to us in creation.
Butwork now has negative aspects. In response to Adam’s sin, Godcurses the ground, introducing “painful toil” into thework cycle (Gen. 3:17–19; 5:29). We now eke out our living byhardship, finding frustration instead of bounty—a lifelongreminder that we are made of dust and will return to dust. The bookof Ecclesiastes echoes this note of futility and raises sharpquestions about the lasting value of human labor (1:2–3, 14;2:4–11, 17–23; 3:9; 4:4–6; 8:16–17). Sin anddeath haunt the unfolding occupations in Gen. 4, and the episode ofthe tower of Babel in Gen. 11 signals God’s judgment on humanpretension (cf. James 4:13–16). Excessive toil (workaholism) isa pitfall, not a virtue, for it expresses reliance on self ratherthan on God, who builds, protects, and gives rest (Ps. 127:1–2).Oppressive, unjust working conditions are cause for lament, and theyincur God’s judgment (Exod. 5:6–19; Prov. 14:31; James5:4–6).
Thus,Israel’s labor policy is to reflect God’s covenantfaithfulness, generosity, and concern for the vulnerable. Moses’law places limits on employers/masters to protect employees, slaves,and foreign workers from exploitation. The primary limit is God’scommand that Israel keep the Sabbath holy by a complete cessation oflabor (Exod. 20:8–11; Deut. 5:12–15). This moveprioritizes God’s covenant above human labor and sets a rhythmof work and rest. Exodus grounds the Sabbath in God’s rest fromhis work of creation on the seventh day. Deuteronomy ties it toIsrael’s history of slavery in Egypt and deliverance by God; bykeeping the Sabbath, Israel shows gratitude to God and guards againstreplicating Egypt’s oppressive policies.
Exodus31–32 portrays work in its best and worst lights. The properinterplay of work and rest is seen in chapter 31, which narrates thedivinely empowered work on the tabernacle, followed by a strongreminder to keep the Sabbath as a “sign” between God andIsrael. In contrast, chapter 32 portrays artisanship put to the worstuse, the making of a golden idol. Aaron fashions gold with a tool andmakes the calf image, but later he tells Moses, “I threw [theirgold jewelry] into the fire, and out came this calf!” (32:24).This remark anticipates the prophets’ later mockery ofidol-makers (e.g., Isa. 44:9–20) and raises the issue ofpersonal responsibility for the outcome of one’s labor: Aaronseeks to avoid being implicated in Israel’s idolatry byconcealing his own role in the project.
Publiclabor issues increase in complexity when Israel adopts human kingshipand engages in international trade (e.g., 1Sam. 8; 1Kings9:15–23). Babylon deals a decisive blow to Judah’sstatehood by deporting leaders and skilled workers. Many of theseestablish such viable, productive new lives in Babylon that whenCyrus later allows the exiled Judeans to return, they choose toremain.
TheNT assumes the legitimacy of work and adopts the OT’s view thatwithin proper limits work is a good gift of God. Jesus, however, hascome to do his Father’s “work” (John 5:16–18),which entails calling some people away from their normal occupationsto follow him, as well as a new approach to Sabbath observance (Mark2:21–27; 3:4). These moves signal the urgency and newness ofthe kingdom of God. Consequently, the apostles are “co-workersin God’s service” (1Cor. 3:9), and Christians are“God’s handiwork” (Eph. 2:10). In light of theresurrection, we offer to God work (Gk. ergon) and labor (Gk. kopos),not in futility but in hope (1Cor. 15:58; cf. Rev. 14:13).
Showing
1
to
50
of299
results
1. Fear and the Farmer
Illustration
John R. Steward
A farmer was being questioned by a lawyer during a trial concerning an accident on a highway. The lawyer asked the farmer, "Is it true, Mr. Jones, that when the highway patrol officer came over to you after the accident, you said, 'I feel fine'?"
Farmer Jones began to answer by saying, "Well, now, me and my cow Bessie were driving down the highway in my pickup truck when..." At this point the attorney interrupted, saying, "Please just answer my question with a yes or a no; did you say to the officer, 'I feel fine'?" Farmer Jones then tried to answer the question again. He said, "Well, now, me and my cow Bessie were driving down the highway in my pickup truck when..." The attorney stopped him again and this time asked the judge to intervene. He said, "Your honor, would you please instruct the witness to simply answer my question with a yes or a no." The judge said, "Why don't we just let him tell his story?"
So, Farmer Jones told his story. "Me and my cow Bessie were driving down the highway in my pickup truck. Bessie, of course, was in the bed of the truck. I heard a loud bang and knew that I had blown out a tire. The truck went flying off the road and landed in a ditch. I went flying out of the truck on one side of the highway and Bessie landed on the other side. When I woke up, the highway patrol officer came over to me and said that Bessie was in awful shape. He then went back over to Bessie, pulled out his gun and shot her dead. Then he came over to me and asked me how I felt and I said, " 'I feel fine, just fine.' "
Fear causes us to do things and say things that we might not do otherwise. Fear can be a powerful motivator in our lives. Too often fear is a destructive force with little redeeming value. In this scripture reading, the Apostle Paul encourages us to "let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts...." He even goes on to say that we have been called to this experience of peace in Jesus Christ. We were built and designed by God to be a people of faith, not fear. Faith in the one who redeems us will lead to peace.
Source: Parables, Etc. (Platteville, Colorado: Saratoga Press), October 1991. Used by permission.
2. An Old Enemy
Illustration
John E. Sumwalt
We met on a commercial flight between Minneapolis and Detroit sometime in the late 1950s. He was Oriental. It was almost 15 years after the war. I don't remember his name, but I still have his business card somewhere in my desk. I'm not sure why I sat beside him. In those days the airlines still allowed you to pick your own seat. I could have sat with any number of people, or I could have sat by myself. For some reason I chose to sit beside him.
The plane took off, and after we had been flying for a little while I asked him if he was Japanese. He said yes. On an impulse I decided to tell him a story that I had just heard -- about a man who died and was given the option of going to heaven or hell. He decided to go to hell because he thought that was where his friends were most likely to be. When he arrived in hell he discovered that there was plenty of rice and other good things to eat, but everyone was starving because the chopsticks were all six feet long. He didn't like the looks of things in hell, so he asked if he could go to heaven instead. He was given permission to go and when he arrived he discovered that everything was exactly the same, except in heaven they were feeding each other.
"Oh," my companion said, "you must be a Christian. I am too." He went on to tell that his mother was a Christian and that he had become a Christian after the war. I asked him what he had done during the war. He said that he had been a fighter pilot in the Southwest Pacific. I told him that I had been a fighter pilot too, in the same area. We quickly compared notes and discovered that we had flown missions over Formosa at the same time. Neither of us said it aloud but I'm sure it occurred to him as it did to me that had we met in the air during the war we would have tried to kill each other.
We went on to talk about our work. He was serving on the Economic Council of the United Nations as a representative of Japan. I thought about the great number of people throughout the world that he was able to help with his work, and me with mine, and it struck me what a great tragedy it would have been if one of us had killed the other. When I got off that plane I didn't hate the Japanese people anymore, and I knew the meaning of forgiveness.
Author's Note: Kendall W. Anderson related this account of his unexpected meeting with his old enemy to the author in September of 1990. Ken served as a pilot with the 39th Fighter Squadron in the Southwest Pacific in World War II. He is a graduate of Bangor Theological seminary and served pastorates in New England and Wisconsin before retiring in 1984. Ken resides in Turtle Lake, Wisconsin, where he does some counseling and serves as the editor of the 39th Fighter Squadron Association Newsletter.
3. A Job Well Done
Illustration
H. A. Ironside
When I was a boy, I felt it was both a duty and a privilege to help my widowed mother make ends meet by finding employment in vacation time, on Saturdays and other times when I did not have to be in school. For quite a while I worked for a Scottish shoemaker, or "cobbler," as he preferred to be called, an Orkney man, named Dan Mackay. He was a forthright Christian and his little shop was a real testimony for Christ in the neighborhood. The walls were literally covered with Bible texts and pictures, generally taken from old-fashioned Scripture Sheet Almanacs, so that look where one would, he found the Word of God staring him in the face. There were John 3:16 and John 5:24, Romans 10:9, and many more.
On the little counter in front of the bench on which the owner of the shop sat, was a Bible, generally open, and a pile of gospel tracts. No package went out of that shop without a printed message wrapped inside. And whenever opportunity offered, the customers were spoken to kindly and tactfully about the importance of being born again and the blessedness of knowing that the soul is saved through faith in Christ. Many came back to ask for more literature or to inquire more particularly as to how they might find peace with God, with the blessed results that men and women were saved, frequently right in the shoe shop.
It was my chief responsibility to pound leather for shoe soles. A piece of cowhide would be cut to suite, then soaked in water. I had a flat piece of iron over my knees and, with a flat-headed hammer, I pounded these soles until they were hard and dry. It seemed an endless operation to me, and I wearied of it many times.
What made my task worse was the fact that, a block away, there was another shop that I passed going and coming to or from my home, and in it sat a jolly, godless cobbler who gathered the boys of the neighborhood about him and regaled them with lewd tales that made him dreaded by respectable parents as a menace to the community. Yet, somehow, he seemed to thrive and that perhaps to a greater extent than my employer, Mackay. As I looked in his window, I often noticed that he never pounded the soles at all, but took them from the water, nailed them on, damp as they were, and with the water splashing from them as he drove each nail in.
One day I ventured inside, something I had been warned never to do. Timidly, I said, "I notice you put the soles on while still wet. Are they just as good as if they were pounded?" He gave me a wicked leer as he answered, "They come back all the quicker this way, my boy!"
"Feeling I had learned something, I related the instance to my boss and suggested that I was perhaps wasting time in drying out the leather so carefully. Mr. Mackay stopped his work and opened his Bible to the passage that reads, "Whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of god."
"Harry," he said, "I do not cobble shoes just for the four bits and six bits (50c or 75c) that I get from my customers. I am doing this for the glory of God. I expect to see every shoe I have ever repaired in a big pile at the judgment seat of Christ, and I do not want the Lord to say to me in that day, 'Dan, this was a poor job. You did not do your best here.' I want Him to be able to say, 'Well done, good and faithful servant.'"
Then he went on to explain that just as some men are called to preach, so he was called to fix shoes, and that only as he did this well would his testimony count for God. It was a lesson I have never been able to forget. Often when I have been tempted to carelessness, and to slipshod effort, I have thought of dear, devoted Dan Mackay, and it has stirred me up to seek to do all as for Him who died to redeem me.
4. Our King's Righteous Attire
Illustration
Michael P. Green
In the fable “The Emperor’s New Clothes, an unscrupulous con artist, seeking royal favor, promises to provide the emperor with an outfit of clothing that would be very special. So delicate and rare would be the fabric that the clothes would be undetectable to the touch. More importantly, they would be invisible to anyone of poor character or inferior ability. When the emperor received the empty hanger on which his new outfit was supposedly displayed, he could hardly admit not seeing the clothes without impugning his own suitability for royal office. So he admired the clothes (as did his advisors), put them on, and strutted proudly around his kingdom—stark naked!
We Christians can fall into the same trap. In the first part of Colossians 3, Paul said to “take off” practices such as fornication, lying, greed, and so forth. But the point is that we are to “put on” new practices to replace the old ones. Have we really donned those positive attitudes and actions of compassion, kindness, humility?
Sometimes the answer is “No.” Instead, we parade around showing off our new clothes of righteousness and refusing to admit the truth: that we are really naked. And we walk about, blinded to the fact that the world is snickering behind our backs because the righteousness we think we're wearing isn't the righteousness of Christ; rather, it isour own failed efforts!
5. Dance the Offering Forward
Illustration
James W. Moore
A missionary in Africa was preaching his first sermon in a mission church. When time came for the offering, the people danced their offerings forward. They danced and sang praise to God as they brought their offerings to the altar. It was a beautiful moment. What do you think? Should we get our ushers to do that?
After the service, he asked one of the people, "Why do you dance and sing when you bring your offering forward on Sunday morning?" Back came the answer: "How could we not dance? We are so grateful to God for what He has done for us in sending Jesus Christ to save us, that we have to dance and sing our thanksgiving and besides it says in the Bible, God loves a cheerful giver."
Let me ask you something. Do you feel gratitude to God that strongly? Do you have a strong case of the "can't help its" when it come to gratitude? When you are Christians, gratitude is the spirit of your lifestyle. When you are a Christian, you can't help but be grateful!
6. I Choose You
Illustration
Victoria Brooks
There's an old, word-of-mouth story, which is probably aprochryphal, about Abraham Lincoln visitinga slave auction. Observing the proceedings from the rear of the crowd, his attention was caught by a strong, defiant, young slave girl with sharp, angry eyes.
Something in her manner pierced him; the sheer intensity of her gaze spoke to him of the anguish of her captivity and her longing for freedom. When it was her turn to step to the auction block, he and several others bid. With each rise in price, her hostility grew. Finally, Lincoln won, paid the money, and had her brought to him.
She came, rigid with resistance, arms tied behind her back, leg chains dragging.
“Untie her,” Lincoln said.
“Oh no, sir!” her auctioneer responded, pulling her forward with a jerk. “She be a wild one! Ain’t no end o’ trouble in her. Ya best git her home afore ya be takin’ her chains off.” With that, he secured her to the horse rail, turned, and left.
Lincoln stood quietly for a moment, looking at the young woman. “What is your name?” he asked.
She did not respond.
“What are you called?” he repeated.
Steeling herself for the inevitable blow, she set her jaw, stared at the ground, and said nothing.
Taking the bill of sale from his pocket, Lincoln read it carefully, then marked the bottom with his signature. Slowly he stooped, undid the clasp of her ankle irons, and untied the rope that had cut into her wrists.
“You’re free to go, Sara-Jane,” he said, handing her the document. “You are free to choose your own life now.”
Reaching again into his pocket, he drew out a card and several coins. “If you have any trouble,” he said, “call on me at this address and I will help you.”
As the reality of what she had heard seeped slowly through her brain and into her muscles, the young woman grew weak and unable to sustain her rage. Minutes ticked by as anger gave way to confusion, and confusion to disbelief. Like someone in the grip of a personal earthquake, shockwaves of agonizing hope rippled through the muscles of her face. As she fought for control, her jaw clenched, then settled again; her muscular shoulders convulsed, then were still. Finally, a large, work-callused hand rose to take the papers and the money. Instantly, she turned and ran.
Lincoln watched as she disappeared down the rutted road.
Taking the reins of his horse, he began to mount when he saw her suddenly stop. Some distance away, she stood totally still. More minutes passed. Then, slowly, deliberately, she made her way back. Standing in front of him, she handed him the money.
“I choose you,” she said, looking up for the first time into Lincoln’s gaunt, craggy face. “You say I choose my own life now,” she continued haltingly, “ ... that I work for who I want. You give me papers to show that I be free.” The deep sinkholes of her oval face were wet with emotion. “If that be true . . . if I be free . . . then I choose you.”
7. Heirs According to the Promise
Illustration
King Duncan
There is a legend which comes from the French Revolution. King Louis XVI and his queen were condemned to death. They were escorted to the guillotine in a public square in Paris where they were beheaded. The mob was not satisfied. "Bring out the Prince," they cried. "He is next!!" The young boy was terrified. He was only six years old, but he was next in line to be King. In the mind of the crowd, he had to be eliminated.
According to the story, the young prince stood on the platform trembling in his black velvet coat. The mob screamed at him, "Down with Royalty! Eliminate all royalty! Kill the Prince!!" Suddenly a shout came from the crowd: "Don't kill him. Killing him is too good for him. It will only send him to heaven, and that is too good for royalty. I say turn him over to Meg, the Witch. She'll teach him to be a sinner, and when he dies his soul will go to hell. That's what royalty deserves."
So according to the legend, that is exactly what happened. The officials turned the young prince over to the witch. The vile woman tried to teach him foul language, but every time she prompted the Prince to be profane, he would stubbornly stamp his feet and clench his fists and shout: "I will not say it. I will not speak that way. I was born a King, and I will not speak like I live in a gutter."
Thisapocryphal story speaks toPaul's words: "You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise."
8. The Gifts Are Unrelated
Illustration
Paul Lintern
Lydia loved to give things away crafts, baked goods, items she picked up at auctions or sales. It seemed her mind was always thinking about who might enjoy a pick-me-up, an act of encouragement, an expression of love.
When she baked, she baked enough to fill several paper plates to take to neighbors, people at work, her daughter's teacher, some shut-ins at church.
When she learned a new craft, everyone knew it, because Lydia would share with them.
Once, at a garage sale, she spent a dollar for a whole box of old animal figurines ü muddy, greasy, ready-for-the-trash figurines. She cleaned each one with an old toothbrush, glued it to a three-by-five card, and wrote a scripture verse on the card.
On the card with a little bird, she wrote, "Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your Heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?"
Placing a sheep on a card, she wrote, "The Lord is my Shepherd."
One figure was an armadillo; on that card, she wrote, "Put on the whole armor of God."
And the figure of the pink and purple mouse, dressed in red bow tie and rainbow colored top hat, she wrote, "Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your minds."
She greatly enjoyed this project, because she pictured in advance each person to whom she would give that figurine. The zebra was for the nurse who cared for her aunt, the lion for the old man who lives alone in the house behind her, the turtle for the little boy at church who broke his leg. As she delivered them she enjoyed the responses of others and her own joy within.
One day, soon after she had delivered the figurines, Lydia was surprised to see at her door old Mr. Lyons (the one to whom she had given the lion). He handed her a little box which contained a beautifully carved teakwood dove ü smooth, intricately detailed, right down to the feathers and the compassionate eyes.
Lydia's eyes widened. "Oh Mr. Lyons, this is beautiful. Where did you find this?"
His eyes sparked as he said, "Inside a piece of wood; of course I had to whittle away some of the wood to find it."
"I am so overwhelmed. This is so beautiful, such a special part of you. I don't know what to say. I gave you so little. You gave me so much. How can I ever thank you?"
"You already have. This is my gift to you. Your gratitude is your gift to me. They are not dependent on each other; they are both gifts. Like God's gift of grace, and our gifts of gratitude."
He smiled and excused himself to return home. Lydia smiled with a tear in her eye and a rush of joy in her heart. As she walked back to the kitchen, she saw that Mr. Lyons had placed a card in the box. It read, "For we are what God has made us, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand to be our way of life."
9. 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).
10. In All Things Be Thankful - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
Back during the dark days of 1929, a group of ministers in the Northeast, all graduates of the Boston School of Theology, gathered to discuss how they should conduct their Thanksgiving Sunday services. Things were about as bad as they could get, with no sign of relief. The bread lines were depressingly long, the stock market had plummeted, and the term Great Depression seemed an apt description for the mood of the country. The ministers thought they should only lightly touch upon the subject Thanksgiving in deference to the human misery all about them. After all, there was to be thankful for. But it was Dr. William L. Stiger, pastor of a large congregation in the city that rallied the group. This was not the time, he suggested, to give mere passing mention to Thanksgiving, just the opposite. This was the time for the nation to get matters in perspective and thank God for blessings always present, but perhaps suppressed due to intense hardship.
I suggest to you the ministers struck upon something. The most intense moments of thankfulness are not found in times of plenty, but when difficulties abound. Think of the Pilgrims that first Thanksgiving. Half their number dead, men without a country, but still there was thanksgiving to God. Their gratitude was not for something but in something. It was that same sense of gratitude that lead Abraham Lincoln to formally establish the first Thanksgiving Day in the midst of national civil war, when the butcher's list of casualties seemed to have no end and the very nation struggled for survival.
Perhaps in your own life, right now, intense hardship. You are experiencing your own personal Great Depression. Why should you be thankful this day? May I suggest three things?
1. We must learn to be thankful or we become bitter.
2. We must learn to be thankful or we will become discouraged.
3. We must learn to be thankful or we will grow arrogant and self-satisfied.
11. Our Gunsback Awakening
Illustration
By the time he was twenty-one years of age, Albert Schweitzer was already successful and world-famous as a musician and a philosopher. Then he entered medical school, became a medical doctor, and gave the remainder of his long life to the healing ministries of the mission hospital he established at Lambarene in French Equatorial Africa. What brought about this change in the focus and direction of this man's life?
Well, in a word, he became a dedicated and committed Christian. There came to him, he says, certain awareness, an awakening. He tells us about it in his book Out of My Life and Thoughts. He writes of "one brilliant summer morning" at Gunsback in 1896 when "there came to me, as I awoke, the thought that I must not accept this happiness as a matter of course, but must give something in return for it."
And so he did. His surging gratitude of spirit overflowed in kind acts of compassion touching the lives of more than 200,000 persons.
You know, somewhere along the way most of us need some kind of "Gunsback awakening." We need to become aware of how blessed we are and resolve to do something about it. May a Gunsback awareness of God's great goodness come with overflowing power upon us as we wait and worship here today.
12. The Gratitude Attitude
Illustration
Billy D. Strayhorn
Rev. John R. Ramsey tells how in one church a certain person provided him with a rose boutonniere for the lapel of his suit every Sunday. At first he really appreciated it but then it sort of became routine. Then one Sunday it became very special.
As he was leaving the Sunday Service a young boy walked up to him and said, "Sir, what are you going to do with your flower?" At first the preacher didn't know what the boy was talking about. When it sank in, he pointed to the rose on his lapel and asked the boy, "Do you mean this?"
The boy said, "Yes, sir. If you're just going to throw it away, I would like it."
The preacher smiled and told him he could have the flower and then casually asked what he was going to do with it. The boy, who was probably no more than 10 years old, looked up at the preacher and said, "Sir, I'm going to give it to my granny. My mother and father divorced last year. I was living with my mother, but she married again, and wanted me to live with my father. I lived with him for a while, but he said I couldn't stay, so he sent me to live with my grandmother. She is so good to me. She cooks for me and takes care of me. She has been so good to me that I wanted to give her that pretty flower for loving me."
When the little boy finished, the preacher could hardly speak. His eyes filled with tears and he knew he had been touched by God. He reached up and unpinned the rose. With the flower in his hand, he looked at the boy and said, "Son, that is the nicest thing that I've ever heard but you can't have this flower because it's not enough. If you'll look in front of the pulpit, you'll see a big bouquet of flowers. Different families buy them for the Church each week. Please take those flowers to your granny because she deserves the very best."
Then the boy made one last statement which Rev. Ramsey said he will always treasure. The boy said, "What a wonderful day! I asked for one flower but got a beautiful bunch of flowers."
That's the thankful spirit. That's the gratitude attitude. And it's that attitude that should guide our giving and our lives. Like that boy's granny, God has blessed us so much. God has been so good to us that giving shouldn't even be a question. It should just flow from us naturally.
13. Hiding from Transformed Living
Illustration
Simeon the Stylite separated himself from sinful society by choosing to live at the top of a narrow pillar many stories high. He spent thirty-seven years living at the top of various pillars as a sign of devotion. Other monks became jealous of Simeon's religious devotion, so they began building their own pillars to live on. Soon, pillar-sitting became a full-blown competition.
Agnes de Rochier was a nun who lived in the 1400s. At the age of eighteen, she asked to be entombed in a cell inside a church. Workmen built a brick cell around Agnes' body, leaving only a small opening through which Agnes could breathe, hear the prayers and Masses performed, and receive food. She lived eighty years inside this self-imposed prison. Instead of going out into the world to minister to others and to share the good news of Christ, people like Simeon and Agnes spent their lives in this absurd, self-contained state of supposed devotion. There are still people today who believe that the Christian life is one of rules and regulations, rather than transformed living.
14. Our Relationship with God
Illustration
John P. Jewell
One of the reasons people tend to see faith as a religionaboutGod instead of a relationshipwithGod is the sense that they are not worthy of the attention of an Almighty God."My problems are too small for God to care about."or"With all the pain and suffering in this world, why would God care about me?"are a couple of ways people give expression to this sense of insignificance. The sense is the one expressed by our theme title today,"How can one so great care for one so small."
Have you ever felt that sense of insignificance? There have been times when I've gazed into the incredible expanse of a starlit sky and felt ever so small and insignificant. Even our planet is hardly a speck of dust in the vast cosmos.
And yet, the heart of the lesson for today says that God is attentive to the heartache and suffering of all persons, no matter how insignificant they may seem to the world around them.
Religion can get in the way of a relationship with God. Faith is not about rules, regulations and religion. It is about we human beings reaching out to a God who reaches out to us through Jesus Christ who reaches into the pain and anguish of our living. The good news for the people in our scripture lesson is that the barriers all fall away. For the woman, for Jairus and for the little girl - the greatness of God and the good news of Jesus Christ eliminate all obstacles to health and life.
And aren't you glad that Christ cares more about our wholeness and our living than he does about the niggling details of religious convention? When I am in anguish and wish for the presence of Christ, I do not need to worry that I am too great a sinner or that some folks would consider me to be unacceptable I know that Jesus cared for a woman who was a social reject and for a little girl that was not among the children of his followers.
15. Christ Is Willing to Heal
Illustration
Let me share a story about Michael Wayne Hunter who was put on death row in California in 1983, in San Quentin Prison. After his third year on death row something happened. One day he was getting ready to spend time exercising when the guard said, "You're going to miss Mother Teresa. She's coming today to see you guys." Yea, sure, he said, "one more of those designs they have on us." A little later he heard more commotion about it and thought it might be true.
Another guard said, "Don't go into your cells and lock up. Mother Teresa stayed to see you guys." So Michael jogged up to the front in gym shorts and a tattered basketball shirt with the arms ripped out, and on the other side of the security screen was this tiny woman who looked 100 years old.
Yes, it was Mother Teresa.
This hardened prisoner wrote about his experience, he said, "You have to understand that, basically, I'm a dead man. I don't have to observe any sort of social convention; and as a result, I can break all the rules, say what I want. But one look at this Nobel Prize winner, this woman so many people view as a living saint, and I was speechless."
Incredible vitality and warmth came from her wizened, piercing eyes. She smiled at him, blessed a religious medal, and put it in his hands. This murderer who wouldn't have walked voluntarily down the hall to see the Warden, the Governor, the President, or the Pope, stood before this woman, and all he could say was, "Thank you, Mother Teresa."
At one point Mother Teresa turned and pointed her hand at the sergeant, "What you do to these men," she told him, "you do to God." The sergeant almost faded away in surprise and wonder.
That day was a turning point in the life of Michael Wayne Hunter. This San Quentin Death Row prisoner was cleansed by that experience. Life changed. Suddenly there was meaning to it. So drastic was the change a new trial was set and the death penalty was not sought. The verdict was guilty on both counts of first degree murder but a new sentence was given: Life without the possibility of parole. Prosecution did not seek the death penalty because Mr. Hunter was now a model prisoner and an award-winning writer. He is one other thing: A testimony that Christ still is willing to heal, still willing to touch the untouchable, and to make us whole.
16. How Not to Do It
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
The sheriff's office in a Texas city once distributed a list of rules titled "How to Raise a Juvenile Delinquent in Your Own Family":
Begin with infancy to give the child everything he wants. This will insure his believing that the world owes him a living.
Pick up everything he leaves lying around. This will teach him he can always throw off responsibility on others.
Take his part against neighbors, teachers, policemen. They are all prejudiced against your child. He is a "free spirit" and never wrong.
Finally, prepare yourself for a life of grief. You're going to have it.
17. The Marks of a Cult
Illustration
Staff
Marks of a Cult:
- Authoritarian: There is almost always a central, charismatic, living human leader who commands total loyalty and allegiance.
- Oppositional: Their beliefs, practices and values are counter to those of the dominant culture.
- Exclusivistic: They are the only group that possesses the "truth."
- Legalistic: Rules and regulations abound governing spiritual matters and the details of everyday living.
- Subjective: They emphasize the experiential, the feelings and the emotions. This is usually accompanied by an anti- intellectualism.
- Persecution-conscious: The groups feel they are being singled out by mainstream Christians, the press, parents, and the government.
- Sanction-oriented: They require conformity in practice and belief, and exercise sanctions against the wayward.
- Esoteric: They promote a religion of secrecy and concealment. Truth is taught on two levels, inner truth and outer truth.
- Anti-sacerdotal: There are no paid clergy or professional religious functionaries.
18. Be Careful How You Live - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
Years ago, Harry Emerson Fosdick, then at the height of his influence as minister of the Riverside Church, New York City, was making a tour of Palestine and other countries of the Near and Middle East. He was invited to give an address at the American University of Beirut, Lebanon, where the student body comprised citizens of many countries and representatives from sixteen different religions. What could one say that would be relevant or of interest to so mixed and varied a group? This is how Fosdick began: "I do not ask anyone here to change his religion; but I do ask all of you to face up to this question: What is your religion doing to your character?"
This was a call to consider one of the great issues of human belief: religion and life, Christianity and character, word and spirit. Emerson once said, "What you are speaks so loudly I cannot hear a word you say." Jesus' discourse in this whole sixth chapter of the Gospel of John had two foci - spirit and life. "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." By this he meant that those who appropriated his spirit, i.e., fed upon him as the bread of life, would find, thereby, a fulfillment and satisfaction no other means could give.
The traditions of the world of his time, of course, had a different emphasis. The Greeks were in search of a formula for life, a slogan by which to perform, but such could never claim the commitment of the human will. The Jews had their Law, demanding obedience to every detail as the requisite to the good life, but St. Paul discovered that a set of rules could never provide salvation nor solve the deadly problem of sin and moral failure. Jesus, however, came with a new key to true life: accept his spirit, surrender to the claim of his will, allow him to enter the stream of everyday living; and, in this commitment, all we say and do will reflect the influence of his life within us.
What does this do for and with those who resolve to do it? How has it worked in the Christian story? The world saw this effect in the spirit of the early church, the spirit of human conduct, and in the power to realize what the Christian story promises.
1. The New Spirit's Effecton the Early Church.
2. The New Spirit'sEffectupon Human Conduct.
3. The Power to Realize the Christian Story's Promises.
19. The Little Orphan Girl
Illustration
Mark Adams
After the first World War the United States gave vast sums of money to the dislocated orphans of Europe, but they still didn’t have enough money to meet the staggering need. In one of the places where they had set up an orphanage with funds from the states, a man came in leading a little girl. He was very thin, obviously suffering from starvation.
She also showed signs of malnutrition, eyes too large, her little abdomen distended,and her thin little legs and arms too small and too thin for her age. Theman led her in and said to the person in charge, “I would like you to take in my little girl.”
The official at the desk asked him if she was his daughter and he said, “Yes.” He asked if the mother had been killed in the war and again the man said, “Yes.” The official then said, “We’re very sorry, but our rule here is that only full orphans can receive any help. If one of the parents is living then we can’t take responsibility, because we just don’t have enough room. There are too many full orphans for us to take a half orphan.”
The father looked down at his little girl, and then he turned and said, "You don’t understand. I’m sick. I was in a German prison during the war. I was half starved, and now I can’t work. I can barely stagger around. I brought her down for you to take care of her.”
And again the official said, “We’re sorry sir, but there’s nothing we can do. That’s the rule. We only care for full orphans.”
The father thought a moment and said, “Are you saying that if I were dead, you’d take care of my little girl,feed her, and she could live and have clothing and a home?”
The official replied, “Well, yes, that’s the rule.”
Then the father reached down and pulled his daughter’s thin little body up to himself and hugged her hard and kissed her. Then he put her hand in the hand of the hand of the man at the desk and told him, “I’ll arrange that,” and then he walked out of the room and committed suicide.
Often, we put "rules" and "restrictions" on God's love that we bestow upon others, according to our own preferences and ideals. But fortunately for us, God does not do the same. "For whoever knocks, the door will be opened."
20. Ten Rules For a Happy Life
Illustration
Staff
Ten rules for happier living:
- Give something away (no strings attached)
- Do a kindness (and forget it)
- Spend a few minutes with the aged (their experience is a priceless guidance)
- Look intently into the face of a baby (and marvel)
- Laugh often (it's life's lubricant)
- Give thanks (a thousand times a day is not enough)
- Pray (or you will lose the way)
- Work (with vim and vigor)
- Plan as though you'll live forever (because you will)
- Live as though you'll die tomorrow (because you will on some tomorrow)
21. A Revolution in Seven Verses
Illustration
Mickey Anders
Walter Wink, in his book Engaging the Powers, suggests that Jesus' action represented a revolution happening in seven short verses. In this short story, Jesus tries to wake people up to the kind of life God wants for them. He often talks about the Kingdom of God where people have equal worth and all of life has dignity. But in the latter part of his ministry, he begins to act this out. In the midst of a highly patriarchal culture Jesus breaks at least six strict cultural rules:
1. Jesus speaks to the woman. In civilized society, Jewish men did not speak to women. Remember the story in John 4 where Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman at the well. She was shocked because a Jew would speak to a Samaritan. But when the disciples returned, the Scripture records, "They were astonished that he was speaking with a woman?" In speaking to her, Jesus jettisons the male restraints on women's freedom.
2. He calls her to the center of the synagogue. By placing her in the geographic middle, he challenges the notion of a male monopoly on access to knowledge and to God.
3. He touches her, which revokes the holiness code. That is the code which protected men from a woman's uncleanness and from her sinful seductiveness.
4. He calls her "daughter of Abraham," a term not found in any of the prior Jewish literature. This is revolutionary because it was believed that women were saved through their men. To call her a daughter of Abraham is to make her a full-fledged member of the nation of Israel with equal standing before God.
5. He heals on the Sabbath, the holy day. In doing this he demonstrates God's compassion for people over ceremony, and reclaims the Sabbath for the celebration of God's liberal goodness.
6. Last, and not least, he challenges the ancient belief that her illness is a direct punishment from God for sin. He asserts that she is ill, not because God willed it, but because there is evil in the world. (In other words, bad things happen to good people.)
And Jesus did all this in a few seconds.
22. One True God
Illustration
J. Howard Olds
Paul Tillich said in the 1960's our god is our ultimate concern. Whatever gains our ultimate attention becomes our god. We have problems with idolatry in the 21st century too.
Like Martha in the Bible, we are troubled and concerned over many things. We are concerned about work, family, marriage, health, life. Every concern is tyrannical. It wants to own our whole heart, our whole mind. It wants our infinite attention, our unconditional devotion. I saw a bumper sticker stating "Soccer Rules." In many families that is true. We develop all kinds of gods.
Maybe it's time to pledge our allegiance to the one, true, living, everlasting, God and set our feet to walking in God's ways. We believe in one God. May we see his glory in and through our lives every day.
23. 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!
24. Do You Want To Be More Spiritual?
Illustration
Clement E. Lewis
In his letter to the Philippians, Paul advised, "Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus." To the Romans he wrote, "To set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace." In order to be more spiritual, the mind needs to be fixed on abiding by the rules of spirituality. Our attitude toward God and Jesus Christ in spiritual matters, and in secular conduct has much to do with how we qualify spiritually. Our devotional, intentionally creative and conscientious participation help to enrich our spiritual manifestations.
The first requirement is to overcome the feelings of distance and strangeness in our relation to God. There are those who feel that God is aloof, or far from them, in spite of our being taught that God is everywhere. Someone asked, "When you feel far from God, who moved?" We need a working and conversational relationship with God, at least daily. Someone also asked, "Do you treat God like your doctor, only consulting with him when you have a problem?"
Learn to use prayer as an instrument of faith, rather than as a salve for conscience, or a plea in emergencies. We should, instead of praying out of duty, talk with God out of love for him and for the life he has given us. Be willing to be yourself with God, facing the truth as it really is, letting him guide you in knowledge and understanding.
Take stock of yourself, your interests and goals in life, and talk them over with God. You may do well to share them also with a good friend who has a deep reverence for life and for God. Ask yourself if what you think and feel would have the endorsem*nt of Jesus. Are you about to do what you sincerely believe is right under the circ*mstance and proper at the time? Are you putting off what you know ought to be considered because it may require more of you than you want to give of yourself, time, or substance? It is hard to feel spiritual comfort, or to be satisfied within yourself if these matters cannot be rightly dealt with.
We need to take our emotions and our reasoning both into account. Sometimes we are torn between the two. While matters of the heart are necessary to enjoy fulfillment, the mind must be in agreement, or an inner argument can ensue, causing regret for a long time. Spiritual joy dies when conflicts are not properly resolved. Remember, life is very personal, and resolution of feelings and problems are essential to spiritual growth.
Most people discover that when they have done the right thing, and have done their best in the interest of spiritual development and religious growth, inner peace comes to their lives. It is then that they come to full appreciation of the words, "To be spiritually minded is life and peace." Total commitment to God through Christ is the best means of finding that life and peace.
When we are truly spiritual persons we often find that we have considerable influence on others. These lines may well serve as our prayer.
May every soul that touches mine,
Be it the slightest contact, get therefrom some good,
Some little grace, one kindly thought,
One aspiration yet unfelt, one bit of courage
For the darkening sky, one gleam of faith
To brave the thickening ills of life;
One glimpse of brighter sky beyond the gathering mist,
to make this life worthwhile
And heaven a surer heritage. Amen.
A Closing Hymn: "Spirit Of The Living God"
25. Clothing and Spiritual Change
Illustration
Mickey Anders
Clothing is a common New Testament metaphor for spiritual change. Paul wrote in Romans, "Clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature" (Rom 13:14).
And in First Corinthians, "The perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. (1 Corinthians 15:53).
In Colossians, we read, "Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience(Colossians 3:12).
Finally, in First Peter we are admonished, "All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because, 'God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble'" (1 Peter 5:5).
Being clothed anew is a consistent New Testament expression for holiness and righteousness. The old clothes have to come off and new ones put on.
This text confronts us with the paradox of God's free invitation to the banquet with no strings attached and God's requirement of "putting on" something appropriate to that calling. The theological point is that we are warned of the dire consequences of accepting the invitation and doing nothing except showing up.
26. Man Up A Tree
Illustration
Larry Powell
Every church school childknows the story of Zacchaeus: "Zacchaeus was a wee little man, a wee little man was he; he climbed up in a sycamore tree, for Jesus he would see." For our purposes here, let us divide the story into three parts:
1. The person. Jericho was the gate city for Judea’s trade with the East, which meant that it was also the checkpoint for customs on imports and exports. Zacchaeus, as "chief tax collector," was in charge of collections and overseer of all other tax collectors in his district. Consequently, he was not only entitled to whatever revenues he could manage for himself, but also a share of what had been taken in by the other collectors. Opportunities for self-enrichment abounded and, from all indications, Zacchaeus allowed none to escape him. I would expect that at a very early age it had become clear to him that his choices would be severely limited. He was not physically suited for life in the country, nor strong enough to be a merchant who must travel long distances to trade. His childhood peers doubtless reminded him of his size by numerous remarks and omissions. But there was apparently one thing he could do well: cipher. He would excel in the area of his strongest ability and greatest interest ... money. The Scriptures depict him as short in stature, crooked in dealings, self-seeking, but interestingly enough, retaining a glimmer of moral consciousness.
2. The encounter. A large crowd had gathered to see Jesus as he passed through the city. Too small to see over the shoulders of others and unable to force his way to the front line, Zacchaeus climbed into a sycamore tree in order to see and, who knows, perhaps even to be seen. There is the possibility that the time had come in the little man’s life when his spirit cried out for peace and security ... the kind which the world cannot give ... something he had been unable to achieve by a lifetime of jaded aggressiveness. There is at least the possibility that something more than curiosity caused him to position himself in such a prominent place along the path of the one who was said to "forgive sinners." Whatever his reason, Jesus addressed him personally, went home with him to spend the day, and caused the people to complain, "He has gone in to be the guest of a man who is a sinner" (19:7).
3. The transformation. At some point during their visit, Zacchaeus stood up and said, "Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I will restore it fourfold." And Jesus said to him, "Today salvation has come to this house" (19:8-9).
The story of Zacchaeus is not an isolated incident. Other similarly tainted individuals have discovered that the deep places of their lives have been touched and embraced by one whose perception and discerning compassion penetrates beneath life’s surface and addresses a lingering need. Had our Lord considered the tax collector as others saw him ... nigg*rdly, self-motivated, crooked, irritatingly ambitious ... had our Lord stopped there, considering only the topical evidence, Zacchaeus would have been left up in the tree. But Jesus did not take his meal in the home of a reprobate that day; he supped with a man who had a need, and as the shadows of evening gathered about Jericho, the need of at least one of its citizens had been met; "Today salvation has come to this house."
27. The Fourth Wise Man
Illustration
John R. Steward
The story is told of a fourth wise man who had followed the Star announcing the birth of Jesus. He, too, went to Bethlehem with a gift for the Savior. His gift was that of precious jewels to give to Jesus.
On his way to Bethlehem he found a man who had been beaten and robbed by thieves and left to die. The wise man took the injured man to an inn and paid for his care with one of the jewels that had been meant for Jesus.
When he finally arrived in Bethlehem, Mary and Joseph had fled to Egypt with Jesus. He found that Herod and his soldiers were killing children and that Mary and Joseph had escaped with Jesus. The wise man saw a soldier preparing to kill one of the children of Bethlehem and so he bribed him with another jewel to save the child's life. The mother's tears of gratitude was all he needed to hear.
The wise man went on to Egypt in pursuit of Jesus and his parents. However, while in Egypt the wise man became ill and a kind but poor woman nursed him back to health. On one occasion he found this woman crying and soon discovered why. Her son had been forced to join the army and now this woman was very distraught. The wise man was so grateful to this woman for all she had done that he used his last jewel and bought her son out of the army. Now he had nothing to offer Jesus.
Thirty years had passed and many other journeys, until the man thought that he should return to his home town. On his journey home, ashe was passing through Jerusalem there was a large crowd. It was the day that Jesus was to be crucified. Upon learning this he stood with the crowd hoping that he still might see Jesus.
As he stood waiting to see Jesus, a tile from a nearby roof fell and landed on the wise man's head and killed him. Some might argue that his life was a failure because he never brought his gifts to Jesus. Yet, because he believed in Jesus as God's anointed, he was transported to heaven. There in heaven he finally saw Jesus. Jesus was on his throne and wearing a crown. The wise man could barely believe his eyes when he saw the crown of Jesus. In the center of the crown were the three jewels he had given to help others.
Jesus said,"When we do it to the least of these, you do it unto me."
Adapted by Stuart Robertson, Balanced Burdens (London: Hodder and Stoughton, Limited), p. 142.
28. With Heart and Hand and Voices
Illustration
Brett Blair
Martin Rinkart was a minister in the little town of Eilenburg in Germany some 350 years ago. He was the son of a poor coppersmith, but somehow, he managed to work his way through an education. Finally, in the year 1617, he was offered the post of Archdeacon in his hometown parish. A year later, what has come to be known as the Thirty-Years-War broke out. His town was caught right in the middle. In 1637, the massive plague that swept across the continent hit Eilenburg... people died at the rate of fifty a day and the man called upon to bury most of them was Martin Rinkart. In all, over 8,000 people died, including Martin's own wife. His labors finally came to an end about 11 years later, just one year after the conclusion of the war. His ministry spanned 32 years, all but the first and the last overwhelmed by the great conflict that engulfed his town.
Tough circ*mstances in which to be thankful. But he managed. And he wrote these words:
Now thank we all our God
With heart and hands and voices;
Who wondrous things hath done,
In whom his world rejoices.
It takes a magnificent spirit to come through such hardship and express gratitude. Here is a great lesson. Surrounded by tremendous adversity, thanksgiving will deliver you...with heart and hand and voices.
29. The Word Love
Illustration
Brian Stoffregen
In his commentary on Matthew ProfessorDouglas Harewrites: In an age when the word 'love' is greatly abused, it is important to remember that the primary component of biblical love is not affection but commitment. Warm feelings of gratitude may fill our consciousness as we consider all that God has done for us, but it is not warm feelings that Deut. 6:5 demands of us but rather stubborn, unwavering commitment. Similarly, to love our neighbor, including our enemies, does not mean that we must feel affection for them. To love the neighbor is to imitate God by taking their needs seriously.
30. Nine Reasons They Did Not Return
Illustration
King Duncan
Why did only one man cleansed from leprosy return to thank Jesus? Someone has made a list of nine suggested reasons why the nine did not return:
One waited to see if the cure was real.
One waited to see if it would last.
One said he would see Jesus later.
One decided that he had never had leprosy in the first place.
One said he would have gotten well anyway.
One gave the glory to the priests.
One said, "O, well, Jesus didn't really do anything."
One said, "Any rabbi could have done it."
One said, "I was already much improved."
That's not surprising, is it? I doubt that more than ten percent of us are ever truly grateful to God. In fact, it often seems that the more we have, the less gratitude we feel.
31. Mary Had the Little Lamb
Illustration
Marv & Marbeth Rosenthal
Mary Had The Little Lamb
Mary had the little Lamb, who lived before His birth;
Self-existent Son of God, from Heaven He came to Earth.
Micah 5:2
Mary had the little Lamb; see Him in yonder stall
Virgin-born Son of God, to save man from the Fall.
Isaiah 7:14
Mary had the little Lamb, obedient Son of God;
Everywhere the Father led, His feet were sure to trod.
John 6:38
Mary had the little Lamb, crucified on the tree
The rejected Son of God, He died to set men free.
1 Peter 1:18
Mary had the little Lamb men placed Him in the grave,
Thinking they were done with Him; to death He was no slave!
Matthew 28:6
Mary had the little Lamb, ascended now is He;
All work on Earth is ended, our Advocate to be.
Hebrews 4:14-16
Mary had the little Lame mystery to behold!
From the Lamb of Calvary, a Lion will unfold.
Revelation 5: 5,6
When the Day Star comes again, of this be very sure:
It won't be Lamb-like silence, but with the Lion's roar.
Psalm 2:12
Revelation 19:11-16
32. BIG DADDY, J.C., AND THE SPOOK
Illustration
John H. Krahn
Many Christians are hurt by even the slightest criticism of their faith. Yet God often uses attacks and slurs on one’s faith to strengthen it.
Madalyn Murray O’Hair was invited by the Student Christian Association to speak at a certain college in Ohio. Mrs. O’Hair will go down in history as the one who knocked prayer and Bible reading out of the public schools. Over 350 students, faculty, and townspeople gathered to hear Mrs. O’Hair discuss her views in opposition to God and religion.
She lambasted everything sacred. She made fun of pastors, leaders, and church officers. She said the Bible was not infallible, and it did not amount to anything anyway; she harassed the students and professors; she harangued the foolish thinkers who believed what they read. She referred to God as "Big Daddy" and to Jesus Christ as "J.C." and to the Holy Ghost as the "Spook." The audience was stunned by her speech, and as questions were put to Mrs. O’Hair, she further attacked Christianity.
As the meeting was about to break up, a tiny voice of a little college girl came from the back of the auditorium. She spoke quietly and lovingly and her voice was full of compassion. Here is what she said, "Mrs. O’Hair, I am so happy you came to speak to all of us here at our college tonight! We have listened with attention to your tirade on our beliefs. We thank you for showing all of us what an atheist is; we express gratitude on your challenge to our faith; we appreciate your concern for us ... but now we, in turn, must be ever grateful for your visit ... because ... now and forever we have been strengthened in our Christian beliefs. We really feel sorry for you, and we’ll pray each night and day for your conversion to our Christian beliefs, and again we thank you for coming, and I know that you have strengthened my faith in our church, in our religion, and in our Christ! Now I’ll have more faith in ‘Big Daddy,’ in ‘J.C.’, and in the ‘Spook’! Again I say, thank you, and bless your soul!"
The speaker of the evening was flabbergasted. She had no answer. There was a riot of noise. The applause for this response was deafening. The meeting broke up with people experiencing an unbelievable Christian conviction of love for Jesus Christ, the Father, and the Holy Spirit.
The next time someone looks down on your faith, let God use even that person’s negative attitude to draw you closer to him.
33. Truly Thankful
Illustration
John Wesley was about 21 years of age when he went to Oxford University. He came from a Christian home, and he was gifted with a keen mind and good looks. Yet in those days he was a bit snobbish and sarcastic. One night, however, something happened that set in motion a change in Wesley's heart. While speaking with a porter, he discovered that the poor fellow had only one coat and lived in such impoverished conditions that he didn't even have a bed. Yet he was an unusually happy person, filled with gratitude to God. Wesley, being immature, thoughtlessly joked about the man's misfortunes. "And what else do you thank God for?" he said with a touch of sarcasm.
The porter smiled, and in the spirit of meekness replied with joy, "I thank Him that He has given me my life and being, a heart to love Him, and above all a constant desire to serve Him!" Deeply moved, Wesley recognized that this man knew the meaning of true thankfulness.
Many years later, in 1791, John Wesley lay on his deathbed at the age of 88. Those who gathered around him realized how well he had learned the lesson of praising God in every circ*mstance. Despite Wesley's extreme weakness, he began singing the hymn, "I'll Praise My Maker While I've Breath."
34. Because He Wasn't Killed
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
We heard of a man and woman who gave a sizeable contribution to the church to honor the memory of their son who lost his life in the war. When the announcement was made of the generous donation, a woman whispered to her husband, "Let's give the same amount for our boy!" Her husband said, "What are you talking about? Our son wasn't killed." "That's just the point," she said. "Let's give it as an expression of our gratitude to God for sparing his life!"
35. Virtue in Anxious Times
Illustration
Paul J. Wadell
Anxiety's central message is that we cannot afford to share because we can never have enough. Put more strongly, in a culture marked by anxiety and fear, the very things we have traditionally called sins or vices (hoarding, greed, suspicion) become wise and prudent virtues. Fear, rather than love, governs our lives. But such fear is a kind of idolatry because it suggests we are giving more attention to our own security than we are giving to God. As Scott Bader-Saye warns, "the ethic of security produces a skewed moral vision. It suggests that suspicion, preemption, and accumulation are virtues insofar as they help us feel safe. But when seen from a Christian perspective, such ‘virtues' fail to be true virtues, since they do not orient us to the true good—love of God and neighbor. In fact, they turn us away from the true good, tempting us to love safety more than we love God."
The "human way out" of the despair of our age is through hospitality because a person well practiced in Christian hospitality chooses love over fear, trust over suspicion, and even risk over security.
36. Epiphany Moments
Illustration
Arthur G. Ferry
Working in a small town in Latin America, a woman felt despair. She was experiencing marital problems, as well as conflicts with people she worked with. Without warning, an earthquake struck one day. In those moments of panic and fear she ran with other people to the relative safety of a garden plaza as buildings shattered and dust billowed.
"For those moments I saw everything so clearly," she recalls, "how I could become so much kinder to my husband, how other relationships could work out. In an instant and with such gratitude I saw how it would be so easy for me to turn things around." In that dramatic moment this woman had glimpsed how the brokenness in her life could be mended. At that moment she saw clearly how she could bring about healing in her life. At that moment it was as if God had spoken to her in a most dramatic way.
God had told John in a personal epiphany, "He on whom you see the spirit descend and remain is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit." When John saw the Spirit descend upon Jesus in the form of a dove, he knew without a doubt that Jesus was the Messiah. John believed that day because of a personal act of revelation.
Sometimes that happens.The truth of God comes into ourlives in such a dramatic fashion that wecan scarcely deny that wehave been in His presence.
37. What Law is Operating Here?
Illustration
John Killinger
Note: We do not advise using this illustration in a sermon. In fact, we strongly advise against it, but we thought it a great meditation for us clergy, considering subjects of Law and Grace. Here it it:
In Mary Gordon's novel, Final Payments, a book addressing the repression of many young Catholics of the 50s and 60s, a young woman named Isabel Moore has just buried her father after several years of illness, during which she was confined to his bedside. For several months, she flounders, trying to discover what she has the aptitude to do with the remainder of her life. She finallyaccepts employment as a social worker, going into homes to check on the welfare of ill and elderly people kept by individuals or families under contract to the social services department. One day she is visiting a Mr. Spenser, an 83-year-old man who lives his life in a bed. As she enters his room histeeth are out, and he's reading the Memoirs of Casanova. He is very polite, and offers to put his teeth in, but she says he need not. They talk with great ease and candor, for Isabel has been accustomed to conversing for hours with her father.
Mr. Spenser says that most people are kind to the elderly only out of guilt. Isabel asks if he doesn't believe in acts of pure generosity. He responds that he finds the very concept of purity rather "jejune." Isabel says he reminds her of a friend she loves but whom she cannot have because he is married and has a daughter. Mr. Spenser talks with her about love and tells her she is a beautiful woman. She doesn't think she is, but his insistence encourages her, and she thanks him.
As she prepares to leave, he asks a favor.
"Name it," she says.
"Let me see your breasts."
At first, Isabel says she can't. He wants to know why. She says merely because they are hers. But then she thinks: What could it hurt? She remembers the woman in The Brothers Karamazov who tells a priest she cannot give up an adulterous affair because "it gives him so much pleasure and me so little pain." She locks the door, unbuttons her blouse, loosens and removes her brassiere, and stands there.
Mr. Spenser says nothing. He looks, then closes his eyes.
"You have done me a great kindness," he says. "You have given me what I wanted, not what you thought I wanted, or what you wanted me to want."
Isabel dresses. They shake hands very formally. She unlocks the door and leaves.
Some may find prurience in this passage, but I sense instead a great depth of love and mercy, a recognition of our common humanity, an act of genuine and redemptive compassion. What law is operating here? The law forbidding sexual looseness, voyeurism, and lust? Or is that transcended, in Isabel's case, by the law of kindness and generosity? The latter, I would contend. There is more of the authentic spirit of Jesus in Isabel's act than in all the railing against sensuality and p*rnography by the Jesse Helmses and James Wildmons, and certainly more than in the stern judgmentalism of the Puritan community that condemned Hester Prynne in Hawthorne's novel.
And it is this higher law, the law of love and understanding, that must be identified and taught from our pulpits in the coming century. The media often understand this better than our churches, and their dramas frequently turn on the contrast between the hypocrisy of "good" Christians and the genuine kindness of instinctively well-dispositioned persons in the secular culture outside the church. This isnot to say that Hollywood is a better gauge of morals than the church; however,thepreacher can help to dispel the confusion parishioners feel by more consistently identifying Christ's position over against that of the legalists and by saying no to the Phariseeism that continues to plague the church from generation to generation.
38. Commentary
Illustration
Archibald M. Hunter
The Parable of the Talents makes no attempt to examine the causes of the slave's laziness, but one factor is evident from the dialogue: the slave has no love for his master. He is really interested only in himself, and consequently security, not service, is his goal. There is not the slightest trace of gratitude that his master trusted him with so great a sum. Respect for his master is limited to a grudging acknowledgement of power.
If we are correct in taking the phrase "to each according to his ability" as indicating that for Matthew the parable challenges Christians to make full use of the gifts that God has entrusted to them, the portrayal of the third servant reminds us that love for our master must be demonstrated in faithful and untiring service to other people.
It is routine for Christians to excuse themselves by protesting that their gifts are too modest to be significant. This parable insists that the gifts are precious and are to be exploited to the full.
39. Magic Words
Illustration
James W. Moore
When our grand-daughter Sarah was two years old, she was extremely active. She was always busy, always moving and always in a hurry… because at two years of age, she had already realized that there are so many exciting things to do and see and experience in this incredible world God has given us.
One day Sarah interrupted her play-time just long enough to run into the kitchen in search of a mid-afternoon snack. Hurriedly, she said to her mother: "Banana, Momma, Banana!"
Jodi, her mother, handed her a banana. Sarah quickly grabbed the banana and turned to rush back out of the kitchen. However, before she took very many steps, her mother said: "Sarah, come back. What are the magic words?" Sarah screeched to a halt, turned back around and said: "Please! Thank You! You're Welcome! God Bless You! And I Love You, Mommy!"
Now, that's gratitude. That's the healed lepers heart and her mother recognized it, and Sarah got a second banana!... And a warm hug!
40. Selling Yourself As A Slave
Illustration
Michael P. Green
Well before Paul was born, there had been a Roman law stating that no freeborn man could be enslaved. Therefore, a man could literally sell himself into slavery, collect the proceeds, then have a friend come and attest to his status as a freeborn man, and he would have to be released at once. This caused havoc with the Roman economy, which was well oiled by its slave labor. Therefore, just before Paul’s day, a new law was enacted whereby any man who sold himself into slavery could no longer claim free status later. The law could no longer help him. It was therefore clear to Paul’s readers in Rome that “to whom you present yourselves as slaves for obedience, his slave you are.”
41. A Simple, Forthright Invitation
Illustration
Joel D. Kline
Come and see. No arm twisting. No gimmicks. No Bible thumping. No apparent pressure. Just a simple, forthright invitation — come and spend time with Jesus and with those he is calling to join with him in living and proclaiming a new way of living. Come and see — see with eyes of faith, allowing oneself to be transformed by Christ's Spirit. Is this not what Marcus Borg had in mind when asserting in his book, Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time? "Believing in Jesus…is the movement from secondhand religion to firsthand religion, from having heard about Jesus with the hearing of the ear to being in relationship with the Spirit of Christ." It is a matter of firsthand encounter with God, trusting that similar words spoken by God to Jesus at the time of baptism are also spoken to us, "You are my beloved daughter or son." And once we are anchored in that kind of love, we find the strength and power to walk in the footsteps of Jesus, going the extra mile in relationships, witnessing for peace, extending arms of reconciliation, offering acts of compassion and care, serving those in need. As Henri Nouwen writes, "Only when your roots are deep can your fruits be abundant."
42. Clothed with Humility
Illustration
John R. Gunn
The word "humility" means literally a low estimate of self. But this does not imply self-deprecation. When you hear someone deprecating himself, usually you can put it down as a sort of counterfeit humility. Someone has said, "The true way to be humble is not to stoop until you are smaller than yourself, but to stand at your full height before some higher nature that will show you how small your greatness is." "Walk humbly with thy God." Here is where we learn true humility. Walking with God, seeing ourselves by the side of His greatness, we see how little we are. And seeing how little we are is the first step toward becoming what we can and ought to be.
We never become truly great, we never do our best work until we are "clothed with humility"; until, like our Lord and Savior, we are willing to live to serve others.
43. KNEELING TIME
Illustration
John H. Krahn
The greatest story of all time begins as silently as a single snowflake slowly drifting down into a quiet forest at midnight. "And in that region there were shepherds out in the fields keeping watch over their flock by night." Imagine the feeling of those shepherds as the sky filled with angels singing, "Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace, good will toward men." No wonder they "came to the manger with haste" and arriving there they found the Holy Family. On the faces of our Lord’s parents was wonder and reverence mixed with gratitude and joy.
In the Ozark Mountains, I am told, there is an old legend that at midnight on Christmas Eve the cattle kneel in adoration of the Savior who came into their stable so many years ago. A part of the legend, however, is that they will not kneel if any human being is watching. That, of course, makes the story safe from prying, scientific eyes. We shall never be able to prove it or disprove it with our senses. But isn’t that the way Christmas is ... an intimate and ultimate experience which is forever beyond the eyes of proud minds.
Only the cattle know if they really kneel to the Savior at midnight - as only we ourselves know in the deepest regions of our hearts whether we too are really there at the manger. Christmas is kneeling time for the entire earth as the eyes of faith-filled hearts look upon the only-begotten Son of the Father. And as we look, our hard and distraught faces melt into expressions of joy and adoration. For those who kneel at the manger rise again, filled with the love of God which brings peace and joy to their lives.
44. My Childhood Promise
Illustration
Charles Swindoll
I recall, as a little barefoot boy with a cowlick of snow-white hair on my forehead, standing erect in my classroom and repeating the "Pledge of Allegiance" one Thanksgiving season. Our nation was at war and times were hard. My teacher had lost her husband on the blood washed shores of Normandy. As we later bowed our heads for prayer she wept aloud. I did too. All the class joined in. She stumbled through one of the most moving expressions of gratitude and praise that ever emerged from a soul plunged in pain. At that time in my young life, I fell strangely in love with Thanksgiving. Lost in sympathy and a boy's pity for his teacher, I walked home very slowly that afternoon. Although only a child, I had profound feelings of gratitude for my country . . . my friends . . . my school . . . my church . . . my family. I swore before God that I would fight to the end to keep this land free from foes who would want to take away America's distinctives and the joys of living in this good land. I have never forgotten my childhood promise. I never shall.
45. Thank God for Pain
Illustration
Dorothy Clarke Wilson
Dr. Paul W. Brand, the noted leprosy expert who was chief of the rehabilitation branch of the Leprosarium in Carville, Lousiana, had a frightening experience one night when he thought he had contracted leprosy. Dr. Brand arrived in London one night after an exhausting transatlantic ocean trip and long train ride from the English coast. He was getting ready for bed, had taken off his shoes, and as he pulled off a sock, discovered there was no feeling in his heel. To most anyone else this discovery would have meant very little, a momentary numbness. But Dr. Brand was world famous for his restorative surgery on lepers in India. He had convinced himself and his staff at the leprosarium that there was no danger of infection from leprosy after it reached a certain stage. The numbness in his heel terrified him.
In her biography of Dr. Brand, Ten Fingers for God, Dorothy Clarke Wilson says, "He rose mechanically, found a pin, sat down again, and pricked the small area below his ankle. He felt no pain. He thrust the pin deeper, until a speck of blood showed. Still he felt nothing...He supposed, like other workers with leprosy, he had always half expected it...In the beginning probably not a day had gone by without the automatic searching of his body for the telltale patch, the numbed area of skin." All that night the great orthopedic surgeon tried to imagine his new life as a leper, an outcast, his medical staff's confidence in their immunity shattered by his disaster. And the forced separation from his family. As night receded, he yielded to hope and in the morning, with clinical objectivity, "with steady fingers he bared the skin below his ankle, jabbed in the point and yelled."
Blessed was the sensation of pain! He realized that during the long train ride, sitting immobile, he had numbed a nerve. From then on, whenever Dr. Brand cut his finger, turned an ankle, even when he suffered from "agonizing nausea as his whole body reacted in violent self-protection from mushroom poisoning, he was to respond with fervent gratitude, 'Thank God for pain!'"
46. Asking for Help
Illustration
Richard J. Fairchild
Doctor Fred Collier, a retired physician tells this story about his youth.
He was a medical student in the Army Specialized Training Corps in 1945 when World War II ended. He was from a Kansas family that didn't have the kind of money he needed to complete medical school on his own. And so when he mustered out of the army, he had no idea how he'd ever finish school, if indeed he'd ever finish it all.
One day he happened to pick up a copy of a magazine in a barber shop. One of the articles talked about the kindness and compassion of Eleanor Roosevelt, whose husband, President Franklin Roosevelt had died just a few months before.
That article planted a seed in Fred's mind. He went to the local library and with the help of the librarian found Mrs. Roosevelt's home address. Then he sat down and composed a letter telling her about his plight. He wrote it and rewrote until he had it exactly the way he wanted it.
When he put the letter in an envelope and dropped it in the mailbox, even his young wife wondered if it was worth the time and the postage he'd spent on it.
To Fred's amazement, Mrs. Roosevelt agreed to meet him. When the meeting ended, she promised to help him. In the months and years ahead Fred got checks through Mrs. Roosevelt from a variety of sources, including her own personal checks. Fred, in turn, kept her informed of his progress and sent her copies of all his term papers. Her secretary said later that she always read them with great interest.
Later Mrs. Roosevelt visited the couple in their sparsely furnished apartment. The owner of the apartment nearly collapsed when he recognized the famous visitor.
When Fred finally finished MedicalSchool he told Mrs. Roosevelt that he didn't know how he would ever be able to repay her. She said that repayment wasn't necessary nor desirable. Then she added "I will be adequately repaid if, when you are financially secure someday, you help out someone else who is truly deserving, as you were."
Doctor Fred Collier reached out for help and he received it. As did blind Bartimaeus. It is a hard thing to do, this asking, a difficult thing, a humbling thing, but there are times when we all need help, times when we must turn to our parents once again for help, or to our children. Sometimes it is to the church. Sometimes to God.
47. Parable of the Value of an Apple Pie
Illustration
"Here's a little something for your supper," the lady said.
"Thank you very much," said Jim. On arrival home, he opened the package and told his brother, "Isn't that marvelous, a delicious apple pie!"
"What's so wonderful about that?" said Dick. "You can get one bigger than that at the bakery for 75 cents."
"I know, but this was for nothing, and it was baked especially for me. It makes me happy all over. It's wonderful to me."
"Well, I can't see anything so wonderful about a little pie."
"That's it," said Jim, "you just don't get it."
One of the tragedies of life is that many folks just don't get it. That is, the kindness of neighborly consideration and the appreciation of the efforts of others for all the little things that make life worthwhile.
As we ride our beautiful cars, we often fail to see the inventor, the laborer, the mechanic, the distributor, the road builder, the traffic policeman and the road cleanup crew. As we enter the bakery and take our piece of delicious pastries, we don't see the farmer, the harvester, the flour maker, the baker and the clerk.
We live all too selfishly -- not seeing how many thousands contribute to our health and happiness and we fail to give thanks.
We ought, more than once a week, to be on our knees saying, "Oh God, how grateful I am for Thy many kindnesses."
Thanksgiving and Christmas make for joyful seasons because we pause to consider the wisdom and joy of gratitude.
48. Love of Enemies
Illustration
Joyce Hollyday
Sarah Corson, a founder of Servant in faith and Technology (SIFAT) in Alabama, was on a mission in theSouth American jungles to set up an agricultural project in a village where she and her husband had earlier started a church and built a fish hatchery. She was with seventeen young people, including two of her sons. One Thursday night, around midnight, thirty soldiers rushed toward the house where they were all staying. Sarah was paralyzed with shock as the soldiers stormed over the clearing leading to the house. She remembered with fear that earlier that day, a neighbor had overheard a conversation near the military camp in which soldiers had blamed Americans for recent resistance to a military takeover of the country. The soldiers had vowed to exterminate all Americans in the region.
Sarah Corson prepared to die. But as the soldiers approached, she found herself offering them warm words of welcome. The commander shoved his rifle against her stomach and pushed her into the house. The soldiers began pulling everything off the shelves and out of drawers. Sarah calmly explained that she and the others were there only to set up projects and teach the Bible. The commander, stating that he had never read the Bible, said, 'Maybe it is a communist book, for all I know.' Sarah asked him to let her talk about it.
While he kept his gun pointed at her and the other soldiers continued ransacking the house, Sarah opened a Spanish Bible the Sermon on the Mount. She read about Jesus' command to love one's enemies.
'That's humanly impossible!' the commander shouted.
'That's true, sir,' she answered. 'It isn't humanly possible, but with God's help it is possible.' She challenged him to let her prove it by killing her slowly: 'Cut me to pieces little by little, and you will see you cannot make me hate you. I will die praying for you because God loves you.'
The commander lowered his gun and stepped back. Then he ordered everyone in the house to march to a truck. But before they reached the truck, he turned around and led the women back to the house. He told Sarah that the women would be raped repeatedly in the jungle camp, so he could not take them there. He also told her that this was the first time he had disobeyed an order from a superior officer-and that he would pay with his life if he were found out. He said as he left, 'I could have fought any mount of guns you might have had, but there is something here I cannot understand. I cannot fight it.'
The village waited in agony for word of the men who had been taken. The local people insisted that the church service not be held on Sunday, because soldiers considered any gathering a source of political agitation. But on Saturday night, a messenger arrived with word from the commander of the attack that he would be in church on Sunday. He wanted Sarah to come and get him; if she did not, he would walk the ten miles. It sounded to Sarah like a threat. She sent a message throughout the town that night. 'We will have the service after all,' she said, 'but you are not obligated to come. In fact you may lose your life by coming. No one knows what this solider will do. Do not come when the church bell rings unless you are sure God wants you to come.'
Sarah picked up the commander and his bodyguard at the military camp. Holding their rifles they marched coldly into the church and sat down. The church was packed before the first hymn was over. The people came in fear and trembling, but they came.
It was the church custom to welcome visitors by inviting them to the platform, singing a welcome song, and waving to them. Then the congregation would line up to shake the visitors' hands, embrace them, and offer a personal greeting. Sarah decided only to offer the commander and his bodyguard the song. Stunned to be invited up front, the two soldiers stood with their guns across their backs. The people sang weakly and waved timidly. But then, the first man on the front seat came forward and put out his hand. As he bent over to hug the soldiers, Sarah overheard him saying, 'Brother, we don't like what you did to our village, but this is the house of God, and God loves you, so you are welcome here.' Every person in the church followed his example, even the women whose eyes were red from weeping for their loved ones whom the commander had taken prisoner.
The commander was incredulous. He marched to the pulpit and said, 'Never have I dreamed that I could raid a town, come back, and have that town welcome me as a brother.' Pointing to Sarah, he said, 'That sister told me Thursday night that Christians love their enemies, but I did not believe her then. You have proven it to me this morning. . . I never believed there was a God before, but what I have just felt is so strong that I will never doubt the existence of God as long as I live.'
The commander stayed for lunch with the congregation and offered money from his own pocket to parishioners who had loved ones taken away. Two weeks later, all of the men who had been taken were released from the basem*nt cell where they had been imprisoned and some had been tortured.
Sarah Corson was overcome with gratitude to God for putting divine love in her heart for a person she could not love on her own. She remembers the last words the commander said to her: 'I have fought many battles and killed many people. It was nothing to me. It was just my job to exterminate them. But I never knew them personally. This is the first time I ever knew my enemy face to face. And I believe that if we knew each other, our guns would not be necessary.'"
Note: the full story can be found here -https://sifat.org/pdfs/Welcoming_the_Enemy.pdf
49. One Final Song
Illustration
A body is not crippled 'til its heart has ceased to praise. Louis Albert Banks tells of an elderly Christian man, a fine singer, who learned that he had cancer of the tongue and that surgery was required. In the hospital after everything was ready for the operation, the man said to the doctor, "Are you sure I will never sing again?" The surgeon found it difficult to answer his question. He simply shook his head no.
The patient then asked if he could sit up for a moment. "I've had many good times singing the praises of God," he said. "And now you tell me I can never sing again. I have one song that will be my last. It will be of gratitude and praise to God." There in the doctor's presence the man sang softly the words of Isaac Watts' hymn,
"I'll praise my Maker while I've breath,
And when my voice is lost in death,
Praise shall employ my nobler power;
My days of praise shall ne'er be past,
While life, and thought, and being last,
Or immortality endures."
50. No Exceptions
Illustration
Paul Borthwick
Bill Hybels related a story of integrity in Leadership Magazine. It illustrates proper humility in a leader:
"One evening I stopped by the church just to encourage those who were there rehearsing for the spring musical. I didn't intend to stay long, so I parked my car next to the entrance. After a few minutes, I ran back to my car and drove home.
The next morning I found a note in my office mailbox. It read: A small thing, but Tuesday night when you came to rehearsal, you parked in the "No Parking" area. A reaction from one of my crew (who did not recognize you after you got out of your car) was, 'There's another jerk in the 'No Parking' area!' We try hard not to allow people even workers to park anywhere other than the parking lots. I would appreciate your cooperation, too. It was signed by a member of our maintenance staff.
(This man's) stock went up in my book because he had the courage to write to me about what could have been a slippage in my character. And he was right on the mark. As I drove up that night, I had thought, I shouldn't park here, but after all, I am the pastor. That translates: 'I'm an exception to the rules.' But that employee wouldn't allow me to sneak down the road labeled 'I'm an exception.' I'm not the exception to church rules or any of God's rules. Exemplary conduct means encouraging others to imitate us, even in the small matters."
Showing
1
to
50
of
299
results
- Biden opens up about why he quit race, points to pressure from Democrats: ‘A transition president’
- Jeremiah Johnson’s brother claims he faked pro-Trump prophecies, visions
- UK tribunal member rebuked for bias in Christian teacher’s case: 'Undermining trust'
- Calvin Robinson warns UK on 'cusp of a civil war' amid simmering tensions, riots
- Megachurch pastor to pay ex-wife $12K per month in alimony after 33 years of marriage
- 300 Christian leaders demand action from US gov’t over persecution in India
- Cliques, exclusion top reasons Americans aren't getting more involved in their churches: survey
- 5 things to know about Tim Walz's faith, church and the ELCA
- This week in Christian history: All-Russian Church Council opens, James Strong born
- Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone credits God after doing what no woman has done before: 'Let me be the vessel'
- 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
- Walz’s Brand Is More Left than Lutheran Among Minnesota Evangelicals
- Why Changes to India’s Colonial Criminal Code Concern Christians
- Gordon College Loses Religious Liberty Case for Loan Forgiveness
- Yes, Fiji Olympians Are Singing Hymns
- Churches Find a Homelessness Solution in Their Own Backyards
- Venezuelan Churches Brace for Migration Wave After Disputed Maduro Election
- Black Christian Leaders Find Hope with Kamala Harris
- A woman dies after being caught in a baggage carousel, and more shocking news
- 4 Signs That A Marriage Is Sure To End In Divorce—By A Psychologist
- Triptii Dimri and Avinash Tiwary’s Laila Majnu Goes From Box Office Dud To Soft Hit After Its Rerelease
- Oct. 7 hurt relationships between Jews and communities of color. We must reckon with this damage on Tisha B’Av
- Stretched 12 inches on the rack, crushed in iron maidens… or killed with an 'anal pear': Terrifying...
- The Druze Religion, Explained
- The Global Rise of Narco-Pentecostalism
- 'Lord, make them die an awful death': Prisoner's dark pleas found etched into Roman-era prison
- Ancient Babylonian Tablets Are Finally Deciphered. They’re Full of Bad News
- 9 Facts About Tim Walz’s Church
- Where is the Most Religious Place in the World?
- Bigoted Kamala Harris and Her Long History of Faith-Based Discrimination
- Why the Temple Curtain was Torn in Two When Jesus Died
- Parishes Preparing Their People for...What Exactly?
- 10 Years After Ferguson: What Does It Mean to Be the Church?
- You Cannot Lie Your Way to the Truth
- American Gen Z: Depressed and Spiritually Hungry
- Time to Reclaim Jewish Indigeneity
- Case Dismissed Against Man Charged in Death of Synagogue Leader
- New Book Explores Richard Nixon's Religious Journey
