24 Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."
26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
28 Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
29 Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
30 Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
The Jesus RX and the Biology of Belief
John 20:24-31
Sermon
by Leonard Sweet
Every year or so another great cure-all springs from science, folk medicine, or common sense and becomes the hottest "new cure."
[Bring some show and tells to pass out to your people-or just show them off. Maybe some people in your church collect old, 19th century remedies and containers they were sold in. Use them as symbols of what you're preaching about. Maybe even have a display set up.]
How many of you sucked on and sucked down zinc lozenges a few winters ago when some anonymous "studies" suggested that zinc could actually ward off that nasty winter cold?
A few small towns volunteered to go on oatmeal diets, eagerly scooping up spoonful after spoonful of the glutinous liquid. Some even sprinkled dry oatmeal flakes on everything from yogurt to fried chicken. Remember how it was going to dramatically lower our cholesterol? Forget that you needed to take almost a tub of it a day for it to work its wonders.
Echinacea flowers are a new big cash crop thanks to the rediscovery of the cold and fly fighting qualities of this traditional herb. See this little vial of liquid Echinacea? It costs $22 [or whatever--check your local pharmacy for the liquid version]. It's liquid gold. This herb is even more expensive than perfume.
For some of us these and other new "wonder treatments" do seem to work wonders. Colds are held at bay or vanquished quickly. Cholesterol levels go down. We feel better, stronger, healthier. Then, just about the time we are feeling smug and satisfied with ourselves, a new study from a prestigious lab will announce--"oops, we were wrong!"
Guess what? We now read that zinc has no effect on keeping colds away, the link between oatmeal and cholesterol levels is unproven, and Echinacea can be downright dangerous if you take too much or take it with other medication.
So why did we feel so much better?
The truth is not easy to take--for it means that Norman Vincent Peale and Robert Schuller were on to something. One of the biggest medicinal boosts we can give our bodies is the belief of our own mind and Spirit--a fact healers, physicians, shamans and moms have known about forever. Whatever else can explain how one kiss, planted lovingly on a scraped knee or poked finger, can cause instant healing and spontaneous hugs?
The scientific term for this phenomenon, of course, is the placebo effect. The uplift of your mind creates a surge of power that uplifts your body. Told you've been given a new cancer-fighting drug, your tumor decreases in size even though you've been given a sugar pill. Mind over matter. The placebo effect can be as much as 90% effective in healing. It's the power of positive thinking.
Less well-known, however, but just as prevalent is "the nocebo effect"--the power of negative thinking. Believing the worst case scenario, downed by depression, the mind/body connection plummets the body into an ever-grimmer state of ill health.
Given a cancer-fighting drug, but told there's little hope, the tumor increases in size. The drag of your mind impedes your healing. This is called the nocebo response.
How sick can you make yourself?
"The nocebo response is illustrated by the case of a woman who had a non-serious heart condition as well as congestive heart failure that was completely under control with medication. During a routine visit to the hospital, she overheard a doctor telling someone she had T. S. She assumed that T.S. meant 'terminal situation' when it actually referred to tricuspid stenosis. The woman thought she was dying. While still in the hospital, she became more ill and died later that day despite the fact that she had nothing seriously wrong with her." (As cited in Howard Brody, "Mind Over Medicine," Psychology Today, 32 [July/August 2000], 60-67.)
The power to heal and the power to hurt is all in our head. Well, not all of it. But a lot. What did Jesus say? As you think in your heart, so you become?
"Placebo" comes from early Roman church and means "I will please." The healing role of leaders is to please, encourage, uplift. That means each of us should make placebo into a verb--to use the placebo effect as part of our healing ministry as a church and as ministers in the church (So argues Lloyd Rediger "The Placebo Effect and Ministry," Clergy Journal, 76 [July 2000], 20-24.)
What each of us should be doing with our knowledge of the placebo effect is transforming placebo into a verb. "Placeboing" means using your own healing resources and gathering your own spiritual forces to activate the positive, self-soothing, self-healing capabilities dwelling within each and every mind-body-spirit you encounter.
Do you know someone who languishes in despair?
Placebo them a reason for joy.
Do you know someone fighting a grave illness?
Placebo them a vision of health.
Do you know someone who suffers chronic pain?
Placebo them the Scriptures and images for comfort.
Do you know someone who cries out with loneliness?
Placebo them connections.
Do you know someone broken by addiction?
Placebo them the hope of freedom.
Do you know someone trapped by failure?
Placebo them a dream of achievement.
Do you know someone hollowed out by cynicism and consumerism?
Placebo them the joy of faith.
What transforms placebo into a verb is your own actions, your own faith, your own powers that you release and liberate to work for others.
Placebos aren't lies. Despair is the lie. Pain is the lie. Addiction is the lie. Awakening others to the placeboing power locked in their own minds, bodies and spirits so that they may attain health--that is the truth.
Harvard Medical School's course on "Spirituality and Healing in Medicine" has been widely cited as touting the power of belief. Even the most skeptical admit that the power of belief accounts for 30% of medicine's impact. Others put it as high as 90%. The fact of the matter is that between 30-90% of any cure is due to the placebo effect-or belief in belief.
Why is it that we in the church are so ready to believe nocebos . . .
· we listen to the nightly news--and curse the condition of the world
· another environmental disaster occurs--and we write off an ecosystem ("there goes another one" we shrug)
· global warming, ignorance, and greed bring on a widespread famine--and we think "population control"
· border skirmishes and long-nursed hatreds erupt into seemingly eternal wars--and we build higher walls to protect ourselves from the alien hoards
The nocebo effect encourages us to believe the worst, accept the inevitability of bad news, and take all negatives as genuine truths.
In today's gospel text, Thomas was similarly paralyzed by the nocebo effect. Although Mary Magdalene and the disciples gathered in that closed room, all testified excitedly that they had encountered the risen Jesus. Thomas let doubt and disbelief close the door on his own entrance into the story. He remained locked up--in his heart and spirit and mind-as much as in that small closed room. Unable to believe, Thomas was unable to respond to the hope, the anticipation, and the excitement that filled the other disciples.
The risen Christ used the nocebo of Thomas' doubt to bring faith and health to all future generations of believers. Confronting Thomas with his wounds, the resurrected Jesus elicited a confession of faith from his doubting disciple that would become the first great theological pronouncement of the church.
Jesus is "my Lord and my God."
Although acknowledging Thomas' ultimate stand in faith, Jesus also takes this nocebo moment to offer this prescription for all future generations of the faithful: "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe" (verse 29).
In other words, seeing is not believing. Believing is seeing.
Do you believe this morning? Do you believe that the power of that which is within you is greater than any power that is in the world?
Believing can make you well. Literally. Believe in belief is the (re)new(ed) admonition to physicians at all major medical schools. Reclaiming the force of the connection between mind-body-spirit is the key to placeboing our own health. Ironically, there are now more courses on prayer, belief, and healing in medical schools than in divinity schools.
Here's a statistic for you: "Regular churchgoers aged 65 to 74 are 46 percent less likely to die in that decade of life than those who do not attend regularly." (Journal of Gerontology: Medical Sciences, July 1999).
When you receive a prescription from your physician, the standard shorthand we all recognize is Rx. The most common interpretation of this symbol source is that it's a contraction of the Latin verb "recipe" which means "you take" or "take thou."
But there's another possible historical source for the symbol. is the Roman reading of the Greek symbol for the god Ammon, or Jupiter. This makes the symbol for a medical prescription begin with an invocation, a prayer asking for healing.
Jesus offers Christians his own Rx: "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe." Faith is the way to health, to joy, to wholeness.
Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and be-live – to life.
ChristianGlobe Networks, Collected Sermons, by Leonard Sweet
All the Gospels record that the first witnesses to Jesus’s resurrection were women. In John 20:1–2, Mary Magdalene, likely accompanied by other women, discovers that the tomb is empty and runs to tell Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved. In John 20:3–9, we learn that Peter and John immediately run to the tomb. John arrives first but only looks in, while Peter barges right into the tomb upon arrival. They discover grave clothes but no body. At this point John “saw and believed,” although the disciples still did not fully understand that Jesus had to rise from the dead (20:8–9). In John 20:10–18, we read about Jesus’s appearance to Mary Magdalene. Mary mourns deeply (twice she is asked, “Woman, why are you crying?”), and when she encounters the two angels and the one she believes to be t…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
24 Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."
26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
28 Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
29 Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
30 Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
When Jesus met with the disciples, Thomas (11:16; 14:5; 21:2) was absent. He receives the now familiar Easter greeting (20:25) but claims that unless he can acquire this certainty himself (i.e., “see the Lord”) he will not believe. On the following Sunday the group is gathered again, and Jesus appears, offering to Thomas that which he seeks. Thomas provides the Gospel’s final response to Jesus when he offers the ultimate title of divinity and lordship to him (20:28). Jesus’s final words speak to Thomas and to the church together. While “seeing” forms the basis of the apostolic witness (Acts 1:21–22; 1Cor. 15:3–8; 1John 1:1–4), it cannot belong to all. Those who believe without seeing—without demanding signs (cf. John 4:48)—are more blessed still.
20:30–31 · Conclusion:It is evident that this is a natural conclusion to the Gospel (see commentary on 21:1–25). The Fourth Evangelist stresses the purpose of his Gospel: that we might believe. (The verb has two readings, which the NIV calls attention to in a margin note: “to begin to believe” [aorist] and “to continue to believe” [present]; the former implies an evangelistic purpose, the latter a pastoral intent for those who already believe.) The Gospel is a record of signs—of evidences—that the reader must weigh. It stems from Jesus’s disciples, who are trustworthy witnesses (see 19:35), and in particular from the testimony of John (21:24). Its aim is to lead us to faith in Christ because in him alone can we find life.
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
The scene shifts from the tomb in the garden to a locked room somewhere in Jerusalem, and from “early on the first day of the week” (v. 1) to the evening of that first day of the week (v. 19). Despite the faith of the beloved disciple (v. 8) and despite the message brought by Mary Magdalene (v. 18), the disciples as a group are still afraid. Their reaction to her message is not recorded in John’s Gospel, but another tradition appended to Mark by later scribes states that after Mary had seen Jesus she “went and told those who had been with him” and found them “mourning and weeping. When they heard her say that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it” (Mark 16:10; cf. the apostles’ reaction to the report of the women who had seen the angels at the tomb according to Luke 24:11).
In John, the unbelief of the disciples as a group is not mentioned explicitly, only their fear of the Jewish authorities. The unbelief is attributed instead to one disciple, Thomas, in particular (vv. 24–25). The appearance to him in verses 26–29 is really an extension of the appearance to the gathered disciples in verses 19–23, even though it takes place a week later. Verses 24–25 link the two incidents together, so that in effect what is said to the disciples in verses 19–23 is said to Thomas as well, and what is said to him in verses 26–29 is said to them all. If this is so, it is incorrect to single out Thomas as the lone skeptic among the disciples. He is, rather, the disciples’ representative and spokesman both in his skepticism (v. 25b) and in his faith (v. 28). The rest of the disciples, except for their report to Thomas in verse 25a, We have seen the Lord! are silent throughout the story, but Thomas’ confession, My Lord and my God! (v. 28) is finally theirs as well.
The disciples’ fear and helplessness before seeing Jesus and receiving the Holy Spirit is shown by the fact that on Sunday evening they were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews (v. 19). They were essentially no better off than those who earlier had “believed in him,” but “because of the Pharisees they would not confess their faith for fear they would be put out of the synagogue” (12:42). Of those, the narrator had said, “They loved praise from men rather than praise from God” (12:43). The disciples had fled at Jesus’ arrest (16:32; 18:8) and returned to their quarters in Jerusalem (cf. 19:27; 20:10); now (despite what two of them had seen in vv. 3–9) they were living in fear as fugitives. Only the presence of Jesus and the Spirit could transform them again into a missionary community ready to carry on their Lord’s work (cf. 17:9–19). Yet a week later, after receiving the Spirit, they were still in hiding, gathered probably in the same place, with the doors locked (v. 26)! The only possible explanation is that their reunion with Jesus and their reception of the Spirit did not take effect—in some sense were not complete—until their skepticism (personified by Thomas) was overcome and their faith in Jesus found its voice in the decisive confession My Lord and my God (v. 28). This means that verses 19–29 present essentially one resurrection appearance of Jesus in two stages, a week apart. Together, they illustrate the same ambiguity about the disciples’ faith that has been present in the narrative all along (cf., e.g., 16:29–33) and dramatize the terse statement of Matthew’s Gospel that when Jesus appeared to the disciples on a mountain in Galilee, “they worshiped him; but some doubted” (Matt. 28:17). The command Stop doubting and believe (v. 27), though addressed to Thomas in particular, is an appropriate command for every disciple and every reader (cf. the cry of the father of a demon-possessed boy in Mark 9:24: “I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!”).
Jesus’ self-disclosure to his disciples on Easter Sunday evening and a week later is most appropriately understood as the fulfillment of virtually all he had promised them in his farewell discourses:
The Promise
The Fulfillment
I will come to you (14:18, 28). My Father and I will come to him (14:23).
Jesus came and stood among them (20:19, 26).
Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you (14:27). I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace (16:33).
Peace be with you (20:19, 21, 26).
In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me (16:16). I will see you again and you will rejoice, and no one will take away your joy (16:22).
The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord (20:20).
I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor … the Spirit of truth (14:16–17). The Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things (14:26; cf. also 15:26; 16:7–15).
With that he breathed on them and said: “Receive the Holy Spirit” (20:22)
If the empty tomb signified to the beloved disciple Jesus’ departure to the Father, his appearance to the disciples gathered behind locked doors signifies his return. He has come back, not to pay them a brief visit and go away again, but to stay. His return is not a momentary incident but the beginning of a new relationship. “Before long,” he had said, “the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you” (14:19–20). The new relationship is made possible by the Spirit, who, Jesus had said, “lives with you and will be in you” (14:17). The disciples’ joy at this reunion is a joy that “no one will take away” (16:22).
Three times the risen Jesus reveals himself to the disciples with the salutation Peace be with you (vv. 19, 21, 26). The first time he verified his presence and identity by showing them his pierced hands and wounded side (v. 20). The second time he commissions them (As the Father has sent me, I am sending you, cf. 17:18) and breathes on them as a sign of the impartation of the Holy Spirit (vv. 22–23). The act of breathing proves that Jesus is once more alive (contrast 19:30) and, what is more, able to give life. The verb breathed (Gr.: enephysēsen) corresponds to the Greek translation of Genesis 2:7, when God “breathed … the breath of life” into Adam at the creation (cf. 6:63: “the Spirit gives life”). The Spirit, depicted in the farewell discourses as a person (“the Counselor,” 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7) is here seen as the divine power by which the disciples will be enabled to complete their mission, that is, to continue the work of Jesus himself (cf. Paul’s allusion to Gen. 2:7: “So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living being,’” to which he adds, “the last Adam, [i.e., Jesus] a life-giving spirit,” 1 Cor. 15:45). Specifically, the work of Jesus that the Spirit continues is the work of forgiving (or not forgiving) people’s sins, the two-sided work of giving life on the one hand, and bringing judgment or condemnation on the other (cf. 5:19–29). The same Jesus who told the royal official, “Your son will live” (4:50, 53), and called Lazarus out of his tomb (11:43) also told the Pharisees, “Your guilt remains” (9:41; cf. 15:22–24). He came “so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind” (9:39). In this respect, his disciples’ mission in the power of the Spirit would be no different from his own.
The third greeting of Peace, like the first, is accompanied by the verification of Jesus’ identity by the wounds in his hands and side (v. 27). In this case, the manner of verification corresponds exactly to the sign that Thomas, in the meantime, had demanded of his fellow disciples (v. 25). The resulting confession, My Lord and my God (v. 28) was Thomas’ acknowledgment, first, that the man standing before him was Jesus, his beloved teacher (cf. “my Lord” on the lips of Mary Magdalene in v. 13), and second, that he now understood his beloved teacher to be none other than God himself (cf. Jesus’ prophetic words in 8:28, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am the one I claim to be”).
Jesus’ response to this last great confession of John’s Gospel is much like his response to all the other confessions. He accepts it, but with no special words of commendation (cf., e.g., 1:50; 6:70; 16:31–32). Instead of pronouncing a beatitude on Thomas as he does in Matthew’s Gospel on Simon Peter (“Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah,” Matt. 16:17), Jesus reserves his beatitude for others who are not even present: Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed (v. 29). The purpose of the distinction is not so much to rebuke Thomas and the assembled disciples for their skepticism as to emphasize that Jesus’ memorable words and tangible signs were not just for the immediate participants in the drama of his resurrection but for other believers and later generations as well. The pronouncement lays the basis for a significant comment by the Gospel writer to some who had not seen the nail marks in Jesus’ hands and the gaping wound in his side—specifically the Gospel’s readers (vv. 30–31).
At some stage in the growth of this Gospel’s traditions, the last two verses of the chapter probably functioned as a summary statement of purpose for the Gospel as a whole. Jesus’ ministry in its entirety is characterized as a series of miraculous signs written down in order to foster belief in him as the Christ, the Son of God (in contrast to those who saw his miracles but refused to believe, cf. 12:37). Such an understanding has much to commend it if the end of this chapter is also the end of the book, but in John’s Gospel as it stands, this is not the case. Another chapter follows, with its own appropriate postscript to the book as a whole (21:25). To what miraculous signs, then, do verses 30–31 refer? Some have argued that the summary once stood at the end of a collection of miracle stories (the seven “signs” of Jesus’ public ministry, perhaps: the Cana wedding, the healing of the nobleman’s son, the sick man at Bethesda, the feeding of the five thousand, the walking on the water, the blind man at Siloam, the raising of Lazarus), but such a theory, even if valid, offers no help in explaining how the statement functions in its present position in the Gospel as we have it today. It is more likely that the term miraculous signs is here used to denote resurrection signs, like the “many convincing proofs” of Acts 1:3. They are words or actions of the risen Lord that either made him known to his disciples or reinforced the instructions and commands he gave them (e.g., vv. 16, 17, 22, 27; cf. Luke 24:30, 39–42). The narrator implies that he knows—and could have included—many more of these, and that what he has provided is only a small sampling. The purpose of the sampling is in order that you [i.e., the readers of the Gospel] may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (v. 31). The narrator’s intent is that through his writing (especially his account of the resurrection appearances), his readers should enter into the once-and-for-all experience of Jesus’ original disciples (cf. the invitation of the original disciples to do exactly that in 1 John 1:1–3). He wants them to claim for themselves Jesus’ last beatitude, Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed (v. 29). Their confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God echoes Thomas’ exclamation, My Lord and my God! (v. 28), while the accompanying promise of life in his name recalls the life that Jesus breathed into his disciples when he conferred on them the Holy Spirit (v. 22).
Much has been written on the question of whether verses 30–31 could have been addressed to those who were already “believers” or whether the phrase that you may believe implies that the recipients were unbelievers. The answer probably hinges less on whether the verb is believe (NIV text) or “continue to believe” (NIV margin) than on the analogy between the Gospel’s readers and the disciples who literally saw the risen Jesus. The disciples were “believers” in Jesus almost from the start (cf. 2:11), yet in this resurrection encounter the group (represented by Thomas) “believed” once more (vv. 28–29), just as they had done on certain other occasions after their first expression of faith (cf. 6:69; 16:30). The narrator intends that this should happen to his readers as well. To him, faith is no static thing that comes once to a person, only to lie dormant, but a response to God that comes to expression again and again as one is confronted afresh with the story of Jesus (cf. 4:50, 53). It is therefore likely that the resurrection narrative—like the rest of John’s Gospel—is directed at those who already believe, so as to engage them anew with the events on which their faith is built, events that may have seemed to be receding all too quickly into a less defined and less insistent past.
Additional Notes
20:19 On the evening of that first day of the week (cf. v. 1). It is possible that the phrase “of that … day” has eschatological significance because the events to be recorded are fulfillments of Jesus’ words of promise in his farewell discourses (cf. 14:20: “On that day, you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you”). More likely, however, the phrase looks back from the narrator’s standpoint on “that [memorable] day,” the Sunday when Jesus rose from the dead (cf. “that year” in 11:49 and 18:13). If so, the language reflects an early stage in a process that culminated in the formal observance of Easter.
20:22 Receive the Holy Spirit: The most natural way of understanding these words is that the disciples were intended to receive (and did receive) the Holy Spirit at that very moment. Because the book of Acts records the coming of the Spirit fifty days later, at Pentecost (Acts 2:1–4), some have regarded the statement here as proleptic (i.e., as a promise that the disciples would later receive the Spirit). Appeal could be made to 2:19, where Jesus uses an aorist imperative (“Destroy this temple”) to refer to something that did not happen until he was crucified. But the cases are not alike, for the imperative in 2:19 is conditional (i.e., “If you tear down this temple, I will raise it up”), whereas the imperative here is an actual command. This is the only recorded fulfillment of Jesus’ promises of the Spirit in his farewell discourses (cf. also 7:39), and it is clear that the Gospel writer intends it as the fulfillment. In that sense it is the Johannine equivalent of Pentecost, not a mere foretaste of Pentecost.
Historically, there are hints in Luke and Acts that even before Pentecost the Spirit indeed played a role in the ministry of the risen Jesus to his disciples. The preface to the book of Acts states: “Until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen” (Acts 1:2). In Luke 24, when Jesus revealed himself to his gathered disciples, he is said to have “opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures” (i.e., by the power of the Spirit? 24:45); in this connection he said, “I am going to send you what my Father has promised” (24:49a). The latter statement is more literally translated in the present tense: “And I myself am [now] sending upon you what my Father promised.” Such an interpretation makes better sense of what immediately follows; “But stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high” (24:49b). Clearly, something is given and something is still expected. Luke’s emphasis is largely on what is still expected, whereas John’s emphasis is exclusively on what is already given.
20:23 If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven. The metaphorical equivalent of this pronouncement is the promise of Jesus to Peter in Matt. 16:19 and to all the disciples in Matt. 18:18 (as translated in NIV with the verbs “bind” and “loose”). To “bind” is understood as “not forgive”; to “loose” is understood as “forgive.” The setting in John is not church discipline (as in Matthew) but mission, the proclamation of Jesus’ message to the world. The first part of Jesus’ statement has a parallel in a similar resurrection context in Luke’s Gospel: “And repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24:47).
20:24 Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve: See note on 11:16. Thomas was actually introduced more abruptly in his first appearance in the Gospel than he is here. The designation of him as one of the Twelve is supplied here to emphasize the point that he normally would have been present for the incident recorded in vv. 19–23 but was not. The Twelve (though now only eleven because of Judas’ departure) are still being viewed as a fixed group representing the whole church (cf. 6:70). Even though Judas has departed, Thomas must be present in order for the revelation to be complete.
20:26 A week later: lit., “after eight days.” A common ancient custom was to count both the first and the last days in a series, so that eight days would be the equivalent of a week. The meaning is that the appearance took place on the next Sunday after Easter (cf. v. 19).
20:29 Because you have seen me, you have believed. There is no question either about Thomas’ belief or about the basis of it. Jesus does not say that Thomas touched him, and there is no evidence in the text that his skepticism went so far as actually to accept the challenge laid down in v. 27. He believed because he saw, just as the rest of the disciples did (vv. 20, 25; cf. v. 8).
Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by J. Ramsey Michaels, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.
Birth and childhood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesus was probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’s death (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of a virginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governor Quirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place in Bethlehem (2:15). Both the census and the governorship at the time of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars. Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to either confirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must be determined on the basis of one’s view regarding the general reliability of the Gospel tradition.
On the eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keeping with the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus” (Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home of his parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel of Luke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth in strength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke also contains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Baptism, temptation, and start of ministry. After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke 3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instant ministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that the temptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Luke identify three specific temptations by the devil, though their order for the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine intervention after jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’s kingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation, quoting Scripture in response.
Matthew and Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum in Galilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13; Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirty years of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity or perhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of the Levites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning of Jesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples and the sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Galilean ministry. The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and around Galilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ first teaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30); the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for his calling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection and suffering.
All the Gospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in his Galilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke 5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioning of the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers is recorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministry is the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke 6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, in particular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synoptics focus on healings and exorcisms.
During Jesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with his identity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority (Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family (3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner of Beelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesus told parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growing kingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humble beginnings (4:1–32).
The Synoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful. No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority or ability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized many demons (5:1–13), raised the dead (5:35–42), fed five thousand (6:30–44), and walked on water (6:48–49).
In the later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew and traveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are not written with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns to Galilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fear resolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee, where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ disciples with lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed the Pharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents (7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demanding a sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, who confessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus did provide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesus withdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician woman requested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans had long resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality that allotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere “crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,” Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-mute man in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’ travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The city was the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judean ministry. Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry as he resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually led to his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem into three phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27). The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of the journey. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, and the demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem (Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45; Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journey toward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvation and judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase of the journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are the main themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Social conflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposte interactions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel (Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomic feathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who had little value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16; Luke 18:15–17).
Passion week, death, and resurrection. Each of the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with the crowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark 11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Luke describes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during which Jesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
In Jerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17). Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “began looking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segment of Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’ authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions (12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation (12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s own destruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, Judas Iscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’ arrest (14:10–11).
At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a new covenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29; Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned the disciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark 14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and later he prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agony and submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42; Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial, crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15; Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18). Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission by making disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8) and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return (Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
Surname of the apostle Thomas, meaning “twin.” The term occurs only in the Gospel of John (11:16; 20:24; 21:2). “Didymus” is the Greek equivalent of the Aramaic “Thomas,” which also means “twin.”
Mark’s Gospel is a fast-paced, action-packed narrative that portrays Jesus as the mighty Messiah and Son of God, who suffers and dies as the servant of the Lord—a ransom price for sins. Mark’s purpose is to provide an authoritative account of the “good news” about Jesus Christ and to encourage believers to follow Jesus’ example by remaining faithful to their calling through persecution and even martyrdom. A theme verse is Mark 10:45: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
Mark’s narrative may be divided into two main parts. The first half of the story demonstrates that Jesus is the mighty Messiah and Son of God (1:18:26); the second half reveals that the Messiah’s role is to suffer and die as a sacrifice for sins (8:27–16:8).
Unlike Matthew and Luke, Mark does not begin with stories of Jesus’ birth but instead moves directly to his public ministry. As in the other Gospels, John the Baptist is the “messenger” who prepares the way for the Messiah (cf. Isa. 40:3; Mal. 3:1). John preaches a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins and announces the “more powerful” one, the Messiah, who will come after him (1:7). When Jesus is baptized by John, the Spirit descends on him, empowering him for ministry. After his temptation (or testing) by Satan in the desert, Jesus returns to Galilee and launches his ministry, proclaiming the “good news” (gospel) that “the time has come.... The kingdom of God has come near” (1:15).
During his Galilean ministry, Jesus demonstrates extraordinary authority in teaching, healing, and exorcism. He calls fishermen from their occupation, and they drop everything and follow him (1:16–20). He claims authority to forgive sins (2:10) and authority over the Sabbath command (2:28). He reveals power over natural forces, calming the sea (4:35–41), walking on water (6:45–52), and feeding huge crowds with a few loaves and fishes (6:30–44; 8:1–13). The people stand “amazed” and “astonished” (a major theme in Mark) at Jesus’ teaching and miracles, and his popularity soars.
Jesus’ authority and acclaim provoke opposition from the religious leaders of Israel, who are jealous of his influence. The scribes and Pharisees accuse him of claiming the prerogative of God (2:7), associating with undesirable sinners (2:16), breaking the Sabbath (2:24), and casting out demons by Satan’s powers (3:22). They conspire to kill him (3:6).
A sense of mystery and awe surrounds Jesus’ identity. When he calms the sea, the disciples wonder, “Who is this?” (4:41), and King Herod wonders if this might be John the Baptist risen from the dead (6:16). Adding to this sense of mystery is what has come to be called the “messianic secret.” Jesus silences demons who identify him as the Messiah and orders those he heals not to tell anyone what has happened. This secrecy is not, as some have claimed, a literary device invented by Mark to explain Jesus’ unmessianic life; rather, it is Jesus’ attempt to calm inappropriate messianic expectations and to define his messianic mission on his own terms.
The critical turning point in the narrative comes in 8:27–33, when Peter, as representative of the disciples, declares that Jesus is the Messiah. The authority that Jesus has demonstrated up to this point confirms that he is God’s agent of salvation. Yet Jesus startles the disciples by announcing that his messianic task is to go to Jerusalem to suffer and die. Peter rebukes him, but Jesus responds, “Get behind me, Satan! ... You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns” (8:33). Jesus will accomplish salvation not by crushing the Roman occupiers, but by offering his life as a sacrifice for sins.
In the second half of the Gospel, Jesus journeys to Jerusalem, three times predicting that he will be arrested and killed (8:31–32; 9:31; 10:33–34). The disciples repeatedly demonstrate pride, ignorance, and spiritual dullness (8:33; 9:32–34; 10:35–41), and Jesus teaches them that whoever wants to be first must become last (9:35); that to lead, one must serve (10:45); and that to be Jesus’ disciple requires taking up one’s cross and following him (8:34).
When he comes to Jerusalem, Jesus symbolically judges the nation by clearing the temple of merchants (11:15–17) and by cursing a fig tree (representing Israel), which subsequently withers (11:12–14, 20–21). He engages in controversies with the religious leaders (chaps. 11–12) and teaches the disciples that Jerusalem and the temple will be destroyed (chap. 13). Judas Iscariot, one of Jesus’ own disciples, betrays him. Jesus is arrested and brought to trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin, which finds him guilty of blasphemy. That council turns Jesus over to the Roman governor Pilate, who accedes to his crucifixion (chaps. 14–15).
The crucifixion scene in Mark is a dark and lonely one. Jesus is deserted by his followers, unjustly condemned, beaten by the soldiers, and mocked by all. Apparently deserted even by God, Jesus cries out from the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (15:34). Yet the reader knows by this point in the story that Jesus’ death is not the tragedy that it seems. This is God’s means of accomplishing salvation. Upon Jesus’ death, the curtain of the temple is torn, opening a new way into God’s presence. The Roman centurion at the cross cries out, “Surely this man was the Son of God!” (15:39). The death of the Messiah is not a defeat; it is an atoning sacrifice for sins. Three days later Jesus rises from the dead, just as he has predicted. When Jesus’ women followers come to the tomb, the angel announces, “He has risen! He is not here” (16:6). Jesus the Messiah has turned tragedy into victory and has defeated sin, Satan, and death.
The English word “messiah” derives from the Hebrew verb mashakh, which means “to anoint.” The Greek counterpart of the Hebrew word for “messiah” (mashiakh) is christos, which in English is “Christ.”
In English translations of the Bible, the word “messiah” (“anointed one”) occurs rarely in the OT. In the OT, kings, prophets, and priests were “anointed” with oil as a means of consecrating or setting them apart for their respective offices. Prophets and priests anointed Israel’s kings (1Sam. 16:1 13; 2Sam. 2:4, 7).
The expectation for a “messiah,” or “anointed one,” arose from the promise given to David in the Davidic covenant (2Sam. 7). David was promised that from his seed God would raise up a king who would reign forever on his throne. Hopes for such an ideal king began with Solomon and developed further during the decline (cf. Isa. 9:1–7) and especially after the collapse of the Davidic kingdom.
The harsh reality of exile prompted Israel to hope that God would rule in such a manner. A number of psalms reflect the desire that an ideal son of David would come and rule, delivering Israel from its current plight of oppression. Hence, in Ps. 2 God declares that his son (v.7), who is the Lord’s anointed one (v.2), will receive “the nations [as] your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession” (v.8). God promises that “you will rule them with an iron scepter; you will dash them to pieces like pottery” (v.9; see NIV footnote). Jesus demonstrates great reticence in using the title “Messiah.” In the Synoptic Gospels he almost never explicitly claims it. The two key Synoptic passages where Jesus accepts the title are themselves enigmatic. In Mark’s version of Peter’s confession (8:29), Jesus does not explicitly affirm Peter’s claim, “You are the Messiah,” but instead goes on to speak of the suffering of the Son of Man. Later, Jesus is asked by the high priest Caiaphas at his trial, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?” (Mark 14:60). In Mark 14:62, Jesus answers explicitly with “I am,” while in Matt. 26:64, he uses the more enigmatic “You have said so.” Jesus then goes on to describe himself as the exalted Son of Man who will sit at Yahweh’s right hand.
Jesus no doubt avoided the title because it risked communicating an inadequate understanding of the kingdom and his messianic role. Although the Messiah was never a purely political figure in Judaism, he was widely expected to destroy Israel’s enemies and secure its physical borders. Psalms of Solomon portrays the coming “son of David” as one who will “destroy the unrighteous rulers” and “purge Jerusalem from Gentiles who trample her to destruction” (Pss. Sol. 17.21–23). To distance himself from such thinking, Jesus never refers to himself as “son of David” and “king of Israel/the Jews” as other characters do in the Gospels (Matt. 12:23; 21:9, 15; Mark 10:47; 15:2; John 1:49; 12:13; 18:33). When Jesus was confronted by a group of Jews who wanted to make him into such a king, he resisted them (John 6:15).
In Mark 12:35–37, Jesus also redefines traditional understandings of the son of David in his short discussion on Ps. 110:1: he is something more than a mere human son of David. Combining Jesus’ implicit affirmation that he is the Messiah in Mark 8:30 with his teaching about the Son of Man in 8:31, we see that Jesus is a Messiah who will “suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the teachers of the law” (8:31) and through whom redemption will come (10:45). Jesus came not to defeat the Roman legions, but to bring victory over Satan, sin, and death.
In the OT, heavenly beings or angels are sometimes referred to as “sons of God” (Gen. 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Pss. 82:6; 89:6). The more important background for the NT, however, is the use of the term with reference to the nation Israel and the messianic king from David’s line. Israel was God’s son by virtue of God’s unique calling, deliverance, and protection. Hosea 11:1 reads, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” Similar references to God as the father of his people appear throughout the OT (Exod. 4:22; Num. 11:12; Deut. 14:1; 32:5, 19; Isa. 43:6; 45:11; Jer. 3:4, 19; 31:9, 20; Hos. 2:1). The king from the line of David is referred to as the son of God by virtue of his special relationship to God and his representative role among the people. In the Davidic covenant, God promises David concerning his descendant, “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2Sam. 7:14; cf. Pss. 2:7; 89:26). Later Judaism appears to have taken up these passages and identified the coming Messiah as the “son of God.”
One of Jesus’ original twelve apostles (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15), referred to as “Didymus,” meaning “twin” (John 11:16; 20:24; 21:2). The infamous title of “Doubting Thomas” comes from his refusal to believe in Jesus’ resurrection. Thomas said, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe” (John 20:25). A week later the risen Jesus again appeared to the apostles, including Thomas. Thomas’s response was “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). Despite his previous disbelief in Jesus’ resurrection, Thomas was present with the other apostles in the upper room (Acts 1:13).
Direct Matches
The Greek term for “disciple,” mathētēs,means “student.” Like other rabbis and religious figuresof the time, Jesus taught a group of such students (Matt. 9:14;22:16; Mark 2:16; John 1:35; 4:1). The forms of address that Jesus’disciples used for him reflect the nature of the relationship:“rabbi” (Mark 9:5), “teacher” (Mark 9:38),and “master” (Luke 5:5). In addition to receivinginstruction from Jesus, his disciples took care of his physical needs(Matt. 21:1; John 4:8), ate with him (Matt. 9:10; 26:18), performedexorcisms and healings (Matt. 10:1; Luke 10:17), baptized (John 4:2),controlled access to Jesus (Matt. 19:13; John 12:21), and traveledwith him (Luke 8:1; John 2:12). On one occasion Jesus visited thehouse of Peter and healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt. 8:14),which suggests that although the Gospels do not generally depict theprivate lives of Jesus or his disciples apart from their publicministry, the relationship among these men did not prevent thedisciples from maintaining their own homes, families, and, probably,occupations.
Inthe Gospels Jesus is depicted with variously sized groups ofdisciples and followers. A prominent tradition in the Gospelsindicates that there was an inner group of twelve (Matt. 10:1; 26:20;Mark 3:14; 4:10; 6:7; John 6:70), each of whom is known by name. Thisis the group most traditionally understood as “the disciples”of Jesus. As an authority, the group of twelve persisted beyond theascension of Jesus (Acts 6:2). Following the death of Judas Iscariot,Matthias was chosen to take his place among the Twelve (Acts 1:26).Other passages specify a group of seventy or seventy-two (Luke 10:1,16), and often the number of disciples is indeterminate. Severalpassages name disciples beyond the Twelve (Matt. 27:57; Luke 24:18;Acts 9:10; 9:36; 16:1; 21:16), and some later authors attempted tolist the names of the seventy by drawing names from the book of Acts,the Epistles, and other early Christian traditions (e.g., thethirteenth-century Syriac compilation The Book of the Bee). The bookof Acts often refers to any follower of Christ as “disciple,”including those in cities throughout the Roman Empire.
TheGospels tend to present Jesus as a charismatic teacher who couldattract adherents with little overt persuasion. The calling ofseveral disciples is narrated, including that of the brothers SimonPeter and Andrew, the brothers James and John the sons of Zebedee(Mark 1:16–20; John 1:40–41), Philip and Nathanael (John1:44–45), and Matthew/Levi (Mark 2:13–17 pars.). TheGospel of John presents Andrew as a former disciple of John theBaptist.
TheTwelve
Eachof the Synoptic Gospels has a list of the Twelve (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16; cf. the list of eleven inActs 1:13), and the Gospel of John mentions “the Twelve”several times without providing a list. With some slightharmonizations, it is possible to come up with a single list oftwelve disciples based on the three Synoptic lists.
(1)Allthree Synoptic Gospels agree in placing Simon Peter first in thelist. (2)His brother Andrew is second, though Mark has placedAndrew farther down the list and does not identify him as Peter’sbrother. (3)James the son of Zebedee and (4)John thebrother of James are next. Mark adds that the two were also named“Boanerges,” meaning “sons of thunder.” Theplacement of Peter, James, and John at the head of the listcorresponds with the prominence of these three disciples in the storyof Jesus’ arrest at Gethsemane, where these three were present(Matt. 26:37// Mark 14:33). Perhaps the order of Mark’slist reflects the prestige of these three disciples, with Matthew andLuke bringing Andrew to the head of the list not because of anyparticular importance but so that he is listed with his brotherPeter.
Thelists continue with (5)Philip, (6)Bartholomew, and(7)Matthew, further identified in Matt. 10:3 as a “taxcollector.” The calling of Matthew is narrated in Matt. 9:9–13and also in Mark 2:13–17; Luke 5:27–32, where Matthew iscalled “Levi.” (8)Thomas is next (Matt. 10:3 listsThomas before Matthew; in John 20:24 he is also called “Didymus”),followed by (9)James the son of Alphaeus (Mark 2:14 also callsLevi “son of Alphaeus”), so named to avoid confusion withJames the son of Zebedee. (10)Simon the Cananaean (Matt. 10:4;Mark 3:18 NRSV) or Zealot (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13) is so designated toavoid confusion with Simon Peter. The precise meaning of the term“Cananaean” is uncertain (see Cananaean). (11)Thaddaeus(who precedes Simon the Cananaean in Matthew and Mark) probablyshould be identified with the eleventh disciple in Luke’s list,Judas the son of James. The names of Thaddaeus and Judas son of Jamesrepresent the greatest single discrepancy among the three lists, butit may be mitigated somewhat by the fact that some manuscriptsidentify “Thaddaeus” as a surname (though they give thisdisciple’s other name as “Lebbaeus,” not “Judas”).All three lists agree in listing (12)Judas Iscariot as the lastdisciple in the list, and all note that he betrayed Jesus or became atraitor. The fact that Judas Iscariot bears a second name(“Iscariot”) may suggest that there was another Judasamong the Twelve from whom it was necessary to distinguish him, as inthe case of the two Simons and the two Jameses. This observationlends some weight to the notion that Thaddaeus was also named“Judas.”
TheDisciples as Apostles
Atvarious points in his ministry Jesus sent out his disciples to preachand perform miracles, hence they are also referred to as “apostles”(i.e., emissaries). The connection between these two terms is madeclear in Luke 6:13: “When morning came, he called his disciplesto him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles.”In the NT Epistles the title “apostle” is applied toseveral individuals who were not among Jesus’ twelve disciples,most notably Paul. In sum, both “disciple” and “apostle”have narrow and broad meanings in the NT, though there is substantialcontinuity between “the Twelve” disciples or apostles ofJesus and the narrow definition of “apostle” in the earlychapters of Acts.
TheLater Careers of the Disciples
Afterhis resurrection, Jesus told his disciples (“the apostles hehad chosen” [Acts 1:2]) that they would be his witnesses “inJerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of theearth” (Acts 1:8). Stories about the subsequent careers of theTwelve exist in both the NT and other early Christian sources. Thefirst half of Acts largely focuses on the career of Simon Peter,before attention shifts to the career of Paul in the eastern RomanEmpire. Extracanonical books and local legends trace the latercareers of Jesus’ twelve disciples, placing them in Rome(Peter), Scythia (Andrew), Spain (James), Ephesus (John), Phrygia(Philip), Armenia (Bartholomew and Thaddaeus), India (Thomas),Ethiopia (Matthew), and North Africa (Simon the Cananaean). Piouslocal traditions attribute martyrdom to a number of the Twelve,though in the NT we know only of the deaths of Judas Iscariot (Matt.27:3–10; Acts 1:16–20) and James the son of Zebedee (Acts12:1–2).
For Christians, God is the creator of the cosmos and theredeemer of humanity. He has revealed himself in historicalacts—namely, in creation, in the history of Israel, andespecially in the person and work of Jesus Christ. There is only oneGod (Deut. 6:4); “there is no other” (Isa. 45:5). Because“God is spirit” (John 4:24), he must reveal himselfthrough various images and metaphors.
Imageryof God
God’scharacter and attributes are revealed primarily through the use ofimagery, the best and most understandable way to describe themysterious nature of God. Scripture employs many images to describeGod’s being and character. Some examples follow here.
Godis compared to the father who shows compassion and love to hischildren (Ps. 103:13; Rom. 8:15). The father image is also used bythe prophets to reveal God’s creatorship (Isa. 64:8). Jesuspredominantly uses the language of “Father” in referenceto God (Mark 8:38; 13:32; 14:36), revealing his close relationshipwith the Father. God is also identified as the king of Israel evenbefore the Israelites have a human king (1Sam. 10:19).
ThePsalter exalts Yahweh as the king, acknowledging God’ssovereignty and preeminence (Pss. 5:2; 44:4; 47:6–7; 68:24;74:12; 84:3; 95:3; 145:1). God is metaphorically identified as theshepherd who takes care of his sheep, his people, to depict hisnature of provision and protection (Ps. 23:1–4). The image ofthe potter is also employed to describe the nature of God, whocreates his creatures according to his will (Jer. 18:6; Rom.9:20–23). In Hos. 2:4–3:5 God is identified as thelong-suffering husband of the adulterous wife Israel. In the settingof war, God is depicted as the divine warrior who fights against hisenemy (Exod. 15:3).
Godis also referred to as advocate (Isa. 1:18), judge (Gen. 18:25), andlawgiver (Deut. 5:1–22). The image of the farmer is alsofrequently adopted to describe God’s nature of compassionatecare, creation, providence, justice, redemption, sanctification, andmore (e.g., Isa. 5:1–7; John 15:1–12). God is oftenreferred to as the teacher (Exod. 4:15) who teaches what to do, asdoes the Holy Spirit in the NT (John 14:26). The Holy Spirit isidentified as the counselor, the helper, the witness, and the guide(John 14:16, 26; 15:26). God is often metaphorically compared tovarious things in nature, such as rock (Ps. 18:2, 31, 46), light (Ps.27:1), fire (Deut. 4:24; 9:3), lion (Hos. 11:10), and eagle (Deut.32:11–12). In particular, the Davidic psalms employ many imagesin nature—rock, fortress, shield, horn, and stronghold (e.g.,Ps. 18:2)—to describe God’s perfect protection.
Last,anthropomorphism often is employed to describe God’sactivities. Numerous parts of the human body are used to speak ofGod: face (Num. 6:25–26), eyes (2Chron. 16:9), mouth(Deut. 8:3), ears (Neh. 1:6), nostrils (Exod. 15:8), hands (Ezra7:9), arms (Deut. 33:27), fingers (Ps. 8:3), voice (Exod. 15:26),shoulders (Deut. 33:12), feet (Ps. 18:9), and back (Exod. 33:21–22).
Namesand Attributes of God
TheOT refers to God by many names. One of the general terms used forGod, ’el (which probably means “ultimate supremacy”),often appears in a compound form with a qualifying word, as in ’el’elyon (“God Most High”), ’el shadday (“GodAlmighty”), and ’el ro’i (“the God who seesme” or “God of my seeing”). These descriptive namesreveal important attributes of God and usually were derived from thepersonal experiences of the people of God in real-life settings;thus, they do not describe an abstract concept of God.
Themost prominent personal name of God is yahweh (YHWH), which istranslated as “the Lord” in most English Bibles. At theburning bush in the wilderness of Horeb, God first revealed to Moseshis personal name in sentence form: “I am who I am”(Exod. 3:13–15). Though debated, the divine name “YHWH”seems to originate from an abbreviated form of this sentence. Yahweh,who was with Moses and his people at the time of exodus, is the Godwho was with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Jesus’testimony, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the Godof Jacob” is identified as the God “of the living”(Matt. 22:32). Hence, the name “Yahweh” is closely tiedto God’s self-revelation as the God of presence and life. (Seealso Names of God.)
Manyof God’s attributes are summarized in Exod. 34:6–7: “TheLord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger,abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands,and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leavethe guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their childrenfor the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”Below are further explanations of some of the representativeattributes of God.
Holiness.The moral excellence of God is the attribute that underlies all otherattributes. Thus, all God’s attributes can be modified by theadjective holy: holy love, holy justice, holy mercy, holyrighteousness, holy compassion, holy wisdom, and so forth. God is theonly supremely holy one (1Sam. 2:2; Rev. 15:4). God’sname is also holy; those who profane God’s name are condemnedas guilty (Exod. 20:7; Lev. 22:32). God is depicted as the one whohas concern for his holy name, which the Israelites profaned amongthe nations; God actively seeks to restore the holiness of hisdefiled name (Ezek. 36:21–23). God’s holiness is revealedby his righteous action (Isa. 5:16). Not only is God holy, but alsohe expects his people to be holy (Lev. 11:45; 19:2). All thesacrificial codes of Leviticus represent the moral requirements ofholiness for the worshipers. Because of God’s character ofholiness, he cannot tolerate sin in the lives of people, and hebrings judgment to those who do not repent (Hab. 1:13).
Loveand justice.Because “God is love,” no one reaches the true knowledgeof God without having love (1John 4:8). Images of the fatherand the faithful husband are frequently employed to portray God’slove (Deut. 1:31; Jer. 31:32; Hos. 2:14–20; 11:1–4).God’s love was supremely demonstrated by the giving of his onlySon Jesus Christ for his people (John 3:16; Rom. 5:7–8; 1John4:9–10). God expects his people to follow the model of Christ’ssacrificial love (1John 3:16).
God’sjustice is the foundation of his moral law and his ways (Deut. 32:4;Job 34:12; Ps. 9:16; Rev. 15:3). It is also seen in his will (Ps.99:4). God loves justice and acts with justice (Ps. 33:5). God’sjustice is demonstrated in judging people according to theirdeeds—punishing wickedness and rewarding righteousness (Ezek.18:20; Ps. 58:11; Rev. 20:12–13). God establishes justice byupholding the cause of the oppressed (Ps. 103:6) and by vindicatingthose afflicted (1Sam. 25:39). God is completely impartial inimplementing justice (Job 34:18–19). As with holiness, Godrequires his people to reflect his justice (Prov. 21:3).
Godkeeps a perfect balance between the attributes of love and justice.God’s love never infringes upon his justice, and vice versa.The cross of Jesus Christ perfectly shows these two attributes in oneact. Because of his love, God gave his only Son for his people;because of his justice, God punished his Son for the sake of theirsins. The good news is that God’s justice was satisfied by thework of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:25–26).
Righteousnessand mercy.God’s righteousness shows his unique moral perfection. God’snature, actions, and laws display his character of righteousness(Pss. 19:8–9; 119:137; Dan. 9:14). “Righteousness andjustice” are the foundation of God’s throne (Ps. 89:14).God’s righteousness was especially demonstrated in the work ofJesus Christ (Rom. 3:21–22). God’s righteousness willultimately be revealed in his final judgment (Rev. 19:2; 20–22;cf. Ps. 7:11).
TheEnglish word “mercy” renders various words in theoriginal languages: in Hebrew, khesed, khanan, rakham; in Greek,charis, eleos, oiktirmos, splanchnon. English Bibles translate thesevariously as “mercy,” “compassion,” “grace,”“kindness,” or “love.” The word “mercy”is chosen here as a representative concept (cf. Ps. 86:15). God’smercy is most clearly seen in his act of forgiving sinners. In thePsalter, “Have mercy on me” is the most common form ofexpression when the psalmist entreats God’s forgiveness (Pss.41:4, 10; 51:1). God’s mercy is shown abundantly to his chosenpeople (Eph. 2:4–8). Because of his mercy, their sins areforgiven (Mic. 7:18), their punishments are withheld (Ezra 9:13), andeven sinners’ prayers are heard (Ps. 51:1; Luke 18:13–14).God is “the Father of mercies” (2Cor. 1:3 NRSV).
Godkeeps a perfect balance between righteousness and mercy. Hisrighteousness and mercy never infringe upon each other, nor does oneoperate at the expense of the other. God’s abundant mercy isshown to sinners through Jesus Christ, but if they do not repent oftheir sins, his righteous judgment will be brought upon them.
Faithfulness.God’s faithfulness is revealed in keeping the covenant that hemade with his people. God “is the faithful God, keeping hiscovenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him andkeep his commandments” (Deut. 7:9). God is faithful to hischaracter, his name, and his word (Neh. 9:8; Ps. 106:8; 2Tim.2:13; Heb. 6:13–18). God’s faithfulness is clearly seenin fulfilling his promise (Josh. 23:14). God showed his faithfulnessby fulfilling all the promises that he made to Abraham (Gen. 12:2–3;Rom. 9:9; Gal. 4:28; Heb. 6:13–15), by having Solomon build thetemple that he promised to David (2Sam. 7:12–13; 1Kings8:17–21), and by sending his people into exile in Babylon andreturning them to their homeland (Jer. 25:8–11; Dan. 9:2–3).God’s faithfulness was ultimately demonstrated by sending JesusChrist, as was promised in the OT (Luke 24:44; Acts 13:32–33;1Cor. 15:3–8).
Goodness.Jesus said, “No one is good—except God alone” (Mark10:18). God demonstrates his goodness in his actions (Ps. 119:68), inhis work of creation (1Tim. 4:4), in his love (Ps. 86:5), andin his promises (Josh. 23:14–15).
Patience.God is “slow to anger” (Exod. 34:6; Num. 14:18), which isa favorite expression for his patience (Neh. 9:17; Pss. 86:15; 103:8;Joel 2:13). God is patient with sinful people for a long time (Acts13:18). Because of his patient character, he delays punishment (Isa.42:14). For instance, God was patient with his disobedient prophetJonah and also with the sinful people of Nineveh (Jon. 3:1–10).The purpose of God’s patience is to lead people towardrepentance (Rom.2:4).
Godof the Trinity
TheChristian God of the Bible is the triune God. God is one but existsin three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt.28:19). The Son is one with the Father (John 10:30); the Holy Spiritis one with God (2Sam. 23:2–3). All three share the samedivine nature; they are all-knowing, holy, glorious, and called“Lord” and “God” (Matt. 11:25; John 1:1;20:28; Acts 3:22; 5:3–4; 10:36; 1Cor. 8:6; 2Cor.3:17–18; 2Pet. 1:1). All three share in the same work ofcreation (Gen. 1:1–3), salvation (1Pet. 1:2), indwelling(John 14:23), and directing the church’s mission (Matt.28:18–20; Acts 16:6–10; 14:27; 13:2–4).
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.
Introduction
Name.Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title“Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). Thename “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was acommon male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ”is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh(“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually werenamed after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry ofJesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah(Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).
Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.
TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.
Theearly church tried to put together singular accounts, so-calledGospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionitesrepresents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Anotherharmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was producedaround AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning thelife of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, thePauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John.Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come,God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4).The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was apassion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. Thefirst extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’sletters (1Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognizedfrom the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1Cor.15:13–14).
Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.
TheJewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a storyabout the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus(Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in adifferent part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus isthe Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). Themajority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic butheavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source,the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but thesereferences are very late and of little historical value.
NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.
Jesus’Life
Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.
Onthe eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keepingwith the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus”(Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home ofhis parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel ofLuke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth instrength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke alsocontains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Jesuswas born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered atemple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford tosacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, ormetal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth wasnot a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground.Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently commonfirst-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Cananything good come from there?” (John 1:46).
Jesuswas also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy weresurely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnantbefore her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only theintervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal(Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem,far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinshiphospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay withdistant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcomebecause of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Maryhad to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feedingtrough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later inNazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son”(Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming himas one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewiserejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucifyhim!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21;John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled(Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter,vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71;Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His ownsiblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamedof his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his motherinto the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27)rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.
Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.
Matthewand Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum inGalilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13;Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirtyyears of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity orperhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of theLevites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning ofJesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples andthe sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Jesus’public ministry: chronology.Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28,and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple hadbeen forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as thetemple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out themoney changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding andexpansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during theeighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry ofJohn the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius(Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From thesedates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of thereign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset ofJesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.
TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.
Jesus’ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and hisJudean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry inGalilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.
Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.
AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.
DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).
TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).
Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesuswithdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician womanrequested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sentonly to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans hadlong resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality thatallotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere“crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Eventhe dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,”Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-muteman in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’sconfession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The citywas the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Socialconflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposteinteractions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel(Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomicfeathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who hadlittle value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16;Luke 18:15–17).
PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).
Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
TheIdentity of Jesus Christ
Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).
Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.
Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).
ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).
Rabbi/teacher.Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbisor Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguishedhim was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28,32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathereddisciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to joinhim in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).
Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.
Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).
Jesus’teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. Theseconflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions inwhich the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus usedthese interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gavereplies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’swill, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. TheSynoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations ofviolating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answersto such accusations often echoed the essence of 1Sam. 15:22,“To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). Anoverall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’public teaching.
TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.
Jesus’teachings found their authority in the reality of God’simminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9),necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence(Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—thefamily of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged,“Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness”(Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among propheticteachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his owngrounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt.10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).
Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).
Jesus’kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, andeschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internaltransformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring onlove (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus tobless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesustaught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father isperfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as yourFather is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” onesin Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful,and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godlycharacter.
Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).
Messiah.The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore theglories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability wascommon in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babyloniancaptivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace andprotection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer,one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice andrighteousness (2Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16;Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2;Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whosesuffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle ofexpectation in terms of a deliverer.
Jesus’authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianicimages in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearerscalled him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt.12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesusas the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). Inline with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesusfocused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regenerationthrough his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).
Eschatologicalprophet.Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewishapocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God tointervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom ofGod. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ propheciesconcerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2,15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Inaddition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representativeof the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30).Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images ofcoming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt.24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).
SufferingSon of God.Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth wasparadigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa.61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so herevealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptlyportrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ ownteachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13,31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “TheSon of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give hislife as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly careerended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewishcomponents (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65;15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24;18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.
Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).
ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).
Asmuch as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory overdeath was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost,Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises(Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31).Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through hisresurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his lifeand work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him asLord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31;Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).
Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).
Jesus’Purpose and Community
Inthe Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, whopreaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent(4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter thekingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, onemade in Jesus’ blood (26:28).
Inthe prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identityof Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidingsof salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of thegospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.
Lukelikewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose ofJesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is thekingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John theBaptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesusanswered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen andheard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosyare cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good newsis proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, aspresented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery ofsight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God alreadypresent in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20;8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).
Inthe Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signsthroughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, hisidentity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah,the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundantlife is lived out in community.
Inthe Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community ofGod (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but theycontinued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout hisministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a callto loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38;Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50;Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock Iwill build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call tocommunity. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community wasreplaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).
Jesus’ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’sfamily—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained byadopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through theinitiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16;10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).
TheQuests for the Historical Jesus
Thequest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from ahistorical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary byscholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding ofthe church.
Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.
In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.
Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.
Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.
Because Scripture sees all things as providentially arrangedand sustained by God’s sovereign power at all times (Heb. 1:3),miracles are not aberrations in an otherwise closed and mechanicaluniverse. Nor are miracles raw demonstrations of divinity designed toovercome prejudice or unbelief and to convince people of theexistence of God (Mark 8:11–12). Still less are they cleverconjuring tricks involving some kind of deception that can beotherwise explained on a purely scientific basis. Rather, God in hisinfinite wisdom sometimes does unusual and extraordinary things tocall attention to himself and his activity. Miracles are divinelyordained acts of God that dramatically alert us to the presence ofhis glory and power and advance his saving purposes in redemptivehistory.
Terminology
Thebiblical writers describe miracles with various terms, such as“signs,” “wonders,” and “miracles”(or “powers”), which can carry various connotations. Asthe word “sign” suggests, divine miracles are significantand should cause us to think more deeply about God in a way that goesbeyond mere amazement or curiosity (Exod. 4:30–31; John 2:11).Not all of God’s signs are miraculous. Some are given as partof his ordering of the natural world (Gen. 1:14) or as anencouragement to faith that God will do as he has said (e.g., therainbow in Gen. 9:8–17; the blood of the Passover lamb in Exod.12:13). (See also Sign.)
Oftencoupled with signs are “wonders” (Jer. 32:21; John 4:48;2Cor. 12:12). If the depiction of miracles as “signs”indicates an appeal to the intellect, that of “wonders”points to the emotions. Miracles evoke astonishment and awe at theone who did them.
TheNT word “miracle” carries the meaning of power andtherefore points to the supernatural source of these events (Luke10:13; Acts 8:13).
Miraclesin the Bible
OldTestament.In the OT, miracles are not evenly distributed but rather are foundin greater number during times of great redemptive significance, suchas the exodus and the conquest of Canaan. Miracles were performedalso during periods of apostasy, such as in the days of theninth-century prophets Elijah and Elisha. Common to both of theseeras is the powerful demonstration of the superiority of God overpagan deities (Exod. 7–12; 1Kings 18:20–40).
NewTestament. Inthe NT, miracles often are acts of compassion, but more significantlythey attest the exalted status of Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 2:22) andthe saving power of his word (Heb. 2:3–4). In the SynopticGospels, they reveal the coming of God’s kingdom and theconquest of Satan’s dominion (Matt. 8:16–17; 12:22–30;Mark 3:27). They point to the person of Jesus as the promised Messiahof OT Scripture (Matt. 4:23; 11:4–6). John shows a preferencefor the word “signs,” and his Gospel is structured aroundthem (John 20:30–31). According to John, the signs that Jesusperformed were such that only the one who stood in a uniquerelationship to the Father as the Son of God could do them.
Miraclesand faith.Just as entrenched skepticism is injurious to faith, so too is naivecredulity, for although signs and wonders witness to God, falseprophets also perform them “to deceive, if possible, even theelect” (Matt. 24:24). Christians are to exercise discernmentand not be led astray by such impostors (Matt. 7:15–20).
Therelationship between miracles and faith is not as straightforward assometimes supposed. Miracles do not necessarily produce faith, nordoes faith necessarily produce miracles. Miracles were intended tobring about the faith that leads to eternal life (John 20:31), butnot all who witnessed them believed (John 10:32). Additionally, Jesusregarded a faith that rested only on the miracle itself as precarious(Mark 8:11–13; John 2:23–25; 4:48), though better than nofaith at all (John 10:38). Faith that saves must ultimately find itsgrounding in the person of Jesus as the Son of God.
Itis also clear that although Jesus always encouraged faith in thosewho came to him for help (Mark 9:23), and that he deliberatelylimited his miraculous powers in the presence of unbelief (Mark 6:5),many of his miracles were performed on those who did not or could notexercise faith (Matt. 12:22; Mark 1:23–28; 5:1–20; Luke14:1–4).
Thefact that Jesus performed miracles was never an issue; rather, hisopponents disputed the source of his power (Mark 3:22). Argumentsabout his identity were to be settled by appeal not to miracles butto the word of God (Matt. 22:41–46).
Thefunction of miracles.Miracle accounts function in a symbolic and prophetic manner. Hence,the cursing of the fig tree was prophetic of the coming judgment(Mark 11:12–21). The unusual two-stage healing of the blind manof Bethsaida symbolized Peter’s incomplete understanding ofJesus’ messiahship (Mark 8:22–33).
Themiraculous element of Jesus’ ministry carries an eschatologicalsignificance, pointing to the order of things in the age to come. Forexample, the nature miracles (Mark 4:35–41) look forward to theredemption of creation itself, which is presently subject tofrustration and decay (Rom. 8:20–21); the healing miraclespoint to a day when disease and deformity will be abolished (Rev.21:4); and miracles in which the dead are raised to life anticipate atime when death itself will be no more (Rev. 20:14; 21:4). From thisperspective, the miracles are a gracious foretaste of a far moreglorious future.
Several different Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek biblical wordsare translated into English as “nail.” First, there arethe common fasteners that attach one item to another (Jer. 10:4),often made of iron to join pieces of wood (1Chron. 22:3; Isa.41:7), or even made of gold to overlay sheets of gold (2Chron.3:9). The writer of Ecclesiastes speaks metaphorically of wisesayings as “firmly embedded nails” (Eccles. 12:11). Romansoldiers fastened Jesus to the cross with nails (John 20:25). Second,there are pegs either driven into walls from which people hung items(Isa. 22:25; Ezek. 15:3) or used to anchor tents (Isa. 33:20). Thetent pegs for the tabernacle were made of bronze (Exod. 27:19), andJael used a tent peg to kill Sisera (Judg. 4:21–22). Isaiahspeaks metaphorically of Eliakim as one whom God will drive “likea peg into a firm place” (Isa. 22:23). Finally, there are thenails of fingers (Dan. 4:33). Deuteronomy prescribes the trimming ofnails as part of the purification process for Israelite men to marrycaptive women (Deut. 21:12).
The word “sign” usually is a translation of theHebrew word ’otor the Greek word sēmeion.Signs are visible, typically being an object, a mark, an event, or acustom. In addition, signs are symbolic, pointing to things not seen.Signs often reveal or share some quality with the unseen reality towhich they point, and so they are a token of that reality. In theBible, signs typically are caused or instituted by God, and in manycases they are miraculous. However, in a few cases signs are setforth as the work of other gods (as in Deut. 13:1–2) or asbeing instituted by merely human design (as in Num. 2:2). In summary,a sign may be defined as something seen that points to somethingunseen, and that is instituted or created to do so by someone’sintention.
Severalexamples support this definition. Keeping the Sabbath is a sign ofGod’s rest after creating the world (Exod. 31:15); the Sabbathrest itself imitates God’s rest. Circumcision is a sign ofGod’s promise to both Abraham and his descendants; circumcisionis also a physical mark that is related to human fertility (Gen.17:11). The rainbow is a sign of God’s promise not to destroythe world by water and rain; rainbows appear only with rain (Gen.9:13). (In the original Hebrew text, both the custom of circumcisionand the rainbow that appears after the great flood are called“signs.”) The early Passover plagues both bring and warnof judgment, while the healing miracles of Jesus both bring andpromise blessing. While signs point to unseen realities, theserealities do not diminish the value or importance of the visibleworld. Instead, the unseen realities themselves are ultimatelyexpressed in the visible world.
DivineIntervention
Theword “sign” usually refers to an event that cannot beplausibly explained by natural or human causes but is consistent withintervention by God or by some other divine power. An importantexample of this occurs in the book of Exodus. In Exodus, Mosespredicts each kind of plague that will occur and the time of itsoccurrence. Many of those plagues, such as the plague of locusts(Exod. 10:14–15), are events that could occur naturally.However, the merely natural occurrence of so many plagues in such ashort time is quite improbable. It is likewise improbable that Mosescould simply guess beforehand the type and timing of all theseplagues.
Ultimately,a merely natural explanation for these plagues does not provecredible to the Egyptians. However, the plagues are consistent withacts of divine intervention, provided one does not rule out thatpossibility beforehand. They are consistent because Moses gives aplausible explanation of why God would intervene at this time, eventhough God had not intervened within living memory. All theseevidences together are considered sufficient to infer that some godhas caused the signs. The signs are portrayed as objectively knownevents. When Pharaoh refuses to admit that Moses can bring plagues,Pharaoh’s own officials say that he should know better (Exod.10:7). The officials believe in the reality of the signs even thoughthey do not follow the faith or God of Moses.
Throughoutthe Bible, signs give evidence of God’s direct action andidentity, but they are not given as evidence for God’sexistence. God’s existence is to be known by other means; forexample, Paul writes that the existence of the Creator is “clearlyseen” from the created world (Rom. 1:20).
Miraclesand Faith
Miraculoussigns often are given to validate a prophet and his message. Signsare especially frequent when that prophetic message is a covenantfrom God that has life-or-death consequences. Both the Mosaiccovenant (Deut. 30:15–20) and the new covenant of Jesus (Luke22:15–20; John 5:24–29) warn of life and death. In theOT, signs occur most prolifically at the hands of Moses. The signsmanifested on behalf of Moses are explicitly given so that peoplewill believe in Moses and follow God’s covenant (Exod. 4:1–9;19:9).
Signsoccur even more frequently and prominently in the NT. Jesus makes thelame walk, heals the blind, and even raises the dead (John 5:1–9;9:1–7; 11:1–44). Throughout the Gospels, Jesus ischaracterized as performing many signs, and the signs are cited asone reason to believe in Jesus (John 20:30–31). The signs arecharacteristic of Jesus’ ministry and later of his apostles’ministries. The tradition that Jesus performed signs is interwoventhroughout the four Gospels as we have them, even in portions oftenthought to reflect earlier sources. The most important sign in the NTis the resurrection of Jesus, since this is the ultimate validationof Jesus by God, and the Christian faith hangs upon the truth ofJesus’ resurrection (1Cor. 15:1–20).
Althoughsigns are given to elicit faith, human nature and desires are suchthat reasonable belief does not always take root. As with Pharaoh,many others throughout the OT do not believe despite seeing signs(e.g., Num. 14:11; Ps. 78:11). In the Gospels, many will not believeany reports about miraculous signs. They instead demand to see signspersonally (Mark 8:11–12; John 4:48; 6:30; 9:27–41;20:29) or attribute them to Satan. The Passover signs were to beremembered and credited by later generations (Exod. 12:26–27).Similarly, the signs performed by Jesus were intended by theevangelists to be credited by readers who had not seen them (John20:29–31). Belief is not expected without inquiry (John4:39–42; Acts 17:11); however, unbelief in the face of evidenceis seen as a human failing (John 11:37–40).
In the OT, heavenly beings or angels are sometimes referredto as “sons of God” (Gen. 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Pss.82:6; 89:6). The more important background for the NT, however, isthe use of the term with reference to the nation Israel and themessianic king from David’s line. Israel was God’s son byvirtue of God’s unique calling, deliverance, and protection.Hosea 11:1 reads, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, andout of Egypt I called my son.” Similar references to God as thefather of his people appear throughout the OT (Exod. 4:22; Num.11:12; Deut. 14:1; 32:5, 19; Isa. 43:6; 45:11; Jer. 3:4, 19; 31:9,20; Hos. 2:1). The king from the line of David is referred to as theson of God by virtue of his special relationship to God and hisrepresentative role among the people. In the Davidic covenant, Godpromises David concerning his descendant, “I will be hisfather, and he will be my son” (2Sam. 7:14; cf. Pss. 2:7;89:26). Later Judaism appears to have taken up these passages andidentified the coming Messiah as the “son of God.”
Inthe Synoptic Gospels, Jesus’ divine sonship is closely linkedto his messiahship. The angel Gabriel connects Jesus’ status as“Son of the Most High” with his reception of the throneof David (Luke 1:32). At Jesus’ baptism (which Luke identifiesas Jesus’ messianic anointing [Luke 3:21; 4:1, 14, 18]), theFather declares Jesus to be “my Son, whom I love” (3:22),an allusion to Ps. 2:7. Satan tempts Jesus as the Son of God toabandon obedience to the Father and claim independent authority(Matt. 4:1–11; Luke 4:1–13). Peter confesses that Jesusis “the Messiah, the Son of the living God” (Matt.16:16), and the high priest questions whether Jesus is “theMessiah, the Son of the Blessed One” (Mark 14:61; Matt. 26:63).In these and other texts “Son of God” is almostsynonymous with “Messiah” (cf. Mark 1:1; Luke 4:41;22:70; John 11:27; 20:31; Acts 9:20, 22). In other contexts, Jesus’divine sonship appears to exceed messianic categories. Jesus prays toGod as his Father (“Abba” [Mark 14:36]) and refers tohimself as the Son, who uniquely knows and reveals the Father. TheFather has committed all things to him. No one knows the Father butthe Son and those to whom the Son reveals him (Matt. 11:25–27;Luke 10:21–22). It is by virtue of Jesus’ unique sonshipthat he invites his disciples to pray to God as their Father (Matt.6:9).
Inthe Fourth Gospel, the status of Jesus as the Son of God isespecially important, indicating both Jesus’ uniquerelationship with the Father and his essential deity. John introducesthe notion of preexistent sonship in which the “Word”from creation is the Son (John 1:1–18; 17:5, 24). God sendsinto the world his Son (3:16), who reflects the glory of the Father(1:14; 14:6–11) and who will soon return (14:28). Jesus affirmsthat “I and the Father are one” (10:30), that “theFather is in me, and I in the Father” (10:38). John’spurpose in writing is to provoke faith “that Jesus is theMessiah, the Son of God” (20:31).
Somescholars reject the royal Jewish background of “the Son of God”when investigating the phrase in the Gospels. Instead, they appeal toHellenistic sources to argue that Jesus as the Son of God is a“divineman” (theios anēr), which accounts for his ability to workmiracles. This line of thinking, however, is fraught with manydifficulties, not least of which is that the epithet is never used todescribe the “divineman” in Greek literature.
InPaul’s thinking, the corporate, Israelite background of “Sonof God” is renewed with reference to the NT people of God. Paulstates that “theirs [the people of Israel] is the adoption tosonship” (Rom. 9:4). Although ethnic Israelites are rightfullycalled “sons of God,” this status is contingent uponbeing people of faith: “So in Jesus Christ you are all childrenof God through faith” (Gal. 3:26); Jesus’ death as theSon effects salvation (Rom. 8:2, 32; Gal. 2:20). The Spirit alsoplays a role in testifying with the spirits of believers that theyare indeed children of God (Rom. 8:15–16), by which they cry,“Abba, Father” (Gal. 4:3–6). The believers’status as God’s children will be completely revealed when theyshare in Christ’s glory (Rom. 8:17).
One of Jesus’ original twelve apostles (Matt. 10:3;Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15), referred to as “Didymus,” meaning“twin” (John 11:16; 20:24; 21:2). The infamous title of“Doubting Thomas” comes from his refusal to believe inJesus’ resurrection. Thomas said, “Unless I see the nailmarks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put myhand into his side, I will not believe” (John 20:25). A weeklater the risen Jesus again appeared to the apostles, includingThomas. Thomas’s response was “My Lord and my God!”(John 20:28). Despite his previous disbelief in Jesus’resurrection, Thomas was present with the other apostles in the upperroom (Acts 1:13).
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
John 20:24-31
is mentioned in the definition.
Traditionally identified with John the son of Zebedee, theGospel of John depicts him as the ideal eyewitness to Jesus and asthe ideal author. He first explicitly appears in John 13–21. Inrepresenting the Beloved Disciple as the author of the Gospel of John(John 21:24–25), the author thus claims a privileged place forits revelation about Jesus, perhaps in relation to the Gospel ofMark, which many in the early church considered to have Peter as itsprimary source of testimony.
Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.
Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.
The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.
The Development of Hermeneutics
The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.
From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.
Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circ*mstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.
From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.
More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.
Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic
An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circ*mstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.
Linguistics
An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.
A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.
Literature and Literary Theory
The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.
Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.
History
As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circ*mstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.
Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).
Humility and the Attitude of the Reader
Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.
Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).
Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation
Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.
The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).
Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.
Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.
Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).
Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.
Eternal life usually is mentioned in reference to human life, where it means unending life in the body, free from death. The expression, though most common in the NT, is drawn from the OT. The book of Daniel says that many who “sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt” (12:2). This yearning for eternal life is also expressed in Genesis, where those who eat of the “tree of life” will “live forever” (3:22). In Deuteronomy, God likewise declares, “I live forever” (32:40). Among the DSS, 4Q418 (frag. 69) and 1QS (4:7), both of which predate the NT, also refer to everlasting life.
The NT expression “eternal life” may seem to have a different meaning than the OT expression “everlasting life.” Any such appearance arises only in translation to English, for the underlying Greek words in the NT have the same meaning as the underlying Hebrew words in the OT. The words are already treated synonymously by the LXX, an ancient translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek (predating the NT).
The English word “eternal” may refer to eternity past and future, but in biblical usage that word does not generally refer to eternity past. This is evident where the NT mentions “eternal fire” (Matt. 18:8) and “eternal punishment” (Matt. 25:46). It is also indicated where eternal life is seen as a future reward for the righteous (Dan. 12:2; Luke 18:30; Rom. 2:7; Gal. 6:8; Titus 1:2; 1John 2:25).
That life in the body is included in the NT concept of eternal life is evident from several considerations. Jesus says of everyone who believes in him, “I will raise them up at the last day” (John 6:40). The bodily nature of everlasting life is indicated by Jesus’ own resurrection, for his tomb was left empty. Jesus says after his own resurrection that a spirit “does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have” (Luke 24:39). The apostle Paul even writes that without the resurrection the Christian faith is invalidated (1Cor. 15:12–19). When Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,” he does not mean that resurrection is of the human spirit, but rather that perishable flesh and blood must first be made immortal (1Cor. 15:50–54; 2Cor. 5:4).
The prospect of eternal life is often contrasted with death and punishment, just as the Bible more generally contrasts the prospect of life with death and lawless behavior. In Gen. 3, the sin of Adam and Eve shows that people turn from God out of self-interest, so everlasting life is not given to them. Much later, the people of Israel are warned that they will suffer death if they break faith with the true God to follow other gods (Lev. 26; Deut. 28; 30:15–20). Later still, the book of Daniel warns plainly that resurrection is to everlasting life or to everlasting contempt (12:1–3). The NT likewise, drawing at times from the Hebrew prophets (e.g., Isa. 66:22–24), contrasts the prospect of eternal life with the prospect of punishment for doing evil (Matt. 25:31–46; John 5:28–29; Rom.6:23; Gal.6:8; Rev.20:10–15; 22:1–6).
Just as eternal life is contrasted with death, eternal life is sometimes referred to more fundamentally and simply as “life” (e.g., Matt. 19:17; Acts 11:18; 1John 3:14). All life comes from God, through his divine word (Gen. 1; Deut. 30:20; John 1:1–4). The NT says that God gave his Son the power to give eternal life, since the Son does only what God the Father commands (John 5:19–30; 6:57–58).
The NT promises eternal life to all who believe (trust) in God’s Son (John 3:16; 3:36; 6:40; 11:25–26; 20:31; 1John 5:13). To believe in God’s Son is to believe that God sent Jesus (John 17:8), to listen to Jesus’ message from God and so believe in God (5:24; 12:44), and to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah (20:31).
The belief in God and Jesus that secures eternal life is not mere mental assent, but rather is expressed in a life that turns from evil. Those who will receive eternal life are characterized by love rather than by hatred and murder (John 5:29; 1John 3:14–15). Only the righteous will enter into eternal life, and they are marked by their care for Jesus’ brothers and sisters: feeding the hungry and clothing the poor (Matt. 25:31–46). They do not live for themselves, nor do they give free rein to all human desires, but instead they are led by, and walk in accordance with, the Spirit of God (John 12:25; Gal. 5:16–21; 6:8).
Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.
Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.
The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.
The Development of Hermeneutics
The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.
From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.
Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circ*mstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.
From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.
More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.
Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic
An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circ*mstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.
Linguistics
An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.
A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.
Literature and Literary Theory
The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.
Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.
History
As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circ*mstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.
Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).
Humility and the Attitude of the Reader
Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.
Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).
Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation
Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.
The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).
Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.
Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.
Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).
Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.
FirstJohn is a letter written to reassure Christians ofthe security of their salvation in Christ. The letter contrasts thetruth of the original gospel taught by the author with the hereticaldoctrines of traveling teachers who sought to instill doubt and fearin the churches. The incarnation takes center stage as the climacticconfession of Christianity (1John 4:2–3). Christian loveflows out of God’s ultimate example of love in the atoningdeath of Christ.
Genre
FirstJohnis commonly referred to as a letter, but it bears none of thetraditional marks of a Greco-Roman letter. The author does notintroduce himself, the recipients are not named, there is no openinggreeting or wish for health, and there are no closing salutations.Some have suggested that 1John is a universal tract, but thecontent is too specific and polemical. FirstJohn is probably acircular letter intended for general distribution among the churchesassociated with the author.
MainThemes
FirstJohnrepeats many of the same themes as the Gospel of John. The historicalreality of the incarnation of Christ is a central theme in 1John(1:1–3). The incarnation is rooted in history and cannot bedivorced from that foundational fact. Christ’s “atoningsacrifice” is another foundational fact of Christian belief;however, it is not simply that Christ died a sacrificial death, butthat he did so “for our sins” (2:2; 4:10). The authorexplains the meaning of the atonement to help build the salvationconfidence of the struggling Christians. In a number of places theauthor places special stress on the forgiveness of sins that comesthrough Jesus’ blood. His death “purifies us from allsin” (1:7). He came to take away sin and to destroy the work ofthe devil (3:5, 8).
Loveis another resounding theme. Christians are to love one another inconcrete ways, reflecting the sacrificial love of Christ (2:16–18).Love is rooted in God and ultimately demonstrated at the cross (4:9).We will never find what love means if we start from the human end. Wemust start from the cross, where we see the love of God (4:10). Theauthor reminds his readers that they have the Holy Spirit and have noneed for further instruction by the false teachers (2:20–21,26–27). The Spirit of God is the Spirit of truth, who bearswitness that Jesus is Christ in the flesh (4:2, 6). Competing spiritsshould be tested and rejected as “antichrist” if theyfail to confess Christ (4:3).
FirstJohnis full of family imagery. The author repeatedly addresses hisreaders as “children,” “brothers,” and“beloved.” Being “born of God” is thehallmark of those who are “children of God” (2:23; 3:1–3,9–10). Children of God love one another and do what is right(3:10–11). Eternal life is a present possession that believerscan be assured of (5:13). Although the false teachers sow seeds ofdoubt, the author seeks to uproot them. Salvation is not for thosewho are spiritually enlightened but for all whose faith is in theblood of Christ.
LiteraryFeatures
Oneof the author’s favorite literary features is the repetition ofkey words. The word “love” appears over fifty times in1John. Love is the bedrock of the Christian faith. The verb “toknow” appears approximately forty times in 1John. Theauthor reassures his readers of their salvation by repeating whatthey already “know.” They “know” God andshould not fear the false teachers’ so-called knowledge. Theverb “to remain” appears twenty-four times. God, God’sword, Christ, truth, life, love, and the Holy Spirit all remain inbelievers. They, in turn, should remain in God, Christ, and thelight. In contrast, unbelievers remain in death (3:14). FirstJohnalso has strong dualistic contrasts: light/dark, love/hate,truth/falsehood (1–2; 4:6). The dualism of 1John issimilar to that found in the DSS, but its Christian character givesit a unique christocentric emphasis.
Authorship
FirstJohnand the Gospel of John share common vocabulary, writing style, andmany interlocking themes that point to a common author. The openingverses of 1John show a close affinity with the beginning of theGospel (John 1:1; 1John 1:1). Also, the purpose statements ofboth the Gospel and 1John concern faith in Christ and receivingeternal life (John 20:31; 1John 5:13). Some scholars believethe apostle John is the author, but this is impossible to prove fromthe text itself, since the author never mentions his name. Churchfathers such as Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullianattributed 1John to the apostle. An alternative theory is thatthe three letters were written by another John, known as John “theelder” (2John 1; 3John 1). The church historianEusebius thought that this elder John rather than the apostle Johnwas the author of the Johannine Letters. John the elder is thought tohave lived in Ephesus at about the same time as John the apostle. Yetthere is no indisputable proof that this person existed or that hewrote anything to churches in the area. Nevertheless, there isnothing in 1John that hinges on the exact identity of theauthor. He seems to be well advanced in years and regards the churchmembers as his “children” (2:1, 18, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4;5:21) and “friends” (3:2, 21; 4:1, 7, 11). He has a closerelationship with them and shows a genuine pastoral concern for theirwell-being. He claims to be an eyewitness of Jesus, the Word of life(1:1–3).
Audience,Life Setting, and Date
Audienceand date.The audience is a group of churches in fellowship with the author’schurch. This group of churches is often referred to as the JohannineCommunity, a community represented by the Johannine literature of theNT (Gospel of John, 1–3 John, Revelation). Whether thiscommunity functioned formally as such is unclear, but there seems tobe a close-knit network of churches associated with the author.Tradition places these churches in and around Ephesus at the end ofthe first century. Since John’s Gospel was written sometime inthe years AD 85–95, 1John was written probably not longafterward to churches in and around Ephesus.
Lifesetting.The exact life setting behind 1John is uncertain, but thechurches apparently were endangered by itinerant false teachersintent on distorting the gospel preached by the author. Theirteachings may have stemmed from a misinterpretation of John’sGospel, but this is difficult to prove. They were in fellowship withthe author at one time but broke away and charted their own deceptivedirection (1John 2:18–19, 26). The audience had alreadyheard the message of the gospel, including its command to love, andthis had already impacted their lives (2:8). They already knew thetruth of the gospel (2:21), but the false teachers began to sow seedsof doubt. This explains the purpose statement of 1John: “Iwrite these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of Godso that you may know that you have eternal life” (5:13). Theauthor’s purpose was not to correct the heretics, for theletter was not written to them, but to show his readers that thefalse teachers’ claims were indeed false.
Theidentity of the false teachers is unknown, but their teachingsreflected seeds of gnosticism and docetism and may have included someJewish influences. The more-advanced forms of gnosticism and docetismthat threatened the church in the second century were not yet fullydeveloped by the time of John, but similar ideas were alreadybeginning to infiltrate the church. Gnostics taught a radicaldivision between flesh and spirit. Flesh and matter were bad, butspirit was good. Because of this false premise, they may havemisinterpreted Jesus’ words in John’s Gospel: “Fleshgives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit”(John 3:6). A gnostic or a docetic who was “born from above”(see John 3:3 NIV mg.) was resurrected and became “otherworldly”and truly “spiritual.” Flesh was discarded as worthlessand evil. Although this was only one aspect of the false teaching, itwas enough to threaten the very core of the gospel of Christ in theflesh as well as a bodily resurrection. For the false teachers, Jesusonly seemed to have a genuine body of flesh and to suffer and die(docetism), since flesh was evil by nature (gnosticism). This notionthreatened the very heart of the Christian gospel.
Amongthe debated issues were the identity of Christ, the significance ofhis atoning death, the nature of salvation, and the shape ofChristian discipleship. The heretics claimed to be without sin(1John 1:8–2:2), continued to sin (3:6, 8, 10), disobeyedGod’s commands (1:6–7; 2:4–6; 5:2–3), did notlove their brothers and sisters in Christ yet claimed to love God(2:7–11; 3:10–18, 23; 4:7–11, 20–21), andloved the world (2:15–17; 4:4–6; 5:19). They erredregarding the nature and work of Christ. They denied that Jesus wasthe Christ and, by doing so, denied God as well (2:22; 5:1). Bydenying Jesus, they did not remain in God (4:15; 5:5, 10, 13). Theyrejected the historical fact that Christ came in the flesh (4:3).They also rejected the atonement of Christ (2:2; 3:5; 4:10; 5:6).Those who threatened the church may have valued the heavenly andspiritual realm and despised physical matter in such a way that itled them to place all their emphasis on the heavenly Christ ratherthan the human Jesus, and on their own “spiritual” statusas the children of God rather than their day-to-day actions. Theywere committed to a fundamentally different understanding of theChristian faith.
Theheretics were not content to keep their ideas to themselves, so theycirculated among the churches in order to spread their beliefs. Theysought to win people over to their understanding of things (2:26;4:1–3). This led to confusion among the believers who remainedfaithful to the gospel as it was proclaimed at the beginning, thegospel that had come from eyewitnesses such as the author. As aresult, these Christians doubted their salvation, doubted that theyreally knew God and Christ, and doubted that they were experiencingeternal life. Clearly, the author viewed the teachings and practicesof the false teachers as a threat to the proper understanding oftruth and to the well-being of his readers.
Outline
I.Prologue: The Incarnate Word of Life (1:1–4)
II.Walking in the Light (1:5–2:2)
III.Keeping His Commands (2:3–11)
IV.Do Not Love the World (2:12–17)
V.A Warning against Antichrists (2:18–27)
VI.The Hope of God’s Children (2:28–3:3)
VII.Born of God (3:4–10)
VIII.Love One Another (3:11–18)
IX.Assurance and Obedience (3:19–24)
X.The Spirits of Truth and Falsehood (4:1–6)
XI.The Priority of God’s Love (4:7–12)
XII.Christian Love (4:13–5:4)
XIII.The True Faith Confirmed (5:5–12)
XIV.Concluding Remarks (5:13–21)
The English word “gospel” translates the Greekword euangelion, which is very important in the NT, being usedseventy-six times. The word euangelion (eu= “good,”angelion= “announcement”), in its contemporary usein the Hellenistic world, was not the title of a book but rather adeclaration of good news. Euangelion was used in the Roman Empirewith reference to significant events in the life of the emperor, whowas thought of as a savior with divine status. These events includeddeclarations at the time of his birth, his coming of age, and hisaccession to the throne. The NT usage of the term can also be tracedto the OT (e.g., Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1), which looked forward to thecoming of the Messiah, who would bring a time of salvation. This goodnews, which is declared in the NT, is that Jesus has fulfilled God’spromises to Israel, and now the way of salvation is open to all.
TheGospel Message
Theapostle Paul recognizes that the gospel is centered on the death,burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1Cor. 15:1–5). Hestates that this gospel is the power of God for the salvation ofeveryone who believes (Rom. 1:16), a sacred trust (1Tim. 1:11),the word of truth (Eph. 1:13), and an authoritative pronouncementthat requires a response (Rom. 10:16; 2Cor. 11:4; 2Thess.1:8). The declaration of this good news is found on the lips of Jesusin the Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 11:5; Luke 4:18), who calls people torespond in repentance and belief (Mark 1:15). The good news is alsoin the early apostolic preaching, where it is associated with theproclamation of Christ (Acts 5:42; 8:35; 11:20).
Therecords of apostolic preaching in Acts are records of the earliestpublic declaration of this gospel. The apostle Peter gives three suchspeeches (Acts 2:14–41; 3:11–4:4; 10:34–43), whosecontent can be summarized as follows. The age of fulfillment hasdawned through the birth, life, ministry, and resurrection of JesusChrist (2:22–31), which has ushered in the “latter days”foretold by the prophets (3:18–26). Jesus, by his resurrection,has been exalted to the right hand of God as the head of the newIsrael (2:32–36), and the Holy Spirit has been given to thechurch as the sign of Christ’s present power and exaltation(10:44–48). This age will reach its consummation at the returnof Christ (3:20–21), and in response to this gospel an appealis made for repentance, with the offer of forgiveness, the HolySpirit, and salvation (2:37–41).
Thisdeclaration of the gospel is concerned primarily with what waspreached rather than what was written. Itinerant preachers of thisgospel were known as “evangelists,” which in Greek isclosely related to the term euangelion (Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; 2Tim.4:5). Some scholars believe that during the stage of oraltransmission, the gospel accounts developed a certain form throughrepetition, which helps explain some similarities between laterwritten accounts of the gospel.
FromOral to Written Gospel
Later,this “oral” gospel was written down, for several reasons.With the rapid spread of Christianity, as recorded in the book ofActs, a need arose for a more efficient dissemination of the messageof Jesus than was available by oral means. Furthermore, there was aneed to keep the message alive because some of the apostles had died(e.g., James in Acts 12:2) and many churches were facing oppositionand persecution. The written Gospels would facilitate catecheticaland liturgical needs and encourage persecuted Christians to continuefollowing Jesus by telling the story of his faithfulness throughgreat suffering. These written Gospels would also contain examples ofthose who persevered in following Jesus and of those who denied himand betrayed him. These accounts about Jesus and those who followedhim became foundational documents for the early church.
Itshould be noted that the gospel was not written down in order to giveit greater authority. The first-century context was largely an oralculture, in which storytelling and the rehearsal of facts wasintegral. Papias, a leader of the church in Hierapolis in Asia Minorwho died around AD 130, states his preference for oral traditionrather than written information about Jesus: “For I did notthink that information from books would help me as much as the wordof a living and surviving voice” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl.3.39.4). There is, however, a traceable trajectory from the gospelpreached by the apostles to the written accounts that bear the namesof Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It is generally held that theauthors/editors of the four canonical Gospels were using oral and/orwritten sources (Luke 1:1–4), and that their respective Gospelswere written in the second half of the first century.
Themajority of biblical scholars hold that Mark was the first Gospel tobe written (c. AD 66). According to tradition, its editor/author wasJohn Mark, a close friend of the apostle Peter (1Pet. 5:13) anda part-time companion of the apostle Paul (Acts 12:12; Col. 4:10;2Tim. 4:11). This tradition is not without basis. Papias says,“Mark, who had indeed been Peter’s interpreter,accurately wrote as much as he remembered, yet not in order, aboutthat which was either said or done by the Lord” (Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 3.39.15). This tradition is also outlined by Clement ofAlexandria, who, around AD 200, wrote, “When Peter had publiclypreached the word at Rome, and by the Spirit had proclaimed thegospel, then those present, who were many, exhorted Mark, as one whohad followed him for a long time and remembered what had been spoken,to make a record of what he said; and that he did this, anddistributed the Gospel among those that asked him” (Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 6.14.5–7; cf. 2.15.1–2).
Itis widely held that Matthew and Luke used Mark as one of theirsources: of the material in Mark, over 97percent is repeated inMatthew and over 88percent in Luke. Matthew and Luke alsocontain material that appears to come from a common written sourcethat is not found in Mark. Scholars have named this source as “Q”(from the German Quelle= “source”), although thismay be a collection of sources rather than a single document.
Furthermore,the association of the Fourth Gospel with the apostle John goes backto Irenaeus (c. AD 180), who states, “John, the disciple of theLord, who leaned on his breast, also published the gospel whileliving at Ephesus in Asia” (Haer. 3.1.1, as cited in Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 5.8.4). By the second century, the term “gospel”is used for the written accounts of the life, death, and resurrectionof Jesus (e.g., Did. 11.3; 15.4). Justin Martyr (c. AD 140) refers tothe “memoirs of the apostles” (1Apol. 67) andIrenaeus (c. AD 180) mentions the four canonical Gospels by name(Haer. 3.11.7).
ThePurpose and Genre of the Gospels
Purpose.The Gospels were written to convey theology and to create and confirmfaith. They do not give an objectively neutral account of the life ofJesus; they enthusiastically endorse their protagonist and condemnthose who oppose him. They differ from traditional biographies inthat they give little information about the chronology of Jesus’life. Only two of the Gospels, Matthew and Luke, tell of the eventssurrounding Jesus’ birth. Luke alone tells of an event inJesus’ childhood (Luke 2:41–52). It is virtuallyincidental that Jesus worked as a carpenter and had brothers andsisters (Mark 6:3). A large percentage of each of the four canonicalGospels is devoted to the last week of Jesus’ life; of thesixteen chapters of Mark’s Gospel, six are devoted to the oneweek from Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem until his resurrection.
Theprimary intentions of the authors/editors of the written Gospels werenot to give biographical details but rather to lead the reader to anacknowledgment of the identity of Jesus and a belief in the purposeof his mission (Luke 1:4; John 20:31). Their theological purposes,however, do not necessarily compromise their commitment to historicalaccuracy. Jesus is presented as a real, historical figure who livedwithin a specific historical time frame. Luke appears to be moreconcerned than the other evangelists with historical details, givinga rough date for Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1–2) and a morespecific time for Jesus’ baptism (3:1–2).
Genre.The discerning reader of the Gospels is forced to ask questionsconcerning the literary genre(s) of these texts. Such a discussion isimperative, as the interpretation of a section of any piece ofliterature will largely be determined by the function of the textwithin a certain literary genre. Prior to the 1970s, most NT scholarsbelieved that the Gospels formed a unique literary genre and weretherefore distinct from other first-century literary forms. Thisconclusion was based on the belief that the written Gospels werecollections of smaller sections sewn together by the evangelists, andthat the documents as a whole lacked coherence. Since then, thispresupposition has been challenged, largely because scholars haveseen that the Gospel writers were real editors and authors who werenot just collecting primitive source material but were using thatmaterial to write a larger story about Jesus. The written Gospelstherefore have overall coherence and purpose; they were written insuch a way as to bring about a desired response in the reader. Suchan overall intention may have stronger similarities with differentgenres in the Greco-Roman world of theNT.
TheGospels have been associated with several genres. They bear someresemblance to aretalogies, which were narratives about divinepersons in antiquity from which flowed moral instructions. Thesestories often involved miraculous events at the subject’s birthor death or during life, and they included the presence of bothdisciples and opponents. Within these aretalogies, the narrative wassecondary to the morality. An association with aretalogies,therefore, would encourage the reader to give greater attention tomoral teaching than to events in which this teaching is embedded.Similarly, others have seen the Gospels as essentially a collectionof wisdom sayings set in a historicized narrative; this view againgives priority to sayings and is doubtful of the historicity of thenarrative. Such views that downplay the narrative, and particularlythe miracles in Jesus’ life, have led others to argue theopposite extreme, which sees the Gospels, and Luke-Acts inparticular, as examples of ancient novels, with their focus onmiracle stories. Many scholars have rejected the emphasis on eithersayings or narrative, arguing that the literary genre that theGospels most closely resemble is ancient biographies (bioi). Thesecontained praise for the protagonist, rhetoric, moral philosophy, anda concern for character.
Althoughthe Gospels use different literary motifs that are reflective ofdifferent genres of the Greco-Roman world, they do not exactlyreplicate a known genre. They contain material not found in otherHellenistic literature of the time—for example, the fulfillmentof OT expectations and their desire to address particular issuesfaced by the early church, such as opposition; the Gentile mission;the need to redefine Israel in the light of Jesus’ life, death,and resurrection; and the nature of Christian discipleship. Unlikeother literature of the time, they do not name their authors, andwith the exception of Luke, they lack traditional literary devicessuch as prefaces. They are therefore to be seen as unique, or atleast as a distinct subgenre of ancient biographies.
Canonicaland Noncanonical Gospels
Theprogression from the events of Jesus’ life to the oralpreaching of this gospel to the first-century writing of the storyled to the acceptance of the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark,Luke, and John into the NT canon. There is also a significant body ofliterature that is normally referred to as the noncanonical gospels.These later documents were neither widely accepted nor viewed asauthoritative, but they provide useful insights into the nature ofearly Christianity. A significant noncanonical gospel is the Gospelof Thomas, which is part of a large collection of works discovered atNag Hammadi (Egypt) in 1945. The Gospel of Thomas does not contain aresurrection account and is primarily a collection of sayings.
Thecanonical Gospels are not more authoritative than other sections ofScripture, but because they focus on Jesus’ ministry, withparticular attention to his death and resurrection, they draw theattention of the reader to the fulfillment of God’s purpose inthe life and work of Jesus, the Messiah. They are therefore of greatimportance within Scripture.
The English word “gospel” translates the Greekword euangelion, which is very important in the NT, being usedseventy-six times. The word euangelion (eu= “good,”angelion= “announcement”), in its contemporary usein the Hellenistic world, was not the title of a book but rather adeclaration of good news. Euangelion was used in the Roman Empirewith reference to significant events in the life of the emperor, whowas thought of as a savior with divine status. These events includeddeclarations at the time of his birth, his coming of age, and hisaccession to the throne. The NT usage of the term can also be tracedto the OT (e.g., Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1), which looked forward to thecoming of the Messiah, who would bring a time of salvation. This goodnews, which is declared in the NT, is that Jesus has fulfilled God’spromises to Israel, and now the way of salvation is open to all.
TheGospel Message
Theapostle Paul recognizes that the gospel is centered on the death,burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1Cor. 15:1–5). Hestates that this gospel is the power of God for the salvation ofeveryone who believes (Rom. 1:16), a sacred trust (1Tim. 1:11),the word of truth (Eph. 1:13), and an authoritative pronouncementthat requires a response (Rom. 10:16; 2Cor. 11:4; 2Thess.1:8). The declaration of this good news is found on the lips of Jesusin the Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 11:5; Luke 4:18), who calls people torespond in repentance and belief (Mark 1:15). The good news is alsoin the early apostolic preaching, where it is associated with theproclamation of Christ (Acts 5:42; 8:35; 11:20).
Therecords of apostolic preaching in Acts are records of the earliestpublic declaration of this gospel. The apostle Peter gives three suchspeeches (Acts 2:14–41; 3:11–4:4; 10:34–43), whosecontent can be summarized as follows. The age of fulfillment hasdawned through the birth, life, ministry, and resurrection of JesusChrist (2:22–31), which has ushered in the “latter days”foretold by the prophets (3:18–26). Jesus, by his resurrection,has been exalted to the right hand of God as the head of the newIsrael (2:32–36), and the Holy Spirit has been given to thechurch as the sign of Christ’s present power and exaltation(10:44–48). This age will reach its consummation at the returnof Christ (3:20–21), and in response to this gospel an appealis made for repentance, with the offer of forgiveness, the HolySpirit, and salvation (2:37–41).
Thisdeclaration of the gospel is concerned primarily with what waspreached rather than what was written. Itinerant preachers of thisgospel were known as “evangelists,” which in Greek isclosely related to the term euangelion (Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; 2Tim.4:5). Some scholars believe that during the stage of oraltransmission, the gospel accounts developed a certain form throughrepetition, which helps explain some similarities between laterwritten accounts of the gospel.
FromOral to Written Gospel
Later,this “oral” gospel was written down, for several reasons.With the rapid spread of Christianity, as recorded in the book ofActs, a need arose for a more efficient dissemination of the messageof Jesus than was available by oral means. Furthermore, there was aneed to keep the message alive because some of the apostles had died(e.g., James in Acts 12:2) and many churches were facing oppositionand persecution. The written Gospels would facilitate catecheticaland liturgical needs and encourage persecuted Christians to continuefollowing Jesus by telling the story of his faithfulness throughgreat suffering. These written Gospels would also contain examples ofthose who persevered in following Jesus and of those who denied himand betrayed him. These accounts about Jesus and those who followedhim became foundational documents for the early church.
Itshould be noted that the gospel was not written down in order to giveit greater authority. The first-century context was largely an oralculture, in which storytelling and the rehearsal of facts wasintegral. Papias, a leader of the church in Hierapolis in Asia Minorwho died around AD 130, states his preference for oral traditionrather than written information about Jesus: “For I did notthink that information from books would help me as much as the wordof a living and surviving voice” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl.3.39.4). There is, however, a traceable trajectory from the gospelpreached by the apostles to the written accounts that bear the namesof Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It is generally held that theauthors/editors of the four canonical Gospels were using oral and/orwritten sources (Luke 1:1–4), and that their respective Gospelswere written in the second half of the first century.
Themajority of biblical scholars hold that Mark was the first Gospel tobe written (c. AD 66). According to tradition, its editor/author wasJohn Mark, a close friend of the apostle Peter (1Pet. 5:13) anda part-time companion of the apostle Paul (Acts 12:12; Col. 4:10;2Tim. 4:11). This tradition is not without basis. Papias says,“Mark, who had indeed been Peter’s interpreter,accurately wrote as much as he remembered, yet not in order, aboutthat which was either said or done by the Lord” (Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 3.39.15). This tradition is also outlined by Clement ofAlexandria, who, around AD 200, wrote, “When Peter had publiclypreached the word at Rome, and by the Spirit had proclaimed thegospel, then those present, who were many, exhorted Mark, as one whohad followed him for a long time and remembered what had been spoken,to make a record of what he said; and that he did this, anddistributed the Gospel among those that asked him” (Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 6.14.5–7; cf. 2.15.1–2).
Itis widely held that Matthew and Luke used Mark as one of theirsources: of the material in Mark, over 97percent is repeated inMatthew and over 88percent in Luke. Matthew and Luke alsocontain material that appears to come from a common written sourcethat is not found in Mark. Scholars have named this source as “Q”(from the German Quelle= “source”), although thismay be a collection of sources rather than a single document.
Furthermore,the association of the Fourth Gospel with the apostle John goes backto Irenaeus (c. AD 180), who states, “John, the disciple of theLord, who leaned on his breast, also published the gospel whileliving at Ephesus in Asia” (Haer. 3.1.1, as cited in Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 5.8.4). By the second century, the term “gospel”is used for the written accounts of the life, death, and resurrectionof Jesus (e.g., Did. 11.3; 15.4). Justin Martyr (c. AD 140) refers tothe “memoirs of the apostles” (1Apol. 67) andIrenaeus (c. AD 180) mentions the four canonical Gospels by name(Haer. 3.11.7).
ThePurpose and Genre of the Gospels
Purpose.The Gospels were written to convey theology and to create and confirmfaith. They do not give an objectively neutral account of the life ofJesus; they enthusiastically endorse their protagonist and condemnthose who oppose him. They differ from traditional biographies inthat they give little information about the chronology of Jesus’life. Only two of the Gospels, Matthew and Luke, tell of the eventssurrounding Jesus’ birth. Luke alone tells of an event inJesus’ childhood (Luke 2:41–52). It is virtuallyincidental that Jesus worked as a carpenter and had brothers andsisters (Mark 6:3). A large percentage of each of the four canonicalGospels is devoted to the last week of Jesus’ life; of thesixteen chapters of Mark’s Gospel, six are devoted to the oneweek from Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem until his resurrection.
Theprimary intentions of the authors/editors of the written Gospels werenot to give biographical details but rather to lead the reader to anacknowledgment of the identity of Jesus and a belief in the purposeof his mission (Luke 1:4; John 20:31). Their theological purposes,however, do not necessarily compromise their commitment to historicalaccuracy. Jesus is presented as a real, historical figure who livedwithin a specific historical time frame. Luke appears to be moreconcerned than the other evangelists with historical details, givinga rough date for Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:1–2) and a morespecific time for Jesus’ baptism (3:1–2).
Genre.The discerning reader of the Gospels is forced to ask questionsconcerning the literary genre(s) of these texts. Such a discussion isimperative, as the interpretation of a section of any piece ofliterature will largely be determined by the function of the textwithin a certain literary genre. Prior to the 1970s, most NT scholarsbelieved that the Gospels formed a unique literary genre and weretherefore distinct from other first-century literary forms. Thisconclusion was based on the belief that the written Gospels werecollections of smaller sections sewn together by the evangelists, andthat the documents as a whole lacked coherence. Since then, thispresupposition has been challenged, largely because scholars haveseen that the Gospel writers were real editors and authors who werenot just collecting primitive source material but were using thatmaterial to write a larger story about Jesus. The written Gospelstherefore have overall coherence and purpose; they were written insuch a way as to bring about a desired response in the reader. Suchan overall intention may have stronger similarities with differentgenres in the Greco-Roman world of theNT.
TheGospels have been associated with several genres. They bear someresemblance to aretalogies, which were narratives about divinepersons in antiquity from which flowed moral instructions. Thesestories often involved miraculous events at the subject’s birthor death or during life, and they included the presence of bothdisciples and opponents. Within these aretalogies, the narrative wassecondary to the morality. An association with aretalogies,therefore, would encourage the reader to give greater attention tomoral teaching than to events in which this teaching is embedded.Similarly, others have seen the Gospels as essentially a collectionof wisdom sayings set in a historicized narrative; this view againgives priority to sayings and is doubtful of the historicity of thenarrative. Such views that downplay the narrative, and particularlythe miracles in Jesus’ life, have led others to argue theopposite extreme, which sees the Gospels, and Luke-Acts inparticular, as examples of ancient novels, with their focus onmiracle stories. Many scholars have rejected the emphasis on eithersayings or narrative, arguing that the literary genre that theGospels most closely resemble is ancient biographies (bioi). Thesecontained praise for the protagonist, rhetoric, moral philosophy, anda concern for character.
Althoughthe Gospels use different literary motifs that are reflective ofdifferent genres of the Greco-Roman world, they do not exactlyreplicate a known genre. They contain material not found in otherHellenistic literature of the time—for example, the fulfillmentof OT expectations and their desire to address particular issuesfaced by the early church, such as opposition; the Gentile mission;the need to redefine Israel in the light of Jesus’ life, death,and resurrection; and the nature of Christian discipleship. Unlikeother literature of the time, they do not name their authors, andwith the exception of Luke, they lack traditional literary devicessuch as prefaces. They are therefore to be seen as unique, or atleast as a distinct subgenre of ancient biographies.
Canonicaland Noncanonical Gospels
Theprogression from the events of Jesus’ life to the oralpreaching of this gospel to the first-century writing of the storyled to the acceptance of the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark,Luke, and John into the NT canon. There is also a significant body ofliterature that is normally referred to as the noncanonical gospels.These later documents were neither widely accepted nor viewed asauthoritative, but they provide useful insights into the nature ofearly Christianity. A significant noncanonical gospel is the Gospelof Thomas, which is part of a large collection of works discovered atNag Hammadi (Egypt) in 1945. The Gospel of Thomas does not contain aresurrection account and is primarily a collection of sayings.
Thecanonical Gospels are not more authoritative than other sections ofScripture, but because they focus on Jesus’ ministry, withparticular attention to his death and resurrection, they draw theattention of the reader to the fulfillment of God’s purpose inthe life and work of Jesus, the Messiah. They are therefore of greatimportance within Scripture.
Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.
Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.
The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.
The Development of Hermeneutics
The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.
From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.
Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circ*mstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.
From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.
More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.
Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic
An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circ*mstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.
Linguistics
An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.
A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.
Literature and Literary Theory
The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.
Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.
History
As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circ*mstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.
Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).
Humility and the Attitude of the Reader
Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.
Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).
Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation
Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.
The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).
Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.
Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.
Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).
Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.
Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.
Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.
The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.
The Development of Hermeneutics
The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.
From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.
Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circ*mstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.
From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.
More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.
Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic
An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circ*mstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.
Linguistics
An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.
A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.
Literature and Literary Theory
The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.
Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.
History
As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circ*mstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.
Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).
Humility and the Attitude of the Reader
Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.
Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).
Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation
Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.
The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).
Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.
Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.
Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).
Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.
Introduction
Name.Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title“Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). Thename “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was acommon male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ”is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh(“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually werenamed after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry ofJesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah(Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).
Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.
TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.
Theearly church tried to put together singular accounts, so-calledGospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionitesrepresents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Anotherharmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was producedaround AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning thelife of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, thePauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John.Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come,God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4).The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was apassion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. Thefirst extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’sletters (1Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognizedfrom the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1Cor.15:13–14).
Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.
TheJewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a storyabout the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus(Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in adifferent part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus isthe Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). Themajority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic butheavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source,the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but thesereferences are very late and of little historical value.
NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.
Jesus’Life
Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.
Onthe eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keepingwith the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus”(Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home ofhis parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel ofLuke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth instrength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke alsocontains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Jesuswas born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered atemple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford tosacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, ormetal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth wasnot a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground.Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently commonfirst-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Cananything good come from there?” (John 1:46).
Jesuswas also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy weresurely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnantbefore her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only theintervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal(Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem,far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinshiphospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay withdistant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcomebecause of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Maryhad to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feedingtrough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later inNazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son”(Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming himas one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewiserejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucifyhim!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21;John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled(Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter,vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71;Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His ownsiblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamedof his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his motherinto the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27)rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.
Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.
Matthewand Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum inGalilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13;Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirtyyears of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity orperhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of theLevites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning ofJesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples andthe sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Jesus’public ministry: chronology.Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28,and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple hadbeen forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as thetemple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out themoney changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding andexpansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during theeighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry ofJohn the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius(Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From thesedates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of thereign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset ofJesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.
TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.
Jesus’ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and hisJudean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry inGalilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.
Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.
AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.
DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).
TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).
Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesuswithdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician womanrequested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sentonly to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans hadlong resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality thatallotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere“crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Eventhe dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,”Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-muteman in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’sconfession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The citywas the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Socialconflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposteinteractions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel(Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomicfeathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who hadlittle value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16;Luke 18:15–17).
PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).
Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
TheIdentity of Jesus Christ
Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).
Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.
Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).
ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).
Rabbi/teacher.Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbisor Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguishedhim was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28,32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathereddisciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to joinhim in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).
Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.
Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).
Jesus’teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. Theseconflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions inwhich the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus usedthese interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gavereplies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’swill, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. TheSynoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations ofviolating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answersto such accusations often echoed the essence of 1Sam. 15:22,“To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). Anoverall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’public teaching.
TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.
Jesus’teachings found their authority in the reality of God’simminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9),necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence(Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—thefamily of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged,“Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness”(Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among propheticteachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his owngrounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt.10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).
Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).
Jesus’kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, andeschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internaltransformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring onlove (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus tobless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesustaught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father isperfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as yourFather is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” onesin Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful,and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godlycharacter.
Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).
Messiah.The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore theglories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability wascommon in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babyloniancaptivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace andprotection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer,one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice andrighteousness (2Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16;Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2;Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whosesuffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle ofexpectation in terms of a deliverer.
Jesus’authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianicimages in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearerscalled him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt.12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesusas the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). Inline with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesusfocused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regenerationthrough his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).
Eschatologicalprophet.Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewishapocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God tointervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom ofGod. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ propheciesconcerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2,15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Inaddition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representativeof the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30).Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images ofcoming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt.24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).
SufferingSon of God.Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth wasparadigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa.61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so herevealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptlyportrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ ownteachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13,31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “TheSon of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give hislife as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly careerended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewishcomponents (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65;15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24;18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.
Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).
ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).
Asmuch as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory overdeath was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost,Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises(Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31).Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through hisresurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his lifeand work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him asLord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31;Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).
Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).
Jesus’Purpose and Community
Inthe Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, whopreaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent(4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter thekingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, onemade in Jesus’ blood (26:28).
Inthe prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identityof Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidingsof salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of thegospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.
Lukelikewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose ofJesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is thekingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John theBaptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesusanswered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen andheard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosyare cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good newsis proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, aspresented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery ofsight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God alreadypresent in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20;8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).
Inthe Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signsthroughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, hisidentity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah,the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundantlife is lived out in community.
Inthe Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community ofGod (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but theycontinued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout hisministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a callto loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38;Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50;Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock Iwill build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call tocommunity. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community wasreplaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).
Jesus’ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’sfamily—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained byadopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through theinitiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16;10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).
TheQuests for the Historical Jesus
Thequest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from ahistorical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary byscholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding ofthe church.
Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.
In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.
Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.
Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.
The biblical writers proclaim that only one God exists, yetthey also refer to three persons as “God.” The Father,the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all God. Furthermore, these threepersons relate to one another as self-conscious individuals. Jesusprays to the Father (John 17). The Father speaks from heavenconcerning the Son (Matt. 3:17; Luke 3:22). Jesus vows to send theSpirit as “Advocate” after his ascension, and he will dowhat Jesus himself did while he was among us (John 16:7–8). Thechallenge of Christian theology, therefore, is to formulate adoctrine of God that captures all these elements, each of whichsurfaces in both Testaments.
OldTestament
Inthe OT, evidence for the Trinity appears mostly at the implicitlevel. Yahweh is called “Father” in Isaiah (63:16; 64:8),Jeremiah (3:4, 19; 31:9), and Malachi (2:10). Isaiah declares, “Butyou are our Father, though Abraham does not know us or Israelacknowledge us; you, Lord, are our Father, our Redeemer from of oldis your name” (Isa. 63:16). Yahweh identifies himself as“Father” implicitly when he claims Israel as his “son”(Hos. 11:1), and the same principle applies to Ps. 2:7, where Goddeclares to his anointed, “You are my son; today I have becomeyour father.” These cases do not compare in numbers with the NTevidence, but a person thought of as “God the Father”certainly appears in the OT.
Messianictexts of the OT introduce us to God the Son. In Isa. 9:6 a “childis born” who will be called “Wonderful Counselor, MightyGod, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” The day of“Immanuel,” or “God with us,” is foreshadowedin Isa. 7:14 (cf. Matt. 1:22), while Isa. 40:3–5 anticipatesthe appearance of the Lord “in the wilderness” (cf. Matt.3:3). Daniel sees “one like a son of man, coming with theclouds of heaven” being given “authority, glory andsovereign power” (Dan. 7:13–14). In Ps. 110:1 Yahweh saysto David’s “Lord,” “Sit at my right handuntil I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”
Similarly,the OT seems to distinguish the Spirit of God from Yahweh whileimplying the Spirit’s own personality. Genesis 1:2 makes thatcase, as does Exod. 31:3, where Yahweh fills Bezalel with the “Spiritof God” (cf. Exod. 35:31; Num. 11:29). In 1Sam. 16:14 acontrast is made between the “Spirit of the Lord” thatleaves Saul and an “evil spirit from the Lord” thattorments him; also we find a repentant David pleading that God wouldnot take away his “Holy Spirit” (Ps. 51:11). The Spiritcan be put on persons by God, with the result that they prophesy(Isa. 61:1; Joel 2:28–29) and do what pleases him (Ezek.36:26–27). In the OT, therefore, we see two persons (the Sonand the Holy Spirit) who are both God and also distinguishable fromone to whom they answer and by whom they are sent.
NewTestament
TheNT contains abundant evidence for “God the Father,” oftenbecause of Jesus’ teaching. The “Father” appearsseveral times in the Sermon on the Mount (e.g., Matt. 5:16; 6:6–9,14, 18, 26, 32; 7:11). Matthew 7:21 stands out because of Jesus’reference to “my Father who is in heaven,” by which heidentifies himself as the Son (see also Matt. 15:13; 16:17; 18:10;and Luke 24:49). Paul’s greetings normally come from God theFather and the Lord Jesus Christ, as seen in Rom. 1:7: “Graceand peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ”(also 1Cor. 1:3; 2Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:1–3; 1Tim.1:2; 2Tim. 1:2). Paul introduces the Father and the Son in1Cor. 8:6: “For us there is but one God, the Father, fromwhom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord,Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live”(see also 1Cor. 15:24; 2Cor. 11:31; Eph. 1:3; Phil.2:22). Other significant texts include Heb. 1:5; 1Pet. 1:2–3;in the latter, the scattered believers are those “who have beenchosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through thesanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ andsprinkled with his blood.... Praise be to the Godand Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!” The NT evidence for “Godthe Father” is clear.
Biblicaltexts that point to the deity of Christ supply evidence for thesecond claim: the Son is God. Some of the texts listed above say asmuch, but one can take this case further. In context, John’sprologue refers to Jesus as the “Word” and proclaims thathe was “with God” and “was God” (John 1:1).Jesus also relates to the Father in ways that imply his own deity, ashe declares in John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.”After significant doubting, Thomas confesses the deity of Christ inJohn 20:28: “My Lord and my God!” NT passages thatidentify Jesus as the “Son of God” point to his deity, asPeter does in Matt. 16:16: “You are the Messiah, the Son of theliving God.” Even demons identify Jesus as the Son. They callout, “What do you want with us, Son of God? ...Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?”(Matt. 8:29; cf. Mark 5:7). The so-called Christ Hymn of Phil. 2:6–11puts Jesus on the level with God, saying that he did not consider“equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.”The author of Hebrews declares that Jesus is “the radiance ofGod’s glory and the exact representation of his being”(1:3). Colossians 1:15–16 says that Jesus is the “imageof the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation” and theone by whom “all things were created,” and Col. 1:19states that “God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell inhim.” According to Titus 2:13, Jesus is “our great Godand Savior.” The entire sequence of Rev. 4–5 highlightsthe deity of Christ, culminating in the praise “To him who sitson the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory andpower, for ever and ever!” as both the Enthroned One and theLamb are worshiped as God (5:13–14).
TheNT writers underscore both the deity and the distinctive personalityof the Holy Spirit. Jesus is conceived in Mary’s womb by theSpirit’s power (Matt. 1:18–20), and when Jesus isbaptized, the Spirit descends upon him as a dove (Matt. 3:16; Mark1:10). Jesus drives out demons by the Spirit, and one dare not speakagainst the Spirit when he does so (Matt. 12:28–32). Luke’sGospel puts added emphasis on the ministry of the Spirit, as we alsosee in Acts. He empowers various people to praise and prophesy (Luke1:41, 67) and to be witnesses for Christ (Acts 1:8; 2:4, 17–18,38). Sinners can lie to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3, 9), and the HolySpirit bears witness along with the apostles to the risen Christ(5:32). In John’s Gospel, the Spirit becomes the counselor andteacher of the disciples, reminding them of their Lord’sinstructions (John 14:26; 16:13). The Spirit brings assurance ofsonship (Rom. 8:16) and helps disciples when they pray (8:26). Thisperson even knows the very thoughts of God (1Cor. 2:11).Accordingly, the Great Commission requires baptism in the name of theFather, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19). All three membersof the Trinity have a part in the advancement of the kingdom, theSpirit no less than the Father and the Son.
Relationshipsbetween Father, Son, and Spirit
Theevidence considered thus far demonstrates that three persons arecalled “God” in Scripture: the Father, the Son, and theHoly Spirit. But the Scriptures also point to a chain of command intheir relationship to one another. The Son obeys the Father, and theSpirit proceeds from the Father and the Son to apply the work of thecross to the church. This “functional subordination” ofthe Son to the Father, some might argue, would follow simply from theanalogy chosen by God to reveal himself to us. The “Son”would obey his “Father,” not vice versa, though theyshare a common dignity as God, just as a human father and son share acommon humanity. But the NT writers expressly tell us that theyrelate to each other in this way. In Matt. 11:27 (cf. Luke 10:22)Jesus announces, “All things have been committed to me by myFather” (cf. John 3:35; 5:22). The latter transfers authorityto the former as his subordinate. The Father even (for a season)knows more than the Son regarding the last days: “About thatday or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,but only the Father” (Matt. 24:36), though he also dignifiesthe Son: “For the Father loves the Son and shows him all hedoes” (John 5:20). The Son’s commitment to please hisheavenly Father is a prominent theme of the NT, as Jesus declares inJohn 5:19: “The Son can do nothing by himself; he can do onlywhat he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does theSon also does.” No text brings out this dependence of the Sonupon the Father more clearly than Heb. 5:7–8, where the Son issaid to have “offered up prayers and petitions with ferventcries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he washeard because of his reverent submission. Son though he was, helearned obedience from what he suffered.” It is debated bytheologians whether this functional subordination relates only to theperiod of the Son’s earthly ministry, or whether it is aneternal subordination.
TheSpirit, though equal in personality and dignity with the Father andthe Son, proceeds from them to apply the work of the cross andempower the church for ministry. In John 14:26 Jesus says, “TheAdvocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, willteach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said toyou.” In John 15:26 Jesus announces that he also sends theSpirit out: “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to youfrom the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from theFather—he will testify about me.” The Spirit only conveyswhat he has received: “He will not speak on his own; he willspeak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come”(John 16:13). The same “chain of command” appears in John16:15, where Jesus says, “All that belongs to the Father ismine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what he willmake known to you.”
TrinitarianHeresies
TheFather, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are God, while beingdistinguishable persons. The Son obeys the Father; and these twopersons of the Trinity send out the Holy Spirit to implement ourdeliverance from sin. A defensible explanation of the Trinity willrespect all these dynamics, taking special care not to illustratethem with misleading images or simply lapse into various forms ofpolytheism. One of the earliest heresies of the church came fromMarcion, a second-century theologian who distinguished the Father ofJesus from the supposedly vindictive God of the OT, which leaves uswith more than one God. Later came the heresies of modalism andsubordinationism (or Arianism). Modalists claimed that the persons ofthe Trinity are no more than guises worn by the one person of God.One minute God is the Father, the next he is the Son or the HolySpirit. Subordinationists such as Arius (died AD 336) went beyond thefunctionality of the NT’s chain of command, arguing that theSon and the Holy Spirit are not themselves God but are essentiallysubordinate to him. Jehovah’s Witnesses have fallen into thislatter error, suggesting that Jesus is “a god” but notthe Creator God.
Theseearly heresies pressed the church to refine its understanding of theTrinity. In his response to Marcion’s error, Tertullian coinedprecise language to describe the persons of the Godhead, so thatGod’s “threeness” and “oneness” arepreserved. He used the Latin term trinitas to describe the ChristianGod and argued that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit sharethe same “substance.” The Son (also, then, the HolySpirit) is not simply of “like substance” (Gk.hom*oiousios) with God the Father, but rather is “consubstantial”(Gk. hom*oousios) with him: the Son is God, and so is the Holy Spirit.The Nicene Creed of AD 325 incorporated this explanation and, in sodoing, also set aside the idea that either the Son or the Holy Spiritwas created by God, as the Arian heresy requires. Nicaea alsorejected adoptionism, which regards Jesus as a man whom God promotedby endowing him with supernatural powers.
Eachof these heresies—plus, say, the strict monotheism ofIslam—attempts to relieve the tension seen among the claimsthat constitute the Trinity; however, orthodox Christians willremember that tensions and paradoxes are not automaticcontradictions. No philosopher or theologian has ever expresslydemonstrated that the Trinity entails logical nonsense, andChristianity’s detractors carry the burden of proof in thiscase. It is one thing to allege that an idea is contradictory, andquite another thing to show with an argument that it is so. On thepositive side, the Trinity must remain a central doctrine of thechurch because it affects all the others, especially the entire workof redemption. If God is not triune, then Jesus is not God; and if heis not God, then he cannot save us, nor can we worship him as ourLord. The sacrifice that he offers for our sin would not, in thatcase, be supremely valuable. Consider also the application to us ofwhat Christ has done. If the Holy Spirit is not God, then he cannotspeak for God as one who knows perfectly his thoughts and gives usthe word of God, our Bible. Scripture indicates that God is triune,and sinners need him to be so.
Because Scripture sees all things as providentially arrangedand sustained by God’s sovereign power at all times (Heb. 1:3),miracles are not aberrations in an otherwise closed and mechanicaluniverse. Nor are miracles raw demonstrations of divinity designed toovercome prejudice or unbelief and to convince people of theexistence of God (Mark 8:11–12). Still less are they cleverconjuring tricks involving some kind of deception that can beotherwise explained on a purely scientific basis. Rather, God in hisinfinite wisdom sometimes does unusual and extraordinary things tocall attention to himself and his activity. Miracles are divinelyordained acts of God that dramatically alert us to the presence ofhis glory and power and advance his saving purposes in redemptivehistory.
Terminology
Thebiblical writers describe miracles with various terms, such as“signs,” “wonders,” and “miracles”(or “powers”), which can carry various connotations. Asthe word “sign” suggests, divine miracles are significantand should cause us to think more deeply about God in a way that goesbeyond mere amazement or curiosity (Exod. 4:30–31; John 2:11).Not all of God’s signs are miraculous. Some are given as partof his ordering of the natural world (Gen. 1:14) or as anencouragement to faith that God will do as he has said (e.g., therainbow in Gen. 9:8–17; the blood of the Passover lamb in Exod.12:13). (See also Sign.)
Oftencoupled with signs are “wonders” (Jer. 32:21; John 4:48;2Cor. 12:12). If the depiction of miracles as “signs”indicates an appeal to the intellect, that of “wonders”points to the emotions. Miracles evoke astonishment and awe at theone who did them.
TheNT word “miracle” carries the meaning of power andtherefore points to the supernatural source of these events (Luke10:13; Acts 8:13).
Miraclesin the Bible
OldTestament.In the OT, miracles are not evenly distributed but rather are foundin greater number during times of great redemptive significance, suchas the exodus and the conquest of Canaan. Miracles were performedalso during periods of apostasy, such as in the days of theninth-century prophets Elijah and Elisha. Common to both of theseeras is the powerful demonstration of the superiority of God overpagan deities (Exod. 7–12; 1Kings 18:20–40).
NewTestament. Inthe NT, miracles often are acts of compassion, but more significantlythey attest the exalted status of Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 2:22) andthe saving power of his word (Heb. 2:3–4). In the SynopticGospels, they reveal the coming of God’s kingdom and theconquest of Satan’s dominion (Matt. 8:16–17; 12:22–30;Mark 3:27). They point to the person of Jesus as the promised Messiahof OT Scripture (Matt. 4:23; 11:4–6). John shows a preferencefor the word “signs,” and his Gospel is structured aroundthem (John 20:30–31). According to John, the signs that Jesusperformed were such that only the one who stood in a uniquerelationship to the Father as the Son of God could do them.
Miraclesand faith.Just as entrenched skepticism is injurious to faith, so too is naivecredulity, for although signs and wonders witness to God, falseprophets also perform them “to deceive, if possible, even theelect” (Matt. 24:24). Christians are to exercise discernmentand not be led astray by such impostors (Matt. 7:15–20).
Therelationship between miracles and faith is not as straightforward assometimes supposed. Miracles do not necessarily produce faith, nordoes faith necessarily produce miracles. Miracles were intended tobring about the faith that leads to eternal life (John 20:31), butnot all who witnessed them believed (John 10:32). Additionally, Jesusregarded a faith that rested only on the miracle itself as precarious(Mark 8:11–13; John 2:23–25; 4:48), though better than nofaith at all (John 10:38). Faith that saves must ultimately find itsgrounding in the person of Jesus as the Son of God.
Itis also clear that although Jesus always encouraged faith in thosewho came to him for help (Mark 9:23), and that he deliberatelylimited his miraculous powers in the presence of unbelief (Mark 6:5),many of his miracles were performed on those who did not or could notexercise faith (Matt. 12:22; Mark 1:23–28; 5:1–20; Luke14:1–4).
Thefact that Jesus performed miracles was never an issue; rather, hisopponents disputed the source of his power (Mark 3:22). Argumentsabout his identity were to be settled by appeal not to miracles butto the word of God (Matt. 22:41–46).
Thefunction of miracles.Miracle accounts function in a symbolic and prophetic manner. Hence,the cursing of the fig tree was prophetic of the coming judgment(Mark 11:12–21). The unusual two-stage healing of the blind manof Bethsaida symbolized Peter’s incomplete understanding ofJesus’ messiahship (Mark 8:22–33).
Themiraculous element of Jesus’ ministry carries an eschatologicalsignificance, pointing to the order of things in the age to come. Forexample, the nature miracles (Mark 4:35–41) look forward to theredemption of creation itself, which is presently subject tofrustration and decay (Rom. 8:20–21); the healing miraclespoint to a day when disease and deformity will be abolished (Rev.21:4); and miracles in which the dead are raised to life anticipate atime when death itself will be no more (Rev. 20:14; 21:4). From thisperspective, the miracles are a gracious foretaste of a far moreglorious future.
Showing
1
to
50
of730
results
1. The Scarred Hands
Illustration
Robert Allen
I read a story by Leslie Flynn who told of a small boy being raised in a frontier city by his grandmother. One night the house catches on fire. The grandmother, trying to rescue the boy who was asleep in the bedroom upstairs, is overcome by the smoke and dies in the fire. This frontier city doesn't have much of a fire department. A crowd gathers around the house and they hear a small boy crying out for help. The lower floor is a wall of flames and no one seems to know what to do. Suddenly, a man pushes through the crowd and begins climbing an iron drainage pipe which runs to the roof. The pipe is hot from the fire, but he makes it to a second floor window. The man crawls through the window and locates the boy. With the crowd cheering encouragement, the man climbs back down the hot iron pipe with the boy on his back and his arms around his neck.
A few weeks later, a public meeting was held to determine in whose custody the boy would be placed. Each person wanting the child would be allowed to make a brief statement. The first man said, "I have a farm and would give the boy a good home. He would grow up on the farm and learn a trade."
The second person to speak was the local school teacher. She said, "I am a school teacher and I would see to it that he received a good education." Finally, the banker said, "Mrs. Morton and I would be able to give the boy a fine home and a fine education. We would like him to come and live with us." The presiding officer looked around and asked, "Is there anyone else who would like to say anything?" From the back row, a man rose and said, "These other people may be able to offer some things I can't. All I can offer is my love." Then, he slowly removed his hands from his coat pockets. A gasp went up from the crowd because his hands were scarred terribly from climbing up and down the hot pipe. The boy recognized the man as the one who had saved his life and ran into his waiting arms.
The farmer, teacher and the banker simply sat down. Everyone knew what the decision would be. The scarred hands proved that this man had given more than all the others.
2. An Invasion of Privacy
Illustration
William G. Carter
Every Sunday morning, the people of a church in the Pacific Northwest say, "Peace be with you." They begin the worship service with a hymn of praise. The people confess their sins together, and hear of God's forgiveness. Then they are invited to turn to others around them and pass the peace. It has become an exuberant moment in an otherwise sober occasion. Friends leave their pews to embrace one another. Newcomers are warmly welcomed with a kind word or a hug.
Nobody thought much about the weekly ritual until the pastor received a letter from a man who had recently joined the congregation. The new member was a promising young lawyer from a prestigious downtown law firm. He drafted a brief but pointed letter on his firm's letterhead. "I am writing to complain about the congregational ritual known as 'passing the peace,'" he wrote. "I disagree with it, both personally and professionally, and I am prepared to take legal action to cause this practice to cease." When the pastor phoned to talk with the lawyer about the letter, he asked why the man was so disturbed. The lawyer said, "The passing of the peace is an invasion of my privacy."
I have no doubt that there are people who would take their church to court if too many people shook their hands, or if neighbors were too friendly, or if fellow pewsitters interrupted their private little religious moments. To that end, I think the pastor's response to the lawyer was right on target.
He said, "Like it or not, when you joined the church you gave up some of your privacy, for we believe in a risen Lord who will never leave us alone." Then he added, "You never know when Jesus Christ will intrude on us with a word of peace."
3. Rosie Lives!
Illustration
Bill Bouknight
There was a man named George who was accustomed to driving his wife, Rosie, to church. They had a long and happy marriage; their love for each other was monumental. They did everything together; everything, that is, except one thing. When George drove Rosie to church each Sunday, she went in but he did not. He remained in the car, reading the newspaper.
After 45 years of marriage, Rosie died. George was distraught with grief. On Sunday mornings George no longer made that drive to church, transporting Rosie. But several months after her death Easter Sunday rolled around. George drove to the church and he went in. The pastor delivered a stirring resurrection sermon and then closed with prayer.
Then there were a few moments of silence as the pastor prepared to announce the final hymn. Suddenly George stood up and with deep emotion declared loudly, "Rosie lives!" Then he began to sing with a deep, rich baritone voice that song that he had always associated with Rosie --"My Wild Irish Rose, the Sweetest Flower That Grows..." The congregation was stunned at first. But several people in the congregation knew George and how he was grieving for Rosie. They stood up and joined in the song. Then more and more people joined into the song. Finally, the whole congregation was joyfully and tearfully singing a glorious, secular Easter hymn.
4. A Backstage View
Illustration
Craig Barnes
Garrison Keillor said, "We always have a backstage view of ourselves." We let the audience see only the neatly arranged stage. But behind the curtain all kinds of things are lying around: old failures, hurts, guilt and shame. We hear that we are living in a shameless society, and that people are no longer bothered by shame. I don’t believe it. Shame plagues our souls. Psychologists tell us that shame sweeps over us when we overstep our abilities, or when our fantasy about who we would like to be encounters the backstage reality of who we really are.
Nothing is more crippling to our souls than working at hiding shame. We lock up more and more doors, sealing off more and more rooms of the heart to prevent our true selves from being discovered. We think we are keeping the world out, but in fact we are keeping ourselves locked in.
5. The Reputation of a Lifetime
Illustration
John Ewing Roberts
Thomas found a Lord who dealt with him where he was, in his present circ*mstances but led him beyond the passing into the permanent. I think it is criminal to call him, "Doubting Thomas," for one brief moment of his life. We should remember him for the permanent affirmation Jesus evoked from him.
I recall a story my grandmother told of a man in west Kentucky around 1900. He never touched a drop of "Demon Rum" except for one memorable occasion. He got roaring drunk, stole a horse and buggy, and raced down the main street of Arlington, Kentucky, all the while singing at the top of his lungs the song, "There'll be a hot time in the old town tonight!" For the rest of his life he was known as "Hot Time." One night and a reputation for a lifetime! It wasn't fair to call him "Hot Time" all his life, nor is it fair to keep on saying, "Doubting Thomas" for one request on one night.
6. No Evidence Necessary
Illustration
Scott Hoezee
When Thomas was first told about the meeting with Jesus that he had missed, he was understandably guarded. The notion that a dead man was back alive again was not exactly something you grabbed hold of and easily believed in a minute or two, not today and not 2,000 years ago, either. Modern scholars sometimes pet the disciples as such naïve bumpkins that they’d believe anything. Not so. They knew the dead stayed dead and this was not a fact you revised on a whim. So Thomas plays it safe but also then speculates aloud as to what it might take for him to believe this after all. As he talks, his rhetoric gets more and more exaggerated. "My friends, I'd have to see with my own eyes the nail holes in his hands. No, tell you what, I'd need to touch those holes with my own finger. Better yet, I'd want to stick my whole hand right into his side where the sword pierced him!" Thomas kept mounting up an ever-larger heap of evidence that he thought he'd need to believe. His words seemed calculated to induce some eye-rolling.
Of course, once he does meet Jesus, all that evaporates. To paraphrase a traditional aphorism, if you don't have faith, then there will never be evidence enough to convince you, and if you do have faith, no evidence is needed.
Without faith, no evidence is sufficient; with faith, no evidence is necessary.
7. I’m in the Bible!
Illustration
Scott Hoezee
When I was a kid, my father read the end of John 20 at the dinner table one night for our family devotions. After he read the part about Jesus’ telling Thomas that there would be lots of people who would not see him but who would still believe in him anyway, my mother commented, “Jesus means us. He’s talking about us. We’ve never seen him the way the disciples did, but he is our Savior and we believe in him. Jesus is talking about us.”
All these years later, I can still remember marveling a bit over a thought that tantalized my young heart: I am in the Bible! Little Scott Hoezee of Ada, Michigan, is in the Bible!
How cool is that?
A few years later when I ran across that same passage in high school, I realized that my mom might have been guilty of a little rhetorical excess. No, I am not in the Bible. Not specifically, not personally, not really. That’s the kind of thing a naïve kid thinks. And when I was a child, I thought like a child and reasoned like a child but now . . .
Then a few more years passed. I entered Seminary and began to understand a few things about the divine inspiration of Scripture, about how the Word of God is alive, living, vibrant, sharper than a two-edged sword and cutting clean to the bone of those who read that Word. I began to understand that the living God really can and does encounter his people through his Word and that he’d been doing just that to countless millions of people across the millennia. And so when the evangelist John turns to the reader to say, “These are written that you may believe,” by the Holy Spirit, that is a direct and living address to me as the reader. Maybe all of us are, maybe each of us is, really in the Bible after all. I am in the Bible. This is my story.
And all God’s people said, “How cool is that?”
8. Seeing Beyond Our Ability
Illustration
Keith Wagner
It is difficult to see things that are beyond our reality. We live lives that are narrowly focused, conditioned by our environment, traditions and habits. The name Hans Lippershey is not a famous one, but he made a tremendous contribution to the world of vision. In l600, he created the first telescope. He was a Dutch spectacle maker. One day two children came into his shop and were playing with some of the lenses scattered around. They put two together which greatly magnified a weathervane across the street. Lippershey capitalized on the discovery and made a profit selling his new lenses to the military.
This all happened in Middleburg, Netherlands. Several others claimed to invent the telescope about the same time. Galileo is the most famous but even he credits Lippershey for its creation. Most everyone doubted the creation at first. It was hard for them in that time to envision things could be magnified. It was beyond their reality. Even when our vision is enhanced by technology it is sometimes impaired by our lack of faith. Ironically, it took two small children at play to make it all happen. An unexplainable event shaped the beliefs of society and enabled them to see.
9. The Greatest Scar Story
Illustration
Christi O. Brown
I can think of no better modern-day illustration of the sacrifice Jesus made for us than a recent story I heard about a woman who is afit 30-something-year-old. Yet she has a brace on each knee and scars on both, but the scars are not from surgery.
Here's what happened. Several years ago she scooped up her toddler son from the swimming pool and began to walk towards a lounge chair. As she stepped onto the tiled patio, her foot slipped on the wet slick surface. She was also seven months pregnant, and it was one of those moments where you feel like you’re moving in slow motion but there’s nothing you can do to stop the fall.
Within a split second, she knew her momentum was toppling her forward, and she could either face-plant and land on top of both her son and her unborn child, or she could fall on her knees.
Of course, as any loving parent would do, she chose to fall on her knees directly onto the unforgiving concrete. Her knees immediately burst open and blood went everywhere. She ended up needing stitches, which resulted in scars, but her son and unborn child were both unscathed. It is hard for me to tell this story without tearing up, because to me, it serves as a miniscule example of the immense sacrifice and love of Jesus Christ for us. You see, we are the beloved children of God for whom Jesus took the fall. Christ suffered on the cross and endured unimaginable pain for us. His is the greatest scar story ever told.
10. We Want Proof
Illustration
Scott Hoezee
There is a reason why many Christians around the world have latched so quickly and tenaciously onto the discovery of what may be the ossuary or burial box for James, the brother of Jesus. There's a reason why every time archaeologists discover some inscription referring to King David, Pontius Pilate, or some other biblical figure that this news immediately makes a splash in the pages of Christianity Today. Here, we are told, is further "proof" that the stuff in the Bible really did happen! There's a reason why there is now a huge enterprise that is literally scouring the universe for evidence that the formation of the cosmos required the hand of a Creator God. It's not just that we want to meet evolutionary and atheist scientists on their own turf--most folks also quietly hanker for something tangible that can bolster the confidence they have in their faith. Over and again we find ourselves wanting more.
Jesus himself knows that faith is both a blessing and a miracle. That's why he says in verse 29 that while it was one thing for Thomas to believe with Jesus standing right in front of him, it would one day be quite another thing to believe without such undeniable physical proof standing in the same room.
11. The Secret of the Power
Illustration
Brett Blair
Thomas Jefferson ranks as one of our nations greatest intellects but not many people know that he rejected the notion of miracles. When he approached the scriptures he could not tolerate those passages which dealt with the supernatural. So what did he do? He wrote his own bible. In the Thomas Jefferson Bible you will find only the moral teachings and historical events of Jesus' life. No virgin birth. No healing of Jairus' daughter. No walking on water. And, no resurrection. Here is how the his bible ends: "There laid they Jesus and rolled a great stone at the mouth of the sepulcher and departed."
It is very easy to rewrite history. To say, "that did not happen." But the story remains that the disciples were witnesses to these events. Thomas Jefferson is in essence calling the disciples liars and that they continued throughout the first century, for 70 years, to propagate those lies. Furthermore, Jefferson's Bible has been robbed of its power. I am convinced that the church does not accomplish 2000 years of life inside the walls of a closed dark sepulcher. There is no power in that dark place; rather, the Church is alive because He is alive forevermore.
12. What Anger Leaves Behind
Illustration
Brett Blair
There was a little boy who had a bad temper. His father gave him a bag of nails and told him that every time he lost his temper, he must hammer a nail intothe back of the fence.
The first day the boy had driven 37 nails into the fence. Over the next few weeks, as he learned to control his anger, the number of nails hammered daily gradually dwindled down. He discovered it was easier to hold his temper than to drive those nails into the fence.
Finally the day came when the boy didn't lose his temper at all. He told his father about it and the father suggested that the boy now pull out one nail for each day that he was able to hold his temper. The days passed and the young boy was finally able to tell his father that all the nails were gone.
The father took his son by the hand and led him to the fence. He said, "You have done well, my son, but look at the holes in the fence. The fence will never be the same. When you say things in anger, they leave a scar just like this one. You can put a knife in a man and draw it out. It won't matter how many times you say I'm sorry, the wound is still there."
The little boy then understood how powerful his words were. He looked up at his father and said "I hope you can forgive me father for the holes I put in you."
"Of course I can," said the father.
It's not always anger, it is your actions in general. There are no "fresh starts" in life. There is no new beginning. Forgiveness comes easy for many people but the scars of the past, they never go away. Watch what you do today, because sometimes the price isn't worth the reward (or more explicitly stated: what you gain through your anger isn't worth the damage left behind).
13. Thomas - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
If I were to mention the names of certain disciples to you and ask you to write down the first word that comes into your mind, it is unlikely you would come up with the same words. If I were to mention the name of Judas many of you would write down the word "betray" but not all of you. If I were to mention Simon Peter, some of you would write down the word "faith," but not all of you. If I were to mention the names of James and John, some of you would write down the phrase "Sons of Thunder," but not all of you. But when I mention the word Thomas, there is little question about the word most everyone would write down. It would be the word doubt. Indeed, so closely have we associated Thomas with this word, that we have coined a phrase to describe him: "Doubting Thomas."
You may be interested to know that in the first three gospels we are told absolutely nothing at all about Thomas. It is in John's Gospel that he emerges as a distinct personality, but even then there are only 155 words about him. There is not a lot about this disciple in the Bible but there is more than one description.
When Jesus turned his face toward Jerusalem the disciples thought that it would be certain death for all of them. Surprisingly, it was Thomas who said: Then let us go so that we may die with him. It was a courageous statement, yet we don't remember him for that. We also fail to point out that in this story of Thomas' doubt we have the one place in the all the Gospels where the Divinity of Christ is bluntly and unequivocally stated. It is interesting, is it not, that the story that gives Thomas his infamous nickname, is the same story that has Thomas making an earth shattering confession of faith? Look at his confession, "My Lord, and my God." Not teacher. Not Lord. Not Messiah. But God! It is the only place where Jesus is called God without qualification of any kind. It is uttered with conviction as if Thomas was simply recognizing a fact, just as 2 + 2 = 4, and the sun is in the sky. You are my Lord and my God! These are certainly not the words of a doubter.
Unfortunately history has remembered him for this scene where the resurrected Christ made an appearance to the disciples in a home in Jerusalem. Thomas was not present and when he heard about the event he refused to believe it. Maybe he was the forerunner of modern day cynicism. Maybe the news simply sounded too good to be true. Thomas said: Unless I feel the nail prints in his hands I will not believe.
Now I cannot help but notice that Thomas has separated himself from the disciples and therefore, in his solitude, missed the resurrection appearance. I think that john is suggesting to us that Christ appears most often within the community of believers that we call the church, and when we separate ourselves from the church we take a chance on missing his unique presence.
But the story doesn't end here. The second time Jesus made his appearance Thomas was present with the disciples and this time he too witnessed the event. This time he believed. What can we learn from the life of Thomas?
1. Jesus did not blame him.
2. The most endearing things in life can never be proven.
3. We must move beyond doubt to faith.
14. Doubting Thomas
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
Tommy Russo tried and tried to go to church with his wife. Sophia Russo was the one who had been brought up in the church. Her parents had been very devout Christian people. With Tommy's parents it was completely different. They didn't attend church and they didn't make their kids attend either. At this point in their marriage, therefore, Tommy and Sophia Russo faced a real dilemma. Tommy had promised he'd give church a try. And he did. But the whole thing left him sort of cold. He just couldn't buy it all. There was just too much there that was unbelievable!
Tommy tried talking to Sophia about it one Sunday after they had been to church. "Can't we find some kind of compromise on this religion thing?" Tommy asked. But Sophia would have none of it. Her Christian faith meant the world to her. She was not about to compromise. She was not about to give up her faith practices. "You promised," she said to Tommy. "You said you would give it a try."
"But I have tried," Tommy replied. "How long do I have to go on with this anyway? I've been to church with you just about every Sunday for this whole first year of our marriage. Isn't that trying? What more do you want from me? Enough is enough. There's just too much about church and all that I just can't believe."
"What can you believe about it all?" Sophia asked.
"Jesus," Tommy blurted out after a few moments of silence. "I like Jesus. He makes a lot of sense to me at times. There's some very good advice about life in his teachings. But to buy into Jesus I've got to buy into too much other stuff that is not helpful at all. In fact, it just confuses the issue. Take this Virgin Mary business, for example. I mean, come on! Get serious. Stuff like that just doesn't happen. And what's the use of it anyway? Does it make Jesus any better than he already is? I don't think so. And then there's the miracles and the final miracle: 'he was raised from the dead.' I feel the same way about that as I do about his birth. So what? Jesus was a great man, a great teacher. I don't need all this miracle business. I honestly doubt that it really happened that way. Maybe the disciples just made it up for all we know."
At the end of their discussion, however, Tommy agreed to keep his promise and go with her on Sundays for a few more months. One Sunday the gospel reading caught him up short. It was about Thomas. That was his name. Thomas had doubts. So did he. He liked what Thomas had to say about Jesus being raised from the dead. "Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands, and put my finger in the mark of the nails and my hand in his side, I will not believe." Tommy Russo couldn't have put it better himself. "If only I could see his body," he thought to himself. "If only I could touch his body. That's the way we Thomas people are."
Tommy's mind got fixed on the Bible's doubting Thomas. That's all he could think about for the rest of the service. That's what he thought about when he and Sophia went up for communion. "If only I could see his body. If I only could touch his body." And then Tommy's reverie was interrupted by the pastor's words. The words jolted his consciousness. It was just a simple word. "This is my body given for you."
15. Are We Brave enough to Bet It All?
Illustration
Thomas Long
In John Updike's A Month of Sundays, there is a parable about how the Christian faith is, indeed, an improbable wager on the impossible possibility. In one episode, a group of men are playing a variation of poker. In this game, each person is dealt several cards, some of them on the table face up and the others concealed in the hand.
In one round, the main character, a man named Thomas, has been dealt a very strong hand, and he decides to bet heavily. As Thomas keeps sweetening the pot and raising the stakes, all of the other players drop out one by one, intimidated by Thomas' hand, that is, all except one player, a stutterer named Fred.
Curiously, Fred appears to have a poor hand; his cards showing on the table are "nondescript garbage." Astonishingly, though, he keeps up the betting pace, calling and raising Thomas at every opportunity. Thomas is puzzled since his own hand is a poker player's dream. It isn't absolutely perfect he is holding one poor card but other than this single little flaw his hand is virtually unbeatable. Why does Fred keep on betting against such odds? Why doesn't he fold?
When the time comes to lay down the cards, though, Thomas is shocked to discover that Fred has the winning hand. When he compares Fred's hand with his, Thomas realizes that there was only one card in the whole deck that could have made Thomas the loser, and that was the one bad card that Thomas had hidden in his hand. If Thomas had held any other card, he would have won, and won big. In other words, Fred was betting everything everything on the tiny chance that Thomas held this one losing card. Dumbfounded, Thomas thinks to himself: Fred had stayed, then, against me when only one card in the deck ... could have made my hand a loser to his. Two truths dawned upon me:
He was crazy. He had won. He had raised not on a reasonable faith but on a virtual impossibility; and he had been right. "Y-y-y-you didn't feel to me like you had it," he told me, raking it in.
16. A Palace in Heaven
Illustration
Richard J. Fairchild
There is a legend from the first century about the disciple Thomas who was sent by Christ to India.
Thomas was employed by the local king Gundaphorus to build a new palace, and he was given money to buy materials and hire workmen. Thomas gave the money to the poor, but always assured the king that his palace was rising steadily. The king became suspicious when Thomas kept putting off his requests to see the work in progress and finally sent for Thomas. "Have you built my Palace?", he asked.
"Yes", Thomas replied.
"Then we shall go and see it now," said the King.
Thomas answered: "You can not see it now, but when you depart this life you shall see it. I have built you a palace in heaven by giving your money to the poor and needy of your kingdom."
The King was furious and had Thomas thrown in prison. All that night he considered how he should put Thomas to death. It seems good to me, the king said, to flay him and burn him with fire. But that night the king's brother dies and sees the kings palace in heaven which has been built by Thomas' charitable work. He makes a request to return to earth. His dead body is suddenly revived; he tells his brother of the magnificent palace awaiting him in heaven. Thomas is freed from prison and the king and his brother become Christians.
17. No One is Exempt From Doubt
Illustration
Brett Blair
Some of you may remember Dave Dravecky, former pitcher for the San Francisco Giants. At the peak of his career in 1991 he lost his pitching arm to cancer. Those who watched his 1989 comeback will never forget the Montreal game. Dave's left arm snapped with a deafening crack that could be heard in the stands. The comeback quickly ended. It was a devastating experience. It is bad enough to have cancer, let alone face the amputation of an arm, but then on top of that, to lose a promising career as a major league baseball player. Naturally Dave was filled with many questions.
During his struggles, letters of encouragement poured in from all over the country. Most were letters of encouragement. Some were looking for answers to life's questions. They had seen him keep his faith, and they wanted to know how he had done it. But one day he received this letter:
Dear Mr. Dravecky, If there is a God who cares so much about you, why did he allow you to have the surgery in the first place? I have lived 41 years in this old world and have yet to see any piece of genuine evidence that there is anything real about any of those religious beliefs you talk about. God certainly does not love me and has never done a single thing to express that love for me. I have had to fight for everything I ever got in life. Nobody cares about what happens to me and I don't care about anybody else either. Can't you see the truth that religion is nothing more than a crutch used by a lot of weaklings who can't face reality and that the church is nothing but a bunch of hypocrites who care nothing for each other and whose faith extends not to their actions or daily lives but is only just a bunch of empty phrases spouted off to impress others?
A cruel letter, isn't it? How would you have responded to it? He sent a letter to the man and said that he had faced his own doubts and that faith was not always easy. He wrote, "I am convinced that there is a God. That no matter what happens to me, there is a purpose for it and behind that purpose stands a loving, caring God." Dravecky had come to know the same Lord who came back for Thomas. The same Resurrected Jesus who stood before all the disciples and said, "Peace be with you, Thomas. Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
We all have doubts: Thomas, Dravecky, the letter writer. No one is exempt. What Jesus says to you is: You will be blessed if in the midst of those doubts you believe.
18. Regardless of the Cost?
Illustration
Bryn MacPhail
There's a vast difference between intellectual faith and genuine faith. In the late 1890's, a famous tightrope walker strung a wire across Niagara Falls. As 10,000 people watched, he inched his way along the wire from one side of the falls to the other.
When he got to the other side, the crowd cheered wildly. Finally, the tightrope walker was able to quiet the crowd and shouted to them, 'Do you believe in me?'. The crowd shouted back, 'We believe! We believe!'.
Again he quieted the crowd and shouted to them, 'I'm going back across the tightrope but this time I'm going to carry someone on my back. Do you believe I can do that?'. The crowd yelled back, 'We believe! We believe!'. He quieted the crowd one more time and then asked them, 'Who will be that person?'.
The crowd suddenly became silent. Not a single person was willing to apply the very truth that they professed to believe in that the tightrope walker could cross the falls with a person on his back.
We may believe that Jesus is the Son of God, but does our faith surpass the faith of demons? Are we willing trust our lives with Jesus? Are we willing to follow Him regardless of the cost?
19. An Angel Came to Joseph
Illustration
Samuel G. Candler
We too often forget about poor Joseph. Every year, we tend to focus on the story of Mary. But this year, it's Joseph.
Now, if the angel can appear to Mary, and then also appear to Joseph, there's a lesson in that. That means that the angel can appear to you and me, too. In the Bible, the annunciation does not occur only once, but twice-not just to a woman, but also to a man.
The Bible, then, carries an implicit message that God does appear over and over again, to various sorts of folks. Matthew and Luke both have it right, but they are different stories. God continues to come into the world, but we have to trust other sources!
What are you giving for Christmas this year? I do not mean what are you getting. We all want something wonderful, I am sure. But what are you giving for Christmas?
The greatest gift you can give this year is to believe in someone's dreams. The greatest gift you can give is to have faith in someone else; believe in their dreams. Believe in the dreams of the person you love. Believe in the dream of your husband. Believe in the dream of your wife. Believe in the dreams of your children. Believe in the dream of your hero, your leader, your friend. Believe in their dreams!
20. Faith: Do You Believe?
Illustration
There was a tightrope walker, who did incredible aerial feats. All over Paris, he would do tightrope acts at tremendously scary heights. Then he had succeeding acts; he would do it blindfolded, then he would go across the tightrope, blindfolded, pushing a wheelbarrow. An American promoter read about this in the papers and wrote a letter to the tightrope walker, saying, "Tightrope, I don't believe you can do it, but I'm willing to make you an offer. For a very substantial sum of money, besides all your transportation fees, I would like to challenge you to do your act over Niagara Falls." Now, Tightrope wrote back, "Sir, although I've never been to America and seen the Falls, I'd love to come." Well, after a lot of promotion and setting the whole thing up, many people came to see the event. Tightrope was to start on the Canadian side and come to the American side. Drums roll, and he comes across the rope which is suspended over the treacherous part of the falls blindfolded!! And he makes it across easily. The crowds go wild, and he comes to the promoter and says, "Well, Mr. Promoter, now do you believe I can do it?" "Well of course I do. I mean, I just saw you do it." "No," said Tightrope, "do you really believe I can do it?" "Well of course I do, you just did it." "No, no, no," said Tightrope, "do you believe I can do it?" "Yes," said Mr. Promoter, "I believe you can do it." "Good," said Tightrope, "then you get in the wheel barrow."
The word believe, in Greek means "to live by". This is a nice story...makes you ask, how often do we say that we believe Christ can do it, but refuse to get in the wheelbarrow?
21. Compared Faiths
Illustration
Scott Chambers
Several years ago a scholar by the name of Dr. Harry Rimmer had a friendly discussion with a Muslim teacher in which they compared their faiths.
Dr. Rimmer said “We believe that God has spoken to us in a book, the Bible.”
The Muslim teacher replied, “We believe God has spoken to us in a book, the Koran.”
Rimmer then said, “We believe that God visited this planet in the person of Jesus Christ.”
The Muslim teacher replied, “We believe that God has revealed himself in the prophet Muhammad.”
Rimmer then said “We believe that Jesus Christ died for His people.”
The Muslim replied, “We believe that Muhammad died for his people.”
Rimmer then added, “We believe that Jesus proved His claim, by coming back from the grave.”
The Muslim teacher replied, “We have no record of our prophet after his death.”
22. Historic: The Declaration of Independence
Illustration
Staff
The unanimous Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies in Congress, July 4, 1776
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained, and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies, without the consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
- For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
- For protecting them by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
- For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
- For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
- For depriving us in many cases of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
- For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
- For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighboring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
- For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
- For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circ*mstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms. Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren.
- We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.
- We have reminded them of the circ*mstances of our emigration and settlement here.
- We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence.
They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare.
That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
The signers of the Declaration represented the new states as follows:
- New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
- Massachusetts: John Hanco*ck, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
- Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
- Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
- New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
- New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
- Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
- Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
- Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton
- Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton
- North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
- South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton
- Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
Background
On July 4, 1776, the Second Continental Congress, meeting in Philadelphia in the Pennsylvania State House (now Independence Hall), approved the Declaration of Independence. Its purpose was to set forth the principles upon which the Congress had acted two days earlier when it voted in favor of Richard Henry Lee's motion to declare the freedom and independence of the 13 American colonies from England. The Declaration was designed to influence public opinion and gain support both among the new states and abroad especially in France, from which the new "United States" sought military assistance.
Although Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Roger Sherman and Robert R. Livingston comprised the committee charged with drafting the Declaration, the task fell to Jefferson, regarded as the strongest and most eloquent writer. The document is mainly his work, although the committee and Congress as a whole made a total of 86 changes to Jefferson's draft.
As a scholar well-versed in the ideas and ideals of the French and English Enlightenments, Jefferson found his greatest inspiration in the language and arguments of English philosopher John Locke, who had justified England's "Glorious Revolution" of 1688 on the basis of man's "natural rights." Locke's theory held that government was a contract between the governed and those governing, who derived their power solely from the consent of the governed and whose purpose it was to protect every man's inherent right to property, life and liberty. Jefferson's theory of "natural law" differed in that it substituted the inalienable right of "the pursuit of happiness" for "property," emphasizing that happiness is the product of civic virtue and public duty. The concept of the "pursuit of happiness" originated in the Common Sense School of Scottish philosophy, of which Lord Kames was the best-known proponent.
Jefferson emphasized the contractual justification for independence, arguing that when the tyrannical government of King George III of England repeatedly violated "natural law, " the colonists had not only the right but the duty to revolt.
The assembled Continental Congress deleted a few passages of the draft, and amended others, but outright rejected only two sections: 1) a derogatory reference to the English people; 2) a passionate denunciation of the slave trade. The latter section was left out, as Jefferson reported, to accede to the wishes of South Carolina and Georgia, who wanted to continue the importation of slaves. The rest of the draft was accepted on July 4, and 56 members of Congress began their formal signing of the document on August 2, 1776.
23. Wisdom from Helen Keller
Illustration
Helen Keller
I believe that we can live on earth according to the teachings of Jesus, and that the greatest happiness will come to the world when man obeys His commandment "Love one another."
I believe that we can live on earth according to the fulfillment of God's will, and that when the will of God is done on earth as it is done in heaven, every man will love his fellowmen, and act toward them as he desires they should act toward him. I believe that the welfare of each is bound up in the welfare of all.
I believe that life is given us so we may grow in love, and I believe that God is in me as the sun is in the color and fragrance of a flower—the Light in my darkness, the Voice in my silence.
I believe that only in broken gleams has the Sun of Truth yet shone upon men. I believe that love will finally establish the kingdom of God on earth, and that the cornerstones of that kingdom will be liberty, truth, brotherhood, and service.
24. Doubt: The Prelude to Faith
Illustration
William L. Self
Several years ago I spoke on a university campus, and when I finished speaking, a young man accosted me in the hall. He said, "I don't like what you had to say in there." I asked him to tell me which part he didn't like.
"He replied, "Actually, I didn't hear you. I just don't like preachers." I agreed that I have some trouble with preachers too.
I said, "Well, what are you?"
And he said, "I'm a seeker."
I said, "That's interesting. Where do you meet?"
He said, "We don't meet."
I said, "What are you seeking?"
He said, "We're seeking truth."
I said, "Well, what have you read?"
He said, "I haven't read anything in particular."
We went on with the conversation for a short while. Finally, I looked at him and said, "I don't think you are a seeker. I think you are a runner. I think you are hiding. For you see, not to decide is to decide. You have decided that you want to hide in unbelief."
The disbelief and the doubting for Thomas was not something that was rooted in fact. It was something that was inside of Thomas.
Doubt is like a front porch. All of us go through it before we get into the house of faith.
25. Is There Anyone Else Up There?
Illustration
Joel D. Kline
You may know the old story of a hiker who comes too close to the edge of the Grand Canyon, losing his footing and plunging over the side. Yet, amazingly, the hiker is able to grab hold of a small bush. Filled with fear, the hiker calls out, "Is anyone up there? Can anyone help me?"
A reassuring voice promptly answers, "I'm here; I'm the Lord your God."
Overjoyed, the hiker responds, "I'm so glad you came along, God. I can't hold on much longer."
"Before I help you," God responds, "I want to know if you believe in me."
"Yes," says the hiker. "I go to churchevery Sunday, I read my Bible, I pray daily, I even contribute some money to the offering."
"But do you really believe in me?" questions God.
Growing more and more desperate, the hiker shouts, "Lord, you can't believe how much I believe in you! I really believe!"
"Good," says God. "Let go of the branch."
"But, God. . ." protests the hiker. Once again God responds, "If you really believe in me, let go of the branch."
The hiker is silent for a few moments, then shouts, "Is anybody else up there?"
26. I Believe in Miracles
Illustration
Erwin Drake
I believe for every drop of rain that falls, a flower grows;
I believe that somewhere in the darkest night, a candle glows;
I believe for everyone who goes astray, someone will come to show the way;
I believe above the storm the smallest prayer will still be heard;
I believe that Someone in the great somewhere hears every word;
Every time I hear a newborn baby cry, or touch a leaf, or see the sky,
Then I know why, I believe.
27. Decisions Based on Integrity
Illustration
Keith Wagner
Adrian Thomas held a bonfire out behind his drugstore in Meyersdale, PA, which his family owned and operated for three generations. During the winter in 1992, he came to a fateful decision. He had seen too many deaths of his friends caused by lung cancer and heart disease. For ninety-six years, his family business sold tobacco products. On that day, Thomas, his family members, and his employees boxed up all the cigars, snuff, and pipe-tobacco products and piled them in the middle of the parking lot. Thomas then struck a match and used his state tobacco license to start the fire. A crowed gathered and Thomas told the local media he could no longer put profits ahead of the health of his patrons. Perhaps that single event didn't change the smoking habits in society and other stores probably absorbed profits, but, this was not a decision based on economics, Thomas was responding from his own sense of integrity. (from God's Little Lessons on Life for Dad, Honor Books)
It took Thomas years to change his family business. Thankfully, he made a commitment and like the first son in our story, acted out of a sense of integrity.
28. Believing Is Beyond Seeing
Illustration
H. Lindsell
D.L. Moody often told this experience: "Mr. Moody, what do you do with that?" "I do not do anything with it." "How do you understand it?" "I do not understand it." "How do you explain it." "I do not explain it." "What do you do with it?" "I do not do anything with it." "You do not believe it, do you?" "Oh, yes, I believe it." "Well, you don't accept anything you can't understand, do you?" "Yes, I certainly do. There are lots of things I do not understand, but I believe them. I do not know anything about higher mathematics, but I believe in them. I do not understand astronomy, but I believe in astronomy...A man told me a while ago he would not believe a thing he had never seen, and I asked him if he had ever seen his own brain? Did you ever notice that the things at which men cavil most are the very things on which Christ has set His seal?"
When a liberal preacher declared that the story of Jonah and the whale was a myth, reporters asked Mr. Moody his opinion of the question. His reply, contained in four words, was telegraphed far and wide: "I stand by Jonah."
29. Make a Decision
Illustration
Robert AuBuchon
Ed Young, pastor of the Second Baptist Church of Houston, Texas, tells of one event in his call to the ministry.
While I attended the University of Alabama, I got away from Bible study and away from the church. I had a friend name Walter Carroll, who was an atheist. He was a good guy, though. One Sunday afternoon he looked at me and said, "Eddie, do you believe there's a God??" I said, "Sure, Walter, I believe there is a God." He said, "You don't live like it." I said, "What do you mean?" He said, "You live just like I do. I'm an atheist. I don't believe there's a God, and I live like there's no God. We're buddies. You do everything I do. You say there is a God, and yet you don't live like there's a God. Don't you know that, if there is a God, if you can get to know Him and live the way He wants you to live, that's the most important thing in life?"
Ed Young goes on to say, "That was the greatest sermon I have ever heard. God used the mouth of an atheist. I'll never forget it. I couldn't answer. I went to my room, dropped on my knees and said, Lord, I know you're there. I believe Jesus is Your Son. I've gotten away from that? Just lead me. I'm yours."
Do you believe there's a God? The most natural response is "of course!" Our lives, the way we live - do they support our belief of God? Many of us have wavered between belief and unbelief in both thought and action. It's time to make a decision.
30. Death and Resurrection
Illustration
We, as human beings, whoever we are and whatever station in life we are in, all stand on common ground when we realize that we all at sometime in life fear death, we all live in the presence of death, that all men, in some way or another, have been hurt by death. And it does not only touch the life of the elderly. In his preface of "Bread For the World", Author Simon reminds us that before we complete reading this brief preface that four people in the world will have died of starvation, most of them children. So no matter who you are, whether you are in the sunset years and expect to live fewer years than you have lived to date, or whether you are just beginning life's journey—death is real. All of the wars in the world have not increased the death toll by one. It robs people of valuable years of their life but it in no way increases the death toll, for all of us, one day, shall have to go through the experience of death.
I have always wondered about the cynics and non-believers. What do they do at Easter? Have you ever wondered about that. On that day when the Christian church joyfully celebrates the resurrection of Jesus Christ, what do they do. Humanism is all right for the classroom, but it leaves you nothing at an icy graveside. It is precisely at that point that Christianity responds: Yes, we shall see our loved ones again and all be reunited.
Some demand that they need proof and documentation. I wonder what kind proof that they desire. There is more documented evidence that Jesus Christ rose from the dead than there is that Julius Caesar ever lived. There is more evidence of the resurrection than there is that Alexander the Great died at age 33. I have always found it interesting that some will accept thousands of facts for which there are only shreds of evidence, but in the face of overwhelming evidence of the resurrection they cast a skeptical doubt, because it is so unique. We say that we want the facts. Well the facts are that in the history of the ancient world the resurrection has been attested to as much as most of the events that we routinely accept and read in the history books.
In the early nineties the ABC news show 20/20 had an interesting segment on the shroud of Turin. If you were completely out of touch at that time and have not heard of the shroud of Turin, let me tell you that it is supposed to be the cloth that Jesus was buried in. And on this cloth is an imprint of the person of Jesus. It is now housed in a cathedral in Turin, Italy. Several years ago an international team of scientists, consisting of Christians, Jews, Moslems, and non-believers, set about to prove or disprove the story behind this ancient cloth. The results of their findings were published in an issue of National Geographic magazine.
The interesting thing to me about the 20/20 story was an interview that they had with one of the scientists, an Air Force colonel who was a specialist in laser technology. He openly admitted that he began the project not only as a non-Christian, but as a person who was openly anti-religious. I relished this opportunity, he said, to debunk what I considered a childish myth. Haraldo Rivera asked him: Now that you have spent four years on this project what is your response. His response not only shocking, but it was shocking that 20/20 allowed it to go on the air. He said: After four years on this project, I now fall upon my knees and worship a resurrected Christ.
It would be nice if we could hold some physical evidence in our hands to prove it all, but I would mislead you this Easter Day if I left the impression that the resurrection was a matter of fact. For in the end, the resurrection is a religious belief. In the end you cannot prove it or disprove it. And that is why some brilliant people believe and why some brilliant people do not believe. Because you cannot prove it one way or the other. There just are not any photographs. In the end we must fall back upon the words of the resurrected Christ to the disciple Thomas: Thomas, you have believed because you have seen. Blessed are those who have not seen, and yet believe.
31. Peace Be With You...It Already Is!
Illustration
Thomas Long
Theologian Karl Barth once remarked that to say the old line from the creed, "I believe in the Holy Catholic Church" does not mean that we believe in the church. It means rather to believe that God is present and at work in the church, that "in this assembly, the work of the Holy Spirit takes place. ... We do not believe in the Church: but we do believe that in this congregation the work of the Holy Spirit becomes an event."
32. A Lifelong Allegiance to God
Illustration
King Duncan
The late Danny Thomas lost his life savings of $600.00 at a time when he was out of work. He and his wife, Rosie, had a baby on the way, and they needed money. Danny worked at part-time jobs so Rosie could buy groceries. He also borrowed money from friends. It was a tough time in his life. A week before the baby was born, Danny had the grand total of seven dollars and eighty-five cents to his name. What would he do? "My despair led me to my first exposure to the powers of faith," Danny would later recall.
On Sunday morning Danny went to church. When the offering plate was passed he put in his "usual one dollar." But something unexpected happened that day. A special missions offering was taken. The priest explained where the mission offering would go, and Danny felt he had to give something. "I got carried away," Danny said, "and ended up giving my seven dollars." He had given away all his money that Sunday. What in the world had he done? He walked up to the altar rail, got on his knees and prayed aloud. "Look, I've given my last seven bucks," he prayed. "I need it back tenfold because I've got a kid on the way, and I have to pay the hospital bill." He went home with a mere eighty-five cents in his pocket all the money he had in the world. "You won't believe this," Danny Thomas later wrote, "but the next morning the phone rang in the rooming house hall." It was a job offer. He was offered a part in a commercial. The job wasn't much but the pay was good seventy-five dollars. "I literally dropped the telephone receiver," Danny remembered. "First I whooped with joy; then an eerie feeling came over me." He remembered what he had prayed at church the day before. "The seventy-five-dollar fee," he said, "unheard of for me at that time, was almost exactly ten times the amount of money I had donated to the church."
The important truth about this story is not that Danny Thomas received a tenfold return on his money. He might have done just as well at the racetrack. The important thing was Danny Thomas' lifelong allegiance to God. Those of you who know his story know that St. Jude's Hospital for Children in Memphis Tennessee stands today as silent testimony to that allegiance. Often when God asks us, "What will you give?" we take the bit that we can spare, the part we can easily give and offer it to God. The question is one of total allegiance. How committed are you to God?
33. It Is God's Will to Heal
Illustration
Glenn Pease
Modern doctors have confirmed that one of the keys to healing is the will. Those who believe God is willing to heal them have a better chance of experiencing a miracle. Those who do not believe that God is willing to heal can die, even when it is not medically necessary. Dr. Bernie Siegal in his book, Love, Medicine & Miracles, has many examples. He specializes in cancer surgery, and has many examples of people who are fatalists about cancer. When they hear that they have it, they lock in on the idea that death is inevitable, and God is not willing to deviate from the statistics.
Irving was a financial advisor, and when he was told he had six months to live with his liver cancer, he refused to think otherwise. He said, "I've spent my whole life making predictions based on statistics. Statistics tell me I am suppose to die. If I don't die, my whole life doesn't make sense." He went home and died on time.
15 to 20% of his cancer patients do this, for they say there is no willingness in the universe that it be otherwise. But Dr. Siegal started a therapy group called, Exceptional Cancer Patients. He discovered there are another 15 to 20% of his patients with the same cancers who refused to believe there is no willingness in God to heal them. In fact, they believe just the opposite. They believe it is His will to heal no matter how bad they are, and how grim the statistics. These people break all the rules, and like the leper in our text, they walk away clean from hopeless situations.
Miracles take place when people are convinced someone is willing to heal them. These exceptional cancer patients refuse to be victims. They are the doctors worst patients. They will not follow the herd and do as they are told. They question everything, and demand answers and explanations for everything, and if it doesn't make sense to them, they won't do it. They are independent, but they are the ones who are most likely to get well. Those who never question, and just go along with the routine, are ideal patients, but they are the ones most likely to die.
34. Sowing the Seed
Illustration
David E. Leininger
One of William Barclay's friends tells this story. In the church where he worshiped there was a lonely old man, old Thomas. He had outlived all his friends and hardly anyone knew him. When Thomas died, this friend had the feeling that there would be no one to go to the funeral so he decided to go, so that there might be someone to follow the old man to his last resting-place.
There was no one else, and it was a miserable wet day. The funeral reached the cemetery, and at the gate there was a soldier waiting. An officer, but on his raincoat there were no rank badges. He came to the grave side for the ceremony, then when it was over, he stepped forward and before the open grave swept his hand to a salute that might have been given to a king. The friend walked away with this soldier, and as they walked, the wind blew the soldier's raincoat open to reveal the shoulder badges of a brigadier general.
The general said, "You will perhaps be wondering what I am doing here. Years ago Thomas was my Sunday School teacher; I was a wild lad and a sore trial to him. He never knew what he did for me, but I owe everything I am or will be to old Thomas, and today I had to come to salute him at the end." Thomas did not know what he was doing.
No preacher or teacher ever does. Keep sowing the seed. We can leave the rest to God, including keeping the fire going. And that is GOOD news for all us tenant farmers.
35. !!!
Illustration
John H. Krahn
With the coming of the Holy Spirit an exclamation point was added to the Christian witness. Excitement had arrived. Power was present. Unbelief vanished. Fear fled. God, full throttle, was busy putting punch into preaching - cracking walls of unbelief, and giving the apostles a spiritual trip that they had never imagined possible.
At Pentecost the church is born. It had ceased to be an expectant enclave and now becomes a witnessing community. What emerged that day was a congregation filled with the power, excited over the message of salvation through Jesus Christ, alive at worship, consumed with love for one another, and devoted to the Lord. Their ministry was so positive that Luke tells us that the whole city was favorable to them.
We all get excited over the early success of the Christian Church, for everyone likes to hear a success story. In recent history, there have been fewer success stories in the church. In contemporary America, a congregation merely holding its own is seen as doing exceptionally well. The church has developed a failure mentality. At times even its leadership and its pastors speak in terms of its lessening influence and its ineffective witness. Disgraceful! All hell rejoices over such negatives.
When I recite the Creed every Sunday at our services, I believe what I say. "I believe in the Holy Ghost, the holy Christian Church." I really do. And I know you do also. I not only believe the church will remain, but I also believe it will flourish. The promises of God and the powerful Spirit are still with us!
There is no dream inspired by God and having the blessing of his Spirit that is unattainable for us. As a salesman member of our parish put it to me, "We have the greatest product there is, Jesus Christ." To which I might add, "We have a great area to market it. We all live in communities stocked with thousands of potential customers. In most cases only forty percent of them are worshiping regularly." I have only the highest hopes for the church’s future.
"I believe in the Holy Spirit." Pentecost continues to happen! The Spirit’s power is ours! We must seize the moment and become a dynamic church in every way to the glory of God until the Lord comes again!
36. We Believe You
Illustration
King Duncan
I ran across a beautiful story recently about a woman named Rosemary who works in the Alzheimer’s Unit of a nursing home. Rosemary and a colleague named Arlene brought the residents of the home together one Good Friday afternoon to view Franco Zeffirelli’s acclaimed production Jesus of Nazareth. They wondered whether these elderly Alzheimer’s patients would even know what was going on, but they thought it might be worth the effort.
When they finally succeeded in getting everyone into position, they started the video. Rosemary was pleasantly surprised at the quiet attention being paid to the screen. At last came the scene where Mary Magdalene comes upon the empty tomb and sees Jesus’ body not there. An unknown man, in reality the risen Christ, asks Mary why she is looking for the living among the dead. Mary runs as fast as she can back to the disciples and tells Peter and the rest with breathless excitement, "He’s alive! I saw Him, I tell you! He’s alive." The doubt in their eyes causes Mary to pull back. "You don’t believe me . . . You don’t believe me!"
From somewhere in the crowd of Alzheimer’s patients came the clear, resolute voice of Esther, one of the patients. "WE BELIEVE YOU," she said, "WE BELIEVE YOU!"
Well, Esther, I believe it too. The evidence is overwhelming, and life makes no sense without it. Jesus Christ rose from the dead.
37. Do an About-Face
Illustration
Staff
Professor Drummond once described a man going into one of our after meetings and saying he wanted to become a Christian.
"Well, my friend, what is the trouble?"
He doesn't like to tell. He is greatly agitated. Finally he says, "The fact is, I have overdrawn my account" a polite way of saying he has been stealing.
"Did you take your employer's money?"
"Yes."
"How much?"
"I don't know. I have never kept account of it."
"Well, you have an idea you stole $1,500 last year?"
"I am afraid it is that much."
"Now, look here, sir, I don't believe in sudden work; don't steal more than a thousand dollars this next year, and the next year not more than five hundred, and in the course of the next few years you will get so that you won't steal any. If your employer catches you, tell him you are being converted; and you will get so that you won't steal any by and by."
My friends, the thing is a perfect farce! "Let him that stole, steal no more," that is what the Bible says. It is right about face.
Take another illustration. Here comes a man, and he admits that he gets drunk every week. That man comes to a meeting, and wants to be converted. Shall I say, "Don't you be in a hurry. I believe in doing the work gradually. Don't you get drunk and knock your wife down more than once a month?" Wouldn't it be refreshing to his wife to go a whole month without being knocked down? Once a month, only twelve times in a year! Wouldn't she be glad to have him converted in this new way! Only get drunk after a few years on the anniversary of your wedding, and at Christmas, and then it will be effective because it is gradual!
Oh! I detest all that kind of teaching. Let us go to the Bible and see what that old Book teaches. Let us believe it, and go and act as if we believed it, too. Salvation is instantaneous. I admit that a man may be converted so that he cannot tell when he crossed the line between death and life, but I also believe a man may be a thief one moment and a saint the next. I believe a man may be as vile as hell itself one moment, and be saved the next.
Christian growth is gradual, just as physical growth is; but a man passes from death unto everlasting life quick as an act of the will "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life."
38. A Seeking Doubt
Illustration
Mickey Anders
Someone described Thomas' doubt as a "seeking doubt, a doubt that wants not to continue to doubt but to come to believe."
Thomas makes it clear to us that there is more than one kind of doubt. There is the kind of doubt that does not want to believe, that reaches for arguments in order to deny the affirmations of the faith. But there is also that "seeking doubt." This is a person who earnestly wants to believe but honestly admits that he struggles to understand. This kind of doubt actually energizes and expands faith.
39. We Believe You
Illustration
King Duncan
I ran across a beautiful storyabout a woman named Rosemary who works in the Alzheimer’s Unit of a nursing home. Rosemary and a colleague named Arlene brought the residents of the home together one Good Friday afternoon to view Franco Zeffirelli’s acclaimed production Jesus of Nazareth. They wondered whether these elderly Alzheimer’s patients would even know what was going on, but they thought it might be worth the effort.
When they finally succeeded in getting everyone into position, they started the video. Rosemary was pleasantly surprised at the quiet attention being paid to the screen. At last came the scene where Mary Magdalene comes upon the empty tomb and sees Jesus’ body not there. An unknown man, in reality the risen Christ, asks Mary why she is looking for the living among the dead. Mary runs as fast as she can back to the disciples and tells Peter and the rest with breathless excitement, "He’s alive! I saw Him, I tell you! He’s alive." The doubt in their eyes causes Mary to pull back. "You don’t believe me . . . You don’t believe me!"
From somewhere in the crowd of Alzheimer’s patients came the clear, resolute voice of Esther, one of the patients. "WE BELIEVE YOU," she said, "WE BELIEVE YOU!"
Well, Esther, I believe it too. The evidence is overwhelming, and life makes no sense without it. Jesus Christ rose from the dead.
Note: We don't know the source of this story. Treat it as a modern parable.
40. Santa in a UFO
Illustration
Owen Edwards
On December 16, 1965, NASA astronauts Wally Schirra Jr. and Thomas P. Stafford contacted Mission Control in Houston, Texas, to report a UFO sighting. Mission Control engineers listened tensely as the astronauts aboard Gemini 6 described the unusual aircraft they spotted as they orbited the earth.
“I see a command module and eight smaller modules in front,” Stafford said. “The pilot of the command module is wearing a red suit.” The Houston lab was silent, waiting for more details on this UFO, when Wally Schirra began playing “Jingle Bells” on his harmonica, while Thomas Stafford stood in the background and shook a set of tiny sleigh bells.
It was a little Christmas prank they had planned for weeks before the Gemini’s launch. Today, Wally Schirra’s harmonica sits in a special display case in the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum. It is, according to historians, the first musical instrument ever played in space.
41. Affirming What We Believe
Illustration
William G. Carter
In his autobiography, actor Alec Guinness tells a story that might keep every pastor and church school teacher awake at night. He was a teenager and it was the morning of his confirmation. The classes were finished. The students' heads had been filled full of Bible stories and theological doctrines. Guinness says HolyTrinityChurch in Eastbourne was crammed with confirmation candidates, their parents, friends, schoolteachers, and sponsors. At the appropriate moment, he notes, "The girls, mostly in grey uniforms, filed up to kneel at the Bishop's left hand and the boys, in blue serge, to his right. I remember white episcopal hands and shaggy black eyebrows. A pale, greenish light filtered through the window-panes, giving a subaqueous hue to the perspiring congregation." Then he adds, "At the age of sixteen, one early summer day, I arose from under the hands of the Bishop of Lewes a confirmed atheist ... With a flash I realized I had never really believed what I had been taught."
I don't know about you, but I am troubled by that story. I believe in Christian education. God's people are called to teach the Christian faith to children, teenagers, and adults. Sunday church school and confirmation classes are important educational activities. The church needs to do these things. And yet, here is the story of a bright, intelligent person who emerged from those experiences, and he did not believe a word of what he learned. As a professional church leader, as a Christian educator, that story bothers me. At a personal level, however, that story haunts me for another reason, namely, that it sounds surprisingly familiar. On a bright Sunday morning, it is easy to affirm what we believe. As the familiar verse we've heard today puts it, "God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but have eternal life." With sunbeams shining through stained glass, I can believe it. But late at night, after the lights are dimmed, sometimes I have my doubts, my questions, my lapses of belief. Perhaps I'm not the only one.
42. The Apostles' Creed
Illustration
Staff
The earliest known mention of the expression "Apostles' Creed" occurs in a letter of AD 390 from a synod in Milan. The most traditional version of the creed is as follows:
I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit
and born of the virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to hell.
The third day he rose again from the dead.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.
From there he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic* church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.
*that is, the true Christian church of all times and all places
The Old RomanSymbol (Latin: vetus symbolum romanum), or Old Roman Creed, is an earlier and shorter version of the Apostles’ Creed. It was based on the 2nd-century Rule of Faith and the interrogatory declaration of faith for those receiving Baptism.It is said that this earlier and first adopted version wasbased on the Trinitarian formula found in The Great Commission in Matthew 28:19. It was widely accepted in the 4th century, that, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, each of the Twelve Apostles contributed an article to the twelve articles of thiscreed:
I believe in God the Father almighty;
and in Christ Jesus His only Son, our Lord,
Who was born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary,
Who under Pontius Pilate was crucified and buried,
on the third day rose again from the dead,
ascended to heaven,
sits at the right hand of the Father,
whence He will come to judge the living and the dead;
and in the Holy Spirit,
the holy Church,
the remission of sins,
the resurrection of the flesh
(the life everlasting)
The Apostles' Creed (100 A.D.) is the oldest and shortest creed with only 109 words in the traditional version. Only the New Testament creed, "Jesus is Lord," is older. It is also the most often used -- practically every Sunday, except for festivals and seasons when the Nicene Creed is confessed. Undoubtedly, it is the most universal statement of the Christian faith.
By 100 A.D. the Apostles' Creed became the basic statement of faith for the church. In the first century, it was the rule of faith for baptismal candidates. In 390 it became known as the Apostles' Creed, even though it was not written by the apostles but contained the beliefs of the apostles. An ancient legend has it that after Pentecost the apostles agreed on a summary of what they were going to preach. The summary was the Apostles' Creed. Yet, the creed did not reach its final form until the sixth or seventh century. Martin Luther held this creed in such high regard that he used it in his Small Catechism to teach families what a Christian believes. To this day the Small Catechism is used as the basis for youth and adult preparation for church membership in Lutheran churches.
43. We Don’t Have to Sneak In
Illustration
Adrian Dieleman
The night before a camping trip one boy was staying at the home of another when suddenly he realized he forgot his fishing gear. "Let's run to my house and get it," he said. "Isn't it too late?" asked his friend. "Everybody will be sleeping."
"We'll sneak in," said the first boy. "Come on."
When they got to his house all the doors were locked. He decided to pry the screen off his bedroom window and enter that way. He tried to be quiet, but the noise woke his parents. His dad grabbed a baseball bat and went to investigate. The boy had one leg in the window when his dad yelled, "Stop, or I'll hit you!"
The boy froze. "Don't! It's me, Dad!" he said.
His father flicked on a light. "Why didn't you ring the doorbell?" he said. "You didn't have to try and sneak in."
The front door was available to him but he chose another way. So often that's thetempted to try it our way instead of the through the gate available, but the consequences of the short cut are far greater than the responsibilities at the front door.
44. Luke's Stories
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
Luke is fond of telling stories of faith. In his stories Luke narrates scenes in which trust in the spoken word from God is the very essence of faith.
It all begins with an old priest named Zechariah. This is the first story that Luke tells us in his Gospel. One day, Luke writes, the lot fell to Zechariah to enter the temple of the Lord and burn incense. As he was about to perform this sacred task, however, an angel of the Lord appeared to him standing just to the right of the altar. Zechariah was troubled. Fear fell upon him. The angel spoke words of comfort to Zechariah. "Do not be afraid, Zechariah," the angel said, "for your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you will name him John" (Luke 1:13). The angel Gabriel went on to announce to Zechariah that his son John would be filled with the Holy Spirit and would make the way ready for the Messiah to come. Zechariah had heard a word spoken to him from God. Zechariah had heard a word from Gabriel announcing new realities that were to come to pass.
Of such stuff is faith composed as Luke tells the story. Faith, or unfaith! Zechariah heard the word from God. He did not believe it! "How will I know that this is so?" Zechariah demanded of the angel (Luke 1:18). "I'm an old man and my wife is old too. How can this word be?" "I am Gabriel," the angel shot back. "How will I know?" said Zechariah. "I am Gabriel," came the reply. And the angel continued. "... because you did not believe my words, which will be fulfilled in their time, you will become mute, unable to speak, until the day these things occur" (Luke 1:20). "You did not believe my words." That is the heart of Zechariah's unbelief. Mary is next in line. Six months into Elizabeth's pregnancy Gabriel spoke words from God to Mary. "Hail, O favored one, the Lord is with you" (Luke 1:28).
That was Gabriel's greeting to Mary. Like Zechariah before her, Mary was troubled and afraid at the sound of the angel's voice. Gabriel spoke to her as he had spoken to Zechariah: "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And now, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you will name him Jesus" (Luke 1:31). Mary, like Zechariah, heard a word spoken to her from God. Mary, too, is unsure. "How can this be," she protests, "since I am a virgin?" (Luke 1:34). Gabriel told Mary that it will be because the Holy Spirit will make it happen. Mary was satisfied. She spoke great words of faith. "Here I am," she said, "the servant of the Lord; let it be with me according to your word" (Luke 1:38). "You did not believe my words," said Gabriel to Zechariah. That is the heart of Zechariah's unfaith. "...let it be with me according to your word," were Mary's words to Gabriel. This is the heart of Mary's faith.
Faith is called into being by a word spoken from God. A centurion in Capernaum grasped this reality very well. "Only say the word ...," the centurion said. Luke presents this rather unlikely fellow, this centurion, this stranger to Israel, this foreigner as a model of faith. "Only say the word ...."
45. A Church with Nothing to Offer
Illustration
Thomas Long
Check out the church ads on the religion page of the Saturday edition of most big city newspapers and you find some impressive sounding places of worship. There, with sleek graphics and Madison Avenue phrases, a few select churches boast of their assets -- their choirs, their friendliness, their powerful preaching, their singles ministries, their ample parking, their family life centers, their sensitive child care, and their compassionate spirit. Some churches, it seems, have it all.
Other churches, however, appear by contrast to have nothing, absolutely nothing. Take, for example, the church depicted in our text for today. Here, we get our first glimpse of the disciples gathered together after the resurrection, the first glimpse, in other words, of the church in its earliest days, and, all in all, it is not a very pretty picture. Near the end of his life, Jesus had carefully prepared his disciples to be a devoted and confident fellowship of faith. They were to be a community of profound love with the gates wide open and the welcome mat always out, but here we find them barricaded in a house with the doors bolted shut. They were to be the kind of people who stride boldly into the world to bear fruit in Jesus' name, a people full of the Holy Spirit performing even greater works than Jesus himself (John 14:12), but here we find them cowering in fear, hoping nobody will find out where they are before they get their alibis straight. In short, we see here the church at its worst -- scared, disheartened and defensive. If this little sealed-off group of Christians were to place one of those cheery church ads in the Saturday newspaper, what could it possibly say? "The friendly church where all are welcome"? Hardly, unless one counts locked doors as a sign of hospitality. "The church with a warm heart and a bold mission"? Actually more like the church with sweaty palms and a timid spirit.
Indeed, John's gospel gives us a snapshot of a church with nothing – no plan, no promise, no program, no perky youth ministry, no powerful preaching, no parking lot, nothing. In fact, when all is said and done, this terrified little band huddled in the corner of a room with a chair braced against the door has only one thing going for it: the risen Christ. And that seems to be the main point of this story. In the final analysis, this is a story about how the risen Christ pushed open the bolted door of a church with nothing, how the risen Christ enters the fearful chambers of every church and fills the place with his own life.
46. And Their Eyes Were Opened
Illustration
Larry Powell
Some years ago, a movie titled Zapata depicted the engaging story of the famous Mexican hero, Zapata. He was to the Mexicans what "El Cid" was to the Spanish: a redeemer of his people. Those who loved Zapata were radically devoted to him and his cause. At the end, when Zapata was ambushed by government troops, the white horse upon which he had led countless charges, escaped into the hills. The peasants violently refused to believe that their leader would have allowed himself to be ambushed and killed, and whenever they caught a glimpse of the white horse in the hills, they claimed that it carried Zapata, signaling to them that he would return. They fully expected the return, but in time, the expectation died.
Although Jesus attempted on several occasions to interpret specific events to his disciples, as well as to prepare them for his certain return, not one of them was prepared. As Carlyle Marney once said, none of them lay hidden in the shrubbery near the tomb ... waiting ... waiting. Judas had gone off somewhere and hanged himself. The others were scattered, afraid, stroking their wounds, trying to recover from the total collaspe of everything. They had not been prepared for the crucifixion, much less the Resurrection. The post-Resurrection appearances mentioned in our scripture caught them totally by surprise. Two observations about the particular appearance described in our text:
1. The two men were on their way to Emmaus, discussing events pertaining to the crucifixion. Jesus caught up to them in the midst of their own journey, becoming a part of it himself, and in the end, baptizing it with his blessing. Those of us in the church believe that this is still the way Christ often comes into our lives. Off on our own journeys, pursuing some goal or objective, totally submerged in our own concerns ... determined, ambitious, outrunning the spiritual life while in full stride toward that which we hope to achieve. And then, it happens. In half-step we are arrested by the sudden awareness of another presence; we had not expected it, nor do we always recognize it immediately. It just abides, and just as with the Emmaus travelers, it comes into clearer focus in due time. As the Holy Spirit accompanies us in our own journeys, it is hoped that somewhere along the way it may be with us as it was with them; "And their eyes were opened and they recognized him" (v. 31).
2. It is significant that Jesus was made known to them in the "breaking of bread." In the upper room Jesus had taken the elements of the Passover meal and transformed them into something completely different. The familiar ritual was changed from remarks about the Passover to references to the "body and blood" of the host. In a very real sense, Jesus’ messianic identity was uniquely made known to them in the breaking of bread in the upper room. Then, at Emmaus, he was again "made known" in the breaking of bread. There are other references to post-Resurrection appearances of Jesus at which his presence was made known around a meal (see Mark 16:14; John 21:9-14). Little wonder that early Christians quickly associated a mystical significance with the meal, more specifically, the Eucharist. Consequently, the church observed communion several times daily with the prayer, "Maranatha" (Come Lord!).
The expected return of Zapata was never fulfilled, and eventually the expectation faded. The unexpected return of Jesus of Nazareth took even his followers by surprise. Ironically, it seems that he must still catch us from behind.
47. Nothing Fills the Vacuum
Illustration
Billy D. Strayhorn
In 1992, the Washington Redskins won the Super Bowl with an explosive victory over the Buffalo Bills. Seventy five thousand people gathered on the mall between the Capitol and the Washington Monument to cheer their team and Coach. Four days later, Chuck Colson called the Redskins' office to see if any football players could attend a rally at a prison the next day. Many of the players had given their life to Christ. Joe Gibbs the head coach answered the phone and told Colson that all the players had left the city for a well-deserved rest. With his characteristic humility, Joe Gibbs asked Colson, "Will I do?"
Colson immediately accepted the offer by the coach of the championship Washington Redskins. Five days after winning the Super Bowl, Joe Gibbs could have opened any door in Washington DC but he was willing to walk behind the locked steel doors of the penitentiary for the District of Columbia to speak to men about his faith in Christ.
Joe Gibbs stood up to speak to the cheers, whistles and applause of 500 prisoners five days after he had won the most prestigious event in pro sports. He told those men:
"A lot of people in the world would probably look at me and say: Man, if I could just coach in the Super Bowl, I'd be happy and fulfilled... But I'm here to tell you, it takes something else in your life besides money, position, football, power, and fame. The vacuum in each of our lives can only be filled through a personal relationship with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Otherwise, I'm telling you, we'll spend the rest of our lives in a meaningless existence. I've seen it in football players' eyes, and I've seen it in men who are on their deathbed. There's nothing else that will fill the vacuum."
48. Absolute Truth
Illustration
Mickey Anders
In religious circles today, there is abroad discussion about the nature of truth.I have been involved in some of those discussions and listened in on others on Internet discussion groups.Most of them turn into a highly philosophical debate over questions such as these: "Is the Truth objective or subjective?" or "Is the Truth absolute or relative?"
Whether we think philosophically or not, the issue confronts everyone sooner or later.In fact, this issue came up in our church some years ago when a young family visited our church for several months. I have been told that they loved the people, loved the building, loved the programs, but finally decided to find another church.When someone asked them why they left our church, they replied, "Your church doesn't seem to believe in Absolute Truth."
How did they decide that this church did not believe in Absolute Truth?Did someone tell them that?And what did this young family mean by that phrase, "Absolute Truth?" If we don't believe in Absolute Truth, what kind of truth do we believe in? What is so dangerous about this Subjective Truth others condemn? Why is Objective Truth so much better than Subjective Truth?More importantly, where does the Bible discuss the difference between them?
49. I Believe On Authority
Illustration
C.S. Lewis
Believing things "on authority"only means believing them because you have been told them by someone you think trustworthy. Ninety-nine percent of the things you believe are believed on authority. I believe there is such a place as New York. I could not prove by abstract reasoning that there is such a place. I believe it because reliable people have told me so. The ordinary person believes in the solar system, atoms, and the circulation of the blood on authority because the scientists say so. Every historical statement is believed on authority. None of us has seen the Norman Conquest or the defeat of the Spanish Armada. But we believe them simply because people who did see them have left writings that tell us about them; in fact, on authority. A person who balked at authority in other things, as some people do in religion, would have to be content to know nothing all his life.
50. A Dead Balloon
Illustration
Brian Stofregen
A "dead balloon" -- has no life. It continues to lie wherever you put it. It doesn't move. It has no power.
Take a "dead balloon" and do what Jesus did -- blow in it. What happens? It's full of air; but it is still dead, going nowhere until that power is released. [As an illustration, the "powered balloon" can be released.]
Under the "spirit's/breath's/wind's" power, the balloon can move. It goes out. However, when the wind power within the balloon is released, you don't know where the balloon is going to go; but you know it's going somewhere. (We don't know where the wind comes from or is going.)
Jesus did not give the disciples the Spirit's power so that they could stay behind locked doors in fear. It is given as a power to move people out into the world -- even if we don't always know exactly where we will end up.
What happens to the balloon after it has "spent" its power? It seems dead again. All out of power. It's flat. There's no more "spirit/breath" within it. On one hand we are not like that balloon. Jesus promises that the Spirit will be with us forever. We will never run out of the Spirit's power. The Spirit given to you in baptism remains forever. On the other hand, over and over again in Acts, we read that certain disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit. Their filling didn't just happen once, but over and over again. So we also need to be refilled. Weekly we return to church as a refilling station. To receive Jesus again in the hearing of the word and in the sharing of sacrament and through the fellowship of the saints.
Showing
1
to
50
of
730
results
- UK tribunal member rebuked for bias in Christian teacher’s case: 'Undermining trust'
- Jeremiah Johnson’s brother claims he faked pro-Trump prophecies, visions
- Calvin Robinson warns UK on 'cusp of a civil war' amid simmering tensions, riots
- Episcopal Church launches AI chatbot ‘AskCathy’
- Biden opens up about why he quit race, points to pressure from Democrats: ‘A transition president’
- Illinois law threatens religious employers' right to hire staff who share their beliefs, ADF warns
- Archaeologists uncover quarry stones possibly used to build road walked by Jesus, disciples
- Harrison Butker defends speech comments as he becomes NFL's highest-paid kicker
- 'So many questions, so few answers': Nelon daughter's faith endures amid tragic plane crash
- Iranian 'surprise' attack on Israel could 'even last three to four days,' says Iranian lawmaker
- Died: Patricia Gundry, Evangelical Feminist Who Wanted Women to Be Free
- Some Churches Lose Coverage as Insurers Hit by a Wave of Storm Claims
- The Olympics’ Most Iconic Photo Has a Christian Message
- Died: Doris Brougham, Missionary Who Taught English to Taiwan
- 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
- A woman dies after being caught in a baggage carousel, and more shocking news
- Prominent German cantor and opera singer is killed in what police say was a family dispute
- 4 Signs That A Marriage Is Sure To End In Divorce—By A Psychologist
- Queenie Hallegua, second-to-last Jewish resident of historic Indian Jewish community, dies at 89
- 'Miracle' discovered in church as Virgin Mary statue is pictured 'blinking' by worshippers
- More Churches Up in Flames in Canada as Outrage Against Catholic Church Grows
- To the Left, Now Even Viewpoint Diversity Is ‘White Supremacy’
- We Were Born To Win This War
- Stretched 12 inches on the rack, crushed in iron maidens… or killed with an 'anal pear': Terrifying...
- The Druze Religion, Explained
- 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
