18 I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. 19 The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.
22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has? 25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.
26 In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. 27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will.
Out Of Our Control
Romans 8:18-27
Sermon
by King Duncan
No matter what happened to a certain gold miner he always described it as pure luck. It was a particularly bitter winter. He was nearly freezing to death, but he kept digging for gold in the granitelike ground. Finally, as the Earth thawed in the Spring and he was down to his last meager ration of food, he broke through the hard crust and dug and dug until at last he hit a box. Inside the box was a carton of canned food left behind by some earlier miner. "Boy, am I lucky." he said, "it could have been gold."
We like to describe ourselves as self-made men and women. We like to take credit for our accomplishments. We like to be rewarded for our sacrifices and hard work. It is difficult for us to admit there are some things in life over which we have no control.
Some of them are very basic. We could not choose our parents. We could not choose the country in which we were born. We could not choose the color of our skin or our native language. We could not choose the prenatal care we had or the quality of our teachers.
Some of us "self-made people" started life with an enormous advantage. Now that we are adults, though, we can choose. We can set goals, chart courses, work hard, persevere. Still, there is a margin of life that does not yield to our control.
We speak of being in the "right place at the right time," or perhaps the "wrong place at the wrong time."
A couple happened to be sitting in a restaurant in New York City. They overheard two Wall Street types discussing a certain stock that was about to skyrocket in value. The couple rushed to the bank, withdrew their savings and invested in that stock. It was a risky venture. They could have lost everything. They were what we call "lucky." The stock tripled in value in a relatively short time and they made a killing.
A ball player, playing on natural turf, is set to field a routine ground ball. The ball strikes a small clod of clay and skips off the player's glove. A run scores. Through no fault of the player, the game is lost. He's the goat. Wrong place, wrong time.
SOME THINGS IN LIFE ARE BEYOND OUR CONTROL. A daughter has an outdoor wedding planned. Mom and Dad are hoping for sunshine. The darkest clouds of the summer roll in.
Baby smiles that first big smile. Parents have been waiting poised weeks with the camera. The corners of the mouth turn up, grab the camera, push the button, "poof," the bulb in the flash fails at precisely that moment.
A more tragic example: Junior is sailing down the street on his sixteenth birthday. This is the first time he has driven on his on. He takes his eye off the road for just a moment to pop a cassette in the dash. At that moment a truck backs into the street in his lane. Instant tragedy.
No matter how disciplined or intelligent or hardworking we are there are some things in life beyond our control.
SOME OF OUR EFFORTS TO CONTROL THE UNCONTROLLABLE ARE LUDICROUS.
For you see, this is where superstition creeps into life. In order to control the uncontrollable we resort to charms, rituals, signs.
Athletes are notoriously superstitious. In the first game of a double header, former baseball star Minnie Minoso went hitless in five at bats. Between games he took a shower in his uniform, claiming he was washing away the evil spirits. Everybody laughed, but in the second game Minnie got three hits. After the game, eight players took showers with their uniforms on.
The night before the final round of the 1935 Masters, a friend gave golfer Gene Sarazen a ring. He told Gene the ring had belonged to Benito Juarez, the 19th Century Mexican statesman. Carry it for good luck, he said.
Three strokes back with four holes left on Sunday, Sarazen took the ring out of his pocket. He gave it a rub for good luck before playing his second shot to the 15th green. Then he proceeded to put the ball into the hole with a 4 wood for his famous double eagle. His friend later confessed that the ring never belonged to Benita Juarez at all. It was just something he picked up from a street vendor.
The pervasiveness of superstition to control human destiny was brought home to us as a people quite starkly when it was revealed that an astrologer influenced former President Reagan's schedule.
It is interesting that in this age of science, belief in superstition is growing. According to a 1978 Gallup Poll 19 percent of American teenagers believed in witches, 28 percent in astrology.
By 1988, 29 percent of American teenagers polled by the Gallup organization believed in witchcraft. Fiftyeight percent of those teens polled believed in astrology.
Sometimes, superstition even creeps over into Christian faith. Respected scholar and teacher, Dr. R.C. Sproul refers to a practice which he calls "Lucky dipping." Here is how he defines it:
"Lucky dipping refers to the method of Bible study in which a person prays for divine guidance and then lets the Bible fall open to wherever it happens to open. Then, with eyes shut the person `dips' his finger to the page and gets his answer from God wherever the finger lands on the page...
"This is not a sound way to use the Bible," says Sproul. "I don't think...the Holy Ghost had this in mind when the words were penned." (1)
Most of us remember the old saw about the man who lucky dipped the Scripture and his finger fell on the verse, "And Judas went and hanged himself..." Trying again his finger fell on another verse, "Go thou and do likewise..."
Of course, every one of us has tried to use prayer to control the uncontrollable at some time or another. Have you ever thought what a bind it would put God in if He tried to answer all our prayers?
There was an interesting scene on the television program,Helprecently. A truck carrying toxic radioactive material had crashed on a bridge. During the attempt to recover it, it began to rain. "Thank God," said one of the team members. The rain would help hinder the possible spread of contamination.
Meanwhile a short distance away, other team members were trying to rescue a little girl who had fallen into a manhole in the street and was lodged near some high voltage lines. Their greatest fear was that it would rain, which would expose the little girl to a greater risk of electrocution. Can you see what a bind God would be in if He attempted to answer all our prayers to control the uncontrollable?
THERE ARE AREAS OF OUR LIVES BEYOND OUR CONTROL AND THIS IS GOOD. With our finite minds, we could never order a perfect world.
There are many ancient fables illustrating this truth. There is an old Hebrew legend that tells of a man journeying on a mule through a wild and desolate area. His only companion was a rooster whose shrill crowing at sunrise awoke him to his devotions. At nightfall he came to a small town looking for shelter, but the inhabitants turned him away. Outside the village he found a cave to sleep in. He lit his lamp before retiring, but a gust of wind blew out the light. During the night a wolf killed his rooster and a lion devoured his mule. Early in the morning he went back to the town to see if he could buy some food. To his surprise he found no one alive. A band of robbers had plundered the settlement while he slept and slain all the inhabitants. "Now I understand my troubles," said the man. "If the townspeople had received me, I would have joined them in death. If my rooster and mule had not been killed, their noise and the light from my lamp would have revealed my hiding place. God has been good to me." (2)
At the end of the 16th century a fisherman was standing on a cliff on one of the Orkney Islands north of Scotland. He watched a storm batter his cottage, his boat, and fishing tackle. The man was a Christian, but his faith sagged as he watched the harsh destruction of all he owned.
Little did he know that this very same storm had sunk part of the Spanish Armada that was headed toward England bent on conquest. This storm may very well have spared England the terror of a Spanish Inquisition. It may have also permitted the flowering of the Elizabethan Agethat golden era that gave us such notables as Shakespeare, John Donne, Francis Bacon, Ben Jonson, Christopher Marlowe, and John Webster. Of course, the climaxing and culminating literary achievement in 1611 was the King James Version of the Bible. (3)
There are areas of our life beyond our control and this is good. We simply cannot ever hope to have enough knowledge or enough wisdom to perfectly determine our lives. As someone has wisely said, "If God would concede me His omnipotence for twenty-four hours, you would see how many changes I would make in the world. But if He gave me his wisdom too. I would leave things as they are."
Thomas Carlyle once wrote: "Does the minnow understand the oceantides and periodic currents, the trade winds and monsoons and moon's eclipses, by all of which the condition of its little creek is regulated, and may, from time to time, be quite overset and reversed? Such a minnow is man; his creek, this planet earth; his ocean, the immeasurable all; his monsoons and periodic currents, the mysterious course of providence."
THIS IS WHERE THE CHRISTIAN RELIES NOT ON LUCK OR UPON SUPERSTITION, BUT UPON FAITH IN A WISE AND LOVING GOD. St. Paul writes those very familiar words in Romans 8:28, "We know that in everything God works for good with those who love Him, who are called according to His purpose." (RSV) That is the Gospel. It doesn't fit our rationalistic view of our universe. It makes a mockery of our dependence upon charms and astrologers, but it is the Gospel. In everything, God is working for good with those who love Him.
How can we get our minds around this great truth? Wendell P. Loveless once explained it in terms any of us can understand. He said, "My wife can make better chocolate cake than anyone I know. So one day I thought I'd go into the kitchen and see what wonderful ingredients she used. First she sifted some flourthis didn't appeal to me at all, for it was dry and unappetizing.
Next she added a cup of sour milk. Now the batter looked very distasteful. Then, to make matters worse, she put in a raw egg. By this time I was not too sure whether I liked chocolate cake or not. I left just as she was popping it into the oven. Much to my surprise, that evening her masterpiece was as delicious as any she ever baked! This is the spiritual lesson I learned: Often in life we encounter `dry stretches' which are tasteless and uninviting like the flour. We also meet with `sour' experiences like the milk, and even a few `raw deals' like the egg; but after we have gone through the oven of affliction, praise God, all will become a sweet and flavorful blessing over there!" (4)
This is as far as we can go. There is much in life beyond both our control and our comprehension, but not beyond God's. He is able to make all things work for good for those who love Him.
1. R.C. Sproul, KNOWING SCRIPTURE (Downers Grove, Ill. InterVarsity, 1977), pp. 6465.
2. Henry G. Bosch, RAINBOWS FOR GOD'S CHILDREN IN THE STORM, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1981)
3. Betty Carlson, NO ONE'S PERFECT, (Westchester, IL: Good News Publishers, 1976).
4. Bosch
Dynamic Preaching, Collected Sermons, by King Duncan
Believers’ present sufferings simply don’t stack up to their future glory (8:18; 2Cor. 4:17). Even creation itself waits eagerly for the children of God to be revealed in glory (8:19–21). Creation is broken. But when God’s people are finally and gloriously restored, God’s creation will also be fully restored (cf. Rev. 21:5). Until then, creation groans “as in the pains of childbirth” (8:22). Christians also yearn for things to be the way th…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
18 I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. 19 The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.
22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has? 25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.
26 In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. 27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will.
8:18–39 Review · Suffering in hope and ultimate triumph:In the concluding section of his description in chapters 6–8 of God’s saving righteousness through Jesus Christ in the lives of the believers, Paul reflects first on believers’ suffering in the present (8:18–30) and then on the triumph of God’s grace in the future (8:31–39).
8:18–30 · Paul points out that believers’ present suffering is nothing in comparison with the future glory that awaits them (8:18). Paul knows that the life of a Christian is often accompanied by suffering—the distress of everyday living, the pain of illnesses, and the afflictions of discrimination and persecution resulting from being a follower of Jesus Christ. But these sufferings seem insignificant, and thus bearable, when we see them in the light of the glory of God’s new world, which he will usher in before long.
Paul explains in 8:19–23 that the sufferings of believers should be understood in the context of a fallen creation in which distress, pain, and death are part and parcel of human existence (Gen. 3:14–19). Since Adam’s fall, creation is no longer “very good” and waits for restoration and perfection. The promised consummation of God’s salvation is not a restoration of paradise, however, but the glorification of the children of God in a new heaven and a new earth (8:19). Creation changed as it was impacted by the futility of human existence, which became the dominating reality on account of Adam’s sin. The present state of creation is distressful, but there is hope because God promised the restoration of a perfect world (8:20). One day, when believers in Jesus Christ will be glorified as God’s children in the consummation, creation will be liberated from being subject to the control of decay and corruption (8:21). At the moment, creation is suffering pain, waiting for the birth of God’s new world (8:22).
As human beings are part of creation, they participate in the distress and the pains of creation. This is true for Christian believers as well (8:23), precisely because they have the Spirit of God, who has given them insight into the causes of the distress of creation and into the deadly consequences of sin, which affects creation. Believers express their frustration with the present corrupting state of affairs by groaning “inwardly”—they are very much aware of what is going on, but they do not go around complaining to others. The presence of the Spirit does not distance believers from creation. On the contrary, the Spirit draws them into an even closer solidarity with creation, as they know that its restoration is connected with the consummation of their own salvation in the future. The presence of the Spirit is the “firstfruits” of the consummation, God’s pledge that believers will indeed share the glory of Jesus Christ the Son of God, with the redeemed bodies of God’s new and perfect world (1Cor. 15:35–57). The anguished cry of Romans 7:24, in which the groaning of 8:23 finds expression, is answered in verse 23 with reference to the glory of the future consummation.
In 8:24–27 Paul elaborates on the situation of the believer. The salvation of believers is a reality because of the effect of the atoning death of Christ. But the physical completion of their salvation has yet to come. Believers are saved in hope (8:24). This hope stands in contrast to seeing, as it is directed toward the invisible reality of God’s perfect world. This means that, as believers live in hope, they wait patiently for the consummation (8:25). Believers are not alone, even though they live in a world darkened by sin, waiting for God’s future to arrive. They have God’s Spirit, who helps them in their weakness (8:26). Here, weakness is not the fact that believers can still be tempted by sin but the inability to pray as they should be praying. Since believers have not yet seen what they will inherit as co-heirs of Christ, they do not fully know what terms like “salvation,” “freedom,” “glory,” and “adoption as God’s children” mean with reference to the unseen reality of God’s new and perfect world. Christians experience salvation as “firstfruits” only (8:23), with the full harvest yet to come. Christians speak the language of hope. Even when they pray they do not use a language that truly corresponds to the glory and majesty of God. But God’s Spirit helps believers to pray, as he translates their prayers into words that correspond to the glory of God (8:26–27).
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Big Idea: Paul showcases another blessing from the Spirit of the new covenant: glory. More particularly, the Spirit is a sign of the glory of the age to come and the new covenant. And yet, that glory occurs in the midst of this age and suffering.
Understanding the Text
1. Suffering/glory (8:18)
2. Three groanings (8:19–27)
a. Creation groans (hope for the revelation of the children of God) (8:19–22)
b. Believers groan (firstfruits of the Spirit / by hope we were saved) (8:23–25)
c. The Spirit groans (the Spirit helps us in our weaknesses) (8:26–27)
3. Suffering/glory (8:28–30)1
Each of these points—suffering/glory, the groaning of creation, the groaning of Christians, and the groaning of the Spirit—includes blessings of the age to come and the new covenant that have already dawned for Christians but are not yet complete.
Historical and Cultural Background
1. Verses17–18 and verses28–30, preoccupied with the themes of suffering and glory as they are, form an inclusio around Romans 8:19–27. These two themes combined to form a prominent notion in Jewish apocalyptic writers, who believed that the suffering of the people of God in the present age would bring them glory in the age to come (e.g., 1En. 1.2–8; 96.3; 2Bar. 48.49–50; 51.3–11; 4Ezra 7.15–16, 95–98). Yet for Paul, as for the early Christians, the relationship between suffering and glory no longer was consecutive (the one would lead to the other) but rather was dialectical (the one is intermingled with the other). Because of the death and resurrection of Christ, the glory of the age to come has broken into this age of suffering. Thus, the two are intertwined in the Christian’s life, as Romans 8:17–18 makes clear. God’s glory is already the possession of the believer, even in this age of suffering. But the divine glory is presently invisible, residing in the Christian’s heart. Only at the parousia (the return of Christ) will it be revealed publicly in the believer’s resurrection body (see 2Cor. 4:16–5:10; Phil. 3:20–21; Col. 3:1–4).
Romans 8:28–30 presents the same pattern: divine glory is the present possession of the believer, but it coexists with suffering. The former aspect is delineated in 8:29–30, which showcases a dazzling display of theological terms to describe the present aspect of the Christian’s salvation (“foreknew,” “predestined,” “called,” “justified,” “glorified”). It is not accidental that “glory” (8:30) is the term used to conclude that list, for it returns the reader to the thought that initiated the paragraph (8:17). The latter aspect, suffering, is the conceptual antecedent of the words “in all things God works for the good of those who ... have been called according to his purpose” (8:28). In context, the “all things” are the afflictions that God uses (8:17–25) to conform believers to the image and glory of Christ (8:29).2
2. Romans 8:22, at first glance, is enigmatic: “We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.” Moreover, Paul attributes humanlike qualities to creation when he asserts, “The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed” (8:19 [cf. the similar description in 8:21]). The longing of the cosmos for the final glorification of the people of God and the simultaneous restoration of the earth is a dominant refrain in Jewish apocalypticism and is succinctly summarized in the modern expression Urzeit-Endzeit (“original time–end time”). This means that the end of time, or the age to come, will recapitulate the paradisiacal setting of the beginning of time (see Isa. 11:6–8; 65:17–25; Ezek. 34:25–27; Jub. 1.29; 1En. 45.4–5; 2Bar. 32.6; 49; 73.5–7; 4Ezra 6.16; 7.25, 119–26; cf. Rev. 21–22).
Interpretive Insights
8:18 present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. Verse18 continues the theme of suffering leading to glory from 8:17. Three comments can be made about this theme. First, as noted earlier, suffering for righteousness’ sake in this age leading to the glory of the age to come is apocalyptic in orientation. Second, it is also rooted in the new covenant. Paul makes this clear in 2Corinthians 3:1–5:21, where he talks about the glory of the new covenant over the old covenant (3:1–4:6) but says that such a new covenant is rooted in suffering (4:7–5:21). Third, in participating in the suffering/glory paradigm, the Christian participates in Christ’s suffering and glory (compare Rom. 8:17–18 with 2Cor. 3:1–5:21; Phil. 3:10, 21; Col. 3:4; 2Thess. 2:14; Heb. 2:7–10).
8:19–22 creation waits in eager expectation ... the whole creation has been groaning. The suffering/glory theme now gets expressed in terms of the groanings of creation (8:19–22), of the Christian (8:23–25), and of the Spirit (8:26–27). Regarding the groaning of creation, the future glory of the nonhuman world is linked to the return of Christ and the glorious resurrection body that awaits the believer (8:19, 21b). The assumption here is that the new creation that Christ brings will restore lost paradise—the Urzeit-Endzeit pattern (compare Gen. 1–3 with Rev. 21–22). All of creation has been groaning for that day since Adam’s sin brought the divine curse on the earth (compare Rom. 8:20–22 with Gen. 3:17).3Perhaps, as in Romans 5:12–14, we are to see in Romans 8:19–22 the dynamic of the law of the old covenant stimulating Adam’s sin and the resulting curses on humanity as well as on the nonhuman world. But already in the garden of Eden God held out the hope that the Messiah would come and restore all things (compare Rom. 8:20 with Gen. 3:15, the protoevangelion).4
8:23–25 we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait. The groaning of the Christian also evokes the suffering/glory paradigm. Thus, believers groan because they, like creation, are subject to Adam’s curse in this present evil age. But Christians also groan because they know that the indwelling Spirit is proof that the glorious resurrection body certainly awaits them. And such a hope sustains the believer in the meantime (8:24–25). So the groaning is both negative (suffering in this age) and positive (glory in the age to come).5
Two more comments can be made about the believer’s glorious body, both connected to the new covenant. First, the future glorious resurrection was associated by the prophets with the restoration of Israel and the arrival of the new covenant (e.g., Ezek. 36–37; Dan. 12:1–3). Second, Revelation 21–22, the quintessential description of the future resurrection and the new creation, intimately associates such realities with the new covenant: “God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God” (21:3). Such a classic formulation of the covenant is not far removed from the doctrine of the indwelling of the Spirit, who provides certain hope for the glorious resurrection and new creation.
8:26–27 the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans ... in accordance with the will of God. These mysterious and wonderful verses point out that the indwelling Holy Spirit groans on behalf of the believer. Such groaning, like that of creation and the Christian, is evidence of the overlapping of the two ages. The Spirit groans on behalf of the believer who suffers in this age. But the Spirit’s groaning is also a sign that the age to come has dawned. Thus, the Spirit intercedes with the Father when the believer is not sure what the will of God is. This understanding, rather than ecstatic speech, is most likely what Paul has in mind in 8:26–27. Access to the throne of God via the guidance of the Spirit assures the Christian that God hears now and will grant the glory of his Son (cf. 8:30).
8:28 in all things God works for the good of those who love him. We earlier noted that the suffering/glory paradigm imprints 8:28–30. The “all things” consists of the sufferings of this age (8:19–27), which God uses to conform the believer to the image of his Son, in whose glory the believer shares (8:30).6
8:29–30 those God foreknew he also predestined ... those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified. The cluster of theological terms in these verses—“foreknew,” “predestined,” “called,” “justified,” “glorified”—assures believers that God’s gracious election will see them through the purging process so that they become like Christ, with all the glory that entails. We should also note that several words here convey a covenantal nuance. First, “foreknow” (8:29) is rooted in God’s covenantal love for Israel (e.g., Gen. 18:19; Exod. 33:13; Ps. 18:43; Prov. 9:10; Jer. 1:5; Hos. 13:4). Second, to “love” God (8:28) is the stipulation of the old covenant (e.g., Exod. 20:6; Deut. 5:10; 6:5; 7:9; Josh. 22:5; 1Kings 3:3; Neh. 1:5). Third, Jesus the “firstborn” Son (8:29) alludes to Israel as God’s firstborn son (e.g., Exod. 4:22; Pss. Sol. 18.4). But Paul applies these terms to Christ and his followers as participants of the new covenant.
Theological Insights
Several theological truths encourage the reader of Romans 8:18–30. First, suffering does not negate the fact that a person is a Christian; rather, it proves that the Christian’s profession of faith is genuine. Second, Christians should have respect not only for the human body but also for the nonhuman creation, for both will participate in the new creation. Third, the Holy Spirit intercedes for believers even when they do not know what God’s will is. Fourth, God’s saving action on behalf of his people will keep them secure for all eternity.
Teaching the Text
A good way to preach or teach Romans 8:18–30 is to use the outline that I suggested (see “The Text in Context” section above). The suffering/glory motif is the key to interpreting the three groanings in these verses because it forms an inclusio for the paragraph: suffering now in this age ensures the glory of the age to come. But since the overlapping of the two ages governs Paul’s thought here, we could just as well say that the glory of the age to come has broken into this present age. Thus, because of the first coming of Christ there is a sense in which inanimate creation inherently grasps that its own destiny is tied into the future resurrection of the children of God at the parousia. That is, when Christ returns and his followers are resurrected, so too the old creation will be transformed into paradise regained.
Thus, the groaning of the cosmos is both positive and negative: negative because creation suffers under the curse of Adam’s sin, but positive because it longs for the new creation. And Christians understand that the dawning of the age to come at the first coming of Christ ensures for them a future body like Jesus’ glorified body. So believers’ groaning is negative in that they are subject to Adam’s sin, but positive in that they know their destiny is celestial. Furthermore, the Spirit’s groaning is testimony to the overlapping of the two ages. The Spirit groans within believers because they struggle over what to pray for in this present evil age. This is the negative aspect of the Spirit’s groaning. But such intercession of the Spirit on behalf of believers is also positive in that the heavenly Father knows the mind of the Spirit as to what is best for each struggling Christian and answers accordingly.
Illustrating the Text
Both creation and Christians groan for release from suffering and frustration.
Film: Cocoon. In this science-fiction movie (1985), aliens are portrayed as having human bodies clothed in an invisible, but clearly glorious form, illustrating the “now but not yet.”
Poetry: “Who Am I?,” by Dietrich Bonhoeffer. This poem is found in Bonhoeffer’s Letters and Papers from Prison. Bonhoeffer (1906–45) was a great German pastor, theologian, and writer who was martyred for his resistance to Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. He is known for his unflinching courage while in a concentration camp where he died, but this poem candidly and poignantly expresses his anguish and self-doubt in the midst of suffering.
Poetry: “Sympathy,” by Paul Dunbar. Dunbar (1872–1906) was the first African American to gain national recognition as a poet. Maya Angelou (b.1928), a contemporary African American writer, titled her autobiography with a line from this poem, “I know why the caged bird sings.” The whole poem could be used as an illustration, but the last stanza is particularly apt in describing suffering in the Christian life.
I know why the caged bird sings, ah me,
When his wing is bruised and his bosom sore,—
When he beats his bars and would be free;
It is not a carol of joy or glee,
But a prayer that he sends from his heart’s deep core,
But a plea, that upward to Heaven he flings—
I know why the caged bird sings!
A Christian’s hope is in the Spirit, who helps us pray and intercedes for us.
Film: The Legend of Bagger Vance. This film (2000) tells the story of a golfer, Rannulph Junuh (played by Matt Damon), who is the best that Savannah, Georgia, has ever seen. He returns from World WarI traumatized and lives on the edges of life as a drunk. Through a series of events, he is chosen to be a local participant in a golf tournament. One night as Junuh is trying to hit golf balls, a stranger carrying a suitcase appears, gives his name as Bagger Vance (played by Will Smith), and says he will be Junuh’s caddy. He begins to help Junuh deal with what is haunting him and with his golf game. When Junuh follows his wise advice, it works, and Junuh begins to win and come into his own, personally and professionally. Bagger decides that Junuh does not need him anymore and disappears as mysteriously as he arrived. Some critics have noted that this movie is a good portrayal of how the Holy Spirit comes into our lives in the midst of our “groaning” and brings us the gift of guidance and peace.
Hymn Text: “Spirit of God, Descend upon My Heart,” by George Croly. In this beautiful hymn, Croly (1780–1860) very personally addresses the Holy Spirit, asking him to “make me love Thee as I ought to love,” to “take the dimness of my soul away,” and to give “the patience of unanswered prayer.”
Justification before God because of the Love of Christ
Big Idea: Romans 8:31–39 forms an inclusio with Romans 5:1–11, thereby summarizing the blessings of the new covenant delineated in chapters5–8. Thus, 8:31–39, like 5:1–11, relates two summary blessings of the new covenant: justification before God (8:31–34), because of the love of Christ (8:35–39).
Understanding the Text
Romans 8:31–39, like 5:1–11, declares that the Christian is justified before God because of the atoning sacrifice of Christ, which is rooted in the love of Christ. More specifically, 8:31–39 divides into two sections:
1. Justification before God because of the atoning sacrifice of Christ (8:31–34)
2. Justification is rooted in the love of Christ and love of God (8:35–39)
Historical and Cultural Background
The main background material in this unit is the juridical language in 8:31–34, which I will discuss in the “Interpretive Insights” section.
Interpretive Insights
8:31 What, then, shall we say... If God is for us, who can be against us? Paul begins this section with two questions. First, “What, then, shall we say in response to these things?” Here, “these things” (tauta) refers to all that Paul has been saying since chapter5 with regard to the blessings of the new covenant. Second, “If God is for us, who can be against us?” “For us” translates hyper h?m?n (“on our behalf”), which Paul regularly uses to depict the vicarious atonement of Christ (see especially 5:6–8). Here hyper applies to God’s work on behalf of Christians. No matter who the enemies of Christians are, God is on his children’s side and will protect them.
8:32 He who did not spare his own Son ... how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? The words “He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all” echo the offering of Isaac (Gen. 22:1–18). Later Jewish tradition interpreted Abraham’s offering of his son (known as the Aqedah) as an atonement for sin. Besides hyper h?m?n in 8:31, we meet with another juridical action of God in the phrase “gave him up.” The verb here is paradid?mi, which the Gospel passion predictions pick up from Isaiah 53 and apply to Jesus. The next clause in 8:32, “how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?” is a “major to minor” argument (recall our treatment of qal wahomer in the discussion of Rom. 4:1–8): if God gave his Son for us (major argument), how will he not also give us all things (minor argument)? In other words, if God did not spare his Son for us, then neither will he deny us anything pertaining to salvation.
8:33–34 Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? The correct way to punctuate 8:33–34 is debated, but the NIV seems to offer the best solution: first question, then answer; this pattern occurs in both verses.[1] Four juridical terms occur in these verses. “Bring a charge” (enkale?) is used of Paul’s court trials (Acts 19:38, 40; 23:28–29; 26:2, 7).[2] “Justify” (dikaio?) is a forensic term, as is “condemn” (katakrin?). “Intercede” (entynchan?) is used in Hebrews 7:25 of Christ’s high priestly intercession for his followers. This term is also used of angels interceding for the righteous (1En. 13.4) and, closer to home, of the Spirit’s intercession for believers (Rom. 8:27). In the New Testament Jesus’ intercession for his followers at the right hand of God is referenced with allusion to Psalm 110:1, often applied to his ascension (Matt. 22:44; 26:64; Acts 2:33–34; 5:31; 7:55–56; Eph. 1:20; Col. 3:1; Heb. 1:3, 13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; 1Pet. 3:22). Paul’s argument in 8:33–34 is that if God justifies the Christian, and Christ died, was raised, and intercedes for the Christian, then who could possibly hold anything against believers?
8:35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Earlier I called attention to the love of Christ/God as being the theme of 8:35–39 (note vv.35, 37, 39). Verse35 consists of one of Paul’s peristasis catalogues (a list of afflictions) (cf. 2Cor. 4:7–16; 6:3–10; 11:21–29; 12:10). All of the items except the last one are found in Paul’s apostolic hardship lists in 2Corinthians 11:26–27; 12:10. These afflictions may be general trials, but more probably they refer to the messianic woes of the end time (see the sidebar).3
8:36 “For your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered.” Paul cites Psalm 44:22 (43:23LXX), from a passage that laments the suffering of the righteous. In similar fashion, the apostle wants his readers to know that suffering for Christ is to be expected (cf. Rom. 12:14–21).
8:37 in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. Paul assures the believer of future victory with his choice of words “more than conquerors” (hypernika?). Nika? is a favorite word of Revelation for the victorious destiny of believers who are faithful to Christ despite being persecuted for their faith (e.g., 2:7, 17, 26; 3:5).
8:38–39 neither death nor life ... nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God. Verses 38–39 eliminate any possibility of Christians being separated from the love of God in Christ: neither death nor life, angels nor rulers (demons?), present nor future, height nor depth (astronomical, not astrological terms), nor any power, nor anything in creation that Paul fails to mention. The believer could not be more secure. Note also that Paul equates the love of Christ (8:35, 37) with the love of God (8:39), an indication that the two—Christ and God—are equally divine. This is the apex of Christology.
Theological Insights
Here is a good place to summarize the blessings of the new covenant that belong to the church as spelled out in Romans 8. We can do no better than to quote Thomas Schreiner on this point:
One of the striking themes in chapter 8 is that the blessings originally promised to Israel have become the province of the church. Israel was promised the Holy Spirit (Ezek. 36:26–27) so that they could keep the ordinances of the law, but this promise has come to fruition in the church through the gift of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:4). Israel had the pledge of a future resurrection (Ezek. 37), and yet Paul speaks of the resurrection of believers (Rom. 8:10–11). Israel was God’s son (Exod. 4:22), but now believers in Christ are sons and daughters of God and adopted as his own (Rom. 8:14–17). The future inheritance was promised to Israel (Isa. 60), but now it is pledged to the church (Rom. 8:17). Israel was God’s chosen people and the only one foreknown among the nations (Amos 3:2), and yet now the church is said to be foreknown and chosen by God (Rom. 8:29–30). Yahweh had promised never to forsake Israel (Deut. 31:6), yet now this promise is extended to the church (Rom. 8:38–39; cf. also Heb. 13:5).4
Teaching the Text
Romans 8:31–39 can be preached or taught according to its twofold division: there is no condemnation because of Christ’s atonement (vv.31–34); there is no separation because of Christ’s love (vv.35–39). The title “More Than Conquerors” is a fitting one for this magnificent passage. The first paragraph might best be presented as if the audience were witnessing the drama of a heavenly courtroom scene. The accused (the sinner) is on the witness stand and is being grilled with questions by the prosecuting attorney, Satan (the accuser), who throws the book at the accused. The prosecutor brings up every sin that the accused has ever committed—in thought, word, and deed. The accused deserves justice not mercy, hell not heaven. When the prosecution has finished its testimony, the defendant apparently has no chance. But then the defense lawyer, Jesus Christ, provides his evidence as to why the defendant should be acquitted. He shows his nail-pierced hands and feet, his thorn-cut brow, and his spear-punctured side. The hymnist Eliza Hewitt (1851–1920) put the defense well:
My faith has found a resting place,
not in device or creed.
I trust the ever-living One,
his wounds for me shall plead.
I need no other argument,
I need no other plea;
It is enough that Jesus died,
and that he died for me.
God, the judge, then pronounces, “Case dismissed!”
Regarding 8:35–39, one could name the obstacles and challenges that Paul mentions—trouble, hardship, persecution, famine, nakedness, danger, sword, death/life, angels/demons, present/future, height/depth—and then ask the audience if Paul left out anything. If the audience mentions an obstacle, the speaker could place it in one of the categories mentioned in 8:35–39. The point, of course, is that absolutely nothing can come between the love of God in Christ and his children.
Illustrating the Text
Because of Christ’s atonement, we are no longer under condemnation.
Film: Camelot. This film (1967), an adaptation of the musical by the same name (1960), is based on the legends of King Arthur, who defended Britain against Saxon invaders in the early sixth century, according to medieval histories and romances. King Arthur gathered around him the Knights of the Round Table, who were devoted to a stringent code of honor. His most trusted knight, Lancelot, betrayed code and king by having an affair with Arthur’s wife, Guinevere. Caught in adultery by the hostile Mordred, Arthur’s illegitimate son, Lancelot escapes. Guinevere, however, is sentenced to be burned at the stake. Everyone wonders if the king will let her die. Mordred sings, “Arthur! What a magnificent dilemma.... Which will it be, Arthur? Do you kill the Queen or kill the law?” Arthur resolves to uphold the law, but looking on as his beloved comes to the place of execution, he cries, “I can’t! I can’t! I can’t let her die!” even hoping that Lancelot will save her. Mordred taunts, “Well, you’re human after all, aren’t you, Arthur? Human and helpless.” King Arthur’s struggle out of human love might be compared to that of God, who also watched as his beloved Son was led to execution. Yet God, in contrast, out of divine love bore the pain, allowing his Son to die that we might be set free.
Though we may suffer, we will never be separated from the love of God.
Spiritual Autobiography: The Hiding Place, by Corrie tenBoom, with John and Elizabeth Sherrill. This autobiography (1971), later made into a film (1975), is the account of Corrie tenBoom, filled with stories of her growing understanding of God’s love in the midst of tragedy. Four members of the tenBoom family gave their lives because of their work in the Dutch underground during World WarII, hiding Jews from Nazi persecution. Corrie and her sister were imprisoned in three different camps, including the notorious Ravensbrück near Berlin, the camp where Betsie tenBoom died and from which Corrie was released. Corrie is famous for the words she learned from her sister: “There is no pit so deep that God’s love is not deeper still,” and “God will give us the love to be able to forgive our enemies.”
Hymn Text: “O Love That Wilt Not Let Me Go,” by George Matheson. The story of Matheson (1842–1906), known as “the blind preacher,” is an illustration of this passage. The oldest of eighteen children, he graduated from the University of Edinburgh with degrees in the classics, logic, and philosophy. Engaged to be married, he discovered that he was going blind. Subsequently, his fiancée broke the engagement. Completely blind by the time he was twenty, Matheson became a pastor. He said that the text of this great hymn was the fruit of “the most severe mental suffering.” Particularly poignant is the following stanza:
O Joy that seekest me through pain,
I cannot close my heart to thee;
I trace the rainbow through the rain,
And feel the promise is not vain,
That morn shall tearless be.
Teaching the Text by C. Marvin Pate, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
The voluntary process of granting the rights, privileges, responsibilities, and status of child or heir to an individual or group that was not originally born to the adopter. While birth occurs naturally, adoption occurs only through the exertion of will. Two significant figures in the OT were adopted, Moses (Exod. 2:10) and Esther (Esther 2:7).
Although adoption is fairly uncommon in the OT, God’s adoption of Israel is of the utmost importance. It demonstrates God’s willingness to initiate relationship with humankind, a truth that later culminated in Jesus Christ. God chooses to adopt the nation of Israel as his child (Deut. 7:6; Isa. 1:2; Hos. 11:1) and more significantly as his firstborn son (Exod. 4:22; Jer. 31:9).
The concept of adoption is more prevalent in the NT, primarily in the apostle Paul’s writings. Based on the belief that Israel’s exclusive position as the adopted firstborn son of God the Father is no longer deserved, the NT includes those who believe in Jesus Christ as adopted children of God’s eternal family (John 1:12; 11:52; Gal. 4:5; Eph. 1:5; Phil. 2:15; 1John 3:1). The adopted children of God enjoy all the rights of a natural-born child, including the opportunity to call God “Father,” as Jesus did (e.g., Matt. 5:16; Luke 12:32). Paul in particular uses adoption to describe the Christian’s new relationship with God through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Rom. 8:15 16, 21–23; 9:25–26).
There are numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized as following a servant-master model. These included service to the monarchy (2Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in the temple (1Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also see extensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:111; Lev. 25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concerned with the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelines for their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaves who had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of six years. On the seventh year, known also as the Sabbath Year, they were to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent away empty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s “threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slaves also had certain rights that gave them special privileges and protection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, were allowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays (Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their master permanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also, severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death (Exod. 21:20–21).
Slavery was very common in the first century AD, and there were many different kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in an extended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they might choose to sell themselves into this situation (1Pet. 2:18–25). Although slavery was a significant part of society in the first century AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery. Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obedience for slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25; 1Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1Pet. 2:18–21). Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves (Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned by the apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1Tim. 1:10–11).
Jesus embodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled the role of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servant predicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in the Gospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve (Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5). Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the very nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).
The special relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured in the servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’s letters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses not so much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegiance and honor owed to Christ Jesus.
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.”
The foundational story in all of the OT is the story of creation, found in Gen. 12. Throughout the history of interpretation there have been many approaches to understanding these chapters. In the modern world, discoveries from both science and archaeology have challenged some traditional convictions, and debates continue to rage. Still, what Gen. 1–2 communicates is generally clear: (1)it establishes Yahweh, the God of Israel, as the God by whose word all exists; (2)it presents for ancient readers a compelling argument for why they should worship Israel’s God and not other gods of the ancient world.
Whether animal or human, “creature” assumes creator. God’s unique creative activity is showcased in his majestic work: “creatures.” While the infinite God is not confined in the lives of his creatures, both are linked in a relationship of fidelity (Ps. 104).
A creature is a gift and has an obligation of service (Ps. 150). Scripture celebrates divine rule and creaturely dependence (Ps. 96). Creatures have roles, and the liturgy of doxology revels in a cosmic and eschatological drama (Ps. 148; Isa. 40:1231; 65:17–25). Humans are caretaking creatures (Ps. 8).
The earliest ripening produce of the harvest (Exod. 23:16; Neh. 10:35) or, more generally, the highest-quality portion of any produce or manufactured commodity (Num. 15:20).
The firstfruit of the harvest is a symbol and harbinger of God’s blessing. Thus, God commands that sacrifices take place in which the “best of the firstfruits” are offered to him in thanksgiving and praise (Exod. 34:26; cf. Lev. 23:17; Deut. 26:2). The same principle applies to manufactured goods (Deut. 18:4), and all these events are accompanied by feasts and festivals (Exod. 23:16). Such ceremonial worship takes on renewed importance in the return from the exile, where they are connected to God’s worldwide rule and his claim upon the firstborn (Neh. 10:3537; cf. Exod. 13:2–16).
Paul uses this OT background to metaphorically describe the resurrection, God’s final “harvest” of the earth. Jesus Christ, by virtue of his resurrection from the dead, is “the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1Cor. 15:20; cf. Rom. 8:29). The resurrection of Christ is the guarantee of an abundant harvest to come, in which those united to Jesus will be similarly raised into abundant life. There is therefore a two-part order to a single resurrection harvest: “Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him” (1Cor. 15:23).
Furthermore, since Jesus’ own resurrection has already taken place, believers, who are sealed with Christ through “the firstfruits of the Spirit,” enjoy now a foretaste of the abundant life to come (Rom. 8:23; cf. 2Cor. 1:22; 5:5). Believers are therefore encouraged to live as those who have been born again by faith, “that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created” (James 1:18). Similarly, Paul sometimes uses the term “firstfruits” to describe the first converts in a region (Rom. 16:5; 1Cor. 16:15 KJV), symbolizing the expectation of fruitful ministry and the intimation of worldwide salvation.
The tangible presence of God, experienced as overwhelming power and splendor. The main Hebrew word referring to glory, kabod, has the root meaning “heavy” (1Sam. 4:18), which in other contexts can mean “intense” (Exod. 9:3; NIV: “terrible”), “wealthy” (i.e., “heavy in possessions” [Gen. 13:2]), and “high reputation” (Gen. 34:19; NIV: “most honored”). When used of God, it refers to his person and his works. God reveals his glory to Israel and to Egypt at the crossing of the sea (Exod. 14:4, 1719). He carefully reveals his glory to Moses after Israel’s sin with the golden calf in order to assure him that he will not abandon them (33:12–23).
In the NT the glory of God is made real in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14; Heb. 1:3). He is, after all, the very presence of God. When he returns on the clouds, he will fully reveal God’s glory (Matt. 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27).
Physiologically, the heart is an organ in the body, and in the Bible it is also used in a number of metaphors.
Metaphorically, the heart refers to the mind, the will, the seat of emotions, or even the whole person. It also refers to the center of something or its inner part. These metaphors come from the heart’s importance and location.
Mind. The heart refers to the mind, but not the brain, and in these cases does not involve human physiology. It is a metaphor, and while the neurophysiology of the heart may be interesting in its own right, it has no bearing on this use of language. Deuteronomy 6:5 issues the command to love God with all one’s heart, soul, and strength. When the command is repeated in the Gospels, it occurs in three variations (Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). Common to all three is the addition of the word “mind.” The Gospel writers want to be sure that the audience hears Jesus adding “mind,” but this addition is based on the fact that the meaning of the Hebrew word for “heart” includes the mind.
The mental activities of the metaphorical heart are abundant. The heart is where a person thinks (Gen. 6:5; Deut. 7:17; 1Chron. 29:18; Rev. 18:7), where a person comprehends and has understanding (1Kings 3:9; Job 17:4; Ps. 49:3; Prov. 14:13; Matt. 13:15). The heart makes plans and has intentions (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Prov. 20:5; 1Chron. 29:18; Jer. 23:20). One believes with the heart (Luke 24:25; Acts 8:37; Rom. 10:9). The heart is the site of wisdom, discernment, and skill (Exod. 35:34; 36:2; 1Kings 3:9; 10:24). The heart is the place of memory (Deut. 4:9; Ps. 119:11). The heart plays the role of conscience (2Sam. 24:10; 1John 3:2021).
It is often worth the effort to substitute “mind” for “heart” when reading the Bible in order to grasp the mental dimension. For example, after telling the Israelites to love God with all their heart, Moses says, “These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts” (Deut. 6:6). Reading it instead as “be on your mind” changes our perspective, and in this case the idiom “on your mind” is clearer and more accurate. The following verses instruct parents to talk to their children throughout the day about God’s words. In order for parents to do this, God’s requirements and deeds need to be constantly on their minds, out of their love for him. Similarly, love for God and loyalty are expressed by meditation on and determination to obey his law (Ps. 119:11, 112). The law is not merely a list of rules; it is also a repository of a worldview in which the Lord is the only God. To live consistently with this truth requires careful, reflective thought.
Emotions and attitude. The heart, as the seat of emotion, is associated with a number of feelings and sentiments, such as gladness (Exod. 4:14; Acts 2:26), hatred (Lev. 19:17), pride (Deut. 8:14), resentment (Deut. 15:10), dread (Deut. 28:67), sympathy (Judg. 5:9), love (Judg. 16:15), sadness (1Sam. 1:8; John 16:6), and jealousy and ambition (James 3:14). The heart is also the frame of reference for attitudes such as willingness, courage, and desire.
At times simply indicating a wish (2Cor. 11:1), in the Bible the word “hope” most often designates a disposition of soul, the grounds for one’s hope, or the outcome for which one hopes. At its core, biblical hope is hope in God, rooted in God’s covenant faithfulness (Ps. 62:58; Jer. 14:8; 17:13; Rom. 4:18; 5:1–5). Hope trusts God in the present and lives even now on the strength of God’s future accomplishments (Gal. 5:5; Heb. 11:1).
In the NT, hope is closely associated with Christ and his saving work. Christians now live by hope in Christ (Eph. 1:12; 1Pet. 1:3; 3:15); indeed, he is “Christ Jesus our hope” (1Tim. 1:1), and his future appearing is “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13). Thus, hope refers to eschatological glory (2Cor. 3:11–12; Eph. 1:18). It is “the hope of the resurrection” (Acts 23:6; cf. 24:15; 26:6–9), our transformation into Christ’s likeness (1John 3:1–3). That expectation stimulates various hopes for God’s plans to be realized in one’s own or others’ lives (1Cor. 9:10, 13; Phil. 2:19, 23; 2Tim. 2:25; 2John 12). So hope is named repeatedly as an essential Christian attribute (Rom. 12:12; 15:4, 13; 1Cor. 13:13).
The act of advocating before the powerful on someone’s behalf (Gen. 23:89), especially turning to God in prayer to seek God’s favor for others in crisis (2Sam. 12:16). While it is a prerogative of prophets (Gen. 20:7; Num. 12; Amos 7:1–6), priests (Ezra 6:9–10), and kings (1Chron. 21:17; 2Chron. 30:18; Jer. 26:19), intercession is a ministry that belongs to all the people of God (Acts 12:5; Eph. 6:18; 1Tim. 2:1; James 5:16).
In the OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modern ways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayer does not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer to God, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray to humans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction between the sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in the OT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, such as that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. These should be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, but rather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” in recognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. In the NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.
A presupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and may indeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is not primarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of the one praying, but rather about God changing the circ*mstances of the one praying.
The depiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of the OT, but there are important developments.
Jesus tells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt. 6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Prayer to God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:1920; John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26).
Prayer can also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him in the early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. Unlike anything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for their enemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke 23:34; Acts 7:60).
The Holy Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we are able to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is to be done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1Cor. 14:15).
Jesus encourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke 18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).
Jesus becomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions (Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points (Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offers prayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers that are (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and not give up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overly literalized “pray without ceasing” in 1Thess. 5:17 NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb. 5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and even now, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, our intercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb. 4:14–16).
More than a simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the grace of the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classical texts use the Greek word apolytrōsis (“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given to release a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. The group of words based on the Greek term lytron (“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. The corresponding Hebrew word padah is a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.
The experience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religious significance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included the dedication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:1213). Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), was redeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up to describe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continued to broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance from all Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included the whole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or the new age to come).
The NT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). When Jesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slavery of sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many (Matt. 20:28// Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the cross accentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17; 7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christian idea of ransom followed the accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death (Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with a ransom (Col. 1:13–14).
Although redemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future (Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1Cor. 15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions of redemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expects redemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption is universal; it restores the relationship between creation and the Creator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).
In the world of the Bible, a person was viewed as a unity of being with the pervading breath and thus imprint of the loving and holy God. The divine-human relationship consequently is portrayed in the Bible as predominantly spiritual in nature. God is spirit, and humankind may communicate with him in the spiritual realm. The ancients believed in an invisible world of spirits that held most, if not all, reasons for natural events and human actions in the visible world.
The OT writers used the common Hebrew word ruakh (“wind” or “breath”) to describe force and even life from the God of the universe. In its most revealing first instance, God’s ruakh hovered above the waters of the uncreated world (Gen. 1:2). In the next chapter of Genesis a companion word, neshamah (“breath”), is used as God breathed into Adam’s nostrils “the breath of life” (2:7). God thus breathed his own image into the first human being. Humankind’s moral obligations in the remainder of the Bible rest on this breathing act of God.
The OT authors often employ ruakh simply to denote air in motion or breath from a person’s mouth. However, special instances of the use of ruakh include references to the very life of a person (Gen. 7:22; Ps. 104:29), an attitude or emotion (Gen. 41:8; Num. 14:24; Ps. 77:3), the negative traits of pride or temper (Ps. 76:12), a generally good disposition (Prov. 11:13; 18:14), the seat of conversion (Ezek. 18:31; 36:26), and determination given by God (2Chron. 36:22; Hag. 1:14).
The NT authors used the Greek term pneuma to convey the concept of spirit. In the world of the NT, the human spirit was understood as the divine part of human reality as distinct from the material realm. The spirit appears conscious and capable of rejoicing (Luke 1:47). Jesus was described by Luke as growing and becoming “strong in spirit” (1:80). In “spirit” Jesus “knew” what certain teachers of the law were thinking in their hearts (Mark 2:8). Likewise, Jesus “was deeply moved in spirit and troubled” at the sickness of a loved one (John 11:33). At the end of his life, Jesus gave up his spirit (John 19:30).
According to Jesus, the spirit is the place of God’s new covenant work of conversion and worship (John 3:5; 4:24). He declared the human spirit’s dependence on God and ascribed great virtue to those people who were “poor in spirit” (Matt. 5:3).
Human beings who were possessed by an evil spirit were devalued in Mediterranean society. In various places in the Synoptic Gospels and the book of Acts, either Jesus or the disciples were involved in exorcisms of such spirits (Matt. 8:2833; Mark 1:21–28; 7:24–30; 9:14–29; 5:1–20; 9:17–29; Luke 8:26–33; 9:37–42; Acts 5:16).
The apostle Paul pointed to the spirit as the seat of conversion (Rom. 7:6; 1Cor. 5:5). He described believers as facing a struggle between flesh and spirit in regard to living a sanctified life (Rom. 8:2–17; Gal. 5:16–17). A contradiction seems apparent in Pauline thinking as he appears to embrace Greek dualistic understanding of body (flesh) and spirit while likewise commanding that “spirit, soul and body be kept blameless” (1Thess. 5:23). However, the Christian struggle between flesh and Spirit (the Holy Spirit) centers around the believer’s body being dead because of sin but the spirit being alive because of the crucified and resurrected Christ (Rom. 8:10). Believers therefore are encouraged to lead a holistic life, lived in the Spirit.
The accomplishment of God’s purposes. This was most clearly expressed by Jesus’ prayer, “Not my will, but yours be done” (Luke 22:42). Jesus stipulated in the Gospel of John that he was pursuing not his own will but that of God (5:19, 30; 6:38). God’s will is revealed in creation (Rev. 4:11), Scripture (2Pet. 1:2021), his standards (Ezra 10:11; Rom. 12:1–2; 1Thess. 4:3), his calling (1Cor. 1:1), and his purpose (Isa. 46:10).
Direct Matches
The voluntary process of granting the rights, privileges,responsibilities, and status of child or heir to an individual orgroup that was not originally born to the adopter. While birth occursnaturally, adoption occurs only through the exertion of will.
Atleast two significant figures in the OT were adopted. After Moses’birth mother kept him alive despite Pharaoh’s command to drownevery newborn Hebrew boy in the Nile (Exod. 1:22), Moses was,ironically, adopted by Pharaoh’s daughter (2:10). Esther, orHadassah, was adopted by her uncle (or cousin) Mordecai upon thedeath of her parents (Esther 2:7)—this adoption plays animportant part in Esther’s ability to prevent the Jewishextermination intended by Haman.
Althoughadoption is fairly uncommon in the OT, God’s adoption of Israelis of the utmost importance. It demonstrates God’s willingnessto initiate relationship with humankind, a truth that laterculminated in Jesus Christ. God chooses to adopt the nation of Israelas his child (Deut. 7:6; Isa. 1:2; Hos. 11:1) and more significantlyas his firstborn son (Exod. 4:22; Jer. 31:9). Thus God singles outIsrael among the nations of the earth, bestowing the highest possiblehonor.
Theconcept of adoption is more prevalent in the NT, primarily in theapostle Paul’s writings. Based on the belief that Israel’sexclusive position as the adopted firstborn son of God the Father isno longer deserved, the NT includes those who believe in Jesus Christas adopted children of God’s eternal family (John 1:12; 11:52;Gal. 4:5; Eph. 1:5; Phil. 2:15; 1 John 3:1). The adoptedchildren of God enjoy all the rights of a natural-born child,including the opportunity to call God “Father,” as Jesusdid (e.g., Matt. 5:16; Luke 12:32). Paul in particular uses adoptionto describe the Christian’s new relationship with God throughthe atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Rom. 8:15–16, 21–23;9:25–26).
Births in the ancient world were the domain of women. The women who bore children were often assisted in the birthing process by midwives (Gen. 35:17; 38:28; Exod. 1:15–20). Although work was forbidden on the Sabbath, Jewish law permitted midwives to assist laboring women with births on the Sabbath because childbirth was viewed as saving a life.
Many women utilized a birthing stool (Exod. 1:16). Upon birth, the newborn often was washed with water, rubbed with salt, and wrapped in cloths (Ezek. 16:4; Luke 2:7, 12). The OT required women to undergo a rite of purification following childbirth (Exod. 13:2, 20; 34:20; Lev. 12:6–8; Luke 2:22–24). This purification lasted forty days after the birth of a son and eighty days after the birth of a daughter and concluded with the sacrifice of both a burnt offering and a sin offering.
Birthing was valued, and women who were considered to be infertile often faced great shame (1 Sam. 1:10–11; Luke 1:25). Jewish tradition drew additional connections between childbirth and a woman’s character. For instance, death in childbirth was threatened for women who did not follow the law. Pain in childbirth was associated with the sin of Eve (Gen. 3:16), and conversely, absence of pain was interpreted as a sign that a woman was particularly righteous. According to Josephus, Moses was borne with no pain to his mother, and the Protevangelium of James indicates the same about Mary’s labor with Jesus.
The birthing process posed significant risk to both woman and child. Estimates of mortality rates for babies vary, but it is thought that as many as 50 percent of children did not survive beyond the age of five, with many failing to live through the first week outside the womb. Conservative guesses place the death rate for mothers around 5 percent. Death rates during childbirth were higher among Greek women, who often married younger than their Jewish counterparts and frequently suffered complications in childbirth due to their youth.
The Bible sometimes employs the language of birth as a spiritual metaphor. In John 3:3–6 Jesus instructs Nicodemus about the need for spiritual birth by explaining that he must be born again. In Rom. 8:22 Paul describes the whole of creation as experiencing the pain of childbirth as it awaits redemption, and in Gal. 4:19 he says that he is in labor for a second time with the Galatians as he desires the formation of Christ in them.
The earliest ripening produce of the harvest (Exod. 23:16;Neh. 10:35) or, more generally, the highest-quality portion of anyproduce or manufactured commodity (Num. 15:20).
Thefirstfruit of the harvest is a symbol and harbinger of God’sblessing. Thus, God commands that sacrifices take place in which the“best of the firstfruits” are offered to him inthanksgiving and praise (Exod. 34:26; cf. Lev. 23:17; Deut. 26:2).The same principle applies to manufactured goods (Deut. 18:4), andall these events are accompanied by feasts and festivals (Exod.23:16). Such ceremonial worship takes on renewed importance in thereturn from the exile, where they are connected to God’sworldwide rule and his claim upon the firstborn (Neh. 10:35–37;cf. Exod. 13:2–16).
Pauluses this OT background to metaphorically describe the resurrection,God’s final “harvest” of the earth. Jesus Christ,by virtue of his resurrection from the dead, is “thefirstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1Cor.15:20; cf. Rom. 8:29). The resurrection of Christ is the guarantee ofan abundant harvest to come, in which those united to Jesus will besimilarly raised into abundant life. There is therefore a two-partorder to a single resurrection harvest: “Christ, thefirstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him”(1Cor. 15:23).
Furthermore,since Jesus’ own resurrection has already taken place,believers, who are sealed with Christ through “the firstfruitsof the Spirit,” enjoy now a foretaste of the abundant life tocome (Rom. 8:23; cf. 2Cor. 1:22; 5:5). Believers are thereforeencouraged to live as those who have been born again by faith, “thatwe might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created” (James1:18). Similarly, Paul sometimes uses the term “firstfruits”to describe the first converts in a region (Rom. 16:5; 1Cor.16:15 KJV), symbolizing the expectation of fruitful ministry and theintimation of worldwide salvation.
The blocking or hindering of plans or desires. Plans may befrustrated due to lack of consultation (Prov. 15:22). People may tryto frustrate the plans of others, either for good or for ill (2Sam.15:34; Ezra 4:5; Esther 2:21–23; 8:3; Ps. 14:6). God frustratesthe plans of the wicked (2Sam. 17:14; Neh. 4:15; Job 5:12; Ps.146:9; Prov. 22:12; 1Cor. 1:19; cf. Esther 6), but the plans ofGod cannot be frustrated (Isa. 14:27). Frustration is a general partof life in a sinful and cursed world, as Eccles. 5:15–17observes. Paul describes the curse in Gen. 3 as the creation being“subjected to frustration” (Rom. 8:20) in the hope of agreater glory.
Althoughforms of the word “frustration” are not abundant in Bibletranslations, the feelings of frustration are common to many stories.Cain is frustrated that his offering is not received (Gen. 4:5–6).Amnon is frustrated because he desires Tamar (2Sam. 13:2).David’s plans to trick Uriah were frustrated by Uriah’supright character (2Sam. 11). The psalms of lament are filledwith frustrations. Such stories raise the character issue of what todo with frustrations. In seeking (the feeling of) relief, Cain andDavid murdered, and Amnon raped. And multiple stories tell offrustrated people making bad choices. The model of the psalms is toturn to God and give full voice to frustrations (though not overpetty, selfish issues) and to persist in righteousness.
In Christian theology, the Third Person of the Trinity. Theusage derives from the NT, in which the divine Spirit is treated asan independent person who is instrumental in salvation and is worthyof the praise accorded to both the Father and the Son (John 14:16–23;Rom. 8:26–27; 1Pet. 1:2).
OldTestament
Thescarcity of the phrase “Holy Spirit” in the OT (only inPs. 51:11; Isa. 63:10–11) does not imply lack of interest orimportance. While it should be recognized that in the OT the personof the Holy Spirit receives nothing like the systematic reflectionfound in the NT, when one includes correlative terms, such as “Spiritof God,” “my Spirit,” “wind,” or“breath,” it is apparent that OT writers attributed greatsignificance to God’s Spirit. Thus, the Spirit was at work inthe beginning of creation (Gen. 1:2). Adam and Eve are uniquely givenlife by the breath of God (Gen. 2:7). The Spirit enables the buildingof the tabernacle (Exod. 31:3), gives voice to the message of theprophets (Num. 11:29; cf. 2Pet. 1:21), empowers Israel’sleaders (1Sam. 16:13), and provides access to God’spresence (Ps. 51:11). Yet in all this, the work of the Spirit in theOT is sporadic, occasional, and localized. Thus, the prophets longfor a new age when God’s people will more perfectly enjoy theSpirit’s presence (Isa. 32:15; 44:3; 61:1; Joel 2:28).
NewTestament
TheSpirit in the ministry of Christ.The NT views the OT prophetic hope for the Spirit as fulfilled in andthrough Jesus Christ (Luke 4:18–21). The unique relationshipbetween God’s Holy Spirit and the person and work of Jesusexplains the systemic reflection that the Holy Spirit receives in theNT. This is signaled at the very beginning of Jesus’ life, whenthe Holy Spirit “comes upon” Mary, overshadowing her with“the power of the Most High” (1:35). Similarly, at thestart of Jesus’ public ministry, the Holy Spirit “descendedon him” at baptism (3:22). This anointing by the Spiritinitiates and empowers Jesus’ public ministry, from hispreaching, to his miraculous works, to his perfect obedience (Luke4:14–18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38). Even his sacrificial death isaccomplished by the power of the Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14).
Significantly,just as the Holy Spirit empowered the life and death of Jesus, so toois the Spirit responsible for his resurrection and characteristic ofhis glorious reign. Death is not a defeat for Jesus: he is“vindicated by the Spirit” (1Tim. 3:16), “appointedthe Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead”(Rom. 1:4; cf. 1Pet. 3:18). Furthermore, at his resurrection,Jesus comes into a new phase of full and perfect possession of theeternal Spirit as the reward for his obedience. So complete is thisunion that Paul at one point claims that “the Lord is theSpirit” (2Cor. 3:17).
TheSpirit in the church and the believer.The church and its members are the immediate beneficiaries ofChrist’s spiritual fullness. Since Jesus is now a “life-givingspirit” through his resurrection and ascension (1Cor.15:45), he is able to fulfill the promise of Spirit baptism (Luke3:16). This baptism takes place in the outpouring of the Spirit atPentecost, which marks the birth of the NT church. The apostles,illuminated by the Holy Spirit, provide true and powerful testimonyabout Jesus (John 16:4–15), testimony that serves as thechurch’s foundation and principal tradition (Eph. 2:20). Thework of the Spirit continues within the church in the postapostolicage, uniting its members in Christ for God’s holy purpose (Eph.2:22).
Thissame outpouring of the Holy Spirit is the salvation of individualbelievers. Believers receive the Spirit by faith (Gal. 3:14). TheSpirit in turn unites them to Christ and all his benefits (Gal. 3:2;Eph. 1:3), including his life (Heb. 4:15–16), suffering (Phil.1:29; 1Pet. 4:14), death (Rom. 6:3), resurrection (Rom. 6:5),justification (Rom. 4:25), and glorious reign in heaven (Phil. 3:20).These benefits, though undoubtedly perfected and consummated only atChrist’s return (Phil. 1:6), are characteristic of believers’present experience, enjoyed now because the Spirit dwells within themas the “firstfruits” of the harvest to come (Rom. 8:23;cf. Gal. 2:19–20). This indwelling of the Spirit results in newbirth and new creation (2Cor. 5:17), a newness identified withthe life that Christ received in his resurrection (Rom. 8:11).
Forthis reason, believers are urged to further the work of the Spirit intheir lives until the bodily resurrection of all God’s people.They are to cultivate the “fruit of the Spirit” (Gal.5:22), and they are correspondingly warned not to “grieve theHoly Spirit” (Eph. 4:30). Furthermore, since new life isinitiated by the Spirit (John 3:6–8), Christians are to remainin that Spirit, not turning aside in reliance on vain and uselessprinciples (Gal. 3:1–5). Conversely, they are to be “filledwith the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18), putting off the old person andputting on the new (4:22). This filling grounds every aspect of thebeliever’s life, from obedience, to worship, to the hope ofresurrection. The Spirit, in uniting believers to all the riches ofChrist and his resurrection, is therefore central in the work ofsalvation. See also Spirit.
Scopeand Uses of the Word “Hope”
Attimes simply indicating a wish (2Cor. 11:1), in the Bible theword “hope” most often designates a disposition of soul,the grounds for one’s hope, or the outcome for which one hopes.
Thosewhom God has helped and delivered expect to see God’s poweragain when future needs arise, knowing that in God there are reasonsfor hope. Mere optimism assumes that bad circ*mstances will improvewith the passing of time. In contrast, hope assumes that God isfaithful and is convinced that he is able to bring about his goodpurpose (Isa. 44:1–8). So at its core, biblical hope is hope inGod, rooted in God’s covenant faithfulness (Ps. 62:5–8;Jer. 14:8; 17:13; Rom. 4:18; 5:1–5). Hope trusts God in thepresent and lives even now on the strength of God’s futureaccomplishments (Gal. 5:5; Heb. 11:1).
Bothof the main OT words for “hope” (Heb. roots qwh and ykhl)are at times translated “wait.” By definition, hope meansthat God’s promised outcome has not arrived, and that some timewill pass before it does. But that time is filled with a sense ofwaiting on God, often with a deep ache of longing for God to act (seePss. 25:16–21; 39:4–7; Isa. 40:28–31; Lam.3:19–24).
Theinner disposition of hope may be seriously threatened by injusticeand other devastating life experiences, as reflected in Job 6:8–13;14:19; 19:10. The refrain of Pss. 42:5–6, 11; 43:5 is apsalmist’s self-exhortation to hope amid oppressive anddepressing circ*mstances: “Why, my soul, are you downcast? Whyso disturbed within me? Put your hope in God, for I will yet praisehim, my Savior and my God.” Words for “hope”function similarly in other psalms of lament (Pss. 9:18; 31:24; 71:5,14; cf. Mic. 7:7).
TheOT usually locates individual hope within the horizon and limits ofthis world. One hopes for outcomes that may be realized in one’sown lifetime; indeed, when life ends, hope ends (Prov. 11:7; 24:20;Eccles. 9:4; Isa. 38:18). Proverbs that mention hope regardingsomeone’s character development show an underlying concern thatGod’s purposes be vindicated in one’s life (e.g., Prov.19:18; 26:12). When used in conjunction with Israel as a whole, hopelooks to a more distant future and coming generations.
Inthe NT, hope is closely associated with Christ and his saving work.Christians now live by hope in Christ (Eph. 1:12; 1Pet. 1:3;3:15); indeed, he is “Christ Jesus our hope” (1Tim.1:1), and his future appearing is “the blessed hope”(Titus 2:13). Thus, hope refers to eschatological glory (2Cor.3:11–12; Eph. 1:18). It is “the hope of the resurrection”(Acts 23:6; cf. 24:15; 26:6–9), our transformation intoChrist’s likeness (1John 3:1–3). That expectationstimulates various hopes for God’s plans to be realized inone’s own or others’ lives (1Cor. 9:10, 13; Phil.2:19, 23; 2Tim. 2:25; 2John 12). So hope is namedrepeatedly as an essential Christian attribute (Rom. 12:12; 15:4, 13;1Cor. 13:13).
Hopeas a Biblical Theme
Withthe God of hope as its covenant Lord, hope is a defining reality forIsrael and a persistent theme in the historical books (e.g., 2Sam.23:1–7; 2Kings 25:27–30). Psalmists find hopeeither in continuity with present structures (Ps. 37) or in drasticchange (Pss. 33; 82), such as personal or corporate restoration.
Judgmentdominates the message of the preexilic prophets, although expressionsof hope are also found. But Judah’s downfall in 587/586 BCmarks a turning point in prophetic hope. While preexilic prophecybases its indictment, appeal, and warning in the exodus and thecovenant, Jeremiah and Ezekiel tend to redirect hope and expectationto a new work of salvation that God will accomplish through and afterthe judgment of exile (e.g., Jer. 31:31–34; Ezek. 11:16–21;cf. Isa. 43:18–19). In the wake of Judah’s destruction,these prophets grasp a remarkable new vision of grace and promise.Restoration will be personal as well as national; forgiveness of sinwill enable obedience to God’s law, now to be found written ontheir hearts.
Duringthe exile, collection of Israel’s sacred texts enabled theshattered community to sustain identity and hope. Postexilic prophecyis often “text prophecy” that arises from reflection uponand reapplication of written prophecies, psalms, and other scripturaltexts. For example, the book of Zechariah (especially chaps. 9–14)alludes to many earlier writings and also moves toward apocalypticl*terature, contributing dramatic new imagery of God’s conquestof evil to establish his cosmic reign and fulfill his covenant.Messianic hopes rose throughout this period, fueled by earlierprophecies (e.g., Isa. 9; 11; 65:17; Jer. 23:5; Mic. 5:2).
Ifthe OT gives occasional hints of an afterlife, this hope becomesmanifest in the NT (2Tim. 1:10). Jesus promises the thief onthe cross fellowship after death (Luke 23:43). For Paul, “todepart and be with Christ” is such a vivid hope that “todie is gain” (Phil. 1:21–24). Such texts imply that deathushers the believer into Christ’s presence. Yet thisintermediate state is not the whole picture. We are saved in hope ofthe redemption of our bodies (Rom. 8:23–25)—ourresurrection from the dead and entry into a new glorified, bodilyexistence (1Cor. 15; Phil. 3:20–21).
Christis judge as well as savior (Matt. 16:27; 25:31–46; Acts 17:31;Rom. 2:16), and the NT anticipates final judgment of all persons andpowers arrayed against God, including sin and death (1Cor.15:24–26; 2Thess. 1:5–10). Christian hope involvesnothing less than the return and full revelation of Jesus Christ, theresurrection of the dead, and the renewal of all creation (1Thess.4:13–18; Rev. 21–22)—the complete vindication ofGod’s rule, secured already in Christ. Then God’sredeemed people will see his face and live in his presence forever(Matt. 5:8; Jude 24; Rev. 22:4). A vision of this future enables usto press on with hope, stretching toward what is to come (Phil.3:13–14).
Referring to sickness or weakness, the word “infirmity”occurs most often in the KJV. The term appears far more frequently inthe NT than in the OT. In the Gospels, the sense of physical sicknessis arguably always in view (e.g., Matt. 8:17; Luke 5:15; 8:2;13:11–12; John 5:5), but in the Epistles, where “infirmity”occurs rarely outside the KJV, the idea of weakness is most common(e.g., Rom. 6:19; 8:26; 2Cor. 11:30; Heb. 4:15).
Referring to sickness or weakness, the word “infirmity”occurs most often in the KJV. The term appears far more frequently inthe NT than in the OT. In the Gospels, the sense of physical sicknessis arguably always in view (e.g., Matt. 8:17; Luke 5:15; 8:2;13:11–12; John 5:5), but in the Epistles, where “infirmity”occurs rarely outside the KJV, the idea of weakness is most common(e.g., Rom. 6:19; 8:26; 2Cor. 11:30; Heb. 4:15).
The act of advocating before the powerful on someone’sbehalf (Gen. 23:8–9), especially turning to God in prayer toseek God’s favor for others in crisis (2Sam. 12:16).While it is a prerogative of prophets (Gen. 20:7; Num. 12; Amos7:1–6), priests (Ezra 6:9–10), and kings (1Chron.21:17; 2Chron. 30:18; Jer. 26:19), intercession is a ministrythat belongs to all the people of God (Acts 12:5; Eph. 6:18; 1Tim.2:1; James 5:16).
OldTestament
ReflectingGod’s own deliberative process (Gen. 1:26–27; 2:18), ourcreation in God’s image implies and makes possible our genuineconversation, participation, and even disputation with God. Abiblical understanding of God’s rule accommodates thisdivine-human dialogue and the intertwined roles of both parties.People request intercession for themselves (1Kings 13:6; Acts8:24), but Scripture highlights God’s initiative.
InGen. 18 God invites (even provokes) Abraham’s intercession byconfiding in Abraham, reviewing the divine promises, and disclosingthe guilt and impending doom of Sodom and Gomorrah. On behalf ofrighteous persons who may live there, Abraham appeals boldly to God’sown “justice” (mishpat) in distinguishing the innocentfrom the guilty, and he successfully negotiates God’s pledge tospare the city if even ten righteous persons can be found there.Without disputing the allegations of wickedness, Abraham puts God’sjust response on the table as well.
Similarly,in Exod. 32 God informs Moses of the Israelites’ sin with thegolden calf and his own intention to destroy them and start over withMoses. In response, Moses intercedes, arguing that God’sdeliverance of Israel, and the likelihood of its being misconstruedby Egypt, should trump divine anger. Moses urges a different courseof action: turn from anger, relent, and do not bring the announceddisaster. The destruction of Israel would be inconsistent with God’sown commitment to multiply the people of Israel and give them theland as their inheritance (cf. Num. 14:13–29). The issue forMoses is not only Israel’s sin but also the rightness of God’sresponse in faithfulness to his purposes.
InJob’s intercession for his friends, God dictates the entireprocess, directing the friends to make offerings and assigning Jobthe task of interceding for them. God makes his own vindication thecentral issue: Eliphaz and friends have not said “the truth”(nekonah) of God, as Job had (Job 42:7–10).
Thesethree narratives highlight God’s initiative and make God’scharacter the grounds for intercession. They also introduce thepotential pain borne by the intercessor. For example, Mosesdramatizes his passionate concern for God’s cause by fallingdown before God and lying prostrate forty days and nights (Deut.9:13–29). He so identifies his own destiny with Israel’sas to offer himself as “atonement,” saying, “Pleaseforgive their sin—but if not, then blot me out of the book youhave written” (Exod. 32:32). This anticipates later prophets’participation in the sorrow of God and the pain of the people’sseparation from God (Jer. 15; cf. Luke 13:34–35; 19:41–44).
NewTestament
Inthe Gospels, Jesus heals by command, without explicit reference tointercession, and in this way remarkably transcends the OT prophets(1Kings 17:19–21). Although he does ask his Father toforgive his crucifiers (Luke 23:34), the Gospels emphasize Jesus’intercession for his disciples, such as for Simon Peter to surviveSatan’s assaults on his faith (22:31–32). John 17comprises an extended intercession of Jesus for hisdisciples—significantly, that the Father will protect them in ahostile world. Moreover, Christ promises to acknowledge faithfuldisciples before the Father (Matt. 10:32), an action formally closeto intercession, and that Christ performs as mediator of the Father’skingdom and salvation.
Paul’sprayer for his fellow Israelites to be saved is fueled by anguishover their unbelief (Rom. 9:1–3; 10:1–4). Mirroring thisis “the pressure of concern” he feels for all thechurches and for the welfare of their members (2Cor. 11:28–29),hence the prominent role of prayer in Paul’s ministry (see thethanksgivings that open his letters [e.g., Phil. 1:3–11]).Intercession perse, as prayer that others be spared ordelivered from crisis, is seen in the churches’ prayers forPaul’s deliverance from prison and death (Phil. 1:19; 2Thess.3:2–3; cf. Rom. 15:31).
TheNT extends the Gospel portrayals to reveal Christ as our heavenlyintercessor, a role made possible by the cross and resurrection. InRom. 8:34–39 Christ’s death, resurrection, and reign “atthe right hand of God” ground Paul’s confidence thatChrist’s intercession assures victory over condemnation and allopposition. The work of Christ our high priest (Heb. 7:25) may besummed up as intercession, echoing Isa. 53:12. Accordingly, “JesusChrist the Righteous One” not only advocates before the Fatherfor the forgiveness of our sins but also is their atoning sacrifice(1John 2:1–2). In these texts, Christ’s heavenlyintercession implements the saving purposes of God made real in thecross. Moreover, the work of Christ as prophet, priest, and kingimplies the central role of intercession, since intercession is afunction of each of these offices.
ThusGod’s initiative in intercession is intensified in the NT:God’s self-giving through Christ is the foundation of anongoing heavenly intercession that in turn gives the church increasedconfidence to intercede boldly. Further, God’s Spirit helps usin our weakness by interceding for us in accord with God’swill, even if we experience that intercession as “wordlessgroans” (Rom. 8:26–28).
The act of advocating before the powerful on someone’sbehalf (Gen. 23:8–9), especially turning to God in prayer toseek God’s favor for others in crisis (2Sam. 12:16).While it is a prerogative of prophets (Gen. 20:7; Num. 12; Amos7:1–6), priests (Ezra 6:9–10), and kings (1Chron.21:17; 2Chron. 30:18; Jer. 26:19), intercession is a ministrythat belongs to all the people of God (Acts 12:5; Eph. 6:18; 1Tim.2:1; James 5:16).
OldTestament
ReflectingGod’s own deliberative process (Gen. 1:26–27; 2:18), ourcreation in God’s image implies and makes possible our genuineconversation, participation, and even disputation with God. Abiblical understanding of God’s rule accommodates thisdivine-human dialogue and the intertwined roles of both parties.People request intercession for themselves (1Kings 13:6; Acts8:24), but Scripture highlights God’s initiative.
InGen. 18 God invites (even provokes) Abraham’s intercession byconfiding in Abraham, reviewing the divine promises, and disclosingthe guilt and impending doom of Sodom and Gomorrah. On behalf ofrighteous persons who may live there, Abraham appeals boldly to God’sown “justice” (mishpat) in distinguishing the innocentfrom the guilty, and he successfully negotiates God’s pledge tospare the city if even ten righteous persons can be found there.Without disputing the allegations of wickedness, Abraham puts God’sjust response on the table as well.
Similarly,in Exod. 32 God informs Moses of the Israelites’ sin with thegolden calf and his own intention to destroy them and start over withMoses. In response, Moses intercedes, arguing that God’sdeliverance of Israel, and the likelihood of its being misconstruedby Egypt, should trump divine anger. Moses urges a different courseof action: turn from anger, relent, and do not bring the announceddisaster. The destruction of Israel would be inconsistent with God’sown commitment to multiply the people of Israel and give them theland as their inheritance (cf. Num. 14:13–29). The issue forMoses is not only Israel’s sin but also the rightness of God’sresponse in faithfulness to his purposes.
InJob’s intercession for his friends, God dictates the entireprocess, directing the friends to make offerings and assigning Jobthe task of interceding for them. God makes his own vindication thecentral issue: Eliphaz and friends have not said “the truth”(nekonah) of God, as Job had (Job 42:7–10).
Thesethree narratives highlight God’s initiative and make God’scharacter the grounds for intercession. They also introduce thepotential pain borne by the intercessor. For example, Mosesdramatizes his passionate concern for God’s cause by fallingdown before God and lying prostrate forty days and nights (Deut.9:13–29). He so identifies his own destiny with Israel’sas to offer himself as “atonement,” saying, “Pleaseforgive their sin—but if not, then blot me out of the book youhave written” (Exod. 32:32). This anticipates later prophets’participation in the sorrow of God and the pain of the people’sseparation from God (Jer. 15; cf. Luke 13:34–35; 19:41–44).
NewTestament
Inthe Gospels, Jesus heals by command, without explicit reference tointercession, and in this way remarkably transcends the OT prophets(1Kings 17:19–21). Although he does ask his Father toforgive his crucifiers (Luke 23:34), the Gospels emphasize Jesus’intercession for his disciples, such as for Simon Peter to surviveSatan’s assaults on his faith (22:31–32). John 17comprises an extended intercession of Jesus for hisdisciples—significantly, that the Father will protect them in ahostile world. Moreover, Christ promises to acknowledge faithfuldisciples before the Father (Matt. 10:32), an action formally closeto intercession, and that Christ performs as mediator of the Father’skingdom and salvation.
Paul’sprayer for his fellow Israelites to be saved is fueled by anguishover their unbelief (Rom. 9:1–3; 10:1–4). Mirroring thisis “the pressure of concern” he feels for all thechurches and for the welfare of their members (2Cor. 11:28–29),hence the prominent role of prayer in Paul’s ministry (see thethanksgivings that open his letters [e.g., Phil. 1:3–11]).Intercession perse, as prayer that others be spared ordelivered from crisis, is seen in the churches’ prayers forPaul’s deliverance from prison and death (Phil. 1:19; 2Thess.3:2–3; cf. Rom. 15:31).
TheNT extends the Gospel portrayals to reveal Christ as our heavenlyintercessor, a role made possible by the cross and resurrection. InRom. 8:34–39 Christ’s death, resurrection, and reign “atthe right hand of God” ground Paul’s confidence thatChrist’s intercession assures victory over condemnation and allopposition. The work of Christ our high priest (Heb. 7:25) may besummed up as intercession, echoing Isa. 53:12. Accordingly, “JesusChrist the Righteous One” not only advocates before the Fatherfor the forgiveness of our sins but also is their atoning sacrifice(1John 2:1–2). In these texts, Christ’s heavenlyintercession implements the saving purposes of God made real in thecross. Moreover, the work of Christ as prophet, priest, and kingimplies the central role of intercession, since intercession is afunction of each of these offices.
ThusGod’s initiative in intercession is intensified in the NT:God’s self-giving through Christ is the foundation of anongoing heavenly intercession that in turn gives the church increasedconfidence to intercede boldly. Further, God’s Spirit helps usin our weakness by interceding for us in accord with God’swill, even if we experience that intercession as “wordlessgroans” (Rom. 8:26–28).
Origins,Composition, and Constitution
Origins.The Bible is not unique in offering an account of human origins.Interesting accounts are found in Sumerian (Enki and Ninmah, Hymn toE-engurra), Akkadian (Atrahasis Epic, Enuma Elish), and Egyptiantexts (Pyramid Texts, Instruction of Merikare). These texts provide ahelpful window into the biblical world and show the common concern toexplain the origin and role of humanity in the world.
Onedistinct feature of ancient Near Eastern texts is that they generallyspeak of human origins in a collective sense. Specialists refer tothis phenomenon as polygenesis. Such a collective creation betterserves the purpose of the gods, who have made the human race as alabor force. In the Bible, however, the book of Genesis describes anoriginal human pair who are the progenitors of the human race. Thisphenomenon is referred to as monogenesis. Humanity is not merelycreated to serve and do the work of the gods. Instead, it is aspecial creation of God, intended to bear his image.
Composition.The composition of humanity is described in Gen. 2:7: “The LordGod formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into hisnostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”Humanity is not distinct from animals in having the breath of life(1:30). Indeed, the description of the composition of humanity isalso quite, well, human. Genesis describes humans as made from thedust. Dust is not fertile, nor is it pliable. It refers to the earthand that which is dead. The wordplay between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah) appears tobe a major focus of the text (2:7) and suggests that the majorconnection being established concerns the first humans as archetypes.
Constitution.Certain passages of Scripture have led interpreters to posit atrichotomous nature of humanity (i.e., mind, body, soul; cf. 2Cor.4:16; 5:1–9; 1Thess. 5:23). Likewise, even though theGreek language can bifurcate the soul (psychē) and the body(sōma), a kind of dualism should not be inferred from this (cf.Matt. 6:25; 27:50; Luke 10:27; 2Cor. 4:11). Either approach isforeign to the unified biblical mind-set. The only dualism in theanthropological perspective of the NT is in the nature of humanity inrelation to Christ’s new creative work.
Formand Function
Form:male and female.Just as God created man (’ish), he also created woman (’ishah)(Gen. 1:26–27). Although woman is initially created as a“suitable helper” (2:18), it should be noted that theunderlying Hebrew term (’ezer) is used almost exclusively inreference to God elsewhere. This suggests that “suitablehelper” does not indicate a difference of essence, value, orstatus.
TheBible describes woman as coming from the “side” of man,probably communicating something about their equality (Gen. 2:21–22).Thus, it should be understood that just as all humanity shares aconnection to the ground, so also a man shares an intimate connectionwith a woman. Although the phrase “one flesh” often istaken as a euphemism, it probably is a remarkably descriptivestatement of the archetypal nature of Adam and Eve (cf. 2:24).
Function:image of God.The distinction between humanity and the other animals created by Godis that humans are created in God’s image. The concept of theimage of God, however, is not unique to the biblical text (Gen.1:26–27; cf. Instruction of Merikare). Throughout the ancientNear East, kings were thought to actually be the image of a god. Inthe Christian understanding, only Christ is the image of God (2Cor.4:4), whereas humanity is created in the image of God. Although thismay imply a kingly role with regard to humanity’s function overthe rest of creation, the main parallel should be seen in how imagesare meant to represent a god’s presence.
Humanityin Pauline Thought
Paul’sconception of humanity is thoroughly eschatological insomuch as hisvision of Christ as the image of God is identified with Christ as“risen Lord.” Christ as the image of God is the finaldestiny of the humanity that is “in Christ” (1Cor.15:23–28; 44–49; Eph. 1:9–10). Because of theeffects of sin, creation has been subjected to futility (Rom.8:19–22), and humanity to death (Rom. 5:12–14; 1Cor.15:21–22). Yet Paul’s outburst of “new creation”(Gal. 6:15; cf. 2Cor. 5:17) indicates his understanding of thecosmological, and therefore anthropological, effects of being unitedwith Christ. Indeed, if God is making the “former things”into “new things” (2Cor. 5:17; cf. Isa. 65:17–19),this new creative act certainly impacts humanity. That reality isalready partially realized in the elimination of distinctions in thispresent “evil age” (Gal. 1:4), for in Christ “thereis neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there maleand female, for you are all one” (Gal. 3:28; cf. 1Cor.12:12–13; Gen. 17). Until the end, the Christian lives in thetension of already beginning to experience the act of new creationand not yet completely disinheriting the effects of sin (Rom.8:18–30; 2Cor. 12:5–10).
A distinction needs to be made between the variousoccurrences of the words “pray” and “prayer”in most translations of the Bible and the modern connotation of thesame words. In the OT, the main Hebrew words translated as “topray” and “prayer” (palal and tepillah) refer tothe act of bringing a petition or request before God. They do notnormally, if ever, refer to the other elements that we today think ofas being included in the act of praying, such as praise orthanksgiving. The same is the case in the NT, where the main Greekwords translated “topray” and “prayer” (proseuchomai and proseuchē)also specifically denote making a petition or request to God. Butother words and constructions in both Testaments are also translated“to pray” and “prayer,” and this article willdeal with the larger concept,including praise, thanksgiving, petition, and confession, as opposedto the narrower meaning of the particular Hebrew and Greek terms (seealso Praise; Thanksgiving; Worship).
OldTestament
Inthe OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modernways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayerdoes not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer toGod, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray tohumans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction betweenthe sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in theOT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, suchas that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. Theseshould be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, butrather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” inrecognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. Inthe NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.
Manyof the prayers in the OT are explicitly set in a covenantal context.God owes nothing to his creatures, but God has sworn to be faithfulto those with whom he has entered into covenant. Thus, many OTprayers specifically appeal to the covenant as a motivation for boththose praying and God’s answering (1Kings 8:23–25;Neh. 1:5–11; 9:32; Pss. 25:10–11; 44:17–26; 74:20;89:39–49). In postexilic books such as Ezra, Nehemiah, andDaniel, an important feature in the recorded prayers is the use ofprior Scripture, praying God’s words (many times covenantal)back to him (in the NT, see Acts 4:24–30). Also, the closenessengendered by the covenant relationship between God and his peoplewas unique in the ancient Near Eastern context. So Moses can marvel,“What other nation is so great as to have their gods near themthe way the Lord our God is near us whenever we pray to him?”(Deut. 4:7).
Prayermust be made from a heart that is right toward God. There is noguarantee that God will hear every prayer (Ps. 66:18; Prov. 1:28;Isa. 1:15; 59:2). For the most part, the “rightness” thatGod requires in prayer is “a broken and contrite heart”(Ps. 51:17; cf. Isa. 66:2).
Althoughseveral passages talk about prayer in the context of sacrifice (e.g.,Gen. 13:4), there is surprisingly little emphasis on prayer in thelegal texts about sacrifice in the Pentateuch, no prescriptions forthe kinds of prayer or the words that are to be said in connectionwith the sacrifices. Interestingly, however, in later, perhapspostexilic contexts, where there is no temple and therefore nosacrifice, we find texts such as Ps. 141:2, where the petitioner asksGod to accept prayer as if it were an offering of incense and theevening sacrifice (cf. Prov. 15:8; in the NT, see Rev. 5:8).
Apresupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and mayindeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is notprimarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of theone praying, but rather about God changing the circ*mstances of theone praying.
Thereis a striking honesty, some would even say brashness, evident in manyOT prayers. Jeremiah laments that God has deceived both the people(Jer. 4:10) and Jeremiah himself (20:7) and complains about God’sjustice (12:1–4). Job stands, as it were, in God’s faceand demands that the Almighty answer his questions (Job 31:35–37).The psalmist accuses God of having broken his covenant promises (Ps.89:39). While it is true that God does, to some extent, rebukeJeremiah and Job (Jer. 12:5; Job 38–42), he does not ignorethem or cast them aside. This would seem, ultimately, to encouragesuch honesty and boldness on the part of those who pray.
Literarily,accounts of prayers in narratives serve to provide characterizationsof the ones praying. The recorded prayers of people such as Abraham,Moses, Hannah, Ezra, and Nehemiah demonstrate their true piety andhumility before God. By contrast, the prayer of Jonah recorded inJon. 2, in its narrative context, betrays a certain hypocrisy on thepart of the reluctant prophet.
NewTestament
Thedepiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of theOT, but there are important developments.
Jesustells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt.6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Although recent scholarship hasdemonstrated that “Abba” is not the equivalent of our“daddy,” it expresses a certain intimacy that goes beyondwhat was prevalent at the time, but retains an element of reverenceas well. God is not just “Father,” but “our Fatherin heaven” (Matt. 6:9). Even Jesus addresses God as “HolyFather” (John 17:11), “Righteous Father” (John17:25), and “Father, Lord of heaven and earth” (Matt.11:25). And Paul, as mentioned earlier, uses a buffer zone, rarely inhis epistles using the word “Father” by itself, butinstead referring to “God our Father” (e.g., Rom. 1:7)and frequently using the phrase “the God and Father of our LordJesus Christ” (Rom. 15:6; 2Cor. 1:3; 11:31; Eph. 1:3; cf.Eph. 1:17; Col. 1:3). God is our Father, but still he is a Fatherbefore whom one reverently kneels (Eph. 3:14).
Prayerto God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:19–20;John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26). While there is some debate as tothe exact nuance of this idea, it seems clear that, at the veryleast, prayers in Jesus’ name need to be ones that Jesus wouldaffirm and are in accordance with his holy character and expressedwill. It is, in essence, saying to God that the prayer being offeredis one that Jesus would approve.
Prayercan also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him inthe early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. Theinstances of this in the NT are rare, however, and generally eitherexclamatory or rhetorical (Acts 7:59; 1Cor. 16:22; Rev. 22:20).The norm would still seem to be that prayer is to be made to theFather, through Jesus’ name.
Unlikeanything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for theirenemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke23:34; Acts 7:60).
TheHoly Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we areable to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6).The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is tobe done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1Cor.14:15).
Jesusencourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).
Jesusbecomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions(Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points(Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offersprayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers thatare (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and notgive up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overlyliteralized “pray without ceasing” in 1Thess. 5:17NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb.5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and evennow, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, ourintercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb.4:14–16).
A distinction needs to be made between the variousoccurrences of the words “pray” and “prayer”in most translations of the Bible and the modern connotation of thesame words. In the OT, the main Hebrew words translated as “topray” and “prayer” (palal and tepillah) refer tothe act of bringing a petition or request before God. They do notnormally, if ever, refer to the other elements that we today think ofas being included in the act of praying, such as praise orthanksgiving. The same is the case in the NT, where the main Greekwords translated “topray” and “prayer” (proseuchomai and proseuchē)also specifically denote making a petition or request to God. Butother words and constructions in both Testaments are also translated“to pray” and “prayer,” and this article willdeal with the larger concept,including praise, thanksgiving, petition, and confession, as opposedto the narrower meaning of the particular Hebrew and Greek terms (seealso Praise; Thanksgiving; Worship).
OldTestament
Inthe OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modernways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayerdoes not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer toGod, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray tohumans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction betweenthe sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in theOT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, suchas that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. Theseshould be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, butrather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” inrecognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. Inthe NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.
Manyof the prayers in the OT are explicitly set in a covenantal context.God owes nothing to his creatures, but God has sworn to be faithfulto those with whom he has entered into covenant. Thus, many OTprayers specifically appeal to the covenant as a motivation for boththose praying and God’s answering (1Kings 8:23–25;Neh. 1:5–11; 9:32; Pss. 25:10–11; 44:17–26; 74:20;89:39–49). In postexilic books such as Ezra, Nehemiah, andDaniel, an important feature in the recorded prayers is the use ofprior Scripture, praying God’s words (many times covenantal)back to him (in the NT, see Acts 4:24–30). Also, the closenessengendered by the covenant relationship between God and his peoplewas unique in the ancient Near Eastern context. So Moses can marvel,“What other nation is so great as to have their gods near themthe way the Lord our God is near us whenever we pray to him?”(Deut. 4:7).
Prayermust be made from a heart that is right toward God. There is noguarantee that God will hear every prayer (Ps. 66:18; Prov. 1:28;Isa. 1:15; 59:2). For the most part, the “rightness” thatGod requires in prayer is “a broken and contrite heart”(Ps. 51:17; cf. Isa. 66:2).
Althoughseveral passages talk about prayer in the context of sacrifice (e.g.,Gen. 13:4), there is surprisingly little emphasis on prayer in thelegal texts about sacrifice in the Pentateuch, no prescriptions forthe kinds of prayer or the words that are to be said in connectionwith the sacrifices. Interestingly, however, in later, perhapspostexilic contexts, where there is no temple and therefore nosacrifice, we find texts such as Ps. 141:2, where the petitioner asksGod to accept prayer as if it were an offering of incense and theevening sacrifice (cf. Prov. 15:8; in the NT, see Rev. 5:8).
Apresupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and mayindeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is notprimarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of theone praying, but rather about God changing the circ*mstances of theone praying.
Thereis a striking honesty, some would even say brashness, evident in manyOT prayers. Jeremiah laments that God has deceived both the people(Jer. 4:10) and Jeremiah himself (20:7) and complains about God’sjustice (12:1–4). Job stands, as it were, in God’s faceand demands that the Almighty answer his questions (Job 31:35–37).The psalmist accuses God of having broken his covenant promises (Ps.89:39). While it is true that God does, to some extent, rebukeJeremiah and Job (Jer. 12:5; Job 38–42), he does not ignorethem or cast them aside. This would seem, ultimately, to encouragesuch honesty and boldness on the part of those who pray.
Literarily,accounts of prayers in narratives serve to provide characterizationsof the ones praying. The recorded prayers of people such as Abraham,Moses, Hannah, Ezra, and Nehemiah demonstrate their true piety andhumility before God. By contrast, the prayer of Jonah recorded inJon. 2, in its narrative context, betrays a certain hypocrisy on thepart of the reluctant prophet.
NewTestament
Thedepiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of theOT, but there are important developments.
Jesustells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt.6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Although recent scholarship hasdemonstrated that “Abba” is not the equivalent of our“daddy,” it expresses a certain intimacy that goes beyondwhat was prevalent at the time, but retains an element of reverenceas well. God is not just “Father,” but “our Fatherin heaven” (Matt. 6:9). Even Jesus addresses God as “HolyFather” (John 17:11), “Righteous Father” (John17:25), and “Father, Lord of heaven and earth” (Matt.11:25). And Paul, as mentioned earlier, uses a buffer zone, rarely inhis epistles using the word “Father” by itself, butinstead referring to “God our Father” (e.g., Rom. 1:7)and frequently using the phrase “the God and Father of our LordJesus Christ” (Rom. 15:6; 2Cor. 1:3; 11:31; Eph. 1:3; cf.Eph. 1:17; Col. 1:3). God is our Father, but still he is a Fatherbefore whom one reverently kneels (Eph. 3:14).
Prayerto God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:19–20;John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26). While there is some debate as tothe exact nuance of this idea, it seems clear that, at the veryleast, prayers in Jesus’ name need to be ones that Jesus wouldaffirm and are in accordance with his holy character and expressedwill. It is, in essence, saying to God that the prayer being offeredis one that Jesus would approve.
Prayercan also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him inthe early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. Theinstances of this in the NT are rare, however, and generally eitherexclamatory or rhetorical (Acts 7:59; 1Cor. 16:22; Rev. 22:20).The norm would still seem to be that prayer is to be made to theFather, through Jesus’ name.
Unlikeanything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for theirenemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke23:34; Acts 7:60).
TheHoly Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we areable to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6).The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is tobe done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1Cor.14:15).
Jesusencourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).
Jesusbecomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions(Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points(Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offersprayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers thatare (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and notgive up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overlyliteralized “pray without ceasing” in 1Thess. 5:17NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb.5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and evennow, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, ourintercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb.4:14–16).
The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More thana simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the graceof the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classicaltexts use the Greek word apolytrōsis(“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given torelease a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. Thegroup of words based on the Greek term lytron(“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. Thecorresponding Hebrew word padahis a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.
OldTestament
Theexperience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religioussignificance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included thededication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13).Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), wasredeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up todescribe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continuedto broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance fromall Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included thewhole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or thenew age to come).
AnotherHebrew term, ga’al,generally relates to the kinsman-redeemer. In the case of a personwho had sold property due to poverty or even gone into slavery to paya debt, a kinsman could become a redeemer by buying back the property(Lev. 25:25–28) and/or purchasing freedom from slavery(25:47–49). The book of Ruth describes this, detailing therelationship between the impoverished Ruth and Boaz, thekinsman-redeemer. The prophets and the psalms apply thisunderstanding to how God redeems Israel (Isa. 43:1–3; Ps.19:14; cf. Job 19:25). God, however, does not pay ransom to anyone(Isa. 52:3–4); rather, he causes redemption by his power(45:13).
Theawaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’sultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’scontinued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant,God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon.Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was ifGod would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. Thislonging for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As thepersecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamentalperiod (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT andthe NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianichope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people fromGreek and Roman oppression.
NewTestament
TheNT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). WhenJesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slaveryof sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many(Matt. 20:28// Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the crossaccentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17;7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christianidea of ransom followedthe accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death(Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with aransom (Col. 1:13–14). The predominance of apolytrōsis inthe NT, compared to common Greek literature of that period,underscores its significance for early Christian conceptualization.
Withoutreflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made anissue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlightJesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12;cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need oftheredeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of theredemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from onesphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another.Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted ofmonetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1Pet.3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of thosehe redeemed (antilytron hyper [1Tim. 2:6]). God still did notpay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.
TheOT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in thepresent, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills theNT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’stheological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from theslavery of sin (1Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matterof ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already butnot yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption isevidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).
Althoughredemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future(Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1Cor.15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions ofredemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expectsredemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption isuniversal; it restores the relationship between creation and theCreator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).
The Bible has much to say about suffering. While in the OTsuffering is regularly an indication of divine displeasure (Lev.26:16–36; Deut. 28:20–68; Ps. 44:10–12; Isa. 1:25;cf. Heb. 10:26–31), in the NT it becomes the means by whichblessing comes to humanity.
TheBible often shows that sinfulness results in suffering (Gen. 2:17;6:5–7; Exod. 32:33; 2Sam. 12:13–18; Rom. 1:18;1Cor. 11:27–30). Job’s friends mistakenly assumethat he has suffered because of disobedience (Job 4:7–9; 8:3–4,20; 11:6). Job passionately defends himself (12:4; 23:10), and in thefinal chapter of the book God commends Job and condemns his friendsfor their accusations (42:7–8; cf. 1:1, 22; 2:10). The writermakes clear that suffering is not necessarily evidence of sinfulness.Like Job’s friends, Jesus’ disciples assume thatblindness is an indication of sinfulness (John 9:1–2). Jesusrejects this simplistic notion of retributive suffering (John 9:3,6–7; cf. Luke 13:1–5).
Theprayers of suffering people are expressed in the sixteen communal andthirty-seven individual laments in the book of Psalms. Within thelaments the writers describe their problems, express feelings, makerequests, ask questions (“How long, Lord?” [13:1]; “Whyhave you forsaken me?” [22:1]), and lodge complaints againstGod (“My eyes fail, looking for my God [69:3]), enemies (“Youhave made us an object of derision to our neighbors, and our enemiesmock us” [80:6]), and even themselves (“I am a worm andnot a man” [22:6]).
TheNT writers reveal that Jesus’ suffering was prophesied in theOT (Mark 9:12; 14:21; Luke 18:31–32; 24:46; Acts 3:18; 17:3;26:22–23; 1Pet. 1:11; referring to OT texts such as Ps.22; Isa. 52:13–53:12; Zech. 13:7). The Lord Jesus is presentedas the answer to human suffering: (1)Through the incarnation,God’s Son personally experienced human suffering (Phil. 2:6–8;Heb. 2:9; 5:8). (2)Through his suffering, Christ paid the pricefor sin (Rom. 4:25; 3:25–26), so that believers are set freefrom sin (Rom. 6:6, 18, 22) and helped in temptation (Heb. 2:18).(3)Christ Jesus intercedes for his suffering followers (Rom.8:34–35). (4)Christ is the example in suffering (1Pet.2:21; 4:1; cf. Phil. 3:10; 2Cor. 1:5; 4:10; 1Pet. 4:13),and though he died once for sins (Heb. 10:12), he continues to sufferas his church suffers (Acts 9:4–5). (5)Christ provideshope of resurrection (Rom. 6:5; 1Cor. 15:20–26; Phil.3:10–11) and a future life without suffering or death (Rev.21:4).
Thereare many NT examples of suffering believers (John 15:20–21;Acts 4:3; 5:18; 7:57–60; 8:1–3; 12:1–5; 14:19;16:22–24; 18:17; 2Cor. 6:4–5, 8–10; Heb.10:32; 1Pet. 5:9; Rev. 2:10). Suffering is part of God’splan for his people (Acts 9:16; 1Thess. 3:2–4) and ispart of what it means to be a follower of Christ Jesus (Acts 14:22;Rom. 8:17; Phil. 1:29; 1Pet. 2:21; 4:12).
TheNT writers repeatedly mention the benefits of suffering, for it hasbecome part of God’s work of redemption. The suffering ofbelievers accompanies the proclamation and advancement of the gospel(Acts 5:41–42; 9:15–16; 2Cor. 4:10–11;6:2–10; Phil. 1:12, 27–29; 1Thess. 2:14–16;2Tim. 1:8; 4:5) and results in salvation (Matt. 10:22; 2Cor.1:6; 1Thess. 2:16; 2Tim. 2:10; Heb. 10:39), faith (Heb.10:32–34, 38–39; 1Pet. 1:7), the kingdom of God(Acts 14:22), resurrection from the dead (Phil. 3:10–11), andthe crown of life (Rev. 2:10). It is an essential part of thedevelopment toward Christian maturity (Rom. 5:3–4; 2Cor.4:11; Heb. 12:4; James 1:3–4; 1Pet. 1:7; 4:1).
Sufferingis associated with knowing Christ (Phil. 3:10); daily inward renewal(2Cor. 4:16); purity, understanding, patience, kindness,sincere love, truthful speech, the power of God (2Cor. 4:4–10);comfort and endurance (2Cor. 1:6); obedience (Heb. 5:8);blessing (1Pet. 3:14; 4:14); glory (Rom. 8:17; 2Cor.4:17); and joy (Matt. 5:12; Acts 5:41; 2Cor. 6:10; 12:10; James1:2; 1Pet. 1:6; 4:13). Other positive results of Christiansuffering include perseverance (Rom. 5:3; James 1:3), character andhope (Rom. 5:4), strength (2Cor. 12:10), and maturity andcompleteness (James 1:4). Present suffering is light and momentarywhen compared to future glory (Matt. 5:10–12; Acts 14:22; Rom.8:18; 2Cor. 4:17; Heb. 10:34–36; 1Pet. 1:5–7;4:12–13).
Throughoutthe Bible, believers are instructed to help those who suffer. The OTlaw provides principles for assisting the poor, the disadvantaged,and the oppressed (Exod. 20:10; 21:2; 23:11; Lev. 19:13, 34; 25:10,35; Deut. 14:28–29; 15:1–2; 24:19–21). Jesusregularly taught his followers to help the poor (Matt. 5:42; 6:3;19:21; 25:34–36; Luke 4:18; 12:33; 14:13, 21). It is believers’responsibility to show mercy (Matt. 5:7; 9:13), be generous (Rom.12:8; 2Cor. 8:7; 1Tim. 6:18), mourn with mourners (Rom.12:15), carry other’s burdens (Gal. 6:1–2), and visitprisoners (Matt. 25:36, 43). See also Servant of the Lord.
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
Romans 8:18-27
is mentioned in the definition.
The choice or selection of a person or group, especially God’s determination of who will be saved.
Terminology
On occasion, the language of being “elect” is used as a description of Christ, or perhaps even a title. Isaiah, in one of his Servant Songs, gives a description that is probably best taken as a veiled reference to Christ in his unique relationship with the Father: “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen [or ‘elect’] one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations” (Isa. 42:1). There is similar usage in the NT, where Jesus is described in 1Pet. 2:6 (using a quotation from Isa. 28:16): “For in Scripture it says: ‘See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen [or ‘elect’] and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.’ ”
Many times the word “elect” is used in Scripture as a synonym for believers. For example, Jesus speaks of the future time when “he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other” (Matt. 24:31). Similarly, Peter addresses his first letter “to God’s elect” (1Pet. 1:1). John does something similar in his second letter, addressed to “the lady chosen by God [KJV, RSV: “elect lady”] and to her children, whom I love in the truth” (2John1).
Election and Salvation
There is more to this terminology, though, than simply a descriptive name for Christ or God’s people. Other passages are more explanatory in nature and imply a definite and active place for God’s involvement in the salvation process. For example, Peter continues on in his introduction to his first letter with a description of the elect as those “who have been chosen [KJV: ‘elect’] according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood” (1Pet. 1:2). Here there is the key question of how we should understand the role of God’s foreknowledge in the expression “chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” Some argue that this is simply telling us that God is able to look forward and know ahead of time who will exercise faith and be saved, so salvation is simply based on a purely human decision after all.
However, Rom. 9 suggests otherwise. This chapter, perhaps more than any other, sheds light on God’s election of his people. Paul is in the process of explaining how God’s plan of redemption (which he has been developing in Rom. 1–8) applies to his own Jewish people. If the gospel is really as powerful as Paul claims, why has it produced so little fruit among God’s own covenant people, the Jews? Paul answers, “It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel” (9:6). Then, in the following verses, Paul explains what he means by “not all Israel are Israel.” Not every child of Abraham is a child of faith (9:7–13). The promise has come only through Isaac, and not through Abraham’s other sons, Ishmael and the six sons of Keturah (see Gen. 25:1). Similarly, the line of promise and blessing does not involve all of Isaac and Rebekah’s children either, but only Jacob and not Esau (9:10–13). Here Paul explains, “Before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls” (9:11–12). In support of this conclusion, Paul quotes from Mal. 1:2–3: “Just as it is written: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’ ” (9:13). The bottom line, according to Paul, is not one’s ancestry at all, but God’s own choice. God tells Moses in Exod. 33:19, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” (quoted in Rom. 9:15). Paul gives his summary of election: “It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy” (9:16). He rests his case with the classic OT illustration of God’s hardening of Pharaoh (9:17) before concluding, “Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden”(9:18).
Romans 9 is not an isolated passage of Scripture. The apostle John says much the same of Jesus’ ministry, and how salvation is specifically to all “those who believed in his name”; to them “he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God” (John 1:12–13). The last part of this passage is key: salvation ultimately depends not upon “natural descent” or one’s human ancestry (including whether one is Jewish or not), nor upon “human decision” (including any and all acts of the human will), nor upon a “husband’s will” (a more difficult expression that probably refers to the decisions of others in the family), but solely and ultimately only on being “born of God.”
Hardening of Hearts and the Nonelect
Certainly, there is a mystery in all of this. There is no easy way to understand the negative process of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart or to explain the mechanics of the positive process of election. Scripture often describes God himself as the one who has hardened the hearts of various individuals. In Exod. 4:21, for example, God says to Moses, “I will harden [Pharaoh’s] heart so that he will not let the people go.” Other times, Scripture is less clear and simply tells us that “Pharaoh’s heart became hard” (Exod. 7:13). Then there are still other times when Pharaoh himself is described as being actively involved in this process of hardening his own heart, such as “when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen to Moses and Aaron” (Exod. 8:15). Undoubtedly, the best way to understand this is to see a negative response such as the hardening of a person’s heart as a combination of the active will of fallen human beings and the mysterious workings of a sovereign God. In a similar way, both salvation and spiritual growth are other spiritual realities that also involve the mysterious combination of God’s direct involvement in people’s lives and the necessity of their own human response. Paul captures this tension in Phil. 2:12–13: “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.”
There is also the question of the nonelect, sometimes put in terms of “reprobation” or “double predestination.” If God is actively involved in the positive act of bringing human beings into a proper relationship with himself in salvation, is he actively involved equally in choosing those who will never respond in faith and will suffer an eternity of judgment apart from him? Again, Christians are divided, and simplistic overgeneralizations do little to advance our understanding of this topic. Those who give precedence to God’s sovereignty in their understanding of the process of salvation usually see a greater involvement of God in the decisions of those who do not respond in faith; those who emphasize human involvement in salvation will also emphasize human decision in those who do not respond.
Those who emphasize God’s sovereignty in this mystery of the faith lean toward the Calvinistic or Reformed end of the scale. They tend also to emphasize the total depravity of humanity: the notion not that people are as bad as they can possibly be, but simply that sin has tainted every area of the mind, will, and emotions, making a positive turning to God, apart from God’s grace, humanly impossible. They also emphasize the definite atonement, the doctrine that Christ died specifically for the elect. On the other hand, those who emphasize human involvement, often called “Arminians,” tend to emphasize the importance of human free will in order to create a sense of responsibility for one’s decisions. They also emphasize an unlimited atonement, the doctrine that Christ died potentially for anyone and everyone.
Summary
The proper balance in Scripture seems to involve both God’s sovereignty and human involvement. Peter captures some of this need for balance: “Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble” (2Pet. 1:10). Election is ultimately God’s work, but at the same time there is a human involvement in it. Charles Spurgeon’s illustration seems appropriate here. Human will and predestination are like the two rails on a railroad track: everywhere we look they are separate and distinct and thus irreconcilable; yet it is only off in the distance (really in the mind of God himself) that these two complementary truths come together in their perfect resolution. There is no question that “elect” and “election” are biblical terms; the key question is how to understand this difficult topic and to work out all the logical implications in terms of sharing the gospel with others in a meaningful and appropriate manner.
The Hebrew word ’erets occurs 2,505 times in the OT andis most frequently translated “country” or “land.”“Earth” renders the Greek word gē in the NT. Notsurprisingly, ’erets appears 311 times in Genesis alone, thebook that initiates Israel’s landed covenant (Gen. 15:18). Theprimary uses of ’erets are cosmological (e.g., the earth) andgeographical (e.g., the land of Israel). Other uses of ’eretsinclude physical (e.g., the ground on which one stands) and political(e.g., governed countries) designations. Less frequently, “earth”translates the Hebrew word ’adamah (“country, ground,land, soil”).
Heavenand Earth
Israelshared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. Thisworldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon theprimeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having fourrims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rimswere sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters.God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth andshaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12–13). Similarly,the Akkadian text Hymn to the Sun-God states, “You [Shamash]are holding the ends of the earth suspended from the midst of heaven”(I:22). The earth’s boundaries were set against chaos (Ps.104:7–9; Isa. 40:12). In this way, the Creator and the Saviorcannot be separated because, taken together, God works against chaosin the mission of redemption (Ps. 74:12–17; Isa. 51:9–11).The phrase “heavens and earth” is a merism (two extremesrepresenting the whole) for the entire universe (Gen. 1:1; Ps.102:25). Over the earth arched a firm “vault” (Gen. 1:6).Heaven’s vault rested on the earth’s “pillars,”the mountains (Deut. 32:22; 1Sam. 2:8). Below the heavens isthe sea, part of the earth’s flat surface.
Therewas no term for “world” in the OT. The perception ofworld was basically bipartite (heaven and earth), though sometripartite expressions also occur (e.g., heaven, earth, sea [Exod.20:11; Rev. 5:3, 13]). Though rare, some uses of ’erets mayrefer to the “underworld” or Sheol (Exod. 15:12; Jer.17:13; Jon. 2:6). The earth can be regarded as the realm of the dead(Matt. 12:40; Eph. 4:9). However, the OT is less concerned with theorganic structure of the earth than with what fills the earth:inhabitants (Ps. 33:14; Isa. 24:1), people groups (Gen. 18:18; Deut.28:10), and kingdoms (Deut. 28:25; 2Kings 19:15). The term’erets can be used symbolically to indicate its inhabitants(Gen. 6:11). However, unlike its neighbors, Israel acknowledged nodivine “Mother Earth,” given the cultural associationswith female consorts.
TheTheology of Land
Inbiblical faith, the concept of land combines geography with theology.The modern person values land more as a place to build than for itsproductive capacities. But from the outset, human beings and the“earth” (’erets) functioned in a symbioticrelationship with the Creator (Gen. 1:28). God even gave the landagency to “bring forth living creatures” (Gen. 1:24). The“ground” (’adamah) also provided the raw substanceto make the human being (’adam [Gen. 2:7]). In turn, the humanbeing was charged with developing and protecting the land (Gen. 2:5,15). Showing divine care, the Noahic covenant was “between[God] and the earth” (Gen. 9:13). Thus, land was no mereonlooker; human rebellion had cosmic effects (Gen. 6:7, 17). The landcould be cursed and suffer (Gen. 3:17; cf. 4:11).
Israel’spromised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen.13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing,fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orientingpoints for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise,“flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27).Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity andjudgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationshipwith God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; thiscould ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits”people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).
ForIsrael, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen.15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithfulobedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1Kings 2:1–4).Conditionality and unconditionality coexisted in Israel’srelationship of “sonship” with Yahweh (Exod. 4:22; Hos.11:1). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen.18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was thesupreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev.25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance”to give (1 Sam. 26:19; 2 Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). TheLevites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did theother tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20;Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter andto occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3).Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when theyaccused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing withmilk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however,no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance”(Josh. 13:1).
Landpossession had serious ethical and religious ramifications (Deut.26:1–11). Israel was not chosen to receive a special land;rather, land was the medium of Israel’s relationship with God.Land functioned as a spiritual barometer (Ps. 78:56–64; Lam.1:3–5). The heavens and earth stood as covenant witnesses(Deut. 4:26). Blood, in particular, could physically pollute the land(Num. 35:30–34). National sin could culminate in expulsion(Lev. 26:32–39), and eventually the land was lost (Jer.25:1–11). For this reason, Israel’s exiles prompted aprofound theological crisis.
Inheritance
Thenotion of inheritance connected Israel’s religious worship withpractical stewardship. Land was not owned; it was passed down throughpatrimonial succession. God entrusted each family with an inheritancethat was to be safeguarded (Lev. 25:23–28; Mic. 2:1–2).This highlights the serious crime when Naboth’s vineyard wasforcibly stolen (1Kings 21). It was Israel’s filialsonship with Yahweh and Israel’s land tenure that formedYahweh’s solidarity with the nation. The law helped limitIsrael’s attachment to mere real estate: Yahweh was to beIsrael’s preoccupation (see Jer. 3:6–25). When the nationwas finally exiled, the message of the new covenant transcendedgeographical boundaries (Jer. 32:36–44; Ezek. 36–37; cf.Lev. 26:40–45; Deut. 30:1–10). In postexilic Israel,sanctuary was prioritized (Hag. 1:9–14).
Itwas Israel’s redefinition of land through the exile thatprepared the way for the incorporation of the Gentiles (Ezek.47:22–23), an integration already anticipated (Isa. 56:3–7).The prophets saw a time when the nations would share in theinheritance of God previously guarded by Israel (Isa. 60; Zech. 2:11;cf. Gen. 12:3). Viewed as a political territory, land receives nosubstantial theological treatment in the NT; rather, inheritancesurpasses covenant metaphor. Using the language of sonship andinheritance, Paul develops this new Gentile mission in Galatians (cf.Col. 1:13–14). The OT land motif fully flowers in the NTteaching of adoption (cf. 1Pet. 1:3–5). Both curse andcovenant are resolved eschatologically (Rom. 8:19–22).Inheritance is now found in Christ (Eph. 2:11–22; 1Pet.1:4). In the economy of the new covenant, land tenure has matured infellowship (koinōnia). Koinōnia recalibrates the ethicalsignificance of OT land themes, reapplying them practically throughinclusion, lifestyle, economic responsibility, and social equity.
Beyondcosmological realms, heaven and earth are also theological horizonsstill under God’s ownership. What began as the creation mandateto fill and subdue the earth (Gen. 1:28) culminates in the newcreation with Christ (Rom. 8:4–25). Under the power of Satan,the earth “lags behind” heaven. Christ’s missionbrings what is qualitatively of heaven onto the earthly stage, oftenusing signs of the budding rule of God (Matt. 6:10; Mark 2:10–11;John 3:31–36; Eph. 4:9–13; Heb. 12:25). As Israel was tostand out in a hostile world (Deut. 4:5–8), now those ofAbrahamic faith stand out through Christian love (John 13:34–35;Rom. 4:9–16). According to Heb. 4:1–11, Israel’sinitial rest in the land (see Exod. 33:14; Deut. 12:9) culminates inthe believers’ rest in Christ (Heb. 4:3, 5). The formerinheritance of space gives way to the inheritance of Christ’spresence. The OT theme of land is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus’exhortation to “abide in me” (John 15).
Earthquake–InPalestine there have been about seventeen recorded major earthquakesin the past two millennia. One of the major sources of theseearthquakes is believed to originate from the Jordan Rift Valley. Inantiquity earthquakes were viewed as fearful events because themountains, which represented everlasting durability, were disturbed.The confession of faith is pronounced in association with suchphenomena (“We will not fear, though the earth give way”[Ps. 46:2]). An earthquake must have made a great impact in Amos’sday (“two years before the earthquake” [Amos 1:1; cf.Zech. 14:5]).
Anearthquake has many symbolic meanings. First, the power of God andhis divine presence are manifested through it (Job 9:6; Ps. 68:8;Hag. 2:6). It accompanied theophanic revelation (Exod. 19:18; Isa.6:4; 1Kings 19:11–12) when the glory of the Lord appeared(Ezek. 3:12). His divine presence was especially felt whenearthquakes occurred during the time of the crucifixion and theresurrection of Jesus Christ (Matt. 27:54; 28:2). It led thecenturion to confess of Christ, “Surely he was the Son of God!”(Matt. 27:54). God’s salvation power is represented when anearthquake comes at the appropriate moment, such as when it freedPaul and Silas from prison (Acts 16:26).
Second,it is used in the context of God’s judgment (Isa. 13:13; Amos9:1; Nah. 1:5). It becomes the symbol of God’s anger and wrath(Ps. 18:7). God brought earthquakes upon the people to destroy evilin the world and to punish those who had sinned against him (Num.16:31–33; Isa. 29:6; Ezek. 38:19). Earthquake activity possiblyexplains the background to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen.19:24).
Third,earthquakes are said to precede the end of time (Matt. 24:7; Mark13:8; Luke 21:11). In the apocalyptic book of Revelation, earthquakesare regular occurrences (Rev. 6:12; 11:13, 19; 16:18).
The choice or selection of a person or group, especially God’s determination of who will be saved.
Terminology
On occasion, the language of being “elect” is used as a description of Christ, or perhaps even a title. Isaiah, in one of his Servant Songs, gives a description that is probably best taken as a veiled reference to Christ in his unique relationship with the Father: “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen [or ‘elect’] one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations” (Isa. 42:1). There is similar usage in the NT, where Jesus is described in 1Pet. 2:6 (using a quotation from Isa. 28:16): “For in Scripture it says: ‘See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen [or ‘elect’] and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.’ ”
Many times the word “elect” is used in Scripture as a synonym for believers. For example, Jesus speaks of the future time when “he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other” (Matt. 24:31). Similarly, Peter addresses his first letter “to God’s elect” (1Pet. 1:1). John does something similar in his second letter, addressed to “the lady chosen by God [KJV, RSV: “elect lady”] and to her children, whom I love in the truth” (2John1).
Election and Salvation
There is more to this terminology, though, than simply a descriptive name for Christ or God’s people. Other passages are more explanatory in nature and imply a definite and active place for God’s involvement in the salvation process. For example, Peter continues on in his introduction to his first letter with a description of the elect as those “who have been chosen [KJV: ‘elect’] according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood” (1Pet. 1:2). Here there is the key question of how we should understand the role of God’s foreknowledge in the expression “chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” Some argue that this is simply telling us that God is able to look forward and know ahead of time who will exercise faith and be saved, so salvation is simply based on a purely human decision after all.
However, Rom. 9 suggests otherwise. This chapter, perhaps more than any other, sheds light on God’s election of his people. Paul is in the process of explaining how God’s plan of redemption (which he has been developing in Rom. 1–8) applies to his own Jewish people. If the gospel is really as powerful as Paul claims, why has it produced so little fruit among God’s own covenant people, the Jews? Paul answers, “It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel” (9:6). Then, in the following verses, Paul explains what he means by “not all Israel are Israel.” Not every child of Abraham is a child of faith (9:7–13). The promise has come only through Isaac, and not through Abraham’s other sons, Ishmael and the six sons of Keturah (see Gen. 25:1). Similarly, the line of promise and blessing does not involve all of Isaac and Rebekah’s children either, but only Jacob and not Esau (9:10–13). Here Paul explains, “Before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls” (9:11–12). In support of this conclusion, Paul quotes from Mal. 1:2–3: “Just as it is written: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’ ” (9:13). The bottom line, according to Paul, is not one’s ancestry at all, but God’s own choice. God tells Moses in Exod. 33:19, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” (quoted in Rom. 9:15). Paul gives his summary of election: “It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy” (9:16). He rests his case with the classic OT illustration of God’s hardening of Pharaoh (9:17) before concluding, “Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden”(9:18).
Romans 9 is not an isolated passage of Scripture. The apostle John says much the same of Jesus’ ministry, and how salvation is specifically to all “those who believed in his name”; to them “he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God” (John 1:12–13). The last part of this passage is key: salvation ultimately depends not upon “natural descent” or one’s human ancestry (including whether one is Jewish or not), nor upon “human decision” (including any and all acts of the human will), nor upon a “husband’s will” (a more difficult expression that probably refers to the decisions of others in the family), but solely and ultimately only on being “born of God.”
Hardening of Hearts and the Nonelect
Certainly, there is a mystery in all of this. There is no easy way to understand the negative process of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart or to explain the mechanics of the positive process of election. Scripture often describes God himself as the one who has hardened the hearts of various individuals. In Exod. 4:21, for example, God says to Moses, “I will harden [Pharaoh’s] heart so that he will not let the people go.” Other times, Scripture is less clear and simply tells us that “Pharaoh’s heart became hard” (Exod. 7:13). Then there are still other times when Pharaoh himself is described as being actively involved in this process of hardening his own heart, such as “when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen to Moses and Aaron” (Exod. 8:15). Undoubtedly, the best way to understand this is to see a negative response such as the hardening of a person’s heart as a combination of the active will of fallen human beings and the mysterious workings of a sovereign God. In a similar way, both salvation and spiritual growth are other spiritual realities that also involve the mysterious combination of God’s direct involvement in people’s lives and the necessity of their own human response. Paul captures this tension in Phil. 2:12–13: “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.”
There is also the question of the nonelect, sometimes put in terms of “reprobation” or “double predestination.” If God is actively involved in the positive act of bringing human beings into a proper relationship with himself in salvation, is he actively involved equally in choosing those who will never respond in faith and will suffer an eternity of judgment apart from him? Again, Christians are divided, and simplistic overgeneralizations do little to advance our understanding of this topic. Those who give precedence to God’s sovereignty in their understanding of the process of salvation usually see a greater involvement of God in the decisions of those who do not respond in faith; those who emphasize human involvement in salvation will also emphasize human decision in those who do not respond.
Those who emphasize God’s sovereignty in this mystery of the faith lean toward the Calvinistic or Reformed end of the scale. They tend also to emphasize the total depravity of humanity: the notion not that people are as bad as they can possibly be, but simply that sin has tainted every area of the mind, will, and emotions, making a positive turning to God, apart from God’s grace, humanly impossible. They also emphasize the definite atonement, the doctrine that Christ died specifically for the elect. On the other hand, those who emphasize human involvement, often called “Arminians,” tend to emphasize the importance of human free will in order to create a sense of responsibility for one’s decisions. They also emphasize an unlimited atonement, the doctrine that Christ died potentially for anyone and everyone.
Summary
The proper balance in Scripture seems to involve both God’s sovereignty and human involvement. Peter captures some of this need for balance: “Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble” (2Pet. 1:10). Election is ultimately God’s work, but at the same time there is a human involvement in it. Charles Spurgeon’s illustration seems appropriate here. Human will and predestination are like the two rails on a railroad track: everywhere we look they are separate and distinct and thus irreconcilable; yet it is only off in the distance (really in the mind of God himself) that these two complementary truths come together in their perfect resolution. There is no question that “elect” and “election” are biblical terms; the key question is how to understand this difficult topic and to work out all the logical implications in terms of sharing the gospel with others in a meaningful and appropriate manner.
The choice or selection of a person or group, especially God’s determination of who will be saved.
Terminology
On occasion, the language of being “elect” is used as a description of Christ, or perhaps even a title. Isaiah, in one of his Servant Songs, gives a description that is probably best taken as a veiled reference to Christ in his unique relationship with the Father: “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen [or ‘elect’] one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations” (Isa. 42:1). There is similar usage in the NT, where Jesus is described in 1Pet. 2:6 (using a quotation from Isa. 28:16): “For in Scripture it says: ‘See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen [or ‘elect’] and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.’ ”
Many times the word “elect” is used in Scripture as a synonym for believers. For example, Jesus speaks of the future time when “he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other” (Matt. 24:31). Similarly, Peter addresses his first letter “to God’s elect” (1Pet. 1:1). John does something similar in his second letter, addressed to “the lady chosen by God [KJV, RSV: “elect lady”] and to her children, whom I love in the truth” (2John1).
Election and Salvation
There is more to this terminology, though, than simply a descriptive name for Christ or God’s people. Other passages are more explanatory in nature and imply a definite and active place for God’s involvement in the salvation process. For example, Peter continues on in his introduction to his first letter with a description of the elect as those “who have been chosen [KJV: ‘elect’] according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood” (1Pet. 1:2). Here there is the key question of how we should understand the role of God’s foreknowledge in the expression “chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” Some argue that this is simply telling us that God is able to look forward and know ahead of time who will exercise faith and be saved, so salvation is simply based on a purely human decision after all.
However, Rom. 9 suggests otherwise. This chapter, perhaps more than any other, sheds light on God’s election of his people. Paul is in the process of explaining how God’s plan of redemption (which he has been developing in Rom. 1–8) applies to his own Jewish people. If the gospel is really as powerful as Paul claims, why has it produced so little fruit among God’s own covenant people, the Jews? Paul answers, “It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel” (9:6). Then, in the following verses, Paul explains what he means by “not all Israel are Israel.” Not every child of Abraham is a child of faith (9:7–13). The promise has come only through Isaac, and not through Abraham’s other sons, Ishmael and the six sons of Keturah (see Gen. 25:1). Similarly, the line of promise and blessing does not involve all of Isaac and Rebekah’s children either, but only Jacob and not Esau (9:10–13). Here Paul explains, “Before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls” (9:11–12). In support of this conclusion, Paul quotes from Mal. 1:2–3: “Just as it is written: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’ ” (9:13). The bottom line, according to Paul, is not one’s ancestry at all, but God’s own choice. God tells Moses in Exod. 33:19, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” (quoted in Rom. 9:15). Paul gives his summary of election: “It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy” (9:16). He rests his case with the classic OT illustration of God’s hardening of Pharaoh (9:17) before concluding, “Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden”(9:18).
Romans 9 is not an isolated passage of Scripture. The apostle John says much the same of Jesus’ ministry, and how salvation is specifically to all “those who believed in his name”; to them “he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God” (John 1:12–13). The last part of this passage is key: salvation ultimately depends not upon “natural descent” or one’s human ancestry (including whether one is Jewish or not), nor upon “human decision” (including any and all acts of the human will), nor upon a “husband’s will” (a more difficult expression that probably refers to the decisions of others in the family), but solely and ultimately only on being “born of God.”
Hardening of Hearts and the Nonelect
Certainly, there is a mystery in all of this. There is no easy way to understand the negative process of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart or to explain the mechanics of the positive process of election. Scripture often describes God himself as the one who has hardened the hearts of various individuals. In Exod. 4:21, for example, God says to Moses, “I will harden [Pharaoh’s] heart so that he will not let the people go.” Other times, Scripture is less clear and simply tells us that “Pharaoh’s heart became hard” (Exod. 7:13). Then there are still other times when Pharaoh himself is described as being actively involved in this process of hardening his own heart, such as “when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen to Moses and Aaron” (Exod. 8:15). Undoubtedly, the best way to understand this is to see a negative response such as the hardening of a person’s heart as a combination of the active will of fallen human beings and the mysterious workings of a sovereign God. In a similar way, both salvation and spiritual growth are other spiritual realities that also involve the mysterious combination of God’s direct involvement in people’s lives and the necessity of their own human response. Paul captures this tension in Phil. 2:12–13: “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.”
There is also the question of the nonelect, sometimes put in terms of “reprobation” or “double predestination.” If God is actively involved in the positive act of bringing human beings into a proper relationship with himself in salvation, is he actively involved equally in choosing those who will never respond in faith and will suffer an eternity of judgment apart from him? Again, Christians are divided, and simplistic overgeneralizations do little to advance our understanding of this topic. Those who give precedence to God’s sovereignty in their understanding of the process of salvation usually see a greater involvement of God in the decisions of those who do not respond in faith; those who emphasize human involvement in salvation will also emphasize human decision in those who do not respond.
Those who emphasize God’s sovereignty in this mystery of the faith lean toward the Calvinistic or Reformed end of the scale. They tend also to emphasize the total depravity of humanity: the notion not that people are as bad as they can possibly be, but simply that sin has tainted every area of the mind, will, and emotions, making a positive turning to God, apart from God’s grace, humanly impossible. They also emphasize the definite atonement, the doctrine that Christ died specifically for the elect. On the other hand, those who emphasize human involvement, often called “Arminians,” tend to emphasize the importance of human free will in order to create a sense of responsibility for one’s decisions. They also emphasize an unlimited atonement, the doctrine that Christ died potentially for anyone and everyone.
Summary
The proper balance in Scripture seems to involve both God’s sovereignty and human involvement. Peter captures some of this need for balance: “Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble” (2Pet. 1:10). Election is ultimately God’s work, but at the same time there is a human involvement in it. Charles Spurgeon’s illustration seems appropriate here. Human will and predestination are like the two rails on a railroad track: everywhere we look they are separate and distinct and thus irreconcilable; yet it is only off in the distance (really in the mind of God himself) that these two complementary truths come together in their perfect resolution. There is no question that “elect” and “election” are biblical terms; the key question is how to understand this difficult topic and to work out all the logical implications in terms of sharing the gospel with others in a meaningful and appropriate manner.
The Bible contains two kinds of statements related to properconduct. Some of them describe the nature of God, the sort of worldhe created, and what he has done for particular groups of people. Italso contains statements telling us what we ought to do, both ascreatures of this God and, in some instances, as the uniquebeneficiaries of his redemptive activity. Consequently, the Biblesets forth a moral viewpoint or ethical system, supported by reasonsthat justify its content and urgency. The writers of Scripture werenot moral philosophers, outlining their position in technical detail;nevertheless, they intended to reveal what pleases our God andSavior, so that the saints are “thoroughly equipped for everygood work” (2Tim. 3:16–17). The Bible, therefore,is the foundational resource for moral discernment, the definitivestatement of what Christians must do and who they must become.
TheSources of Moral Knowledge
Scriptureidentifies two sources of moral knowledge. First, all human beingshave the law of God “written on their hearts” (Rom.2:15). We have a conscience, a God-given awareness of right and wrongthat acquits or convicts us, depending on how we respond to it. Thefall of humankind has damaged this source of knowledge, and ourconsciences can become “seared” through chronicdisobedience and doctrinal treason (1Tim. 4:2). We do not,therefore, see infallibly what our duties are. Nevertheless, theapostle Paul argues that every human being knows enough of God’slaw—and indeed, enough about his nature as God—toeliminate every defense on judgment day (Rom. 1:18–20). No onewill be able to say to God in that hour, “I had no idea who youwere and no hint of what you expected ofme.”
Second,as noted above, we have the Bible as a source of knowledge, this onebeing fully adequate and sufficiently clear to guide our choices.Knowing Scripture is necessary for Christian ethics because it offersa high-definition view of what conscience can (even in its bestmoments) scarcely grasp. The Bible proclaims not only what the churchmust do, often in straightforward, concrete terms, but also (atleast, in many cases) why God’s will has its particular contentand why obedience is an emergency, not a safely deferred, improvementproject. The Bible does not, and really could not, answer everyethical question put to it in unambiguous detail. New technologiesand cultural shifts have created dilemmas unimagined in the firstcentury or any previous age. But the church can be assured that afaithful reading of and response to Scripture will, by the grace ofGod, please him even today, whatever our particular circ*mstances.
TheLogic of Biblical Morality
Themoral teaching of Scripture has an identifiable structure consistingof duties and final objectives. When we obey God’scommandments, which is our duty, his ultimate goals or objectives increating us are realized. In this sense, biblical morality iscomplete and informative compared to systems derived from otherworldviews. It explains what life is all about, but also what we mustdo from day to day. This entire picture emerges from Scripturebecause its theological statements are always practically applied andnever presented with merely theoretical interest.
Theobjectives of biblical morality.The objectives of an ethical system are its final ends or purposes:the results that obedience is supposed to yield. In the Bible, twoobjectives have this ultimate significance, one being the anticipatedside effect of the other.
Toglorify God.The biblical writers proclaim the spectacular goodness of God. He ismaximally excellent in all ways as the Creator, including wisdom,power, justice, and love. He is the holy God who, almost in spite ofthat fact, loves us and gave his Son, Jesus, to suffer for our sinsso that we might live eternally in his presence. In these respects,God stands alone, not simply in experience but necessarily so. No oneever has, and no one ever could, be like him. Thus, the finalobjective of all human striving must be to glorify this God—toknow him, to praise him, and to value what he values. Our actionsmust testify to his excellence, honoring him and encouraging othersto do likewise. Obedience treasures what God treasures, shuns what heabhors, and allows his power to work in our lives, causing us to livein unity with our fellow believers. These patterns of behavior definewhat it means to glorify God.
Tobe happy in God’s presence.The second goal or objective of biblical morality is to be happy inways that are proper for God’s creatures. In this sense, theChristian system of ethics differs from moral theories that eitherreject happiness altogether, viewing it as an unworthy goal, or elsereduce it to a merely practical necessity—that is, we sinnersneed our incentives. On the contrary, the God of Scripture plainlydesires our happiness and often presents himself as the final sourceof it when calling his people to obedience. This tendency followsfrom the perfect goodness of God and his freedom in creating allthings. He did not have to make anything else, but he did so; andbecause he has no needs, his purposes must have been selfless ratherthan selfish. He created in order to give rather than to get, and thevery best he desires for any of us is the happiness that results fromour glorifying him together, as one body in Christ. Likewise, then,biblical morality differs from ethical systems that make humanhappiness an intrinsic good, so that any means to it is acceptable.God wants us to be happy, but our happiness must come from bringinghim glory. All other forms of happiness are deceptive and transitory.The heavenly scenes of the book of Revelation show the church whathappiness God has in store for them if they overcome the trials ofthis life (so, e.g., Rev. 4–5; 7; 21–22; cf. 1Cor.2:9; Heb. 12:2).
Themeans of biblical morality.Not surprisingly, the Bible also shows us how to glorify God—howto reflect his majesty in our daily lives, how to praise him, and howto value what he values. Within the whole of this teaching, severalmajor themes can be discerned, five leading examples of which appearbelow, allowing some overlap between them.
Trustingin God’s promises.Biblical faith is the confidence that God will do for us what he haspromised. We believe that he can and will meet our needs and notallow us to endure pointless suffering. When we trust him, weproclaim his greatness and acknowledge our own dependence upon him.Both Rom. 4 and Heb. 11 make this point in ways that reflect upon OThistory with an application to the present Christian life. The gospelis a promise concerning the death, burial, and resurrection ofChrist; and faith assures us that God will reckon these events to ouraccount. Conversely, we often violate God’s commandmentsbecause we doubt that he will give us what we need when we need it(so, e.g., Abraham’s capitulation to Sarah in Gen. 16, with itscorresponding negative results).
Keepingholiness and impurity separated.God is the all-powerful, all-knowing, morally perfect Creator of theuniverse. All things depend on him for their existence, and he isextreme both in his commitment to justice and his desire to love.Consequently, God’s creatures encounter him as “holy,”as the ominously transcendent or dangerously perfect deity. He standsalone, apart from everything else, and life in his presence cannotentail business as usual. The shorthand way of expressing this dutyis to say that we ourselves must be holy, as he is holy, by shunningall forms of impurity. In this way, for example, the ancientIsraelites prepared themselves to enter Yahweh’s presence andgave him public honor (Lev. 11:44; 19:2; Ps. 24:3–4; Isa.6:1–5; cf. 1Pet. 1:15–16).
InScripture, the distinction between the pure and the impure, or theholy and the unholy, is sometimes intrinsic and sometimespedagogical. Breaking any of the Ten Commandments makes oneintrinsically impure. It is always evil, everywhere, for anyone tohave other gods, make idols, and disrespect parents. It is evil tolie, steal, and murder. Even breaking the Sabbath is wrong if itexpresses unbelief in God’s ability and willingness to provide.But some lines between purity and impurity—or, in other cases,just between the sacred and the common—seem to be drawn by Godfor instructional purposes only. They do not separate good from evilas such, but they compel the Israelites to “practice Yahweh’spresence” by honoring boundaries imposed on domestic life. Itis not evil to eat pork, but doing that is forbidden in the OT andpermitted in the NT (Lev. 11:7; Mark 7:19). It is not evil to wearblended cloth, but doing that is forbidden in the OT and passed overin the NT (Lev. 19:19). Therefore, as suggested, Levitical rules ofthis kind must have had some instrumental purpose, serving anobjective beyond themselves. They impose the holiness of Yahweh oneveryday choices, as the Holy Spirit now presses the claims of Godupon his church. This separation of impurity and holiness is, in anycase, a constant theme in the OT, and it carries over into the NT aswell, where it informs the question “What must I do to besaved?” (cf. Acts 16:30).
ImitatingGod/Christ.The biblical writers also construe the moral life as an imitation ofGod and/or Christ, especially when the virtues of mercy, humility,and endurance are at stake. In the OT, Yahweh’s behavior towardpeople becomes the standard for Israel’s own conduct. So, forexample, he says, “But let the one who boasts boast about this:that they have the understanding to know me, that I am the Lord, whoexercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in theseI delight” (Jer. 9:24). In the NT, similar inferences appear,as when Jesus says, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they willbe called children of God” (Matt. 5:9), the son being one whofollows in his father’s footsteps. We must love our enemies, sothat we may be “children of (our) Father in heaven”(Matt. 5:44–45). We must “be perfect,” as he isperfect (Matt. 5:48). Jesus commands his disciples to wash oneanother’s feet, after his own example (John 13:14–15).They must love each other as he has loved them (John 15:12). The newcommandment to love one another, following the Lord’s example,puts on display his character and their own relationship to him(13:34–35). Jesus prays that his disciples will be “one,”just as the Father and the Son are one (17:22). Paul’s hymn inPhil. 2:5–11 serves this purpose: we must imitate the humilitythat surrendered all, even to the point of crucifixion. Hebrews12:1–2 holds up Christ as one who “for the joy set beforehim endured the cross, scorning its shame,” resulting in hisglory.
Livingout our unique identity.Scripture defines the moral ideal for all persons, whoever they are,because its perspective is not relativistic. Murder, idolatry, andlying are not wrong for some and right for others. Nevertheless, mostof the Bible’s moral teaching has a target audience, so that itoften contains inferences to this effect: “You shall do X (ordoing X is urgent for you), either (a)because you belong to Godin a special way or (b)because he has done this special thingfor you.” In the OT, the target audience is Israel; in the NT,the corresponding group is the church. In both Testaments, however,the same ethical particularism operates, thereby giving the moralexhortations of Paul and Peter, to cite two clear examples, arecognizably “Jewish” structure or theme.
Thelinkage between gift and task, or supernatural identity and behavior,is the basic structure of the Sinai covenant itself. The text movesfrom prologue, “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out ofEgypt,” to moral exhortation, beginning with, “You shallhave no other gods before me” (Exod. 20:1–3; Deut.5:6–7). Echoes of this prologue also occur frequently in the OTas motive clauses. God will say, in effect, “You shall do X,for I am the Lord your God,” or “You shall not do Y, forI am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt.” In somecases, the motive clause identifies the people themselves, as in,“For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord yourGod has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth tobe his people, his treasured possession” (Deut. 7:6). Or again,“You are the children of the Lord your God. Do not cutyourselves or shave the front of your heads for the dead, for you area people holy to the Lord your God. Out of all the peoples on theface of the earth, the Lord has chosen you to be his treasuredpossession” (Deut. 14:1–2). In some cases, God refers tothe people’s unique condition to shame them, as in, “WhenIsrael was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.But the more they were called, the more they went away from me”(Hos. 11:1–2). Loyalty was especially urgent, given Israel’sexperience of God’s particular love.
Inthe NT, the mandate to live out one’s special identity appearsoften, especially (though not exclusively) in the writings of Pauland Peter. In Rom. 6 those who have been emancipated from sin mustresist its waning influence. In Rom. 8 those who are under the HolySpirit’s new management must walk in accordance with him andshun the mind-set of the flesh. The Corinthians have become anunleavened batch of dough; therefore, they must “Get rid of theold yeast,” which tolerates extraordinary sin (1Cor. 5).The members of Christ’s one body are to function as one newhumanity (1Cor. 12:12–31). If the Galatians live by theSpirit, they must also walk by the Spirit (Gal. 5:25). Peter tellshis readers to love one another because they have been “bornagain” of “imperishable seed” (1Pet.1:22–23). They are a “chosen race,” a “royalpriesthood,” and a “holy nation”; therefore, theymust proclaim his excellence and abstain from carnal passions (1Pet.2:9–11). Jesus himself says that because he is the vine and weare the branches, we must abide in him (John 15:1–11). In allthese cases, the target audience has a special relationship to Godthat imposes on them corresponding duties or priorities, so that theyreflect his holiness, value what he values, and attain the goals thathe has set before them.
Livingin unity with one another.The first sin separated God from humankind and damaged all otherrelationships (Gen. 3). From that point onward, Adam and Eve wouldlive in tension (Gen. 3:16), and their son Cain kills his brotherAbel (Gen. 4:8). Disunity results from sin; and in some cases, Godscatters sinners as judgment on their wickedness (e.g., Gen. 11:1–9;1Kings 11). It is “good and pleasant” when “God’speople live together in unity” (Ps. 133:1), and obedience to OTteaching would make them do so. Nevertheless, sin stands betweenYahweh and his people, and it stands between one Israelite andanother. Disunity, in all these dimensions, is the unfinishedbusiness of the OT story.
TheNT presents unity as both an effect and a duty (or a gift and a task)of the new life in Christ. We are one in Christ, and we must live inunity of fellowship with one another. Jews and Gentiles—indeed,people from all walks of life—become one body, a new kind ofpeople, defined by relationships that are “thicker than blood,”so to speak, as blood is thicker than water. Paul, as the apostle tothe Gentiles, enforces this theme throughout his letters, so that hisexhortations concentrate on the church, in the first instance, ratherthan the individual. Christians must display the social virtues oflove and humility, resisting selfish ambition and pride, both ofwhich separate believer from believer and each from the head of thechurch, who is Christ. Romans and Ephesians make a positive case forChristian unity among Jews and Gentiles, while Philippians (perhaps,in a broader sense, also Galatians and Colossians) confronts adivisive tendency. The essential vice denounced in 1–2Corinthiansis arrogant grandstanding, which rejects Paul’s “messageof the cross” (1Cor. 1:18) and subdivides the church intocults of personality. Worldly forces are centrifugal, leading us awayfrom one another and into competition for influence, wealth, andpublic honor. In contrast, the Holy Spirit’s force iscentripetal, creating unity where no one would expect it and leadingeach person to self-sacrifice so that others in the body of Christmight be built up in him.
Evil is unquestionably real from the biblical perspective,but the origin and nature of evil remain mysterious. The Bible isreplete with references to evil, starting with the temptation andfall (Gen.3) and the toll that it exacted on human existence.Humans not only suffer inwardly and reciprocally but also are nowhopelessly and irredeemably inclined to evil. The Bible is theunfolding story of redemption through the sacrificial death ofChrist, the ongoing battle in the lives of believers against thepower of evil, and the eventual conquering of evil by the divinepower vested in the risen Christ, who is to come as the cosmic ruler.
Thissits uncomfortably with a fundamental affirmation in the Bible: theinherent goodness of creation. This is magisterially illustrated inthe creation account of Genesis, where the Creator repeatedlypronounces at the end of each day that what had been created was“good” (Heb. tob means “good” in theaesthetic as well as the moral sense). The world, however, fell underthe curse of human sin and, once compromised, is now under the ruleof the evil one (1John 5:19) and eagerly awaits its redemption(Rom. 8:19–23).
Thoughnot narrated in the Bible, it is a likely inference that the originof evil dates back further than human existence. Prior to thetemptation of the first human couple, the tempter (Heb. satan,“accuser,” is a poignant reminder of the treacherousnature of the temptation, as the tempter himself would function asthe accuser of those who fell by his lies) and his followers hadtheir own momentous experience: they jeopardized their privilege toserve God by separating themselves to establish their own kingdom.That God allows this realm of dark forces to persist until the end ofhistory is itself a mystery.
Despiteits grip over humanity, evil has been severely battered as it hasconfronted the divine power manifested at the cross. In fact, evilhad no chance to challenge the real power. The essence of evil liesin its parasitic nature. Evil does not create; it only destroys. Evildraws its power from the absolute good, as it exercises its dominionover failed human beings by condemning them against the perfectstandard established by God. It accuses humans of being wrong butnever tells them how to be right. It diagnoses terminal illnesswithout offering a cure. Satan achieved his grip over humanity by aconniving distortion of God’s truth.
Thecrucifixion of Christ and his subsequent resurrection marked thedecisive blow against the power of evil and death. The gospel is thedeclaration that evil finally met the higher power at the atoningdeath of the sinless Christ. The lie has been exposed. The risenChrist freed human beings from their bondage to sin and death.Despite this, evil will persist due to the arrogance of the evil one,who vows to never submit to God’s authority. In fact, theactivity of the evil one will only increase toward the end ofhistory, even to the point that it will present a rival before thecoming Christ. Against the second coming of Christ (Gk. parousia)there will be the coming (parousia) of the lawless one. Not only willhe stand up against Christ, but also he will present himself as thealternative for Christ, befitting the title “antichrist”(anti, “instead of, in place of” as well as “against”).But eventually this rally against God will be in vain. Satan will bepermanently and irrevocably crushed and thrown into “the lakeof fire,” destined for oblivion.
The word “Gentiles” is often used to translatewords meaning “nations” or “peoples.” It hasa Latin etymology from gens, meaning “clan” or “family”and, eventually, “race” or “people.” TheGreek word genos (“race, kind”) has a close relationship.In the Bible it loosely refers to nations or peoples other thanIsrael. English Bibles often translate it as “nations,”“peoples,” or “races.”
OldTestament
Ingeneral, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. Godchose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:6–8;10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership inthe covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becomingpart of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).
TheOT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessingthrough Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping thelaw, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. Thelaw is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenantthat God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5;20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6;10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss.119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).
Suchlaw/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OTunderstanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel,the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in andthrough Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3;17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specificallyinvolves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]).Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subjectto Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16;14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed byIsrael’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel,serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fearIsrael’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5;60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic.7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages furtherelucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in theGod of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer.12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations“flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentileparticipation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa.2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).
TheServant Songs in Isa. 40–55 also reflect thislaw/Israel-centered nature of salvation for the Gentiles. Theservant, explicitly identified as Israel (41:8, 9; 42:18–19;44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3; 54:17; see also 65:9; 66:14),serves as God’s instrument for reaching the nations (42:1, 6;49:6; 52:15). The OT usually condemns Gentiles who remain separatefrom Israel to some form of judgment, especially Gentiles who haveharmed Israel.
SecondTemple Judaism and Early Christianity
SecondTemple Jewish sources exhibit diverse views about Gentiles, theirnature, their possible relation to God, and their fate at the end.Many reflect something resembling the OT views. Israel as God’speople defined by the law, variously understood and contested amongSecond Temple sources, generally continues to be the locus of God’sultimate blessing activities.
SituatingJesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentilesensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread acrossthe Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God ofIsrael in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentilesexperience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.
SomeChristians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought thatGentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God ofIsrael’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’sopponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from Godand his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13;1Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation,especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin,lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32;Eph. 4:17–19; 1Thess. 4:5; 1Pet. 1:14, 18).
However,various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keepthe law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’sultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, hasreplaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and hisdeath and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ bythe Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true,redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheritingGod’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25;8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7;Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentilesattain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightlybefore God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30;1Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1Thess. 4:3–8).Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles withrespect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.
Debatesabout Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for theseissues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocalsaying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and someother NT writings.
Both speaking in tongues and interpreting tongues are listedamong the various gifts of the Spirit that God may choose to give tobelievers according to his will (1Cor. 12:10, 28). The act ofspeaking in tongues is referred to as “glossolalia” (fromGk. glōssa [“tongue”] and laleō [“speak”]).
NarrativeRecord
Instancesin which believers exercise the gift of tongues are recorded in threebiblical narratives, with Acts 2 detailing the most notableoccurrence. When the Holy Spirit first was poured out upon Christianbelievers gathered at Pentecost, visible tongues of fire wereaccompanied by a Spirit-enabled ability to speak in languages thatwere foreign to them (2:3–4). In this instance, the tonguesspoken are identified as the actual human languages and dialects ofvarious people groups who resided throughout the Mediterranean world(2:8–11). The phenomenon resulted in the ability of many tohear the wonders of God in their native languages and prompted bothcuriosity and scoffing (2:12–13).
Asimilar outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon Cornelius and his fellowGentiles in connection with the ministry of Peter was accompanied byspeaking in tongues (Acts 10:44–46). This ability to speak intongues provided undeniable evidence that God had indeed poured outthe Holy Spirit upon Gentile Christians by manifesting the Spirit’spresence in a way comparable to the initial Pentecost experience ofthe Jewish Christians (11:15–18). A final account from thePauline ministry notes the coming of the Holy Spirit upon a dozendisciples in Ephesus with the accompanying ability to speak intongues (19:6). The text does not reveal what languages were spokenin either of these latter episodes.
Itis sometimes argued that the gift of tongues normally accompaniesChristian salvation or baptism with the Holy Spirit and is a giftthat believers should earnestly seek. However, this argument cannotbe sustained by the historical narratives of Acts. All three recordedinstances of tongues detail the gift coming upon groups of peoplerather than individuals, and the gift is poured out upon them withouttheir praying for it or seeking it out in any way. Furthermore, theseare the only three instances in Scripture where tongues clearlyaccompany salvation, whereas numerous other Lukan accounts of thesalvation of various individuals (Acts 2:41; 4:4; 8:36–39;13:12, 48; 16:14, 34), including Paul (9:1–19; 22:6–16),contain no mention of the gift of tongues.
Paul’sTeaching
Thefirst-century Corinthian church exercised a variety of spiritualgifts, including the gift of tongues. When Paul writes to thatchurch, he includes teaching designed to correct various abuses ofthese spiritual gifts. A lengthy discussion about spiritual gifts in1Cor. 12–14 affirms the practice of speaking in tonguesin the Corinthian assembly under certain conditions (14:39–40)while also relegating it to a status lower than the gift of prophecy(14:5). By its very nature, Paul asserts, those who speak in tonguesare not understood by their human audience; utterances in tonguesspeak to God, not to human beings (14:2). Therefore, on its own,glossolalia cannot edify those who hear it unless an interpretationis also provided for them. For this reason, Paul directs theCorinthians to other spiritual gifts (14:6) that can function tobuild up the church (14:12). Nonetheless, Paul affirms the practiceof glossolalia in the Corinthians’ public worship when it islimited to two or three speakers, when it is done in an orderlymanner with the speakers taking turns, and when it is coupled withinterpretation so that the church can be edified by its message(14:26–27).
ContemporaryDebates
Threequestions dominate modern discussions about the gift of tongues:(1)What is the primary purpose of speaking in tongues? (2)Whatis the nature of the language spoken when the gift of tongues isexercised? (3)Does the gift of tongues continue beyond theapostolic era? Answers to these questions vary and reflect diversetheological positions.
Primarypurpose.One position maintains that when the Spirit gives the gift oftongues, it is always a public exercise that produces infalliblerevelation from God. The primary, or perhaps sole, purpose of thisgift of miraculous utterance is as a sign to authenticate the gospelproclamation and thus contribute to the common good of the church asa whole by reaching unbelievers with the gospel in a powerful way.Proponents of this view find support in 1Cor. 14:22, where Paulspeaks of tongues as a sign for unbelievers. Also, the Pentecostexperience, narrated in Acts 2, can be understood as a use of tonguesthat fits into this framework. Opponents object to thisinterpretation by noting that it was Peter’s subsequent sermonrather than the gift of tongues itself that served an evangelisticpurpose.
Othersfind biblical support for an additional private use of tongues bybelievers in their prayer and praise directed toward God (1Cor.14:2, 28). Although the teaching in 1Cor. 14 focuses on whetherand how tongues are to be used in the public assembly, some adherentsof this position point to 14:14–19 for evidence of Paul’sown use of the gift of tongues in his devotional life. This use oftongues is thought to contribute to the common good of the churchthrough the personal edification of the individual believers whopractice this gift (14:4) and who make up the believing community.
Natureof the language.It is not entirely clear from Scripture whether the tongues spoken bythose with the gift of tongues are human languages otherwise unknownto the speaker, whether they consist of otherworldly (heavenly,angelic, spiritual) languages, or whether both constitute validoptions. The record of Pentecost in Acts 2 is the only scripturalnarrative of tongues that explicitly identifies the languages spokenby those exercising the gift of tongues; they are human languages.However, three NT passages are cited in support of the broader view.
First,in 1Cor. 13:1 Paul alludes to the possibility of speech “inthe tongues of men or of angels.” While this may affirm theidea of an angelic language being spoken by believers with the giftof tongues, those who limit tongues to human languages see in thisstatement hyperbole rather than a description of reality.
Second,when Paul discusses tongues in 1Cor. 14:2, he indicates that noone who hears understands the language. This statement is easily trueif the language spoken is “angelic,” but it would also betrue of a human language generally unfamiliar to those in theCorinthian worship assembly.
Finally,Rom. 8:26, by describing the Spirit’s intercession in prayer asgroans and utterances too deep for words, may support the idea thatthe gift of tongues consists of a spiritual rather than a humanlanguage. Opponents argue that this text in no way speaks of the giftof tongues.
Continuationbeyond the apostolic era.Finally, nowhere does Scripture expressly teach that the gift oftongues will continue throughout the entire church age, nor does itclearly state a time, be it the end of the apostolic period, theclosing of the NT canon, or some other time, when the gift of tongueswill cease. Because the NT describes the gift of tongues functioningamong believers in the first century, many believe that the gift oftongues continues to be expressed by God’s new covenant peopletoday.
Continuationistsargue that Scripture nowhere anticipates a change in the HolySpirit’s work or empowerment for ministry, and so the life ofChristians today should be similar to that of NT believers withregard to the expected and empowering presence of tongues.
Onthe other hand, cessationists believe that passages such as Eph.2:11–21 identify the first century as a unique, foundationaltime in salvation history, characterized by apostolic leadership andan open canon. Just as there are no longer apostles today, one shouldnot be surprised if the practice of miraculous gifts, including thegift of tongues, should significantly decrease or stop entirelyfollowing that foundational time. Some also point to 1Cor. 13:8as evidence that a time will come when the gift of tongues willend.
Othersopt for an intermediate position, arguing that while speaking intongues is not the standard for the church era, it is possible thatthe gift continues to operate today on a more limited scale, mostlikely only in places where the gospel is making inroads for thefirst time, a situation comparable to that of the NT era.
Both speaking in tongues and interpreting tongues are listedamong the various gifts of the Spirit that God may choose to give tobelievers according to his will (1Cor. 12:10, 28). The act ofspeaking in tongues is referred to as “glossolalia” (fromGk. glōssa [“tongue”] and laleō [“speak”]).
NarrativeRecord
Instancesin which believers exercise the gift of tongues are recorded in threebiblical narratives, with Acts 2 detailing the most notableoccurrence. When the Holy Spirit first was poured out upon Christianbelievers gathered at Pentecost, visible tongues of fire wereaccompanied by a Spirit-enabled ability to speak in languages thatwere foreign to them (2:3–4). In this instance, the tonguesspoken are identified as the actual human languages and dialects ofvarious people groups who resided throughout the Mediterranean world(2:8–11). The phenomenon resulted in the ability of many tohear the wonders of God in their native languages and prompted bothcuriosity and scoffing (2:12–13).
Asimilar outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon Cornelius and his fellowGentiles in connection with the ministry of Peter was accompanied byspeaking in tongues (Acts 10:44–46). This ability to speak intongues provided undeniable evidence that God had indeed poured outthe Holy Spirit upon Gentile Christians by manifesting the Spirit’spresence in a way comparable to the initial Pentecost experience ofthe Jewish Christians (11:15–18). A final account from thePauline ministry notes the coming of the Holy Spirit upon a dozendisciples in Ephesus with the accompanying ability to speak intongues (19:6). The text does not reveal what languages were spokenin either of these latter episodes.
Itis sometimes argued that the gift of tongues normally accompaniesChristian salvation or baptism with the Holy Spirit and is a giftthat believers should earnestly seek. However, this argument cannotbe sustained by the historical narratives of Acts. All three recordedinstances of tongues detail the gift coming upon groups of peoplerather than individuals, and the gift is poured out upon them withouttheir praying for it or seeking it out in any way. Furthermore, theseare the only three instances in Scripture where tongues clearlyaccompany salvation, whereas numerous other Lukan accounts of thesalvation of various individuals (Acts 2:41; 4:4; 8:36–39;13:12, 48; 16:14, 34), including Paul (9:1–19; 22:6–16),contain no mention of the gift of tongues.
Paul’sTeaching
Thefirst-century Corinthian church exercised a variety of spiritualgifts, including the gift of tongues. When Paul writes to thatchurch, he includes teaching designed to correct various abuses ofthese spiritual gifts. A lengthy discussion about spiritual gifts in1Cor. 12–14 affirms the practice of speaking in tonguesin the Corinthian assembly under certain conditions (14:39–40)while also relegating it to a status lower than the gift of prophecy(14:5). By its very nature, Paul asserts, those who speak in tonguesare not understood by their human audience; utterances in tonguesspeak to God, not to human beings (14:2). Therefore, on its own,glossolalia cannot edify those who hear it unless an interpretationis also provided for them. For this reason, Paul directs theCorinthians to other spiritual gifts (14:6) that can function tobuild up the church (14:12). Nonetheless, Paul affirms the practiceof glossolalia in the Corinthians’ public worship when it islimited to two or three speakers, when it is done in an orderlymanner with the speakers taking turns, and when it is coupled withinterpretation so that the church can be edified by its message(14:26–27).
ContemporaryDebates
Threequestions dominate modern discussions about the gift of tongues:(1)What is the primary purpose of speaking in tongues? (2)Whatis the nature of the language spoken when the gift of tongues isexercised? (3)Does the gift of tongues continue beyond theapostolic era? Answers to these questions vary and reflect diversetheological positions.
Primarypurpose.One position maintains that when the Spirit gives the gift oftongues, it is always a public exercise that produces infalliblerevelation from God. The primary, or perhaps sole, purpose of thisgift of miraculous utterance is as a sign to authenticate the gospelproclamation and thus contribute to the common good of the church asa whole by reaching unbelievers with the gospel in a powerful way.Proponents of this view find support in 1Cor. 14:22, where Paulspeaks of tongues as a sign for unbelievers. Also, the Pentecostexperience, narrated in Acts 2, can be understood as a use of tonguesthat fits into this framework. Opponents object to thisinterpretation by noting that it was Peter’s subsequent sermonrather than the gift of tongues itself that served an evangelisticpurpose.
Othersfind biblical support for an additional private use of tongues bybelievers in their prayer and praise directed toward God (1Cor.14:2, 28). Although the teaching in 1Cor. 14 focuses on whetherand how tongues are to be used in the public assembly, some adherentsof this position point to 14:14–19 for evidence of Paul’sown use of the gift of tongues in his devotional life. This use oftongues is thought to contribute to the common good of the churchthrough the personal edification of the individual believers whopractice this gift (14:4) and who make up the believing community.
Natureof the language.It is not entirely clear from Scripture whether the tongues spoken bythose with the gift of tongues are human languages otherwise unknownto the speaker, whether they consist of otherworldly (heavenly,angelic, spiritual) languages, or whether both constitute validoptions. The record of Pentecost in Acts 2 is the only scripturalnarrative of tongues that explicitly identifies the languages spokenby those exercising the gift of tongues; they are human languages.However, three NT passages are cited in support of the broader view.
First,in 1Cor. 13:1 Paul alludes to the possibility of speech “inthe tongues of men or of angels.” While this may affirm theidea of an angelic language being spoken by believers with the giftof tongues, those who limit tongues to human languages see in thisstatement hyperbole rather than a description of reality.
Second,when Paul discusses tongues in 1Cor. 14:2, he indicates that noone who hears understands the language. This statement is easily trueif the language spoken is “angelic,” but it would also betrue of a human language generally unfamiliar to those in theCorinthian worship assembly.
Finally,Rom. 8:26, by describing the Spirit’s intercession in prayer asgroans and utterances too deep for words, may support the idea thatthe gift of tongues consists of a spiritual rather than a humanlanguage. Opponents argue that this text in no way speaks of the giftof tongues.
Continuationbeyond the apostolic era.Finally, nowhere does Scripture expressly teach that the gift oftongues will continue throughout the entire church age, nor does itclearly state a time, be it the end of the apostolic period, theclosing of the NT canon, or some other time, when the gift of tongueswill cease. Because the NT describes the gift of tongues functioningamong believers in the first century, many believe that the gift oftongues continues to be expressed by God’s new covenant peopletoday.
Continuationistsargue that Scripture nowhere anticipates a change in the HolySpirit’s work or empowerment for ministry, and so the life ofChristians today should be similar to that of NT believers withregard to the expected and empowering presence of tongues.
Onthe other hand, cessationists believe that passages such as Eph.2:11–21 identify the first century as a unique, foundationaltime in salvation history, characterized by apostolic leadership andan open canon. Just as there are no longer apostles today, one shouldnot be surprised if the practice of miraculous gifts, including thegift of tongues, should significantly decrease or stop entirelyfollowing that foundational time. Some also point to 1Cor. 13:8as evidence that a time will come when the gift of tongues willend.
Othersopt for an intermediate position, arguing that while speaking intongues is not the standard for the church era, it is possible thatthe gift continues to operate today on a more limited scale, mostlikely only in places where the gospel is making inroads for thefirst time, a situation comparable to that of the NT era.
The word “Gentiles” is often used to translatewords meaning “nations” or “peoples.” It hasa Latin etymology from gens, meaning “clan” or “family”and, eventually, “race” or “people.” TheGreek word genos (“race, kind”) has a close relationship.In the Bible it loosely refers to nations or peoples other thanIsrael. English Bibles often translate it as “nations,”“peoples,” or “races.”
OldTestament
Ingeneral, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. Godchose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:6–8;10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership inthe covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becomingpart of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).
TheOT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessingthrough Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping thelaw, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. Thelaw is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenantthat God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5;20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6;10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss.119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).
Suchlaw/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OTunderstanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel,the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in andthrough Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3;17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specificallyinvolves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]).Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subjectto Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16;14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed byIsrael’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel,serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fearIsrael’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5;60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic.7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages furtherelucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in theGod of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer.12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations“flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentileparticipation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa.2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).
TheServant Songs in Isa. 40–55 also reflect thislaw/Israel-centered nature of salvation for the Gentiles. Theservant, explicitly identified as Israel (41:8, 9; 42:18–19;44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3; 54:17; see also 65:9; 66:14),serves as God’s instrument for reaching the nations (42:1, 6;49:6; 52:15). The OT usually condemns Gentiles who remain separatefrom Israel to some form of judgment, especially Gentiles who haveharmed Israel.
SecondTemple Judaism and Early Christianity
SecondTemple Jewish sources exhibit diverse views about Gentiles, theirnature, their possible relation to God, and their fate at the end.Many reflect something resembling the OT views. Israel as God’speople defined by the law, variously understood and contested amongSecond Temple sources, generally continues to be the locus of God’sultimate blessing activities.
SituatingJesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentilesensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread acrossthe Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God ofIsrael in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentilesexperience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.
SomeChristians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought thatGentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God ofIsrael’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’sopponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from Godand his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13;1Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation,especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin,lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32;Eph. 4:17–19; 1Thess. 4:5; 1Pet. 1:14, 18).
However,various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keepthe law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’sultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, hasreplaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and hisdeath and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ bythe Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true,redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheritingGod’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25;8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7;Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentilesattain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightlybefore God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30;1Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1Thess. 4:3–8).Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles withrespect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.
Debatesabout Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for theseissues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocalsaying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and someother NT writings.
The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2Cor. 12:2–4, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.
The Abode of God
One of the challenges in understanding “heaven” as the present dwelling place of God involves God’s omnipresence. In one sense, God is present everywhere. David asks in Ps. 139:7, “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?” He answers that regardless of whether he goes as high up as anyone can go (“up to the heavens”), as low down as anyone can go (“in the depths), as far east as anyone can go (“the wings of the dawn”), or as far west as anyone can go (“the far side of the sea”), God is still there (Ps. 139:8–9).
Although God is present everywhere, God is also present in a special way in “heaven.” During Jesus’ earthly ministry, the Father is sometimes described as speaking in “a voice from heaven” (Matt. 3:17). Similarly, Jesus instructs us to address our prayers to “Our Father in heaven” (6:9). Even the specific request in the Lord’s Prayer that “your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (6:10) reminds us that heaven is a place already under God’s full jurisdiction, where his will is presently being done completely and perfectly. Jesus also warns of the dangers of despising “one of these little ones,” because “their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven” (18:10). Jesus “came down from heaven” (John 6:51) for his earthly ministry, and after his death and resurrection, he ascended back “into heaven,” from where he “will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).
At times, “heaven” becomes virtually a synonym for God himself. In the parable of the prodigal son in Luke 15, the son confesses to his father, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you” (v.21). This son’s sin against “heaven” has nothing to do with environmental issues such as air pollution, and everything to do with his relationship with God. Note also Matthew’s expression “the kingdom of heaven” versus “the kingdom of God” used elsewhere.
The Final Dwelling Place for Believers
Given this strong connection between heaven and God’s presence, there is a natural connection in Scripture between heaven and the ultimate hope of believers. Believers are promised a reward in heaven (“Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven” [Matt. 5:12]), and even now believers can “store up for [themselves] treasures in heaven” (6:20). Even in this present life, “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20), and our hope at death is to “depart and be with Christ, which is better by far” (1:23). Since Christ is currently in heaven, deceased believers are already present with Christ in heaven awaiting his return, when “God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him” (1Thess. 4:14).
However, this picture of heaven is more complicated. It is true that heaven is sometimes used in Scripture to refer to the present abode of all departed believers who have left this present life and entered the intermediate state between death and the bodily resurrection (2Cor. 5:4). It is this hope in a bodily resurrection that sets Christianity apart from other religions. Ultimately, the Christian hope is not that people will receive new physical bodies and float around some ethereal “heaven” like astronauts in outer space for all eternity. Instead, God has created human beings with physical bodies to inhabit a physical world, and our future hope is one of new resurrection bodies inhabiting new heavens and a new earth (Isa. 65:17; 66:22; 2Pet. 3:13). Just as there will be a certain continuity between the bodies of believers in this present life and their new resurrection bodies (we will know one another), there will also be a certain continuity between this present earth and the new earth to come. Yet, at the same time, everything will also be changed and made new and perfect, as God has designed it to be (Rom. 8:18–21).
The clearest description of this new reality is found in Rev. 21–22, where John describes how he “saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth,’ for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away” (21:1). Here is “the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband” (21:2), when “God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (21:3–4). Even better than all the descriptions of such things as streets of “gold, as pure as transparent glass” (21:21) is that God himself will come and dwell in the midst of his people. As Paul has phrased it, “Now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face” (1Cor. 13:12). The day will come when we will see God as he is, in all his glory (1John3:2).
Two other ideas complete our picture of life in these new heavens and new earth. Heaven will be a place of continued activity and service. Notice Jesus’ blessing in Matt. 25:21: “Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things.” The other principle is that there will be different degrees of reward. Although our ultimate reward is simply being with God himself, Paul also reminds us that if what believers do with their lives “survives, the builder will receive a reward,” and if what they do “is burned up, the builder will suffer loss” (1Cor. 3:14–15 NRSV). Our choices make a difference for time and eternity (cf. Rev. 14:13). See also Heavens, New.
The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2Cor. 12:2–4, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.
The Abode of God
One of the challenges in understanding “heaven” as the present dwelling place of God involves God’s omnipresence. In one sense, God is present everywhere. David asks in Ps. 139:7, “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?” He answers that regardless of whether he goes as high up as anyone can go (“up to the heavens”), as low down as anyone can go (“in the depths), as far east as anyone can go (“the wings of the dawn”), or as far west as anyone can go (“the far side of the sea”), God is still there (Ps. 139:8–9).
Although God is present everywhere, God is also present in a special way in “heaven.” During Jesus’ earthly ministry, the Father is sometimes described as speaking in “a voice from heaven” (Matt. 3:17). Similarly, Jesus instructs us to address our prayers to “Our Father in heaven” (6:9). Even the specific request in the Lord’s Prayer that “your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (6:10) reminds us that heaven is a place already under God’s full jurisdiction, where his will is presently being done completely and perfectly. Jesus also warns of the dangers of despising “one of these little ones,” because “their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven” (18:10). Jesus “came down from heaven” (John 6:51) for his earthly ministry, and after his death and resurrection, he ascended back “into heaven,” from where he “will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).
At times, “heaven” becomes virtually a synonym for God himself. In the parable of the prodigal son in Luke 15, the son confesses to his father, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you” (v.21). This son’s sin against “heaven” has nothing to do with environmental issues such as air pollution, and everything to do with his relationship with God. Note also Matthew’s expression “the kingdom of heaven” versus “the kingdom of God” used elsewhere.
The Final Dwelling Place for Believers
Given this strong connection between heaven and God’s presence, there is a natural connection in Scripture between heaven and the ultimate hope of believers. Believers are promised a reward in heaven (“Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven” [Matt. 5:12]), and even now believers can “store up for [themselves] treasures in heaven” (6:20). Even in this present life, “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20), and our hope at death is to “depart and be with Christ, which is better by far” (1:23). Since Christ is currently in heaven, deceased believers are already present with Christ in heaven awaiting his return, when “God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him” (1Thess. 4:14).
However, this picture of heaven is more complicated. It is true that heaven is sometimes used in Scripture to refer to the present abode of all departed believers who have left this present life and entered the intermediate state between death and the bodily resurrection (2Cor. 5:4). It is this hope in a bodily resurrection that sets Christianity apart from other religions. Ultimately, the Christian hope is not that people will receive new physical bodies and float around some ethereal “heaven” like astronauts in outer space for all eternity. Instead, God has created human beings with physical bodies to inhabit a physical world, and our future hope is one of new resurrection bodies inhabiting new heavens and a new earth (Isa. 65:17; 66:22; 2Pet. 3:13). Just as there will be a certain continuity between the bodies of believers in this present life and their new resurrection bodies (we will know one another), there will also be a certain continuity between this present earth and the new earth to come. Yet, at the same time, everything will also be changed and made new and perfect, as God has designed it to be (Rom. 8:18–21).
The clearest description of this new reality is found in Rev. 21–22, where John describes how he “saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth,’ for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away” (21:1). Here is “the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband” (21:2), when “God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (21:3–4). Even better than all the descriptions of such things as streets of “gold, as pure as transparent glass” (21:21) is that God himself will come and dwell in the midst of his people. As Paul has phrased it, “Now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face” (1Cor. 13:12). The day will come when we will see God as he is, in all his glory (1John3:2).
Two other ideas complete our picture of life in these new heavens and new earth. Heaven will be a place of continued activity and service. Notice Jesus’ blessing in Matt. 25:21: “Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things.” The other principle is that there will be different degrees of reward. Although our ultimate reward is simply being with God himself, Paul also reminds us that if what believers do with their lives “survives, the builder will receive a reward,” and if what they do “is burned up, the builder will suffer loss” (1Cor. 3:14–15 NRSV). Our choices make a difference for time and eternity (cf. Rev. 14:13). See also Heavens, New.
Origins,Composition, and Constitution
Origins.The Bible is not unique in offering an account of human origins.Interesting accounts are found in Sumerian (Enki and Ninmah, Hymn toE-engurra), Akkadian (Atrahasis Epic, Enuma Elish), and Egyptiantexts (Pyramid Texts, Instruction of Merikare). These texts provide ahelpful window into the biblical world and show the common concern toexplain the origin and role of humanity in the world.
Onedistinct feature of ancient Near Eastern texts is that they generallyspeak of human origins in a collective sense. Specialists refer tothis phenomenon as polygenesis. Such a collective creation betterserves the purpose of the gods, who have made the human race as alabor force. In the Bible, however, the book of Genesis describes anoriginal human pair who are the progenitors of the human race. Thisphenomenon is referred to as monogenesis. Humanity is not merelycreated to serve and do the work of the gods. Instead, it is aspecial creation of God, intended to bear his image.
Composition.The composition of humanity is described in Gen. 2:7: “The LordGod formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into hisnostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”Humanity is not distinct from animals in having the breath of life(1:30). Indeed, the description of the composition of humanity isalso quite, well, human. Genesis describes humans as made from thedust. Dust is not fertile, nor is it pliable. It refers to the earthand that which is dead. The wordplay between “man”(’adam) and the “ground” (’adamah) appears tobe a major focus of the text (2:7) and suggests that the majorconnection being established concerns the first humans as archetypes.
Constitution.Certain passages of Scripture have led interpreters to posit atrichotomous nature of humanity (i.e., mind, body, soul; cf. 2Cor.4:16; 5:1–9; 1Thess. 5:23). Likewise, even though theGreek language can bifurcate the soul (psychē) and the body(sōma), a kind of dualism should not be inferred from this (cf.Matt. 6:25; 27:50; Luke 10:27; 2Cor. 4:11). Either approach isforeign to the unified biblical mind-set. The only dualism in theanthropological perspective of the NT is in the nature of humanity inrelation to Christ’s new creative work.
Formand Function
Form:male and female.Just as God created man (’ish), he also created woman (’ishah)(Gen. 1:26–27). Although woman is initially created as a“suitable helper” (2:18), it should be noted that theunderlying Hebrew term (’ezer) is used almost exclusively inreference to God elsewhere. This suggests that “suitablehelper” does not indicate a difference of essence, value, orstatus.
TheBible describes woman as coming from the “side” of man,probably communicating something about their equality (Gen. 2:21–22).Thus, it should be understood that just as all humanity shares aconnection to the ground, so also a man shares an intimate connectionwith a woman. Although the phrase “one flesh” often istaken as a euphemism, it probably is a remarkably descriptivestatement of the archetypal nature of Adam and Eve (cf. 2:24).
Function:image of God.The distinction between humanity and the other animals created by Godis that humans are created in God’s image. The concept of theimage of God, however, is not unique to the biblical text (Gen.1:26–27; cf. Instruction of Merikare). Throughout the ancientNear East, kings were thought to actually be the image of a god. Inthe Christian understanding, only Christ is the image of God (2Cor.4:4), whereas humanity is created in the image of God. Although thismay imply a kingly role with regard to humanity’s function overthe rest of creation, the main parallel should be seen in how imagesare meant to represent a god’s presence.
Humanityin Pauline Thought
Paul’sconception of humanity is thoroughly eschatological insomuch as hisvision of Christ as the image of God is identified with Christ as“risen Lord.” Christ as the image of God is the finaldestiny of the humanity that is “in Christ” (1Cor.15:23–28; 44–49; Eph. 1:9–10). Because of theeffects of sin, creation has been subjected to futility (Rom.8:19–22), and humanity to death (Rom. 5:12–14; 1Cor.15:21–22). Yet Paul’s outburst of “new creation”(Gal. 6:15; cf. 2Cor. 5:17) indicates his understanding of thecosmological, and therefore anthropological, effects of being unitedwith Christ. Indeed, if God is making the “former things”into “new things” (2Cor. 5:17; cf. Isa. 65:17–19),this new creative act certainly impacts humanity. That reality isalready partially realized in the elimination of distinctions in thispresent “evil age” (Gal. 1:4), for in Christ “thereis neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there maleand female, for you are all one” (Gal. 3:28; cf. 1Cor.12:12–13; Gen. 17). Until the end, the Christian lives in thetension of already beginning to experience the act of new creationand not yet completely disinheriting the effects of sin (Rom.8:18–30; 2Cor. 12:5–10).
There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin;hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, orportrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of thedriving forces of the entire Bible.
Sinin the Bible
OldTestament.Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’scommandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. WhenAdam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete.They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaveswere inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with theirattempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent,Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).
Inthe midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways thatsin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised toput hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of thewoman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blowupon the offspring of the woman, the offspring ofthe womanwould defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequatecovering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implicationis that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adamand Eve, covering their sin.
InGen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on fulldisplay. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able toeradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humansgathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make aname for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them toscatter across the earth (11:1–9).
Inone sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holyGod satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationshipwith human beings without compromising his justice? The short answeris: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), whoeventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemedthem from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought themto Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated onobedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant wasthe sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided asa means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrificesmade for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year toatone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement thehigh priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies andsprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took asecond goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people ofIsrael, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them onthe head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness....The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barrenregion; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev.16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinfulpeople, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.
Despitethese provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke itscovenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under thereign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people,including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder(2Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wivesand concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods(1Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israeland Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry becamerampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judahin 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised toraise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as aguilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
AfterGod’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that thegreat prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, wereat hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remainedunder foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell ofSolomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Beforelong, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning awayfrom him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administrationof the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failedto properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).
NewTestament.During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longingfor God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last,when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it wasrevealed that he would “save his people from their sins”(Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, Johnthe Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism ofrepentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereasboth Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to bethe obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation(Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13;Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also theSuffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45;cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrathof God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. Withhis justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify allwho are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). Whatneither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, JesusChrist did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).
Afterhis resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers beganproclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus didand calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one ofyou, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”(Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness,they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned againstthem (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believerscontinue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal.5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23).The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the newheaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse(Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).
Aseven this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesisto Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’splot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative;it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved inorder for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.
Definitionand Terminology
Definitionof sin. Althoughno definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of theconcept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conformto God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action,orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered thatGod’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character,so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather isa personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited toactions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen.4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature ashuman beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.
Terminology.TheBible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying themis not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and useof the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one ofthe following four categories.
1.Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator andruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’sself-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankindfoolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom.1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows tohumans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31).Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodlinessor impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa.9:17; 1Pet. 4:18).
2.Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from thelawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass”picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or thecrossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42;Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’slaw, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45;Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violatinghis statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result isguilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’slaw is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectivelyfeels guilt.
3.Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what isgood. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what isgood (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contraststhe upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could alsoinclude here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speakof perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequentmention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievousdeparture from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27;1Cor. 5:1–11).
4.Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individualhad to be in a state of purity before him. While a person couldbecome impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating womanwas impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity”clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek.24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Althoughit is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, inother places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7;Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).
Metaphors
Inaddition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible usesseveral metaphors or images to describe it. The following four areamong the more prominent.
Missingthe mark.In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin”have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sinis reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that aperson simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it isthat he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9;Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional ornot, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num.15:30).
Departingfrom the way.Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in thewisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of therighteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19).Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways,but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18).Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed bytheir own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).
Adultery.Since God’s relationship with his people is described as amarriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32),it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness asadultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous womanvividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them ofspiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52).When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate inidolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1Cor.6:12–20; 10:1–22).
Slavery.Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clearthat Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture ofits far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7;49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to thosewho do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything thatpleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic powerthat is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare(Rom. 7:7–25).
Scopeand Consequences
Sindoes not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage alongwith it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.
Scope.The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As aresult of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist humanefforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen.3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under theweight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2Chron.36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation aswell (Rom. 8:19–22).
Sinaffects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions,motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom.3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “totaldepravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful asthey could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is taintedby sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as asinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societalstructures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economicmarkets, to name but a few.
Consequences.Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’sneighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sinhas consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level.Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen.2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty inGod’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, andsubjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20;5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict betweenindividuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breedsmistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closestrelationships.
Conclusion
Nosubject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding ofsin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As thePuritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ willnot be sweet.”
The concept of justice pervades the Bible, especially, thoughnot exclusively, the OT. The key biblical terms that convey thisconcept include mishpat, tsedeq/tsedaqah, yashar in the OT and thedik- word group in the NT (whose noun and verb forms are translatedrespectively as “righteous” and “justify” ortheir respective cognates). The biblical concept of justice is anembodiment of two contemporary concepts: righteousness and justice.The former designates compliance with the divine norm, while thelatter emphasizes conformity to a societal standard of what is rightand equitable. Focusing exclusively on the latter hinders the correctunderstanding of justice in the biblical sense. Additionally, thebiblical understanding of this concept is encumbered by the use ofdiffering English terms to translate the same Hebrew or Greek terms.
Mishpatand Tsedaqah
Mishpatinherently encompasses the idea of judicial activism consisting inthe provision of standard criteria (legislation, instructions,directives) for conduct and adjudication, and/or the actualarbitration between parties with the goal of ascertaining culpabilityor otherwise and administering the requisite sanctions or acquittal.Tsedaqah, on the other hand, emphasizes the established norm of justorder for right conduct both in the larger society and forindividuals. Whereas mishpat emphasizes the action that seeks toestablish or enforce right patterns of behavior for the common good,tsedaqah stresses the practice (or lack thereof) of such a norm insociety, or between individuals, or an individual’s compliancewith such a norm.
Whenused in combination as a hendiadys (or word pair), these two termssignify an inherent requirement for conformity to an established norm(whether in the religious sphere or in civil society) or therequirement of loyalty or right conduct between individuals. To theperson who stands to benefit from this norm, it approximates a right(i.e., a claim). Conversely, implicit duty is placed upon the personwho ensures the conformity to such an established norm. This fact isbetter appreciated when we reckon with the covenantal nature ofrequirements for justice in the ancient world, in which both partieshave both claim and responsibility. Broadly speaking, this conceptalso implies good governance, which accrues order to life and commonbenefits to all members of the community.
Thisidea is exemplified even in passages that do not use this precisephraseology (mishpat utsedaqah). Judah’s widoweddaughter-in-law, Tamar, had an inherent right to be provided with a(kinsman-redeemer) husband to raise up progeny for her deceasedhusband, while Judah had the incumbent duty of giving her in leviratemarriage to his surviving son. When Judah failed to execute his duty,Tamar entrapped him into an incestuous relationship, from which sheconceived. When condemned to die for adultery in a clannish courtsetting, Tamar revealed the identity of her unborn child’sfather, to which Judah responded by saying, “She is morerighteous than I, since I wouldn’t give her to my son Shelah”(Gen. 38:26). That is, she acted more in conformity to the norm thanhe did. In another instance, Yahweh, while challenging the Judeansconcerning their loyalty to him in a covenant lawsuit setting, asks,“A son honors his father, and a slave his master. If I am afather, where is the honor due me? If I am a master, where is therespect due me?” (Mal. 1:6). It is Yahweh’s right asfather and master to receive honor and respect, while it is theirduty to give him both.
Godas the Source and Model of Justice
Tobe just, then, implies conformity to that which is right—yashar(the standard or norm). In Scripture, this standard is the revealeddivine will and character. Compliance to it is often expressed inbiblical narrative as doing what is “right [or good] in theLord’s sight” (Deut. 6:18; 12:28; 1Kings 14:8;22:43), while its antithesis is doing what is “evil in the eyesof the Lord” (Judg. 2:11; 1Kings 11:6; 14:22) or doingwhat some human figure(s) “saw fit” (Deut. 12:8; Judg.17:6; 21:25).
Therefore,the source of justice is God himself. It flows from his essentialcharacter as one who is both just and righteous, whose actions areflawless, perfect, upright, and just (Deut. 32:4; 1Sam. 12:7;2Sam. 22:31; Job 37:23; Ps. 89:14). God is the righteouslawgiver, hence the one who establishes the norm for right conduct(Deut. 4:4–8; Ps. 19:7–9). He requires justice of all hiscreatures (cf. Gen. 9:5–6; Exod. 21:12, 28–29). God alsojudges righteously (Gen. 18:25; 1Kings 8:32; Ps. 9:4, 9; Jer.9:24) and defends and vindicates the weak and oppressed (Deut. 10:18;Ps. 103:6). The responsibility of maintaining justice in the humancommunity, however, he delegates to its leaders, such as civilmagistrates or political officials, and requires them to execute thisresponsibility with integrity, equity, and impartiality (Deut.1:16–17; 16:18–20; Ps. 82:2–4; Prov. 31:8–9;John 7:24; 1Pet. 2:13–14). God’s requirement ofjustice in the human community is not limited to its leaders only; itis incumbent upon everyone therein (Ps. 15:1–5; Mic. 6:8; Zech.7:9; 8:17; Matt. 23:23).
Executingjustice requires doing all that is essential to bring about thedivine order implicit in creation and explicit in revealed truth, toproduce harmony in all relationships in which humankind is involved(divine-human, human-human, and human-nature). This has the twofoldresult of restraining evil and advancing the benefits of just livingwithin the human society. Thus, the fruits of justice are to be seenin all spheres of human life, such as spirituality (2Cor.5:17–21), morality and ethics (Phil. 4:8; Col. 3:5–9;Titus 2:11–13), social justice (Exod. 22:21–24; Isa.56:1; Amos 2:6–7; Ezek. 22:7–29; James 2:1–9), andeconomic justice (Amos 5:11; 8:4–6; James 5:1–6), as wellas in the environment (Deut. 20:19–20; Pss. 96:9–13;104:1–31; Eccles. 2:5–6; Rom. 8:19–22).
Additionally,the outworking of justice produces (re)distribution and retribution.Distribution means that those blessed materially share of theirblessings with those in need (Deut. 15:1–15; Ps. 112:5–9;Prov. 28:27; Isa. 58:1–11; 2Cor. 8–9). Retributionrelates to the vindication and deliverance of the oppressed andjudgment on the wicked (1Sam. 2:7–10; Job 36:5–10;Ps. 72:4; Luke 4:17–20). This is both attested in biblicalIsrael’s experience (Isa. 1:17–20; 5:1–9; Jer.5:26–29; Mic. 2:1–3) and is being anticipated at thefinal judgment (Isa. 66:24; Dan. 12:1–3; Matt. 25:31–46;2Thess. 1:5–10). The vindicated obtain God’s loveand grace, while the judged receive his justice. Justice and love,therefore, are the two sides of God’s holiness.
The Hebrew word ’erets occurs 2,505 times in the OT andis most frequently translated “country” or “land.”“Earth” renders the Greek word gē in the NT. Notsurprisingly, ’erets appears 311 times in Genesis alone, thebook that initiates Israel’s landed covenant (Gen. 15:18). Theprimary uses of ’erets are cosmological (e.g., the earth) andgeographical (e.g., the land of Israel). Other uses of ’eretsinclude physical (e.g., the ground on which one stands) and political(e.g., governed countries) designations. Less frequently, “earth”translates the Hebrew word ’adamah (“country, ground,land, soil”).
Heavenand Earth
Israelshared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. Thisworldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon theprimeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having fourrims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rimswere sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters.God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth andshaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12–13). Similarly,the Akkadian text Hymn to the Sun-God states, “You [Shamash]are holding the ends of the earth suspended from the midst of heaven”(I:22). The earth’s boundaries were set against chaos (Ps.104:7–9; Isa. 40:12). In this way, the Creator and the Saviorcannot be separated because, taken together, God works against chaosin the mission of redemption (Ps. 74:12–17; Isa. 51:9–11).The phrase “heavens and earth” is a merism (two extremesrepresenting the whole) for the entire universe (Gen. 1:1; Ps.102:25). Over the earth arched a firm “vault” (Gen. 1:6).Heaven’s vault rested on the earth’s “pillars,”the mountains (Deut. 32:22; 1Sam. 2:8). Below the heavens isthe sea, part of the earth’s flat surface.
Therewas no term for “world” in the OT. The perception ofworld was basically bipartite (heaven and earth), though sometripartite expressions also occur (e.g., heaven, earth, sea [Exod.20:11; Rev. 5:3, 13]). Though rare, some uses of ’erets mayrefer to the “underworld” or Sheol (Exod. 15:12; Jer.17:13; Jon. 2:6). The earth can be regarded as the realm of the dead(Matt. 12:40; Eph. 4:9). However, the OT is less concerned with theorganic structure of the earth than with what fills the earth:inhabitants (Ps. 33:14; Isa. 24:1), people groups (Gen. 18:18; Deut.28:10), and kingdoms (Deut. 28:25; 2Kings 19:15). The term’erets can be used symbolically to indicate its inhabitants(Gen. 6:11). However, unlike its neighbors, Israel acknowledged nodivine “Mother Earth,” given the cultural associationswith female consorts.
TheTheology of Land
Inbiblical faith, the concept of land combines geography with theology.The modern person values land more as a place to build than for itsproductive capacities. But from the outset, human beings and the“earth” (’erets) functioned in a symbioticrelationship with the Creator (Gen. 1:28). God even gave the landagency to “bring forth living creatures” (Gen. 1:24). The“ground” (’adamah) also provided the raw substanceto make the human being (’adam [Gen. 2:7]). In turn, the humanbeing was charged with developing and protecting the land (Gen. 2:5,15). Showing divine care, the Noahic covenant was “between[God] and the earth” (Gen. 9:13). Thus, land was no mereonlooker; human rebellion had cosmic effects (Gen. 6:7, 17). The landcould be cursed and suffer (Gen. 3:17; cf. 4:11).
Israel’spromised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen.13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing,fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orientingpoints for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise,“flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27).Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity andjudgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationshipwith God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; thiscould ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits”people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).
ForIsrael, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen.15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithfulobedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1Kings 2:1–4).Conditionality and unconditionality coexisted in Israel’srelationship of “sonship” with Yahweh (Exod. 4:22; Hos.11:1). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen.18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was thesupreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev.25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance”to give (1 Sam. 26:19; 2 Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). TheLevites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did theother tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20;Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter andto occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3).Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when theyaccused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing withmilk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however,no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance”(Josh. 13:1).
Landpossession had serious ethical and religious ramifications (Deut.26:1–11). Israel was not chosen to receive a special land;rather, land was the medium of Israel’s relationship with God.Land functioned as a spiritual barometer (Ps. 78:56–64; Lam.1:3–5). The heavens and earth stood as covenant witnesses(Deut. 4:26). Blood, in particular, could physically pollute the land(Num. 35:30–34). National sin could culminate in expulsion(Lev. 26:32–39), and eventually the land was lost (Jer.25:1–11). For this reason, Israel’s exiles prompted aprofound theological crisis.
Inheritance
Thenotion of inheritance connected Israel’s religious worship withpractical stewardship. Land was not owned; it was passed down throughpatrimonial succession. God entrusted each family with an inheritancethat was to be safeguarded (Lev. 25:23–28; Mic. 2:1–2).This highlights the serious crime when Naboth’s vineyard wasforcibly stolen (1Kings 21). It was Israel’s filialsonship with Yahweh and Israel’s land tenure that formedYahweh’s solidarity with the nation. The law helped limitIsrael’s attachment to mere real estate: Yahweh was to beIsrael’s preoccupation (see Jer. 3:6–25). When the nationwas finally exiled, the message of the new covenant transcendedgeographical boundaries (Jer. 32:36–44; Ezek. 36–37; cf.Lev. 26:40–45; Deut. 30:1–10). In postexilic Israel,sanctuary was prioritized (Hag. 1:9–14).
Itwas Israel’s redefinition of land through the exile thatprepared the way for the incorporation of the Gentiles (Ezek.47:22–23), an integration already anticipated (Isa. 56:3–7).The prophets saw a time when the nations would share in theinheritance of God previously guarded by Israel (Isa. 60; Zech. 2:11;cf. Gen. 12:3). Viewed as a political territory, land receives nosubstantial theological treatment in the NT; rather, inheritancesurpasses covenant metaphor. Using the language of sonship andinheritance, Paul develops this new Gentile mission in Galatians (cf.Col. 1:13–14). The OT land motif fully flowers in the NTteaching of adoption (cf. 1Pet. 1:3–5). Both curse andcovenant are resolved eschatologically (Rom. 8:19–22).Inheritance is now found in Christ (Eph. 2:11–22; 1Pet.1:4). In the economy of the new covenant, land tenure has matured infellowship (koinōnia). Koinōnia recalibrates the ethicalsignificance of OT land themes, reapplying them practically throughinclusion, lifestyle, economic responsibility, and social equity.
Beyondcosmological realms, heaven and earth are also theological horizonsstill under God’s ownership. What began as the creation mandateto fill and subdue the earth (Gen. 1:28) culminates in the newcreation with Christ (Rom. 8:4–25). Under the power of Satan,the earth “lags behind” heaven. Christ’s missionbrings what is qualitatively of heaven onto the earthly stage, oftenusing signs of the budding rule of God (Matt. 6:10; Mark 2:10–11;John 3:31–36; Eph. 4:9–13; Heb. 12:25). As Israel was tostand out in a hostile world (Deut. 4:5–8), now those ofAbrahamic faith stand out through Christian love (John 13:34–35;Rom. 4:9–16). According to Heb. 4:1–11, Israel’sinitial rest in the land (see Exod. 33:14; Deut. 12:9) culminates inthe believers’ rest in Christ (Heb. 4:3, 5). The formerinheritance of space gives way to the inheritance of Christ’spresence. The OT theme of land is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus’exhortation to “abide in me” (John 15).
Earthquake–InPalestine there have been about seventeen recorded major earthquakesin the past two millennia. One of the major sources of theseearthquakes is believed to originate from the Jordan Rift Valley. Inantiquity earthquakes were viewed as fearful events because themountains, which represented everlasting durability, were disturbed.The confession of faith is pronounced in association with suchphenomena (“We will not fear, though the earth give way”[Ps. 46:2]). An earthquake must have made a great impact in Amos’sday (“two years before the earthquake” [Amos 1:1; cf.Zech. 14:5]).
Anearthquake has many symbolic meanings. First, the power of God andhis divine presence are manifested through it (Job 9:6; Ps. 68:8;Hag. 2:6). It accompanied theophanic revelation (Exod. 19:18; Isa.6:4; 1Kings 19:11–12) when the glory of the Lord appeared(Ezek. 3:12). His divine presence was especially felt whenearthquakes occurred during the time of the crucifixion and theresurrection of Jesus Christ (Matt. 27:54; 28:2). It led thecenturion to confess of Christ, “Surely he was the Son of God!”(Matt. 27:54). God’s salvation power is represented when anearthquake comes at the appropriate moment, such as when it freedPaul and Silas from prison (Acts 16:26).
Second,it is used in the context of God’s judgment (Isa. 13:13; Amos9:1; Nah. 1:5). It becomes the symbol of God’s anger and wrath(Ps. 18:7). God brought earthquakes upon the people to destroy evilin the world and to punish those who had sinned against him (Num.16:31–33; Isa. 29:6; Ezek. 38:19). Earthquake activity possiblyexplains the background to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen.19:24).
Third,earthquakes are said to precede the end of time (Matt. 24:7; Mark13:8; Luke 21:11). In the apocalyptic book of Revelation, earthquakesare regular occurrences (Rev. 6:12; 11:13, 19; 16:18).
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.
The word “Gentiles” is often used to translatewords meaning “nations” or “peoples.” It hasa Latin etymology from gens, meaning “clan” or “family”and, eventually, “race” or “people.” TheGreek word genos (“race, kind”) has a close relationship.In the Bible it loosely refers to nations or peoples other thanIsrael. English Bibles often translate it as “nations,”“peoples,” or “races.”
OldTestament
Ingeneral, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. Godchose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:6–8;10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership inthe covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becomingpart of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).
TheOT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessingthrough Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping thelaw, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. Thelaw is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenantthat God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5;20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6;10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss.119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).
Suchlaw/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OTunderstanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel,the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in andthrough Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3;17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specificallyinvolves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]).Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subjectto Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16;14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed byIsrael’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel,serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fearIsrael’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5;60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic.7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages furtherelucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in theGod of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer.12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations“flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentileparticipation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa.2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).
TheServant Songs in Isa. 40–55 also reflect thislaw/Israel-centered nature of salvation for the Gentiles. Theservant, explicitly identified as Israel (41:8, 9; 42:18–19;44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3; 54:17; see also 65:9; 66:14),serves as God’s instrument for reaching the nations (42:1, 6;49:6; 52:15). The OT usually condemns Gentiles who remain separatefrom Israel to some form of judgment, especially Gentiles who haveharmed Israel.
SecondTemple Judaism and Early Christianity
SecondTemple Jewish sources exhibit diverse views about Gentiles, theirnature, their possible relation to God, and their fate at the end.Many reflect something resembling the OT views. Israel as God’speople defined by the law, variously understood and contested amongSecond Temple sources, generally continues to be the locus of God’sultimate blessing activities.
SituatingJesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentilesensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread acrossthe Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God ofIsrael in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentilesexperience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.
SomeChristians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought thatGentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God ofIsrael’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’sopponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from Godand his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13;1Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation,especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin,lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32;Eph. 4:17–19; 1Thess. 4:5; 1Pet. 1:14, 18).
However,various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keepthe law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’sultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, hasreplaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and hisdeath and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ bythe Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true,redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheritingGod’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25;8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7;Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentilesattain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightlybefore God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30;1Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1Thess. 4:3–8).Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles withrespect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.
Debatesabout Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for theseissues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocalsaying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and someother NT writings.
There is at least some confusion surrounding the ultimatehope that God has planned for his people. Many have assumed that thereferences in Scripture to heaven mean that our ultimate destiny isessentially to become disembodied spirits, floating around in outerspace. Such a view is actually far closer to the Greek concept of theimmortality of the soul (where the soul is understood to beimprisoned in a physical body and freed only at death) than it is tothe Christian view of a bodily resurrection. God chose to createhumanity as a unity of a physical body and a nonmaterial soul orspirit. Death is described as the “last enemy” in 1Cor.15:26 because it involves the unnatural separation of the physicalbody from the inner person of the soul/spirit (see Eccles. 12:7). Theclear NT hope is that God will raise our physical bodies so thatpeople will have resurrected bodies for all eternity.
Thebiblical concept of the bodily resurrection naturally leads to thefuture hope of new heavens surrounding a new earth. This hope of anew heavens and a new earth is mentioned in Isaiah’s prophecywhere God “will create new heavens and a new earth” (Isa.65:17), which “will endure before” him (66:22). However,it is in Rev. 21–22 that John gives us a detailed descriptionof “a new heaven and a new earth” (21:1). It is nosurprise that Peter says that “we are looking forward to a newheaven and a new earth” (2Pet.3:13).
Oneof the key questions here involves the relationship between thispresent world order and that of the age to come. Here there is bothdiscontinuity and continuity. On the one hand, Peter tells us, “Theheavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed byfire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare”(2Pet. 3:10). At the same time, just as there was a definitecontinuity between Jesus’ earthly body and his resurrectionbody, and in the same way that there will be a continuity between ourown present earthly bodies and our future resurrection bodies (whichwill be “sown in weakness ... raised in power”[1Cor. 15:43]), so too should we expect a continuity betweenthe present heavens and earth and those to come. The Christian hopeis a supernatural transformation whereby redeemed humanity’sresurrection is linked to the renewal of the whole creation (Rom.8:18–25; 1Cor. 15:20–28; Phil. 3:20–21).
John and the author of Hebrews call Jesus Christ the “onlybegotten,” as traditionally translated (John 1:14, 18; 3:16,18; 1John 4:9; Heb. 11:17 KJV). The epithet, which is a singleword in Greek (monogenēs),signifies being the only one of its kind within a specificrelationship, and therefore, as we find in more recent translations,it may also be translated “one and only Son” (NIV) or“only son” (NRSV). Although the Bible claims that God hasmany humansons and daughters, in various senses he has but one “onlybegotten” Son, who must also be distinguished from the angels,who arealso identified as sons of God (Heb. 1:1–14; seealso Gen. 6:2,4).
Theauthor of Hebrews and Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian,present Isaac as Abraham’s “only begotten son”(Heb. 11:17 KJV; Josephus, Ant. 1.222). But Abraham has two sons, theother one being Ishmael, as the biblical narrative and Paul makeclear (Gen. 16:11–16; Gal. 4:22). The difference is that Isaacwas the only begotten between Abraham and his wife, Sarah, and theone for whom God decided to perpetuate the covenant that heoriginally made with Abraham (Gen. 12:1–3; 15:1–6;17:19). Isaac is presented by early Christians as a type of Christ,and for Paul, he is a type of all the children of the new covenant(Gal. 4:21–31). Nevertheless, through Jesus’ fulfillmentof God’s covenant obligations, many, including the descendantsof Ishmael, will be called “sons of God” (Gen. 17:20;Hos. 1:10, cited in Rom. 9:26; Matt. 5:9; Rom. 8:14, 19; Gal. 3:26;4:6).
Withoutcompromising the uniqueness of his position, the “one and only”Son is happy to share his status before God the Father through faith,by grace, which brings the believer into union with his body, thechurch (Gal. 2:19–20; Eph. 2:1–10; Heb. 2:10). Theconviction that Christ cannot be compared to human children orangels, parts of God’s creation, contributed to the belief ofcomparing Christ only with God, the uncreated.
A distinction needs to be made between the variousoccurrences of the words “pray” and “prayer”in most translations of the Bible and the modern connotation of thesame words. In the OT, the main Hebrew words translated as “topray” and “prayer” (palal and tepillah) refer tothe act of bringing a petition or request before God. They do notnormally, if ever, refer to the other elements that we today think ofas being included in the act of praying, such as praise orthanksgiving. The same is the case in the NT, where the main Greekwords translated “topray” and “prayer” (proseuchomai and proseuchē)also specifically denote making a petition or request to God. Butother words and constructions in both Testaments are also translated“to pray” and “prayer,” and this article willdeal with the larger concept,including praise, thanksgiving, petition, and confession, as opposedto the narrower meaning of the particular Hebrew and Greek terms (seealso Praise; Thanksgiving; Worship).
OldTestament
Inthe OT there is no language or understanding comparable to modernways of talking about prayer as conversational or dialogical. Prayerdoes not involve mutuality. Prayer is something that humans offer toGod, and the situation is never reversed; God does not pray tohumans. Understanding this preserves the proper distinction betweenthe sovereign God and the praying subject. Therefore, prayers in theOT are reverential. Some OT prayers have extended introductions, suchas that found in Neh. 1:5, that seem to pile up names for God. Theseshould be seen as instances not of stiltedness or ostentation, butrather as setting up a kind of “buffer zone” inrecognition of the distance between the Creator and the creature. Inthe NT, compare the same phenomenon in Eph. 1:17.
Manyof the prayers in the OT are explicitly set in a covenantal context.God owes nothing to his creatures, but God has sworn to be faithfulto those with whom he has entered into covenant. Thus, many OTprayers specifically appeal to the covenant as a motivation for boththose praying and God’s answering (1Kings 8:23–25;Neh. 1:5–11; 9:32; Pss. 25:10–11; 44:17–26; 74:20;89:39–49). In postexilic books such as Ezra, Nehemiah, andDaniel, an important feature in the recorded prayers is the use ofprior Scripture, praying God’s words (many times covenantal)back to him (in the NT, see Acts 4:24–30). Also, the closenessengendered by the covenant relationship between God and his peoplewas unique in the ancient Near Eastern context. So Moses can marvel,“What other nation is so great as to have their gods near themthe way the Lord our God is near us whenever we pray to him?”(Deut. 4:7).
Prayermust be made from a heart that is right toward God. There is noguarantee that God will hear every prayer (Ps. 66:18; Prov. 1:28;Isa. 1:15; 59:2). For the most part, the “rightness” thatGod requires in prayer is “a broken and contrite heart”(Ps. 51:17; cf. Isa. 66:2).
Althoughseveral passages talk about prayer in the context of sacrifice (e.g.,Gen. 13:4), there is surprisingly little emphasis on prayer in thelegal texts about sacrifice in the Pentateuch, no prescriptions forthe kinds of prayer or the words that are to be said in connectionwith the sacrifices. Interestingly, however, in later, perhapspostexilic contexts, where there is no temple and therefore nosacrifice, we find texts such as Ps. 141:2, where the petitioner asksGod to accept prayer as if it were an offering of incense and theevening sacrifice (cf. Prov. 15:8; in the NT, see Rev. 5:8).
Apresupposition of prayer in the OT is that God hears prayer and mayindeed answer and effect the change being requested. Prayer is notprimarily about changing the psychological state or the heart of theone praying, but rather about God changing the circ*mstances of theone praying.
Thereis a striking honesty, some would even say brashness, evident in manyOT prayers. Jeremiah laments that God has deceived both the people(Jer. 4:10) and Jeremiah himself (20:7) and complains about God’sjustice (12:1–4). Job stands, as it were, in God’s faceand demands that the Almighty answer his questions (Job 31:35–37).The psalmist accuses God of having broken his covenant promises (Ps.89:39). While it is true that God does, to some extent, rebukeJeremiah and Job (Jer. 12:5; Job 38–42), he does not ignorethem or cast them aside. This would seem, ultimately, to encouragesuch honesty and boldness on the part of those who pray.
Literarily,accounts of prayers in narratives serve to provide characterizationsof the ones praying. The recorded prayers of people such as Abraham,Moses, Hannah, Ezra, and Nehemiah demonstrate their true piety andhumility before God. By contrast, the prayer of Jonah recorded inJon. 2, in its narrative context, betrays a certain hypocrisy on thepart of the reluctant prophet.
NewTestament
Thedepiction of prayer in the NT is largely consistent with that of theOT, but there are important developments.
Jesustells his disciples to address God as “Father” (Matt.6:9; cf. Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Although recent scholarship hasdemonstrated that “Abba” is not the equivalent of our“daddy,” it expresses a certain intimacy that goes beyondwhat was prevalent at the time, but retains an element of reverenceas well. God is not just “Father,” but “our Fatherin heaven” (Matt. 6:9). Even Jesus addresses God as “HolyFather” (John 17:11), “Righteous Father” (John17:25), and “Father, Lord of heaven and earth” (Matt.11:25). And Paul, as mentioned earlier, uses a buffer zone, rarely inhis epistles using the word “Father” by itself, butinstead referring to “God our Father” (e.g., Rom. 1:7)and frequently using the phrase “the God and Father of our LordJesus Christ” (Rom. 15:6; 2Cor. 1:3; 11:31; Eph. 1:3; cf.Eph. 1:17; Col. 1:3). God is our Father, but still he is a Fatherbefore whom one reverently kneels (Eph. 3:14).
Prayerto God is now to be made in the name of Jesus (Matt. 18:19–20;John 14:13; 15:16; 16:23–26). While there is some debate as tothe exact nuance of this idea, it seems clear that, at the veryleast, prayers in Jesus’ name need to be ones that Jesus wouldaffirm and are in accordance with his holy character and expressedwill. It is, in essence, saying to God that the prayer being offeredis one that Jesus would approve.
Prayercan also be made to Jesus (John 14:14), and such devotion to him inthe early church is evidence of his being regarded as deity. Theinstances of this in the NT are rare, however, and generally eitherexclamatory or rhetorical (Acts 7:59; 1Cor. 16:22; Rev. 22:20).The norm would still seem to be that prayer is to be made to theFather, through Jesus’ name.
Unlikeanything prior in the OT, Jesus tells his followers to pray for theirenemies (Matt. 5:44). Jesus and his followers serve as examples (Luke23:34; Acts 7:60).
TheHoly Spirit plays a vital role in prayers. It is by him that we areable to call out, “Abba, Father” (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6).The Spirit himself intercedes for us (Rom. 8:26). Our praying is tobe done in the Spirit (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; possibly 1Cor.14:15).
Jesusencourages fervent and even continual or repeated prayer (Luke18:1–8), but not showy or repetitive prayer (Matt. 6:5–8).
Jesusbecomes the model of prayer. He prays before important decisions(Luke 6:12–13) and in connection with significant crisis points(Matt. 14:23; 26:36–44; Luke 3:21; 9:29; John 12:27). He offersprayers that are not answered (Luke 22:41–44) and prayers thatare (Heb. 5:7). Even as he tells his disciples to always pray and notgive up (Luke 18:1 [which is also the meaning of the sometimes overlyliteralized “pray without ceasing” in 1Thess. 5:17NRSV]), so he himself wrestles in prayer (Luke 22:41–44; Heb.5:7). He has prayed for his disciples (John 17; Luke 22:32), and evennow, in heaven, he still intercedes for us (Heb. 7:25). Indeed, ourintercession before God’s throne is valid because his is (Heb.4:14–16).
The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More thana simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the graceof the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classicaltexts use the Greek word apolytrōsis(“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given torelease a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. Thegroup of words based on the Greek term lytron(“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. Thecorresponding Hebrew word padahis a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.
OldTestament
Theexperience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religioussignificance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included thededication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13).Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), wasredeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up todescribe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continuedto broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance fromall Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included thewhole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or thenew age to come).
AnotherHebrew term, ga’al,generally relates to the kinsman-redeemer. In the case of a personwho had sold property due to poverty or even gone into slavery to paya debt, a kinsman could become a redeemer by buying back the property(Lev. 25:25–28) and/or purchasing freedom from slavery(25:47–49). The book of Ruth describes this, detailing therelationship between the impoverished Ruth and Boaz, thekinsman-redeemer. The prophets and the psalms apply thisunderstanding to how God redeems Israel (Isa. 43:1–3; Ps.19:14; cf. Job 19:25). God, however, does not pay ransom to anyone(Isa. 52:3–4); rather, he causes redemption by his power(45:13).
Theawaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’sultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’scontinued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant,God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon.Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was ifGod would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. Thislonging for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As thepersecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamentalperiod (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT andthe NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianichope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people fromGreek and Roman oppression.
NewTestament
TheNT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). WhenJesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slaveryof sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many(Matt. 20:28// Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the crossaccentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17;7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christianidea of ransom followedthe accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death(Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with aransom (Col. 1:13–14). The predominance of apolytrōsis inthe NT, compared to common Greek literature of that period,underscores its significance for early Christian conceptualization.
Withoutreflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made anissue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlightJesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12;cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need oftheredeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of theredemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from onesphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another.Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted ofmonetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1Pet.3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of thosehe redeemed (antilytron hyper [1Tim. 2:6]). God still did notpay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.
TheOT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in thepresent, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills theNT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’stheological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from theslavery of sin (1Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matterof ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already butnot yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption isevidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).
Althoughredemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future(Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1Cor.15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions ofredemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expectsredemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption isuniversal; it restores the relationship between creation and theCreator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).
The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More thana simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the graceof the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classicaltexts use the Greek word apolytrōsis(“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given torelease a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. Thegroup of words based on the Greek term lytron(“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. Thecorresponding Hebrew word padahis a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.
OldTestament
Theexperience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religioussignificance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included thededication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13).Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), wasredeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up todescribe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continuedto broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance fromall Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included thewhole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or thenew age to come).
AnotherHebrew term, ga’al,generally relates to the kinsman-redeemer. In the case of a personwho had sold property due to poverty or even gone into slavery to paya debt, a kinsman could become a redeemer by buying back the property(Lev. 25:25–28) and/or purchasing freedom from slavery(25:47–49). The book of Ruth describes this, detailing therelationship between the impoverished Ruth and Boaz, thekinsman-redeemer. The prophets and the psalms apply thisunderstanding to how God redeems Israel (Isa. 43:1–3; Ps.19:14; cf. Job 19:25). God, however, does not pay ransom to anyone(Isa. 52:3–4); rather, he causes redemption by his power(45:13).
Theawaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’sultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’scontinued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant,God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon.Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was ifGod would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. Thislonging for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As thepersecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamentalperiod (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT andthe NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianichope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people fromGreek and Roman oppression.
NewTestament
TheNT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). WhenJesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slaveryof sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many(Matt. 20:28// Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the crossaccentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17;7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christianidea of ransom followedthe accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death(Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with aransom (Col. 1:13–14). The predominance of apolytrōsis inthe NT, compared to common Greek literature of that period,underscores its significance for early Christian conceptualization.
Withoutreflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made anissue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlightJesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12;cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need oftheredeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of theredemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from onesphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another.Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted ofmonetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1Pet.3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of thosehe redeemed (antilytron hyper [1Tim. 2:6]). God still did notpay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.
TheOT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in thepresent, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills theNT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’stheological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from theslavery of sin (1Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matterof ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already butnot yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption isevidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).
Althoughredemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future(Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1Cor.15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions ofredemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expectsredemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption isuniversal; it restores the relationship between creation and theCreator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).
The idea of redemption was well known in antiquity. More thana simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the graceof the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classicaltexts use the Greek word apolytrōsis(“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given torelease a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. Thegroup of words based on the Greek term lytron(“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. Thecorresponding Hebrew word padahis a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.
OldTestament
Theexperience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religioussignificance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included thededication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:12–13).Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), wasredeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up todescribe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continuedto broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance fromall Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included thewhole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or thenew age to come).
AnotherHebrew term, ga’al,generally relates to the kinsman-redeemer. In the case of a personwho had sold property due to poverty or even gone into slavery to paya debt, a kinsman could become a redeemer by buying back the property(Lev. 25:25–28) and/or purchasing freedom from slavery(25:47–49). The book of Ruth describes this, detailing therelationship between the impoverished Ruth and Boaz, thekinsman-redeemer. The prophets and the psalms apply thisunderstanding to how God redeems Israel (Isa. 43:1–3; Ps.19:14; cf. Job 19:25). God, however, does not pay ransom to anyone(Isa. 52:3–4); rather, he causes redemption by his power(45:13).
Theawaited Messiah, promised through the prophets, would become God’sultimate expression of his redemptive love. When the people’scontinued rebellion against God finally broke the Mosaic covenant,God’s judgment sent them into captivity and exile in Babylon.Now, without place and identity, their only hope for a future was ifGod would ransom his people and restore his covenant with them. Thislonging for God’s redemption grew during the exile. As thepersecutions increased further during the so-called intertestamentalperiod (an approximately four-hundred-year period between the OT andthe NT), the earlier prophetic promises became a full-blown messianichope. God will send the Messiah as redeemer to ransom his people fromGreek and Roman oppression.
NewTestament
TheNT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). WhenJesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slaveryof sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many(Matt. 20:28// Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the crossaccentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17;7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christianidea of ransom followedthe accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death(Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with aransom (Col. 1:13–14). The predominance of apolytrōsis inthe NT, compared to common Greek literature of that period,underscores its significance for early Christian conceptualization.
Withoutreflecting on to whom the ransom should be paid, which was made anissue by later theologians and philosophers, the NT authors highlightJesus’ blood as the ransom payment (e.g., Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:12;cf. Rev. 5:9). The emphases of the NT remain on the need oftheredeemed, the grace of the redeemer, and the effects of theredemption. Christ’s ransom transfers the redeemed from onesphere of influence to another, or rather, from one owner to another.Incomparable to commonly known worldly ransoms, which consisted ofmonetary means and remained external to the redeemer himself (1Pet.3:18–19), Jesus substituted his own life for the life of thosehe redeemed (antilytron hyper [1Tim. 2:6]). God still did notpay ransom to anyone, but rather caused it by his own power.
TheOT notion that redemption points to God’s involvement in thepresent, allowing for a historical experience of salvation, fills theNT conception as well. This is seen most clearly in Paul’stheological ethics. The new ownership accomplished by Jesus’redemption enables a new kind of life to be lived in freedom from theslavery of sin (1Cor. 6:20; Gal. 5:1). More than just a matterof ethics, it follows Jesus’ emphasis of an “already butnot yet” experience of God’s presence. Redemption isevidenced by the Spirit’s presence (Rom. 8:1–17).
Althoughredemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future(Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1Cor.15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions ofredemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expectsredemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption isuniversal; it restores the relationship between creation and theCreator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).
In the most basic sense, regeneration refers to God givingnew life to someone or something. Although the word “regeneration”does not appear in the NIV, the concept is abundantly present in avariety of terms and images, especially those of new birth, new life,new self, new heart, and new creation. The biblical concept ofregeneration is applied to both individuals and creation.
Individuals.Becauseof Adam’s rebellion in the garden, humanity plunged intospiritual death (Rom. 5:12–14). Nothing short of God impartingnew life to a person can overcome this condition. The classicexpression of this truth is found in Jesus’ conversation withNicodemus (John 3:1–21). According to Jesus, entering thekingdom of God requires being born again, which he further explainsas being “born of water and the Spirit” (John 3:3–5).Jesus’ description taps into the language of Ezek. 36:25–27,where God promises to sprinkle clean water on his people and put hisSpirit within them.
Paulalso attributes regeneration to the work of the Spirit when he saysthat God “saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewalby the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through JesusChrist our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, wemight become heirs having the hope of eternal life” (Titus3:5–7). The renewing work of the Spirit is the initial aspectof a person’s experience of salvation, but it is closelyconnected with several other aspects of God’s work in thebeliever, such as justification, inheritance, and eternal life. Thetransformation that regeneration begins is so profound that Paul canrefer to it as an act of “new creation” in which a personwho experiences it is, in a very real sense, an entirely new person(2Cor. 5:17).
Inaddition to making a person spiritually alive, God’s act ofregeneration places within the believer a new disposition ororientation toward faith in Christ and obedience to him. Those whoare born of God believe that Jesus is the Christ (1John 5:1),love God and others (4:7–11), and do not continue in sin (3:9).God makes sinners alive not only to show the riches of his grace(Eph. 2:4–7), but also so that they “do good works, whichGod prepared in advance for us to do” (2:10).
Creation.God’swork of regeneration extends beyond the individual to the entirecreation. Jesus refers to the consummation of God’s plans as“the renewal [palingenesia, ‘regeneration’] of allthings” (Matt. 19:28). Because of Adam’s sin, creationwas placed under a curse (Gen. 3:17–19). To this day, creationgroans under that curse (Rom. 8:19–22). But in the OT, Godpromised to renew the created order (Isa. 65:17; 66:22). The deathand resurrection of Jesus are the initial fulfillment of this cosmicregeneration (Matt. 27:51–53; 1Cor. 15:20–23), butthe completion awaits the new heaven and earth (Rev. 21–22).
Theregeneration of the individual and creation are inseparable. Godimparts new spiritual life to his chosen people so that they respondin faith and obedience to him. The same regenerating power thatbrings the believer alive will one day renew all creation to make asuitable place for God’s regenerate people to dwell. See alsoNew Birth.
The act of repudiating sin and returning to God. Implicit inthis is sorrow over the evil that one has committed and a completeturnabout in one’s spiritual direction: turning fromidols—anything that wrests away the affection that we oweGod—to God (1Sam. 7:3; 2Chron. 7:14; Isa. 55:6;1Thess. 1:9; James 4:8–10).
Terminology.TwoHebrew word groups are associated with the concept of repentance:nakham and shub. Nakham means “to pant, sigh, groan, howl.”When used with respect to the circ*mstances of others and the feelingof sympathy that they engender, it refers to compassion. When used inreference to feelings generated by one’s own actions, it means“grief” or “remorse.” In this regard, nakhampredominantly has God as the subject. The KJV translates it aboutforty times as “repent.” While one of the senses ofnakham is that of grief over one’s actions, those actions areethically neutral: it does not presuppose that they are inherentlyevil. The NIV is correct, therefore, in never translating nakham as“repent” where God is the subject. In most cases whereGod is its subject, the term highlights God’s compassion andcomfort for the afflicted (Isa. 40:1–2; 49:13), or his griefover the dire consequences brought upon or intended for thedisobedient and his subsequent commutation of their punishment (Exod.32:12–14; Judg. 2:18; 2Sam. 24:16; Jon. 3:10), or hisgrief over human self-ruinous obstinacy (Gen. 6:6–7; 1Sam.15:11). Even in the few cases where nakham has human subjects, itneed not always be rendered “repent,” their concern forchange of heart notwithstanding (cf. Exod. 13:17; Judg. 21:6).
Theconcept of repentance is better conveyed by the Hebrew verb shub(“to turn, return back, restore, reverse, bring back”) orits noun form in rabbinic Judaism, teshubah (“repentance”).While shub has many nonreligious uses, its theological significancederives from the sense of either “turning away from God”(apostasy [cf. Hos. 11:7; Jer. 11:10]) or “turning to God”(repentance [cf. 1Sam. 7:3–4; Hos. 14:1]). Our concern iswith the latter sense, which normally would be followed by God’sreturn to his people (Zech. 1:3; Mal. 3:7).
Inthe OT, shub is central to the concept of repentance. It is the keyterm employed in the entreaty to God’s people to return to him(2Chron. 30:6; Isa. 44:22; Ezek. 14:6). The outward signs ofrepentance in the OT include fasting, mourning (sometimes whilesitting in dust or pouring ashes or dust upon one’s head),rending garments, wearing sackcloth, and offering sacrifices (Lev.5:5–12; 2Kings 22:11, 19; Neh. 9:1; Joel 2:12–17).The Israelites became so preoccupied with these outward forms thatGod told them repeatedly that he no longer had interest in them, butrather sought contrition of the heart (Ps. 34:18; Isa. 1:10–16;58; 66:2; Joel 2:13).
Inthe NT, the dominant terms used for repentance are the verb metanoeōand the cognate noun metanoia; the overwhelming majority of theseoccur in Luke-Acts. These terms are used to expressthe complete turnaround in one’s way of life, includingconversion,faith, and regeneration (Acts 2:28; 3:19; 5:31; 20:21). Occasionallythese two terms are complemented by epistrephō to stress thepositive side of repentance, that of turning from sin oridols to God (Acts 9:35; 11:21; 26:20).
Elementsof repentance.The constituent elements of biblical repentance include thefollowing: (1)A recognition of one’s sin, its damagingeffects on life and nature, its affront to God’s word andauthority, and its dire consequences (Ezek. 18:4; Rom. 3:23; 8:19–22;Rev. 21:8). (2)Personal outrage and remorse over one’ssin, grief at one’s helplessness, and a deep longing forforgiveness, reconciliation, and restoration. (3)A personalresponse to God’s grace in choosing a new spiritual directionby breaking with the past and returning to God. This includesconfession and renunciation of sin, and prayer for God’sforgiveness (Lev. 5:5; Prov. 28:13; 1John 1:9). (4)Insome circ*mstances, repentance may require restitution (Exod.22:1–15; 1Sam. 12:3; 2Sam. 12:6; Luke 19:8). (5)Atit* core, repentance is a rejection of the autonomous life and thesurrender of oneself to the lordship of Christ (Jer. 3:22; Mark8:34–38). (6)The proof of true repentance is the worthyfruit of a changed life (Luke 3:7–14; Eph. 4:17–32; Col.1:10).
The term “salvation” is the broadest one used torefer to God’s actions to solve the plight brought about byhumankind’s sinful rebellion and its consequences. It is one ofthe central themes of the entire Bible, running from Genesis throughRevelation.
OldTestament
Inmany places in the OT, salvation refers to being rescued fromphysical rather than spiritual trouble. Fearing the possibility ofretribution from his brother Esau, Jacob prays, “Save me, Ipray, from the hand of my brother Esau” (Gen. 32:11). Theactions of Joseph in Egypt saved many from famine (45:5–7;47:25; 50:20). Frequently in the psalms, individuals pray forsalvation from enemies that threaten one’s safety or life (Pss.17:14; 18:3; 70:1–3; 71:1–4; 91:1–3).
Relatedto this usage are places where the nation of Israel and/or its kingwere saved from enemies. The defining example of this is the exodus,whereby God delivered his people from their enslavement to theEgyptians, culminating in the destruction of Pharaoh and his army(Exod. 14:1–23). From that point forward in the history ofIsrael, God repeatedly saved Israel from its enemies, whether througha judge (e.g., Judg. 2:16; 3:9), a king (2Kings 14:27), or evena shepherd boy (1Sam. 17:1–58).
Butthese examples of national deliverance had a profound spiritualcomponent as well. God did not save his people from physical dangeras an end in itself; it was the necessary means for his plan to savethem from their sins. The OT recognizes the need for salvation fromsin (Pss. 39:8; 51:14; 120:2) but, as the NT makes evident, does notprovide a final solution (Heb. 9:1–10:18). One of the clearestplaces that physical and spiritual salvation come together is Isa.40–55, where Judah’s exile from the land and prophesiedreturn are seen as the physical manifestation of the much morefundamental spiritual exile that resulted from sin. To address thatfar greater reality, God announces the day when the Suffering Servantwould once and for all take away the sins of his people (Isa.52:13–53:12).
NewTestament
Asin the OT, the NT has places where salvation refers to being rescuedfrom physical difficulty. Paul, for example, speaks of being savedfrom various physical dangers, including execution (2Cor.1:8–10; Phil. 1:19; 2Tim. 4:17). In the midst of a fiercestorm, Jesus’ disciplescry out, “Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!”(Matt. 8:25). But far more prominent are the places in the Gospelsand Acts where physical healings are described with the verb sōzō,used to speak of salvation from sin. The healing of the woman withthe hemorrhage (Mark 5:25–34), the blind man along the road(Luke 18:35–43), and even the man possessed by a demon (Luke8:26–39), just to name a few, are described with the verb sōzō.The same verb, however, is also used to refer to Jesus forgivingsomeone’ssins (Luke 7:36–50) and to his mission to save the lost fromtheir sins (Luke 19:10). Such overlap is a foretaste of the holisticsalvation (physical and spiritual) that will be completed in the newheaven and earth (Rev. 21–22). The NT Epistles give extensivedescriptions of how the work of Jesus Christ saves his people fromtheir sins (see below).
Components
Inseveral passages (e.g., Rom. 5:1–11; Eph. 2:1–10; Titus3:4–7) “salvation” is clearly a summary term forthe totality of what God has done for his people in and throughChrist. Salvation is such a rich and multifaceted work of God that ittakes a variety of terms to bring out its fullness. “Regeneration”refers to the new life that God imparts, bringing a person fromspiritual death to spiritual life (John 3:3–8; Eph. 2:4–7;Titus 3:4–7). “Justification” speaks of Goddeclaring a person not guilty in his court of law on the basis ofChrist’s sacrificial death and life of perfect obedience (Rom.3:21–5:12; Gal. 2:14–21). “Atonement”describes Christ’s payment for sin and resulting forgiveness(Rom. 3:21–26; Heb. 2:17). “Redemption” capturesthe reality of God paying the price to bring his people out of theirslavery to sin and into the freedom of the Spirit (Gal. 4:1–7;5:1). “Reconciliation” refers to God turning hardenedrebels and enemies into his friends (Rom. 5:10–11; 2Cor.5:18–21; Col. 1:20–22). “Adoption” extendsthat reality into the astonishing truth that God makes those whom hereconciles not just his friends but his sons and daughters (Rom.8:14–25; Gal. 4:1–7). In “sanctification” Godsets his people apart for his special purposes and progressivelychanges them into the image of Christ (1Cor. 1:30 ESV, NRSV,NASB; cf. Rom. 8:29). The final component is “glorification,”when God brings to completion the work of salvation by granting hispeople resurrection bodies, removing every last stain of sin, death,and the curse and placing them in a new heaven and earth (Rom. 8:30;1Cor. 15:35–57; Rev. 21–22).
Prepositionsof Salvation
Anotherway that the Bible fills out the nature of salvation is through thevarious prepositions connected to it. The prepositions in thefollowing list are among the more significant.
From.Since the basic idea of salvation is rescue from danger, it is notsurprising that Scripture describes that from which believers aresaved. David cries out to God, “Save me from all mytransgressions” (Ps. 39:8). Salvation from sin is possible onlythrough Jesus, for it is he who “will save his people fromtheir sins” (Matt. 1:21). Reflecting on the work of Jesus onthe cross, Paul claims that because of the sacrificial death ofChrist believers are saved from God’s wrath (Rom. 5:9–10).At the same time, the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus savedpeople from their slavery to sin (Rom. 6:1–11). As a result ofthese and other things from which Christ has saved people, on the dayof Pentecost Peter exhorts his audience to be saved “from thiscorrupt generation” (Acts 2:40). Thus, the unanimous testimonyof Scripture is that believers have been saved from their sin and itsconsequences.
To/into.Believers are saved not merely from something; they are saved to/intocertain states or conditions. Whereas they were once slaves,believers have now been saved “into the freedom and glory ofthe children of God” (Rom. 8:21 [cf. Gal. 5:1]). Through thecross God “has rescued us from the dominion of darkness andbrought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves” (Col. 1:13).Another way of stating this reality is to speak of the peace intowhich believers now have been brought as a result of Christ’swork on their behalf (John 14:27).
By.Scripture frequently uses the preposition “by” to expressthe instrument of salvation. Stated negatively, “It is not bysword or spear that the Lord saves” (1Sam. 17:47). In thebroadest sense, believers are saved from their sins by the gospel(1Cor. 15:1–2). More specifically, salvation is by thegrace of God (Eph. 2:5, 8). The preposition “by” can alsoexpress the agent of salvation. A distinguishing feature of Israelwas that it was saved from its enemies by God (Deut. 33:29; Isa.45:17). The same thing is meant when Scripture speaks of God savinghis people by his right hand (Ps. 17:7) or his name (Ps. 54:1).
Through.The consistent testimony of the Bible is that salvation comes throughfaith (e.g., Eph. 2:8–9). Through faith, believers have beenjustified (Rom. 3:22; 5:1–2) and made children of God (Gal.3:26). It is not righteousness based on the law that matters, “butthat which is through faith in Christ” (Phil. 3:9). Theremarkable actions of God’s people throughout history have beenaccomplished through faith (Heb. 11:1–40).
In.Especially in Paul’s writings the various components ofsalvation (see above) are modified with the phrase “in Christ”or “in him.” Believers are chosen (Eph. 1:4), redeemed(Eph. 1:7), justified (Gal. 2:17), and sanctified (1Cor. 1:2)in Christ. Indeed, God has blessed believers “in the heavenlyrealms with every spiritual blessing in Christ” (Eph. 1:3).
With.Many of the components of salvation that believers experience aresaid to happen “with Christ.” Believers are united withChrist in his death, burial, and resurrection (Rom. 6:4–11;Gal. 2:20). With Christ, believers have been made alive, raised up,and seated in the heavenly realms (Eph. 2:4–6; Col. 2:13).Because of their union with Christ, believers share in hisinheritance (Rom. 8:16–17; Gal. 3:29; 1Pet. 1:4). Eventhe very life of the believer is said to be currently “hiddenwith Christ in God” (Col. 3:3).
Tensesof Salvation
TheBible speaks of salvation in the past, present, and future tenses.Pointing to a definitive experience in the past, Paul tells believersthat “in this hope we were saved” (Rom. 8:24). Yet he canalso speak of himself and other believers as those “who arebeing saved” (1Cor. 1:18; 2Cor. 2:15), pointing toa process that is ongoing. Just a few sentences after assuringbelievers that they have been justified already (Rom. 5:1–2),he can still say that believers will “be saved from God’swrath” through Christ (Rom. 5:9–10).
Theuse of these three tenses reflects the “already and not yet”dynamic of salvation. Through the obedience, death, resurrection, andascension of Jesus, God has rescued his people from their sins. Butthe final and complete realization of all the benefits of salvationmust still await the return of Christ and the establishment of a newheaven and earth (Rev. 19–22).
Conclusion
Withouta proper understanding of humankind’s plight as a result of itsrebellion, the Bible’s repeated emphasis on salvation makeslittle sense. Because sin is humanity’s greatest problem,salvation is humanity’s greatest need. Given the breadth,width, and depth of what God has done to save his people from theirsins through Jesus Christ, it is no wonder that the author of Hebrewsasks, “How shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation?”(2:3).
There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin;hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, orportrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of thedriving forces of the entire Bible.
Sinin the Bible
OldTestament.Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’scommandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. WhenAdam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete.They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaveswere inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with theirattempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent,Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).
Inthe midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways thatsin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised toput hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of thewoman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blowupon the offspring of the woman, the offspring ofthe womanwould defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequatecovering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implicationis that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adamand Eve, covering their sin.
InGen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on fulldisplay. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able toeradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humansgathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make aname for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them toscatter across the earth (11:1–9).
Inone sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holyGod satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationshipwith human beings without compromising his justice? The short answeris: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), whoeventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemedthem from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought themto Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated onobedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant wasthe sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided asa means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrificesmade for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year toatone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement thehigh priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies andsprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took asecond goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people ofIsrael, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them onthe head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness....The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barrenregion; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev.16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinfulpeople, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.
Despitethese provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke itscovenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under thereign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people,including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder(2Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wivesand concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods(1Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israeland Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry becamerampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judahin 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised toraise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as aguilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
AfterGod’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that thegreat prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, wereat hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remainedunder foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell ofSolomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Beforelong, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning awayfrom him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administrationof the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failedto properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).
NewTestament.During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longingfor God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last,when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it wasrevealed that he would “save his people from their sins”(Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, Johnthe Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism ofrepentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereasboth Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to bethe obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation(Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13;Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also theSuffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45;cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrathof God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. Withhis justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify allwho are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). Whatneither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, JesusChrist did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).
Afterhis resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers beganproclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus didand calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one ofyou, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”(Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness,they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned againstthem (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believerscontinue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal.5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23).The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the newheaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse(Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).
Aseven this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesisto Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’splot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative;it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved inorder for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.
Definitionand Terminology
Definitionof sin. Althoughno definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of theconcept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conformto God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action,orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered thatGod’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character,so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather isa personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited toactions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen.4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature ashuman beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.
Terminology.TheBible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying themis not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and useof the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one ofthe following four categories.
1.Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator andruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’sself-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankindfoolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom.1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows tohumans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31).Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodlinessor impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa.9:17; 1Pet. 4:18).
2.Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from thelawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass”picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or thecrossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42;Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’slaw, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45;Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violatinghis statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result isguilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’slaw is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectivelyfeels guilt.
3.Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what isgood. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what isgood (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contraststhe upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could alsoinclude here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speakof perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequentmention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievousdeparture from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27;1Cor. 5:1–11).
4.Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individualhad to be in a state of purity before him. While a person couldbecome impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating womanwas impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity”clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek.24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Althoughit is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, inother places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7;Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).
Metaphors
Inaddition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible usesseveral metaphors or images to describe it. The following four areamong the more prominent.
Missingthe mark.In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin”have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sinis reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that aperson simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it isthat he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9;Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional ornot, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num.15:30).
Departingfrom the way.Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in thewisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of therighteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19).Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways,but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18).Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed bytheir own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).
Adultery.Since God’s relationship with his people is described as amarriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32),it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness asadultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous womanvividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them ofspiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52).When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate inidolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1Cor.6:12–20; 10:1–22).
Slavery.Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clearthat Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture ofits far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7;49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to thosewho do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything thatpleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic powerthat is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare(Rom. 7:7–25).
Scopeand Consequences
Sindoes not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage alongwith it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.
Scope.The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As aresult of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist humanefforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen.3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under theweight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2Chron.36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation aswell (Rom. 8:19–22).
Sinaffects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions,motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom.3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “totaldepravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful asthey could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is taintedby sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as asinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societalstructures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economicmarkets, to name but a few.
Consequences.Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’sneighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sinhas consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level.Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen.2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty inGod’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, andsubjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20;5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict betweenindividuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breedsmistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closestrelationships.
Conclusion
Nosubject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding ofsin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As thePuritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ willnot be sweet.”
The present abode of God and the final dwelling place of the righteous. The ancient Jews distinguished three different heavens. The first heaven was the atmospheric heavens of the clouds and where the birds fly (Gen. 1:20). The second heaven was the celestial heavens of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The third heaven was the present home of God and the angels. Paul builds on this understanding of a third heaven in 2Cor. 12:2–4, where he describes himself as a man who “was caught up to the third heaven” or “paradise,” where he “heard inexpressible things.” This idea of multiple heavens also shows itself in how the Jews normally spoke of “heavens” in the plural (Gen. 1:1), while most other ancient cultures spoke of “heaven” in the singular.
The Abode of God
One of the challenges in understanding “heaven” as the present dwelling place of God involves God’s omnipresence. In one sense, God is present everywhere. David asks in Ps. 139:7, “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?” He answers that regardless of whether he goes as high up as anyone can go (“up to the heavens”), as low down as anyone can go (“in the depths), as far east as anyone can go (“the wings of the dawn”), or as far west as anyone can go (“the far side of the sea”), God is still there (Ps. 139:8–9).
Although God is present everywhere, God is also present in a special way in “heaven.” During Jesus’ earthly ministry, the Father is sometimes described as speaking in “a voice from heaven” (Matt. 3:17). Similarly, Jesus instructs us to address our prayers to “Our Father in heaven” (6:9). Even the specific request in the Lord’s Prayer that “your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (6:10) reminds us that heaven is a place already under God’s full jurisdiction, where his will is presently being done completely and perfectly. Jesus also warns of the dangers of despising “one of these little ones,” because “their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven” (18:10). Jesus “came down from heaven” (John 6:51) for his earthly ministry, and after his death and resurrection, he ascended back “into heaven,” from where he “will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).
At times, “heaven” becomes virtually a synonym for God himself. In the parable of the prodigal son in Luke 15, the son confesses to his father, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you” (v.21). This son’s sin against “heaven” has nothing to do with environmental issues such as air pollution, and everything to do with his relationship with God. Note also Matthew’s expression “the kingdom of heaven” versus “the kingdom of God” used elsewhere.
The Final Dwelling Place for Believers
Given this strong connection between heaven and God’s presence, there is a natural connection in Scripture between heaven and the ultimate hope of believers. Believers are promised a reward in heaven (“Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven” [Matt. 5:12]), and even now believers can “store up for [themselves] treasures in heaven” (6:20). Even in this present life, “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20), and our hope at death is to “depart and be with Christ, which is better by far” (1:23). Since Christ is currently in heaven, deceased believers are already present with Christ in heaven awaiting his return, when “God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him” (1Thess. 4:14).
However, this picture of heaven is more complicated. It is true that heaven is sometimes used in Scripture to refer to the present abode of all departed believers who have left this present life and entered the intermediate state between death and the bodily resurrection (2Cor. 5:4). It is this hope in a bodily resurrection that sets Christianity apart from other religions. Ultimately, the Christian hope is not that people will receive new physical bodies and float around some ethereal “heaven” like astronauts in outer space for all eternity. Instead, God has created human beings with physical bodies to inhabit a physical world, and our future hope is one of new resurrection bodies inhabiting new heavens and a new earth (Isa. 65:17; 66:22; 2Pet. 3:13). Just as there will be a certain continuity between the bodies of believers in this present life and their new resurrection bodies (we will know one another), there will also be a certain continuity between this present earth and the new earth to come. Yet, at the same time, everything will also be changed and made new and perfect, as God has designed it to be (Rom. 8:18–21).
The clearest description of this new reality is found in Rev. 21–22, where John describes how he “saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth,’ for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away” (21:1). Here is “the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband” (21:2), when “God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away” (21:3–4). Even better than all the descriptions of such things as streets of “gold, as pure as transparent glass” (21:21) is that God himself will come and dwell in the midst of his people. As Paul has phrased it, “Now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face” (1Cor. 13:12). The day will come when we will see God as he is, in all his glory (1John3:2).
Two other ideas complete our picture of life in these new heavens and new earth. Heaven will be a place of continued activity and service. Notice Jesus’ blessing in Matt. 25:21: “Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things.” The other principle is that there will be different degrees of reward. Although our ultimate reward is simply being with God himself, Paul also reminds us that if what believers do with their lives “survives, the builder will receive a reward,” and if what they do “is burned up, the builder will suffer loss” (1Cor. 3:14–15 NRSV). Our choices make a difference for time and eternity (cf. Rev. 14:13). See also Heavens, New.
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.
The Bible has much to say about works, and an understandingof the topic is important because works play a role in mostreligions. In the most generic sense, “works” refers tothe products or activities of human moral agents in the context ofreligious discussion. God’s works are frequently mentioned inScripture, and they are always good. His works include creation (Gen.2:2–3; Isa. 40:28; 42:5), sustenance of the earth (Ps. 104;Heb. 1:3), and redemption (Exod. 6:6; Ps. 111:9; Rom. 8:23). Humanworks, therefore, should be in alignment with God’s works,though obviously of a different sort. Works in the Bible usuallyreflect a moral polarity: good or evil, righteous or unrighteous,just or unjust. The context of the passage often determines the moralcharacter of the works (e.g., Isa. 3:10–11; 2Cor. 11:15).
Importantquestions follow from the existence of works and their moral quality.Do good works merit God’s favor or please him? Can good workssave at the time of God’s judgment? When people asked Jesus,“What must we do to do the works God requires?” heanswered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one hehas sent” (John 6:28–29). Without faith it is impossibleto please God (Heb. 11:6). The people from the OT commended in Heb.11 did their works in the precondition of faith. Explicitly in the NTand often implicitly in the OT, faith is the condition for truly goodworks. God elects out of his mercy, not out of human works (Rom.9:12, 16; Titus 3:5; cf. Rom. 11:2). Works not done in faith, even ifconsidered “good” by human standards, are not commendableto God, since all humankind is under sin (Rom. 3:9) and no person isrighteous or does good (Rom. 3:10–18; cf. Isa. 64:6). Workscannot save; salvation is a gift to be received by faith (Eph. 2:8–9;2Tim. 1:9; cf. Rom. 4:2–6). Even works of the Mosaic laware not salvific (Rom. 3:20, 27–28; Gal. 2:16; 3:2; 5:4). Goodworks follow from faith (2Cor. 9:8; Eph. 2:10; 1Thess.1:3; James 2:18, 22; cf. Acts 26:20). The works of those who havefaith will be judged, but this judgment appears to be related torewards, not salvation (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 2Cor. 5:10; cf.Rom. 14:10; 1Cor. 3:13–15).
Showing
1
to
50
of511
results
1. Criticism and the Holy Spirit
Illustration
Oswald Chambers
Oswald Chambers, the great Christian writer, noted, "Someone who is constantly criticized becomes good for nothing; the effect of criticism knocks all the gumption and power out of the person. Criticism is deadly in its effect because it divides one's powers and prevents one from being a force for anything. That is never the work of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit alone is in the true position of a critic: He is able to show what is wrong, without wounding or hurting.
"The counsel of Jesus is to abstain from judging. This sounds strange at first, because the characteristic of the Holy Spirit in a Christian is to reveal the things that are wrong; but the strangeness exists only on the surface.
The Holy Spirit does reveal what is wrong in others, but His discernment is never for the purposes of criticism, but for the purposes of intercession."
2. Sermon Opener - Deal with It, Get over It, Get Help
Illustration
Leonard Sweet
In 1973 a gang of bank robbers held up the Kreditbanken (Credit Bank) in Stockholm, Sweden. The police interrupted their heist, but the bank robbers proceeded to hold a number of bank employees hostage for six long days. When at last they were rescued these kidnap victims, who had been terrorized and abused by their captors, stunned the authorities by demonstrating considerable emotional attachment to their victimizers. Some of the victims even publically defended the very ones who had held them at gun point and threatened their lives.
You know what we call this phenomenon. You may not know that it was a Swedish psychiatrist/criminologist by the name of Nils Bejerot who dubbed this bizarre behavior with its sticky name. But you know the name of the syndrome: it's called . . . the "Stockholm Syndrome." . . . . That's right. You're good. . . .
Since 1973 this strange sympathetic behavior — a hostage showing loyalty and concern for the hostage-taker — has been repeated numerous times since Berejot's observation, and by tens of thousands of unnamed/unknown domestic, spousal, and child abuse victims. The captives get their own identity so wrapped up in that of their captors that no matter how bad their reality, it seems better than facing the fear of an unknown, undefined future.
I want to make the case this morning that one of the dominant sicknesses facing our world today is the "Stockholm Syndrome." There are many of us who are suffering from a kind of cultural "Stockholm Syndrome," blindly defending and claiming as good for ourselves the very things that keep us captive…
Who shall set these people free?
3. What Things Are Perfect Joy
Illustration
St. Francis of Assisi
How St. Francis, Walking One Day with Brother Leo, Explained to Him What Things Are Perfect Joy.
One day in winter, as St. Francis was going with Brother Leo from Perugia to St. Mary of the Angels, and was suffering greatly from the cold, he called to Brother Leo, who was walking on before him, and said to him: "Brother Leo, if it were to please God that the Friars Minor should give, in all lands, a great example of holiness and edification, write down, and note carefully, that this would not be perfect joy."
A little further on, St. Francis called to him a second time: "O Brother Leo, if the Friars Minor were to make the lame to walk, if they should make straight the crooked, chase away demons, give sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, speech to the dumb, and, what is even a far greater work, if they should raise the dead after four days, write that this would not be perfect joy." Shortly after, he cried out again: "O Brother Leo, if the Friars Minor knew all languages; if they were versed in all science; if they could explain all Scripture; if they had the gift of prophecy, and could reveal, not only all future things, but likewise the secrets of all consciences and all souls, write that this would not be perfect joy."
After proceeding a few steps farther, he cried out again with a loud voice: "O Brother Leo, thou little lamb of God! if the Friars Minor could speak with the tongues of angels; if they could explain the course of the stars; if they knew the virtues of all plants; if all the treasures of the earth were revealed to them; if they were acquainted with the various qualities of all birds, of all fish, of all animals, of men, of trees, of stones, of roots, and of waters - write that this would not be perfect joy."
Shortly after, he cried out again: "O Brother Leo, if the Friars Minor had the gift of preaching so as to convert all infidels to the faith of Christ, write that this would not be perfect joy." Now when this manner of discourse had lasted for the space of two miles, Brother Leo wondered much within himself; and, questioning the saint, he said: "Father, I pray thee teach me wherein is perfect joy." St. Francis answered: "If, when we shall arrive at St. Mary of the Angels, all drenched with rain and trembling with cold, all covered with mud and exhausted from hunger; if, when we knock at the convent-gate, the porter should come angrily and ask us who we are; if, after we have told him, ‘We are two of the brethren', he should answer angrily, ‘What ye say is not the truth; ye are but two impostors going about to deceive the world, and take away the alms of the poor; begone I say'; if then he refuse to open to us, and leave us outside, exposed to the snow and rain, suffering from cold and hunger till nightfall - then, if we accept such injustice, such cruelty and such contempt with patience, without being ruffled and without murmuring, believing with humility and charity that the porter really knows us, and that it is God who maketh him to speak thus against us, write down, O Brother Leo, that this is perfect joy. And if we knock again, and the porter come out in anger to drive us away with oaths and blows, as if we were vile impostors, saying, ‘Begone, miserable robbers! to the hospital, for here you shall neither eat nor sleep!' - and if we accept all this with patience, with joy, and with charity, O Brother Leo, write that this indeed is perfect joy.
And if, urged by cold and hunger, we knock again, calling to the porter and entreating him with many tears to open to us and give us shelter, for the love of God, and if he come out more angry than before, exclaiming, ‘These are but importunate rascals, I will deal with them as they deserve'; and taking a knotted stick, he seize us by the hood, throwing us on the ground, rolling us in the snow, and shall beat and wound us with the knots in the stick - if we bear all these injuries with patience and joy, thinking of the sufferings of our Blessed Lord, which we would share out of love for him, write, O Brother Leo, that here, finally, is perfect joy. And now, brother, listen to the conclusion. Above all the graces and all the gifts of the Holy Spirit which Christ grants to his friends, is the grace of overcoming oneself, and accepting willingly, out of love for Christ, all suffering, injury, discomfort and contempt; for in all other gifts of God we cannot glory, seeing they proceed not from ourselves but from God, according to the words of the Apostle, ‘What hast thou that thou hast not received from God? and if thou hast received it, why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received it?' But in the cross of tribulation and affliction we may glory, because, as the Apostle says again, ‘I will not glory save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.' Amen."
4. God's Glory
Illustration
Michael P. Green
God’s “glory” is how we describe the sum effect of all of his attributes:Grace, truth, goodness, mercy, justice, knowledge, power, eternality—all that he is. Therefore, the glory of God is intrinsic, that is, it is as essential to God as light is to the sun, as blue is to the sky, as wet is to water. You don’t make the sun light; it is light. You don’t make water wet; it is wet. In all of these cases, the attribute is intrinsic to the object.
In contrast, man’s glory is granted to him. If you take a king and take off all his robes and crowns and give him only a rag to wear and leave him on the streets for a few weeks, when put next to a beggar you’ll never know which is which. Because there is no intrinsic glory. The only glory a king has is when you give him a crown and a robe and sit him on his throne. He has no intrinsic glory.
That’s the point. The only glory that men have is granted to them. The glory that is God’s is his in his essence. You can’t de-glory God because glory is his nature. You can’t touch his glory. It cannot be taken away. It cannot be added to. It’s his being.
5. We Can't Contain God In Our Cups!
Illustration
Zan W. Holmes
One morning a little girl sat at a kitchen table to eat breakfast with her mother and father. As she listened to the prayer her father prayed before the meal, she was especially intrigued that he thanked God for God's presence everywhere.
After the father finished his prayer the little girl asked him, "Father, is it really true that God is everywhere?"
"Yes," said her father.
"Is God in this house?" she asked.
"Yes," her father said.
"Is God in this kitchen?"
"Yes," her father said.
"Is God on this table?" she asked.
"Yes," her father said.
The little girl hesitated and then asked, "Is God in this cup?"
Her father said, "Yes."
Upon hearing this the little girl quickly covered the cup with her hand and exclaimed, "I've got Him!"
In Job's attempt to make some sense out of his suffering, he tried desperately to figure God out by confining God to his own narrow conception of God. In other words, Job was trying to get God to respond within the limited confines of Job's own theological cup. In fact, Job was so certain of his theology that he believed he would prevail if his case were presented before God. To be sure, this is why he wanted to find God. He said, "Would he contend with me in the greatness of his power? No; but he would give heed to me. There an upright person could reason with him, and I should be acquitted forever by my judge" (Job 23:6-7).
Finally in chapter 38 God appears before Job as a voice out of the whirlwind: Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up your loins like a man, I will question you, and you shall declare to me. Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements -- surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone when the morning stars sang together and all the heavenly beings shouted for joy? -- Job 38:2-7
As soon as God speaks, Job realizes that he can never have the luxury of saying: "I've got God!" Indeed Job now knows that God has exceeded Job's expectations and refuses to be contained and fit neatly into any theological box that Job has constructed. So God answers Job, but not according to Job's definition of the problem of suffering. Instead God transposes the issue to another level which emphasizes God's power and divine knowledge in contrast to the human weakness and ignorance of Job.[1] In response, Job now realizes how foolish he has been to propose that he understood everything that happens. In fact, Job answers God and says, "See, I am of small account; what shall I answer you? I lay my hand on my mouth. I have spoken once, and I will not answer; twice, but will proceed no further" (Job 40:4-5).
No longer does Job seek to arrange a debate where he can instruct God. He finally realizes that it is he and not God who is unaware of life's complete picture. When we too are tempted to believe that God is bound by our theologies, rituals, denominations, and traditions, like Job, we are called to remember that God is boundless and cannot be contained in any of our cups. We cannot put God in the cup of any ritual and say, "I've got God covered." We cannot put God in the cup of any theology and say, "I've got God covered." We cannot put God in the cup of any church tradition and say, "I've got God covered." We cannot put God in any ethnic or gender cup and say, "I've got God covered."
Job learned that God stands above all human systems and wisdom. The purpose behind it all is not to answer directly the problem of suffering, but to give Job a vision of God's glory and presence with Job in the midst of Job's suffering. Thus Job discovers that he can trust God's purposes even though he cannot clearly understand them. Indeed, he comes to see that his new relationship with God will sustain him in the midst of his suffering.
Our African American forefathers and foremothers in the midst of the suffering of slavery could identify with Job's predicament. Even in the face of sorrow and suffering in the absurdity of slavery they were able to sing praises to God through the spirituals. Even though their relationship with God did not bring an immediate end to their oppressive condition, they were sustained by the faith that the cup of slavery could not contain the God of their hope and liberation. By the grace of God, it was a faith that enabled them to sing: Nobody knows the trouble I see, Nobody knows but Jesus. Nobody knows the trouble I see, Glory, Hallelujah.
1. Beverly B. Gaventa, editor, Texts for Preaching, (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993), p. 551. "
6. WHEN WINNING MEANS LOSING
Illustration
John H. Krahn
For the Christian, life is idyllic. As you embrace Christ, your problems become opportunities, heartaches turn into joys, and bad times fade into the past. Your career succeeds as it never has. Your relationship with those around you is enhanced. Unkind words once directed toward you no longer make their way to your ears. Temptation runs against you, then retreats in dismay. Money is no longer a problem, for you’ll have more than enough. Lovely flowers moving in the fresh breeze send their fragrance your way as the warming rays of the sun fill your body with the feeling of health and beautiful harmony with God and nature. You are God’s special person. He spares you from pain, problems, and poverty.
Hogwash, unmitigated hogwash - more like heresy. If Christianity is as I have just described it, then all of us must be wondering whether we really are Christians. Although our walk with Jesus brings us many blessings that will enhance our lives, the Evil One does not roll over and play dead when we follow Christ but continues to dog us as we make our way through life. Following Jesus Christ also brings with it a degree of suffering as our selfishness is lost to service and discipleship. And as we struggle to be what we are, children of God through Baptism, it is often hard and painful. Christ suffered, his followers suffered, we too will have the privilege of suffering.
Those of us who try to live a moral life in society that is so permissive know the suffering that sometimes accompanies our uniqueness. Often, others look at us in disbelief when we stand for something because it’s right rather than because it’s expedient. To them we appear as losers. But for us to do less is to march to a different drum beat than the one Jesus sounds. Jesus puts it this way, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me." To lead a winning Christian life, we lose our selfishness and replace it with selflessness.
Our march through life does not end at the grave but moves beyond. Our vision is both present and future, in this world and the next. Courageously we meet the world, proclaiming the glory of the Lord in word and deed and find strength through him to overcome whatever conflicts our faith might encounter. Leaning on him we seek his Spirit’s power to help us deny ourselves, to bear his cross, and to even suffer for the Gospel’s sake. With Christ we desire that everyone might become his children through faith and join him and us at the Father’s house in eternity.
When we arrive, God will look us over - not for medals, or awards, or degrees, but for scars. Finding them, he will declare, "Ah, a wise person who understood that winning meant losing."
7. NEEDED: A GOOD WORD!
Illustration
John H. Krahn
On November 18, 1861, the Lord began to speak a beautiful word of hope to a fractured American society as a woman by the name of Julia Ward Howe slept fitfully while troops marched in the streets below. As she lay waiting for the dawn, the lines of a beautiful poem began to fashion themselves in her thoughts. The memory of some of the greatest lines in the Old Testament came to her mind, mingled with the faces of soldiers seated around campfires and battle trumpets recently heard. The cost of the Civil War had not been counted; the horror of the war had not been foreseen. It had been entered upon in excitement, almost a pleasurable fervor. And now the pleasurable fervor had given way to determination and the solemn acceptance of sacrifice.
She got out of bed and began to write, "Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord" ... and minutes later a beautiful gospel message flowed from the pen, "In the beauty of the lilies, Christ was born across the sea. With a glory in his bosom that transfigures you and me; as he died to make men holy let us live to make men free, While God is marching on."
It was over a year before her poem was discovered and set to a familiar tune that the soldiers knew. Very quickly it was being sung in many Army regiments. On one occasion a Chaplain McCabe sang it at a mass meeting in Washington. The audience joined in on the chorus. "Glory! glory, hallelujah! Glory! glory, hallelujah! Glory! glory, hallelujah! His truth is marching on." The effect was magical as people wept and sang together ... and above the applause was heard the voice of Abraham Lincoln, exclaiming, while the tears unashamedly rolled down his cheeks, "Sing it again."
Julia Ward Howe was a beautiful Christian lady who permitted God to use her to present his gospel of hope to her troubled world.
Today God has a good word for our nation’s problems. Permit him to speak it through you.
8. He Set His Face
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
He had just finished feeding the 5,000 men plus women and children when he asked them the question (Luke 9:10-17). In this context of feeding people (cf. Luke 24:28-35) Jesus asked his disciples, "Who do the crowds say that I am?" (Luke 9:18). We stand here at a turning point in Luke's story of Jesus. In earlier stories of Jesus' baptism, genealogy, temptation and a sabbath in his hometown synagogue Luke has given us all kinds of clues as to the identity of Jesus. After that there comes action. Jesus healed people. He forgave sinners. He called disciples. He challenged sabbath laws and so on. It's time now to return to the question of identity. Do even the disciples understand who this man is? Does anyone really understand?
The disciples answered Jesus question by stating the opinions of some in the crowds. Jesus' then zeroes in on the disciples themselves. "But who do you say that I am?" (Luke 9:20). "The Messiah of God," Peter answered.
And then Jesus did a surprising thing. He acknowledged that Peter had the right answer to his question. But he told the disciples not to tell anyone the truth of his identity. The coming of the Messiah would move Israel from one degree of glory to another. But Jesus was not to be this Messiah of glory. Jesus was to be a Messiah on a cross. Jesus tells it straight in a new revelation of his identity. "The Son of Man must undergo great suffering, and be rejected by the elders, chief priests, and scribes, and be killed and on the third day be raised" (Luke 9:22).
The disciples must have been stunned. They had glory on their minds, too. But, no, the way of this Messiah was to be a way of suffering for him and for the disciples. "If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me" (Luke 9:23). The disciples never could get this through their heads. In the story of the transfiguration which Luke tells next we hear Jesus discussing the departure he would accomplish in Jerusalem. Jesus, that is, was discussing with Moses and Elijah his way to Jerusalem, his way to the cross. And the disciples? They wanted to build booths and live on this mountain of glory and transfiguration forever. They did not know what they were saying, Luke tells us.
This hardness of heart of the disciples appears again when they all come down from the Mount of Transfiguration. A man comes to Jesus in order that Jesus might heal his son who is possessed by a demon. "I begged your disciples to cast it out, but they could not," the father says to Jesus. Jesus proceeds to wonder aloud about the faithless disciples. He tells them again, therefore, of his mission. "Let these words sink into your ears," he tells them, "The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into human hands." Sadly Luke tells us of the disciples that, "... they did not understand this saying; its meaning was concealed from them, so they could not perceive it" (Luke 9:44-45). The disciples prove the truth of this statement by turning to a discussion among themselves about which one of them was the greatest. They're still thinking of glory!
Jesus has revealed that he must go to Jerusalem to suffer, to die and to be raised again. The disciples don't get it at all. With his heart heavy with the suffering that lay ahead, therefore, and with his mind puzzled by disciples who failed to understand, Jesus set his face to go to Jerusalem.
9. God's Children
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
A Sunday school superintendent had two new boys in her Sunday school. In order to register them she had to ask their ages and birthdays. The bolder of the two said, "We're both seven. My birthday is April 8, 1976, and my brother’s is April 20, 1976." "But that's impossible!" answered the superintendent. "No, it's not," answered the quieter brother. "One of us is adopted." "Which one?" asked the superintendent before she could curb her tongue. The boys looked at each other and smiled, and the bolder one said to the superintendent, "We asked Dad awhile ago, but he just said he loved us both, and he couldn't remember any more which one was adopted."
In Romans 8:17, Paul writes: "Now if we are [God's] children, then we are heirs—heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ . .." (NIV) Paul's comparison is to adoption. By our faith in Christ we become his adopted brothers and sisters—adopted sons and daughters of God. As fully adopted and accepted children, we share the same inheritance as the begotten Son, Jesus. No wonder all creation waits eagerly for the full revealing and adoption to happen!
10. God’s Plan for Renewal
Illustration
George Bass
For Jesus, God had a plan for the recovery and renewal of all people on earth, and his mission was - he believed and staked his life on this - to initiate that plan to bring in the fullness of the kingdom of God.
If Alvin Toffler, author of The Third Wave, is right, we need that kind of hope more than ever. In the face of chaos all over the world, Toffler insists that we are going through something more drastic than temporary hardship. He believes that we are suffering the "birth pains of a new civilization." Arthur Coxe's verse sounds so contemporary:
We are living, we are dwelling, in a grand and awful time,
In an age on ages telling to be living is sublime.
Hark! the waking up of nations; God and Magog to the fray.
Hark! what soundeth? ‘Tis creation groaning for its latter day.
Hope in God helps us to make sense out of the senseless turn of events in our time, in all time, because hope enables us to endure and to press on in the face of present and impending tragedies, doesn't it? When life confuses us and confounds us, when it seems to make no sense at all, the God who started it all and created all living things, lets us get a glimpse of his glory and power and hope is born in us again.
11. No Waste of Saints
Illustration
Oswald Chambers
To choose to suffer means that there is something wrong; to choose God's will even if it means suffering is a very different thing. No healthy saint ever chooses suffering; he chooses God's will, as Jesus did, whether it means suffering or not. Be merciful to God's reputation. It is easy to blacken God's character because God never answers back, He never vindicates Himself. Beware of the thought that Jesus needed sympathy in His earthly life; He refused sympathy from others because He knew far too wisely that no one on earth understood what He was going through. Notice God's 'waste' of saints, according to the judgment of the world. God plants His saints in some of the most useless places. We say, 'God intends me to be here because I am so useful.' Jesus never estimated His life along the line of the greatest use. God puts His saints where they will glorify Him most, and we are no judges at all of where that is.
12. God's Kind of Happiness, Today
Illustration
The Best Gift
George Matheson was a great preacher and hymn writer who lost his sight at an early age. He thought of that infirmity as his thorn in the flesh, as his personal cross. For several years, he prayed that his blindness would be removed. Like most of us, I suppose, he believed that personal happiness would come to him only after the handicap was gone. But then, one day God sent him a new insight: The creative use of his handicap could actually become his personal means of achieving happiness!
So, Matheson went on to write: "My God, I have never thanked Thee for my thorn. I have thanked Thee for my roses, but not once for my thorn. I have been looking forward to a world where I shall get compensation for my cross, but I have never thought of the cross itself as a present glory. Teach me the glory of my cross. Teach me the value of my thorn. Show me that I have climbed to Thee by the path of pain. Show me that my tears have made my rainbow."
Congratulations, George Matheson! Congratulations on finding God's kind of happiness -- the kind of happiness that is not only a future hope, but also a very present reality. So may it be for us all.
The point I want to make here is this: God's kind of happiness, as defined in the Beatitudes of our Lord, represents a radical reversal of almost everything we have ever been taught about the meaning of happiness! Look at the Beatitudes again and contrast them with what we have been taught. "Happy are those who know they are spiritually poor." We have always been taught to define happiness in terms of wealth. "Happy are those who mourn." We have been taught that happiness means never experiencing anything that causes us grief. "Happy are those who are humble." We have been taught that happiness is defined in terms of aggression and the competitive spirit. "Happy are those whose greatest desire is to do what God requires." We have been taught that happiness lies in the desire to conform to the values of our own society.
"Happy are those who are merciful to others." We have been taught that the quality of mercy is a sign of weakness. "Happy are the pure in heart." Tell that one to the guys and gals at work! "Happy are those who work for peace." We have been taught that happiness is defined in terms of preparedness for war. "Happy are those who are persecuted because they do what God requires." We have tended to call such people fools or fanatics! "Happy are you when people insult you...and tell all kinds of evil lies against you because you are my followers." We tend to say, "Don't get mad, get even!" We say it again: God's kind of happiness reverses almost everything we have been taught about happiness. But if one of us has to be wrong -- either us or God -- you can be sure that it isn't God.
13. REMEMBER YOUR BAPTISM
Illustration
John H. Krahn
On January 26, 1905, in Pretoria, South Africa, Captain M. F. Wells found a diamond weighing one and one-quarter pounds. Two years later, the diamond was purchased and presented to King Edward VII of the United Kingdom. In 1908, a diamond cutter from Amsterdam cut from that diamond the Star of Africa, the largest cut diamond in the world, containing seventy-four facets with a weight of 530 carats. Today, the diamond is still set in the British Royal Scepter. Can you imagine the value of such a jewel?
Then there is the Hope Diamond: the largest blue diamond in the world. It weighs in at 44.4 carats. Found in India during the seventeenth century, it has been displayed, since 1958, at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, D.C. At that time it was worth between $700,000 and $1,500,000.
But diamonds are not the most precious of gems. Since 1955 rubies have been the world’s most precious gem, attaining a price of up to $30,000 per carat. Can you imagine what the Burmese Ruby, weighing 1,184 carats, would be worth? To have in our possession one of these jewels would be to have one of the most beautiful and most valued jewels in the world. Imagine how it would feel wearing the Hope Diamond set into a ring. Well, most of us already possess a jewel of even greater value.
In his Large Catechism, Martin Luther makes this concluding statement about Holy Baptism: "No greater jewel can adorn our body or soul than Baptism: For through it, perfect holiness and salvation become accessible to us, which are otherwise beyond the reach of man’s life and energy." I am sure if any of us owned one of the great gems of the world, we would not easily forget about it. Rather we would feel good about it, share its beauty by wearing it, be careful to protect it, and treasure it. Yet our beautiful adornment of Baptism is often forgotten. Weeks go by without us even considering our jewel of Baptism.
Saint Paul reminds us in Romans that through Baptism we were buried with Christ in his death. Baptism joins us to Christ and through it we receive the forgiveness that his death affords. Paul says, "We were buried therefore with him by Baptism into death,... so that as Christ has been raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life."
All of us from time to time have felt that we needed a change; some have even dreamed of a new life, a new beginning. New life, our new beginning, not only happens on the day we are baptized but can extend to every day. As we daily remember our Baptism, we welcome the benefits of Baptism. Benefits that come from a powerful God who offers help and peace to children who call upon his name. Benefits of renewed joy snatched from sorrow, renewed strength formed out of weakness and the ability to forgive someone you would naturally want to hate.
Because we believe and are baptized, we also remember that our eternal future is certain - however uncertain our earthly life might be. We are family. And when we die, we know that God the Father has already made provisions for a great reunion party in heaven. A new life in heaven is ours as we join the forever family of God.
14. !!!
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!
15. Living without Hope
Illustration
Tom Marcum
There was a fascinating conversation on Rush Limbaugh’s talk show a while back. Having just completed Tom Brokaw’s wonderful book The Greatest Generation, a book filled with inspiring stories of the WWII generation, Rush had taken the position that the current generation of young adults, those in their 20’s, are, for the most part, a bunch of whiners. He said that while they are constantly whining and moaning about the difficulty of their lives in fact, when compared to the hardships faced by their grandparents’ generation, they’ve actually got it easy. Their grandparents had endured truly devastating events like The Great Depression and WWII. The current crop of young adults, he concluded, doesn’t even have a clue about real hardship.
Once Rush had finished his monologue a self-professed member of this younger generation of adults called in to offer a different perspective. Bright and extremely articulate, the 23 year-old caller said that, while The Great Depression and WWII certainly created terrible hardships for the people who faced them that he, nonetheless, believed his generation faced an even greater hardship.
Limbaugh asked, “And what exactly would that be?”
The caller said, “The loss of hope.” He said that his experience indicated that many of today’s young adults had simply stopped believing that things were going to get better. They didn’t expect to live as well as their parents had lived. They weren’t expecting a brighter future. They have simply given up hope.
He said, The Great Depression, as terrible as it was, in many cases brought families together as they worked side by side in the hope of saving their families. Most of his friends, he said, grew up in families in complete disarray and have given up the hope of ever having a real family experience of their own.
He said, WWII was a terrible event that obviously cost thousands of Americas’ young men their lives. Then he said, and even though they knew the risks they still enlisted voluntarily by the millions because they saw it as a cause worth dying for. Most of those in his generation, he said, can’t imagine anything worth dying for and they’re committing suicide in record numbers because many can’t imagine anything worth living for.
He said, and I paraphrase, “Mr. Limbaugh, The Great Depression and WWII created terrible hardships. But I submit to you that the greatest hardship of all is living without hope.” I agree. It's harder to develop character in affluence than it is hardship. All the more reason why young people need to see what Simeon saw:
My eyes have seen your salvation,
Which you have prepared in the sight of all people,
A light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to your people Israel.
16. Every Day to Read the Scriptures and Pray
Illustration
Larry R. Kalajainen
Martin Luther, the great reformer of the church back in the 16th century, made the comment one morning when he got out of bed that his work load that day was so heavy, that he knew he would never get it all done unless he spent three hours in prayer first. Many of us find it difficult to set aside 15 minutes a day for prayer, let alone three hours, but then, not many of us are having the impact on the world that Martin Luther did either. It was in his prayer that all his energies were collected, and his action became focused and effective.
What was true of Luther has been true of all those who have been effective and faithful servants of Christ. Who can imagine the incredible success of the early Methodist movement without the disciplined prayer life of John Wesley and the early Methodist class meetings where people gathered to pray, to worship, to encourage and exhort one another in love? Wesley once wrote to a young preacher who was suffering from burn-out, "O begin! Fix some time every day to read the scriptures and to pray. It is for your life. Without this all else would be trifling and idleness." The list could go on and on. All who have been faithful witnesses and seemingly tireless in doing what is right have been sustained and inspired by their hope in God's new creation, and for all of them, that vision has been kept alive by a regular and disciplined habit of prayer.
17. He Has Given Us the Glory
Illustration
Scott Hoezee
The church and the gospel it proclaims are never some local phenomenon. Despite our denominational fractures and the lack of formal unity we may have across the face of the Church today, the fact is that in every hamlet where a tiny congregation gathers in the name of the risen Christ, in every soaring cathedral where hundreds gather, in every megachurch that packs in people by the thousands, and in every house church in nations where official church gatherings are banned—in and through and across it all something quite amazing is happening: the revelation of a mystery of divine love that dates back to well before the creation of the world and that will continue on and on into a future in which at some point this same God is going to say "Behold, I make all things new."
Let's let no one convince us that the church is mostly about bake sales and vacation Bible schools and senior citizen bus trips and silly committee meetings. "I have given them the glory you gave me" Jesus prayed. THAT is a message worth savoring again and again and even forevermore.
18. The Glory And The Pain
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
His given name was Leslie Leonard but everyone just called him "Pete." Pete was the son of very devout parents. They saw to it that the seeds of faith were planted in him. They were there to nourish the seeds along. Once he got out on his own in life, however, it appeared that the seeds of faith had not taken very deep root in Pete's soul. He sowed wild oats instead. He appeared to have left behind him the faith of his parents.
Early on life went well for Pete. He married, had a son, was involved with a number of businesses. He had some successes in his life. What was most successful about him was his personality. Pete was a charmer. He had a ready smile for all whom he encountered. People who were swept into his life's orbit couldn't help but like him. He was just that kind of guy.
As the years passed by things were not easy for Pete. His marriage failed him. His only son failed him as well. And then the greatest tragedy of all occurred. His health failed him. In his early 40s he was stricken with multiple sclerosis. He was totally blind and paralyzed from the neck down. Eventually he got back the use of his upper body though his eyes and his legs never recovered. After some years one of his legs had to be amputated. Suffering covered Pete's life like a blanket.
Blind and crippled Pete had every earthly reason to be bitter over his state in life. He had every earthly reason to complain. He had every earthly reason to hate life and God. But he didn't. Miraculously, as his suffering increased, his faith increased as well. He hinted at times that there in his hospital bed, in the first days of his MS, God had been revealed to him in a special way. Whatever the reason, Pete was a new man. The faith planted by his parents blossomed at last!
People often went to visit Pete. After a visit to him a man said of his experience, "I went to cheer him up and it was he who cheered me up. It's always like that with him."
His pastor spoke similar words about Pete. "I don't go to call on Pete in order to minister to him," they would often say. "I go to call on Pete when I need someone to talk to; when I need someone to minister to me. I take my problems to him. In his blindness he sees more than just about anyone I know."
As long as he was able, Pete was in church every Sunday. There was a space reserved for him in the last row where his wheelchair would easily fit. Through the cajoling of his pastors Pete also served many terms on the church council. He was one of the leaders of his congregation. His common sense and his faith tested-by-fire helped him to pierce to the core of many of the issues that faced the congregation. He was blind but he could see things that most people could never see. He was immobile of body but mobile of mind and thought.
When Pete died the whole congregation mourned. On a bitter winter day the church was full for his funeral. The pastor put into words that day what most of them had thought. "We saw in him the glory of God," the pastor said, "the glory of God shining through the depths of human suffering. Thanks be to God."
19. Suffering and Repentance
Illustration
John Bergland
Trevor Beeson stood at the high altar of Westminster Abbey to celebrate the marriage of his daughter, Catharine, to Anthony, aged twenty-three. Nine months later he stood before the same altar for Anthony's funeral, who was killed when his car ran into a wall in East London. Four months later, Trevor returned to the altar beside the coffin of his friend and hero Earl Mountbatten, who died when his fishing boat was blown to pieces by Irish terrorist. Reflecting on the experience, he said he could not blame God for these senseless tragedies. He wrote:
I should find it impossible to believe in, and worship, a God who arranged for the great servants of the community to be blown up on their holidays and who deliberately turned a young man's car into a brick wall. . .. This is not the God of love whose ways are revealed in the Bible and supremely in the life of Jesus Christ.
Beeson found two insights that helped him to cope with his tragedy and to look beyond it: "The first is that, although God is not responsible for causing tragedy, he is not a detached observer of our suffering. On the contrary, he is immersed in it with us, sharing to the full our particular grief and pain. This is the fundamental significance of the cross."
Second, although we naturally ask, "Why did it happen?" Beeson discovered that the more important question is "What are we going to make of it?"; "Every tragedy contains within it the seeds of resurrection." This is, after all, the whole point of our pilgrimage through Lent, to Good Friday, and Easter morning.
Are those who experience innocent suffering worse than anyone else? Of course not. It can happen to any of us. But is there a connection between innocent suffering and human action? Of course there is, and unless we change our way of living, we may all experience the same suffering. What does Jesus offer us when we experience this kind of suffering? The power of God to hold us firm, to give us strength, and to see us through.
20. Screwtape and Wormwood
Illustration
Carla Thompson Powell
C.S. Lewis, great author and interpreter of the Christian faith, wrote a fictional series of correspondence between two devils entitled The Screwtape Letters. Screwtape is an older, more experienced devil who writes to the younger, naive Wormwood. Wormwood's job is to thwart the faith of a new Christian, to turn a particular Christian believer away from his faith in God. To accomplish his mission, Wormwood tries to make the young Christian realize the absurdity of his new faith. The devil's apprentice works hard to woo his "patient" away from the Christian camp, pointing out illogical teachings and hypocrisy in the church.
Screwtape and Wormwood speak of some of the absurdities of the Christian faith, as a way to draw the believer away from his belief. Screwtape points out that the followers of Jesus "have all been plainly told by Him that suffering is an essential part of what he calls redemption". Screwtape and Wormwood see Jesus' experience and call to suffering as an Achilles' heel in even the most solid faith of a believer. In the Screwtape Letters, Jesus' suffering is one of those absurdities of faith that the devils try to exploit in their attempts to draw people away from Christ. And these two fictional devils aren't the only ones who see a suffering God as confusing and scandalous.
21. Funny Things Are Everywhere
Illustration
Charles Hoffacker
There's an interesting quote - from an unexpected source - that applies to this First Day of Advent, from a book you may have read to your children or grandchildren, or that you may remember from your own childhood. The book is by Dr. Seuss, and is entitled ‘One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish.' The quote to consider today is brief:
From there to here,
from here to there,
funny things
are everywhere.
Funny things are everywhere! And there are two things funny about this First Sunday of Advent, the start of a new church year. The first of them is that, here at the start of a new year, we don't look back to the beginning, but we look forward to the end. Here on the first day of the new church year, we do not focus on the past, but we anticipate the future where Christ promises to meet us.
The second funny thing about today is related to the first. When we look forward to the end, when we anticipate the future, we do not treat this conclusion as some distant, far-off event. It is near at hand. It may be as close as the next second. So imminent is it, in fact, that the future comes and takes up residence in the present. The Christ who will arrive with power and great glory at the end of time comes to us also before the end of time.
22. John Had an Outlook
Illustration
Leonard Mann
In the story of Adam Bede, George Eliot describes a certain conceited person as being "like the co*ck who thought the sun had risen to hear him crow." I've known, as you probably have, a few persons along the way who were just about as vain as this. Remember that line by Tennyson: "One far-off divine event to which the whole creation moves?" I knew one fellow once who apparently believed himself to be that divine event. He seemed to have the idea that all of time and circ*mstance, up to then, had conspired to accomplish only one purpose, and that was just to get him into the world. He saw himself as creation's ultimate achievement, the apex toward which all else had forever been aimed, and beyond which nothing of any notable quality would ever appear again. There isn't much future in that.
This man John was a different type; beyond himself he saw something else, something better, something to be cherished and looked forward to. "He who is coming after me is mightier than I," says he. It is he, not I, who will do the wonderful things the world needs to have done, he says. "His winnowing fork is in his hand," and he will put everything where it belongs; he will set things right. John had a hope, an expectation. He had an outlook. In other words, he could see out. And the view was forward. He could see beyond himself, and beyond his day; and what he saw was good.
23. There's No Ned Here
Illustration
Two drunks were in a railroad station at midnight, discussing the difference between irritation, aggravation, and frustration. They couldn't agree. One finally said, "I'll show you the difference." He went to the phone booth, circled a number in the book and called it. After ringing and ringing, it was finally answered. "Is Ned there?" "NO! There's no Ned here," and the phone was slammed down. "That's irritation," he said to his friend. After another 20 minutes he called again. The phone rang and rang. Finally someone answered and the drunk asked, "Is Ned there?" The answer came back, "There is no Ned here! I told you before!" SLAM. "That's aggravation," he said to his partner. Another 20 minutes went by, and the drunk said, "Now I'll show you frustration," and he made another call. Finally the phone was answered, "I told you before, there's no Ned here!!!" "But this is Ned--any messages for me?"
24. BE EASTER PEOPLE
Illustration
John H. Krahn
After the tomb was found empty and Jesus appeared to the early church on many occasions, doubt disappeared, and the early church had overwhelming confidence in the Lord. The church today must live and be about its ministry with the same Easter confidence. We say we rely on God’s mercy for our salvation; we need to give over all areas of our lives to God’s control. What aspects of ourselves are outside God’s control? Our temper? Our money? Our time? We need join the psalmist and say, "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me." Our trust in the Lord must be complete. We are no longer defeated people but powerful Easter people. Little children in danger or in despair literally run and throw themselves into the arms of their mother. This is confident faith. When was the last time we ran and thrust ourselves onto the Lord? A cautious step in his direction is better than none at all, but believing with abandonment is called forth by an empty tomb. God wants us to fall head over heels in love with him so he can bring the greatest joy and purpose possible into our lives.
God also encourages us to hold fast to hope without wavering. Scripture says, "Where there is no hope, the people perish." Too many of us view too much of our lives and the world as hopeless. Without hope, no great strides will be made in the future; there is no venturesome faith without hope. Without hope we burrow into the ground and live the life of a mole instead of walking freely in God’s sunlight. In a difficult situation, a hopeful people find the challenge and opportunity to do something great with God.
Confident in our faith, with an unwavering hope, the Lord also encourages us to stir up one another to love and good works. We must do something. Faith and hope must move from the abstract to the particular.
Easter people are called upon to celebrate the Festival of the Resurrection each Sunday, for each Sunday is a little Easter. "... Not neglecting to meet together," is how it is written in Hebrews. To break fellowship with the worshiping community is to pursue a weakening faith. It is also a form of denial of all that Christ means. True faith, strong faith, is never faith in isolation but must always be faith shared and strengthened through regular worship. We must encourage one another to be regular in worship and strong in the faith.
The end is drawing near. The Lord will return soon to reclaim his fallen creation. When the Lord of the church comes again, how will he find us? Will we be acting like people who have been touched by the meaning of the cross and the empty tomb? Therefore, let us continue to draw near to the Lord with a true heart and a confident faith. We hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering. We consider how to stir up one another to love and good works. We do not neglect to worship but encourage one another. In sum, we will all be Easter people.
25. Is Vodka Allowed?
Illustration
There is a legend which states that in the late middle ages, the Russian Czar had come to the conclusion that in order to unite his country, there would have to be one state religion to which everyone should belong. He considered carefully all of his options. Finally, he settled on a short list of three, Islam, Buddhism or Christianity. He called representatives from each of the three religions to his court in Russia, and asked them each to state the case for their religion before himself and his advisors.
The Muslim representative spoke first. He spoke of the humaneness of Islam, of its tolerance for others, its respect for science and culture, and how it came with a complete legal system that had been refined and perfected through the centuries. When he had finished his pitch, he asked the Czar if there were anything else he would like to know. "One thing," the Czar told him, "Does Allah look favorably upon Vodka?"
The Muslim emissary shook his head and told him no, that alcohol was an abomination to Allah, and was not permitted.
"Next!" cried the Czar, and the Buddhist missionary was ushered in. The Buddhist monk explained the basic teachings of the Buddha, how all of life was suffering and how the Buddha showed the way to end suffering. Finally the King was getting bored and said, "I'll tell you how I stop suffering. Vodka! What does your Buddha have to say about that?"
The Buddhist monk told him that intoxicants were a hindrance to enlightenment, and were not permitted in Buddhism.
"Next!" cried the Czar, and a Christian Orthodox monk was ushered in. But before he could even begin teaching his elementary catechism, the Czar stopped him short. "Just tell me one thing, does your Jesus allow vodka?"
"Are you kidding?" the monk said, "We will give you wine and bread at every service of worship."
"Now I know what I am!" proclaimed the Czar, "I am a Christian! Baptize me, and all of my people." We can imagine that he also ordered them to break out the vodka in celebration.
Now, many people use this story of Jesus turning the water into wine as a way of showing that Jesus didn't have anything against alcohol. While this is true it's the wrong emphases to place on the story. Look at verse 11. The miracle was a sign to reveal Christ's glory. It was a way to help his disciples understand who he was that they might put their faith in him.
26. Exchanging Our Eschatological Heritage
Illustration
William G. Carter
Neill Hamilton, who taught at Drew University for many years, once observed how people in our time lose hope for the future. It happens whenever we let our culture call the shots on how the world is going to end. At this stage of technological advancement, the only way the culture can make sense of the future is through the picture of everything blowing up in a nuclear holocaust.
The world cannot know what we know, that everything has changed in the death and resurrection of Jesus, that the same Christ is coming to judge the world and give birth to a new creation. And so, people lose hope. As Hamilton puts it: This substitution of an image of nuclear holocaust for the coming of Christ is a parable of what happens to Christians when they cease to believe in their own eschatological heritage. The culture supplies its own images for the end when we default by ceasing to believe in biblical images of God's triumph at the end.
The good news of the gospel is this: when all is said and done, God is going to win.
27. Rejoicing in Suffering
Illustration
Michael P. Green
It is clear from Scripture that “rejoicing in suffering” is not simply stoicism. It is not simply a
- grin-and-bear-it attitude of tough-it-out-and-see-how-much-you-can-take,
- or just-hang-in-there-until-it’s-over-and-don’t-let-anything-get-you-down,
- or keep-a-stiff-upper-lip.
Many people feel that if they do this, they are obeying God and “rejoicing in suffering.” But they are not. If your suffering does not in some way open youup to a deeper meaning of life then suffering willonly teach you bitterness.
28. The Glory Beyond
Illustration
On their journey from Egypt to the Promised Land, the people of Israel come to a wilderness. It was barren and forbidding there. But the Scripture says, "They looked beyond the wilderness and beheld the glory of God."
It is always good to look beyond whatever wilderness we may be in, and to see the glory that is there. In many ways in our time we live in a wilderness kind of world; there are many problems, there is a lot of trouble, there is much complexity and confusion, and a great deal of the news is bad.
Occasionally we need to lift our gaze and look beyond all this. And this is what we do on Sunday morning when we worship God: we look beyond to see the glory.
The central element of the Christian Faith is the Christian gospel - and the word "gospel" means "good news." Beyond all the bad news that's in the daily press is the good news of Christ, our deliverance and our hope. There may be a lot of gloom in the world around us, but think of it: there isn't a single pessimistic idea in the whole New Testament! Today, may we all together see the glory of this, the wonder of what lies beyond.
29. Pastoral Prayer for First Sunday of Lent
Illustration
Joel D. Kline
Gracious God, how blessed we are to live and serve as a community of Your people. Gifted with the beauty of creation surrounding us, lead us into significant relationships that nurture and challenge us, as we experience the promise of life, and are grateful.
Lead us now, O God, as we seek, in this season of Lent, to journey with our eyes fixed on Jesus.
Lead us in righteousness, that our journey might be a journey in which we embrace Christ's ways of compassion and justice, grace and mercy, hope and right living.
Lead us, God, in peace, as we seek to keep our eyes fixed on Jesus.
Fill us with a peace that passes all human understanding, a peace the world cannot give to us, neither can it take away.
But, holy God, let us never be satisfied with personal peace alone. Lead us into paths of peacemaking and reconciliation. And God, we pray that You might soften the hearts of those world leaders who are far more inclined to wage war than to seek peace.
God, where there is brokenness, form us into instruments of forgiveness.
Where there is despair, make of us channels of Your hope.
Where there is division, may we be empowered to bring healing and wholeness.
Where darkness abounds, grant us courage to walk in the light, our eyes fixed on Jesus, the light of the world.
God of healing and compassion,
We hold before You now those in special need of Your healing touch …
God, make us mindful of those among us this day who silently hold hurts and brokenness within them. Teach us to look into one another's eyes and hearts.
We pray for those experiencing pain in their significant relationships, those who are yearning for new beginnings in life. We pray, O God, for young people facing untold pressures and challenges, and for older persons seeking to come to terms with limitations and losses. Whatever our life situations, O God, lead us in paths of right living, our eyes fixed on Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we pray. Amen.
30. Sermon Opener or Ender for Pentecost
Illustration
Rick Kirchoff
Welcome to Pentecost in the 2020s!
It is a time to open up to the mind-blowing, heart-warming, life-changing power of God.
The power of God can invade the body, inflate the mind, swell the soul, lift the Spirit and make us more than we ever imagined.
It'll make you young when you're old, and it'll make you live even when you die.
The power and presence of the Spirit will disturb, delight, deliver and lift.
When God sends forth the Spirit, "the whole face of the earth is renewed."
When God sends forth the Spirit chaos is changed into creation the Red Sea opens up to a highway of freedom.
When God sends forth the Spirit:
A young woman says "Yes". Jesus is born and life is never the same.
When God sends forth the Spirit amazing things happen:
[Ask the congregation to join you by repeating the following]
barriers are broken,
communities are formed,
opposites are reconciled,
unity is established,
disease is cured,
addiction is broken,
cities are renewed,
races are reconciled,
hope is established,
people are blessed,
and church happens.
Today the Spirit of God is present and we're gonna' have church. So be ready, get ready...God is up to something...
[Read these yourself with no response]
discouraged folks cheer up,
dishonest folks 'fees up,
sour folks sweeten up,
closed folk, open up,
gossipers shut up,
conflicted folks make up,
sleeping folks wake up,
lukewarm folk, fire up,
dry bones shake up,
and pew potatoes stand up!
But most of all, Christ the Savior of all the world is lifted up.
31. Sinners Outside the Ark
Illustration
Glenn Pease
A mother calling to her son shouted, "Johnny, tell your sister to get in the house out of the rain." "I can't mom," came the reply. "And just why can't you?" demanded his mother. "Because we are playing Noah's Ark mom, and she's one of the sinners."
We like to make the distinction between the sinners on the outside of the ark and the saints on the inside, and it is a legitimate distinction. But in so doing, we tend to cover up the reality that the saints inside are still sinners. Sinners saved by grace, but nevertheless, sinners. Noah didn't take much time before he demonstrated that after the Ark had landed.
Failure to be aware of this reality led the Pharisees of Christ's day, and self-righteous saints all through history, to feel that the message of repentance does not apply to them. Repentance is only relevant to those sinners outside the ark. It is a message you can preach at the mission, but it has no place in the sanctuary of the saints. Billy Graham said, "I have been shocked to find that the theme proclaimed so emphatically by the prophets and apostles is scarcely mentioned by contemporary preachers."
32. The Cross Sends Us
Illustration
John M. Braaten
A father overheard his two sons playing church. One of them was explaining to the other what all the parts of the liturgy were about. "Do you know what it means at the end of the service when the pastor does this?" he asked, making the sign of the cross. "It means some of you go out this way, and some of you go out that way."
The lad was right. The cross sends us and scatters us out into the world. Someone has said that the really important thing for any church is not how many it seats but how many it sends, with a strange-looking power, the greatest power the world has known, the power of suffering love. So we are sent, you and I, sent to live out our Lord's kind of whimsical and yet lavish grace and with the glory of being marked with the cross, a strange-looking glory sought by few, but which is glory indeed.
33. Break Free From the Scrooge Syndrome
Illustration
Gregory Knox Jones
Each year, in the weeks leading up to Christmas, a great number of people find delight in the marvelous story written by Charles Dickens: A Christmas Carol. There is something in the story that lures us back to it year after year; we never seem to grow tired of hearing its message. The main character in the story is a surly old man named Scrooge, who lives a miserly existence. He sees no benefit in being generous with the poor, or even providing a living wage to dedicated workers. He clutches onto his money and despises the thought of parting with any of it. But it is not only his money that Scrooge withholds from others, it is his entire being. He withholds love and kindness, he withholds warmth and friendship. Then, one night, Scrooge undergoes a profound crisis. He sees himself through the eyes of others. He has a vivid vision of his past; and then his present. But what is most frightful to him - what shakes him to the core of his being - is when he is granted the opportunity of a lifetime. He is allowed to witness his future. But his future proves to be so dark and frightening, that it prompts within him a dramatic change. He undergoes a radical transformation and becomes an entirely new person. Rather than being cold and indifferent to people, he becomes generous and compassionate.
It is a heart-warming story. But more than that, it is a hopeful story. It provides us with the hope that we too can make needed changes in our lives. We can break free from the ruts we have burrowed, and the negative behaviors we have cultivated. We can become kind and compassionate, humble and hospitable, joyful and generous.
I have never read anything which suggests this, but I wonder if the story of John the Baptist influenced Dickens and served as an impetus in his creation of A Christmas Carol?
34. Waiting for More
Illustration
Joel D. Kline
Some Christians make their faith sound so simple. Find Jesus, they assert, be saved, and that will take care of everything. All will be finished, done, complete, settled. But to embrace the light and love of Christ is just the beginning. It is a significant step, but only a beginning. We must then struggle with the presence of darkness, even as we affirm God's gift of light. We must then grapple with the challenge to be co-creators with God as we anticipate that new creation.
William Willimon, dean of the chapel at DukeUniversity, asserts:
Show me a person who is not waiting [for something more to come], not yearning, not leaning forward, standing on tiptoe for something better, and I will show you a person who has given up hope for anything better, someone who has settled down too comfortably in present arrangements. And that's sad. The future belongs to those who wait, for those who know we are meant for something better. The present darkness is not our final destination.
35. Feeling the Suffering of Others
Illustration
David G. Rogne
Flannery O'Connor, the insightful Roman Catholic writer, lifted up the Christian dimension when she wrote: "You will have found Christ when you are concerned with other people's sufferings and not your own." The beginning of compassion involves becoming aware of the suffering of others.
But it is not enough simply to see the suffering of others, we need to feel it. It is possible to see suffering, but not to feel it. Dewitt Jones tells about a photographer who walked down the street one day and came upon a man who was choking. "What a picture," he thought. "This says it all: A man, alone, in need. What a message!" He fumbled for his camera and light meter until the poor fellow who was choking realized that help was not forthcoming. He grabbed the photographer's arm and gasped, "I'm turning blue!"
"That's all right," said the photographer, patting the fellow's hand, "I'm shooting color film." Just noticing suffering isn't enough.
36. THE CROSS
Illustration
John H. Krahn
The cross best proclaims the indisputable fact that we worship a caring God. It is the most popular of all Christian symbols. There is no Christianity without the cross.
The cross shouts God’s words of love to each of us. It is his proclamation of possibility beyond the present. In it is hope for the hopeless, love for the loveless, encouragement for the depressed, and the pronouncement of life beyond death for those who grieve the loss of a friend or contemplate their own demise. Its importance to our faith cannot be over-emphasized, its proclamation must never be subdued. It trumpets, "God cares!" That’s music to our ears - the best news we could ever hear.
As I look at the cross, I cannot help but think of a movie I saw years ago. Few movies in my life have had the impact of Ben Hur. Many scenes made an indelible impression - the great sea battle, the exciting chariot race, the repugnant leprosy colony. Yet, none hit harder than the crucifixion of our Lord. The sound of hammer on nail rings through the air, the cross rises until it suddenly thumps into place. Slowly Jesus’ blood begins to flow - one drop, then another ... a puddle forms beneath the cross. It begins to rain. Water mixes with more blood, and together they begin to trickle down the hillside. The trickle becomes a stream as the blood washes over God’s creation. We are reminded that the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin.
At Calvary God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. The blood of Christ pouring down the cross restored our relationship with the Father. We cannot fully understand the mystery of God’s plan to recapture a creation gone astray. We only know that all who come to the cross in simple, trusting faith are cleansed by his blood and find peace with the Father.
By his death Jesus has unchained us. Unchained - there is no better word for it. He has set us free from the wages of our sins that only pay dividends in hell and has set us on the positive pathway of a life with God. Our eyes need no longer be downcast; our head has no reason to be between our knees. We are no longer oppressed with our weighty sins, for we have been touched by none other than God. He has cared not just a little but powerfully. His power encountered our sin, and it was no more. His incredible desire to rescue us in spite of everything dispels even the worst sin. But we must be wise enough to permit ourselves and our sins to be encountered by that desire.
37. The Language of Suffering
Illustration
Michael P. Green
There are many benefits in knowing a foreign language. One of the chief benefits lies in the increased ability to understand and be understood. If a person knows only one language, he is tempted to think that everything he communicates is understood. However, if forced to translate an idea into another language, he must consider various possible words to use and their shades of meaning as well as all of the other elements of the language. This effort opens up a door, allowing him to communicate with many new people.
Suffering is like knowing a foreign language, since things that one usually takes for granted in a normal flow of life must be thought through in new ways in a time of suffering. For those who have lived with suffering, a door of ministry is opened wide to a world of hurting people.
38. Beyond Ambiguity
Illustration
Larry Powell
In the 1500s, there lived a "prophet" named Nostradamus who upheld the Copernican theory that the world is round and circles the sun more than one hundred years before Galileo was prosecuted for the same belief. He was also widely known as a healer, a dabbler in the occult, and predictor of events far into the future. A present day book, The Prophecies of Nostradamus, purports to show that he predicted such specific events as the assassination of John F. Kennnedy, Hitler’s rise to power, the Blockade of Britain, the Common Market, and other far sweeping events. The writings of Nostradamus are, however, exceedingly ambiguous, requiring a great deal of imagination on the part of the reader to even remotely apply them to events claimed as "fulfillments." I personally place no stock in this ancient mystic’s poetic "prophecies." But there is no ambiguity in the prophecies of Isaiah: (1) "Behold my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights; I have put my spirit upon him, he will bring forth justice to the nations" (42:1). Let us now turn to Matthew 3:16: "As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, ‘This is my son whom I love; with him I am well pleased.’ "
The servant described in Isaiah 53 was to be (2) a suffering servant; "Surely, he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisem*nt that made us whole, and with his stripes we are healed" (vv. 4, 5). The entire New Testament is testimony to the "Song of the Servant," and in the remarkable economy of God, the wounds and bruises resulted in inclusive wholeness and healing. Unfortunately, there are those who have not embraced the vicarious suffering Christ as relevant for their own cases. Even on Christmas day, combat raged in eastern El Salvador between government troops and leftist rebels. A Roman Catholic priest claims that nearly 7,000 persons died in "blind violence" in the country during the past year. We will not dwell upon world violence and political unrest here, except to say that there are those who remain outside of the peace made possible by the redemptive work of Christ. But for those who have experienced the power of Christ in their lives personally, they have found it to be a strong potion, even in difficult times.
Slightly more than one hundred years ago, an especially gifted young man enrolled in Glasgow University. Anxious to begin academic studies and anticipating his forthcoming marriage, his spirits soared. But how rapidly the wheels of fortune turn. He was suddenly stricken by blindness, and his fiance, not wanting to be married to an invalid, rejected him. The tide had turned against him in a manner which would have devastated a lesser person. However, despite his adversities, he graduated from the university and went on to become one of the greatest preachers in the Church of Scotland. Not out of his despair, but out of his personal relationship with Christ, he wrote a hymn which we lift in praise until this day: "O Love That Wilt Not Let Me Go ..." Consequently, not only the New Testament, but individuals like George Matheson the hymnwriter and scores of others who have named the name of Christ, affirm that Isaiah’s prophecy has indeed come to pass.
There is more. The vicarious suffering of Christ was (3) once done, for all, and for all time. Such a sacrifice need never be repeated. I have read where each year, beginning on Ash Wednesday, thousands of Filipino Christians begin Lenten observances by flagellating themselves with whips and heavy branches. The whips have sharp stones and broken pieces of glass affixed to leathered ends. Certain others submit themselves to be actually crucified. Their devotion is admirable, but the gestures in which they engage are both barbaric and unnecessary. We continue to sin, yes, but the redemptive work of Christ at Calvary endures, once done for all time.
39. What Jesus Called Glory
Illustration
King Duncan
Most of us are like Tony Campolo. Some years ago when his children were in their preteen years, he took them with him on a speaking engagement. When they drove into the parking lot adjoining the auditorium where, in just a few minutes, Tony was to speak, there were only three cars parked there.
"Dad!" exclaimed his son Bart, who at that point of his life was somewhat impressed with Tony's role as a public speaker, "Nobody's come to hear you! And you're so famous!"
"Come on, Bart," responded his sister Lisa, who, Tony says, has always been the realist in the family, "if Dad is so famous, where are all the people?"
"Knock it off, Lisa," Bart answered back. "It's pretty tough being famous when nobody knows who you are."
That's where most of us are. "It's pretty tough being famous when nobody knows who you are." Jesus didn't promise that everybody would know our name. He just promised us glory. Evidently, what Jesus called glory was not what the world calls glory. Andthat's just as well.
40. Value of the Bible
Illustration
Staff
An unknown writer said: This Book is the mind of God, the state of man, the way of salvation, the doom of sinners, and the happiness of believers. Its doctrines are holy, its precepts are binding; its histories are true, and its decisions are immutable. Read it to be wise, believe it to be safe, practice it to be holy. It contains light to direct you, food to support you, and comfort to cheer you. It is the traveler's map, the pilgrim's staff, the pilot's compass, the soldier's sword, and the Christian's character.
Here paradise is restored, heaven opened, and the gates of hell disclosed. Christ is its grand subject, our good its design, and the glory of God its end. It should fill the memory, rule the heart, and guide the feet. Read it slowly, frequently, prayerfully. It is a mine of wealth, a paradise of glory, and a river of pleasure. Follow its precepts and it will lead you to Calvary, to the empty tomb, to a resurrected life in Christ; yes, to glory itself, for eternity.
41. Giving Thanks for Our Trouble
Illustration
Ours is a God who does not despise or abhor the affliction of the afflicted and does not hide his face from them." There is always a sense in which great living is found in the midst of suffering and tears.
An old Yiddish folk story tells of a well-to-do gentleman of leisured much interested in the Hebrew Scriptures. He visited a wise rabbi to ask a question. He said: "I think I grasp the sense and meaning of these writings except for one thing. I cannot understand how we can be expected to give God thanks for our troubles." The rabbi knew instantly that he could not explain this with mere words. He said to the gentleman: "If you want to understand this, you will have to visit Isaac the water-carrier." The gentleman was mystified by this, but knowing the rabbi to be wise, crossed to a poor section of the settlement and came upon Isaac the water-carrier, an old man who had been engaged in mean, lowly, backbreaking labor for some fifty years.
The gentleman explained the reason for his visit. Isaac paused from his labors. Finally, after several minutes of silence, looking baffled, hespoke: "I know that the rabbi is the wisest of men. But I cannot understand why he would send you to me with that question. I can't answer it because I've had nothing but wonderful things happen to me. I thank God every morning and night for all his many blessings on me and my family."
It is true, is it not? The pure in heart see God. The humble in spirit know Christ's joy and enter into God's glory. "For I consider," writes Paul, "that the sufferings of the present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us."
42. The Bible Looks Forward
Illustration
Francis I. Anderson
Men seek an explanation of suffering in cause and effect. They look backward for a connection between prior sin and present suffering. The Bible looks forward in hope and seeks explanations, not so much in origins as in goals. The purpose of suffering is seen, not in its cause, but in its results. The man in John 9was born blind so that the works of God could be displayed in him.
43. Break A Leg
Illustration
Michael P. Green
Please see the note below this illustration.
A woman visiting in Switzerland came to a sheepfold on one of her daily walks. Venturing in, she saw the shepherd seated on the ground with his flock around him. Nearby, on a pile of straw lay a single sheep, which seemed to be suffering. Looking closely, the woman saw that its leg was broken.
Her sympathy went out to the suffering sheep, and she looked up inquiringly to the shepherd as she asked how it happened. “I broke it myself,” said the shepherd sadly and then explained. “Of all the sheep in my flock, this was the most wayward. It would not obey my voice and would not follow when I was leading the flock. On more than one occasion, it wandered to the edge of a perilous cliff. And not only was it disobedient itself, but it was leading other sheep astray.
“Based on my experience with this kind of sheep, I knew I had no choice, so I broke its leg. The next day I took food and it tried to bite me. After letting it lie alone for a couple of days, I went back and it not only eagerly took the food, but licked my hand and showed every sign of submission and affection.
“And now, let me say this. When this sheep is well, it will be the model sheep of my entire flock. No sheep will hear my voice so quickly nor follow so closely. Instead of leading the others away, it will be an example of devotion and obedience. In short, a complete change will come into the life of this wayward sheep. It will have learned obedience through its sufferings.”
Many times it is the same in human experience. Through our suffering, God may be seeking to teach us obedience and reliance on his care.
Note: There is no evidence that this was a practice among shepherds. See the following page for more information.
44. Unity Isn’t Easy
Illustration
Billy D. Strayhorn
Unity isn't easy. Most of us have never learned how to disagree in love, or how to love those with whom we disagree. We're like the poet who wrote:
To dwell above with saints we love,
That will be grace and glory.
To live below with saints we know;
Well, that's another story!
Unity isn't easy. But Jesus not only prayed for it, He modeled it for us. Remember when the disciples came to Him complaining about the people who were preaching and doing signs and wonders in Jesus' name but weren't part of the crowd of disciples? They were ready to run them out of town or call down lightning upon their heads. Jesus told the disciples not to stop them and said, "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit."
Christian unity is not determined by whether we agree with each other about every interpretation of scripture or doctrine or form of church government. Christian unity IS determined by whether we love one another, and whether we reflect the love of God in Christ for the world.
45. The Covenants of the Scripture
Illustration
Merrill F. Unger
Scripture'scovenants and their significance:
Eternal covenant, Hebrews 13:20 :The redemptive covenant before time began, between the Father and the Son. By this covenant we have eternal redemption, an eternal peace from the 'God of peace', through the death and resurrection of the Son.
Edenic covenant, Genesis 1:26-28: The creative covenant between the Triune God, as the first party (Genesis 1:26), and newly created man, as the second party, governing man's creation and life in Edenic innocence. It regulated man's dominion and subjugation of the earth, and presented a simple test of obedience. The penalty was death.
Adamic covenant, Genesis 3:14-19: The covenant conditioning fallen man's life on the earth. Satan's tool (the serpent) was cursed (Gen 3:14); the first promise of the Redeemer was given (3:15); women's status was altered (3:16); the earth was cursed (3:17-19); physical and spiritual death resulted (3:19).
Noahic covenant, Genesis 8:20-9:6: The covenant of human government. Man is to govern his fellowmen for God, indicated by the institution of capital punishment as the supreme judicial power of the state (Genesis 9:5-6). Other features included the promise of redemption through the line of Shem (Genesis 9:26).
Abrahamic covenant, Genesis 12:1-3; confirmed 13:14-17; 15:1-7; 17:1-8: The covenant of promise. Abraham's posterity was to be made a great nation. In him (through Christ) all the families of the earth were to be blessed (Galations 3:16; John 8:56-58).
Mosaic covenant, Exodus 20:1-31:18: The legal covenant, given solely to Israel. It consisted of the commandments (Exodus 20:1-26); the judgments (social) - (Exodus 21:1; 24:11) and the ordinances (religious); (Exodus 24:12-31:18); also called the law. It was a conditional covenant of works, a ministry of 'condemnation' and 'death' (2 Corinthians 3:7-9), designed to lead the transgressor (convicted thereby as a sinner) to Christ.
Palestinian covenant, Deut 30:1-10: The covenant regulating Israel's tenure of the land of Canaan. Its prophetic features include dispersion of disobedience (Deuteronomy 30:1), future repentance while in dispersion (30:2), the Lord's return (30:3), the restoration (30:4-5, national conversion (3:6), judgment of Israel's foes (30:7), national prosperity (30:9). Its blessings are conditioned upon obedience (30:8,10), but fulfillment is guaranteed by the new covenant.
Davidic covenant, 2 Samuel 7:4-17, 1 Chr 17:4-15: The kingdom covenant regulating the temporal and eternal rule of David's posterity. It secures in perpetuity a Davidic 'house' or line, a throne, and a kingdom. It was confirmed by divine oath in Psalm 89:30-37 and renewed to Mary in Luke 1:31-33. It is fulfilled in Christ as the World's Saviour and Israel's coming King (Acts 1:6; Rev 19:16; 20:4-6).
New covenant, Jeremiah 31:31-33; Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; Hebrew 8:8-12: The covenant of unconditional blessing based upon the finished redemption of Christ. It secures blessing for the church, flowing from the Abrahamic covenant (Galations 3:13-20), and secures all covenant blessings to converted Israel, including those of the Abrahamic, Palestinian, and Davidic covenants. This covenant is unconditional, final and irreversible.
46. The Battle Hymn
Illustration
In 1861, a prominent Bostonian woman and her husband were visiting Washington, D.C. shortly after the outbreak of the Civil War. They witnessed an impressive military review one day and were on their way back to their hotel with some friends in a carriage when their way was blocked by several columns of soldiers. To pass the time, Julia Ward Howe and her friends began to sing popular army songs, including "John Brown's Body." The soldiers cheered the singing, but one of her friends suggested to Mrs. Howe that the lyrics could be improved.
Early the next morning she arose in her hotel room and quickly scribbled out some new lyrics, inspired by her memory of the soldiers from the day before.
Her new words were published in the spring 1862 issue of Atlantic Monthly and the "Battle Hymn of the Republic" became the major war song of the Union forces. The opening words and the refrain are certainly familiar: "Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord...Glory, hallelujah! his truth is marching on." Perhaps the last verse is not quite as well known, which speaks of "a glory in his bosom that transfigures you and me...While God is marching on."
47. All Night Long
Illustration
Edward F. Markquart
Many years ago, a friend of mine from church pulled me out into the parking lot to listen to a tape in her car. Darlene Malmo wanted me to hear her favorite Lionel Ritchie song. There was this song about life being like a party, "all night long." She said, "I am going to party all night long with God." That is what being a Christian is.
Some Christian say that it is not right to have such a mood of happiness and joy. Especially when there is so much starvation. When there is so much hunger. When there is so much suffering in the world, it is not right to be happy.
But that is not true. I think of the hymn, "This Is My Father's World" and the great words to that hymn. "This is my father's world, o let me ne'ver forget. That though the wrong be oft so strong, God is the ruler yet. This is my father's world, o let my heart by glad, for the Lord is king, let the heavens ring. God reigns, let the earth be glad."
Yes, in this world there is so much suffering and so much starvation, but it is also a banquet. Joy, in the middle of suffering, is at the core of being a Christian.
48. Repent Your Way to a Merry Christmas - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
A number of years ago a couple traveled to the offices of an Adoption Society in England to receive a baby. They had been on the waiting list a long time. They had been interviewed and carefully scrutinized. Now at last their dreams were to be fulfilled. But their day of happiness was another's pain.
Arriving at the offices of the Society they were led up a flight of stairs to a waiting room. After a few minutes they heard someone else climbing the stairs. It was the young student mother whose baby was to be adopted. She was met by the lady responsible for the adoption arrangements and taken into another room. Our friends heard a muffled conversation and a few minutes later footsteps on the stairs as the young mother left. They heard her convulsive sobbing until the front door of the office was closed. Then, there was silence.
The lady in charge then conducted them next door. In a little crib was a six week old baby boy. On a chair beside it was a brown paper bag containing a change of clothes and two letters. One of these, addressed to the new parents, thanked them for providing a home for her baby and acknowledged that under the terms of the adoption each would never know the other's identity. Then the young mother added one request. Would they allow her little son to read the other letter on his eighteenth birthday? She assured them that she had not included any information about her identity. The couple entrusted that letter to a lawyer and one day the young man will read the message which his mother wrote on the day, when with breaking heart, she parted with him.
I wonder what she wrote? If I had to condense all I feel about life and love into a few precious words what would I say? I would have no time for trivia. I would not be concerned about economics, politics, the weather, the size of house or the type of car. At such a time I would want to dwell on the profundities, on what life was all about and what things were absolutely essential.
John in the desert was in the great tradition of the Hebrew prophets. He was aware that time was running out. In his burning message he had no time for peripheral matters. He was not playing Trivial Pursuit nor was he prepared to splash about in the shallows. Soon the sword of Herod's guard would flash and his tongue would lie silent in the grave. Superficial people came out from Jerusalem to see him. They were intrigued by this strange phenomenon of a wild man preaching repentance. They were fascinated by frivolous things such as his dress, his diet, and his fierce declamatory oratory. They wanted to interview him and then tell all their friends about their remarkable experience. "Who are you?" they asked. His answer was curt: "I am not the Christ." "Are you Elijah?" "No!" "Then who are you?" they persisted. They had their doubts about who he was but his message to their ears was clear: Repent.
There comes a moment when the preacher longs for his hearers to lose sight of everything except his message. "Don't listen to my accent. Don't look at my clothes. Don't comment on my style. Don't search my biographical details for my University pedigree. Just listen to what I am saying. Repent!"
I would like to suggest this morning that Repent was the first component of his message. There are two others. Let's take a look at the first.
1. John's Message Called People to Repentance
2. John Told People to Share.
3. The Third Thrust of John's Message Was to Serve.
49. Redemption Is Found Through Suffering
Illustration
John M. Braaten
The heroes and heroines of history are not those who took it easy, who had it good, but those who struggled and who overcame seemingly insurmountable odds.
A striking example is the Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoyevsky regarded by many as one of the greatest literary geniuses of all time. His books are classics. The Brothers Karamazov is regarded by many as the greatest novel ever written. His stories all have a similar theme, that our redemption is to be found through suffering, not simply physical suffering, but in the anguish of our selfhood. We become fully human, Dostoyevsky believed, by being tested and being strengthened through it.
50. Church Strife
Illustration
Michael P. Green
In Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, there are named two ladies who could not get along with each other, Euodia and Syntyche (or, as it has been humorously rendered, Odious and Soontouchy). They obviously had trouble working together. Then and now, the church is too often described in this little jingle:
To dwell above with saints we love,
O that will sure be glory.
But to dwell below with saints we know,
Well, that’s another story!
The church filled with strife may do well to be reminded of Lord Nelson at Trafalgar who, coming on deck and finding two British officers quarreling, whirled them about and—pointing to the ships of their adversary—exclaimed, “Gentlemen, there are your enemies!”
Showing
1
to
50
of
511
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
- Queenie Hallegua, second-to-last Jewish resident of historic Indian Jewish community, dies at 89
- 4 Signs That A Marriage Is Sure To End In Divorce—By A Psychologist
- Prominent German cantor and opera singer is killed in what police say was a family dispute
- To the Left, Now Even Viewpoint Diversity Is ‘White Supremacy’
- Triptii Dimri and Avinash Tiwary’s Laila Majnu Goes From Box Office Dud To Soft Hit After Its Rerelease
- Stretched 12 inches on the rack, crushed in iron maidens… or killed with an 'anal pear': Terrifying...
- The Druze Religion, Explained
- Iran’s Chief Rabbi observes Tisha B’Av in Tehran - watch
- Megan Basham Reveals How ‘Non-Christian Billionaires’ Are Co-opting Churches For Democrats
- 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
